Metacognition in Science Concept Map

Erin E. Peters
June 14, 2005

Metacognition in
science

Conceptual change Deep and surface

learning approaches

Christine Chin

argumentation
Status words as
metacognitive tools

Social construction of knowledge

necessary for thought processes to
be public
Transferable Non-transferable
characteristics characteristics

Rosalind Driver
Paul Newton
Jonathan Osborne
Personality, teaching
style, and ability to use
Teaching students student knowledge in
concepts of lessons
intelligibility, Teacher begins with student
plausibility, and ideas and works until they can
fruitfulness “go no further” then scaffolds
their learning
Michael E. Beeth
Gertrude Hennessey
Peter W. Hewson
Lisa Blank
 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.