According to established theoretical utilization-of-learning-opportunities models, learning outcomes can be explained by learning activities in dependence of individual learning characteristics, context variables and the learning environment (Seidel, 2014). This implies, that teaching quality, which is often described by the three basic dimensions effective classroom management, student support and cognitive activation (Praetorius, Klieme, Herbert & Pinger, 2018), can foster learning outcomes, especially when practices of effective teaching are linked to and promoting the use of elaborate learning strategies. Another assumption, which can be deduced, is, that individual learning characteristics influence the student’s perception of their learning environment, the way they elaborate information and the learning outcomes. In line with these assumptions existing studies show, that teaching quality is an influential factor for successful learning (Decristan, J, Kunter, M., Fauth, B., Büttner, G., Hardy, I., & Hertel, S., 2016; Fauth, Decristan, Rieser, Klieme & Büttner, 2014; Kunter & Voss, 2011) and that the perception of teaching quality can have an impact on the use of metacognitive learning strategies (Mouratidis, Vansteenskiste, Mihou & Lens, 2013; Rieser, Naumann, Decristan, Fauth, Klieme & Büttner 2016). There is also evidence, that preferable motivational learning characteristics (such as high interest) come along with more positive perceptions of teaching quality (Jurik, Häusler, Stubben & Seidel, 2015; Lazarides & Ittel, 2012; Willems, 2018) and that motivational constructs like intrinsic motivation and self efficacy are positively linked to the reported use of metacognitive learning strategies (Moos, 2014; Mouratidis et al., 2013; Rieser et al., 2016; Stephanou & Tsoni, 2019). Against this background, coping with heterogeneity in learning environments and therefore differential effects of teaching quality recently becomes a central topic in educational research again. But so far only a few studies investigated differential effects of teaching quality for students with different motivational characteristics: Mouratidis et al. (2013) showed, that a well-structured learning environment could help adolescence students in Greece with high performance-avoiding goals in regard to negative affects. Rieser et al. (2016) found, that less motivated primary school students in Germany reported a higher use of metacognitive learning strategies in cognitive highly activating environments. There also still is a lack of evidence concerning the relations between teaching quality, various motivational learning characteristics and metacognitive learning strategies. To our knowledge there are no studies investigating the mentionned relations in upper secondary classes in Germany, the investigations cited were based on other learning contexts (data from other educational systems, school levels or grades). Therefore this contribution aims to investigate (1) if teaching quality also influences the use of metacognitive learning strategies in upper secondary german courses, (2) if the use of metacognitive learning strategies varies systematically in dependance of subject-specific interest and academic self-concept and (3) if there are differential effects for students with different levels of subject-specific interest and academic self-concept.

The analyses are based on data of the German study FeeHe (‘Feedback in the context of heterogeneity’), which was conducted to investigate, how students in the upper secondary class perceive teacher feedback and teaching quality in German lessons. A repeated-measures design with two measurement points was used: At the beginning of a school semester (t1) a total of n=810 students (Meanage= 16.69 [SD=.84]; female = 53.8%) attending the 11th and 12th grade in 49 German language courses participated in the questionnaire study. After one school semester (t2) n=696 of the students (Meanage= 17.17 [SD=.90]; female = 55.2%) were surveyed again. To assess the students’ initial perceptions of teaching quality, we used six subscales (4-5 items each), which can be categorized regarding the three basic dimensions effective classroom management, cognitive activation and student support. Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analysis revealed a relatively good fit for the perceived structure (CFI=.95, RMSEA=.048, p(RMSEA)=n.s., χ2[df]= 395.66 [161], p(χ2)<.001). The internal consistencies of the subscales are satisfactory to good (.62≤α≤.85). To measure the use of metacognitive learning strategies after the school semester, we formed a short scale based on item- and confirmatory factor analysis (4 items; α = .72; CFI = .995, TLI = .99, RMSEA = .05, p(RMSEA) = .42 (n. s.), χ2[df] = 5.37 [2], p(χ2) = .007 (n. s.)). The initial motivational learning characteristics were assessed by different multiple item scales, amongst others measuring subject-specific interest and academic self-concept. Both, the overall model fit indices for each construct (CFI≥.95, RMSEA<.05) and the internal consistencies of the scales (α=.87/.84) were good. For the purpose of answering our research questions we conduct regression analysis with Mplus 8.0. Due to the occurrence, that the four included items measuring metacognitive learning strategies showed only small variances between classes we chose to conduct regression analysis by accounting for the hierarchical data structure through correction of the standard errors.

Analysis of the first research question show, that students’ perceptions of all three basic dimensions (classroom management, cognitive activation, student support) of teaching quality assessed at the beginning of the school semester predict the self-reported use of metacognitive learning strategies measured 6 months later. With reference to our second research question, the analysis shows that both, initial subject-specific interest and initial academic self-concept, predicts the use of metacognitive learning strategies. Concerning the third aim of this contribution first analysis results indicate differential effects of the perception of classroom management for students with high and low subject-specific interest on the use of metacognitive learning strategies.

Decristan, J., Kunter, M., et al. (2016). What role does instructional quality play for elementary school children‘s science competence? Journal for educational research online, 8(1), 66-89. Fauth, B., Decristan, J., et al. (2014). Student ratings of teaching quality in primary school: Dimensions and prediction of student outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 29, 1–9. Jurik, V., Häusler, J., Stubben, S. & Seidel, T. (2015). Interaction. Erste Ergebnisse einer vergleichenden Videostudie im Deutsch- und Mathematikunterricht. (Interaction – first results of a comparative video study carried out in language and mathematics instruction) Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 61(5), 692-711. Praetorius, A., Klieme, E., Herbert, B. & Pinger, P. (2018). Generic dimensions of quality teaching: the German framework of the Three Basic Dimensions. ZDM, 70, 407-426. Kunter, M., & Voss, T. (2011). Das Modell der Unterrichtsqualität in COACTIV: Eine multikriteriale Analyse. (The conceptual framework of teaching quality in COACTIV). In M. Kunter (Ed.), Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften: Ergebnisse des Forschungsprogramms COACTIV (pp. 85–113). Münster: Waxmann. Lazarides, R. & Ittel, A. (2012). Instructional quality and attitudes toward mathematics: Do self-concept and interest differ across students‘patterns of perceived instructional quality in mathematics classrooms? Child Development Research. Moos, D. (2014). Setting the stage for the metacognition during hypermedia learning: What motivation constructs matter?. Computers & Education, 70, 128–137. Mouratidis, A., Vansteenkiste, M., Michou, A. & Lens, W. (2013). Perceived Structure and achievement goals as predictors of students’ self-regulated learning and affect and the mediating role of competence need satisfaction. Learning & Individual differences, 23, 178–186. Rieser, S., Naumann, A., Decristan, J., Fauth, B., Klieme, E. & Büttner, G. (2016). The connection between teaching and learning: Linking teaching quality and metacognitive strategy use in primary school. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 526-545. Seidel, T. (2014). Angebots-Nutzungsmodelle in der Unterrichtspsychologie: Integration von Struktur- und Prozessparadigma. (Utilization-of-Learning-Opportunities Models in the Psychology of Instruction: Integration of the paradigms of structure and of process). Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 60(6). Stephanou, G. & Tsoni, F. (2019). Effects of metacognition on performance in mathematics and language – multiple mediation of hope and self-efficacy. International Journal of Psychological Studies, 11(4). Willems, A. S. (2018). Unterrichtsqualitätsprofile und ihr Zusammenhang zum situationalen Interesse in Mathematik. (Profiles of teaching quality and their connection to situational interest in mathematics). In A. Krüger, F. Radisch, A.S. Willems, Th. Häcker & M. Walm (Hrsg.). Empirische Bildungsforschung im Kontext von Schule und Lehrer*innenbildung (pp. 154-167). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.