Academic journal article Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri

Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Metacognition Scale for Primary School Students

Academic journal article Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri

Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Metacognition Scale for Primary School Students

Article excerpt


The purpose of this study is to develop the Metacognition Scale (MS) which is designed for primary school students. The sample of the study consisted of 426 primary school students in Izmir, Turkey. In order to examine the construct validity of the MS, exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were performed. For the validity of the MI, corrected item-total correlations were used. The corrected item-total correlations ranged from .35 to .65. In addition, t-tests between items' means of upper 27% and lower 27% points were compared. For each factor and each item, the differences between mean scores of upper 27% and lover 27% groups are significant. Finally, Cronbach alpha correlation coefficients were used. The internal consistency of the MS is .96 for the entire scale. The MS has eight scales: declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge and conditional knowledge, planning, self-control, cognitive strategies, self assessment and self monitoring. According to these findings, the MS is appropriate for researchers or teachers whose aim is to measure his/her students' metacognitive awareness and metacognitive abilities.

Key Words

Metacognition, Learning, Exploratory Factor Analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

New approaches towards learning have been suggested and the factors effective on the success and failure of the students have been studied since the 1970s. According to these research studies, the factors resulting in student failure are that students do not adopt a specific learning strategy (Feitler & Hellekson, 1993); that they find it difficult to use strategies appropriate for a specific task; and that they prefer ineffective strategies and plans when encountered with new and complex tasks (Kirby & Ashman, 1984). For instance, students who cannot understand the main intention and what to do when asking a question may fail in asking high-quality questions (Açikgöz, 2002). In addition, unawareness of one's own learning processes and lacking required skills to control such processes can be listed as some of the other barriers before the successful learning and high performance (Gunstone, 1994). Therefore, it is suggested that -as well as cognitive processes- a metacognition emphasizing awareness of these processes may be effective on meaningful learning and the transfer of the learned items to the long term memory (Georghiades, 2004).

Flavell (1987) described metacognition as knowledge and cognition about cognitive objects, that is anything about cognitive. The fact that research giving a place to metacognition in psychology, health and education have increased as of the middle of the 1970s have brought about new definitions. Metacognition refers to the knowledge, awareness and control of one's own learning (Baird, 1990; Gunstone & Mitchell, 1998). Planning learning, management of understanding, or inferring and self-evaluation strategies are other definitions of metacognition (Açikgöz, 2000). According to the framework developed by Nelson and Narens (1990), metamemory is constantly monitoring the memory system retrospectively (e.g., confidence judgment) and prospectively. After the goal of study has been determined, the person makes a decision about how to attain that goal (i.e., formulates a plan). This has several parts, involving several kinds of monitoring judgments that need to be distinguished. Ease-of-learning (EOL) judgments are predictions about what will be easy/difficult to learn, either in terms of which items will be easiest or in terms of which strategies will make learning easiest (Nelson & Narens, 1990). For example, when a student receives a text to study, he or she will analyze and judge its difficulty a priori (EOL judgment) and, based on this judgment, allocate study time and select the kind of strategy to approach the material (Carvalho &Yuza wa, 2001). Subsequently, after the study, the student can judge whether he or she has studied well or long enough (JOL judgment) and, based on this second judgment, decide whether to terminate the study section or to consider a change in the strategies to approach the material to be studied. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.