Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Metacognitive instructional behaviours of preschool teachers in mathematical activities

  • Original Article
  • Published:
ZDM Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An effective learning environment can be provided when teachers adopt metacognition-based teaching as a part of their course instructions. A well-developed metacognitive teaching approach can effectively develop students’ problem-solving strategies. In addition to that contribution, it can provide opportunities for students to notice their own strengths and weaknesses together. Therefore, awareness of metacognitive processes should be passed on to students. The purpose of this study is to reveal what metacognitive strategies are adopted by preschool teachers while implementing mathematical activities, to examine their behaviours regarding these strategies, and to investigate how they structure the instruction. The research was constructed as a case study. The data were collected from 15 participating preschool teachers. A semi-structured observation form was used to collect the data. The data collection tool consisted of five dimensions and 24 sub-dimensions concerning aspects of metacognition. Mathematical activities of the participants were tracked by a researcher, and instructional behaviours of the participants were documented in accordance with items in the form. A descriptive analysis was carried out to examine the major characteristics of the dataset. The results indicated that preschool teachers demonstrate some metacognition-based behaviours. However, they do not adequately perform metacognitive skills. This evokes the idea that the teachers do not have adequate knowledge of metacognition. Hence, it is suggested that in-service training or some courses on metacognition-based teaching should be provided for teachers to increase their awareness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander, J. M., Carr, M., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1995). Development of metacognition in gifted children: Directions for future research. Developmental Review, 15, 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1995.1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alin, R. (2012). Teaching linear measurement in the Israeli kindergarten curriculum. In T. Papatheodorou & J. Moyles (Eds.), Cross-cultural perspectives on early childhood (pp. 115–130). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Allsopp, D., Lovin, L. H., & Ingen, S. V. (2017). Supporting mathematical proficiency. Strategies for new special education teachers. Teaching Exceptional Children, 49(4), 273–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059917692112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N. J. (2002). The role of metacognition in second language teaching and learning. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, C. (2002). School readiness: Integrating cognition and emotion in a neurobiological conceptualization of children’s functioning at school entry. American Psychologist, 57(2), 111–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. In R. J. Sprio, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 453–481). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding (pp. 65–116). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryce, D., & Whitebread, D. (2012). The development of metacognitive skills: Evidence from observational analysis of young children’s behaviour during problem-solving. Metacognition and Learning, 7(3), 197–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-012-9091-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coffman, J. L., Ornstein, P. A., McCall, L. E., & Curran, P. J. (2008). Linking teachers’ memory relevant language and the development of children’s memory skills. Developmental Psychology, 44(6), 1640–1654. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Depaepe, F., De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (2010). Teachers’ metacognitive and heuristic approaches to word problem solving: Analysis and impact on students’ beliefs and performance. ZDM The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 42(2), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-009-0221-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desoete, A. (2008). Multi-method assessment of metacognitive skills in elementary school children: How you test is what you get. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9026-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desoete, A. (2009). Mathematics and metacognition in adolescents and adults with learning disabilities. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2(1), 82–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desoete, A., & Özsoy, G. (2009). Introduction: Metacognition, more than the lognes monster? International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2(1), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desoete, A., & Roeyers, H. (2002). Off-line metacognition—a domain-specific retardation in young children with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25(2), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desoete, A., & Roeyers, H. (2006). Metacognitive macroevaluations in mathematical problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 16(1), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.12.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desoete, A., Roeyers, H., & Buysse, A. (2001). Metacognition and mathematical problem solving in grade 3. Journal of Learning Disability, 34(5), 435–449. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940103400505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dignath, C., & Büttner, G. (2008). Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students. A meta-analysis on intervention studies at primary and secondary school level. Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 231–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9029-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dignath, C., & Büttner, G. (2018). Teachers’ direct and indirect promotion of self-regulated learning in primary and secondary school mathematics classes—insights from video-based classroom observations and teacher interviews. Metacognition and Learning, 13(2), 127–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-018-9181-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dignath, C., Büttner, G., & Langfeldt, H.-P. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively? A meta-analysis on selfregulation training programmes. Educational Research Review, 3(2), 101–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.02.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donker, A. S., de Boer, H., Kostons, D., Dignath-van Ewijk, C. C., & van der Werf, M. P. C. (2014). Effectiveness of learning strategy instruction on academic performance: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 11, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.11.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Efklides, A. (2001). Metacognitive experiences in problem solving. In A. Efklides, J. Kuhl, & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Trends and prospects in motivation research (pp. 297–323). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Efklides, A. (2008). Metacognition: Defining its facets and levels of functioning in relation to self-regulation and co-regulation. European Psychologist, 13(4), 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H., Green, F. L., Flavell, E. R., & Grossman, J. B. (1997). The development of children’s knowledge about inner speech. Child Development, 68(1), 39–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H., & Wellman, H. M. (1977). Metamemory. In R. V. Kail & J. W. Hagen (Eds.), Perspective on the development of memory and cognition (pp. 3–33). NJ: Hillsdale.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gascoine, L., Higgins, S., & Wall, K. (2017). The assessment of metacognition in children aged 4–16 years: A systematic review. Review of Education, 5(1), 3–57. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3077.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Georghiades, P. (2004). From the general to the situated: Three decades of metacognition. International Journal of Science Education, 26(3), 365–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000119401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunstone, R. F., & Northfield, J. (1994). Metacognition and learning to teach. International Journal of Science Education, 16(5), 523–537. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069940160504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, H. J. (2001). Teaching metacognitively. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and practice (pp. 149–172). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R. (1981). The complete problem solver. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, Y., Ma, L., & Gao, L. (2016). Assessing teachers’ metacognition in teaching: The Teacher Metacognition Inventory. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 403–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karably, K., & Zabrucky, K. M. (2009). Children’s metamemory: A review of the literature and implications for the classroom. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2(1), 32–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kistner, S., Rakoczy, K., Otto, B., Dignath-van Ewijk, C., Büttner, G., & Klieme, E. (2010). Promotion of self-regulated learning in classrooms: Investigating frequency, quality, and consequences for student performance. Metacognition Learning, 5(2), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9055-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B. (2009). Developing a pedagogical problem solving view for mathematics teachers with two reflection programs. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2(1), 137–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuruyer, H. G., & Özsoy, G. (2016). İyi ve zayif okuyucularin üstbilişsel okuma becerilerinin incelenmesi: Bir durum çalışması. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 24(2), 771–788.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuzle, A. (2018). Assessing metacognition of grade 2 and grade 4 students using an adaptation of multi-method interview approach during mathematics problem-solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30(2), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0227-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, S. (2010). Metacognition in young children. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtman, M. (2006). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucangeli, D., & Cornoldi, C. (1997). Mathematics and metacognition: What is the nature of the relationship? Mathematical Cognition, 3(2), 121–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/135467997387443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, L. H. (2004). Explicit self-regulated strategy development versus reciprocal questioning: Effects on expository reading comprehension among struggling readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 283–296. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mevarech, Z., & Kramarski, B. (2014). Critical maths for innovative societies: The role of metacognitive pedagogies. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264223561-en.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Morin, E. (2003). Geleceğin eğitimi için gerekli yedi bilgi (Translated by. H. Dilli). Istanbul: Istanbul Bilgi University Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 26, pp. 125–141). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 results: Creative problem solving: Students’ skills in tackling real-life problems (Volume V). Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264208070-en.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ohtani, K., & Hisasaka, T. (2018). Beyond intelligence: A meta-analytic review of the relationship among metacognition, intelligence, and academic performance. Metacognition Learning, 13(2), 179–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-018-9183-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otani, H., & Widner, R. L. (2005). Metacognition: New issues and approaches. The Journal of General Psychology, 132(4), 329–334. https://doi.org/10.3200/GENP.132.4.329-334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In B. F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 15–51). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perfect, T. J., & Schwartz, B. L. (Eds.). (2002). Applied metacognition. UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 219–225. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & de Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prytula, M. P. (2008). Scholarship epistemology: An exploratory study of teacher metacognition within the context of successful learning communities (Doctoral dissertation). Canada: University of Saskatchewan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prytula, M. P. (2012). Teacher metacognition within the professional learning community. International Education Studies, 5(4), 112–121. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v5n4p112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1991). On mathematics as sense making: An informal attack on the fortunate divorce of formal and informal mathematics. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 311–343). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26, 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003044231033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., Horn, C., Thorndike-Christ, T., & Bruning, R. (1995). Academic goal orientations and student classroom achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 359–368. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1995.1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychological Review, 7(4), 351–371. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serra, M. J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Effective implementation of metacognition. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 278–298). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sickle, M. V., & Kubinec, W. (2003). Transforming teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching, 32(4), 258–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Elshout, J. J., & Busato, V. V. (1994). Metacognitive mediation in learning with computer-based simulations. Computers in Human Behavior, 10(1), 93–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/0747-5632(94)90031-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Kok, R., & Kuilenburg, J. (2001). Intelligence and metacognitive skilfulness in secondary education. In F. Oser & U. Baets (Eds.), 9th European Conference on Learning and Instruction, Abstract Volume (pp. 166). Aachen: Mainz.

  • Veenman, M. V. J., & Spaans, M. A. (2005). Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 15(2), 159–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2004.12.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Wilhelm, P., & Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills from a developmental perspective. Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 89–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1993). Toward a knowledge base for school learning. Review of Educational Research, 63(3), 249–294. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543063003249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitebread, D., Bingham, S., Grau, V., Pasternak, D. P., & Sangster, C. (2007). Development of metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children: Role of collaborative and peer-assisted learning. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 6(3), 433–455. https://doi.org/10.1891/194589507787382043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitebread, D., & Coltman, P. (2010). Aspects of pedagogy supporting metacognition and self-regulation in mathematical learning in young children: Evidence from an observational study. ZDM The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 42(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-009-0233-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitebread, D., Coltman, P., Pasternak, D. P., Sangster, C., Grau, V., Bingham, S., et al. (2009). The development of two observational tools for assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children. Metacognition Learning, 4(1), 63–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9033-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J., & Clarke, D. (2004). Towards the modelling of mathematical metacognition. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 16(2), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D., & Conyers, M. (2016). Teaching students to drive their brains: Metacognitive strategies, activities, and lesson ideas. Alexandria: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H. (1997). Experimenting to bootstrap self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 397–410. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J., & Jacobs, B. (2003). Teaching phonological awareness and metacognitive strategies to children with reading difficulties: A comparison of two instructional methods. Educational Psychology, 23(1), 17–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410303217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the reviewers for their constructive comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Primary Education, Faculty of Education, Dumlupinar University, Kutahya, Turkey

    Özlem Dogan Temur

  2. Department of Primary Education, Faculty of Education, Ordu University, Ordu, Turkey

    Gökhan Özsoy

  3. Department of Primary Education, Faculty of Education, Bartin University, Bartin, Turkey

    Sedat Turgut

Authors
  1. Özlem Dogan Temur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gökhan Özsoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sedat Turgut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gökhan Özsoy.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

A part of this study was delivered as an oral presentation at the 1st International Conference on Basic Education, 29–31 March 2018, Bursa, Turkey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Temur, Ö.D., Özsoy, G. & Turgut, S. Metacognitive instructional behaviours of preschool teachers in mathematical activities. ZDM Mathematics Education 51, 655–666 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01069-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01069-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation