Metacognition in Science Concept Map

Erin E. Peters

June 14, 2005

Metacognition in science

Educational researchers studying metacognition are in agreement that traditional methods of teaching do not allow students to demonstrate all of their knowledge about science. Methods of teaching that allow students to construct knowledge socially are helpful in developing deeper meaning because thought processes of students are exposed and are easier to understand. Social construction of knowledge also aids students in recognizing the processes involved in developing scientific arguments. Several studies revolve around an exemplary teacher who uses status words to help students evaluate the scientific merit of their knowledge. Some of the techniques of the exemplary teacher are not transferable, but the method she uses to develop student ideas with status words is transferable to other teachers. Intelligibility is the primary criteria students use to determine if an idea makes sense to them. If students find the idea to be intelligible, then they are asked to see if the idea is plausible. To be plausible means that the idea correlates to students’ own experiences or experiences they have heard about. The last criteria, the most difficult to determine, is fruitfulness. If the idea can be transferred to different applications, then the idea is fruitful. Some of the research suggests that these strategies are useful for elementary students, but attempts to use them with middle school students were not as successful. Another camp of researchers sees the chief metacognitive tool as argumentation, as it is central to the presentation of scientific information. Research from this area has shown that written reports of scientific knowledge do not necessarily indicate the totality of student knowledge. Students who use written, visual and oral presentations of information are the methods that are most successful in showing the depth of student knowledge. Researchers have found that teachers do not have the pedagogical knowledge to conduct whole class evaluation of arguments that allow students to have a voice in the class. Overall, allowing students to experience the process of developing and defending arguments provides the context for meaningful learning.