Making Students' Metacognitive Knowledge Visible Through Reflective Writing in a Mathematics-for-Teachers Course
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metacognition directly contributes to learning, performance, and beliefs about the self as a learner. This paper describes the rationale, implementation, and assessment of a weekly online reflection activity based on instructor prompts designed for post-secondary students who aspire to be elementary school teachers. Our study defines four categories of metacognitive knowledge that speak to the specific goals of the course and the characteristics of the students. Using these categories, 71 students’ written responses to four reflection prompts from three course offerings were coded, and their effects were examined in terms of types of metacognitive knowledge demonstrated. Our results not only confirm that students were engaged in metacognition through the reflection activity but also show that students exhibited different categories of metacognitive knowledge in relation to the varying emphases of the prompts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it