Most preservice teachers were overconfident in the completeness of their fraction comparison explanations at both first draft and revision¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2031: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Most preservice teachers showed limitations in calibration, indicating over-confidence in the degree of completeness of their explanations at both time points. → Guba 2026

Evidence¶

Guba 2026¶

Guba, T.-P., Barbieri, C. A., Jansen, A., & Morris, A. (2026). Supports for preservice teachers' metacognitive monitoring and explanations of fraction comparisons. Instructional Science (2026) 54:18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09773-0

q2 · i? · causal · r?

Calibration analysis comparing completeness scores to confidence ratings (1: Not at all Confident to 5: Very Confident), coded as Underconfident, Accurate, or Overconfident. Mean confidence was M = 4.28 (SD = 0.56) at first draft and M = 4.51 (SD = 0.60) at revision; the article reports "Most PSTs also showed limitations in calibration, indicating over-confidence."

"Participants were generally confident with mean confidence ratings of M = 4.28 (SD = 0.56) at first draft and M = 4.51 (SD = 0.60) at revision, collapsed across all tasks and conditions. Confidence ratings were broken into three categories: Underconfident (meaning they were less confident than their explanation was complete), Accurate (meaning their confidence matched their explanation completeness), and Overconfident (meaning they were more confident than their explanation was complete."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Correct exemplars supported greater detection and correction of errors and omissions in explanations than a list of steps focused on structural aspects — related
• A theoretical article, citing two simulation studies, reports that novice clinical learners overestimated their performance and that their confidence exceeded their accuracy — related
• In one 2×2 experiment with 120 undergraduates, an Assessment-Performance Calibration Activity (APCA) gave the most accurate self-assessment and least overconfidence, and adding a feedback-literacy script did not improve calibration further — related
• Prior Knowledge Needed For Accurate Self Assessment — a broader claim this one bears on
• Bias scores did not improve over the school year, but school year level mattered: year 1 students became less overconfident while year 3 students improved their underconfidence — related
• Email-detection confidence judgments show good calibration but poor resolution, with aggregate overconfidence of 18% — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Target strategy use did not vary by instructional support condition for any of the three fraction comparison tasks — related
• Metacognitive monitoring bias and precision modulate when students stop studying relative to their goals — related
• The comparison of decimal fractions undergoes developmental changes over the course of learning — related