Differences in Metacognitive Regulation in Introductory Biology Students: When Prompts Are Not Enough

CBE Life Sciences Education - Tập 14 Số 2 - Trang ar15 - 2015
Julie Dangremond Stanton1, Xyanthe N. Neider2, Isaura J. Gallegos3, Nicole C. Kelp3
1*Department of Cellular Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602
2Writing Program, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99163
3School of Molecular Biosciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99163

Tóm tắt

Strong metacognition skills are associated with learning outcomes and student performance. Metacognition includes metacognitive knowledge—our awareness of our thinking—and metacognitive regulation—how we control our thinking to facilitate learning. In this study, we targeted metacognitive regulation by guiding students through self-evaluation assignments following the first and second exams in a large introductory biology course (n = 245). We coded these assignments for evidence of three key metacognitive-regulation skills: monitoring, evaluating, and planning. We found that nearly all students were willing to take a different approach to studying but showed varying abilities to monitor, evaluate, and plan their learning strategies. Although many students were able to outline a study plan for the second exam that could effectively address issues they identified in preparing for the first exam, only half reported that they followed their plans. Our data suggest that prompting students to use metacognitive-regulation skills is effective for some students, but others need help with metacognitive knowledge to execute the learning strategies they select. Using these results, we propose a continuum of metacognitive regulation in introductory biology students. By refining this model through further study, we aim to more effectively target metacognitive development in undergraduate biology students.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Alexander JM, 1995, Dev Rev, 15, 1, 10.1006/drev.1995.1001

Ambrose SA, 2010, How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, 1

Ames C, 1988, J Educ Psychol, 80, 260, 10.1037/0022-0663.80.3.260

Bandura A, 1997, Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control

Baxter Magolda MB, 2000, J Coll Stud Dev, 41, 141

Biggs JB, 1987, Student Approaches to Learning and Studying, Research

Bogdan R, 2003, Qualitative Research for education: An Introduction to Theories and Methods

Bransford JD, 2000, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School

Brown AL, 1978, In: Advances in Instructional Psychology, vol. 1, 77

Brown AL, 1987, In: Metacognition, Motivation, and Understanding, 65

Coutinho S, 2008, Learn Environ Res, 11, 131, 10.1007/s10984-008-9042-7

Denzin NK, In: The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues, 2, 1

Denzin NK, 2005, In: Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3, 1

Dignath C, 2008, Metacogn Learn, 3, 231, 10.1007/s11409-008-9029-x

Dinsmore D, 2008, Educ Psychol Rev, 20, 391, 10.1007/s10648-008-9083-6

Dweck CS, 1988, Psychol Rev, 95, 256, 10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256

Estrada-Hollenbeck M, 2011, J Educ Psychol, 103, 206, 10.1037/a0020743

Flavell JH, 2004, Merrill Palmer Q, 50, 274, 10.1353/mpq.2004.0018

Gonyea RM, 2005, New Dir Inst Res, 2005, 73

Heyman GD, 1992, Motiv Emotion, 16, 231, 10.1007/BF00991653

Jacobs JE, 1987, Educ Psychol, 22, 255, 10.1207/s15326985ep2203&4_4

Kolencik PL, 2011, Encouraging Metacognition: Supporting Learners through Metacognitive Teaching Strategies

Kuhn D, 2000, Curr Dir Psychol Sci, 9, 178, 10.1111/1467-8721.00088

Lockl K, 2006, Metacogn Learn, 1, 15, 10.1007/s11409-006-6585-9

Lopez EJ, 2013, J Res Sci Teach, 50, 660, 10.1002/tea.21095

Markwell J, 2006, Biochem Mol Biol Educ, 34, 267, 10.1002/bmb.2006.494034042629

Meijer J, 2012, Res Papers Educ, 27, 597, 10.1080/02671522.2010.550011

Novak JD, 1990, J Res Sci Teach, 27, 937, 10.1002/tea.3660271003

Perry WG, 1968, Forms of Ethical and Intellectual Development in the College Years: A Scheme

Pieschl S, 2009, Metacogn Learn, 4, 3, 10.1007/s11409-008-9030-4

Pintrich PR, 2002, Theory Pract, 41, 219, 10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3

Pressley M, 1990, Educ Psychol, 25, 19, 10.1207/s15326985ep2501_3

Rickey D, 2000, J Chem Educ, 77, 915, 10.1021/ed077p915

Saldaña J, 2013, The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, 2

Sandi-Urena S, 2011, Int J Sci Educ, 33, 323, 10.1080/09500690903452922

Schraw G, 1998, Instruct Sci, 26, 113, 10.1023/A:1003044231033

Schraw G, 2006, Res Sci Educ, 36, 111, 10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8

Schraw G, 1995, Educ Psychol Rev, 7, 351, 10.1007/BF02212307

10.1187/cbe.11-11-0100

Tobias S, 2002, Knowing What You Know and What You Don’t: Further Research on Metacognitive Knowledge Monitoring

10.1187/cbe.04-06-0041

10.1187/cbe.13-12-0241

van Hout-Wolters B, 2000, In: New Learning, 83, 10.1007/0-306-47614-2_5

Veenman MV, 2005, Learn Individ Differ, 15, 159, 10.1016/j.lindif.2004.12.001

Veenman MV, 2006, Metacogn Learn, 1, 3, 10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0

Veenman MV, 2004, Learn Instr, 14, 89, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.004

Vukman KB, 2005, J Adult Dev, 12, 211, 10.1007/s10804-005-7089-6

Vukman KB, 2009, Educ Stud, 36, 259, 10.1080/03055690903180376

Wang MC, 1990, J Educ Res, 84, 30, 10.1080/00220671.1990.10885988

Weston C, 2001, Qual Sociol, 24, 381, 10.1023/A:1010690908200

Whitebread D, 2009, Metacogn Learn, 4, 63, 10.1007/s11409-008-9033-1

Yin RK, 2010, Qualitative Research from Start to Finish

Young A, 2008, J Sch Teach Learn, 8, 1

10.1187/cbe.13-09-0175

Zimmerman BJ, 1986, Contemp Educ Psychol, 11, 307, 10.1016/0361-476X(86)90027-5

Zohar A, 2013, Stud Sci Educ, 49, 121, 10.1080/03057267.2013.847261

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

CBE Life Sciences Education

Tập 14 Số 2

ar15

Thông tin tác giả