{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013380909901873328, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001784121320249777, 'mean_word_length': 6.2387096774193544, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Teaching Metacognition Experientially

We investigated the effects of using experiential learning and direct instruction to teach metacognitive theory and to determine whether instructional type differentially affected higher vs. lower level learning. We randomly assigned 87 introductory psychology students to either experiential learning or direct instruction conditions. We pretested participant’s knowledge of metacognitive theory, and then participants received either experiential or direct instruction, after which they completed a posttest of knowledge of metacognitive theory. After covarying prior knowledge, data suggested that experiential learning may be more effective than direct instruction for teaching metacognitive theory, particularly for higher level recall and recognition assessments. Our results suggest that when taught using experiential learning, students may process information at a deeper level and recall more information because they may have related new information to their past experiences, engaged in the course material, and may have increased self-efficacy for the learned material.