Abstract
Building students’ knowledge of the nature of science (NOS) has potential to improve important elements of science literacy as students learn both a body of scientific knowledge and develop understanding of how that body of knowledge has come to be (Duschl 1990; Peters and Kitsantas 2010a). Over 20 years of evidence has demonstrated that a person’s epistemology plays a role in developing reasoning, connecting evidence and claims, and setting the foundation for learning approaches (Hofer and Pintrich 1997; King and Kitchener 1994). Therefore, an emphasis on teaching NOS in science class is important in developing scientifically literate students. However, teaching a sophisticated understanding of NOS to students has been difficult in part due to unfocused pedagogical approaches offered to teachers. The incorporation of NOS teaching into inquiry-based lessons can be focused by a learning theory, and self-regulated learning theory (SRL) has potential as a helpful tool for incorporation of NOS because the theory explains learning as a goal-directed process whereby a person is required to identify a problem, examine relevant data to inform a solution, develop a solution, and evaluate the solution (Zimmerman 2008). The approach offered in this chapter presents new opportunities to reach students supported by a well-document learning theory.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Butler, D. L., Beckingham, B., & Lauscher, H. J. N. (2005). Promoting strategic learning by eighth-grade students struggling in mathematics: A report of three case studies. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20, 156–174.
Cleary, T. J., & Labuhn, A. (2013). Application of cyclical self-regulation interventions in science-based contexts. In H. Bembenutty, T. J. Cleary, & A. Kitasantas (Eds.), Applications of self-regulated learning across diverse disciplines: A tribute to Barry J. Zimmerman (pp. 89–124). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Cleary, T. J., & Platten, P. (2013). Examining the correspondence between self-regulated learning and academic achievement: A case study analysis [Special Issue]. Educational Research International, 2013.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1987). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics (Technical report no. 403). Cambridge, MA: BBN Laboratories. Centre for the Study of Reading, University of Illinois.
De Corte, E., Mason, L., Depaepe, F., & Verschaffel, L. (2011). Self-regulation of mathematical knowledge and skills. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 155–172). New York: Routledge.
Driscoll, M. P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Duschl, R. (1990). Restructuring science education: The role of theories and their importance. New York: Teachers College Press.
Graham, S., & Harris, H. R. (2005). Improving the writing performance of young struggling writers: Theoretical and programmatic research from the center on accelerating student learning. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 19–33.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (3rd ed., pp. 403–422). New York: Longman.
Henderson, R. W. (1986). Self-regulated learning: Implications for the design of instructional media. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 405–427.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140.
Hogan, K. (2000). Exploring a process view of students’ knowledge about the nature of science. Science Education, 84, 51–70.
Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 551–578.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nargund, V., & Park Rogers, M. A. (2009). That is not where that element goes…ah, the nature of science. Science Scope, 10, 23–29.
Peters, E. E. (2009). Thinking like scientists: Using metacognitive prompts to develop nature of science knowledge. Saarbrücken: Verlag Dr. Müller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG Publishers.
Peters, E. E. (2012). Developing content knowledge in students through explicit teaching of the nature of science: Influences of goal setting and self-monitoring. Science & Education, 21(6), 881–898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9219-1.
Peters, E. E., & Kitsantas, A. (2010a). Self-regulation of student epistemic thinking in science: The role of metacognitive prompts. Educational Psychology, 30(1), 27–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410903353294.
Peters, E. E., & Kitsantas, A. (2010b). The effect of nature of science metacognitive prompts on science students’ content and nature of science knowledge, metacognition, and self-regulatory efficacy. School Science and Mathematics, 110, 382–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00050.x.
Peters-Burton, E. E. (2013). The use of clinical interviews to develop in-service secondary science teachers’ nature of science knowledge and assessment of student NOS knowledge. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 86(6), 229–237.
Peters-Burton, E. E. (2015). Outcomes of a self-regulatory curriculum model: Network analysis of middle school students’ views of nature of science. Science & Education, 24, 855–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9769-3.
Peters-Burton, E. E. (2017). Strategies for learning nature of science knowledge: A perspective from educational psychology. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), History, philosophy and science teaching: New perspectives (pp. 167–193). Dordrecht: Springer.
Peters-Burton, E. E., & Botov, I. S. (2017). Self-regulated learning microanalysis as a tool to inform professional development delivery in real-time. Metacognition and Learning, 12(1), 45–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9160-z.
Sinatra, G. M., & Taasoobshirazi, G. (2011). Intentional conceptual change: The self-regulation of science. In B. J. Zimmerman, B. J, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 203–216). New York: Routledge.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social-cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego: Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Education Research Journal, 45, 166–183.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1997). Developmental phases in self-regulation: Shifting from process goals to outcome goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 29–36.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Peters-Burton, E.E., Burton, S.R. (2020). The Use of Metacognitive Prompts to Foster Nature of Science Learning. In: McComas, W.F. (eds) Nature of Science in Science Instruction. Science: Philosophy, History and Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-57238-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-57239-6
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)