Investigation of the Metacognition-Themed Articles Consisting of a Mathematical Content and Published in Turkey

Öz

In this research, it is aimed to review the metacognition-themed articles, which have been conducted and published in Turkey on the topic of the mathematics education, within the scope of methodological features and in terms of the subjects/reached results. The research was designed with a descriptive content analysis method. 117 journals published in our country were determined and 41 articles were included in the research. The obtained data were subjected to a descriptive analysis. As a result of the analyses, it was determined that approximately half of the metacognitive-themed articles were conducted with a quantitative approach and descriptive methods. It was noticed that about half of the articles were conducted at the secondary school level, in the second place, that the university level took place with a one-fourth of rate. In terms of the data collection tools, it was found that mostly questionnaire/open-ended questionnaire/scale/tests were used, observation, interview, think-aloud protocol, and documents were applied; in terms of the data analysis techniques, the correlation, descriptive statistics, independent samples t-test, one-way variance analysis, and regression analysis were used. It was reached that when sorted by frequency the correlational, leveling, metacognitive behaviours of the participants in the problem-solving processes were investigated, and experimental research were conducted.  

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Metacognition
• mathematics education
• metacognition-themed articles in mathematics education

Türkiye’de Yayımlanan ve Matematiksel Bir İçerik Barındıran Makelelere Yönelik İnceleme

Öz

Bu araştırmada, Türkiye’de matematik eğitimi alanında yapılmış ve yayımlanmış olan üstbiliş temalı makaleleri yöntemsel özellikleri ve konular/ulaşılan sonuçlar bağlamında incelemek amaçlanmıştır. Araştırma betimsel içerik analizi yöntemi temel alınarak tasarlanmıştır. Ülkemizde yayın yapan 117 dergi belirlenmiş ve toplam 40 makale araştırmaya dâhil edilmiştir. Elde edilen veriler betimsel analize tabi tutulmuştur. Analizler sonucunda; yaklaşık yarısının nicel bir yaklaşımla ve betimsel yöntemler kullanılarak gerçekleştirildiği belirlenmiştir. Makalelerin yaklaşık yarısının ortaokul düzeyinde gerçekleştirildiği, ikinci sırada ise yaklaşık dörtte birlik bir bölümle üniversite düzeyinin yer aldığı görülmüştür. En fazla anket/açık uçlu anket/ölçek/testler olmakla birlikte gözlem, görüşme, sesli düşünme protokolü ve dokümanların veri toplama sürecinde tercih edildiği ve verilerin analizinde, korelasyon, betimsel istatistikler, bağımsız örneklem t-testi, tek yönlü varyans analizi ve regresyon analizlerinin kullanıldığı saptanmıştır. Matematik alanında üstbiliş temalı yapılan makaleler konu olarak yapılma sıklılğına göre ilişkisel, düzey belirleme, problem çözme sürecinde katılımcıların sergilemiş oldukları üst bilişsel davranışların belirlenmesi ve deneysel araştırmalar şeklinde sıralamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Üstbiliş
• Matematik eğitimi
• matematik eğitiminde üstbiliş temalı makaleler

Kaynakça

1. Acar, F., & Ader, E. (2017). Metacognition used by tutors during peer tutoring sessions in mathematics. Elementary Education Online, 16(3), 1185-1200.
2. Açıkgül, K., & Şahin, K. (2019). Investigation of secondary school students' perceptions on their mathematics-oriented academic risk taking behaviors in terms of gender, grade level, metacognition and attitude variables. Adiyaman University Journal of Social Sciences, 32, 1-30. https://doi.org/10.14520/adyusbd.558120
3. Akaydin, B.B., Yorulmaz, A., & Cokcaliskan, H. (2020). Investigation of primary school students' metacognitive awareness and decision-making skill. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(4), 157-171. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.268.10
4. Akin, A., Abacı, R., & Çetin, B. (2007). The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the metacognitive awareness inventory. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 7(2), 671-678.
5. Akpunar, B. (2011). The analysis of the concepts of cognition and metacognition in terms of the philosophy of mind. Turkish Studies, 6(4), 353-365.
6. Alcı, B., Erden, M., & Baykal, A. (2008). Explanatory and predictive pattern of university students’ mathematics achievement and their perceived problem solving abilities, self-efficacy perceptions, metacognitive self-regulation strategies, and national university entrance examination points. Bogazici University Journal of Education, 25(2), 53-68.
7. Altun, S., & Erden, M. (2006). Validity and reliability study of motivating strategies in learning scale. Yeditepe Üniversitesi. Edu7, 2(1), 1-16.
8. Aşık, G. (2009). A model study to examine the relationship between metacognitive and motivational regulation and metacognitive experiences during problem solving in mathematics (Unpublished master’s thesis). Boğaziçi University, İstanbul.

9. Aşık, G., & Erktin, E. (2019). Metacognitive experiences: Mediating the relationship between metacognitive knowledge and problem solving. Education and Science, 44(197), 85-103. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2019.7199
10. Aşık, G., & Sevimli, E. (2015). Investigation of students’ metacognitive calibration within the context of math achievement: Case of engineering students. Bogazici University Journal of Education, 32(2), 19-36.
11. Ay, Z. S., & Bulut, S. (2017). Investigating the effects of problem solving approach based on metacognitive questioning on self-regulation skills. Elementary Education Online, 16(2), 547-565. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2017.304716
12. Aydemir, H., & Kubanç, Y. (2014). Investigation of the cognitive behavioral problem solving process. Turkish Studies, 9(2), 203-219. https://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.6555
13. Aydın, U. (2007). A structural equation modeling study: The metacognition-knowledge model for geometry (Unpublished master’s thesis). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
14. Aydın, U., & Ubuz, B. (2010). Turkish version of the junior metacognitive awareness inventory: An exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Education and Science, 35(157), 30-45.
15. Baki, A., Güven, B., Karataş, İ., Akkan, Y., & Çakıroğlu, Ü. (2011). Trends in Turkish mathematics education research: from 1998 to 2007. H. U. Journal of Education, 40, 57-68.
16. Bal, A. P., & Demir, Ö. (2011). Cognitive coaching approach in view of prospective teachers. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 12(4), 325-340.
17. Baş, F. (2016). Prospective secondary mathematics teachers' metacognitive awareness and metacognitive behaviours in problem solving processes. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(4), 779-801. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2016.040416
18. Baş, F., & Sağırlı, M. Ö. (2017). A content analysis of the articles on metacognition in education in turkey. Education and Science, 42(192), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2017.7115
19. Baş, F., Özturan-Sağırlı, M., & Bekdemir, M. (2016). The metacognitive awarenesses of prospective secondary school mathematics teachers, beliefs, attitudes on problem solving, and relationship between them. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 12(2), 464-482.
20. Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology, Vol. 1 (pp. 77–165). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
21. Çalık, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). Parameters of content analysis. Education and Science, 39(174), 33-38. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3412
22. Çetinkaya, P., & Erktin, E. (2002). Assessment of metacognition and its relationship with reading comprehension, achievement, and aptitude. Bogazici University Journal of Education, 19(1), 1-11.
23. Çiltaş, A. (2012). Content analysis of the graduate thesis and dissertations in mathematics education in Turkey between 2005-2010. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 5(7), 211-228. https://doi.org/10.9761/JASSS235
24. Çiltaş, A., Güler, G., & Sözbilir, M. (2012). Mathematics education research in Turkey: a content analysis study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(1), 565-580.
25. Demir, M. K., & Budak, H. (2016). The relationship between self-regulating, motivation and metacognitive skills and mathematics success of 4th grade students. Buca Faculty of Education Journal, 41, 30-41.
26. Demir, Ö., & Bal,A. P. (2011). Investigation on the cognitive coaching approach in the view of ma students major subject mathematics. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 10(37), 224-243.
27. Deniz, D. (2017). The impact of model eliciting activities implemented by prospective teachers on tenth-grade students’s metacognition awareness. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(2), 580-595. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.296924
28. Deniz, D., Küçük, B., Cansız, Ş., Akgün, L., & İşleyen, T. (2014). Examining metacognitive awareness of prospective secondary school mathematics teachers in terms of some variables. Kastamonu Education Journal, 22(1), 305-320.
29. Depaepe, F., Corte, E. D., & Verschaffel, L. (2010). Teachers’ metacognitive and heuristic approaches to word problem solving: Analysis and impact on students’ beliefs and performance. ZDM Mathematics Education, 42, 205-218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-009-0221-5
30. Desoete, A. (2007). Evaluating and improving the mathematics teaching–learning process through metacognition. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 5(3), 705–730.
31. Desoete, A., & Özsoy, G. (2009). Introduction: Metacognition, more than the lognes monster?. Online Submission, 2(1), 1-6.
32. Desoete, A., Roeyers, H., & Buysse, A. (2001). Metacognition and mathematical problem solving in grade 3. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(5), 435-447.
33. Dignath, C., Buettner, G., & Langfeldt, H. P. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively? A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programmes. Educational Research Review, 3(2), 101–129. Doğan, A. (2013). Metacognition and metacognition based teaching. Middle Eastern ve African Journal of Educational Research, 3(6), 6-20. Durmuş, F., & Özdemir, A. Ş. (2013). The effects of the education based on the multiple intelligence approach on the sixth grade students’ mathematics course achivement and metacognitive skills. Turkish Studies, 8(12), 443-452.
34. Efklides, A., Kiorpelidou, K., & Kiosseoglou, G. (2006). Worked-out examples in mathematics: effects on performance and metacognitive experiences. in A. Desoete and M. Veenman (eds.), Metacognition in Mathematics Education, pp. 11- 33, New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
35. Erdoğan, F., & Şengül, S. (2014). A study on the elementary students’ self-regulated learning strategies towards mathematics. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 3(3), 108-118.
36. Ersözlü, Z. N., & Çoban, H. (2012). The relationship between candidate teachers’ mathematical reasoning skills and their levels of using metacognitive learning strategies. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 9(19), 205-221.
37. Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. L. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence içinde (s. 231-236). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognitive and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
39. Garner, R., & Alexander, P. A. (1989) Metacognition: Answered and unanswered questions. Educational Psychologist, 24(2), 143-158.
40. Garofalo, J., & Lester, F. K. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 16, 163–176.
41. Gurat, M. G., & Medula, C. T. (2016). Metacognitive strategy knowledge use through mathematical problem solving amongst prospective teachers. American Journal of Educational Research, 4(2), 170-189. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-4-2-5
42. Gürefe, N. (2015). Investigation of metacognitiveawareness of secondary school students in terms of some variables. The Journal of International Education Science, 2(5), 237-246. https://doi.org/10.16991/INESJOURNAL.158
43. Hidayat, R., Syed Zamri, S. N. A., & Zulnaidi, H. (2018). Does mastery of goal components mediate the rela-tionship between metacognition and mathematical modelling competency? Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 18, 579–604. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2018.3.0108
44. Jaafar, W. M. W, & Ayub, A. F. M. (2010) Mathematics self-efficacy and meta-cognition among university students, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 519–524.
45. Jacobse, A. E., & Harskamp, E. G. (2012). Towards efficient measurement of metacognition in mathematical problem solving. Metacognition and Learning, 7, 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-012-9088-x.
46. Kacar, M., & Sarıçam, H. (2015). The examination of the relationship between metacognitive awareness and math anxiety levels in prospective primary school teachers. Trakya Journal of Education, 5(2), 137-152.
47. Kahramanoğlu, R., & Deniz, T. (2017). An investigation of the relationship between middle school students’ metacognitive skills, mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics achievement. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education (INUJFE), 18(3), 189-200. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.334285
48. Kaplan, A., & Duran, M. (2015). Comparison of middle school students’ metacognitive awareness levels in mathematics course studying. Bayburt Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(2), 417-445.
49. Kaplan, A., & Duran, M. (2016). Mathematical metacognition awareness inventory towards middle school students: validity and reliability study. Journal of Kazım Karabekir Education Faculty, 32, 1-17.
50. Kaplan, A., Duran, M., & Baş, G. (2016). Examination with the structural equation modeling of the relationship between mathematical metacognition awareness with skill perception of problem solving of secondary school students. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 17(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.17679/iuefd.17119785
51. Karadeniz, S., Buyukozturk, S., Akgun, O. E., Cakmak, E. K., & Demirel, F. (2008). The Turkish adaptation study of motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ) for 12-18 year old children: results of confirmatory factor analysis. Online Submission, 7(4), 1-10.
52. Karakelle, S., & Saraç, S. (2007). Validity and factor structure of Turkish versions of the metacognitive awareness inventory for children (jr. mai) - A and B forms. Turkish Psychological Articles, 10(20), 87-103.
53. Kaya, D. (2019). Predicting seventh grade students’ mathematics achievements: the role of metacognitive awareness, motivation and, self-regulated learning strategies. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Education Faculty, 38(1), 1-18.
54. Kayhan, M., & Özgün Koca, S. A. (2004). Research subects in mathematics education: 2000-2002. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 26, 72-81.
55. Khan, R., & Panth, M. (2017). Significance of meta-cognition in academic achievement. International Journal of Research in Humanities, Arts and Literature, 7, 1-6.
56. Kurtuluş, A., & Öztürk, B. (2017). The analysis of the effect of metacognitive awareness and mathematics self-efficacy perceptions on mathematics achievement of middle school students. Dicle University Journal of Ziya Gökalp Faculty of Education, 31, 762-778. https://doi.org/10.14582/DUZGEF.1840
57. Lee, N. H., Chang, A., & Lee, P. Y. (2001). The role of metacognition in the learning of mathematics among low achieving students. Teaching and Learning, 22(2), 18-30.
58. Lester, F. K. (1982). Building bridges between psychological and mathematics education research on problem solving. In F. K. Lester & J. Garofalo (Eds.), Mathematical problem solving (pp.55–85). Philadelphia: The Franklin Institute Press.
59. Lester, F. K. J., Garofalo, J., & Kroll, D. L. (1989). The role of metacognition in mathematical problem solving: A study of two grade seven classes. Final report. Accessed from the ERIC database (ED314255).
60. Mazzoni, G., & Nelson, T. O. (Eds.). (1998). Metacognition and cognitive neuropsychology: Monitoring and control processes. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
61. MEB [Ministry of Education], (2018). Matematik dersi öğretim programı (ilkokul ve ortaokul 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar) [Mathematics lesson curriculum (primary and secondary school 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th grades)]. Ankara: MEB Publications.
62. Memiş, A., & Arıcan, H. (2013). The analysis of 5th grade students’ mathematical metacognition levels between the variables gender and achievement. KaraelmasJournal of Educational Sciences, 1(1), 76-93.
63. Mert, M. (2017). The effect of levels of respect and student awareness for mathematics in mathematical success of secondary school students (Unpublished master’s thesis). Erzincan Binali Yıldırım Üniversitesi Fen bilimleri Enstitüsü, Erzincan.
64. Mert, M., & Baş, F. (2019). The anxiety and metacognitive awareness levels of secondary school students towards mathematics and the effect of related variables on their mathematics achievements. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 10(3), 732-756. https://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.508347
65. Mevarech, Z., & Amrany, C. (2008). Immediate and delayed effects of meta-cognitive instruction on regulation of cognition and mathematics achievement. Metacognition and Learning, 3(2), 147–157.
66. Muis, K. R. (2008). Epistemic profiles and self-regulated learning: Examining relations in the context of mathematics problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(2), 177–208.
67. Namlu, A. G. (2004). Metacognitive learning strategies scale: a study of reliability and validity. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 4(2), 123-136.
68. Özçakır Sümen, Ö., & Çalışıcı, H. (2016). The relationships between preservice teachers’ mathematical literacy self efficacy beliefs, metacognitive awareness and problem solving skills. Participatory Educational Research, Special Issue, 11-19. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.16.spi.2.2
69. Özsoy, G. (2007). The effect of metacognitive instruction on problem solving achievement of fifth grade primary school students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University Graduate School of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
70. Özsoy, G., & Ataman, A. (2009). The effect of metacognitive strategy training on mathematical problem solving achievement. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 1(2), 67-82.
71. Özsoy. G. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between metacognition and mathematics achievement, Asia Pacific Educ. Rev., 12, 227-235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-010-9129-6
72. Öztürk, M., Akkan, Y., & Kaplan, A. (2018). The metacognitive skills performed by 6th-8th grade gifted students during the problem solving process: Gümüşhane sample. Ege Journal of Education, 19(2), 446-469. https://doi.org/10.12984/egeefd.316662
73. Öztürk, M., Özgöl, M., & Akkan, Y. (2018). A comparative case study for teaching metacognitive self-regulation in middle school students: prospective elementary math teachers’ views and activities they have designed. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 48, 54-84. doi: 10.21764/ maeuefd.351644
74. Panaoura, A., Philippou, G., & C. Christou, C. (2003). Young pupils' metacognitive ability in mathematics. Paper presented at CERME 3: Third Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education. Online available from http://www.dm.unipi.it/~didattica/CERME3/proceedings/Groups/TG3/TG3_Panaoura_cerme3.pdf,
75. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (Technical Report 91-B-004). The Regents of the University of Michigan.
76. Sarpkaya, G., & Arık, A., & Kaplan, H. A. (2011): The relationship between elementary mathematics teacher candidates' awareness of using the metacognitive strategies and their attitudes towards mathematics. Gaziosmanpaşa University Social Sciences Research Journal, 6(2), 107-122.
77. Schneider, W., & Artelt, C. (2010). Metacognition and mathematics education. ZDM, 42(2), 149-161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-010-0240-2
78. Schneider, W., & Lock, Q. (2002). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children and adolescents. In T. Perfect ve B. Schwartz (Ed.), Applied metacognition. West Nyack, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
79. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). What's all the fuss about metacognition? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 189-215). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
80. Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1), 113- 125. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003044231033
81. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460-475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
82. Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351-371. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212307
83. Senemoğlu, N. (2007). Gelişim, öğrenme ve öğretim [Development, learning and teaching]. Ankara: Gönül Publishing.
84. Serin, M. K., & Korkmaz, İ. (2018). The effect of metacognitive questioning instruction performed in cooperative learning environments on the mathematical problem solving skills of 4th grade primary school students. Elementary Education Online, 17(2), 510-531. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2018.418893
85. Sırmacı, N., & Taş, F. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy perceptions and metacognitive learning strategies of prospective mathematics teachers. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 31(3), 551-563. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2016015698
86. Sperling, R. A., Howard, B. C., Miller, L. A., & Murphy, C. (2002). Measures of children’s knowledge and regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(1), 51-79. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2001.1091
87. Sungur, S. (2004). An implementation of problem-based learning in high school biology courses (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
88. Şeker, V., & Ader, E. (2018). Profiling mathematics teachers regarding factors affecting promotion of students’ metacognition. Bogazici University Journal of Education, 35(1), 51-70.
89. Şengül, S. & F. Yıldız, F. (2013). The relation between the metacognitive behaviours demonstrated by students in their problem solving process with collaborative learning groups and their mathematical self- efficacy, International Journal of Social Science, 6(1), 1295-1324. https://doi.org/10.9761/JASSS_400
90. Şengül, S., & Budak, E. B. (2017). Examining the measurement estimation skills and strategies of seventh grade students on the basis of metacognitive knowledge. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 6(2), 149-160.
91. Şengül, S., & Y. Katrancı, Y. (2015). Meta-cognitive aspects of solving indefinite integral problems, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 622 – 629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.205
92. Tosun, A., & Irak, M. (2008). Adaptation, validity, and reliability of the metacognition questionnaire-30 for the Turkish population, and its relationship to anxiety and obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Turkish Journal of Psychiatry, 19(1), 67-80.
93. Ulutaş, F., & Ubuz, B. (2008). Research and trends in mathematics education: 2000 to 2006. Elementary Education Online, 7(3), 614-626.
94. Ünlü, V., & Soylu, D. (2017). The effects of writing activities on studentsꞌ achievement, attitudes and metacognition in mathematics. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 37(1), 345–360.
95. Üredi, I. (2005). The contributions of perceived parenting styles to 8th class primary school students' self-regulated learning strategies and motivational beliefs (Unpublished doctorate dissertation). Yıldız Teknik University, İstanbul.
96. Veenman, M. V. J. & Spaans, M. A. (2005). Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 159-176.
97. Veenman, M. V. J. (2006). The role of intellectual and metacognitive skills in math problem solving. In A. Desoete ve M. V. J. Veenman (Ed.), Metacognition in Mathematics Education (pp. 35-50). New York: Nova Science Publishers.
98. Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition Learning, 1, 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0
99. Verschaffel, L. (1999). Realistic mathematical modelling and problem solving in the upper elementary school: Analysis and improvement. In J. H. M. Hamers, J. E. H. Van Luit, & B. Csapo (Eds.), Teaching and learning thinking skills. Contexts of learning (pp. 215–240). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
100. Wells, A., & Cartwright-Hatton, S. (2004). A short form of the metacognitions questionnaire: properties of the MCQ-30. Behaviour research and therapy, 42(4), 385-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(03)00147-5
101. Yabaş, D., & Altun, S. (2009). The effects of differentiated instructional design on students’ self-efficacy beliefs, metacognitive skills and academic achievement. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 37, 201-214.
102. Yavuz, G. (2019). The Relationship of learning approaches, opinions about mathematical proof and metacognitive awareness. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 11(4), 83-94. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2019.04.006
103. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2008). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods] (7th ed.). Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.
104. Yıldız, A., & Güven, B. (2016). The behaviours of mathematics teachers ıntended to promote the metacognitions of the students in problem solving environment. Kırşehir Faculty of Education Journal, 17(1), 575-598.
105. Yıldız, E., Akpınar, E., Tatar, N., & Ergin, Ö. (2009). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the metacognition scale for primary school students. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 9(3), 1573-1604.
106. Yıldız, S. G. (2020). Geometrical problem solving performance of preservice teachers: exploring the effectiveness of metacognitive strategies. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(4), 34-47.
107. Yimer, A., & N. F. Ellerton. (2010) A five-phase model for mathematical problem solving: Identifying synergies in prospective-teachers’ metacognitive and cognitive actions. ZDM Mathematics Education, 42(2), 245–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-009-0223-3
108. Yong, . T. Y., & Kiong. L. N. K. (2006). Metacognitive aspect of mathematics problem solving. MARA University of Technology Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur.
109. Yücedağ, T., & Erdoğan, A. (2011). Investigation of mathematics education studies according to some variables studied between 2000–2009 years in Turkey. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 10(2), 825-838.