Metacognition and problem solving: A process-oriented approach.

Abstract

Four studies were conducted to demonstrate that the positive effects of verbalization on solution transfer found in previous studies were not due to verbalization per se but to the metacognitive processing involved in the effort required to produce explanations for solution behaviors. In Experiments 1,2, and 3, a distinction was made between process-oriented, problem-oriented, and simple "think aloud" verbalizations. The process-oriented (metacognitive) solvers performed significantly better than nonprocess control groups on both training and transfer tasks. Experiment 4 further demonstrated this effect by showing that process-oriented participants consistently form more sophisticated problem representations and develop more complex strategies.We observe, anecdotally, in our ordinary encounters with colleagues, peers, and acquaintances that individuals engaged in a difficult or complex problem solving task often talk aloud while trying to find the solution. Many of us have the sense that, somehow, it is helpful to talk through a problem and that, somehow, this aids the process of finding the solution. Although we are not sure specifically why it helps or what the mechanism is that provides us with such assistance, the urge to think out loud is almost irresistible.So, what happens when we engage in such an act? What is it that is so helpful? Much of the problem-solving research that includes verbalization as part of the paradigm has confirmed that, indeed, some kind of thinking aloud is beneficial both during practice/learning trials and on transfer of learning to other tasks (

Seeing is as Good as Doing

“…The fi ndings from this study converge with previous evidence suggesting that instructions designed to encourage hypothesis testing and other similar meta-cognitive processes (e.g., monitoring-tracking one's online goal-directed behaviors) do not interfere with the uptake of skilled knowledge, as some have claimed, but instead enhance skilled performance (Berardi-Coletta et al, 1995;Osman, 2008aOsman, , 2008b. Thus, the present study shows that hypothesis testing, rather than the active engagement with a procedural task, is necessary for the successful uptake of knowledge and its application to mastering a complex control system.…”

Examining the Role of Manipulatives and Metacognition on Engagement, Learning, and Transfer

“…Specifically, the act of reflecting on one's problem-solving process within the domain (metacognitive prompts) is more important to developing conceptual understanding than focusing on the particular pieces of domain knowledge (problem-focused prompts) (Berardi-Coletta et al, 1995). This research suggests that pairing concrete materials with metacognitive prompts should facilitate procedural fluency as well as conceptual understanding and transfer.…”

“…Research has shown benefits for receiving metacognitive prompts while learning by problem solving (Berardi-Coletta, Buyer, Dominowski, & Rellinger, 1995;Chi, de Leeuw, Chiu, & LaVancher, 1994;Schoenfeld, 1987). Specifically, the act of reflecting on one's problem-solving process within the domain (metacognitive prompts) is more important to developing conceptual understanding than focusing on the particular pieces of domain knowledge (problem-focused prompts) (Berardi-Coletta et al, 1995).…”

A Process for Developing Introductory Science Laboratory Learning Goals To Enhance Student Learning and Instructional Alignment

“…Additionally, student interviews may also reveal previously undetected and unreported misconceptions, as the think-aloud method provides unique insight into student thinking. 30 For example, as students verbalized their thoughts while considering questions about liquid−liquid extraction, researchers noted a misconception that density alone could be used to decide whether two liquids were miscible. Results from the first round of question development suggest that >45% of students in our first-year chemistry laboratory course hold this misconception; however, questions designed to assess this misconception require further refinement.…”

“…but never asked the student to explain until af ter they have completed working through the questions, as the act of explaining to another may alter the thought process. 30 Following is an example of improvements arising from student validations of multiple-choice and true-false items based on open-ended questions and observations of students completing the titration process. From the first round of data collection, it was noted that some students believed that a titration with a color-change endpoint would necessarily remain colored "permanently", resulting in development of this question:…”