Cognition, Metacognition, and Culture in STEM Education

Dori, Yehudit Judy; Mevarech, Zemira R.; Baker, Dale R.

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-66659-4

Cited by 40 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…or to investigate and explain the procedures of how the teacher solved a problem rather than asking for facts and correct answers (Episode 7). According to Dori et al (2018), metacognition is central to teaching science, and there is ample research to support the role of metacognition in STEM education, which may explain why the facilitation of intrapersonal competence is easier to observe within mathematics than in other subjects. The research supports how content-independent strategies should be taught and assessed within specific disciplines and topics (Pellegrino & Hilton, 2012;Schwartz et al, 2005).…”

Section: Supporting or Hindering Students' Deeper Understanding And Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers’ potential to promote students’ deeper learning in whole-class teaching: An observation study in Norwegian classrooms

Sølvik

Glenna

2021

J Educ Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teachers worldwide are challenged to adjust their teaching to meet students’ needs for deeper learning. The lack of mutual understanding among researchers, policymakers and teachers tends to blur the discussion on how to enhance deeper learning through teaching, which further challenges teachers in making changes in their classroom practices. This qualitative observation study aims to explore how five skilled and experienced Norwegian teachers facilitate 10–16-year-old students’ potential deeper learning in whole-class teaching. The teachers are videotaped four times during a school year, and observations show how teachers enhance or undermine students’ active involvement, facilitate or hinder positive learning environments, support or impede deeper understanding, and stimulate or inhibit metacognitive reflection. The observations are discussed within a framework of the literature and research on how deeper learning is understood and promoted. The findings indicate how teachers’ facilitation of a supportive learning environment is essential to actively involve students in the classroom interactions and dialogue needed to promote deeper content understanding and metacognitive reflection. We explore the potential for deeper learning within whole-class teaching and argue that such potential arises when teachers facilitate collective, reciprocal, supportive, cumulative and purposeful classroom interactions. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the importance of employing varied teaching practices to further address students’ need for deeper learning. The study presents examples of whole-class teaching practices framed by theory and the earlier research on deeper learning, which may contribute to the concretization of policy changes in support of deeper learning in education.

show abstract

Section: Supporting or Hindering Students' Deeper Understanding And Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers’ potential to promote students’ deeper learning in whole-class teaching: An observation study in Norwegian classrooms

Sølvik

Glenna

2021

J Educ Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A third contextual variable is disciplinary subjects such as science (Grau & Whitebread, 2012;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2014;Zheng, Xing, & Zhu, 2019), engineering (Nguyen et al, 2021), mathematics (Iiskala et al, 2011), statistics (Schoor & Bannert, 2012), medicine (Lajoie & Lu, 2012), education (Järvelä et al, 2013), or history (Janssen et al, 2007). In summary, contextual variables such as age (e.g., Vukman, 2005), academic level (e.g., Veenman & Elshout, 1999) and discipline (e.g., Dori, Mevarech, & Baker, 2018) have been suggested to influence activation of MR in learning.…”

Section: Significance Of Context In Studies Of Mr In Collaborative Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such validity is important, since authentic activities are crucial to support thinking and doing in disciplines (see Engle, 2012;Koretsky et al, 2019;Vauras, Volet, & Nolen, 2019). For example, engineering schools typically draw on the disciplinary culture of engineering (see Carberry & Baker, 2018). To date, however, there is limited empirical research on the relationship between metacognition and culture in engineering (Dori et al, 2018).…”

Section: Forms and Foci Of Metacognitive Regulation (Mr) In Less And More Successful Outcome Groups' Collaborative Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, engineering schools typically draw on the disciplinary culture of engineering (see Carberry & Baker, 2018). To date, however, there is limited empirical research on the relationship between metacognition and culture in engineering (Dori et al, 2018). In addition to being conditioned within a particular discipline, formal learning also occurs within schools, each with their own culture.…”

Section: Forms and Foci Of Metacognitive Regulation (Mr) In Less And More Successful Outcome Groups' Collaborative Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Significance of forms and foci of metacognitive regulation in collaborative science learning of less and more successful outcome groups in diverse contexts

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated how metacognitive regulation (MR), especially its forms and foci, was manifested in less and more successful outcome groups’ collaborative science learning in diverse learning contexts. Whilst previous research has shown that different forms and foci of MR exist in collaborative learning, their role in groups’ learning outcomes remains unexplored. Drawing conclusions from different studies has been difficult because these have used different conceptualisations and analytic methods. In the present study, the learning processes of less and more successful outcome groups from three diverse collaborative science learning contexts were scrutinised. The contexts differed in academic level, disciplinary subject, and national culture. The same theory-based conceptualisations, coding systems, coders, and analyses were used across contexts. In addition, the tasks studied were designed using the same guiding principles. Transcribed video and audio recordings of the groups’ verbal interactions for two distinct interaction segments from these tasks formed the basis of the analyses. Manifestation of forms and foci of MR were quantitatively and qualitatively illustrated in each context. The main findings show that the manifestation of MR of less and more successful outcome groups demonstrated similarities and differences in the three different learning contexts. This study contributes to a contextualised understanding of MR in collaborative science learning, and highlights the importance of using similar, rigorous analytical tools across diverse contexts.

show abstract

“…Argumentation in terms of SSI and CSI involves an ethical dimension, so socioscientific argumentation is a distinct process from scientific argumentation [26]. Multiple studies have demonstrated that reasoning on SSI [27,28] improves the complexity and quality of students' arguments concerning both scientific and socioscientific issues and can improve students' argumentation skills [29] and critical scientific literacy [30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to make evidence-based decisions, and hence to reason on questions concerning scientific and societal aspects, is a crucial goal in science education and science communication. However, science denial poses a constant challenge for society and education. Controversial science issues (CSI) encompass scientific knowledge rejected by the public as well as socioscientific issues, i.e., societal issues grounded in science that are frequently applied to science education. Generating evidence-based justifications for claims is central in scientific and informal reasoning. This study aims to describe attitudes and their justifications within the argumentations of a random online sample (N = 398) when reasoning informally on selected CSI. Following a deductive-inductive approach and qualitative content analysis of written open-ended answers, we identified five types of justifications based on a fine-grained category system. The results suggest a topic-specificity of justifications referring to specific scientific data, while justifications appealing to authorities tend to be common across topics. Subjective, and therefore normative, justifications were slightly related to conspiracy ideation and a general rejection of the scientific consensus. The category system could be applied to other CSI topics to help clarify the relation between scientific and informal reasoning in science education and communication.

show abstract

Cognition, Metacognition, and Culture in STEM Education

Cited by 40 publications

References 3 publications

Teachers’ potential to promote students’ deeper learning in whole-class teaching: An observation study in Norwegian classrooms

Teachers’ potential to promote students’ deeper learning in whole-class teaching: An observation study in Norwegian classrooms

Significance of forms and foci of metacognitive regulation in collaborative science learning of less and more successful outcome groups in diverse contexts

Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About