Vědecké myšlení a metakognitivní monitorování studentů učitelství pro 1. stupeň základní školy

Alena Nováková; Vlastimil Chytrý; Jaroslav Říčan

doi:10.14712/18047106.1041

Vol. 9 No. 1 (2018): sciED Research Reports

Scientific Thinking and Metacognitive Monitoring of Students of Primary School Teaching

Alena Nováková ¹ , Vlastimil Chytrý ¹ , Jaroslav Říčan ¹

Jan Evangelista Purkyně University in Ústí nad Labem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14712/18047106.1041

PDF (Czech)

How to Cite

Nováková, A., Chytrý, V., & Říčan, J. (2018). Scientific Thinking and Metacognitive Monitoring of Students of Primary School Teaching. Scientia in Educatione, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.14712/18047106.1041

Download Citation

Abstract

The research described in this article is focused on the analysis of the level of scientific thinking and the metacognitive monitoring of students of primary school teaching. The primary area of research is the use of the Lawson test of scientific reasoning extended by the self-evaluation scale, which can be used as an indicator of metacognitive monitoring. Based on the results of the given test, two indexes were computed: the absolute accuracy index (which determines the degree of accuracy of the subjective performance estimate compared to the objectively proven performance) and the bias index (which determines the degree of the individual’s underestimation or overestimation, i.e. the direction and size of errors in judgment). A total of 125 tests from student teachers were analyzed in order to establish the relationship between the results of the test of the level of scientific reasoning and the level of metacognitive monitoring. It has been found that students’ level of scientific reasoning shows a strong correlation in some areas with the self-assessment of the respondent (the better were the results of their tests of scientific reasoning, the more accurate the students were in assessing their own performance). The study also noted a difference in the level of scientific reasoning among former grammar school students who achieved a higher test score than those who studied another high school. All analyzed students tended to overestimate themselves, this trend does not vary depending on the type of high school studied.

References

Bandura, A. & Schunk, D.H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3), 586–598. Search in Google Scholar
Benford, R. & Lawson, A.E. (2001). Relationships between effective inquiry use and the development of scientific reasoning skills in college biology labs. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation Search in Google Scholar
Bao, L., Cai, T., Koenig, K., Fang, K., Han, J., Wang, J., Wang, Y. et al. (2009a). Learning and scientific reasoning. Science, 323(5914), 586–587. Search in Google Scholar
Bao, L., Fang, K., Cai, T., Wang, J., Yang, L., Cui, L., Luo, Y. et al. (2009b). Learning of content knowledge and development of scientific reasoning ability: A cross culture comparison. American Journal of Physics, 77(12), 1118–1123. Search in Google Scholar
Bao, L. & Koenig, K. (2012). TI21: A technology enhanced inquiry framework for developing and assessing 21st century skills. Dostupné z http://www.istarassessment.org/ti21/ Search in Google Scholar
Beneš, P. (1999). Reálné modelové experimenty ve výuce chemie. Praha: UK PedF. Search in Google Scholar
Beneš, P., Rusek, M. & Kudrna, T. (2015). Tradice a současný stav pomůckového zabezpečení edukačního chemického experimentu v České republice. Chemické Listy, 109(2), 159–162. Search in Google Scholar
Blažek, R. & Příhodová, S. (2016). Mezinárodní šetření PISA 2015: národní zpráva: přírodovědná gramotnost. Praha: Česká školní inspekce. Search in Google Scholar
Bol, L. & Hacker, D. J. (2012, June 19). Calibration research: Where do we go from here? Dostupné z http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00229/full Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Coletta, V.P. & Phillips, J. A. (2005). Interpreting FCI scores: Normalized gain, preinstruction scores, and scientific reasoning ability. American Journal of Physics, 73(12), 1172–1182. Search in Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. Search in Google Scholar
Dejonckheere, P. J., Van De Keere, K. & Mestdagh, N. (2009). Training the scientific thinking circle in pre-and primary school children. The Journal of Educational Research, 103(1), 1–16. Search in Google Scholar
Ding, L. (2013). Detecting progression of scientific reasoning among university science and engineering students. In Physics Education Research Conference 2013 (pp. 125–128). Portland, OR: AAPT. Search in Google Scholar
Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J. & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 83–87. Search in Google Scholar
Dykstra Jr, D. I. (2011). Výuka fyziky a rozvoj myšlení. Scientia in educatione, 2(2), 59–75. Search in Google Scholar
Gerber, B. L., Cavallo, A.M. & Marek, E. A. (2001). Relationships among informal learning environments, teaching procedures and scientific reasoning ability. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 535–549. Search in Google Scholar
Gilbert, J. (2005) Catching the knowledge wave: the knowledge society and the future of education. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER Press. Search in Google Scholar
Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D.D. & Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 160–170. Search in Google Scholar
Hejnová, E. & Hejna, D. (2016). Rozvoj vědeckého myšlení žáků prostřednictvím přírodovědného vzdělávání. Scientia in educatione, 7(2), 2–17. Search in Google Scholar
Hendl, J. (2012). Přehled statistických metod. Praha: Portál. Search in Google Scholar
Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G. (Eds.) (2005). The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning. Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar
Hilton, M. (2008). Skills for work in the 21st century: what does the research tell us? The Academy of Management Perspectives, 22(4), 63–78. Search in Google Scholar
Chytrý, V. (2015) Logika, hry a myšlení. 1. vyd. Ústí nad Labem: Univerzita J. E. Purkyně v Ústí nad Labem. Search in Google Scholar
Chytrý, V., Pešout, O. & Říčan, J. (2014). Preference metakognitivních strategií na pozadí úkolových situací v matematice u žáků druhého stupně ZŠ. Ústí nad Labem: Univerzita J. E. Purkyně v Ústí nad Labem. Search in Google Scholar
Jang, H. (2016). Identifying 21st century STEM competencies using workplace data. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(2), 284–301. Search in Google Scholar
Janoušková, S., Hubáčková, L., Pumpr, V. & Maršák, J. (2014). Přírodovědná gramotnost v preprimárním a raném období primárního vzdělávání jako prostředek zvýšení zájmu o studium přírodovědných a technických oborů. Scientia in educatione, 5(1), 36–49. Search in Google Scholar
Kruger, J. & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134. Search in Google Scholar
Kuhn, D. (2010). What is scientific thinking and how does it develop?. In U. Goswami (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development (2nd ed.) (pp. 497–523). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Search in Google Scholar
Kuhn, D. & Franklin, S. (2006). The second decade: What develops (and how). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Search in Google Scholar
Kuhn, D. & Pearsall, S. (2000). Developmental origins of scientific thinking. Journal of cognition and Development, 1(1), 113–129. Search in Google Scholar
Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Search in Google Scholar
Lawson, A. E. (2000). Classroom test of scientific reasoning: Multiple choice version. Dostupné z http://www.public.asu.edu/â¼anton1/AssessArticles/Assessments/Mathematics%20Assessments/Scientific%20Reasoning%20Test.pdf Search in Google Scholar
Linn, M.C., Davis, E.A. & Bell, P. (2004). Internet environments for science education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey, USA. Search in Google Scholar
Maki, R.H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A.E. & Zacchilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 723–731. Search in Google Scholar
Moore, N., O’Donnell, J. & Poirier, D. (2012). Using cognitive acceleration materials to develop pre-service teachers’ reasoning and pedagogical expertise. Advancing the STEM Agenda in Education, University of Wisconsin. Search in Google Scholar
Moore, J.C. & Rubbo, L. J. (2012). Scientific reasoning abilities of nonscience majors in physics-based courses. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 8(1), 010106. Search in Google Scholar
McGartland Rubio, D. (2005). Alpha reliability. In K. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social measurement (59–63). Elsveir. Search in Google Scholar
Neuenhaus, N. (2011). Metakognition und leistung: Eine längsschnittuntersuchung in den bereichen lesen und Englisch bei schülerinnen und schülern der fünften und sechsten jahrgangsstufe [Doctoral dissertation]. Universität Otto-Friedrich, Bamberg, Germany. Search in Google Scholar
Retrieved from http://opus4.kobv.de/opus4/bamberg/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/ 327/file/DissNeuenhausseA2.pdf Search in Google Scholar
Nietfeld, J. L., Cao, L.& Osborne, J.W. (2005). Metacognitive monitoring accuracy and student performance in the postsecondary classroom. The Journal of Experimental Educational, 74, 7–28. Search in Google Scholar
Osborne, J. (2013). The 21st century challenge for science education: Assessing scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 265–279. Search in Google Scholar
Osborne, J. & Ratcliffe, M. (2002). Developing effective methods of assessing ideas and evidence. School Science Review, 83(305), 113–123. Search in Google Scholar
Prins, F. J., Veenman, M.V. J. & Elshout, J. J. (2006). The impact of interllectual ability and metacognition on learning: New support for the threshold of problematicity theory. Learning and Instruction, 16, 374–387. Search in Google Scholar
Říčan, J. (2016). Metakognice a metakognitivní strategie jako teoretické a výzkumné konstrukty a jejich uplatnění v moderní pedagogické praxi. Most: Hněvín. Search in Google Scholar
Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awereness. Instructional science, 26(1–2), 113–125. Search in Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1904). The proof and measurement of association between two things. The American Journal of Psychology, 15(1), 72–101. Search in Google Scholar
Tavakol, M. & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2011(2), 53–55. Search in Google Scholar
Trna, J. (2013). Fyzika: Záhadná setrvačnost těles v jednoduchých experimentech. In T. Janík, J. Slavík, V. Mužík, J. Trna, T. Janko, V. Lokajíčková, J. Lukavský,E. Minaříková, Z. Šalamounová, E. Šebestová, N. Vondrová & P. Zlatníček (Eds.), Search in Google Scholar
Kvalita (ve) vzdělávání: obsahově zaměřený přístup ke zkoumání a zlepšování výuky (284–293). Brno: Masarykova Univerzita. Search in Google Scholar
Tomášek, V., Basl, J. & Janoušková, S. (2016). Mezinárodní šetření TIMSS 2015: Národní zpráva. Prague, Czechia: Česká školní inspekce. Retrieved from www.csicr.cz/html/timss/html5/index.html?&locale=CSY&pn=3 Search in Google Scholar
Windschitl, M. (2004). Folk theories of “inquiry”: How preservice teachers reproduce the discourse and practices of an atheoretical scientific method. Journal of research in science teaching, 41(5), 481–512. Search in Google Scholar
Winne, P.H. & Hadwin, A. (1998). Studying as selfregulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky & A.C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (277–304). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Search in Google Scholar
Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27, 172–223. Search in Google Scholar

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

[1] Bandura, A. & Schunk, D.H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3), 586–598. Search in Google Scholar

[2] Benford, R. & Lawson, A.E. (2001). Relationships between effective inquiry use and the development of scientific reasoning skills in college biology labs. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation Search in Google Scholar

[3] Bao, L., Cai, T., Koenig, K., Fang, K., Han, J., Wang, J., Wang, Y. et al. (2009a). Learning and scientific reasoning. Science, 323(5914), 586–587. Search in Google Scholar

[4] Bao, L., Fang, K., Cai, T., Wang, J., Yang, L., Cui, L., Luo, Y. et al. (2009b). Learning of content knowledge and development of scientific reasoning ability: A cross culture comparison. American Journal of Physics, 77(12), 1118–1123. Search in Google Scholar

[5] Bao, L. & Koenig, K. (2012). TI21: A technology enhanced inquiry framework for developing and assessing 21st century skills. Dostupné z http://www.istarassessment.org/ti21/ Search in Google Scholar

[6] Beneš, P. (1999). Reálné modelové experimenty ve výuce chemie. Praha: UK PedF. Search in Google Scholar

[7] Beneš, P., Rusek, M. & Kudrna, T. (2015). Tradice a současný stav pomůckového zabezpečení edukačního chemického experimentu v České republice. Chemické Listy, 109(2), 159–162. Search in Google Scholar

[8] Blažek, R. & Příhodová, S. (2016). Mezinárodní šetření PISA 2015: národní zpráva: přírodovědná gramotnost. Praha: Česká školní inspekce. Search in Google Scholar

[9] Bol, L. & Hacker, D. J. (2012, June 19). Calibration research: Where do we go from here? Dostupné z http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00229/full Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[10] Coletta, V.P. & Phillips, J. A. (2005). Interpreting FCI scores: Normalized gain, preinstruction scores, and scientific reasoning ability. American Journal of Physics, 73(12), 1172–1182. Search in Google Scholar

[11] Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. Search in Google Scholar

[12] Dejonckheere, P. J., Van De Keere, K. & Mestdagh, N. (2009). Training the scientific thinking circle in pre-and primary school children. The Journal of Educational Research, 103(1), 1–16. Search in Google Scholar

[13] Ding, L. (2013). Detecting progression of scientific reasoning among university science and engineering students. In Physics Education Research Conference 2013 (pp. 125–128). Portland, OR: AAPT. Search in Google Scholar

[14] Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J. & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 83–87. Search in Google Scholar

[15] Dykstra Jr, D. I. (2011). Výuka fyziky a rozvoj myšlení. Scientia in educatione, 2(2), 59–75. Search in Google Scholar

[16] Gerber, B. L., Cavallo, A.M. & Marek, E. A. (2001). Relationships among informal learning environments, teaching procedures and scientific reasoning ability. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 535–549. Search in Google Scholar

[17] Gilbert, J. (2005) Catching the knowledge wave: the knowledge society and the future of education. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER Press. Search in Google Scholar

[18] Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D.D. & Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 160–170. Search in Google Scholar

[19] Hejnová, E. & Hejna, D. (2016). Rozvoj vědeckého myšlení žáků prostřednictvím přírodovědného vzdělávání. Scientia in educatione, 7(2), 2–17. Search in Google Scholar

[20] Hendl, J. (2012). Přehled statistických metod. Praha: Portál. Search in Google Scholar

[21] Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G. (Eds.) (2005). The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning. Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

[22] Hilton, M. (2008). Skills for work in the 21st century: what does the research tell us? The Academy of Management Perspectives, 22(4), 63–78. Search in Google Scholar

[23] Chytrý, V. (2015) Logika, hry a myšlení. 1. vyd. Ústí nad Labem: Univerzita J. E. Purkyně v Ústí nad Labem. Search in Google Scholar

[24] Chytrý, V., Pešout, O. & Říčan, J. (2014). Preference metakognitivních strategií na pozadí úkolových situací v matematice u žáků druhého stupně ZŠ. Ústí nad Labem: Univerzita J. E. Purkyně v Ústí nad Labem. Search in Google Scholar

[25] Jang, H. (2016). Identifying 21st century STEM competencies using workplace data. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(2), 284–301. Search in Google Scholar

[26] Janoušková, S., Hubáčková, L., Pumpr, V. & Maršák, J. (2014). Přírodovědná gramotnost v preprimárním a raném období primárního vzdělávání jako prostředek zvýšení zájmu o studium přírodovědných a technických oborů. Scientia in educatione, 5(1), 36–49. Search in Google Scholar

[27] Kruger, J. & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134. Search in Google Scholar

[28] Kuhn, D. (2010). What is scientific thinking and how does it develop?. In U. Goswami (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development (2nd ed.) (pp. 497–523). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Search in Google Scholar

[29] Kuhn, D. & Franklin, S. (2006). The second decade: What develops (and how). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Search in Google Scholar

[30] Kuhn, D. & Pearsall, S. (2000). Developmental origins of scientific thinking. Journal of cognition and Development, 1(1), 113–129. Search in Google Scholar

[31] Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Search in Google Scholar

[32] Lawson, A. E. (2000). Classroom test of scientific reasoning: Multiple choice version. Dostupné z http://www.public.asu.edu/â¼anton1/AssessArticles/Assessments/Mathematics%20Assessments/Scientific%20Reasoning%20Test.pdf Search in Google Scholar

[33] Linn, M.C., Davis, E.A. & Bell, P. (2004). Internet environments for science education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey, USA. Search in Google Scholar

[34] Maki, R.H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A.E. & Zacchilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 723–731. Search in Google Scholar

[35] Moore, N., O’Donnell, J. & Poirier, D. (2012). Using cognitive acceleration materials to develop pre-service teachers’ reasoning and pedagogical expertise. Advancing the STEM Agenda in Education, University of Wisconsin. Search in Google Scholar

[36] Moore, J.C. & Rubbo, L. J. (2012). Scientific reasoning abilities of nonscience majors in physics-based courses. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 8(1), 010106. Search in Google Scholar

[37] McGartland Rubio, D. (2005). Alpha reliability. In K. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social measurement (59–63). Elsveir. Search in Google Scholar

[38] Neuenhaus, N. (2011). Metakognition und leistung: Eine längsschnittuntersuchung in den bereichen lesen und Englisch bei schülerinnen und schülern der fünften und sechsten jahrgangsstufe [Doctoral dissertation]. Universität Otto-Friedrich, Bamberg, Germany. Search in Google Scholar

[39] Retrieved from http://opus4.kobv.de/opus4/bamberg/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/ 327/file/DissNeuenhausseA2.pdf Search in Google Scholar

[40] Nietfeld, J. L., Cao, L.& Osborne, J.W. (2005). Metacognitive monitoring accuracy and student performance in the postsecondary classroom. The Journal of Experimental Educational, 74, 7–28. Search in Google Scholar

[41] Osborne, J. (2013). The 21st century challenge for science education: Assessing scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 265–279. Search in Google Scholar

[42] Osborne, J. & Ratcliffe, M. (2002). Developing effective methods of assessing ideas and evidence. School Science Review, 83(305), 113–123. Search in Google Scholar

[43] Prins, F. J., Veenman, M.V. J. & Elshout, J. J. (2006). The impact of interllectual ability and metacognition on learning: New support for the threshold of problematicity theory. Learning and Instruction, 16, 374–387. Search in Google Scholar

[44] Říčan, J. (2016). Metakognice a metakognitivní strategie jako teoretické a výzkumné konstrukty a jejich uplatnění v moderní pedagogické praxi. Most: Hněvín. Search in Google Scholar

[45] Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awereness. Instructional science, 26(1–2), 113–125. Search in Google Scholar

[46] Spearman, C. (1904). The proof and measurement of association between two things. The American Journal of Psychology, 15(1), 72–101. Search in Google Scholar

[47] Tavakol, M. & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2011(2), 53–55. Search in Google Scholar

[48] Trna, J. (2013). Fyzika: Záhadná setrvačnost těles v jednoduchých experimentech. In T. Janík, J. Slavík, V. Mužík, J. Trna, T. Janko, V. Lokajíčková, J. Lukavský,E. Minaříková, Z. Šalamounová, E. Šebestová, N. Vondrová & P. Zlatníček (Eds.), Search in Google Scholar

[49] Kvalita (ve) vzdělávání: obsahově zaměřený přístup ke zkoumání a zlepšování výuky (284–293). Brno: Masarykova Univerzita. Search in Google Scholar

[50] Tomášek, V., Basl, J. & Janoušková, S. (2016). Mezinárodní šetření TIMSS 2015: Národní zpráva. Prague, Czechia: Česká školní inspekce. Retrieved from www.csicr.cz/html/timss/html5/index.html?&locale=CSY&pn=3 Search in Google Scholar

[51] Windschitl, M. (2004). Folk theories of “inquiry”: How preservice teachers reproduce the discourse and practices of an atheoretical scientific method. Journal of research in science teaching, 41(5), 481–512. Search in Google Scholar

[52] Winne, P.H. & Hadwin, A. (1998). Studying as selfregulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky & A.C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (277–304). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Search in Google Scholar

[53] Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27, 172–223. Search in Google Scholar

Scientia in educatione

Abstract

References

Downloads

License