Assessing changes in performance and monitoring processes in individual and collaborative tests according to students' metacognitive skills

Abstract

This study assessed students' test performances and metacognitive processes in real classroom settings. Psychology undergraduates were categorised according to their metacognitive skills (high vs. low) and had their test performances and monitoring processes in two different types of tests (multiple-choice and short-answer tests) compared in individual and collaborative test conditions. Students' test preparation practices, attributions, and regulatory processes during test-taking were also compared by using open-ended questions. In the collaborative tests, three types of metacognitive pairings were made (high/high vs. high/low vs. low/low). Results showed that: (1) in individual tests, high-metacognitive students presented better performance and higher confidence levels due to their more effective test preparation practices and regulatory skills; (2) Differences in performance and confidence levels due to metacognitive skills disappear when students take tests collaboratively; (3) Over time, collaborative testing had particular positive effects on the low/low metacognitive pairings. Results are discussed focusing on their educational implications.