Metacognition research and theory: Analysis and implications for instructional design

  • Mohamed E. Osman
  • Michael J. Hannafin
Development

Abstract

Metacognition, a construct with strong empirical and theoretical foundations, is integral to successful learning. Research on metacognition has provided convincing evidence supporting its importance in the instruction and learning processes. In this article, research on several aspects of metacognition are briefly reviewed and analyzed, examples of metacognitive strategies are provided, and implications for instructional design are described.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andrews, D. H., & Goodson, L. A. (1980). A comparative analysis of models of instructional design.Journal of Instructional Development, 3, 2–16.Google Scholar
  2. Anzai, Y., & Simon, H. A. (1979). The theory of learning by doing.Psychological Review, 86, 124–140.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, L. (1985). How do we know when we don't understand? Standards for evaluating text comprehension. In D. L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. Garry Waller (Eds.),Metacognition, cognition, and human performance (Vol. I, pp. 155–200). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  4. Beal, C., Garrod, A., & Bonitatibus, G. (1990). Fostering children's revision skills through training in comprehension monitoring.Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 275–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berry, D. C. (1983). Metacognitive experience and transfer of logical reasoning.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35, 39–49.Google Scholar
  6. Black, M. M., & Rollins, H. J., Jr. (1982). The effects of instructional variables on young children's organization and free recall.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 33, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borkowski, J. C., Peck, V. A., Reid, M. K., & Kurtz, B. E. (1983). Impulsivity and strategy transfers: Metamemory as mediator.Child Development, 54, 459–473.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, A. L. (1975). The development of memory: Knowing, knowing about knowing, and knowing how to know. In H. W. Reese (Ed.),Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 104–152). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  9. Brown, A. L. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from texts by means of informed, self-control training.Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 7(2), 1–17.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, A. L., Bransford, J. D., Ferrara, R. A., & Campione, J. C. (1983). Learning, remembering and understanding. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.),Handbook of psychology (Vol. III, pp. 77–166). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., & Barclay, C. R. (1979). Training self-checking routines for estimating test readiness: Generalization from list learning to prose recall.Child Development, 50, 501–512.Google Scholar
  12. Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., & Day, J. D. (1981). Learning to learn: On training students to learn from texts.Educational Researcher, 10, 14–21.Google Scholar
  13. Brown, A. L., Day, J. D., & Jones, R. S. (1983). The development of plans for summarizing texts.Child Development, 54, 968–979.Google Scholar
  14. Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1982).Inducing strategic learning from texts by means of informed, self-control training (Technical Report No. 262, pp. 1–48.) Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  15. Bruner, J. S. (1957). Going beyond the information given. In H. Gruber, et al. (Eds.),Contemporary approach to cognition (pp. 151–156). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Butterfield, C. E., & Nelson, G. D. (1989). Theory and practice of teaching for transfer.Educational Technology Research and Development, 37, 5–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cavanaugh, J. C., & Borkowski, J. C. (1979). The metamemory-memory "connection": Effects of strategy training and maintenance.The Journal of General Psychology, 101, 161–174.Google Scholar
  18. Chi, M. T. H. (1987). Representing knowledge and meta-knowledge: Implications for interpreting metamemory research. In R. H. Kluwe & F. E. Weinert (Eds.),Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 239–66). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  19. Clark, R. (1984). Research on student thought processes during computer-based instruction.Journal of Instructional Development, 7(3), 2–5.Google Scholar
  20. Dansereau, D. F. (1985). Learning strategies research. In J. W. Segal, S. F. Chipman, & R. Glaser (Eds.),Thinking and learning skills (Vol. I, pp. 209–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Dansereau, D. F., Collins, K. W., McDonald, B. A., Holley, C. D., Garland, J., Dickhoff, G., & Evans, S. H. (1979). Development and evaluation of a learning strategy training program.Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 64–73.Google Scholar
  22. Derry, S. J., & Murphy, D. A. (1986). Designing systems that train learning ability: From theory to practice.Review of Educational Research, 56, 1–39.Google Scholar
  23. Dewitz, P., Carr, E. M., & Patberg, J. P. (1987). Effects of inference training on comprehension and comprehension monitoring.Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 99–119.Google Scholar
  24. Di Vesta, F. J. (1989). Application of cognitive psychology to education. In Wittrock, M. C., & Farley, F. (Eds.),The future of educational psychology (pp. 37–73). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Di Vesta, F. J., & Rieber, L. P. (1987). Characteristics of cognitive engineering: The next generation of instructional systems.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 35, 213–230.Google Scholar
  26. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of psychological inquiry.American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.Google Scholar
  27. Flavell, J. H. (1981). Cognitive monitoring. In W. P. Dickson (Ed.),Children's oral communication skills (pp. 35–60). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  28. Flavell, J. H. (1985).Cognitive development (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  29. Flavell, J. H., & Wellman, H. W. (1977). Metamemory. In R. V. Kail & J. W. Hagen (Eds.),Perspectives on the development of memory and cognition (pp. 3–33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  30. Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., Jacobsen, D. R., & Bullock, T. L. (1990).Tools for learning: A guide to teaching study skills. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  31. Garhart, P. M. (1989).The effectiveness of training strategies on comprehension monitoring estimates during computer-based instruction. Unpublished dissertation, Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
  32. Garhart, C., & Hannafin, M. J. (1986). The accuracy of comprehension monitoring computer-based instruction.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 13, 88–93.Google Scholar
  33. Garner, R., & Alexander, P. (1989). Metacognition: Answered and unanswered questions.Educational Psychologist, 24, 143–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Garner, R., & Resi, R. (1981). Monitoring and resolving comprehension obstacles: An investigation of spontaneous text look backs among upper-grade good and poor comprehenders.Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 569–582.Google Scholar
  35. Gordon, C. J., & Braun, C. (1985). Metacognitive process: Reading and writing narrative discover. In D. L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.),Metacognition, cognition and human performance (Vol. II, pp. 1–72). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  36. Gustafson, K. L. (1991).Survey of ID Models (2nd ed.). ERIC document, Syracuse, NY.Google Scholar
  37. Hannafin, M. J. (1984). Guidelines for using locus of instructional control in the design of computer-assisted instruction.Journal of Instructional Development, 7(3), 6–10.Google Scholar
  38. Hannafin, M. J., & Rieber, L. P. (1989). Psychological foundations of instructional design for emerging computer-based instructional technologies: Part 1.Educational Technology Research and Development, 37, 91–101.Google Scholar
  39. Markman, E. M. (1979). Realizing that you don't understand: Elementary school children's awareness of inconsistencies.Child Development, 50, 643–655.Google Scholar
  40. Markman, E. M., & Gorin, L. (1981). Children's ability to adjust their standards for evaluating comprehension.Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 32–325.Google Scholar
  41. Miller, G. E. (1985). The effects of general and specific self-instruction training on children's comprehension monitoring performances during reading.Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 616–628.Google Scholar
  42. O'Sullivan, J., & Pressley, M. (1984). The completeness of instruction and strategy transfer.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38, 275–288.Google Scholar
  43. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and comprehension monitoring activities.Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175.Google Scholar
  44. Paris, S. G., & Myers, M. (1981). Comprehension monitoring, memory, and study strategies of good and poor readers.Journal of Reading Behavior, 13, 5–22.Google Scholar
  45. Paris, S. G., Newman, R. S., & McVey, K. A. (1982). Learning the functional significance of mnemonic actions: A microgenetic study of strategy acquisition.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 34, 490–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Patterson, C. J., & Kister, M. C. (1981). The development of listener skills for referential communication. In P. Dickson (Ed.),Children's oral communication skills (pp. 143–166). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  47. Piaget, J. (1976).The grasp of consciousness: Action and concept in the young child. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Pressley, M., Borkowski, J. G., & O'Sullivan, J. T. (1984). Memory strategy instruction is made of this: Metamemory and durable strategy use.Educational Psychologist, 19, 94–107.Google Scholar
  49. Pressley, M., Borkowski, J. G., & O'Sullivan J. T. (1985). Children's metamemory and the teaching of memory strategies. In D. L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.),Metacognition, cognition, and human performance (Vol. I, pp. 111–149). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  50. Rao, N., & Moely, B. E. (1989). Producing memory strategy maintenance and generalization by explicit or implicit training of memory knowledge.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 48, 335–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Reeve, R. A., & Brown, A. L. (1984).Metacognition reconsidered: Implications for intervention research (Technical Report No. 328). Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  52. Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. (1989). Rocky roads to transfer: Rethinking mechanisms of a neglected phenomenon.Educational Psychologist, 24, 111–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schmitt, M. C., & Newby, T. J. (1986). Metacognition: Relevance to instructional design.Journal of Instructional Development, 9(4), 29–33.Google Scholar
  54. Schneider, W. (1985). Developmental trends in the metamemory-memory behavior relationship: An integrative review. In D. L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.),Metacognition, cognition, and human performance (Vol. I, pp. 57–105). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  55. Schnell, T. R., & Rocchio, D. (1975). A comparison of underlining strategies for improving reading comprehension and retention. In G. McNinch & W. D. Miller (Eds.),Reading: Convention and inquiry (p. 179). Clemson, SC: National Reading Conference.Google Scholar
  56. Singer, R. N., & Suwanthanda, S. (1986). The generalizability effectiveness of a learning strategy on achievement in related closed motor skills.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 57, 205–214.Google Scholar
  57. Wagoner, S. A. (1983). Comprehension monitoring: What it is and what we know about it.Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 328–346.Google Scholar
  58. Wellman, H. M. (1983). Metamemory revisited. In M. T. H. Chi (Ed.),Trends in memory development research: Contributions to human development (Vol. 9, pp. 31–51). Basel: Karger.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohamed E. Osman
    • 1
  • Michael J. Hannafin
    • 1
  1. 1.Florida State UniversityTallahassee

Personalised recommendations