EduPort 2020, 4(1):11-24 | DOI: 10.21062/edp.2020.006

The level of metacognitive monitoring with learners at higher elementary grade in processing informational texts in the subject of science depending on the type of educational curriculum

Jaroslav Říčan, Vlastimil Chytrý
Univerzity of Jan Evangelista Purkyně in Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic

The paper consists of finding the level of metacognitive monitoring in processing informational texts in Science with 5th grade learners attending (a) general elementary schools, (b) Dalton education elementary schools (c) RWCT programme elementary schools. The goal of our empirical research was to verify a presumption that educational programme and the strategies of controlling the curriculum derived from it do influence metacognitive monitoring development. The methodology of the research has a quasi-experimental design. The results confirm the presumption that education programme types influence the learner´s metacognitive development. The RWCT pupils together with Dalton learners are significantly more accurate in their judgement of (in)correctness of answers linked to processing informational texts and scored vastly better in informational text processing tests compared to learners at general schools. The conclusion has drafted potential reasoning for the differences analyzed as a result of the executed curriculum (teaching effect) and offers recommendations for theoretical and professional practice

Keywords: Absolute accuracy, quasi-experiment, metacognitive monitoring, text processing

Prepublished online: December 17, 2020; Published: December 10, 2020  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Říčan J, Chytrý V. The level of metacognitive monitoring with learners at higher elementary grade in processing informational texts in the subject of science depending on the type of educational curriculum. EduPort. 2020;4(1):11-24. doi: 10.21062/edp.2020.006.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    Attachments

    Download fileA_11-24_Rican_Chytry.pdf

    File size: 1.21 MB

    References

    1. Best, R. M., Rowe, M., Ozuru, Y., & McNamara, D. S. (2005). Deep-Level comprehension of science texts: The role of the reader and the text. Topics in Language Disorders, 25(1), 65-83. Go to original source...
    2. Bjorklund, D. F., & Coyle, T. R. (1995). Utilization deficiencies in the development of memory strategies. In F. E. Weinert & W. Schneider (Eds.), Memory development and competencies: Issues in growth and development (pp. 161-180). Mahvah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    3. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    4. Braselton, S., & Decker, B. C. (1994). Using graphic organizers to improve the reading of mathematics. The Reading Teacher, 48, 276-281.
    5. Burson, K. A., Larrick, R. P., & Klayman, J. (2006). Skilled or unskilled, but still unaware of it: Perceptions of difficulty drive miscalibration in relative comparisons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 60-77. Go to original source...
    6. Dunn, J. C. (2004). Remember-know: A matter of confidence. Psychological Review, 111, 524-542. Go to original source...
    7. Dunn, O. J. (1964). Multiple contrast using rank sums. Technometrics, 5, 241-252. Go to original source...
    8. Dunlosky, J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
    9. Gambrell, L. B. (2011). Seven rules of engagement: What's most important to know about motivation to read. The Reading Teacher, 65(3), 172-178. Go to original source...
    10. Garofalo, J., & Lester Jr, F. K. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance. Journal for research in mathematics education, 16(3), 163-176. Go to original source...
    11. Grecmanová, H., & Urbanovská, E. (2007). Aktivizační metody ve výuce, prostředek ŠVP. Olomouc: Hanex.
    12. Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2009). A macro-level analysis of SRL processes and their relations to the acquisition of a sophisticated mental model of a complex system. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 18-29. Go to original source...
    13. Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Keener, M. C. (2008). Metacognition in education: A focus on calibration. In J. Dunlosky & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 429-457). New York: Psychology Press. Go to original source...
    14. Hádková, M., & Jindráček, V. (2012). Princip názornosti ve výuce českého jazyka a literatury. Ústí nad Labem: PF.
    15. Hausenblas, O., & Košťálová, H. (2006). Co je E-U-R: Podrobněji k fázi uvědomění si významu informací. Kritické listy, 23, 57-59 [online]. Retrieved from: http://rejskol.msmt.cz/. [cit. 08-08-2016].
    16. Hendl, J. (2012). Přehled statistických metod: analýza a metaanalýza dat. Praha: Portál.
    17. Janotová, Z., & Šafránková, K. (2013). Čteme nejen v hodinách českého jazyka. Praha: ČŠI.
    18. Kintsch, W. (1988). The use of knowledge in discourse processing: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182. Go to original source...
    19. Klooster, D. (2000). Co je kritické myšlení? Kritické listy, 1-2 [on-line]. Retrieved from: http://www.kritickemysleni.cz/materialy.php?co=kriticke_listy&co2=02/cojeKM. [cit. 12-09-2016].
    20. Koriat, A., Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B. (1980). Reasons for confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6(2) [on-line]. Retrieved from: http://www.communicationcache.com/uploads/1/0/8/8/10887248/reasons_for_confidence.pdf. [cit. 04-11-2016]. Go to original source...
    21. Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121-1134. Go to original source...
    22. Kruskal, W. H., & Wallis, A. (1952). Use of Ranks in One-Criterion Variance Analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 47(260), 583-621. Go to original source...
    23. Kurtz, B. E., & Borkowski, J. G. (1984). Children´s metacognition: Exploring relations among knowldedge, process, and motivational variables. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 37, 335-354. Go to original source...
    24. Lamanauskas, V. (2012). Development of scientific research aktivity as the basic component of science education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 11(3), 200-202. Go to original source...
    25. Lamanauskas, V. (2013). Natural science education importance in adolescence. Journal of Baltic Education, 12(4), 396-398. Go to original source...
    26. Leonesio, J. R., & Nelson, T. O. (1990). Do different metamemory judgments tap the same underlying aspects of memory? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 464-470. Go to original source...
    27. Levine, T. R., & Hullett, C. R. (2002). Eta squared, partial eta squared, and misreporting of effect size in communication research. Human Communication Research, 28(4), 612-625. Go to original source...
    28. Listiana, L., Susilo, H., Suwono, H., & Suarsini, E. (2016). Empowering students´ metacognitive skills through new teaching strategy (group investigation integrated with think talk write) in biology classroom. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(3), 393-400. Go to original source...
    29. Maki, R. H., Foley, J. M., Kojer, W. K., Thompson, R. C., & Willert, M. G. (1990). Increased processing enhances calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 609-616. Go to original source...
    30. Maki, R. H., & McGuire, M. J. (2002). Metacognition for text: Findings and implications for education. In T. J. Perfect & B. L. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied Metacognition (pp. 39-67). Cambridge: University Press. Go to original source...
    31. Maki, R. H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A. E., & Zacchilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 723-731. Go to original source...
    32. Narens, L., Nelson, T. O., & Scheck, P. (2008). Memory monitoring and the delayed-JOL Effect. In J. Dunlosky & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 137-155). New York: Psychology Press.
    33. Nelson, T. O. (1996). Gamma is a measure of the accuracy of predicting performance on one item relative to another item, not the absolute performance on an individual item: comments on Schraw (1995). Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 257-260. Go to original source...
    34. Nietfeld, J. L., Cao, L., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Metacognitive monitoring accuracy andstudent performance in the classroom. Journal of Experimental Education, 74, 7-28.
    35. Nietfeld, J. L., & Schraw, G. (2002). The effect of knowledge and strategy training on monitoring accuracy. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(3), 131-142. Go to original source...
    36. Pressley, M., & Ghatala, E. S. (1990). Self-regulated learning: Monitoring learning from text. Educational Psychologist, 25, 19-33. Go to original source...
    37. Pressley, M., Harris, K. R., & Marks, M. B. (1992). But good strategy instructors are constructivists. Educational Psychology Review, 4, 3-21. Go to original source...
    38. Prins, F. J., Veenman, M. V. J., & Elshout, J. J. (2006). The impact of interllectual ability and metacognition on learning: New support for the threshold of problematicity theory. Learning and Instruction, 16, 374-387. Go to original source...
    39. Roebers, C. M. (2002). Confidence judgements in children´s and adults event recall and suggestibillity. Developmental Psychology, 38, 1052-1067. Go to original source...
    40. Roebers, C. M., Moga, N., & Schneider, W. (2001). The role of accuracy motivation on children's andadults' event recall. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 78, 313-329. Go to original source...
    41. Roeschl-Heils, A., Schneider, W., & Kraayenoord, Ch. E. (2003). Reading, metacognition and motivation: A follow-up study of German students in Grades 7 and 8. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(1), 75-86. Go to original source...
    42. Sadi, Ö, & Uyar, M. (2013). The relationship between self-efficacy, self-regulated learning strategies and achievement: a path model. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12(1), 21-33. Go to original source...
    43. Sen, S. (2016). The relationship between secondary school students' self-regulated learning skills and chemistry achievement. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(3), 312-324. Go to original source...
    44. Serafini, F. (2013a). Close readings and children's literature. The Reading Teacher, 67(4), 299-300. Go to original source...
    45. Serafini, F. (2013b). Supporting Boys as Readers. The Reading Teacher, 67(1), 40-42. Go to original source...
    46. Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrics, 52(3-4), 591-601. Go to original source...
    47. Schleifer, D. (2009). Metacognition and performace in the accouting classroom. Issues in accounting education, 24(3), 339 - 367. Go to original source...
    48. Schneider, W., & Artelt, C. (2010). Metacognition and mathematics education. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 42, 149-161. Go to original source...
    49. Schneider, W., & Bjorklund, D. F. (1998). Memory. In W. Damon, D. Kuhn, & R. S. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Cognition, perception, and language (Vol. 2, pp. 467-521). New York: Wiley.
    50. Schneider, W., & Pressley, M. (1997). Memory Development Between Two and Twenty. Psychology Press.
    51. Schneider, W., Schlagmüller, M., & Visé, M. (1998). The impact of metamemory and domain-specific knowledge on memory performance. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 13, 91-103. Go to original source...
    52. Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awereness. Instructional science, 26(1-2), 113-125. Go to original source...
    53. Soukup, P. (2013). "Věcná významnost výsledků a její možnosti měření." Data a výzkum - SDA Info, 7(2), 125-148. Go to original source...
    54. Sternberg, R. J. (2002). Kognitivní psychologie. Praha: Portál.
    55. Stipek, D., Feiler, R., Daniels, D., & Milburn, S. (1995). Effects of different instructional approaches on young children's achievement and motivation. Child Development, 66(1), 209-223. Go to original source...
    56. Škoda, J., Doulík, P., & Hajerová-Müllerová, L. (2006). Zásady správné tvorby, použití a hodnocení didaktických testů v přípravě budoucích učitelů [on-line]. Retrieved from: http://cvicebnice.ujep.cz/cvicebnice/FRVS1973F5d/. [cit. 07-10-2016].
    57. Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., & Wiley, J. (2011). Test expectancy affects metacomprehension accuracy. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 264-273. Go to original source...
    58. Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Redford, J. S. (2009). Metacognitive monitoring during and after reading. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition andself-regulated learning (pp. 85-106). New York: Routledge.
    59. Thiede, K. W., Redford, J. S., Wiley, J., & Griffin, T. D. (2012). Elementary School Experience With Comprehension Testing May Inluence Metacomprehension Accurancy Among Seventh and Eighth Graders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 554-564. Go to original source...
    60. Tolson, H. (1980). An adjuct to statistical significance ω2. Research Quarterly for Excercise and Sport, 51(3), 580-584. Go to original source...
    61. Veenman, M. V. J., & Spaans, M. A. (2005). Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 159-176. Go to original source...
    62. Vilenius-Tuohimaa, P., Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J. (2008). The association between mathematical word problems and reading coprehension. Educational Psychology, 28(4), 409-426. Go to original source...
    63. Wang, M., Haertel, G., & Walberg, J. H. (1990). What influences learning? A content analysis of review literature. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 30-43. Go to original source...
    64. Waters, H. S. (2000). Memory strategy development: Do we need yet another deficiency? Child development, 71(4), 1004-1012. Go to original source...
    65. Waters, H. S., & Schneider, W. (2009). Metacognition, Strategy Use, and Instruction. Guilford Press.
    66. Waters H. S., & Waters, T. E. (2009). Bird experts: A study of child and adult knowledge utilization. In H. S. Waters & W. Schneider (Eds.), Metacognition, strategy use, and instruction (pp. 113-134). New York: Guifold Press.
    67. Watkins, M. W., Lei, P. W., & Canivez, G. L. (2007). Psychometric intelligence andachievement: A cross-lagged panel analysis. Intelligence, 35, 59-68. Go to original source...
    68. Weaver, C. A. I., & Bryant, D. S. (1995). Monitoring of comprehension: The role of text difficulty in metamemory for narrative and expository text. Memory & Cognition, 23, 12-22. Go to original source...
    69. Winne, P. H. (1995). Inherent details on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 173-187. Go to original source...
    70. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. (1998). Studying as Self-Regulated Learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277-304). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
    71. Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content