|
Method |
|
Participants Data taken from
the 2009 Programme for International Student
Assessment (PISA) was analyzed to assess the effect of the perceived
usefulness of metacognitive strategies of 5,233 fifteen-year-old students nested
within 165 schools (SCHOOLID) in the United States. The number of students within each school
ranges from 1 to 41. PISA uses student
questionnaires to collect information on aspects of their home, family and
school background. Of all the students
surveyed in the United States, a total of 345 students attended 11 private
schools. The majority of students
attended public schools. Materials Recent versions of the PISA assessment include the following items designed to measure the perceived usefulness of metacognitive strategies: Understanding and remembering (UNDREM) and Summarizing (METASUM). Both of the metacognition indices included in PISA are standardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1. 250 students had missing data in UNDREM and 271 in METASUM. PISA estimates academic literacy in reading, mathematics and science in terms of plausible values (PVREAD, PVMATH, and PVSCIE respectively). It is important to note that plausible values are not test scores; rather, they are random numbers drawn from a distribution of scores that could be reasonably assigned to each student. Plausible values contain random error variance components and are better suited to describing the performance of the population, rather than individual performance. PVREAD, PVMATH and PVSCIE are scaled such that the mean of each is 500 with a standard deviation of 100. Please refer to the OECD, PISA 2009 Technical Report for more information about measures used. Procedure Data taken from the 2009 Programme for International Student Assessment was analyzed using PROC MIXED within SAS version 9.3 to assess the effect of the perceived usefulness of metacognitive strategies of 15-year-old students in the United States and their effects on students’ plausible values in reading, mathematics and science. Three linear mixed models were developed to describe the usefulness of metacognitive strategies and their interaction, and their effect on students’ overall reading, math, and science proficiency scores. Satterthwaite was the method used for computing the denominator degrees of freedom. Please refer to Figures 1, 2 and 3 for visual depictions of the mixed models. Additional multivariate analyses were conducted to determine if the effect of the perceived usefulness of metacognitive strategies differs across three criteria: PVREAD, PVMATH, and PVSCIE. |
