Students' monitoring judgments predict their regulation judgments before and after self-scoring¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2022 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The magnitude of monitoring judgments significantly predicted regulation judgments (choosing practice or instruction versus nothing) for the whole sample and both skill subsets, on both tasks, before and after self-scoring. → Sophie Oudman 2021

Evidence¶

Sophie Oudman 2021¶

Sophie Oudman, Janneke van de Pol, Tamara van Gog. (2021). Effects of self-scoring their math problem solutions on primary school students' monitoring and regulation. Metacognition and Learning (2022) 17:213–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09281-9

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Multilevel logistic regression (RQ4A, before self-scoring) of monitoring judgments on regulation judgments; all printed odds ratios were significant (e.g., multiplication practice vs. nothing OR = 0.37). After self-scoring the relation held as well, with odds roughly two to nine times smaller per item.

"When students' monitoring judgments increased with one item, the odds of choosing for additional practice or instruction compared to no intervention became roughly two to seven times smaller."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Self-scoring improves primary students' monitoring accuracy on math problem-solving tasks to near-accurate levels — related
• Self-scoring improves regulation accuracy for the whole sample, but not significantly for low- and high-performing students on division tasks — related
• Before self-scoring, the unskilled-and-unaware effect in regulation accuracy appears on multiplication but not on division tasks — related
• Before self-scoring, high-performing primary students make more accurate monitoring judgments of math problem performance than low-performing students (unskilled-and-unaware effect) — related