Evolution of Research Methods for Probing and Understanding Metacognition

Abstract

This paper reports on the development, self-critique and evolution of research methods for interpreting and understanding students' metacognition that were developed through the Metacognition and Reflective Inquiry (MRI) collaborative study. The MRI collaborative was a multi-year, multi-case, research study that investigated the elusive nature and character of high school students' metacognition across formal and informal science learning contexts. The study's research design comprised a series of integrated, layered, interpretive case studies which were conducted in a hermeneutic fashion over a 3 year period. The implementation of each case study provided an opportunity for the researchers to reflect critically on the research methods used to elucidate metacognition and hence refine the individual and collective capacity, responsiveness and fruitfulness of the methods used. This paper discusses the evolution of these methods and the lessons that the entire study provides for the conceptualization of other qualitative-interpretivist studies. Keywords Research methods . Metacognition . Qualitative research . Research design Nature and Definition of MetacognitionMetacognition is a construct that is often considered to have a core focus on the improvement of students' learning processes and outcomes. Flavell's seminal work (Flavell 1976(Flavell , 1979 has generated continued interest in and research regarding how educators can develop, enhance, and measure students' metacognition. However, there appears to be no uniform definition of metacognition in the literature (Larkin 2006). Veenman et al. (2006) highlighted the ongoing concern raised by Wellman (1985) that metacognition is a fuzzy

Metacognitive Components in Learning to Learn Approaches

“…These definitions show several components without any consensus being reached concerning their nature and number (Anderson, Nashon & Thomas, 2009;Livingston, 1997;Noël, 1997;Veenman, Hout-Wolters & Afflerbach, 2006;Vianin, 2009). They use heterogeneous terms, leading numerous authors to consider the concept as «fuzzy» (e.g., Akturk & Sahin, 2011;Brown, 1987;Hacker, 1998).…”

Applying learning strategy questionnaires: problems and possibilities

“…They find the range of intercorrelations varying from .24 to .63. Questionnaires may also be related to other off-line methods such as interviews (Hopfenbeck 2009), and they may be compared with on-line measures, such as observations, log-file measures or think-aloud measures (Anderson et al 2009;Cromley and Azevedo 2006;Sins et al 2008;Veenman et al 2003). Veenman (2005) gives an overview of multi-method research into the measurement of metacognitive strategies.…”

Filling in the Distance Between Us: Group Metacognition During Problem Solving in a Secondary Education Course

“…Group metacognition ''is considerably under-researched and its effects on learning and behavior are highly underappreciated'' (Anderson et al 2009). New methods of measuring group cognition are needed, especially as we consider the comparison of an individual's knowledge with a group's knowledge.…”

“…In what ways does having more or less awareness affect the group's effectiveness in solving problems? Anderson et al (2009) found that a group with strong social relationships restricted their discussion of ideas for the sake of harmony-or, reducing the distances between the members. How might metasocial awareness influence the learning of a group positively or negatively?…”