Journals / International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik) / 2011 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1

Altıncı sınıfların kendi öğrenmelerini anlaması: çevre eğitimi kursunda bir örnek olay çalışması

Sixth graders’ understanding of their own learning: A case study in environmental education course

Pages
59–78
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was found that 11-year-old sixth graders possessed declarative and procedural metacognition, and also some conditional metacognition.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Knowing „what do I know‟ and thinking about „how do I learn‟, that is metacognition, is an important element in learning.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The methods should help the students to become aware of their own learning, to develop better learning strategies, and skills to apply the strategies in new situations.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was found that 11-year-old sixth graders possessed declarative and procedural metacognition, and also some conditional metacognition.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Knowing „what do I know‟ and thinking about „how do I learn‟, that is metacognition, is an important element in learning. The Finnish curriculum points out metacognition in the choice of the studying methods. The methods should help the students to become aware of their own learning, to develop better learning strategies, and skills to apply the strategies in new situations. In this qualitative case study the metacognition of Finnish sixth graders (N=19) was studied in a virtual learning environment, ENO - Environmental Online. Pupils´ metacognitive knowledge and skills were studied in one ENO course. The aim was to describe what and how pupils monitor in their learning processes. It was found that 11-year-old sixth graders possessed declarative and procedural metacognition, and also some conditional metacognition. In this study, the social component of learning was especially emphasized.

Özet

„Ne bildiğini bilme‟ ve „nasıl öğrendiği hakkında düşünme‟ olarak ifade edilebilecek üstbiliş öğrenmede önemli bir elementtir. Finlandiya müfredatı üstbilişi çalışma metotlarının seçeneklerinde vurgular. Metotlar öğrencilerin kendi öğrenmelerinin farkında olmalarına, daha iyi öğrenme stratejileri geliştirmelerine ve stratejileri yeni durumlara uygulayabilme becerisine yardım etmelidir. Bu niteliksel örnek olay çalışmasında altıncı sınıf (N 19) Finlandiyalı öğrencilerin üstbilişi bir sanal öğrenme ortamında (ENO) „Çevre Online‟ çalışıldı. Öğrencilerin metakognitif bilgileri ve becerileri bir ENO kursunda çalışıldı. Amaç öğrencilerin kendi öğrenme süreçlerini ne ve nasıl gözlemlediklerini betimlemekti. Çalışmada 11. sınıf öğrencilerinin bazı şartlı üstbiliş ile birlikte, bildiren ve işlemsel üstbilişe sahip olduğu bulundu. Bu çalışmada, öğrenmenin sosyal bileşeni özellikle vurgulandı.

🔖

Cite This Article

BEDNARİK, K. P., KEİNONEN, T. (2022). Altıncı sınıfların kendi öğrenmelerini anlaması: çevre eğitimi kursunda bir örnek olay çalışması. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik), Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1, 59–78. https://ajindex.com/articles/540843

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D. L., & Hare, V. C. (1991). Coming to terms: how researchers in learn-ing and learning talk about knowledge. Review of Educational Research 61, 315-343.
  2. Anderson, D., Thomas, G.P., & Nashon, S.M. (2009). Social barriers to meaningful engagement in biology field trip group work. Science Education 93, 511-534.
  3. Annevirta, T. & Vauras, M. (2006). Development changes of metacognitive skill in elementary school children. The Journal of Experimental Education 74, 197-225.
  4. Bartsch, K., Horvath, K., & Estes, D. (2003). Young children‟s talk about learning events. Cognitive Development 18, 177-193.
  5. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn. brain, mind, experience, and school. 2nd edition. Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning. Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. National Research Council. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
  6. Carrell, P. L., Gajdusek, L., & Wise, T. (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading. Instructional Science 26, 97-112.
  7. Cooper, M.M. & Sandi-Urena, S. (2009). Design and validation of an instrument to assess metacogni-tive skillfulness in chemistry problem solving. Journal of Chemical Education, 86, 240-245.
  8. Corkill, A. J. (1996). Individual differences in metacognition. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 275-279. de Jager, B., Jansen, M., & Reezigt, G. (2005). The development of metacognition in primary school learning environments. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16, 179-196.
  9. Fairbrother, R. (2000). Strategies for Learning. In M. Monk & J. Osborne (Eds.) Good practice in science teaching. What research has to say. Philadelphia: Open University Press, 7-24.
  10. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
  11. Georghiades, P. (2004a). Making pupils´ conceptions of electricity more durable by means of situated metacognition. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 85-99.
  12. Georghiades, P. (2004b). From the general to the situated: three decades of metacognition. Interna-tional Journal of Science Education, 26, 365-383.
  13. Glynn, M. & Duit, R. (1995). Learning science in the schools: Research reforming practice. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Mahwah, 3-34.
  14. Gourgey, A. F. (1998). Metacognition in basic skills instruction. Instructional Science, 26, 81-96.
  15. Gunstone, R. F. & Mitchell, I. J. (1998). Metacognition an