Asian Journal of Home Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Age and Gender: Determinants of Metacognition among Rural Adolescents


Affiliations
1 Department of Human Development, College of Home Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The present study was undertaken to investigate the age and gender differentials in metacognition of rural adolescents (13-16 years). The study was carried out in rural schools of block-I, Ludhiana district. The sample comprised of 240 rural adolescents equally distributed over four grades (7th, 8th, 9th and 10th grade), two sexes and two socio-economic groups i.e. middle and low socio-economic group. Metacognitive skills of the subjects were assessed using a self-structured questionnaire adapted from Metacognition Inventory (Govil, 2003) and Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (Schraw and Dennison 1994). Results revealed significant gender differentials in metacognitive skills of rural adolescents with major proportion of female respondents having high level of metacognition as well as better mean scores as compared to their male counterparts.

Keywords

Metacognition, Knowledge of Cognition, Regulation of Cognition, Academic Performance, Adolescents
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Chung, J. and Tang, K. (1998). Inherent gender differences as an explanation of the effect of instructor gender on accounting students performance, In: Black, B. and Stanley, N.(ed.) Teaching and learning in changing times, pp.72-79.Proceedings of the 7th Annual Teaching Learning Forum,(University of Western Australia, February1998.Perth, UWA).

  • Cupchick, G.C. and Poulos,C.X. (1984). Judgments of emotional intensity in self and others: the effects of stimulus context, sex and expressivity. Personality & Social Psychol., 46 (2) : 431-439.

  • Cupchick, G.C. and Leventhal, H. (1974). Consistency between expressive behaviour and the evaluation of humorous stimuli. Personality & Soc. Psychol.,30 (3) : 429-442.

  • Darley, W.K. and Smith, R.E. (1995). Gender differences in information processing strategies: An empirical test of the selectivity model in advertising response. J. Adv., 24 (1) : 41-56.

  • Dweck, C.S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychol., 41 (1) : 1041-1048.

  • Felder, R.M., Felder, G.N., Mauney, M., Hamrin, C.E. and Dietx, E.J. (1995). A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention III. Gender differences in student performance and attitudes. J. Engg. Edu., 84 (2) : 151-163.

  • Gallagher, A., Levin, J. and Cahalan, C. (2002). GRE research: Cognitive patterns of gender differences on mathematics admissions tests (ETS Report No. 02-19). Princeton, NEW JERSEY, U.S.A.

  • Geake, J.G. and Cooper, P.W. (2003). Implications of cognitive neuroscience for education. Westminster Stu. Edu., 26 (10) : 7-20.

  • Gilligan,C. (1982). In a different voice: psychological theory and womens development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, U.S.A.

  • Govil, P. (2003). Meta-Cognition Inventory (MCI). National Psychological Corporation, Agra (U.P.) INDIA.

  • Gurian, M. (2002). Boys and girls learn differently! Jossey Bass, SAN FRANCISCO, U.S.A.

  • Halpern,D.F.(2004). A cognitive-process taxonomy for sex differences in cognitive abilities. Curr. Directions Psychol. Sci.,13 (4) : 135139.

  • Halpern, D. F. and LaMay, M.L. (2000). The smarter sex: a critical review of sex differences in intelligence. Edu. Psyhol.Rev.,12 (2) : 29-46.

  • Hoffman, L.W. (1977). Changes in family roles, socialization and sex differences. American Psychol., 32 (8) : 644-657.

  • Huang, J. (1993). An investigation of gender differences in cognitive abilities among Chinese high school students.Personality & Individual Differences, 15 (6) : 717-719.

  • Kahle, J.B. and Lakes, M.K. (1983). The myth of equality in science classrooms. J. Res. Sci. Teach., 20 (2) : 131-140.

  • Kahle, J.B. and Meece, J. (1994). Research on gender issues in the classroom. In: Gabel D (ed), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, pp.13-39.

  • Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall).

  • Lawton, C.A. and Hatcher, D.W. (2005). Gender differences in integration of images in visuospatialmemory. Sex Roles, 53 (9-10) : 717-25.

  • Leventhal, H. and Cupchick, G.C. (1975). The informational and facilitative effects of an audience upon expression and the evaluation of humorous stimuli. J. Exp.Soc.Psychol.,11 (4) : 363-380.

  • Lowe, P. A., Mayfield, J. W. and Reynolds, C.R. (2002). Gender differences in memory test performance among children and adolescents. Archiv. Clinical Neuro Psychol., 18 (8) : 865-878.

  • Marsh, H.W. and Yeung, A.S. (1998). Longitudinal structural equation models of academic self-concept and achievement: gender differences in the development of math and English constructs. Am. Edu. Res. J., 35 (4) : 705-738.

  • Meenakshi (2001). Socio economic status scale (SESS). Rakhi Prakashan, Agra (U.P.) INDIA.

  • Meyers-Levy, J. and Maheswaran, D. (1991). Exploring differences in males and females processing strategy. J. Consumer Res., 18 (1): 63-70.

  • Meyers-Levy, J. (1985). Gender differences in information processing: a selectivity interpretation. Ph. D. dissertation, (IL, Northwestern University).

  • Meyers-Levy, J. (1989). Gender differences in information processing: A selectivity interpretation, in: Cafferata, P. and Tybout, A.

  • M. (Eds.) Cognitive and affective responses to advertising, pp. 219-260. Lexington, CANADA.

  • Metcalfe, J. and Shimamura, A. P. (1994). Metacognition : Knowledge about knowing. MIT Press, Cambridge, U.S.A.

  • Northen, S. (2004). Why men arent from Mars, Times Educational Supplement, 3 September, 2002, p. 19.

  • Rae, S. (1999). Gender differences in learning science. Internat. J. Sci. Edu., 21:633-643.

  • Rossiter, M.W.(1982). Women scientists in America: Struggles and strategies to 1940. John Hopkins:University Press,BALTIMORE, U.S.A.

  • Royer, J.M., Tronsky, L.N., Chan, Y., Jackson, S.J. and Marchant, H. (1999). Math-fact retrieval as the cognitive mechanism underlying gender differences in math test performance. Contemporary Educational Psychol.,24 (3) :181-266.

  • Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instruct Sci., 26 (1-2) : 113-125.

  • Schraw, G. and Dennison, R.S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemp-Edu. Psychol., 19 (4) : 460-475.

  • Simpson, R.D. and Oliver, J.S. (1990). A summary of major influences on attitude toward achievement in science among adolescent students. Sci. Edu.,74 (1) :1-18.

  • Skaalvik, S. and Skaalvik, E.M. (2004). Gender differences in math and verbal self-concept, performance expectations, and motivation. Sex Roles, 50 (3-4) : 241-252.

  • Temple, C.M. and Cornish, K.M. (1993). Recognition memory for words and faces in schoolchildren: A female advantage for words. British J. Develop. Psychol., 11 (4) : 421-426.

  • Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychol., 5(2) : 207-232.

  • Wigfield, A. and Eccles, J.S. (2002). The development of competence beliefs, expectancies for success and achievement values from childhood through adolescence,In: Wigfield, A. and Eccles,J.A. (ed.)Development of achievement motivation, pp. 91-97.Academic Press, SAN DIEGO, U.S.A.


Abstract Views: 450

PDF Views: 0




  • Age and Gender: Determinants of Metacognition among Rural Adolescents

Abstract Views: 450  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Divya Narang
Department of Human Development, College of Home Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India
Sarita Saini
Department of Human Development, College of Home Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India
Deepika Vig
Department of Human Development, College of Home Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India

Abstract


The present study was undertaken to investigate the age and gender differentials in metacognition of rural adolescents (13-16 years). The study was carried out in rural schools of block-I, Ludhiana district. The sample comprised of 240 rural adolescents equally distributed over four grades (7th, 8th, 9th and 10th grade), two sexes and two socio-economic groups i.e. middle and low socio-economic group. Metacognitive skills of the subjects were assessed using a self-structured questionnaire adapted from Metacognition Inventory (Govil, 2003) and Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (Schraw and Dennison 1994). Results revealed significant gender differentials in metacognitive skills of rural adolescents with major proportion of female respondents having high level of metacognition as well as better mean scores as compared to their male counterparts.

Keywords


Metacognition, Knowledge of Cognition, Regulation of Cognition, Academic Performance, Adolescents

References