Before self-scoring, high-performing primary students make more accurate monitoring judgments of math problem performance than low-performing students (unskilled-and-unaware effect)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? On both multiplication and division tasks, skill group significantly predicted absolute monitoring accuracy before self-scoring, with high-performing students more accurate than low-performing students. → 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 regression analysis of judgments from fourth-grade students (495 multiplication, 359 division analyses) across two days, comparing low- versus high-performing quartiles. The study found "high-performing students making more accurate monitoring judgments than low-performing students" on both tasks; low performers substantially overestimated (multiplication monitoring bias M = 1.34).

"For both tasks, skill group was a statistically significant predictor of absolute monitoring accuracy before self-scoring, with high-performing students making more accurate monitoring judgments than low-performing students (Table 2)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Before self-scoring, the unskilled-and-unaware effect in regulation accuracy appears on multiplication but not on division tasks — related
• After self-scoring, the monitoring-accuracy gap between low- and high-performing students remains on multiplication (small) but disappears on division — related
• 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
• Prior Knowledge Needed For Accurate Self Assessment — a broader claim this one bears on
• In this sample the best-performing university students calibrated slightly worse than the lowest-performing students, so no unskilled-and-unaware effect was supported — related
• High achievers are more accurate than low achievers in metacognitive monitoring and controlling during test taking — related
• Students' monitoring judgments predict their regulation judgments before and after self-scoring — related