CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 13Innovative Teaching and Learning MethodsInnovations in Medical EducationEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Using Metacognitive Strategies to Help Students Learn in Pretest and Posttest Review

Poorman, Susan G., Mastorovich, Melissa L.·2008·Nurse Educator
DOI 10.1097/01.nne.0000312199.81815.f4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The authors discuss the use of several metacognitive strategies that can help turn test reviews into an active learning experience. With these strategies, test reviews can provide students with valuable tools to enhance their thinking and help them better prepare for the high-level thinking test questions that are seen on nursing examinations.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.nne.0000312199.81815.f4

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. Hart, 1965, Memory ant the feeling-of-knowing experience., J Educ Psychol, 56, 208, 10.1037/h0022263 · DOI
  2. Otani, 2005, Metacognition: new issues and approaches., J Gen Psychol, 132, 329, 10.3200/GENP.132.4.329-334 · DOI
  3. Nelson, 1996, Consciousness and metacognition., Am Psychol, 51, 102, 10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.102 · DOI
  4. Pintrich, 2002, The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching and assessing., Theory Pract, 41, 219, 10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Stavrianopoulos, 2007, Adolescents' metacognitive knowledge monitoring and academic help seeking: the role of motivation orientation., Coll Stud J, 41, 444
  6. August-Brady, 2005, The effect of a metacognitive intervention on approach to and self-regulation of learning in baccalaureate nursing students., J Nurs Educ, 44, 297, 10.3928/01484834-20050701-02 · DOI
  7. Kuiper, 2004, Promoting cognitive and metacognitive reflective reasoning skills in nursing practice: self-regulated learning theory., J Adv Nurs, 45, 381, 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02921.x · DOI · Paper page
  8. Martinez, 2006, What is metacognition?, Phi Delta Kappan, 87, 696, 10.1177/003172170608700916 · DOI
  9. Ross, 2006, College students' function of testing: an investigation into metacognitive self-regulation., Innov High Educ, 30, 361, 10.1007/s10755-005-9004-2 · DOI
  10. Kulik, 1988, Timing of feedback and verbal learning., Rev Educ Res, 58, 79, 10.3102/00346543058001079 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Brosvic, 2006, Acquisition and retention of Esperanto: the case for error correction and immediate feedback., Psychol Rec, 56, 205, 10.1007/BF03395545 · DOI
  12. Dihoff, 2004, Provision of feedback during preparation for academic testing: learning is enhanced by immediate but not delayed feedback., Psychol Rec, 54, 207, 10.1007/BF03395471 · DOI
  13. Mathan, 2005, Fostering the intelligent novice: Learning from errors with metacognitive tutoring., Educ Psychol, 40, 257, 10.1207/s15326985ep4004_7 · DOI
  14. Bekowitz, 2004, Metacognitive strategy use in reading of gifted high achieving and gifted underachieving middle school students in New York City., Educ Urban Soc, 37, 37, 10.1177/0013124504268072 · DOI
  15. Ward, 1993, Application of a metacognitive strategy to assessment, intervention and consultation: a think aloud technique., J Sch Psychol, 31, 469, 10.1016/0022-4405(93)90032-E · DOI
  16. Kucan, 1997, Thinking aloud and reading comprehension research: inquiry, instruction and social interaction., Rev Educ Res, 67, 271, 10.3102/00346543067003271 · DOI
  17. Berne, 2004, Think-aloud protocol and adult learners., Adult Basic Educ, 14, 153
  18. Walker, 2005, Thinking aloud: struggling readers often require more than a model., Reading Teacher, 58, 688, 10.1598/RT.58.7.10 · DOI
  19. McKeown, 2007, Think-aloud strategy: metacognitive development and monitoring comprehension in the middle school second language classroom., J Adolesc Adult Learning, 51, 136, 10.1598/JAAL.51.2.5 · DOI
  20. Wall, 2006, Facilitating metacognitive talk: a research and learning tool., Int J Res Method Educ, 29, 39, 10.1080/01406720500537353 · DOI
  21. Thelk, 2006, What are you thinking? Postsecondary student thinks aloud of scientific and quantitative reasoning items., J Gen Educ, 55, 17, 10.1353/jge.2006.0019 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 13

Metadata

Authors
Poorman, S. G., & Mastorovich, M. L.
Affiliations
Indiana University of Pennsylvania (US)
ORCID
Mastorovich, Melissa L.
Venue
Nurse Educator
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2008-07
Volume
33
Issue
4
Pages
176-180
ISSN
0363-3624 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/01.nne.0000312199.81815.f4
OpenAlex
W2000340210
Cited by
13
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nurse Educator (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
metacognitive strategies, test review, active learning, nursing students, nursing examinations, high-level thinking, exam preparation
MeSH terms
Attitude of Health Personnel, Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate, Educational Measurement, Faculty, Nursing, Helping Behavior, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Learning, Psychology, Educational, Self Concept, Students, Nursing, Thinking, Verbal Behavior, Models, Educational

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Using Metacognitive Strategies to Help Students Learn in Pretest and Posttest Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.nne.0000312199.81815.f4
The paper
Poorman, S. G., & Mastorovich, M. L. (2008). Using Metacognitive Strategies to Help Students Learn in Pretest and Posttest Review. Nurse Educator. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.nne.0000312199.81815.f4