| Meta-memory monitoring and control is an cognitive function of human being, which contains the judgment of memory and assessing. In particular, it means the higher you judge, the better you know yourselves, the better you will control your behavior. Recently, it's worth nothing that the learning-disabled students(LD) have particular difficulties in the relationship between meta-memory monitoring and control. The LD students'meta-memory has been greatly studied abroad. In China, however, researches on this problem has not been seen and should be further concerned. By investigating judgments of learning(JOLS) and allocation of study time across items, present research explored the influence of mock test and the percentage likelihood on the relation between monitoring and control on the LD students and normal students.Three experiments were included in present research. Using Dunlosky's paradigm (1999), the first experiment compared the feature of LD students'meta-memory monitoring and control with normal students, which consisted of 20 LD students and 20 normal students in the sixth grade. Experiment 2 further examined the influence of mock test on regulation of learning behaviors based JOL' driving, investigating 55 LD students and 60 normal students in the sixth grade. Experiment 3 explore the effects together of mock test and the percentage likelihood on meta-memory monitoring and control about LD students and normal students, with 45 LD students and 45 normal students. The conclusions of present research were as follows:(1)No difference was found in relative JOL accuracy between the LD pupils and the normal students in higher grad. It means the LD students in higher grad had the ability of meta-memory monitoring.(2)There was difference in allocation of study time in different situation between LD students and normal students. No matter in simple situation or in complex situation, LD students allocated more study time to difficulty items than easy items. However, normal students changed their strategies in the two situations. In simple situation, normal students selected more difficulty items and allocated more study time on them. But in tradeoff difficulties, they would integrate more factors to select items which need more study time to restudy. In more specific terms, they selected more difficulty items than easy items;and in easy items, more high-likelihood items and no-likelihood marked items than low-likelihood items.(3) LD students'items selected strategies were regulated by reread. LD students selected more difficulty items than easy items without reread, but had no difference between difficulty and easy items within reread. In addition, normal students had integrated more factors on difficulty items when they carried out the mock test before the self-regulated learning. They selected the most high-likelihood and no likelihood marked difficulty items, the second most low-likelihood items,then other easy items. They simultaneously allocated most study time on high-likelihood and no likelihood marked difficulty items than others.(4)Although LD students'JOL and study time was negative correlativity, LD students'negative correlation was obviously weaker than normal students. This showed that LD students had weaker ability in controlling the behavior on the use of meta-memory monitoring information.(5)LD students and normal students'the relationship between meta-memory monitoring and control were also influenced by different factors. LD students'inverse correlation between monitoring and control grew stronger because of the reread. However, normal students had no difference in their stronger negative correlation through the test or reread, although the value of JOLs was larger and the total study time dropped. In addition, there was interaction between the types of JOL and the likelihood. It meant the likelihood regulated the relation strength between different type of JOL and study time. |
PDF Full Text Request