American Educational Research Association 2000, New Orleans: Roundtable Metacognitive Self-Regulation and Problem-Solving: Expanding the Theory Base Through Factor Analysis

Abstract

This instrument development study had two goals. First, we had the pragmatic goal of developing a measurement tool that would be valid for research and useful for assessment and intervention in classrooms. Second, we sought to develop theory in the area of self-regulated learning. To accomplish these goals, we began with theory-driven ideas and existing instruments, and combined these with constructs that emerged from exploratory factor analysis. Our results indicate that metacognitive awareness and regulatory skills in a problem-solving context are comprised of five independent factors: Knowledge of Cognition, Objectivity, Problem Representation, Subtask Monitoring, and Evaluation. This research had two phases. In the first phase, we reviewed current techniques for measuring variables related to metacognition and self-regulation and decided on a self-report measure— mainly for pragmatic reasons. Next, data was collected using two existing inventories related to metacognition and problem solving. After eliminating items based on reliability analyses, remaining items were factor-analyzed resulting in five factors. In the second phase, a new inventory was developed focusing on these five factors. Again, reliability analyses were conducted, and the remaining items were factor-analyzed. Our results have important implications for education. They indicate that there are five particular metacognitive and self-regulatory constructs relevant to problem solving. Being able to identify and delineate these constructs further should allow our educational research and teacher professional development teams to begin providing teachers with a set of tools and training resources to help them promote student self-regulation in their classrooms. These resources would be important to teachers who are concerned not only about what students learn but also about how they learn it. Further, our analyses indicate that the constructs measured by the IMSR are independent, and therefore a student may show preferences or “styles” of metacognitive strengths and weaknesses that depend upon his or her unique combination of constructs. If these “styles” can be further understood and delineated, it might be possible to train students to habitually use particular regulatory behaviors.