The assessment of metacognition in children aged 4-16 years: a systematic review

Louise Gascoine, Steve Higgins, Kate Wall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This article presents the results of a syste matic review of methods that have been used to measure or assess metacognition in children aged 4-16 years over a 20-year period (1992-2012). It includes an overview of the types of tool and methods used linked with the ages of the participants targeted an d how metacognition and associated concepts are defined. 2721 records were identified through systematic searching; 525 articles or reports were full text screened, resulting in 149 included studies reporting 84 distinct tools or methods. Of these four we re excluded from further analysis after appraisal for reliability, validity and replicability. The final number of methods and tools for metacognitive assessment included in the analysis is 80. The key findings of this review include:
• Self-report measures (including questionnaires, surveys and tests) comprise 61% of the included tools.
• Observational methods that do not rely on prompting to ‘think aloud’ (Think Aloud Protocols) have only been used with students aged 9 years and under;
• Information about relia bility and validity is not always given or given accurately for different tools and methods;
• The definition of metacognition in a particular study relates directly to its assessment and therefore its outcomes: this can be misaligned.
LanguageEnglish
Pages3-57
Number of pages54
JournalReview of Education
Volume5
Early online date30 May 2016
DOIs
StatePublished - 5 Feb 2017

Fingerprint

questionnaire
student

Keywords

  • metacognition
  • systematic review
  • research methods

Cite this

@article{9495d5538f854a52a6d76556ee5d478a,
title = "The assessment of metacognition in children aged 4-16 years: a systematic review",
abstract = "This article presents the results of a syste matic review of methods that have been used to measure or assess metacognition in children aged 4-16 years over a 20-year period (1992-2012). It includes an overview of the types of tool and methods used linked with the ages of the participants targeted an d how metacognition and associated concepts are defined. 2721 records were identified through systematic searching; 525 articles or reports were full text screened, resulting in 149 included studies reporting 84 distinct tools or methods. Of these four we re excluded from further analysis after appraisal for reliability, validity and replicability. The final number of methods and tools for metacognitive assessment included in the analysis is 80. The key findings of this review include: • Self-report measures (including questionnaires, surveys and tests) comprise 61{\%} of the included tools. • Observational methods that do not rely on prompting to ‘think aloud’ (Think Aloud Protocols) have only been used with students aged 9 years and under; • Information about relia bility and validity is not always given or given accurately for different tools and methods; • The definition of metacognition in a particular study relates directly to its assessment and therefore its outcomes: this can be misaligned.",
keywords = "metacognition, systematic review, research methods",
author = "Louise Gascoine and Steve Higgins and Kate Wall",
year = "2017",
month = "2",
day = "5",
doi = "10.1002/rev3.3077",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
pages = "3--57",
journal = "Review of Education",
issn = "2049-6613",

}

The assessment of metacognition in children aged 4-16 years : a systematic review. / Gascoine, Louise; Higgins, Steve; Wall, Kate.

In: Review of Education, Vol. 5, 05.02.2017, p. 3-57.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The assessment of metacognition in children aged 4-16 years

T2 - Review of Education

AU - Gascoine,Louise

AU - Higgins,Steve

AU - Wall,Kate

PY - 2017/2/5

Y1 - 2017/2/5

N2 - This article presents the results of a syste matic review of methods that have been used to measure or assess metacognition in children aged 4-16 years over a 20-year period (1992-2012). It includes an overview of the types of tool and methods used linked with the ages of the participants targeted an d how metacognition and associated concepts are defined. 2721 records were identified through systematic searching; 525 articles or reports were full text screened, resulting in 149 included studies reporting 84 distinct tools or methods. Of these four we re excluded from further analysis after appraisal for reliability, validity and replicability. The final number of methods and tools for metacognitive assessment included in the analysis is 80. The key findings of this review include: • Self-report measures (including questionnaires, surveys and tests) comprise 61% of the included tools. • Observational methods that do not rely on prompting to ‘think aloud’ (Think Aloud Protocols) have only been used with students aged 9 years and under; • Information about relia bility and validity is not always given or given accurately for different tools and methods; • The definition of metacognition in a particular study relates directly to its assessment and therefore its outcomes: this can be misaligned.

AB - This article presents the results of a syste matic review of methods that have been used to measure or assess metacognition in children aged 4-16 years over a 20-year period (1992-2012). It includes an overview of the types of tool and methods used linked with the ages of the participants targeted an d how metacognition and associated concepts are defined. 2721 records were identified through systematic searching; 525 articles or reports were full text screened, resulting in 149 included studies reporting 84 distinct tools or methods. Of these four we re excluded from further analysis after appraisal for reliability, validity and replicability. The final number of methods and tools for metacognitive assessment included in the analysis is 80. The key findings of this review include: • Self-report measures (including questionnaires, surveys and tests) comprise 61% of the included tools. • Observational methods that do not rely on prompting to ‘think aloud’ (Think Aloud Protocols) have only been used with students aged 9 years and under; • Information about relia bility and validity is not always given or given accurately for different tools and methods; • The definition of metacognition in a particular study relates directly to its assessment and therefore its outcomes: this can be misaligned.

KW - metacognition

KW - systematic review

KW - research methods

UR - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rev3.3077/abstract

U2 - 10.1002/rev3.3077

DO - 10.1002/rev3.3077

M3 - Article

VL - 5

SP - 3

EP - 57

JO - Review of Education

JF - Review of Education

SN - 2049-6613

ER -