The Instrument of Teaching Metacognition in Reading Classrooms: The ITMR

Abstract

Limited influence of metacognition research in mainstream classrooms may stem from a lack of comprehensive pedagogy and/or inconsistent criteria assessing metacognition instruction. For this problem, an instrument designed for metacognition instruction in reading classes was examined. After a systematic and analytic review of broad literature, scale validation procedures were followed. Items that represent observable and measurable teacher-behavior promoting students’ metacognition were generated. Next, QUAID examination, expert-, cognitive-, and focus-group interviews were conducted. Data collected from reading teachers via a computer-assisted survey method were analyzed by exploratory factor analysis, Welch’s, and Spearman’s tests. Findings confirmed that the ITMR had a unidimensional model accounting for 60% of metacognition instruction (α.97). There were no mean differences in metacognition instruction at any elementary grades. The items on the ITMR were also strongly and positively correlated. Thereby, the ITMR can be used to assist and identify classroom metacognition instruction in reading classrooms. 

Keywords

• metacognition
• instruction
• reading
• thinking
• assessment

References

1. Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B.-Y. (2009). Identifying and describing constructively responsive comprehension strategies in new and traditional forms of reading. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 69–90). New York, NY: Routledge.
2. Afflerbach, P., & Meuwissen, K. (2005). Teaching and learning self-assessment strategies in middle school. In S. E. Israel, C. Collins Block, K. L. Bauserman, & K. Kinnucan-Welsch (Eds.), Metacognition in literacy learning: Theory, assessment, instruction, and professional development (pp. 141–164). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Anastasiou, D., & Griva, E. (2009). Awareness of reading strategy use and reading comprehension among poor and good readers. Elementary Education Online, 8(2), 283–297.
4. Andres, L. (2012). Designing and doing survey research. London, England: SAGE.
5. Baker, L. (2017). The development of metacognitive knowledge and control of comprehension: Contributors and consequences. In K. Mokhtari (Ed.), Improving reading comprehension through metacognitive reading strategies instruction (pp. 1–31). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
6. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
7. Bandura, Albert. (1971). Social learning theory. Morristown, NJ: General Learning.
8. Bartlett, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W. K. J. W., & Higgins, C. (2001). Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 19(1), 43–50.

9. Baumann, J. F., Jones, L. A., & Seifert-Kessell, N. (1993). Using enhance comprehensi monitoring The authors think chil ilouds dren ’ s ion al program for teaching students think aloud during reading as a means. The Reading Teacher, 47(3), 184–193.
10. Bolhuis, S., & Voeten, M. J. . (2001). Toward self-directed learning in secondary schools: What do teachers do? Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 837–855.
11. Book, C., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., Meloth, M. S., & Vavrus, L. G. (1985). A study of the relationship between teacher explanation and student metacognitive awareness during reading instruction. Communication Education, 34, 29–36.
12. Boulware-Gooden, R., Carreker, S., Thornhill, A., & Joshi, R. M. (2007). Instruction of metacognitive strategies enhances reading comprehension and vocabulary achievement of third-grade students. The Reading Teacher, 61(1), 70–77.
13. Bradburn, N. M., Sudman, S., & Wansink, B. (2004). Asking questions: The definitve guide to questionnaire design for market research, political polls, and social and health questionnaires (Revised). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
14. Bransford, J., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded). Washington DC: National Academy.
15. Carroll, M. (2008). Metacognition in the classroom. In J. Dunlosky & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 411–427). New York: Psychology Press. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American Educator, 15(3), 6–11.
16. Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.131
17. Curwen, M. S., Miller, R. G., White-Smith, K. A., & Calfee, R. C. (2010). Increasing teachers’ metacognition develops students’ higher learning during content area literacy instruction: Findings from the read-write cycle project. Issues in Teacher Education, 19(2), 127–151.
18. de Winter, J. C. F., Dodou, D., & Wieringa, P. A. (2009). Exploratory factor analysis with small sample sizes. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44(November), 147–181.
19. DeVellis, R. F. (2012). Scale Development: Theory and applications (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
20. Doğanay Bilgi, A., & Özmen, E. R. (2014). The impact of modified multi-component cognitive strategy instruction in the acquisition of metacognitive strategy knowledge in the text comprehension process of students with mental retardation. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(2), 707–714.
21. Duffy, G. G. (1993). Rethinking strategy instruction: Four teachers’ development and low achievers’ understandings. Elementary School Journal, 93(3), 231.
22. Duffy, G. G. (2002). The case for direct explanation of strategies. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 28–41). New York: Guilford.
23. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2013). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
24. Fisher, Robert. (1998). Thinking about thinking: Developing metacognition in children. Early Child Development and Care, 141(1), 1–15.
25. Fisher, Robert. (2007). Dialogic teaching: Developing thinking and metacognition through philosophical discussion. Early Child Development and Care, 177(6–7), 615–631.
26. Fisher, Ros. (2002). Shared thinking: Metacognitive modelling in the literacy hour. Reading, 36(2), 63–67.
27. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
28. Fowler, F. J. (2009). Survey research methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. Fowler, F. J. (1995). Improving survey questions: Design and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
30. Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
31. Goldring, R., Gray, L., & Bitterman, A. (2013). Characteristics of Public and Private Elementary and Secondary School Teachers in the United States: Results From the 2011–12 Schools and Staffing Survey (NCES 2013-2014). Washington DC: NCES, IES, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013314.pdf
32. Gourgey, A. F. (1998). Metacognition in basic skills instruction. Instructional Science, 26, 81–96.
33. Gourgey, A. F. (2001). Metacognition in basic skills instruction. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 17–32). Boston: Kluwer.
34. Guadagnoli, E., & Velicer, W. F. (1988). Relation to sample size to the stability of component patterns. Psychological Bulletin, 103(2), 265–275.
35. Hartman, H. J. (2001). Developing students’ meatcognitive knowledge and skills. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 33–68). Boston: Kluwer.
36. Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967–988.
37. Kerndl & Aberšek, M. K. (2012). Teachers’ competence for developing reader’s reception metacognition. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 46(1979), 52–61.
38. Kurtz, B. E., Schneider, W., Carr, M., Borkowski, J. G., & Rellinger, E. (1990). Strategy instruction and attributional beliefs in West Germany and the United States: Do teachers foster metacognitive development? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 15(3), 268–283. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(90)90024-U
39. Lai, E. R. (2011). Metacognition: A Literature review (Research report). New York, NY:Pearson. Retrieved from http://www.datec.org.uk/CHAT/chatmeta1.htm
40. McKeown, R. G., & Gentilucci, J. L. (2007). Think‐aloud strategy: Metacognitive development and monitoring comprehension in the middle school second‐language classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(2), 136–147.
41. Messick, S. (1993). Foundations of validity: Meaning and consequences in psychological assessment (RR-93-51). Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service.
42. Messick, S. (1994). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning (RR-94-45). Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service.
43. Muñiz-Swicegood, M. (1994). The effects of metacognitive reading strategy training on the reading performance and student reading analysis strategies of third grade bilingual students. Bilingual Research Journal, 18, 83 97. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.1994.10162659
44. Myers, M., & Paris, S. G. (1978). Children’s metacognitive knowledge about reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(5), 680–690.
45. Netemeyer, R. G., Bearde, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
46. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
47. Ozturk, N. (2015). A short review of research on metacognition training. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in the World, 5(3), 50–62.
48. Ozturk, N. (2016). An analysis of pre-service elementary teachers’ understanding of metacognition and pedagogies of metacognition. Journal of Teacher Education and Educators, 5(1), 47–68.
49. Ozturk, N. (2017a). Assessing metacognition: Theory and practices. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 4(2), 134–148.
50. Ozturk, N. (2017b). Identifying the nature of metacognition instruction in reading classrooms (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland. Papleontiou-louca, E. (2003). The concept and instruction of metacognition. Teacher Development, 7(1), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530300200184
51. Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, G. (1983). The gradual release of responsibility model of instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 112–123.
52. Perry, N. E., Hutchinson, L., & Thauberger, C. (2008). Talking about teaching self-regulated learning: Scaffolding student teachers’ development and use of practices that promote self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 47, 97–108.
53. Pintrich, P. R., Wolters, C. A., & Baxter, G. P. (2000). Assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning. In Gregory Schraw & J. C. Impara (Eds.), Assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning (pp. 43–97). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
54. Pintrich, Paul R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219–225.
55. Rahman, T., Fox, M. A., Ikoma, S., & Gray, L. (2017). Certification Status and Experience of U.S. Public School Teachers: Variations Across Student Subgroups (NCES 2017-056). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017056.pdf
56. Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479–530.
57. Schraw, G. (2001). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 3–16). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
58. Schwab, D. P. (1980). Construct validty in organization behavior. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol 2, pp. 3–43). Greenwich: JAI.
59. Sue, V. M., & Ritter, L. A. (2012). Conducting online survey (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Thomas, K. F., & Barksdale-ladd, M. A. (2000). Metacognitive processes: Teaching strategies in literacy education courses. Reading Psychology, 21, 67–84.
60. Tishman, S., & Perkins, D. (1997). The language of thinking. The Phi Delta Kappan, 78(5), 368–374.
61. Van Keer, H., & Vanderlinde, R. (2010). The impact of cross-age peer tutoring on third and sixth graders’ reading strategy awareness, reading strategy use, and reading comprehension. Middle Grades Research Journal, 5(1), 33–45.
62. Veenman, M. V. J. (2016). Metacognition. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of individual differences in reading (pp. 26–40). Routledge.
63. Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0
64. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
65. Wilson, N. S., & Bai, H. (2010). The relationships and impact of teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and pedagogical understandings of metacognition. Metacognition and Learning, 5(3), 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9062-4
66. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA: Academic.
67. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An Overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102
68. Zohar, A. (1999). Teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and the instruction of higher order thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(4), 413–429.