Metacognition & Study Skills in
Honors Biology Students
Janet L Branchaw, Ph.D., Institute for Cross-college Biology Education,
University of Wisconsin – Madison
Research Question
Results
How do the metacognitive and study skills of honors
biology students at the University of Wisconsin Madison develop throughout their undergraduate
career?
Metacognitive Awareness
S2-S3
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
KNOWLEDGE OF
REGULATION OF
COGNITION
COGNITION
Student Self-Assessment of Metacognitive Awareness. Average
responses to survey questions addressing each of the categories from
four data collection times are presented (S2-S3, n = 82; S3-S4, n =
85; S4-S5, n = 57; S5-S6, n = 57). Each bar represents the mean and
standard error. Students were asked to select the answer that best fits
their immediate reaction. (1= very false; 2 = somewhat false; 3 =
neutral; 4 = somewhat true; 5 = very true).
Surveys
Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI)
KNOWLEDGE OF COGNITION =
Declarative Knowledge + Procedural
Knowledge + Conditional Knowledge
REGULATION OF COGNITION =
Planning + Information Management Strategies
+ Comprehension Monitoring + Debugging
Strategies + Evaluation
Study Skills
4.5
Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ)
DEEP LEARNING = Motive + Strategy
SURFACE LEARNING = Motive + Strategy
4
3.5
3
Timeline for Survey Administration
Year 3
2.5
Year 4
Fall  Spring Fall  Spring
Fall  Spring
Fall  Spring









S1 S1-S2 S2-S3 S3-S4
S4-S5 S5-S6
S6-S7 S7-S8 S8
Conclusions
•
No significant changes in metacognitive
awareness or study skills were reported by
honors biology students from S2-S3 to S5-S6.
•
Students reported higher awareness of cognition,
relative to their ability to regulate their cognition,
but results in the two categories are correlated.
•
S5-S6
4
Honors biology students were asked to anonymously
self-assess their metacognitive awareness and
study skills using two online surveys, each taken at
four time points during their undergraduate career.
Year 2
S4-S5
4.5
Study Design
Year 1
S3-S4
Students reported higher levels of deep learning
study skills relative to surface learning study
skills.
References
Schraw, G. and Dennison, R. Assessing Metacognitive Awareness.
Contenproary Educational Psychology (1994) 19, 460-475.
Biggs, J., Kember, D. and Leung, D, Y. P. The Revised two-factor
Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of
Educational Psychology (2001) 71, 133-149.
2
1.5
DEEP LEARNING
SURFACE LEARNING
Student Self-Assessment of Study Skills. Average responses to survey
questions addressing each of the categories from four data collection
times are presented (S2-S3, n = 82; S3-S4, n = 85; S4-S5, n = 57; S5S6, n = 57). Each bar represents the mean and standard error. Students
were asked to select the answer that best fits their immediate reaction.
(1= rarely true; 2 = sometimes true; 3 = true about half the time; 4 =
frequently true; 5 = always true).
Future Studies
•
•
•
Sample all time points; include non-honors students.
Correlate survey results with academic performance
parameters (e.g. ACT or SAT scores, GPA, etc.)
Use surveys to evaluate teaching interventions.