Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T19:25:36.963Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part V - Metacognition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2019

John Dunlosky
Affiliation:
Kent State University, Ohio
Katherine A. Rawson
Affiliation:
Kent State University, Ohio
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Aleven, V. & Koedinger, K. (2016). An interview reflection on “Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city.” International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 1324.Google Scholar
Arguel, A., Lockyer, L., Lipp, O. V., Lordge, J. M., & Kennedy, G. (2016). Inside out: Detecting learners’ confusion to improve interactive digital learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55, 526551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azevedo, R. (2014). Issues in dealing with sequential and temporal characteristics of self- and socially-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 9, 217228.Google Scholar
Azevedo, R. & Aleven, V. (eds.). (2013). International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies. Amsterdam: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azevedo, R. & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 523535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azevedo, R., Feyzi-Behnagh, R., Duffy, M., Harley, J., & Trevors, G. (2012). Metacognition and self-regulated learning in student-centered learning environments. In Jonassen, D. & Land, S. (eds.), Theoretical foundations of student-center learning environments, 2nd edn (pp. 171197). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Azevedo, R., Harley, J., Trevors, G., Duffy, M., Feyzi-Behnagh, R., Bouchet, F., & Landis, R. S. (2013). Using trace data to examine the complex roles of cognitive, metacognitive, and emotional self-regulatory processes during learning with multi-agent systems. In Azevedo, R. & Aleven, V. (eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 427449). Amsterdam: Springer.Google Scholar
Azevedo, R., Johnson, A., Chauncey, A., & Burkett, C. (2010). Self-regulated learning with MetaTutor: Advancing the science of learning with metacognitive tools. In Khine, M. & Saleh, I. (eds.), New science of learning (pp. 225247). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Azevedo, R., Mudrick, N. V., Taub, M., & Wortha, F. (2017). Coupling between metacognition and emotions during STEM learning with advanced learning technologies: A critical analysis, implications for future research, and design of learning systems. In Michalsky, T. & Schechter, C. (eds.), Self-regulated learning: Conceptualization, contribution, and empirically based models for teaching and learning (pp. 118). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Azevedo, R., Taub, M., & Mudrick, N. V. (2018). Using multi-channel trace data to infer and foster self-regulated learning between humans and advanced learning technologies. In Schunk, D. & Greene, J. A. (eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance, 2nd edn (pp. 254270). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Azevedo, R. & Witherspoon, A. M. (2009). Self-regulated learning with hypermedia. In Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 319339). Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bannert, M. & Reimann, P. (2012). Supporting self-regulated hypermedia learning through prompts. Instructional Science, 40, 193211.Google Scholar
Barab, S., Dodge, T., Tuzun, H., Job-Sluder, K. Jr., Gilbertson, R. C., , J., et al. (2007). The Quest Atlantis project: A socially-responsive play space for learning. In Shelton, B. E. & Wiley, D. (eds.), The design and use of simulation computer games in education (pp. 159186). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
Bargh, J. A. & Schul, Y.. (1980). On the cognitive benefits of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 593604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barral, O., Eugster, M. J. A., Ruotsalo, T., Spapé, M. M., Kosunen, I., Ravaja, N., Kaski, S., & Jacucci, G. (2015). Exploring peripheral physiology as a predictor of perceived relevance in information retrieval. In Brdiczka, O., Chau, P., Crenini, G., Pan, S., & Kristensson, P. O. (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th international conference on intelligent user interfaces, (pp. 389399). New York: ACM.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benedek, M. & Kaernbach, C. (2010), Decomposition of skin conductance data by means of nonnegative deconvolution. Psychophysiology, 47, 647658.Google Scholar
Biswas, G., Jeong, H., Kinnebrew, J. S., Sulcer, B., & Roscoe, R. (2010). Measuring self-regulated learning skills through social interactions in a teachable agent environment. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 5, 123152.Google Scholar
Biswas, G., Segedy, J. R., & Bunchongchit, K. (2016). From design to implementation to practice a learning by teaching system: Betty’s Brain. International Journal of Artificial intelligence in Education, 26, 350364.Google Scholar
Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417444.Google Scholar
Boucsein, W. (2012). Electrodermal activity. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradbury, A.E., Taub, M., & Azevedo, R. 2017. The effects of autonomy on emotions and learning in game-based learning environments. In Gunzelmann, G., Howes, A., Tenbrink, T., & Davelaar, E. J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 39th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 16661671). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Brawner, K. W. & Gonzalez, A. J. (2016). Modeling a learner’s affective state in real time to improve intelligent tutoring effectiveness. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics, 17, 183210.Google Scholar
Burkett, C. & Azevedo, R. (2012). The effect of multimedia discrepancies on metacognitive judgments. Computers and Human Behavior, 28, 12761285.Google Scholar
Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Killingsworth, S. S. (2016). Digital games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86, 79122.Google Scholar
Conati, C., Jaques, N., & Muir, M. (2013). Understanding attention to adaptive hints in educational games: An eye-tracking study. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 23, 136161.Google Scholar
D’Mello, S. K. & Graesser, A. C. (2012). Dynamics of affective states during complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 22, 145157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Mello, S. K., Lehman, B. Pekrun, R., & Graesser, A. C. (2014). Confusion can be beneficial for learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 153170.Google Scholar
Duffy, M. & Azevedo, R. (2015). Motivation matters: Interactions between achievement goals and agent scaffolding for self-regulated learning within an intelligent tutoring system. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 338348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition: A textbook for cognitive, educational, life span and applied psychology. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Greene, J. A. & Azevedo, R. (2009). A macro-level analysis of SRL processes and their relations to the acquisition of a sophisticated mental model of a complex system. Contemporary Education Psychology, 34, 1829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26, 126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (2009). Handbook of metacognition in education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hardy, M., Wiebe, E. N, Grafsgaard, J. F., Boyer, K. E., & Lester, J. C. (2013). Physiological responses to events during training: Use of skin conductance to inform future adaptive learning systems. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomic society 57th annual meeting (pp. 21012105).Google Scholar
Harley, J. M., Bouchet, F., Hussain, M. S., Azevedo, R., & Calvo, R. (2015). A multi-componential analysis of emotions during complex learning with an intelligent multi-agent system. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 615625.Google Scholar
Harley, J. M., Taub, M., Azevedo, R., & Bouchet, F. (2018). “Let’s set up some subgoals”: Understanding human-pedagogical agent collaborations and their implications for learning and prompt and feedback compliance. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 11, 5466.Google Scholar
Heilig, M. (1962). United States Patent No. #3,050,870. Alexandria, VA: United States Patent Office.Google Scholar
iMotions. (2017). Attention tool (Version 6.3) [Computer software]. Boston, MA: iMotions Inc.Google Scholar
Järvelä, S., Malmberg, J., & Koivuniemi, M. (2016). Recognizing socially shared regulation by using the temporal sequences of online chat and logs in CSCL. Learning and Instruction, 42, 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulik, J. A. & Fletcher, J. D. (2016). Effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 86, 4278.Google Scholar
Lajoie, S. P., Poitras, E. G., Doleck, T., & Jarrell, A. (2015). Modeling metacognitive activities in medical problem-solving with BioWorld. In Peña-Ayala, A. (ed.), Metacognition: Fundamentals, applications, and trends. A profile of the current state-of the-art (pp. 323343). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Lin, M., Preston, A., Kharrufa, A., & Kong, Z. (2016). Making L2 learners’ reasoning skills visible: The potential of computer supported collaborative learning environments. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 303322.Google Scholar
Matsuda, N., Yarzebinski, E., Keiser, V., Raizada, R., Cohen, W. W., Stylianides, G. J., & Koedinger, K. R. (2013). Cognitive anatomy of tutor learning: Lessons learned with SimStudent. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 11521163.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2014a). Computer games for learning: An evidence-based approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (ed.). (2014b). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 2nd edn. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. & Alexander, P. A. (eds.). (2017). Handbook of research on learning and instruction, 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers and Education, 70, 2940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mudrick, N. V., Rowe, J., Taub, M., Lester, J., & Azevedo, R. (2017). Toward affect-sensitive virtual human tutors: The influence of facial expressions on learning and emotion. In Busso, C. & Epps, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2017 seventh international conference on affective computing and intelligent interaction (ACII) (pp. 184189). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. O. & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 26, 125173.Google Scholar
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Barchfeld, P., & Perry, R. P. (2011). Measuring emotions in students’ learning and performance: The achievement emotions questionnaire (AEQ). Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 3648.Google Scholar
Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 14571506.Google Scholar
Rowe, J. P., Shores, L. R., Mott, B. W., & Lester, J. C. (2011). Integrating learning, problem solving, and engagement in narrative-centered learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 21, 115133.Google Scholar
Santos, M. E. C., Chen, A., Taketomi, T., Yamamoto, G., Miyazaki, J., & Kato, H. (2014). Augmented reality learning experiences: Survey of prototype design and evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 7, 3856.Google Scholar
Sawyer, R. K. (2014). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sawyer, R., Smith, A., Rowe, J., Azevedo, R., Lester, J., & Carolina, N. (2017). Is more agency better? The impact of student agency on game-based learning. In André, E., Baker, R., Hu, X., Rodrigo, M., & du Bouley, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the 18th international conference on artificial intelligence in education (pp. 335346). Amsterdam: Springer.Google Scholar
Scheiter, K. & Eitel, A. (2016). The use of eye tracking as a research and instructional tool in multimedia learning. In Was, C. A., Sansosti, F. J., & Morris, B. (eds.), Eye-tracking technology applications in educational research (pp. 143164). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
Schunk, D. & Greene, J. (2017). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance, 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Taub, M. & Azevedo, R. (2016a). Using multi-channel data to assess, understand, and support affect and metacognition with Intelligent Tutoring Systems. In Micarelli, A., Stamper, J., & Panourgia, K. (eds.), Proceedings of the 13th international conference on intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 543544). Amsterdam: Springer.Google Scholar
Taub, M. & Azevedo, R. (2016b). Using eye-tracking to determine the impact of prior knowledge on self-regulated learning with an adaptive hypermedia- learning environment? In Micarelli, A., Stamper, J., & Panourgia, K. (eds.), Proceedings of the 13th international conference on intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 3447). Amsterdam: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taub, M., Azevedo, R., Bouchet, F., & Khosravifar, B. (2014). Can the use of cognitive and metacognitive self-regulated learning strategies be predicted by learners’ levels of prior knowledge in hypermedia-learning environments? Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 356–36.Google Scholar
Taub, M., Azevedo, R., Bradbury, A. E., Millar, G. C., & Lester, J. (2018). Using sequence mining to reveal the efficiency in scientific reasoning during STEM learning with a game-based learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 54, 93103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taub, M., Mudrick, N. V., Azevedo, R., Millar, G. C., Rowe, J., & Lester, J. (2017). Using multi-channel data with multi-level modeling to assess in-game performance during gameplay with Crystal Island. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 641655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taub, M., Mudrick., N., Bradbury, A. E., & Azevedo, R. (in press). Self-regulation, selfexplanation, and reflection in game-based learning. In Plass, J., Horner, B., & Mayer, R. (eds.), Handbook of game-based learning. Boston, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Trevors, G., Duffy, M., & Azevedo, R. (2014). Note-taking within MetaTutor: Interactions between an intelligent tutoring system and prior knowledge on note-taking and learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62, 507528.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (2018). Cognition and metacognition in self-regulated learning. In Schunk, D. & Greene, J. (eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd edn) (pp. 3648). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. & Azevedo, R. (2014). Metacognition. In Sawyer, K. (ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, 2nd edn. (pp. 6387). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Winne, P., & Hadwin, A. (2008). The weave of motivation and self-regulated learning. In Schunk, D. & Zimmerman, B. (eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 297314). New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Wolff, B. (2009). Building intelligent interactive tutors: Student-centered strategies for adaptive e-learning. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar

References

Ackerman, R. & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning: On screen versus on paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 1832.Google Scholar
Anderson, M. & Thiede, K. W. (2008). Why do delayed summaries improve metacomprehension accuracy? Acta Psychologica, 128, 110118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benjamin, A. S. & Bjork, R. A. (1996). Retrieval fluency as a metacognitive index. In Reder, L. M. (ed.), Implicit memory and metacognition (pp. 309338). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Benjamin, A. S. & Diaz, M. (2008). Measurement of relative metamnemonic accuracy. In Dunlosky, J. & Bjork, R. A. (eds.), Handbook of memory and metamemory (pp. 7394). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Self-explaining: the dual processes of generating inferences and repairing mental models. In Glaser, R. (ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (pp. 161238). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Commander, N. E., Zhao, Y., Li, H., Zabrucky, K. M., & Agler, L. M. L. (2014). American and Chinese students’ calibration of comprehension and performance. Current Psychology, 33, 655671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connor, L. T., Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (1997). Age-related differences in absolute but not relative metamemory accuracy. Psychology and Aging, 12, 5071.Google Scholar
de Bruin, A. B. H., Thiede, K. W., Camp, G., & Redford, J. (2011). Generating keywords improves metacomprehension and self-regulation in elementary and middle school children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109, 294310.Google Scholar
Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P. A., & Loughlin, S. M. (2008). Focusing the conceptual lens on metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 391409.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Lipko, A.R. (2007). Metacomprehension: A brief history and how to improve its accuracy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 228232.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J., Mueller, M. L., & Thiede, K. W. (2016). Methodology for investigating human metamemory. In Dunlosky, J., & Tauber, S. K. (eds.), The Oxford handbook of metamemory (pp. 2338). Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Nelson, T. O. (1992). Importance of the kind of cue for judgments of learning (JOL) and the delayed-JOL effect. Memory and Cognition, 20, 374380.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Rawson, K. A. (2005). Why does rereading improve metacomprehension accuracy? Evaluating the levels-of-disruption hypothesis for the rereading effect. Discourse Processes, 40, 3755.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Rawson, K. A. (2012). Overconfidence produced underachievement: Inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention. Learning and Instruction, 22, 271280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., & Middleton, E. L. (2005). What constrains the accuracy of metacomprehension judgments? Testing the transfer-appropriate-monitoring and accessibility hypotheses. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 551565.Google Scholar
Fischer, P. M. & Mandl, H. (1984). Learner, text variables, and the control of text comprehension and recall. In Mandl, H., Stein, N. L., & Trabasco, T. (eds.), Learning and comprehension of text (pp. 213254). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906911.Google Scholar
Flavell, J. H., Friedrichs, A. G., & Hoyt, J. D. (1970). Developmental changes in memorization processes. Cognitive Psychology, 1, 324340.Google Scholar
Fukaya, T. (2013) Explanation generation, not explanation expectancy, improves metacomprehension accuracy. Metacognition Learning, 8, 118.Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M. & Epstein, W. (1985). Calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 702718.Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M., Sanocki, T., Epstein, W., & Morris, C. (1987). Enhancing calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 119136.Google Scholar
Griffin, T. D., Jee, B. D., & Wiley, J. (2009). The effects of domain knowledge on metacomprehension accuracy. Memory and Cognition, 37, 10011013.Google Scholar
Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Salas, C. (2013). Supporting effective self-regulated learning: The critical role of monitoring. In Azevedo, R. & Aleven, V. (eds.) International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 1934). New York: Springer Science.Google Scholar
Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2008). Individual differences, rereading, and self-explanation: Concurrent processing and cue validity as constraints on metacomprehension accuracy. Memory and Cognition, 36, 93103.Google Scholar
Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2018). The effects of comprehension-test expectancies on metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. Advance online publication: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000634Google Scholar
Hacker, D. J. (1998). Self-regulated comprehension during normal reading. In Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 165191). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacker, D. J., Keener, M. C., & Kircher, J. C. (2009). Writing is applied metacognition. In Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 154172). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hart, J. T. (1965). Memory and the feeling-of-knowing experience. Journal of Educational Psychology, 56, 208216.Google Scholar
Jaeger, A. J. & Wiley, J. (2014). Do illustrations help or harm metacomprehension accuracy?. Learning and Instruction, 34, 5873.Google Scholar
Jaeger, A. J. & Wiley, J. (2015). Reading an analogy can cause the illusion of comprehension. Discourse Processes, 52, 376405.Google Scholar
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kintsch, W., Welsch, D., Schmalhofer, F., & Zimny, S. (1990). Sentence memory: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 133159.Google Scholar
Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 349370.Google Scholar
Kwon, H. & Linderholm, T. (2014). Effects of self-perception of reading skill on absolute accuracy of metacomprehension judgments. Current Psychology, 33, 7388.Google Scholar
Maki, R. H. (1998a) Metacomprehension of text: Influence of absolute confidence level on bias and accuracy. In Medin, D. L. (ed.) The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (pp. 223248). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Maki, R. H. (1998b). Test predictions over text material. In Hacker, D.J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A.C. (eds), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 117144). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Maki, R. H. & Berry, S. L. (1984). Metacomprehension of text material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 663679.Google Scholar
Maki, R. H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A. E., & Zacchilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 723731.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M. (1977). Realizing that you don’t understand: A preliminary investigation. Child Development, 48, 986992.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M. (1979). Realizing that you don’t understand: Elementary school children’s awareness of inconsistencies. Child Development, 50, 643655.Google Scholar
Masson, M. E. & Rotello, C. M. (2009). Sources of bias in the Goodman–Kruskal gamma coefficient measure of association: Implications for studies of metacognitive processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 509527.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. (2002). Is study time allocated selectively to a region of proximal learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 349363.Google Scholar
Millis, K. K., Simon, S., & tenBroek, N. S. (1998). Resource allocation during the rereading of scientific texts. Memory and Cognition, 26, 232246.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of feeling-of-knowing accuracy. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109133.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. O. & Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people’s judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The “delayed-JOL effect.” Psychological Science, 2, 267270.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. O. & Narens, L. (1980). A new technique for investigating the feeling of knowing. Acta Psychologica, 46, 6980.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. O. & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In Bower, G. H. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation, 26, pp. 125141. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Nesbit, J. C. & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76, 413448.Google Scholar
Otero, J. (1998). Influence of knowledge activation and context on comprehension monitoring of science texts. In Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 145164). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ozuru, Y., Kurby, C. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2012). The effect of metacomprehension judgment task on comprehension monitoring and metacognitive accuracy. Metacognition and Learning, 7, 113131.Google Scholar
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pilegard, C. & Mayer, R. E. (2015). Within-subject and between-subject conceptions of metacomprehension accuracy. Learning and Individual Differences, 41, 5461.Google Scholar
Pintrich, P. R., Wolters, C. A., & Baxter, G. P. (2000). Assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning. In Schraw, G. & Impara, J.C. (eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 4397). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.Google Scholar
Rawson, K. A. & Dunlosky, J. (2007). Improving students’ self-evaluation of learning for key concepts in textbook materials. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 559579.Google Scholar
Rawson, K. A., Dunlosky, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2000). The rereading effect: Metacomprehension accuracy improves across reading trials. Memory and Cognition, 28, 10041010.Google Scholar
Redford, J. S., Thiede, K. W., Wiley, J., & Griffin, T. D. (2012). Concept mapping improves metacomprehension accuracy among 7th graders. Learning and Instruction, 22, 262270.Google Scholar
Rhodes, M. G. & Tauber, S. K. (2011). The influence of delaying judgments of learning on metacognitive accuracy: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 131148.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B.L. & Metcalfe, J. (1994). Methodological problems and pitfalls in the study of human metacognition. In Metcalfe, J. & Shimamura, A. P. (eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 93113). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Serra, M. J. & Dunlosky, J. (2010). Metacomprehension judgments reflect the belief that diagrams improve learning from text. Memory, 18, 698711.Google Scholar
Shiu, L. & Chen, Q. (2013). Self and external monitoring of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 7888.Google Scholar
Stensvold, M. S. & Wilson, J. T. (1990). The interaction of verbal ability with concept mapping in learning from a chemistry laboratory activity. Science Education, 74, 473480.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W. & Anderson, M. C. M. (2003). Summarizing can improve metacomprehension accuracy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 129160.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 6673.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W. & Dunlosky, J. (1999). Toward a general model of self-regulated study: An analysis of selection of items for study and self-paced study time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 10241037.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Dunlosky, J., Griffin, T. D., & Wiley, J. (2005). Understanding the delayed-keyword effect on metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 12671280.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Anderson, M. C. M. (2010). Poor metacomprehension accuracy as a result of inappropriate cue use. Discourse Processes, 47, 331362.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Redford, J. (2009). Metacognitive monitoring during and after reading. In Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (eds). Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 85106). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Redford, J. S., Wiley, J., & Griffin, T. D. (2012). Elementary school experience with comprehension testing may influence metacomprehension accuracy among seventh and eighth graders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 554564.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Redford, J. S., Wiley, J., & Griffin, T. D. (2017). How restudy decisions affect overall comprehension for 7th grade students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 590605.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Wiley, J., & Griffin, T. D. (2011). Test expectancy affects metacomprehension accuracy. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 264273.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. K. & McDaniel, M. A. (2007). The negative cascade of incongruent task-test processing in memory and metamemory. Memory and Cognition, 35, 668678.Google Scholar
van Loon, M. H., de Bruin, A. B. H., van Gog, T., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Dunlosky, J. (2014). Can students evaluate their understanding of cause-and-effect relations? The effects of diagram completion on monitoring accuracy. Acta Psychologica, 151, 143154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weaver, C. A. & Bryant, D. S. (1995). Monitoring of comprehension: The role of text difficulty in metamemory for narrative and expository text. Memory and Cognition, 23, 1222.Google Scholar
Weinstein, C. E. & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In Wittrock, M. C. (ed.), Handbook on research in teaching, 3rd edn. (pp. 315327). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wiley, J., Griffin, T. D., Jaeger, A. J., Jarosz, A. F., Cushen, P. J., & Thiede, K. W. (2016). Improving metacomprehension accuracy in an undergraduate course context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22, 393405.Google Scholar
Wiley, J., Griffin, T. D., & Thiede, K. W. (2005). Putting the comprehension in metacomprehension. Journal of General Psychology, 132, 408428.Google Scholar
Wiley, J., Griffin, T. D., & Thiede, K. W. (2008). To understand your understanding, you must understand what understanding means. In Love, B. C., McRae, K., & Sloutsky, V. M. (eds.), Proceedings of the 30th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 817822). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Wiley, J., Griffin, T. D., & Thiede, K. W. (2016). Improving metacomprehension with the situation-model approach. In Mokhtari, K., Improving reading comprehension through metacognitive reading instruction for first and second language readers (pp. 93110). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Wiley, J., Jaeger, A. J., Taylor, A. R., & Griffin, T. D. (2017). When analogies harm: The effects of analogies and valid cues on the metacomprehension of science text. Learning and Instruction, 55, 113123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.10.001Google Scholar
Wiley, J. & Myers, J. L. (2003). Availability and accessibility of information and causal inferences from scientific text. Discourse Processes, 36, 109129.Google Scholar
Wiley, J. Sarmento, D., Griffin, T. D., & Hinze, S. R. (2017). Biology textbook graphics and their impact on expectations of understanding, Discourse Processes, 54, 463478.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277304). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Yates, J. E (1990). Judgment and decision-making. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Zhao, Q. & Linderholm, T. (2011). Anchoring effects on prospective and retrospective metacomprehension judgments as a function of peer performance information. Metacognition and Learning, 6, 2543.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 6472.Google Scholar

References

Alexander, P. A., Dinsmore, D. L., Parkinson, M. M., & Winters, F. I. (2011). Self-regulated learning in academic domains. In Zimmerman, B. J. & Schunk, D. H. (eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 393407). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117131.Google Scholar
Bol, L., Hacker, D., Walck, C., & Nunnery, J. (2012). The effects of individual or group guidelines on the calibration accuracy and achievement of high school biology students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 280287.Google Scholar
Bol, L., Riggs, R., Hacker, D., Dickerson, D., & Nunnery, J. (2010). The calibration accuracy of middle school students in match classes. Journal of Research in Education, 21, 8196.Google Scholar
Callender, A. A., Franco-Watkins, A. M., & Roberts, A. S. (2016). Improving metacognition in the classroom through instruction, training, and feedback. Metacognition and Learning, 11, 215235.Google Scholar
DiGiacomo, G. & Chen, P. P. (2016). Enhancing self-regulatory skills through an intervention embedded in middle school mathematics curriculum. Psychology in the Schools, 53, 601616.Google Scholar
Dinsmore, D. L. & Parkinson, M. M. (2013). What are confidence judgments made of? Students’ explanations for their confidence ratings and what that means for calibration. Learning and Instruction, 24, 414.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Rawson, K. A. (2012). Overconfidence produces underachievement: Inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention. Learning and Instruction, 22, 271280.Google Scholar
Foster, N. L., Was, C. A., Dunlosky, J., & Isaacson, R. M. (2017). Even after thirteen class exams, students are still overconfident: the role of memory for past exam performance in student predictions. Metacognition and Learning, 12(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016–9158-6.Google Scholar
García, T., Rodríguez, C., González-Castro, P., González-Pienda, J. A., & Torrance, M. (2016). Elementary students’ metacognitive processes and post-performance calibration on mathematical problem-solving tasks. Metacognition and Learning, 11(2), 139170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-015–9139-1.Google Scholar
Gutierrez, A. & Schraw, G. (2015). Effects of strategy training and incentives on students’ performance, confidence, and calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education, 83, 386404.Google Scholar
Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Bahbahani, K. (2008). Explaining calibration in classroom contexts: The effects of incentives, reflection, and attributional style. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 101121.Google Scholar
Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D., & Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 160170.Google Scholar
Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Keener, M. C. (2008). Metacognition in education: A focus on calibration. In Dunlosky, J., & Bjork, R. (eds.), Handbook of memory and metacognition (pp. 429455). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hadwin, A. F. & Webster, E. A. (2013). Calibration in goal setting: Examining the nature of judgments of confidence. Learning and Instruction, 24, 3747.Google Scholar
Hawthorne, K., Bol, L., & Pribesh, S. (2017). Can providing rubrics for writing tasks improve developing writers’ calibration accuracy? Journal of Experimental Education, 85, 689708. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2017.1299081.Google Scholar
Huff, J. D. & Nietfeld, J. L. (2009). Using strategy instruction and confidence judgments to improve metacognitive monitoring. Metacognition and Learning, 4, 161176.Google Scholar
Keren, G. (1991). Calibration and probability judgments: Conceptual and methodological issues. Acta Psychologica, 77, 217273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krebs, S.S. & Roebers, C.M. (2010). Children’s strategic regulation, metacognitive monitoring, and control processes during test-taking. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 325340.Google Scholar
Labuhn, A. S., Zimmerman, B. J., & Hasselhorn, M. (2010). Enhancing students’ self- regulation: The influence of feedback and self-evaluative standards. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 173194.Google Scholar
Lichtenstein, S., Fischhoff, B., & Phillips, L. D. (1982). Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art to 1980. In Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (eds.) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lin, L. & Zabrucky, K. M. (1998). Calibration of comprehension: Research and implications for education and instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 345391.Google Scholar
List, A. & Alexander, P. A. (2015). Examining response confidence in multiple text tasks. Metacognition and Learning, 10, 407436.Google Scholar
Miller, T. M. & Geraci, L. (2011b). Training metacognition in the classroom: The influence of incentives and feedback on exam predictions. Metacognition and Learning, 6, 303314.Google Scholar
Morrison, J., Bol, L., Ross, S., & Watson, G. (2015). Paraphrasing and prediction with self- explanation as generative strategies for learning science principles. Education Technology: Research and Development, 63, 861882.Google Scholar
Nietfeld, J. L., Cao, L., & Osborne, J. W. (2006). Metacognitive monitoring accuracy and student performance in the postsecondary classroom. The Journal of Experimental Education, 74, 728.Google Scholar
Schneider, E. F., Castleberry, A. N., Vuk, J., & Stowe, C. D. (2014). Pharmacy students’ ability to think about thinking. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 78, 15.Google Scholar
Schunk, D. H. & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self-regulatory competence. Educational Psychologist, 32, 195208.Google Scholar
Serra, M. J. & DeMarree, K. G. (2016). Unskilled and unaware in the classroom: College students’ desired grades predict their biased grade predictions. Memory and Cognition, 44, 11271137.Google Scholar
Reid, A. J., Morrison, G. R., & Bol, L. (2016). Knowing what you know: Improving metacomprehension and calibration accuracy in digital text. Educational Technology Research and Development, https://doi.org/10.10007/s11423-016–9454-5.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (2004). Students’ calibration of knowledge and learning processes: Implications for designing powerful software learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 41, 466488.Google Scholar
Yates, J. F. (1990). Judgment and decision making. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 166183.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J. & Kitsantas, A. (2002). Acquiring writing revision and self-regulatory skill through observation and emulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 660668.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J. & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognitive and motivation intersect. In Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 299315). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

References

Airasian, P. W. & Russell, M. K. (2007). Classroom assessment, 6th edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Artelt, C. & Rausch, T. (2014). Accuracy of teacher judgments. In Krolak-Schwerdt, S., Glock, S., & Böhmer, M. (eds.). Teachers’ professional development: Assessment, training, and learning (pp. 2743). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
Ball, D. L., Hill, H. C., & Bass, H. (2005). Knowing mathematics for teaching: Who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade, and how can we decide?. American Educator, 29(3), 1446.Google Scholar
Ball, D. L. & Rowan, B. (2004). Introduction: Measuring instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 105(1), 310.Google Scholar
Bates, C. & Nettelbeck, T. (2001). Primary school teachers’ judgments of reading achievement. Educational Psychology, 21(2), 177187.Google Scholar
Benjamin, A. S., Bjork, R. A., & Schwartz, B. L. (1998). The mismeasure of memory: When retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127(1), 5568.Google Scholar
Bennett, R. E., Gottesman, R. L., Rock, D. A., & Cerullo, F. (1993). Influence of behavior perceptions and gender on teachers’ judgments of students’ academic skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(2), 347356.Google Scholar
Box, C., Skoog, G., & Dabbs, J. M. (2015). A case study of teacher personal practice assessment theory and complexities of implementing formative assessment. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 956983.Google Scholar
Brendefur, J. L., Carney, M. B., Hughes, G., & Strother, S. (2015). Framing professional development that promotes mathematical thinking. In Ostler, E. (ed.), Emerging trends and perspectives in STEM learning.Google Scholar
Brendefur, J. L., Thiede, K. T., Strother, S., Jesse, D., & Sutton, J. (2016). The effects of professional development on elementary students’ mathematics achievement. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 5(1), 115.Google Scholar
Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Chiang, C., & Loef, M. (1989). Using knowledge of children’s mathematical thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 499531.Google Scholar
Clark, C. M. & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In Wittrock, M. C. (ed.), Third handbook of research on teaching (pp. 255296). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Coladarci, T. (1986). Accuracy of teacher judgments of student responses to standardized test items. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 141146.Google Scholar
Connor, C. M., Spencer, M., Day, S. L., Giuliani, S., Ingebrand, S. W., McLean, L., & Morrison, F. J. (2014). Capturing the complexity: Content, type, and amount of instruction and quality of the classroom learning environment synergistically predict third graders’ vocabulary and reading comprehension outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(3), 762778.Google Scholar
Curby, T W., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Cameron Ponitz, C. (2009). Teacher-child interactions and children’s achievement trajectories across kindergarten and first grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 912925.Google Scholar
Demaray, M. K. & Elliot, S. N. (1998). Teachers’ judgments of students’ academic functioning: A comparison of actual and predicted performance. School Psychology Quarterly, 13(1), 814.Google Scholar
Dompnier, B., Pansu, P., & Bressoux, P. (2006). An integrative model of scholastic judgments: Pupils’ characteristics, class context, halo effect and internal attributions. European Journal of Psychology in Education, 21(2), 119133.Google Scholar
Donovan, M. S., Bransford, J. D., & Pellegrino, J. W. (eds.). (2000). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. Washington, DC: National Research Council and National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Bjork, R. A. (2008). Handbook of metamemory and memory. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. Thousand Oaks: CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Rawson, K. A. (2012). Overconfidence produced underachievement: Inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention. Learning and Instruction, 22(4), 271280.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Thiede, K. W. (2004). Causes and constraints of the shift-to-easier-materials effect in the control of study. Memory and Cognition, 32(5), 779788.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Thiede, K. W. (2013). Four cornerstones of calibration research: Why understanding students’ judgments can improve their achievement. Learning and Instruction, 24(1), 5861.Google Scholar
Dusek, J. D. & Joseph, G. (1983). The bases of teacher expectancies: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(3), 327346.Google Scholar
Feinberg, A. B. & Shapiro, E. S. (2003). Accuracy of teacher judgment of oral reading fluency. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(1), 5265.Google Scholar
Feinberg, A. B. & Shapiro, E. S. (2009). Teacher accuracy: An examination of teacher-based judgments of students’ reading with differing achievement levels. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(6), 453462.Google Scholar
Gabriele, A. J., Joram, E., & Park, K. H. (2016). Elementary mathematics teachers’ judgment accuracy and calibration accuracy: Do they predict students’ mathematics achievement outcomes? Learning and Instruction, 45(1), 4960.Google Scholar
Givvin, K. B., Stipek, D. J., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). In the eyes of the beholder: Students’ and teachers’ judgments of students motivation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(3), 321331.Google Scholar
Hauser-Cram, P., Selcuk, R. S., & Stipek, D. (2003). When teachers’ and parents’ values differ: Teachers’ ratings of academic competence in children from low-income families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 813820.Google Scholar
Hecht, S. A. & Greenfield, D. B. (2002). Explaining the predictive accuracy of teacher judgments of their students’ reading achievement: The role of gender, classroom behavior, and emergent literacy skills in longitudinal sample of children exposed to poverty. Reading and Writing, 15(7–8), 789809.Google Scholar
Helmke, A., & Schrader, F. W. (1987). Interactional effects of instructional quality and teacher judgement accuracy on achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(2), 9198.Google Scholar
Helwig, R., Anderson, L., & Tindal, G. (2001). Influence of elementary student gender on teachers perceptions of mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 95(1), 93102.Google Scholar
Hertzog, C., Dunlosky, J., Robinson, A. E., & Kidder, D. P. (2003). Encoding fluency is a cue utilized for judgments about learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(1), 2234.Google Scholar
Hinnant, J. B., O’Brien, M., & Ghazarian, S. R. (2009). The longitudinal relations of teacher expectations to achievement in the early school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 662670.Google Scholar
Hoge, R. D. & Coladarci, T. (1989). Teacher-based judgments of academic achievement: A review of literature. Review of Educational Research, 59(3), 297313.Google Scholar
Hughes, J. N., Luo, W., Kwok, O. M., & Loyd, L. K. (2008). Teacher-student support, effortful engagement, and achievement: A 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 114.Google Scholar
Hurwitz, J. T., Elliot, S. N., & Braden, J. P. (2007). The influence of test familiarity and student disability status upon teachers’ judgments of students’ test performance. School Psychology Quarterly, 22, 115144.Google Scholar
Jenkins, L. N. & Demaray, M. K. (2016). Teachers’ judgments of academic achievement of children with and without characteristics of inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity. Contemporary School Psychology, 20(2), 183191.Google Scholar
Kaiser, J., Retelsdorf, J., Südkamp, A., & Möller, J. (2013). Achievement and engagement: How student characteristics influence teacher judgments. Learning and Instruction, 28(1), 7384.Google Scholar
Kaiser, J., Südkamp, A., & Möller, J. (2017). The effects of student characteristics on teachers’ judgment accuracy: Disentangling ethnicity, minority status, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(6), 871888.Google Scholar
Kikas, E., Silinskas, G., & Soodla, P. (2015). The effect of children’s reading skill and interest on teacher perceptions of children’s skill and individualized support. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 39(5), 402412.Google Scholar
Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126(4), 349370.Google Scholar
Koriat, A. & Bjork, R. A. (2005). Illusions of competence in monitoring one’s knowledge during study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(2), 187194.Google Scholar
Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Leinhardt, G. (1983). Novice and expert knowledge of individual student’s achievement. Educational Psychologist, 18(2), 165179.Google Scholar
Leinhardt, G. & Smith, D. A. (1985). Expertise in mathematics instruction: Subject matter knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(3), 247271.Google Scholar
Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K.E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P.W. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
Martínez, J. F., Stecher, B., & Borko, H. (2009). Classroom assessment practices, teacher judgments, and student achievement in mathematics: Evidence from the ECLS. Educational Assessment, 14(1), 78102.Google Scholar
Mizala, A., Martínez, F., Martínez, S. (2015). Pre-service elementary school teachers’ expectations about student performance: How their beliefs are affected by their mathematics anxiety and student’s gender. Teaching and Teacher Education, 50(1), 7078.Google Scholar
NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. O. & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In Bower, G. H. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation, vol. 26, pp. 125141. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Nurmi, J. E. (2012). Students’ characteristics and teacher-child relationships in instruction: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 7(3), 177197.Google Scholar
Oswalt, S. G. (2013). Identifying formative assessment in classroom instruction: Creating an instrument to observe use of formative assessment in practice (Doctoral dissertation). http://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1772&context=td.Google Scholar
Peterson, P. L., Carpenter, T., & Fennema, E. (1989). Teachers’ knowledge of students’ knowledge in mathematics problem solving: Correlational and case analyses. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(4), 558569.Google Scholar
Randel, B., Apthorp, H., Beesley, A. D., Clark, T. F., & Wang, X. (2016). Impacts of professional development in classroom assessment on teacher and student outcomes. The Journal of Educational Research, 109(5), 491502.Google Scholar
Rausch, T., Karing, C., Dörfler, T., & Artelt, C. (2016). Personality similarity between teachers and their students influences teacher judgment of student achievement. Educational Psychology, 36(5), 863878.Google Scholar
Rawson, K. A., O’Neil, R., & Dunlosky, J. (2011). Accurate monitoring leads to effective control and greater learning of patient education materials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(3), 288302.Google Scholar
Ready, D. D. & Wright, D. L. (2011). Accuracy and inaccuracy in teachers’ perceptions of young children’s cognitive abilities the role of child background and classroom context. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 335360.Google Scholar
Robinson, E. A., Hertzog, C, & Dunlosky, J. (2006). Aging, encoding fluency, and metacognitive monitoring. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 13(3–4), 458478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, J., Myran, S., Strauss, R., & Reed, W. (2014). The impact of an alternative professional development model on teacher practices in formative assessment and student learning. Teacher Development, 18(2), 141162.Google Scholar
Ruiz-Primo, M. A. & Furtak, E. M. (2007). Exploring teachers’ informal formative assessment practices and students’ understanding in the context of scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 5784.Google Scholar
Shavelson, R. J. (1978). Teachers’ estimates of student “states of mind” and behavior. Journal of Teacher Education, 29(5), 3740.Google Scholar
Shavelson, R. J., Young, D. B., Ayala, C. C., Brandon, P. R., Furtak, E., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Tomita, M. K., Yin, Y. (2008). On the impact of curriculum-embedded formative assessment on learning: A collaboration between curriculum and assessment developers. Applied Measurement in Education, 21(4), 295314.Google Scholar
Skinner, E. & Belmont, M. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571581.Google Scholar
Son, L. K. & Metcalfe, J. (2000). Metacognitive control strategies in study-time allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(1), 204–221.Google Scholar
Spinath, B. (2005). Accuracy of teacher judgments on student characteristics and the construct of diagnostic competence. Zeitschrift Fur Padagogische Psychologie, 19(1), 8595.Google Scholar
Stein, M. K., Engle, R. A., Smith, M. S., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 10(4), 313340.Google Scholar
Stiggins, R. (2008). Student-involved assessment for learning. Upper Saddle River: NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
Stiggins, R. J. & Chappuis, J. (2006). What a difference a word makes: Assessment “for” learning rather than assessment “of” learning helps students succeed. Journal of Staff Development, 27(1), 1014.Google Scholar
Südkamp, A., Kaiser, J., & Möller, J. (2012). Accuracy of teachers’ judgments of students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 743762.Google Scholar
Südkamp, A. & Möller, J. (2009). Reference-group-effects in a simulated classroom: Direct and indirect judgments. Zeitschrift Fur Padagogische Psychologie, 23(1), 161174.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 6673.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Brendefur, J. L., Osguthorpe, R. D., Carney, M.B., Bremner, A., Strother, S., Oswalt, S., Snow, J. L. Sutton, J., & Jesse, D. (2015). Can teachers accurately predict student performance? Teaching and Teacher Education, 49(1), 3644.Google Scholar
Thiede, K.W. & Dunlosky, J. (1999). Toward a general model of self-regulated study: An analysis of selection of items for study and self-paced study time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 25(4), 10241037.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Anderson, M.C.M. (2010). Poor metacomprehension accuracy as a result of inappropriate cue use. Discourse Processes, 47(4), 331362.Google Scholar
Thiede, K.W., Redford, J.S., Wiley, J., & Griffin, T.D. (2012). Elementary school experience with comprehension testing may influence metacomprehension accuracy among 7th and 8th graders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 554564.Google Scholar
Van Loon, M. H., de Bruin, A. B. H., van Gog, T., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Dunlosky, J. (2014). Can students evaluate their understanding of cause-and-effect relations? The effect of diagram completion on monitoring accuracy. Acta Psychologica, 151(1), 143154.Google Scholar
Wiliam, D. (2010). An integrative summary of the research literature and implications for a new theory of formative assessment. In Andrade, H. L. & Cizek, G. J. (eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 1840). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In Boekaerts, M. and Pintrich, P. (eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531566). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

References

Baker, L. (2016). The development of metacognitive knowledge and control of comprehension. Improving Reading Comprehension through Metacognitive Reading Strategies Instruction, 1.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In Metcalfe, J. & Shimamura, A. P. (eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185206). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Campitelli, G. & Gobet, F. (2011). Deliberate practice: Necessary but not sufficient. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(5), 280285.Google Scholar
Caverly, D. C., Orlando, V. P., & Mullen, J. L. (2000). Textbook study reading. In Flippo, R. F. & Caverly, D. C. (eds.), Teaching reaching and study strategies at the college level (pp. 86165). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Chipman, S. F., Segal, J. W., & Glaser, R. (1985). Thinking and learning skills. Vol. 2: Research and open questions. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Corno, L. (1994). Student volition and education: Outcomes, influences and practices. In Zimmerman, B. J. & Schunk, D. H. (eds.). Self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 229254). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Credé, M. & Kuncel, N. R. (2008). Study habits, skills, and attitudes: The third pillar supporting collegiate academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 425453.Google Scholar
Dearborn, G. V. N. (1916). How to learn easily: Practical hints on economical study. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Derry, S. J. (1990). Learning strategies for acquiring useful knowledge. Jones, B. F. & Idol, L. (eds.) Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 347379). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Donker, A. S., de Boer, H., Kostons, D., Dignath van Ewijk, C. C., & van der Werf, M. P. C. (2014). Effectiveness of learning strategy instruction on academic performance: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 11,126.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Hertzog, C. (1998). Training programs to improve learning in later adulthood: Helping older adults educate themselves. Metacognition in educational theory and practice, 249, 276.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J. & Thiede, K. W. (2004). Causes and constraints of the shift-to-easier-materials effect in the control of study. Memory and Cognition, 32 (5), 779788.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 458.Google Scholar
Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House Digital.Google Scholar
Flavell, J. H., Friedrichs, A. G., & Hoyt, J. D. (1970). Developmental changes in memorization processes. Cognitive Psychology, 1(4), 324340.Google Scholar
Graham, S. & Weiner, B. (2012). Motivation: Past, present and future. In Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Urdan, T. (eds.), APA Educational psychology handbook. Vol. 1: Theories, constructs, and critical issues. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Hadwin, A. F. & Winne, P. H. (1996). Study strategies have meager support: A review with recommendations for implementation. Journal of Higher Education, 67, 692715.Google Scholar
Hadwin, A. F. & Winne, P. H. (2012). Promoting learning skills in undergraduate students. In Lawson, M. J. & Kirby, J. R. (eds.), Enhancing the quality of learning: Dispositions, instruction, and mental structures (pp. 201227). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hartwig, M. K. & Dunlosky, J. (2012). Study strategies of college students: Are self-testing and scheduling related to achievement?. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 19 (1), 126134.Google Scholar
Hattie, J., Biggs, J., & Purdie, N. (1996). Effects of learning skills interventions on student learning: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66, 99136.Google Scholar
Hebert, M., Bohaty, J. J., Nelson, J. R., & Brown, J. (2016). The effects of text structure instruction on expository reading comprehension: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(5), 609629.Google Scholar
Hinsdale, B. A. (1910). The art of study. New York: American Book Company.Google Scholar
Idol, L. & Jones, B. F. (1991). Educational values and cognitive instruction: Implications for reform. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Johns, J. L. & McNamara, L. P. (1980). The SQ3 R study technique: A forgotten research target. Journal of Reading, 23, 705708.Google Scholar
Jones, B. F. & Idol, L. (eds.) (1990). Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Karpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C., & Roediger III, H. L. (2009). Metacognitive strategies in student learning: Do students practise retrieval when they study on their own? Memory, 17(4), 471479.Google Scholar
Koriat, A. (2007). Metacognition and consciousness. In Zelazo, P. D., Moscovitch, M., & Thompson, E. (eds.), Cambridge handbook of consciousness (pp. 289325). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kornell, N. & Bjork, R. A. (2007). The promise and perils of self-regulated study. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 219224.Google Scholar
Marzouk, Z., Rakovic, M., Liaqat, A., Vytasek, J. Samadi, D., Stewart-Alonso, J., Ram, I., Woloshen, S., Winne, P. H., & Nesbit, J. C. (2016). What if learning analytics were based on learning science? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 32(6). https://ajet.org.au/index.php/AJET/article/view/3058/1433Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A. & Kearney, E. M. (1984). Optimal learning strategies and their spontaneous use: The importance of task-appropriate processing. Memory & Cognition, 12(4), 361373.Google Scholar
McKeachie, W. J. (1988). The need for study strategy training. In Weinstein, C. E., Goetz, E. T., & Alexander, P. A. (eds.), Learning and study strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation (pp. 39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. (2002). Is study time allocated selectively to a region of proximal learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology-General, 131 (3), 349363.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. & Kornell, N. (2003). The dynamics of learning and allocation of study time to a region of proximal learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132 (4), 530542Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. & Kornell, N. (2005). A region of proximal learning model of study time allocation. Journal of Memory and Language, 52 (4), 463477.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognitive judgments and control of study. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 159163.Google Scholar
Meyer, B. J. F. (1975). The organization of prose and its effects on memory. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing.Google Scholar
Mulcavy-Ernt, P. I. & Caverly, D. C. (2009). Strategic study-reading. In Flippo, R. F. & Caverly, D. C. (eds.), Handbook of college reading and study strategy research (pp. 177198). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. O. & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition? In Metcalfe, J. & Shimamura, A. P. (eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 125). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Pauk, W. (1991). How to study in college. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 353387.Google Scholar
Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 261288.Google Scholar
Roll, I. & Winne, P. H. (2015). Understanding, evaluating, and supporting self-regulated learning using learning analytics. Journal of Learning Analytics, 2(1), 712.Google Scholar
Scouller, K. (1998). The influence of assessment method on students’ learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. Higher Education, 35, 453472Google Scholar
Segal, J. W., Chipman, S. F., & Glaser, R. (1985). Thinking and learning skills. Vol. 1: Relating instruction to research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63(2), 129138.Google Scholar
Sitzmann, T. & Ely, K. (2011). A meta-analysis of self-regulated learning in work-related training and educational attainment: what we know and where we need to go. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 421–42.Google Scholar
Son, L. K. (2010). Metacognitive control and the spacing effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(1), 255262.Google Scholar
Son, L. K. & Metcalfe, J. (2000). Metacognitive and control strategies in study-time allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(1), 20 r-221.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95 (1), 6673.Google Scholar
Thiede, K. W. & Dunlosky, J. (1999). Toward a general model of self-regulated study: An analysis of selection of items for study and self-paced study time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25 (4), 1024.Google Scholar
Weiner, B. (2010). The development of an attribution-based theory of motivation: A history of ideas. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 2836.Google Scholar
Weinstein, C. E., Goetz, E. T., & Alexander, P. A. (1988). Learning and study strategies. Issues in assessment, instruction and evaluation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Whipple, G. M. (1916). How to study effectively. Bloomington, IL: Public School Publishing.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (1995a). Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30, 173187.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (1995b). Self regulation is ubiquitous but its forms vary with knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 30, 223228.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (1997). Experimenting to bootstrap self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 397410.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (2006). How software technologies can improve research on learning and bolster school reform. Educational Psychologist, 41, 517.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (2010). Bootstrapping learner’s self-regulated learning. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 52, 472490.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (2013). Learning strategies, study skills and self-regulated learning in postsecondary education. In Paulsen, M. B. (ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research. Vol. 28 (pp. 377403). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (2014). Issues in researching self-regulated learning as patterns of events. Metacognition and Learning, 9 (2), 229237.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (2017a). The trajectory of research on self-regulated learning. In Michalsky, T. (ed.), Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Vol. 116: Self-regulated learning: Conceptualizations, contributions, and empirically based models for teaching and learning. Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of EducationGoogle Scholar
Winne, P. H. (2017b). Cognition and metacognition in self-regulated learning. In Schunk, D. & Greene, J (eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. (2nd ed. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. (2017c). Leveraging big data to help each learner upgrade learning and accelerate learning science. Teachers College Record, 119(3), 124.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. & Azevedo, R. (2014). Metacognition. In Sawyer, R. K. (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, 2nd edn (pp. 6387). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H., Gupta, L., & Nesbit, J. C. (1994). Exploring individual differences in studying strategies using graph theoretic statistics. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 40, 177193.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. & Hadwin, A. F. (2008). The weave of motivation and self-regulated learning. In Schunk, D. H. & Zimmerman, B. J. (eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 297314). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. & Jamieson-Noel, D. L. (2002). Exploring students’ calibration of self-reports about study tactics and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 551572.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. & Marx, R. W. (1987). The best tool teachers have: Their students’ thinking. In Berliner, D. & Rosenshine, B. (eds.), Talks to teachers: A festschrift for N. L. Gage (pp. 267304). New York: Random House. Note: This article was misprinted identifying Marx as first author.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P., & Zeidner, M. (eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531566). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H., Vytasek, J. M., Patzak, A., Rakovic, M., Marzouk, Z., Savoji, Pakdaman, Ram, I., Samadi, D., Lin, M. P. C., Liu, A., Liaqat, A., Nashaat, N., Mozaffari, Z., Stewart-Alonso, J., & Nesbit, J. C. (2017). Designs for learning analytics to support information problem solving. In Buder, J. & Hesse, F. W. (eds.) Informational environments: Effects of use, effective designs (pp. 249272). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H., Zhou, M., & Egan, R. (2011). Designing assessments of self-regulated learning. In Schraw, G. & Robinson, D. H. (eds.), Assessment of higher-order thinking skills (pp. 89118). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar