Metacognitive scaffolding produced a small significant positive effect on the individual metacognitive knowledge students acquired¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 Students in scaffolding conditions acquired significantly more metacognitive knowledge than control students, t(108) = 1.63, p < 0.05 (one tailed), r = 0.16. → Molenaar 2010

Evidence¶

Molenaar 2010¶

Molenaar, I., van Boxtel, C. A. M., & Sleegers, P. J. C. (2010). Metacognitive scaffolding in an innovative learning arrangement. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-010-9154-1

q3 · i1 · causal · r2

Planned comparison of the control group with the two scaffolding conditions on a procedural knowledge test (writing steps for redoing the assignment, 18-point maximum). The article reports a significant small effect, r = 0.16; 27 students unable to answer were excluded, equally distributed over conditions.

"scaffolding did significantly affect metacognitive knowledge, t (108) = 1.63; p\0.05 (one tailed). The effect size r = 0. 16 indicated a small positive effect of scaffolding on the amount metacognitive knowledge acquired."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Problematizing scaffolds produced a small significant positive effect on individual metacognitive knowledge compared to structuring scaffolds — related
• Metacognitive scaffolding did not significantly affect group performance of collaborating triads, though the effect size indicated a small to medium positive effect — related
• Both structuring and problematizing avatar scaffolds raise elementary students' metacognitive knowledge relative to no scaffolding — related
• Metacognitive scaffolding had no significant effect on individual domain knowledge (recall, knowledge tests, or transfer), with effect sizes close to zero — related