The Role of Metacognitive Knowledge in Learning, Teaching, and Assessing

By P. Pintrich. 2002

1,524 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e3f125c4e15176d2f34540b7feece1c1b3d8dfd8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

The study, evaluation, and improvement of university student self-efficacy (2016, background): “…better, collaborate with an educational psychology scholar to embed self-regulated learning (SRL) instruction within your regular semester-based courses, as it is argued that embedded instruction of such skills is more effective than generic strategy training (Pintrich 2002; Randi and Corno 2000).”
Biology in bloom: implementing Bloom's Taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology. (2008, background): “, metacognition) is crucial to successful learning (Schraw, 1998; Bransford et al., 2000; Pintrich, 2002; D’Avanzo, 2003; Coutinho, 2007).”
The assessment of metacognition in children aged 4–16 years: a systematic review (2017, methodology): “Pintrich (2002) divided strategic knowledge or metacognitive knowledge of strategy into different types of strategies, which based on the work of Weinstein & Mayer (1986) were: rehearsal (e.g. repeating words over and over to remember), elaboration (e.g. mnemonics for memory, summarising,…”
Malleability, plasticity, and individuality: How children learn and develop in context1 (2019, background): “Such strategies encourage students to reflect on their affective states, how well they are learning, and how new knowledge fits into existing knowledge, increasing self-awareness, expertise, and the ability to transfer knowledge to new situations and problems (Clark, 2006; Pintrich, 2002).”
Students’ perspectives of using cooperative learning in a flipped statistics classroom (2015, background): “…research particularly indicates that learning is greatly enhanced when learners are required to engage in the application of analysis, evaluation, and creation of higher-level thinking skills, as identified in Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy (Ferguson, 2002; Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer, 2002; Pintrich, 2002).”
Peer reviewers learn from giving comments (2011, background): “Students may overestimate the overall quality of their writing after receiving strength comments on surface features, which prevents them from improving the quality of their writing (Pintrich 2002).”
Differences in students' metacognitive strategy knowledge, motivation, and strategy use: A typology of self-regulated learners (2016, background): “It is verbalizable and consciously accessible knowledge that affects the information and memory process (Pintrich, 2002).”
Aspects of pedagogy supporting metacognition and self-regulation in mathematical learning of young children: evidence from an observational study (2010, background): “Flavell, 1987; Pintrich, 2002; Schneider & Lockl, 2002): the individual’s knowledge about personal, task and strategy variables affecting their cognitive performance.”
Online self-assessment with feedback and metacognitive knowledge (2010, background): “(c) Including both concepts in the self-regulated learning construct, following the line of Boekaerts (1999), Pintrich (2002, 2004) or Zimmerman (1995).”
Modeling the Relationships among Students' Motivational Beliefs, Metacognitive Strategy Use, and Effort Regulation (2007, background): “…that can be included in the model, four seem particularly important, namely self-efficacy, control of learning beliefs, task value, and intrinsic goal orientation in metacognitive strategy use and effort regulation (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002; Pintrich & De Groot, 1990; VanderStoep et al., 1996).”
Asynchronous Discussions and Assessment in Online Learning (2007, background): “In assessment, “a focus on self-knowledge implies that students should have the opportunity to assess their own strengths and weaknesses” (Pintrich, 2002, p. 221).”