Lise Öğrencilerinin Problem Çözmede Gösterdikleri Üstbilişsel Davranışlara İlişkin Öz-Değerlendirmeleri

Öz

Çalışmanın amacı, lise öğrencilerinin problem çözme deneyimlerini gözden geçirerek bu süreçte sergiledikleri üstbilişsel davranışlar açısından kendilerini değerlendirmelerini sağlamak ve bu süreci incelemektir. Araştırma nitel bir çalışma olarak tasarlanmış, elde edilen veriler betimsel analiz ile yorumlanmıştır. Çalışma grubunu 2015-2016 eğitim ve öğretim yılında Yozgat ilinin bir ilçesindeki bir lisede 9 ve 10. sınıfta öğrenim gören toplam 94 öğrenci oluşturmaktadır. Veri toplamak için öğrencilere ilk olarak 2 tane problem verilmiştir. Öğrencilerden bu problemleri açık bir şekilde çözmeleri ve düşündüklerini yazmaları istenmiştir. Bu problemleri çözen öğrencilere problem çözme sürecindeki üstbilişsel davranışları değerlendirmeyi sağlayan bir anket uygulanmıştır. Anketten elde edilen veriler analiz edildiğinde öğrencilerin çoğunluğunun problem çözmede yüksek düzeyde üstbilişsel davranışlar sergilediği düşünülebilmektedir. Ancak öğrencilerin problem çözümlerinin bu sonuçlarla çok uyuşmadığı; öğrencilerin göstermiş olduklarını söyledikleri üstbilişsel davranışlar ile problem çözümlerinin incelenmesiyle ortaya çıkan üstbilişsel davranışlar birbiriyle genellikle paralellik göstermediği anlaşılmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• üstbiliş,öz-değerlendirme,lise öğrencileri

Self-Evaluations of High School Students Regarding to Own Metacognitive Behaviours In Problem Solving

Abstract

The aim of the study is to ensure that high school students evaluate themselves in terms of metacognitive behaviors that they demonstrate during their problem solving process through their experiences of problem solving and to examine this process. The study was designed as a qualitative study and the obtained data were interpreted by descriptive analysis. The working group consists of a total of 94 students in 9th and 10th grade in a high school in a district of Yozgat in the academic year of 2015-2016. To collect data, students were first given 2 problems. Students are asked to clearly solve these problems and write down what they think. A questionnaire was applied to the students who solved these problems to evaluate the metacognitive behaviors in the problem solving process. When the data obtained from the questionnaire are analyzed, it can be considered that the majority of the students exhibit highly metacognitive behaviors without problem solving. However, the problem solutions of the students do not match these results very much; it is understood that the metacognitive behaviors that the students say they have shown and the metacognitive behaviors that emerged from examining the problem solutions are not generally parallel to each other.

Keywords

• metacognition,self-evaluations,high school students

Kaynakça

1. Akın, A., & Abacı, R. (2011). Metacognition. Nobel Publishing, Ankara.
2. Aksoy, N. (2003). Action Research: A Method to be Used to Improve and Change Educational Practices. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education Management, 9(4), 474-489.
3. Biryukov, P.(2004). Metacognitive Aspects of Solving Combinatorics Problems. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning (01.07.2006) www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/journal/biryukov.pdf
4. Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing When, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. In R. Glasser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum.
5. Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, Executive Control, Self-Regulation, and Other More Mysterious Mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation, and Understanding. chapter 3 (pp. 65-116). London: LEA Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
6. Çakıroğlu, A. (2007). Metacognition. Turkey Social Research Journal, 11 (2), 21-27.
7. Demircioğlu, H. (2008). The Influence of the Educational Situations Designed for the Development of Metacognitive Behaviour of Mathematics Teacher Candidates. Ph. D. Thesis, Gazi University, Ankara.
8. Doğan, A. (2013). Metacognition and Metacognitive Teaching. Middle Eastern & African Journal of Educational Research, (3), 6-20.

9. Flavell, J.H.(1979). Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring. American Psychologist, 34 (10) 906-911, October 1979.
10. Fortunato, I, Hecht, D., Title, C. K and Alvarez, L. (1991). Metacognition and Problem Solving. The Arithmetic Teacher. Dec. 39(4) 38
11. Garafalo J., Lester, F. (1985) Metacognition, cognitive monitoring and mathematical performance. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,16,163–175.
12. Livingston, J. A. (2003). Metacognition: An Overview. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED474273.pdf (15.04.2018)
13. Ministry of Education (MEB) Commission (2015). Secondary Mathematics Class 9 1st Book, Meb Publications, Ankara. S.108, 198.
14. Özsoy, G. (2008). Metacognition. Turkish Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(4), 713-740.
15. Panaoura, A., & Philippou, G. (2005). The measurement of young pupils’ metacognitive ability in mathematics: The case of self-representation and self-evaluation. In Proceedings of CERME (Vol. 4).
16. Pugalee, D.K.(2001). Writing, Mathematics and Metacognition: Looking for Connections Through Students’ Work in Mathematical Problem Solving, School Science and Mathematics 101(5), 236–245.
17. Şahin, M. (2015). Mathematics 10, Palme Publishing, Ankara. S.10,97