Investigating Middle School Students' Metacognition and Mathematical Reasoning of Problem-Solving Skills

Abstract

Described as being aware of and controlling one's own thinking processes and a benefit of consequences, metacognition is known that it is related to both academic achievement and students' thinking. In this study, it is aimed to investigate the problem-solving and metacognition skills of middle school students with regard to genders, class levels, number of siblings, financial status of the family and educational backgrounds of the parents. For this purpose, 280 middle school students were selected from a public middle school in Melikgazi, Kayseri using convenience sampling method. As a result of the analysis based on the four factors of metacognition scale and problem-solving inventory, boys are good not only at solving problems requiring mathematical reasoning but also at monitoring what they do, what they will do, and most importantly, their own thinking processes. Surprisingly, 5th grade students had higher predictive abilities than 8th graders. Although predictive skills were higher, 5th graders had lower level of problem-solving skills with 6th graders than upper-classes. Also, students whose mothers have undergraduate and graduate degrees are better at solving problems than those whose mothers have never attended a school or who have graduated from elementary school.

Keywords

• Metacognition,Problem-solving

Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin Üstbiliş ve Problem Çözmede Kullandıkları Matematiksel Muhakeme Becerilerinin İncelenmesi

Abstract

References

1. Akturk, A. O., & Sahin, I. (2011). Literature review on metacognition and its measurement. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3731-3736.
2. Borkowski, J. G. (1992). Metacognitive theory: A framework for teaching literacy, writing, and math skills. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 253-257.
3. Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. In R.J. Spiro, B. Bruce, W. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum.
4. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E., Akgün., Ö., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel. F. (2013). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
5. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical assessment, research, and evaluation, 10(1), 7.
6. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. London: SAGE Publication.
7. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.
8. De Clercq, A., Desoete, A., & Roeyers, H. (2000). EPA 2000: A multilingual, programmable computer assessment of offline metacognition in children with mathematical learning disabilities. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 304-311.

9. Deniz, D., Küçük, B., Cansız, Ş., Akgün, l., & İşleyen, T. (2014). Ortaöğretim matematik öğretmeni adaylarının üstbiliş farkındalıklarının bazı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 22(1), 305-320.
10. Desoete, A. (2001). Off-line metacognition in children with mathematics learning disabilities (Doctoral dissertation, Ghent University).
11. Deseote, A. & Roeyers, H. (2002). Off-line metacognition – a domain-specific retardation in young children with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 123-139.
12. Eggen, P. & Kauchak, D. (2001). Educational psychology. New Jersey, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
13. Erez, G., & Peled, I. (2001). Cognition and metacognition: Evidence of higher thinking in problem-solving of adolescents with mental retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 83-93.
14. Flavell, J. H. (1976). “Metacognitive Aspects of Problem Solving”. In L. Resnick (Ed.). The Nature of Intelligence (pp.231-236). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognitive and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Area of Cognitive Developmental Inquiry. American Psychologyst, 34, 906-911.
16. Field, A. (2005). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS (2nd Edition), Sage Publications.
17. Fidan, N. (1996). Okulda öğrenme ve öğretme. İstanbul: Alkım Yayınları.
18. Fraenkel, J., R., & Wallen, N., E. (2010). How to design and evaluate research in education. (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill, New York: NY.
19. Garofalo, J., & Lester, F. K. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance. Journal for research in mathematics education.
20. George, D. & Mallery. M. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference. 17.0 update (10a ed.) Boston: Pearson.
21. Gravetter, F. & Wallnau, L. (2014). Essentials of Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (8th ed.). Belmont. CA: Wadsworth.
22. Kaplan, A., & Duran, M. (2016). Ortaokul öğrencilerine yönelik matematiksel üstbiliş farkındalık ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Atatürk Üniversitesi Kazım Karabekir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (32), 1-17.
23. Lemieux, C. L., Collin, C. A., & Watier, N. N. (2019). Gender differences in metacognitive judgments and performance on a goal-directed wayfinding task. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 1-14.
24. Lucangeli, D., & Cornoldi, C. (1997). Mathematics and metacognition: What is the nature of the relationship? Mathematical Cognition, 3, 121-139.
25. Lutfiyya, L. A. (1998). Mathematical thinking of high school students in Nebraska. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 29(1), 55-64.
26. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), 2012.
27. Özsoy, G. (2007). İlköğretim beşinci sınıfta üstbiliş stratejileri öğretiminin problem çözme başarısına etkisi. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Ankara.
28. Peklaj C, Pecjak S. 2002. Differences in Students’ Self-Regulated Learning According to Their Achievement and Sex. Studia Psychology, 44: 29-43.
29. Schoenfeld, A. (1987). What’s all the fuss about metacognition? In: A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive Science and Mathematics Education, 189-215. Lawrence Erlbaum.
30. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: problem solving, metacognition and sense making in arithmetics. In D.A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching and Learning. A Project of the National Council of Teachers of Arithmetics. (pp. 334-370).
31. Swanson, H. L. (1990). Influence of Metacognitive Knowledge and Aptitude on Problem Solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2), 306-667.
32. Tabachnick, G. B. & Fidell, S. L. (2015). Çok Değişkenli İstatistiklerin Kullanımı- Using Multivariate Statistics (6. Baskı). (Çev. Edt.. Baloğlu. M.). Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
33. Tobias, S., & Everson, H.T. (1996). Assessing metacognitive knowledge monitoring. In K. Hagtvet (Ed.), Advances in Test Anxiety Research. 7, 18-31. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Veloo, A., Rani, M. A., & Krishnasamy, H. N. (2014). The role of gender in the use of metacognitive awareness reading strategies among biology students. Asian Social Science, 11(1), 67-73.
35. Verschaffel, L. (1999). Realistic mathematical modelling and problem solving in the upper elementary school: Analysis and improvement. Teaching and learning thinking skills. Contexts of learning, 215-240.
36. Victor, A. M. (2004). The effects of metacognitive instruction on the planning and academic achievement of first and second grade children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, II Graduate College of the Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago.
37. Winne, P.H. (1997). Experimenting to bootstrap self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 397-410.
38. Yıldız, E., Akpınar, E., Tatar, N., & Ergin, O. (2009). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the metacognition scale for primary school students. Educational Sciences: theory and practice. 9(3), 1591-1604.
39. Yildiz, A., Baltaci, S., & Kuzu, O. (2018). The Investigation of Students’ Cognitive and Metacognitive Competencies According to Different Variables. European Journal of Education Studies.