A study involving 1,050 German early adolescents found that more intelligent students showed greater increases in metacognitive knowledge (in mathematics) over time. This suggests that higher intelligence accelerates metacognitive knowledge development. Interestingly, math knowledge, motivation, and school class type were not associated with the pace of metacognitive knowledge development. The paper was published in Learning and Individual Differences.
Metacognitive knowledge is a person’s knowledge and beliefs about how their own thinking and learning processes work. It includes knowing what one is good or poor at, which tasks are likely to be difficult, and which strategies may help in a particular situation. For example, a student may know that they remember information better when they summarize it in their own words rather than simply rereading it.
Metacognitive knowledge also includes understanding that different tasks may require different approaches, such as memorizing facts versus solving a complex problem. It is commonly divided into declarative knowledge (knowledge about oneself as a learner, knowledge about tasks, and knowledge about strategies), procedural knowledge (how to apply strategies), and conditional knowledge. Conditional knowledge, which is what this study focused on, involves knowing when and why to use particular strategies depending on the specific situation and task at hand.
This type of knowledge helps people plan how to approach learning or problem solving before they begin. It can also guide decisions about when to change strategies if the current approach is not working. Stronger metacognitive knowledge can therefore support more efficient learning, better problem solving, and greater independence in academic work.
Study author Maria Theobald and her colleagues note that metacognitive knowledge is central to learning and academic success, especially in mathematics. However, the trajectory of metacognitive knowledge development and the role of intelligence in this development remain poorly understood. With this in mind, they conducted a study that examined the development of metacognitive knowledge in the domain of mathematics. They chose this aspect of metacognitive knowledge because it strongly predicts mathematical learning and achievement.
Study authors analyzed data from the project PULSS, which examined the development of academic achievement and motivation in the early secondary school years. Participants of this study were 1,050 5th grade students from seven high-track secondary schools (Gymnasium) in Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg, federal states in southern Germany. On average, participants were 11 years old at the start of the study. 40% of participating students were girls. 89% had German as their primary language. The primary languages of the other students were most often Russian, English, and Turkish.
Students were tested at the beginning (T1) and the end of grade 5 (T2), the end of grade 6 (T3), and the middle of grade 7 (T4). However, this analysis used only the data from the first three data collection waves (T1-T3), because metacognitive knowledge was not assessed in the T4 data collection wave. Participants completed assessments of conditional metacognitive knowledge in the domain of mathematics (the MAESTRA 5-6 test), intelligence (only at T1, using the Cognitive Ability Test for Grades 4-12), math knowledge (the German Mathematics Test for Grade 5), and math-related motivation (goal orientation, mathematics self-concept, and interest, all assessed at T1 only).
Results showed that students’ metacognitive knowledge in mathematics generally increased over time, but this varied greatly between students. Students with higher intelligence tended to show greater increases in mathematics metacognitive knowledge over time. Study authors indicate that this suggests that higher intelligence accelerates metacognitive knowledge development. Girls showed a greater increase in metacognitive knowledge than boys over time. Math knowledge, motivation, and class-type (regular vs. for gifted students) were not associated with metacognitive knowledge development.
“These findings highlight the variability in metacognitive knowledge development and underscore intelligence as an important predictor of this differential development,” study authors concluded.
The study sheds light on the factors associated with the development of metacognitive knowledge. However, it should be noted that the design of the study does not allow any definitive causal inferences to be derived from the results.
The paper, “The role of intelligence in the development of metacognitive knowledge,” was authored by Maria Theobald, Wolfgang Schneider, and Franzis Preckel.