9. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Fen Bilimleri Alanındaki Çoktan Seçmeli Soruların Çözümü Öncesi, Esnası, Sonrasında Kullandıkları Bilişsel ve Üstbilişsel Stratejilerin Belirlenmesi

Year 2019, , 1071 - 1099, 30.06.2019

Emine Hatun Diken , Nejla Yürük

https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.512341

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Bu araştırmada Fen Lisesi, Anadolu
Liseleri ve Meslek Lisesi 9. sınıf öğrencilerinin Fen Bilimleri alanındaki
çoktan seçmeli soruların çözümü öncesi, esnası, sonrasındaki süreçlerde
kullandıkları bilişsel ve üstbilişsel stratejiler belirlenmiştir. Araştırmaya her bir liseden beş öğrenci olmak üzere on beş öğrenci
katılmıştır. Araştırmada nitel araştırma deseni kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda; genel olarak Fen Bilimleri alanındaki çoktan
seçmeli soruların çözümü öncesi ve esnasındaki süreçlerde Fen Lisesi
öğrencilerinin Anadolu Liseleri ile Meslek Lisesi öğrencilerine göre fazla
sayıda, çeşitte bilişsel ve üstbilişsel strateji kullandıkları belirlenmiştir.
Soruların çözümü sonrasında öğrencilerin tamamının bilişsel strateji
kullanmadıkları belirlenmiştir. Soruların çözümü sonrasında Fen Lisesi
öğrencilerinin üstbilişsel strateji kullandıkları, Anadolu Liseleri
öğrencilerinin çok az sayıda, çeşitte üstbilişsel strateji kullandıkları,
Meslek Lisesi öğrencilerinin ise üstbilişsel strateji kullanmadıkları tespit
edilmiştir. 

Keywords

Problem Çözme, Bilişsel Stratejiler, Üstbilişsel Stratejiler, Fen Bilimleri Alanındaki Çoktan Seçmeli Sorular, Öğrenci

Determining Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies used by 9th Grade Students Before, while and After Solving Multiple-Choice Science Questions

Abstract

The current study
determines the cognitive and metacognitive strategies used by the 9^th
grade students at Science High Schools, Anatolian High Schools and Vocational
High Schools before, while and after solving multiple-choice science questions.
Fifteen students, five from each high school type, participated in the study.
Qualitative research designs was used in the study. The findings of the study
revealed that the students at Science High Schools used cognitive and
metacognition strategies in a greater number and variety than those at
Anatolian High Schools and Vocational High Schools before and while solving
science questions. It was ascertained that the students in all high school
types did not use cognitive strategies after answering science questions. The
results indicated that Science High School students employed metacognition
strategies after solving the questions, Anatolian High School students used
very few in number and variety and Vocational High School students used no
metacognition strategies. 

Keywords

Problem Solving, Cognitive Strategies, Metacognition Strategies, Multiple-Choice Science Questions, Student

References

• Abdullah, F.A.P.B. (2006). The pattern of physics problem- solving from the perspective of metacognition. Unpublished master’s dissertation, University of Cambridge. Retrieved March 12, 2009, http://people.pwf.cam.ac.ok /kst24/ResearchStudents/ Abdullah 2006metacognition.Adelson, B. (1984). When novices surpass experts: the difficulty of a task may increase with expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 10, 483-495.Altun, M. (2001). Matematik öğretimi. İstanbul: ALFA Basım Yayın Dağıtım.Anderson, J., Greeno, J., Kline, P., & Neves, D. (1981). Acquisition of problem solving skill. In J.R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition, (pp. 313-230). Hillsdale, JH: Erlbaum.Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from text by means of informed, self-control training (Technical Report No. 262). Urbana: University of Illinois, Centre for the study of Reading.Campione, J. C., Brown, A. L., & Connell, M. L. (1988). Metacognition: On the importance of understanding what you are doing. In R. I. Charles & E. A. Edward (Eds.), The teaching and assessing of mathematical problem solving (pp. 93-114). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Sciences, 5, 121-152.Clement, J. J. (1991). Constructivism in the classroom: a review of transforming children’s mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 422-428.Davidson, J.E., Deuser, R., & Sternberg, R.J. (1994). The role of metacognition in problem solving. In J. Metcalf and A.P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition (pp. 207-226). Boston, MA: The MIT Press.Dhillon, A. (1998). Individual differences within problem-solving strategies used in physics. Science Education, 82(3), 379-405.Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 231-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Flavell, J.H. (1979). Metacognitive and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologyst, 34, 906-911.Finegold, M., & Mass, r. (1985). Differences in the processes of solving physics problems between good physics problem solvers and poor physics problem solvers. Research in Science and Technological Education, 3, 59-67.Garofalo, J., & Lester, F. K., Jr. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16, 163-176.Goos, M. (2002). Understanding metacognitive failure. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21(3), 283-302.Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2000). A money problem: a source of insight into problem solving action. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 13, 1-21.Gunstone, R. F., & Mitchell, I. J. (1998). Metacognition and conceptual change, In J.J Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee and J. D. Novak (Eds.), Teaching science for understanding: a human constructivist view (pp. 133-163). San Diego: Academic Press.Hegarty, M., Mayer, R.E., & Monk, C.A. (1995). Comprehension of arithmetic word problems: a comparison of successful and unsuccessful problem solvers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 18-32.Karaçam, S. (2009). Öğrencilerin kuvvet ve hareket konularındaki kavramsal anlamalarının ve soru çözümünde kullandıkları bilişsel ve üstbilişsel stratejilerin soru tipleri dikkate alınarak incelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.Kumlu, G. (2012). Alternatif kavramlara sahip fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarında fen metinlerini okurlarken aktif hale gelen bilişsel ve üstbilişsel stratejiler. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.Lesh, R., & Akerstrom, M. (1982). Applied problem solving: Priorities for mathematics education research. In F.K. Lester and J. Garofalo (Eds.), Mathematical problem solving: Issues in research (pp. 117-129). Philadelphia, PA: The Franklin Institute. Livingstone, J. A. (1997). Metacognition: an overview. Retrieved 16 February, 2009, http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/CEP564/Metacog.html. Malone, L. K. (2006). A comparative study of the cognitive and metacognitive differences between modeling and non-modeling high school physics students. Published doctoral dissertation, University of Carregie Mellon, Pittsbuh, PA.McDermott, J., & Larkin, J. H. (1978). Re-representing textbook physics problems. In Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference, the Canadian Society for Computational Studies of Intelligence. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Priest, A.G., & Lindsay, R.O. (1992). New light on novice-expert differences in physics problem solving. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 389-405.Reif, F., & Allen, S. (1992). Cognition for interpreting scientific concepts: a study of acceleration. Cognition and Instruction, 9(1), 1-44.Savelsbergh, E.R, de Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M.G.M. (1996). Forms of problem representation in physics. The Netherlands: University of Twente.Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334-370). New York: MacMillan.Simon, D. P., & Simon. H. A. (1978). Individual differences in solving physics problems. In R. Siegler (Ed.), Children’s thinking: what develops? (pp. 325-348). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Singh, C. (2002). When physical intuition fails? American Journal of Physics, 70, 1103–1109.Silver, E.A. (1982). Knowledge organization and mathematical problem solving. In F.K. Lester and J. Garofalo (Eds.), Mathematical problem solving: ıssues in research (pp. 15-25). Philadelphia, PA: The Franklin Institute.Tuminaro J., & Redish E. (2007). Elements of a cognitive model of physics problem solving: epistemic games. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 3(2), 101-123. Wilson, J., & Clark, D., (2002). Monitoring mathematical metacognition. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Wilson, J.W., Fernandez, M.L., & Hadaway, N. (1993). Mathematical problem solving. In P.S. Wilson (Ed.), Research ideas for the classroom: High school mathematics (pp. 57-78), New York: Macmillian.Van Gog, T., Paas, F., van Merriënboer, J. G., & Witte, P. (2005). Uncovering the problem solving process: cued retrospective reporting versus concurrent and retrospective reporting. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11(4), 237-244.Yeap, B. H. (1998). Metacognition in mathematical problem solving. Australian Association for Research in Education. 1998 Annual Concerence, Adelaide. Retrieved 8, February, 2009, www.aare.edu.au/98pap/yea98408.htm.