Although sometimes confounded by imprecise definitions and varying methods of measurement, motivational beliefs such as causal attributions and self-efficacy have each been linked to students' metacognitive knowledge. However, it is not clear how these processes may work together to predict metacognitive knowledge.
Correlational data on efficacy and attributions have supported the positive relation between these constructs and metacognitive knowledge. F allowing Carr et al. 's ( 1 99 1 ) findings, it was posited that both attributions and self-efficacy would have a direct effect on metacognitive knowledge. The relative influence of attributions and self-efficacy on students' metacognitive knowledge about reading was investigated in the present study, as this aspect of Borkowski et al. 's ( 1 990, 1 992) theory has yet to be tested. On the basis of Borkowski's theory, it was hypothesised that attributional style would have a stronger positive impact on metacognitive knowledge than would efficacy.
6.1.2.4 The effect of self-efficacy on strategy use and performance
According to the theoretical formulation of Borkowski' s model, self-efficacy is expected to have a direct effect on metacognitive strategy use but not on cognitive strategy use (Borkowski et al., 1 989, 1 990, 1 992; Borkowski & Turner, 1 990; Groteluschen et al., 1 990). However, empirical findings do not support this prediction. For instance; research has shown self-efficacy to be a significant predictor of cognitive strategy use (Pintrich & De Groot, 1 990), metacognitive strategy use (Pintrich & De Groot, 1 990; Pokay & Blumenfeld, 1 990), and general strategy use (Ames & Archer, 1 988) among adolescent students.
82
These competing empirical and theoretical predictions suggest a further need for research in this area to clarify the relationship between efficacy and cognitive/metacognitive strategy use. In accordance with empirical fmdings, it is hypothesized that efficacy would predict both cognitive and metacognitive strategy use. This would also mean that efficacy is a direct predictor of combined strategy use.
The experimental and correlational studies of Schunk (1 985, 1989b) with elementary and junior high students indicate that self-efficacy is consistently related to academic performance. The fmdings of Pintrich and De Groot ( 1990) indicate that self-efficacy has an indirect effect on performance, suggesting that self-efficacy may play a facilitative role when cognitive and metacognitive strategy variables are included. However, this may depend on the outcome measures used. Studies that used domain specific measures of cognitive skills showed a direct relationship between self-efficacy and performance (Schunk, 1989b; Shell, Murphy, & Bruning, 1 989). In contrast, those that used global measures of performance showed self efficacy to have an indirect effect on performance when strategy use variables are included (Pintrich & Schrauben, 1 992). In the present study, domain specific measures of academic performance were used; consequently it was hypothesized that self-efficacy would also have a direct effect on performance.
6.1.2.5 The influence and relative impact of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use on performance
It was previously argued that the use of cognitive strategies should be distinguished from the
use of metacognitive strategies as distinct components of strategy use (see Chapter 3, section
3.2.3). Evidence of such a distinction is supported by both theory and research. A large number of studies attest to the strong relationship between cognitive/metacognitive strategies and performance. The present study investigated the influence of these strategi�s on reading comprehension.
Contrary to Borkowski et al.'s (1 989, 1990, 1 992) model, it is predicted that metacognitive strategy use is directly linked to reading comprehension performance. Although Borkowski' s theoretical model specifies that the relationship between metacognitive strategy use and performance is mediated by cognitive strategy use (Borkowski & Turner, 1990; Groteluschen et al., 1 990), empirical fmdings based on path analysis and multiple regression suggest
metacognitive strategy use may have a direct effect on performance (Pintrich & De Groot,
1 990; Pokay & Blumenfeld, 1 990).
Empirical research also suggests that cognitive strategy use is a direct predictor of performance, particularly for NA children (Pintrich & De Groot, 1 990; Pokay & Blumenfeld, 1 990). However, with regard to RD readers, there has been much speculation on the nature of the relationship between cognitive strategy use and performance. It is unclear whether cognitive strategy use directly predicts reading achievement for RD readers. Research to date has yet to compare the nature of the relationship between cognitive strategy use and performance for NA and RD readers. With regard to RD readers, both the "inactive learner" and the "inefficient learner" perspectives implicate deficiencies in the use of cognitive strategies for learning. Thus, both views would suggest that cognitive strategies would not predict performance for RD students. In the present study, it is hypothesized that the relationship between cognitive strategy use and performance would differ between NA and RD readers.
The relative impact of the distinct components of strategy use on reading performance is generally an under-researched question and would have important implications for educational planning. This question of relative impact is examined in the present study. It is predicted that cognitive strategy use will be more strongly related to performance than metacognitive
strategy use for NA readers. This prediction is based on Pokay and Blumenfeld's (1 990)
study, which indicated that geometry specific and general cognitive strategies were more strongly correlated with mathematical performance than metacognitive strategy use.
6.1.2.6 The relative impact of success and failure attributions on efficacy and metacognitive knowledge
According to Borkowski' s theory, attributional beliefs represent a key variable in the development of metacognitive processes (Borkowski et al., 1989, 1990, 1 992; Borkowski &
Turner, 1 990). However, achievement theories to date have not discussed the differential effects of subcomponents of attributions on metacognitive development. Evidence that differential effects may occur amongst subcomponents of attributions. is provided in the depression literature (Sweeney et al., 1 986). Furthermore, Heider ( 1 95 8) suggested that different attributions for success and failure have distinct consequences for the individual's affective reaction, expectancy of future success, and subsequent behaviour.
84
There is indirect evidence in the achievement literature that different elements of attributions (which vary on the three causal dimensions) have a differential impact on achievement. In the attribution literature, attributions have generally been measured as specific factors or elements (e.g., ability, effort). An investigation of the relative impact of success and failure attributions on metacognitive knowledge would extend previous research and theory. The significance of this model rests on the premise that attributions for different outcomes (success and failure) will have distinct consequences for the individual's metacognitive knowledge and efficacy. The present study tests the validity of this assumption.
6.2 Hypothesized Models
A theoretically parsimonious model is one that would be invariant, to a large degree, across populations. This consideration dictated that few differences in the relationships amongst the variables be specified between groups. In doing so, a conservative model will be generated which explains the differences between NA and RD readers. Four models were generated to investigate the six issues discussed above and to investigate how relationships among motivational, cognitive, and metacognitive variables varied between NA and RD readers.
The four models depicted in Figures 4 through 7 specify the causal relationships amongst the
variables, and how they vary between NA and RD readers. A large number of hypotheses
can be generated from these models. However for practical reasons, the present study limits the number of hypotheses by focusing on specific aspects that are unique and of particular interest in the present study.
The models in the present investigation included two multifaceted constructs; namely attributional style (attributions) and combined strategy use. Each of these multifaceted constructs was composed of two auxiliary concepts, each of which could be distinguished conceptually from the other and measured separately, despite being related to each other both theoretically and empirically. Attributional style was considered as a multifaceted construct comprising two major subcomponents of achievement outcome: attributions for success and attributions for failure. Combined strategy use also consisted of two subcomponents: metacognitive strategy use and cognitive strategy use. One important advantage of combining facets of a multidimensional construct, is that it simplifies the data analysis and the conceptual explanation of the findings (Carver, 1 989). However, summing measures that are conceptually distinct is likely to lead to a loss of information and erroneous conclusions. Carver (1 989) suggested that without testing each component separately, in addition to the test
of the composite index, one cannot be sure of the basis by which the composite was associated with the outcome measure. Hence, these multifaceted constructs were initially tested as one factor models by combining the subcomponents into a single predictive index. This was also done on the basis of parsimony and its conceptual consistency with theoretical formulations of previous researchers who have used such constructs (Carr et al., 1 99 1 ; Meece et al., 1 988). The separate effects of the subcomponents on the rest of the model were also examined.
The first model is tested to replicate some of Carr et al.'s (1991) findings. The second model extends previous research by testing the multicomponential influence of attributions, self efficacy, metacognitive knowledge, and combined strategy use in predicting performance. The third and fourth models examine in detail particular latent constructs that are of theoretical interest in Model 2. More specifically, the differential effects of the subcomponents of combined strategy use and attributional style are investigated. According to Borkowski et al. ( 1989, 1990, 1 992), attributional style and components of combined strategy use are considered important in explaining differences between NA and RD readers. Note that the four models depicted in Figures 4 through 7 have been modified a posteriori and have been presented here in order to clarify the subsequent analyses and results. These a posteriori modifications are mentioned as footnotes under the figure. For example, one of the footnotes suggests that the path from ability to metacognitive knowledge was fixed to zero. This was because the preliminary results had indicated that this relationship was nonsignificant for both groups.
6.2.1 Proposed General Model 1
Figure 4 presents a graphic representation of the first proposed general structural model. The
labelled large circles represent the latent (unmeasured) constructs and the rectangles represent observed (or measured) variables. The unfilled arrows from the large circles to the rectangles indicate that the observed variables are theorized to be generated by the latent construct. Relationships that are hypothesized to be similar between groups have their causal paths constrained to be equal (solid line), whilst those that are hypothesized to differ between groups have their causal paths freed between groups (dotted line).
success controllable success stable general success
Internal unstable failure
Attributional
Style
Self
Efficacy
· task specific failure controllableMSI IRA a ass
room
Figure 4. Hypothesized theoretical Model ! for NA and RD readers.
Note: Pallure Internal attributions were dropped from the model u an Indicator because lt did not display de.dnblc meuurcment propcrtle.s.
The path from ability to metacognltlve lcnowledgc wu fixed to zero for all oompeting models except Model l . l .
· · · ·
�
path allowed to be ftce acro11 JTOupS--•...
path constrained to be equal across aroupsOnly five indicators are used to represent the construct of attributional style due to a modification to this model post facto (see Chapter 8, section 8.3 .4). Students with an
adaptive attributional style ascribe the causes of their success to internal, stable, and controllable factors, and their failure to controllable, unstable factors (e.g., Weiner, 1 985a). Hence, the latent construct of attributional style is represented by manifest variables of success attributional dimensions of locus of causality (intemality), controllability, and stability for success, and failure attributional dimensions of controllability and instability. In other words, all measures were scored so that higher scores implied adaptive attributions. General and task
specific measures of confidence in reading represent indicators for self-efficacy. The metacognitive knowledge construct is represented by two metacognitive knowledge questionnaires, the MSI and the IRA. Standardized reading comprehension scores (PAT) and classroom scores are manifest indicators of the reading achievement construct. The latent construct of ability has one indicator, intellectual ability as measured by the WISC-R.
The components of this model are based on Carr et al.'s (199 1 ) study. However, the measures used are not identical. Model 1 tested the plausibility of a postulated causal system comprising the latent variables of ability, attributional style, self-efficacy, metacognitive knowledge, and reading performance. The relations postulated in this model differed slightly from that proposed by Carr et al. (1991). They are as follows:
1 . In this study, a direct relationship between ability and self-efficacy is specified in accordance with Ban dura's ( 1 986) theory and previous empirical findings. In Carr et al.'s ( 1 99 1 ) model, the link between ability and self-esteem was mediated by attributions about success and failure.
2. In the present study it is hypothesized that the direct relations between ability and metacognitive knowledge, and between ability and reading comprehension performance would differ across groups. Carr et al. (199 1 ) suggested the converse. Further, in contrast to Carr et al. 's model, the present study also postulates that three paths will discriminate RD children from NA children: the paths from ability to attributional style, ability to metacognitive knowledge, and ability to performance.
3 . Compared to Carr et al. ( 1 99 1 ), the present study used a more domain specific measure of expectancy, namely reading self-efficacy. In accordance with empirical research findings, it is hypothesized that self-efficacy will have a direct effect on reading comprehension performance. Such a relationship was not specified for self esteem in Carr et al.'s (199 1 ) model.
88
Apart from the aforementioned paths, the present study aims to replicate the causal ordering of the variables found in the model tested by Carr et al. ( 1 991 ).
6.2.1.1 Hypotheses It is hypothesized that:
1 . Ability directly predicts self-efficacy.
2. Attributional style directly predicts self-efficacy.
3 . Efficacy mediates the relationship between attributions and metacognitive
knowledge.
4. Attributional style would have a stronger direct effect on metacognitive knowledge than efficacy.
5. Self-efficacy directly predicts reading comprehension performance.
6. Not all the relationships between motivational, metacognitive, and cognitive variables would vary in magnitude across NA and RD readers.
7. The magnitude of the relationship between ability and attributions would differ for NA and RD readers. More specifically, the relationship between ability and attributions is not significant for RD readers, but significant for NA readers.
8. The relationship between ability and performance would differ for NA and RD
readers. More specifically, the relationship between ability and performance is significant for NA readers but not for RD readers.
9. The relationship between efficacy and performance would be similar for NA and RD readers.
1 0. The relationship between efficacy and metacognitive knowledge would be similar
for NA and RD readers.
1 1 . The relationship between metacognitive knowledge and performance would be
similar for NA and RD readers.
1 2. The relationship between attributions and efficacy would be similar for NA and RD
readers.
6.2.2 Proposed General Model 2
The second model (see Figure 5) represents an extension of Model 1 by incorporating the latent construct of "combined strategy use". The manifest variables of this construct include a self-report measure and a behavioural measure of global strategy use. Each indicator represents a global measure of strategy use which included a combination of cognitive and
Attributional
Style
general task specific failure unstable failure controllable behavioural CombinedStrategy
Use a ass roomFigure 5. Hypothesized theoretical Model 2 for
NA
and RD readers.Note: Pallure Internal attributions were dropped from the model u an indlcllor because h did not display desirable meuurement properties.
The path from ability to metacognitlve knowledge wu fixed to uro for all oompeting mode!J.
· · · ·
�
path allowed to be free across sroups-�·-�
path canstralned to be equal across sroups00 \0
90
metacognitive strategies. A one factor representation of strategy use is consistent with formulations of previous researchers (Meece et al., 1 988) and self-regulated learning theorists (e.g., Pintrich & De Groot, 1 990).
The proposed model specifies that attributional style predicts metacognitive knowledge directly or indirectly through self-efficacy and that combined strategy use mediates the effect of metacognitive knowledge on performance. The model also specifies a direct relationship between efficacy and combined strategy use. In this model, it is hypothesized that the following four paths will discriminate RD children from NA children: ability to attributions, ability to metacognitive knowledge, ability to performance, and combined strategy use to performance. All relationships postulated are considered to be in the positive direction.
6.2.2.1 Hypotheses It is hypothesized that:
I . Metacognitive knowledge mediates the relationship between motivational beliefs (attributions, efficacy) and combined strategy use.
2. Combined strategy use mediates the relationship between metacognitive knowledge and reading comprehension performance.
3. Self-efficacy directly predicts combined strategy use.
4. The relationship between metacognitive knowledge and combined strategy use would be similar for NA and RD readers.
5. The magnitude of the relationship between combined strategy use and performance would differ for NA and RD readers.
6.2.3 Proposed General Model 3
In Model 3 , combined strategy use was respecified to form two latent variables. An implicit assumption underlying strategy use in Model 2 is that the responses to items used to define each measured variable are reasonably unidimensional. In this way the multiple indicators of a particular latent construct can be used to test the underlying structure and to assess measurement error. However, this approach may not be appropriate when the formation of
Attributional Style general failure controllable Cognitive Strategy Use
Figure
6.
Hypothesized theoretical Model 3 forNA
and RD readers.Note: Feilure Internal ettributlons were dropped from the model u an lndicetor beceuse lt did not diJplay de$lrable meuurement propenle$, The pith rrom ability to metacoJIIItive knowledge wu fixed to uro for �I competing mode!J.
. ·· .. .·· .. · . ·· .. . ·· .. .. · .·· Classroom
· · · ·
�
peth allowed to be Cree acrou ,roup•path eonttralned to be equal acrou aroupt
\l) ...
92
item clusters confounds information from different domains (e.g., cognitive versus metacognitive) which are substantively important and differentially related to other latent constructs of interest. According to Borkowski's theory, it seems likely that responses to different clusters of items of strategy use would be differentially related to performance
(Borkowski et al., 1 989, 1990, 1 992). In other words, distinct components of strategy use are
likely to have differential effects on the other latent constructs of interest in this study. In
addition, empirical research in the domain of mathematics, has demonstrated that cognitive
strategy use is more strongly related to performance than metacognitive strategy use for NA readers. Consequently, by averaging responses to these different components of strategy use, such potentially important distinctions cannot be evaluated.
Model 3 (see Figure 6), an extension of Model 2, investigates in more detail the latent construct of combined strategy use by examining the differential effects of its metacognitive and cognitive subcomponents. The latent construct of metacognitive strategy use is specified by two indicators: a self report measure and a behavioural measure of metacognitive strategy use. Similarly, a self report and behavioural measure of cognitive strategy use represent the indicators of the latent construct of cognitive strategy use.
Model 3 specifies that both cognitive and metacognitive strategy use mediate the relationship