Abstract
The development and enhancement of science students’ metacognition should be an important goal of science education. The extent to which it is, however, is questionable. The explosion of science information (and misinformation) around issues such as climate change, COVID-19, the Anthropocene, and sustainability makes developing students’ potentials to be aware of how to manage and monitor the quality of their science learning a priority for consideration by science educators. This is because individuals’ science learning will need to continue long after they complete formal schooling. However, attempts to prioritize instruction for metacognition in science education have faltered, stagnated, and lack momentum. This chapter identifies key reasons for this situation and proposes considerations to (re)elevate instruction for metacognition into science classrooms. The considerations involve reorienting research perspectives in the field of metacognition research in science education, considering increasing attention to metacognition in pre- and in-service teacher education, being realistic about our expectations for instruction for metacognition in science learning contexts, and considering the use of Open Educational Resources (OERs) such as podcasts and websites that can be accessed across countries by pre-service and practicing teachers and teacher educators to inform them about metacognition and about instruction for metacognition.
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
References
Anderson, J. R. (1983). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 22, 261–295. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90201-3
Anderson, J. R. (1990). The adaptive character of thought. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (ACARA). (2021). Science (version 8.4). https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/senior-secondary-curriculum/science/
Avargil, S., Lavi, R., & Dori, Y. J. (2018). Students’ metacognition and metacognitive strategies in science education. In Y. J. Dori, Z. R. Mevarech, & D. R. Baker (Eds.), Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education. Innovations in science education and technology (Vol. 24). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66659-4_3
Azevedo, R. (2020). Reflections on the field of metacognition: Issues, challenges, and opportunities. Metacognition and Learning, 15, 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09231-x
Baird, J. R., & Mitchell, I. J. (1986). Improving the quality of teaching and learning: An Australian case study – The PEEL Project. PEEL Publishing.
Bencze, L. (n.d.). https://wordpress.oise.utoronto.ca/jlbencze/
Bencze, L., Sperling, E., & Carter, L. (2011). Students’ research-informed socio-scientific activism: Re/visions for a sustainable future. Research in Science Education, 42, 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9260-3
Braund, H. (2019). Supporting metacognitive development in science education: Exploring Ontario elementary teacher’s beliefs and practices in metacognition. Alberta Science Education Journal, 46(1), 10–21.
Braund, H., & Soleas, E. (2019). The struggle is real: Metacognitive conceptualizations, actions, and beliefs of pre-service and in-service teachers. In J. Mena, A. García-Valcárel, & F. García Peñalvo (Eds.), Teachers’ professional development in global contexts (pp. 105–124). Brill Sense.
Brown, A. L. (1994). The advancement of learning. Educational Researcher, 23(8), 4–12.
Carter, L. (2011). Gathering the thread in the insensible global world: The wicked problems of globalization and science education. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 6(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-9307-1
Chen, L., & Xiao, S. (2021). Perceptions, challenges and coping strategies of science teachers in teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 32(7). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100377
Collier, J., Ryrolle, H., & Marine, C. (1997). Expertise in dynamic environments. Ergonomics, 40(1), 28–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/001401397188350
Connell, R. W., Ashenden, D. J., Kessler, S., & Dowsett, G. W. (1985). Teachers’ work (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003117667
Cooper, A., Rodway, J., & Read, R. (2018). Knowledge mobilization practices of educational researchers across Canada. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 48(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.7202/1050839ar
Couteret, L., King, C., & Thomas, G. P. (2018). Bridging the gap between theory and practice in science education: Really? When? How? Why? In D. C. Young, W. L. Kraglund-Gauthier, & T. G. Ryan (Eds.), Readiness for the field: Perspectives from within the triangle of teacher education (pp. 35–55). Common Ground.
Craig, C. J. (2017). International teacher attrition: Multi-perspective views. Teachers and Teaching, 23(8), 859–862. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1360860
Department of Education. (2014). The national curriculum in England: Key stages 3 and 4 framework document. Department of Education. www.gov.uk/dfe/nationalcurriculum
Dori, Y. J., Mevarech, Z. R., & Baker, D. R. (2018). Introduction. In Y. J. Dori, Z. R. Mevarech, & D. R. Baker (Eds.), Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM Education, Innovations in science education and technology (Vol. 24, pp. 1–8). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66659-4_1
Dori, Y. J., Mevarech, Z. R., & Baker, D. R. (Eds.) (2018). Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM Education. Innovations in science education and technology (Vol. 24). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66659-4
Dow, A., Hattam, R., Reid, A., Shacklock, G., & Smyth, J. (2000). Teachers’ work in a globalizing economy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203979693
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1996). The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and reflective. Instructional Science, 24, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00156001
Feldon, D. F. (2016). The development of expertise in scientific research. Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences. (14 pages). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0411
Furlong, V., & Vignoles, V. L. (2020). Social identification in collective climate action: Predicting participation in the environmental movement, extinction rebellion. Identity; An international Journal of Theory and Research, 21(1), 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/15283488.2020.1856664
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
Georghiades, P. (2006). The role of metacognitive activities in the contextual use of primary pupils’ conceptions of science. International Journal of Science Education, 36, 29–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-3954-8
Glaser, R., & Chi, M. T. H. (1988). Overview. In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. xv–xxviii). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Guile, D., & Unwin, L. (2022). Expertise as a ‘capacity for action’: Reframing vocational knowledge from the perspective of work. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 74(1), 31–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2020.1858939
Gunstone, R. F., & Mitchell, I. J. (1998). Metacognition and conceptual change. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 133–163). Academic Press.
Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645–670. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690305021
Jin, Q., & Kim, M. (2021). Supporting elementary students’ scientific argumentation with argument-focused metacognitive scaffolds (AMS). International Journal of Science Education, 43(12), 1984–2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1947542
Kozulin, A. (2021). Why teachers need metacognition training. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 17(2), 59–64. https://psyjournals.ru/en/kip/2021/n2/Kozulin.shtml
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Martin, L. E., & Mulvihill, T. M. (2017). Current issues in teacher education: An interview with Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond. The Teacher Educator, 52(2), 75–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2017.1294921
McRobbie, C. J., & Tobin, K. (1995). Restraints to reform: The congruence of teacher and student actions in a chemistry classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(4), 373–385. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320406
Ministry of Education. (2020). Science syllabuses: Lower secondary express course; Normal academic course. Curriculum Planning and Development Division.
Mitchell, I., & Mitchell, J. (2008). The project for enhancing effective learning (PEEL): 22 years of praxis. In A. P. Samaras, A. R. Freese, C. Kosnik, & C. Beck (Eds.), Learning communities in practice. Explorations of educational purpose (Vol. 4). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8788-2_1
NGSS. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press. https://www.nextgenscience.org/
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2019). Future of education and skills 2030: Skills for 2030 – Conceptual learning framework. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/teaching-and-learning/learning/skills/
Quast, C. (2018). Towards a balanced account of expertise. Social Epistemology, 32(6), 397–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2018.1546349
Räsänen, K., Pietarinen, J., Pyhältö, K., Soini, T., & Väisänen, P. (2020). Why leave the teaching profession? A longitudinal approach to the prevalence and persistence of teacher turnover intentions. Social Psychology of Education, 23, 837–859. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-020-09567-x
Robertson, S. (2017). Changing teachers’ work, globalization and the state. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315053912
Rose, K. (2021). How do teachers’ perceptions of their agency and engagement change after participating in self-directed professional development? (Unpublished PhD thesis). The University of Alberta. https://doi.org/10.7939/r3-ftn8-fq86
Sandi-Urena, S., Cooper, M. M., & Stevens, R. H. (2011). Enhancement of metacognition use and awareness by means of a collaborative intervention. International Journal of Science Education, 33(3), 323–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903452922
Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26, 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003044231033
Shanteau, J. (1992). The psychology of experts: An alternative view. In G. Wright & F. Bolger (Eds.), Expertise and decision support (pp. 11–23). Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-585-34290-0_2
Sorensen, L. C., & Ladd, H. F. (2020, January). The hidden costs of teacher turnover. AERA open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420905812
Thomas, G. P. (1999). Student restraints to reform: Conceptual change issues in enhancing students’ learning processes. Research in Science Education, 29(1), 89–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461182
Thomas, G. P. (2009). Metacognition or not: Confronting hegemonies. In I. M. Saleh & M. S. Khine (Eds.), Fostering scientific habits of mind: Pedagogical knowledge and best practices in science education (pp. 83–106). Sense Publishers.
Thomas, G. P. (2011). A new science future, a new science teacher: Teacher metacognition as a priority in science teacher education. The International Journal of Educational Administration and Development, 2, 350–363.
Thomas, G. P. (2012). Metacognition in science education: Past, present and future considerations. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 131–144). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_11
Thomas, G. P. (2013). Changing the metacognitive orientation of a classroom learning environment to stimulate metacognitive reflection regarding the nature of physics learning. International Journal of Science Education, 35(7), 1183–1207. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.778438
Thomas, G. P. (2017). “Triangulation:” An expression for stimulating metacognitive reflection regarding the use of ‘triplet’ representations for chemistry learning. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 533–548. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00227G
Thomas, G. P. (2018, May 27). Science teachers’ procedural metacognitive knowledge: Initial investigations. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Canadian Society for Studies in Education, Regina, Canada.
Thomas, G. P. (2020a). Exploring practicing and pre-service teachers’ procedural metacognitive knowledge: Initial findings and potential implications. In O. Levrini & G. Tasquier (Eds.), Electronic Proceedings of the ESERA 2019 Conference. The beauty and pleasure of understanding: Engaging with contemporary challenges through science education, Strand 3 (co-ed. S. Fechner & R. Verhoeff) (pp. 367–373). ALMA MATER STUDIORUM – University of Bologna. 978–88–945874-0-1978-88-945874-0-1.
Thomas, G. P. (2020b). Adopting a reflexive disposition as a teacher<+>researcher to reconceptualize a science teacher education course. In E. Tsang, K. C. Li, & P. Wang (Eds.), Proceedings of the international conference on open and innovative education (ICOIE 2020) (pp. 1–14). Open University of Hong Kong.
Thomas, G. P. (2021). The language of thinking: Reflecting on Tishman and Perkins. https://era.library.ualberta.ca/items/a80dd2e8-5a34-4d2f-b871-a3cb79e6890b
Thomas, G. P. (accepted). Who are the students in metacognition research in high school science education? Reflections on ecological validity, representative design, and generalizability. In S. Larkin (Ed.), Metacognition and education: Future trends. Taylor and Francis.
Thomas, G. P. (n.d.-a). The metacognition channel. https://metacognition.podbean.com/
Thomas, G. P. (n.d.-b). Metacognition online. https://www.metacognition.ca/
Thomas, G. P., & Au, D. K.-M. (2005). Changing the learning environment to enhance students’ metacognition in Hong Kong primary school classrooms. Learning Environments Research, 8(3), 221–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-005-1565-6
Thomas, G. P., & McRobbie, C. J. (2001). Using a metaphor for learning to improve students’ metacognition in the chemistry classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 222–259. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200102)38:2%3C222::AID-TEA1004%3E3.0.CO;2-S
Thomas, G. P., & McRobbie, C. J. (2002). Collaborating to enhance student reasoning: Frances’ account of her reflections while teaching chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 405–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110074035
Tishman, S., & Perkins, D. N. (1997). The language of thinking. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(5), 368–374.
UNESCO. (2018). Welcome to the Anthropocene! The UNESCO Courier, (2018, No. 2). https://en.unesco.org/courier/2018-2
Veenman, M. V. J. (2012). Metacognition in science education: Definitions, constituents, and their intricate relation with cognition. In A. Zohar, A. & Y. Dori (Eds.), Metacognition in science education. Contemporary trends and issues in science education (Vol. 40) (pp. 21–36). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2132-6_2
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
Wallace, M., Bazzul, J., Higgins, M., & Tolbert, S. (2022). Reimagining science education in the Anthropocene. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79622-8_1
Wallis, H., & Loy, L. S. (2021). What drives pro-environmental activism of young people? A study survey on the Fridays for future movement. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 74, 101581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101581
Watson, E. R. (2021). Connecting epistemic beliefs about physics knowledge and curriculum concerns in Saskatchewan: A mixed analysis study (Unpublished PhD thesis). The University of Alberta. https://doi.org/10.7939/r3-0yef-pg89
Wilson, N. S., & Bai, H. (2010). The relationships and impact of teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and pedagogical understandings of metacognition. Metacogition and Learning, 5, 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9062-4
Younie, S., Audain, J., Eloff, I., Leask, M., Procter, R., & Shelton, C. (2018). Mobilising knowledge through global partnerships to support research-informed teaching: Five models for translational research. Journal of Education for Teaching, 44(5), 574–589. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2018.1516348
Yuruk, N., Beeth, M. E., & Andersen, C. (2009). Analyzing the effect of metaconceptual teaching practices on students’ understanding of force and motion concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 39, 449–475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9089-6
Zohar, A. (1999). Teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and the instruction of higher order thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 413–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00063-8
Zohar, A. (2006). The nature and development of teachers’ metastrategic knowledge in the context of higher-order thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 331–377.
Zohar, A., & Barzilai, S. (2013). A review of research on metacognition in science education: Current and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 49(2), 121–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2013.847261
Zohar, A., & Barzilai, S. (2015). Metacognition and teaching higher-order thinking (HOT) in science education. In R. Wegerif, L. Li, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook on research on teaching thinking (pp. 229–242). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315797021
Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2012). Introduction. In A. Zohar & Y. J. Dori (Eds.), Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research (pp. 1–19). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2132-6
Zouda, M., El Halwany, S., & Bencze, L. (in press). Science and technology studies informing STEM education: Possibilities and dilemmas. In G. P. Thomas & H. Boon (Eds.), Challenges in science education: Global perspectives for the future. Palgrave Macmillan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Thomas, G.P. (2023). Instruction for Metacognition in Science Classrooms: Harsh Realities and a Way Forward?. In: Thomas, G.P., Boon, H.J. (eds) Challenges in Science Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18092-7_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18092-7_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-18091-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-18092-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)