APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
Developing Metacognition with LASSI Online
DOWNING, Kevin
City University of Hong Kong
SHIN, Kristina
Polytechnic University of Hong Kong
Abstract: The increased use of web-based learning, and pressure upon universities from both
employers and funding bodies to develop students with lifelong learning skills, has brought
about a shift in emphasis from a concentration on subject specialist knowledge towards more
generic skills that prepare students for a diverse and rapidly changing working environment.
As a result, attention has turned to the topic of metacognition or ‘thinking about thinking’
(Bogdan, 2000; Flavell, 1999; Metcalfe, 2000) and the twin challenges of producing students
that have developed metacognitive skills, and providing evidence that universities have
facilitated that development. This paper examines the impact of the introduction of the
Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) online in the promotion of a data driven
approach to facilitating and evidencing the development of metacognition at City University
of Hong Kong.
Introduction
Most academics now accept that web-based or e-learning is here to stay and it is no
longer a question of whether to use e-learning in a university course, rather one of how it is to
be used to best effect (Downing, 2001). Consequently, in order to be successful, increasing
numbers of online students are required to move from expectations of being told ‘what to
learn and when to learn it’ to a more complex learning environment which requires the
adoption of a more self-regulatory approach in order to achieve success (Phelps & Ellis,
2002b; McMahon, 2002). In many ways, this self-regulatory approach is very similar to what
will be expected of many graduates when they leave higher education and enter the
workplace (Lynch et al., 2006) and is consequently a desirable side-effect of e-learning.
Generic skills that can be developed at university and transferred to the workplace are
increasingly seen as part of the ‘added-value’ of higher education brought about in part by the
adoption of a competence or outcomes based approach, which Fuller & Unwin (2002)
suggests does little to prepare employees for change and future workplace roles, unless
supported through the development of metacognitive skills like problem-solving and critical
reflection.
Metacognition
Metacognition is best defined as ‘thinking about thinking’ (Bogdan, 2000; Flavell, 1999;
Metcalfe, 2000) however this definition requires further explanation, because metacognition
also involves knowing how to reflect and analyse thought, how to draw conclusions from that
analysis, and how to put what has been learned into practice. In order to solve problems,
students often need to understand how their mind functions. In other words, they need to
perceive how they perform important cognitive tasks such as remembering, learning and
problem solving. Kluwe (1987) noted two particular characteristics of metacognition: the
thinker knows something about his or her own and others’ thought processes, and the thinker
can pay attention to and change his or her thinking. This latter type of metacognition Kluwe
calls ‘executive processes’. Hacker (1998) points out the difference between cognitive tasks
(remembering things learned earlier that might help with the current task or problem) and
metacognitive tasks (monitoring and directing the process of problem solving), stressing the
1
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
importance of learning more about thinking. In defining metacognition as ‘thinking about
thinking’ or ‘second-order cognition’, Weinert (1987) acknowledges that purpose, conscious
understanding, ability to talk or write about tasks, and generalisability to other tasks are also
important factors in determining whether a given task is metacognitive. This viewpoint is
supported by Brown (1987) who agrees that metacognition requires the thinker to use and
describe the process of mental activity. Many other researchers also make the point that
metacognition is best defined by acknowledging that it is both knowledge about, and control
over thinking processes (Allen & Armour-Thomas, 1991).
Therefore, whilst cognition focuses on solving the problem, metacognition focuses on the
process of problem solving (Marchant, 2001).
Assessing Metacognition using the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI)
Metacognition can be assessed in a number of ways but one of the most popular methods
currently used in universities worldwide is through the use of questionnaires which require
students’ to report their perceptions about their thinking and problem-solving skills and
strategies. It is generally accepted that most students who struggle at university could
improve their performance considerably if they understood their learning process better.
Weinstein (1988) points out that grades begin to improve when students learn the tricks of
pinpointing the key points in lectures, and learning is more effective when we engage in
thinking about the processes of learning, thinking, and problem-solving. As a result of her
work in the field of strategic learning at the University of Texas at Austin, she developed the
Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) which is now the most widely used
learning inventory in the world (Weinstein, 1987). The LASSI measures student’s
perceptions of their study and learning strategies and methods. In other words, it is a measure
of the students thinking about their thinking, or metacognition. The tool consists of ten scales,
and eighty items which provide an assessment of students' awareness about and use of
learning and study strategies related to skill, will and self-regulation components of strategic
learning. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that these factors contribute significantly to
successful study, and that they can be learned or enhanced through educational interventions
such as learning and study skills courses (Weinstein, 1994a, 1994b; King, 1991; Letteri, 1992;
Hanley, 1995). The LASSI provides standardised scores for the ten different scales and
provides students with a diagnosis of their strengths and weaknesses, compared to other
students, in the areas covered. It measures three main areas of ‘strategic learning’:
i) Skill Component of Strategic Learning
These scales examine students' perception (metacognition) of their learning strategies,
skills and the thought processes related to identifying, acquiring and constructing meaning for
important new information, ideas and procedures. The LASSI scales related to the skill
component of strategic learning are:
• Information Processing-the ability to process ideas by mentally elaborating on
them and organizing them in meaningful ways.
• Selecting Main Ideas- the student’s ability to identify the important
information in a learning situation.
• Test Strategies-the student’s ability to prepare effectively for an examination
and to reason through a question when answering it.
.
ii) The Will Component of Strategic Learning
2
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
These scales measure students' perceptions of their receptivity to learning new
information, their attitudes and interest in college, their diligence, self-discipline, and
willingness to exert the effort necessary to successfully complete academic requirements, and
the degree to which they worry about their academic performance. The LASSI Scales related
to the will component of strategic learning are:
• Attitude-the student’s perceived motivation and interest to succeed in their
study, and willingness to perform the tasks necessary for academic success.
• Motivation-the extent to which the student accepts responsibility for
performing those tasks by using self-discipline and hard work.
• Anxiety-the degree of anxiety perceived by the student when approaching
academic tasks.
iii) The Self-regulation Component of Strategic Learning
These scales measure how students’ perceptions of how they manage, or self-regulate and
control, the whole learning process through using their time effectively, focusing their
attention and maintaining their concentration over time, checking to see if they have met the
learning demands for a class, an assignment or a test, and using study supports such as review
sessions, tutors or special features of a textbook. The LASSI Scales related to the self-
regulation component of strategic learning are:
• Concentration-the student’s perceived ability to focus his or her attention, and
avoid distractions, while working on school-related tasks like studying.
• Time Management-the student’s perception of the extent to which they create
and use schedules to manage their responsibilities effectively.
• Self-Testing-the student’s awareness of the importance of self-testing and
reviewing when learning material, and use of those practices.
• Study Aids-the student’s perceived ability to use or develop study aids that
assist with the learning process.
There is a wealth of research, making use of the LASSI as a measure of metacognition,
which identifies the value of learning to learn interventions in schools, colleges and
universities (Loomis, 2000), however few studies have used the online version of LASSI to
reinforce the overall added-value of thinking about thinking in an online learning
environment. Therefore, this study shares some of the online data produced by LASSI and
suggests how it might be used to provide evidence of metacognitive development in
undergraduates, and facilitate a data driven approach to enhancing the generic skills so valued
in the workplace. Successful e-learning requires high level self-regulatory skills so that
learners not only understand the text itself, but also browse through the space selectively with
a concurrent awareness of their study skills and strategies. This practice undoubtedly enables
successful e-learners to develop their metacognitive skills considerably. Vygotsky’s (1986)
view was that in order to subject a function to intellectual and voluntary control, we must first
possess that function. In other words, metacognition and self-reflection will develop first as a
skill before it can be used as a series of consciously controlled strategies, and this is
undoubtedly a skill which is required by any successful e-learner.
Method
(i) Sample
3
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
Starting from 2005-06 LASSI is offered online to all first-year undergraduate students at
City University of Hong Kong in order to help them monitor and develop appropriate
learning attitudes and strategies and maximize the opportunity for students to enjoy a
successful learning experience during university and beyond. As a pilot study, the LASSI is
currently offered on a voluntary, rather than compulsory, completion basis to all new
undergraduate students within weeks 3 to 5 of their first semester at City University. It is
anticipated that an interim test will follow this pre-test around the middle of the student’s
undergraduate programme, and that a post-test will be administered towards completion of
the undergraduate programme. In other words, each undergraduate student will take LASSI
three times during their undergraduate study at City University. Therefore, it should be
possible to produce longitudinal data as evidence of growth in metacognitive ability over the
time spent in undergraduate study, and correct any problems with this development early. It
takes approximately 25 minutes to complete the inventory which is completed online. It is
planned to introduce the LASSI as a compulsory assessment tool with effect from semester A
(September) 2006 in order to avoid some of the sampling difficulties inherent in voluntary
completion. For example, the likelihood of positively skewed scores because those students
who complete LASSI voluntarily are likely to be the most interested in their learning and
study strategies, and therefore more aware and interested in their metacognition than the
overall first-year student population at the university.
(ii) Materials
The Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (2nd Edition) Weinstein & Palmer, (2002).
Demographic ‘entry’ data collected by City University of Hong Kong during the student
admission process.
(iii) Participants
LASSI data was collected from a total of 1,821 (N = 1,821) new first-year undergraduate
students at City University of Hong Kong, and correlated with variables taken form the same
students’ demographic data collected as a normal part of the admission process.
(iv) Procedure
1,821 City University of Hong Kong freshmen voluntarily completed the LASSI online
during weeks 3 to 5 of semester A 2005. The data was fed back to them immediately and
individually via automatic electronic method and was also made available to their year and
course tutors.
Results
Not surprisingly for a large-scale study of this type, a range of data for correlation was
collected and analysed. However, only a small selection of the possible analyses are
presented in this paper in order to stimulate thinking about the value of LASSI online data to
colleagues engaged in facilitating e-learning courses and programmes.
Table 1: Average score of all students
4
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
ANX ATT CON INP M OT SFT SM I STA TM T TST
Total
ANX ATT CON INP MOT SFT SMI STA TMT TST
Score
50 22 48 50 35 47 49 51 47 45 444
Total participants: N=1821
The data in this table can be compared with international norms for various institutions
worldwide and can give a good overall comparison of the metacognitive and meta-affective
skills of students on entry. This can be compared at a later date with student scores in year
two of their study and at graduation. The LASSI is scored automatically through electronic
means and uses percentiles. Percentiles are values that divide a sample of data into one
hundred groups containing (as far as possible) equal numbers of observations. For example,
30% of the data values lie below the 30th percentile. The median is the 50th percentile. After
residuals are ordered from smallest to largest, the 90th percentile is the value with 10% of the
values above and 90% below. Percentiles are simply statements of the percentage of scores
lower than a specific score. For example, if you score 60 on a test, and are told that your
score puts you at the fiftieth percentile, which means that 50% of the people taking the test
scored lower than 60. In standardised testing, the percentile score is the percentage of a norm
group who scored lower than your score. If you score at the 50th percentile on a standardised
test, that means that 50% of the sample used to set norms for the test scored lower than you.
5
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
Table 2: Average score of all students, grouped by 3 components
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
INP TST SM I M OT ANX ATT TM T SFT STA CON
Skill Will Self-regulation
Skill Will Self-regulation Total
INP TST SMI MOT ANX ATT TMT SFT STA CON Score
50 45 49 35 50 22 47 47 51 48 444
Total participants: N=1821
In this example, the LASSI scores are grouped according to the three correlated
components of the test, ‘will’, ‘skill’, and ‘self-regulation’. This grouping is particularly
helpful in providing data that can be used to analyse relative strengths and weaknesses and
direct freshmen to appropriate sections of online or traditional ‘learning to learn’ courses,
rather than requiring them to attend a complete sequence. Whilst looking at these aggregate
scores horizontally across LASSI items is not particularly helpful given the use of percentiles
and ordinal data, a longitudinal analysis (not yet available) to ascertain how the institution is
doing in developing the metacognitive abilities of its students is exceptionally valuable data
(see discussion below).
Table 3 below also demonstrates that LASSI can be used to compare the entrance
requirements for particular faculties and check patterns of scores to identify particular overall
strengths and weaknesses. When entry data is available for a second intake in September
2007 it will be possible to compare the relative metacognitive skill base of the pool of
freshmen commencing their study at City University of Hong Kong with the 2006 cohort and
gradually build up a trend picture which provides much useful information to feedback to
secondary schools and faculty/departmental entrance tutors.
6
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
Table 3: Faculty average score
BST FB FH FS FL SM
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
ANX ATT CON INP MOT SFT SMI STA TMT TST
Faculty No. of Total
ANX ATT CON INP MOT SFT SMI STA TMT TST
Students Score
BST 308 46 16 44 48 30 44 43 49 43 36 399
FB 437 51 27 52 51 40 48 51 50 50 48 468
FH 500 51 21 50 48 33 47 50 54 49 48 451
FS 519 50 21 47 51 35 47 48 49 46 43 437
FL 31 56 30 49 51 32 55 55 57 49 52 486
SM 26 54 25 46 58 31 43 56 48 41 48 450
Total participants: 1821
It is also possible to correlate LASSI scores with a number of other significant or
potentially significant factors in terms of metacognitive development. For example, a small
scale pilot study conducted by Downing et al. (2006 forthcoming) demonstrates a significant
relationship between LASSI score and type of housing, or more accurately, whether a student
is living in the ‘home’ environment (Family Home or FH). In this study students from the
Chinese mainland coming to Hong Kong to study (moving away from ‘home’) with
unidentified housing type obtained by far the highest overall LASSI scores (n=127, mean
score=619.73) with those students living in City University’s accommodation on campus
producing the second highest LASSI scores (n=45, mean score=580.58). Perhaps less
surprisingly, those living in private housing produced (n=621, mean score=435.83) the third
highest LASSI scores (see Table 4). The results from this study N=1815 were analysed with
ANOVA and produced highly significant effects as can be seen from Table 5 below. These
results raise the question of the extent to which the metacognitive skills assessed by the
Learning and Study Strategies Inventory are influenced or associated with moving away from
the home environment in order to engage in undergraduate study. In other words, does a
significant change in the social context like moving away from home to study, impact
positively upon metacognitive development? This question is dealt with in Downing et al
(2006 forthcoming).
7
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
Table 4: Mean Total LASSI score according to Type of Housing (FH vs. NFH).
Mean LASSI
N Score
LASSI Staff quarters (FH) 5 369.8000
HOS/PSPS (FH) 2
419.3494
69
Private housing (FH) 6
435.8293
21
Public housing (FH) 7
418.4238
48
Student halls (NFH) 4
580.5778
5
From Chinese Mainland 1
619.7323
(NFH) 27
Total 1
442.4887
815
Key:FH – Living in family home. HOS - Home Ownership Scheme. NFH – Living away
from family home. PSPS - Private Sector Participation Scheme.
Table 5: ANOVA
Sum of Mean S
Squares df Square F ig.
will Between 4
531261. 10625 .
component Groups 5 0.56
269 2.254 000
1
Within 4738756 18 2619.5
Groups .397 09 45
Total 5270017 18
.666 14
skills Between 3
546883. 10937 .
components Groups 5 1.88
932 6.786 000
3
Within 6205872 18 3430.5
Groups .248 09 54
Total 6752756 18
.180 14
self- Between 3
785366. 15707 .
regulation Groups 5 1.24
094 3.219 000
component 9
Within 9093021 18 5026.5
Groups .373 09 46
Total 9878387 18
.468 14
LASSI Between 4
5478997 10957 .
Groups 5 5.10
.128 99.426 000
1
Within 4395286 18 24296.
8
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
Groups 4.391 09 774
Total 4943186 18
1.518 14
Discussion
The introduction to this paper identified twin challenges of producing students that have
developed metacognitive skills, and providing evidence that universities have facilitated that
development. The Universities General Council of Hong Kong (UGC) mandate on the
adoption of outcome-based teaching and learning (OBTL) and the move to the 4-year
curriculum have put the onus of providing evidence for effective student learning as a major
responsibility for universities in the SAR. In its various communications, the UGC has also
made clear that the quality of such evidence will be used to inform direct funding to
universities. Therefore, a reliable, valid, and recognised tool has to be engaged to help
universities collect and disseminate information to improve student learning and provide
evidence for eventual submission to the UGC. This tool must be flexible enough to allow
large quantities of useful data to be collected efficiently online, with automatic feedback
mechanisms available for staff and students so they are able to act on the data received and
ensure students get the specifically targeted help they need promptly, and with the minimum
of complicated analysis by hard-pressed staff. Used appropriately, LASSI can assist staff and
students to identify areas of relative weakness in study strategy and assist in the development
of the highly valuable metacognitive skills so essential for both the modern workplace, and
lifelong learning. In addition, the data collected, and subsequent analyses, can be used as
evidence of ‘value-addedness’ of university undergraduate programmes to the UGC in Hong
Kong, and other university funding bodies. This is particularly pertinent in view of the
change to the 4-year curriculum in Hong Kong where the UGC intends to claw back student
numbers for re-distribution based on evidence of improved student learning. The move
towards a four-year curriculum and the subsequent need for more flexible modes of delivery
will inevitably require students to more effectively self-regulate their own study habits. In
addition, the rapid rise in the use of interactive technologies and e-learning will ensure a
consistent demand for graduates who possess life long learning skills that will enable them to
continually upgrade and revise their knowledge and skills through their own self-motivation
(Bennett, Dunne, & Carre, 1999; Dearing, 1997). Ensuring sufficient support for
undergraduate students in this new flexible, technologically rich, environment requires an
understanding of the importance of metacognitive development if we are to avoid the high
attrition rates sometimes associated with e-learning (Brooks, 1997), and a set of tools which
allow institutions to monitor and develop their strategies for facilitating student development.
It is no longer sufficient to evidence learning outcomes purely based on subject specific
ability and the often hidden (and largely un-evidenced) metacognitive skills developed during
undergraduate education need to be more explicitly stated and backed-up with appropriate
data.
The effective use of LASSI depends upon a determined and coordinated approach which
ensures that the various initiatives and courses offered by education development offices,
student development services, and faculties, are demonstrably LASSI data driven. LASSI is
best regarded as a reasonably accurate but relatively ‘blunt’ diagnostic tool for individual
students, faculties and the university. However, it is clear from a number of studies into
LASSI in various parts of the world, including City University of Hong Kong (Corrigan and
Lee, 1997), that LASSI is a useful measure to diagnose those learning areas which need most
attention. However, whilst LASSI might generate data which shows that graduates have
9
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
improved their scores over time, it would be unwise to rely upon it as the sole measure of
metacognitive development. Consequently, having identified the areas for development using
LASSI, consideration should be given to sharper and more specific measures of successful
intervention when working with students and staff on these areas. Blakey & Spence (1990)
identify some useful strategies for developing metacognitive behaviours which are easily
adapted to the e-learning environment:
• Self-evaluation.
• Planning and self-regulation.
• Debriefing the thinking process.
• Talking about thinking.
• Identifying ‘what you know’ and ‘what you don’t know’.
• Keeping a thinking journal.
The fact that LASSI is administered as a diagnostic tool, and as means of providing
evidence of value-addedness, will ensure that students are engaging in self-evaluation about
their planning and self-regulatory processes. It is then for learning and teaching staff to
ensure that students are encouraged to talk about the thinking process and this can easily be
achieved with appropriate use of formative and summative discussion or bulletin board
questions related to the LASSI scores. E-portfolios and self-reflective exercises can also be
used to encourage students to think about what they do and don’t know. For example asking
students to formulate questions in advance of an online tutorial session can be an effective
way of assisting in the development of appropriate metacognitive behaviours. Another
effective way of encouraging students to think about their thinking is the peer interaction that
occurs online when students are asked to collectively critique an academic or newspaper
article.
Conclusion
Clearly, there are a wide range of opportunities for teachers to engage students in
metacognitive behaviours but this can only happen if staff are aware of the importance of this
area of their work, and student awareness of the importance of metacognitive development is
raised. The introduction of a diagnostic tool like the LASSI can assist those engaged in
facilitating learning at universities to raise staff and student awareness of this important
concept, target appropriate ‘learning to learn’ interventions more effectively, reduce online
attrition rates, and provide financially vital evidence of adding value to undergraduate
education.
The examples provided in this paper indicate the potential value of this online inventory
in meeting the changing needs of undergraduates, employers, universities, and higher
education funding bodies. The key role that inventories like the LASSI can play in meeting
the twin challenges of producing students that have developed metacognitive skills, and
providing evidence that universities have facilitated that development should not be
underestimated, particularly given the move towards a four-year curriculum in Hong Kong,
and the continued growth of e-learning across the globe.
10
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
References
Allen, B.A., & Armour-Thomas, E. (1991), Construct validation of metacognition. Journal of
Psychology, 127(2), 203-211.
Bennett, N., Dunne, E., & Carre, C. (1999) Patterns of core and generic skill provision in
higher education. Higher Education, 37(1), 71-93.
Blakey, E., & Spence, S. (1990) Developing Metacognition. ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearing
house on Information Resources Syracuse NY. Retrieved on 14th March 2002 from:
[Link]
Bogdan, R.J. (2000), Minding minds: Evolving a reflexive mind by interpreting others.
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Brooks, D.W., (1997) Web Teaching: a guide to designing interactive teaching for the World
Wide Web. New York: Plenum Press.
Brown, A. (1987), Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more
mysterious mechanisms. In F. Weinert, & R. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation,
and understanding (pp. 65-116). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Corrigan, P & Lee, P (1997), ‘The Expert Learners Workshops Project’ IVETA ’97
Conference Proceedings, pp118-122 International Conference on Vocational
Education and Training, August 24th to 28th , Helsinki, Finland.
Dearing. J. (1997). Higher Education in the Learning Society. London: HMSO.
Downing, K., (2001). Information Technology, Education and Health Care: constructivism in
the 21st Century. Educational Studies, 27 (3), 229-235.
Downing, K., Ho, R., Shin, K., Vrijmoed, L., & Wong, E. (Forthcoming 2006).
‘Metacognitive Development and Moving Away’ Educational Studies.
Flavell, J.H. (1999), Cognitive development: Children’s knowledge about the mind. Annual
Review of Psychology, 50, 21-45.
Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. (2002) ‘Developing pedagogies for the contemporary workplace’ in
Evans, K., Hodkinson, P., and Unwin, L. (Eds), Working to Learn, Kogan Page,
London.
Hacker, D.J. (1998), Definitions and empirical foundations. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A.
Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp1-23), Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Hanley, G.L. (1995), Teaching critical thinking: Focusing on metacognitive skills and
problem solving. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 68-72.
King, A. (1991), Improving lecture comprehension: Effects of a metacognitive strategy.
Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 331-346.
Kluwe, R.H., (1987), Executive decisions and regulation of problem solving behaviour. In F.
Weinert & R. Kluwe (Eds.) Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp1-19).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Letteri, C.A. (1992) Diagnosing and augmenting basic cognitive skills. In J.W. Keefe & H.J.
Walbert (Eds.), Teaching for thinking (pp 59-71). Reston, VA: National Association
of Secondary Principals.
Loomis, K.D. (2000) ‘Learning styles and Asynchronous Learning: Comparing the LASSI
Model to Class Performance’ Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4 (1) 23-
31.
Lynch, R., Leo, S., & Downing, K., (2006) Context dependent learning: its value and impact
for workplace education. Education + Training, 48 (1), 15-24.
Marchant, G.J. (2001), Metateaching: A metaphor for reflective teaching. Education, 109(4),
487-489.
11
APERA Conference 2006 28 – 30 November 2006 Hong
Kong
McMahon, M., (2002) Designing an online environment to scaffold cognitive self-regulation.
Retrieved on 14th March 2006 from:
[Link]
Metcalfe, J. (2000), Metamemory: Theory and data. In E. Tulving & [Link] (Eds.). The
Oxford handbook of memory. (pp. 197-211) New York: Oxford University Press.
Phelps, R. & Ellis, A. (2002b), 'A metacognitive approach to computer education for teachers:
Combining theory and practice for computer capability', Paper presented to Linking
Learners: Australian Computers in Education Conference (ACEC2002), Hobart,
Tasmania. Retrieved from: [Link] 7th March 2006.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge MA.: MIT Press.
Weinert, F.E. (1987), Introduction and overview: Metacognition and motivation as
determinants of effective learning and understanding. In F. Weinert & R. Kluwe
(Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding (pp1-19), Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Weinstein, C.E. (1987) LASSI User’s Manual, Clearwater, Florida, H & H Publishing Inc.
Weinstein, C.E. & Palmer, D. (1988). Learning and studies skills inventory. NCS Trans-
Optic EP 30-27841, 321.
Weinstein, C.E. (1994a). Strategic learning/strategic teaching: Flip sides of a coin. In P.R.
Pintrich, D.R. Brown, C.E. Weinstein (Eds.), Student motivation, cognition and
learning (pp 257-273). New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Weinstein, C.E. (1994b), Students at risk for academic failure: Learning to Learn classes. In
K.W. Pritchard & R.M. Sawyer (Eds.). Handbook of college teaching (pp 375-385).
Westport, CT: Greenwood press.
12
