Prospective teachers’ metacognition knowledge rose significantly from pre-test to post-test after inquiry learning about fluid in three classes with no control group, with high n-gain in Group A and moderate n-gain in Groups B and C¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · checked against its sources 2026-11-02 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Metacognition knowledge of prospective teachers rose significantly from pre-test to post-test in all three inquiry-taught classes (paired t-tests, p < 0.05); with no control class, the design cannot attribute the rise to inquiry learning. → Asy’ari 2019 q2 i? Pre-post n-gain on metacognition knowledge was high for Group A (0.71) and moderate for Group B (0.66) and Group C (0.63). → Asy’ari 2019 (2)

Evidence¶

Asy’ari 2019¶

Asy’ari, M., Ikhsan, M., & Muhali. (2019). The Effectiveness of Inquiry Learning Model in Improving Prospective Teachers’ Metacognition Knowledge and Metacognition Awareness. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 455-470. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12229a

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Weak-experimental one-group pretest-posttest study with three classes of 30 students each and no control class; paired t-tests in all three groups on a 20-item metacognition knowledge test showed significant pre-post increases, with t values of 92.343, 73.767 and 84.999 (df = 29 in Table 5; the prose quoted below says 30) at p < .05 (the Wilcoxon test was used only for Group A's awareness scores). Without a comparison group the increases cannot be attributed to inquiry learning rather than to testing, maturation or the course itself. No effect size printed.

"Table 5 shows that t -value of metacognition knowledge of subjects from three groups within degree of freedom (df) of 30, shown in sequence (A -B-C): t = 92,343; t = 73,767; t = 84,999."

Asy’ari 2019 (2)¶

Asy’ari, M., Ikhsan, M., & Muhali. (2019). The Effectiveness of Inquiry Learning Model in Improving Prospective Teachers’ Metacognition Knowledge and Metacognition Awareness. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 455-470. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12229a

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive n-gain analysis (Hake, 1999) of pretest-posttest scores across the three experimental groups; the article reports n-gain of 0.71 for Group A (high) and 0.66 and 0.63 for Groups B and C (moderate). These are descriptive pre-post gains with no control class, not effect sizes.

"Result of measuring Group A subjects’ metacognition knowledge, by calculating their average score, found score of n -gain of 0.71, in which improvements was found high. Group B and Group C recorded 0.66 and 0.63, improved at moderate level."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Metacognition — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Metacognition gains after inquiry learning differed across three classes: knowledge gains differed among all three, while awareness gains differed only between Group A and Groups B and C, not between B and C — related
• Prospective teachers’ overall metacognition awareness (MAI) rose significantly from pre-test to post-test after inquiry learning in three classes with no control group, at moderate overall n-gain in each class — related