In this study, an alternative assessment for measuring metacognition in mathematics (MIM) is proposed. The reliability of the MIM is examined (Cronbach α=.905) while the Split-half reliability test is done (Cronbach α = .825). The factor analysis yielded four factors which were 'prediction', 'planning', 'monitoring' and 'evaluation'. Meanwhile, the MIM yielded a small linear relationship with the High School Entrance Exam (HSEE) (r=.285, p<.001) which is highly consistent with recent research findings. Planning seems to have the highest linear relationship with mathematics performance among all metacognitive skills (r=.346, ρ<.001). On the other hand, the academic performance of senior two students (M=76,SD=22.2) was found to be significantly lower than those of senior three students (M=170,SD=19.0) while no significant difference was found in metacognition. It is believed that the Content-specific knowledge would become more and more dominant in predicting the academic success when the level of study increases. Copyright © 2017 Center for Promoting Ideas, USA.
|Journal||American International Journal of Contemporary Research|
|Publication status||Published - Dec 2017|
CitationFung, C. H., & Leung, C. K. (2017). Pilot study on the validity and reliability of MIM: An alternative assessment for measuring metacognition in mathematics among college students. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 7(4), 11-22.
- Alternative assessment
- Domain-specific instrument and mathematical modelling