The Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory.

Abstract

Abstract This study investigated the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory. The sample of the study consisted of 607 university students. Results of language equivalence indicated that the correlations between Turkish and English forms of the MAI were quite high (r = .93). As a result of a series of factor analyses eight subscales have emerged under the and regulation of cognition. These subscales were declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, conditional knowledge, planning, monitoring, evaluation, debugging, and information management. The internal consistency of the entire inventory was .95. The item-total correlations ranged from .35 to .65 and test-retest reliability coefficient was .95. According to these findings, the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory is a valid and reliable instrument that can be used in the field of education. Key Words Metacognitive Awareness, Validity, Reliability, Factor Analysis It is important for students to be aware of their strengths and limitations as learners. In last twenty years, metacognition has been receiving increased attention in cognitive psychology. Specific attention has been focused on this construct as the interface between cognition and affect and its essential role in self-regulation in achievement settings (Carrell, Gajdusek, & Wise, 1998; Lucangeli & Cornoldi, 1997). Metacognition itself does not predict achievement, but theorists believe that it may serve as a mediator to learning (Braten, 1991; Bruning, Schraw, & Ronning, 1995). Pintrich & De Groot, 1990). Highly metacognitive individuals do better than others in planning, managing information, monitoring, debugging, and evaluating (Anderson & Walker, 1991; Schraw & Dennison 1994). The concept of metacognition was introduced by John Flavell in the early 1970s, based on the term metamemory, previously conceived by the same scholar (Butler & Winne, 1995; Campbell, 1999; Delclos & Harrington, 1991). Flavell (1979) regarded metacognition as learners' of their own cognition, defining it as knowledge and cognition cognitive phenomena (p. 906). Metacognition is often referred to in the literature as 'thinking one's own thinking', or 'cognitions cognitions'. It is usually associated with learners' knowledge, awareness, and control of the processes by which they learn (Brown 1987; Garner & Alexander 1989) and the metacognitive learner is believed to be characterized by ability to recognize, evaluate, and where needed reconstruct existing ideas (Blank, 2000; Gunstone, 1991; Wellman, 1985). Though no universally accepted definition of metacognition can be found in the literature, many researchers agree on common fundamental components of metacognition and they suggest that metacognition can be classified into two main components as; of cognition and regulation of cognition (Brown, 1987; Everson & Tobias, 1998; Flavell, 1987; Forrest-Pressley & Waller; 1984; Mazzoni & Nelson, 1998; Metcalfe & Shimmura, 1994; Nelson & Narens, 1990; Schraw & Dennison, 1994). Knowledge of cognition refers to what individuals know their own cognition or cognition in general (Kumar, 1998; Kyllonen & Woltz, 1989). It includes at least three different kinds of metacognitive awareness: Declarative, procedural, and conditional (Brown, 1987; Jacobs & Paris, 1987; Schraw & Moshman, 1995). Declarative refers to knowing about things. Procedural refers to knowing how to do things. Conditional refers to knowing the why and when aspects of cognition. Regulation of cognition refers to a set of activities that help students control their learning (Gavelek & Raphael, 1982; Gourgey, 1998; Hartman, 1998). Although a number of regulatory skills have been defined in the literature, three basic skills are included in all accounts: Planning, monitoring, and evaluation (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2000; Jacobs & Paris, 1987). …