CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Educational Strategies and EpistemologiesEducational and Psychological AssessmentsInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Assessment of metacognitive knowledge in students with special educational needs

Händel, Marion, Lockl, Kathrin, Heydrich, Jana, Weinert, Sabine, Artelt, Cordula·2014·Metacognition and Learning
DOI 10.1007/s11409-014-9119-x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11409-014-9119-x

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The MST constitutes an economic and scenario-based measure of learning strategies.

    “The MST constitutes an economic and scenario-based measure of learning strategies (for further information about scenario-based measures, see Händel et al. 2014).”

    From Transfer of metacognitive skills in self-regulated learning: an experimental training study (2020) · cites this paper as Händel et al. 2014

  • Previous scenario-based measures aiming to capture predominantly metacognitive knowledge have provided good reasons for investing effort in developing and using these tools.

    “Previous scenario-based measures aiming to capture predominantly metacognitive knowledge have provided good reasons for investing effort in developing and using these tools (e.g., Händel et al. 2014;Maag Merki et al. 2013;Neuenhaus et al. 2011).”

    From Transfer of metacognitive skills in self-regulated learning: an experimental training study (2020) · cites this paper as Händel et al. 2014

  • The intended application of a strategy is recorded in a fictitious learning situation, increasing the validity of strategy measurement.

    “The intended application of a strategy is recorded in a fictitious learning situation, increasing the validity of strategy measurement (e.g., Händel et al. 2014).”

    From Transfer of metacognitive skills in self-regulated learning: an experimental training study (2020) · cites this paper as Händel et al. 2014

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Händel, M., Lockl, K., Heydrich, J., Weinert, S., & Artelt, C.
Affiliations
  • Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE)
  • Leibniz Institute for Educational Trajectories (DE)
  • University of Bamberg (DE)
Corresponding author
Händel, Marion
ORCID
Venue
Metacognition and Learning
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2014-06-24
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
333-352
ISSN
  • 1556-1623 (ISSN-L)
  • 1556-1631
DOI
10.1007/s11409-014-9119-x
OpenAlex
W2079588789
Cited by
20
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
4.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Metacognition and Learning (publishedVersion)
  • OPUS (Augsburg University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational and Psychological Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
metacognitive knowledge, special educational needs, students with learning disabilities, assessment validity, strategy knowledge, autonomous reading, reading speed, reasoning skills, Hauptschule, German National Educational Panel Study, test accommodations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review