Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies in Problem-Posing Tasks in the Context of Science

Year 2023, Volume: 7 Issue: 15, 769 - 787, 21.10.2023

Gülfem Dilek Yurttaş Kumlu , Mehtap Taştepe

https://doi.org/10.31458/iejes.1345989

Abstract

This study aims to determine the cognitive and metacognitive strategies used by pre-service mathematics teachers for activating mental processes in a semi-structured problem-posing task. A holistic multiple-case design was used to in this study. For the case study, five voluntary pre-service mathematics teachers participated in this study. This task involves problem-posing in the context of science appropriate for different mathematical expressions. A think-aloud protocol, a semi-structured interview, observation and the pieces of papers for each question were used in this study. Open coding was performed using the continuous comparative analysis technique. The main results are that (a) they used various cognitive and metacognitive strategies to activate mental processes in problem-posing, (b) these strategies differed both in diversity and the usage of frequency of them and some strategies are either domain-specific or general-specific and (c) the use of metacognitive strategies is more common than cognitive strategies.

Keywords

Cognitive strategies, mathematical expressions, metacognitive strategies, semi-structured problem-posing, the context of science

References

• Alavi, S. M., & Kaivanpanah, S. (2006). Cognitive and metacognitive vocabulary learning strategies across fields of study. Pazhuhesh-e Zabanha-ye Khareji, 27, 83-105.
• Altun, H., & Yeşilpınar-Uyar, M. (2023). The prediction level of metacognitive awareness of reading strategies on problem posing skill. Anadolu University Journal of Education Faculty (AUJEF), 7(2), 335-345.
• Aydoğdu, M. Z., & Türnüklü, E. (2023). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin geometri problemi kurma stratejilerinin incelenmesi [The investigation of middle school students’ problem posing strategies]. Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 14(1), 45-70.
• Bannert, M., & Mengelkamp, C. (2008). Assessment of metacognitive skills by means of instruction to think aloud and reflect when prompted. Does the verbalisation method affect learning?. Metacognition and Learning, 3(1), 39-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-007-9009-6
• Blackley, S., & Howell, J. (2019). The next chapter in the STEM education narrative: Using robotics to support programming and coding. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 51-64. http://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v44n4.4
• Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (2005). The art of problem posing (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
• Burrows, A., & Slater, T. (2015). A proposed integrated STEM framework for contemporary teacher preparation. Teacher Education and Practice, 28(2/3), 318–330.
• Cai, J., Hwang, S., Jiang, C., & Silber, S. (2015). Problem-posing research in mathematics education: Some answered and unanswered questions. In F. Singer, N. Ellerton & J. Cai (Eds.), Mathematical problem posing (pp. 3-34). New York, NY: Springer.
• Cai, J., & Leikin, R. (2020). Affect in mathematical problem posing: Conceptualization, advances, and future directions for research. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 105(3), 287-301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10008-x
• Davison, D. M., Miller, K. W., & Metheny, D. L. (1995). What does integration of science and mathematics really mean?. School Science and Mathematics, 95(5), 226-230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1995.tb15771.x
• Dugger, W. E. (2010, January). Evolution of STEM in the United States. In Knowledge in Technology Education: Proceedings of the 6th Biennial International Conference on Technology Education: Volume One (TERC 2010) Volume One (TERC 2010) (pp. 117-123). Surfers Paradise, QLD: Griffith Institute for Educational Research.
• Duncan, T.G., & McKeachie, W.J. (2005). The making of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 117–128.
• English, L. D. (1997). The development of fifth-grade children's problem-posing abilities. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34(3), 183-217.
• Ekici, D. (2016). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin matematiksel problem kurma stratejilerinin incelenmesi [An investigation of middle school students' problem posing strategies] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Dokuz Eylul University.
• Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
• Ghasempour, Z., Bakar, N., & Jahanshahloo, G. R. (2013). Innovation in teaching and learning through problem posing tasks and metacognitive strategies. International Journal of Pedagogical Innovations, 1(1), 53-62.
• Gonzales, N. A. (1994). Problem posing: A neglected component in mathematics courses for prospective elementary and middle school teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 94(2), 78–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1994.tb12295.x
• Gonzales, N. A. (1998). A blueprint for problem posing. School Science and Mathematics, 98(8), 448- 456. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1998.tb17437.x
• Gunstone, R.F., & Mitchell, I. J. (1998). Metacognition and conceptual change. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 133-163). San Diego: Academic Press.
• Gül, K. (2019). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarına yönelik bir STEM eğitimi dersinin tasarlanması, uygulanması ve değerlendirilmesi [The design, implementation, and evaluation of a STEM education course for prerservice science teachers]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Gazi University, Ankara.
• Hartman, H. J. (2001a). Teaching metacognitively. In H. J. Harrtman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and practice (pp. 149-172). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2243-8
• Hartman, H. J. (2001b). Developing students' metacognitive knowledge and skills. In H. J. Harrtman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and practice (pp. 33-68). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2243-8
• Hıdıroğlu, Ç. N. (2018). Üstbiliş kavramına ve problem çözme sürecinde üstbilişin rolüne eleştirel bir bakış [A critical overview of metacognition and metacognition’s role in problem solving process]. Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 32, 87-103.
• Jääskeläinen, R. (2010). Think-aloud protocol. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of translation studies (Volume 1) (pp. 371-373). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Karnain, T., Bakar, M. N., Siamakani, S. Y. M., Mohammadikia, H., & Candra, M. (2014). Exploring the metacognitive skills of secondary school students’ use during problem posing. Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences), 67(1), 27–32. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v67.1847
• Kim, M. K., & Cho, M. K. (2015). Design and implementation of integrated instruction of mathematics and science in Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(1), 3-15. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1301a
• Kojima, K., Miwa, K., & Matsui, T. (2009). Study on support of learning from examples in problem posing as a production task. In S.C. Kong et all. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computers in Education. Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education.
• Kopparla, M., Bicer, A., Vela, K., Lee, Y., Bevan, D., Kwon, H., ... & Capraro, R. M. (2019). The effects of problem-posing intervention types on elementary students’ problem-solving. Educational Studies, 45(6), 708-725. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2018.1509785
• Kumlu, G. (2012). Alternatif kavramlara sahip fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarında fen metinlerini okurlarken aktif hale gelen bilişsel ve üst bilişsel stratejiler [Cognitive and metacognitive strategies activated while the science texts being read by science and technology pre-service teachers having alternative concepts] Unpublished master’s thesis. Gazi University, Ankara.
• Kyngäs, H. (2020). Inductive content analysis. In The application of content analysis in nursing science research. In H. Kyngäs, K. Mikkonen & M. Kääriäinen (Eds.). The application of content analysis in nursing science research (pp. 13-21). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
• Larkin, S. (2009). Metacognition in young children. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Leutwyler, B. (2009). Metacognitive learning strategies: Differential development patterns in high school. Metacognition and Learning, 4(2), 111-123.
• Li, Y., Wang, K., Xiao, Y., & Froyd, J. E. (2020). Research and trends in STEM education: A systematic review of journal publications. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1-16.
• McBride, J. W., & Silverman, F. L. (1991). Integrating elementary/middle school science and mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 91(7), 285-92.
• Meijer, J., Veenman, M. V. J., & van Hout-Wolters, B. H. (2006). Metacognitive activities in text-studying and problem-solving: Development of a taxonomy. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(3), 209-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610500479991
• Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
• Mishra, S., & Iyer, S. (2015). An exploration of problem posing-based activities as an assessment tool and as an instructional strategy. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 10(5), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41039-015-0006-0
• O’Malley, J. M. & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. London: Cambridge University. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524490
• Osana, H. P., & Pelczer, I. (2015). A review on problem posing in teacher education. In F. Singer, N. Ellerton & J. Cai (Eds.), Mathematical problem posing (pp. 469-492). NY: Springer.
• Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. NY: Newbury House Publishers.
• Öztürk, F. & Özdemir, D. (2020). The effect of STEM education approach in science teaching: Photosynthesis experiment example. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 8(16), 821-841. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.698445
• Pape, S. J., & Tchoshanov, M. A. (2001). The role of representation(s) in developing mathematical understanding. Theory into Practice 40(2), 118-127.
• Paris, S. G., & Hamilton, E. E. (2009). The development of children’s reading comprehension. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 32-53). NY: Routledge.
• Pelczer, I., Voica, C., & Gamboa, F. (2008). Problem posing strategies of first year mathematics students. In O. Figueras, J. L. Cortina, S. Alatorre, T. Rojano, A. Sepúlveda (Eds.), Proceedings of PME 32 and PME-NA, 4, 97-104.
• Pilten, P., Isik, N., & Serin, M. K. (2017). The effects of mathematical discussion environment supported by metacognitive problems on the problem posing skills of 3th grade primary school grade students. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(4), 523-543. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.438145
• Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Doubleday.
• Roelle, J., Nowitzki, C., & Berthold, K. (2017). Do cognitive and metacognitive processes set the stage for each other? Learning and Instruction, 50, 54-64. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.009
• Rosli, R., Capraro, M. M., Goldsby, D., y Gonzalez, E. G., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Capraro, R. M. (2015). Middle-grade preservice teachers’ mathematical problem solving and problem posing. In F. Singer, N. Ellerton & J. Cai (Eds.), Mathematical problem posing (pp. 333-354). New York NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6258-3_16
• Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.). Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334-370). NY: Macmillan Publishing.
• Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460-475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
• Silver, E. A. (1994). On mathematical problem posing. For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(1),19-28.
• Silver, E. A., Mamona-Downs, J., Leung, S. S., & Kenney, P. A. (1996). Posing mathematical problems: An exploratory study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(3), 293–309. https://doi.org/10.2307/749366
• Stoyanova, E., & Ellerton, N. F. (1996). A framework for research into students’ problem posing in school mathematics. In P. C. Clarkson (Ed.), Technology in Mathematics Education Proceedings of the 19th Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia Conference (pp. 518– 525). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA).
• Straus, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage Publications.
• Taufik, A. R., Pagiling, S. L., Mayasari, D., Munfarikhatin, A., Natsir, I., & Dadi, O. (2019). The metacognition of junior high school students in posing mathematical problems viewed from cognitive style. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 383, 137-143.
• Van Keer, H. (2004). Fostering reading comprehension in fifth grade by explicit instruction in reading strategies and peer tutoring. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(1), 37-70. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709904322848815
• Yerdelen-Damar, S., & Eryılmaz, A. (2021). Promoting conceptual understanding with explicit epistemic intervention in metacognitive instruction: Interaction between the treatment and epistemic cognition. Research in Science Education, 51(2), 547-575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9807-7
• Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. London: Sage Pub.