Teachers show stronger regulation than students: both select lower-JOL texts for restudy, but the JOL–restudy correlation is significantly stronger for teachers (Experiment 1).¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Teacher regulation grand mean was −.635 and student regulation −.379; the classroom-level difference was significant, t(26) = 3.227, p = .004. → Jan A. A. Engelen 2018

Evidence¶

Jan A. A. Engelen 2018¶

Jan A. A. Engelen, Gino Camp, Janneke van de Pol, Anique B. H. de Bruin. (2018). Teachers' monitoring of students' text comprehension: can students' keywords and summaries improve teachers' judgment accuracy? Metacognition and Learning 13:287–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-018-9187-4

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Experiment 1 compared regulation (gamma between JOLs and restudy selections) aggregated at classroom level via independent-samples t-tests. Teachers' grand mean was −.635 and students' −.379; the difference was "significantly higher for teachers than for students", t(26) = 3.227, p = .004.

"Regulation w as significantly higher for teachers than for students, Mdiff =. 2 5 3 ,t(26) = 3.227, p = .004."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Teachers' intra-individual monitoring accuracy of students' text-by-text learning is not better than chance and is not improved by students' keywords or summaries (Experiment 1). — related
• Teachers' inter-individual judgment accuracy (predicting differences between students) is well above chance (.528) even though their intra-individual accuracy is not (Experiment 1). — related
• Sixth-graders' own monitoring accuracy is low and does not differ between no-cue, keyword, and summary cue-prompt conditions (Experiment 1). — related