Research in Science Education

, Volume 36, Issue 1–2, pp 29–49 | Cite as

The Role of Metacognitive Activities in the Contextual Use of Primary Pupils' Conceptions of Science

  • Petros Georghiades


This paper addresses the problematic nature of pupils' attempts to use their science conceptions in contexts other than the ones in which the original learning of the concept takes place. It reports research with 60 Year-5 primary school children studying current electricity, during which the researcher employed metacognitive activities alongside normal teaching procedures, in an attempt to enhance cross-contextual use of taught concepts. In order to assess the effect of different contexts on pupils' performance, a test was repeatedly administered over one school year that tested the same concepts in distinctly different contexts. Although the role of a familiar context is only partly determined, the results suggest that pupils' ability to use concepts in unfamiliar contexts is stable for a long period of time. The results also support the provision of metacognitive activities as a means of enhancing pupils' ability for cross-contextual use of their conceptions of science.


context metacognition science conceptions 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adey, P., Robertson, A., & Venville, G. (2002). Effects of a cognitive acceleration programme on Year 1 pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(1), 1–25. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adey, P., Shayer, M., & Yates, C. (1991). Better learning. A report from the Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education (CASE) project. London: Kings College, University of London. Google Scholar
  3. Baird, J. R., & Mitchell, I. J. (Eds.). (1986). Improving the quality of teaching and learning: An Australian case study – The PEEL Project. Melbourne, Australia: Monash University. Google Scholar
  4. Billett, S. (1996). Situated learning: Bridging sociocultural and cognitive theorising. Learning and Instruction, 6(3), 263–280. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blank, L. M. (2000). A metacognitive learning cycle: A better warranty for student understanding? Science Education, 84(4), 486–506. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bliss, J., Morrison, I., & Ogborn, J. (1988). A longitudinal study of dynamics concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 10(1), 99–110. Google Scholar
  7. Boaler, J. (1993). Encouraging the transfer of ‘school’ mathematics to the ‘real world’ through the integration of process and content, context and culture. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 25, 341–373. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65–116). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  9. Brown, A. L., Bransford, J. D., Ferrara, R. A., & Campione, J. C. (1983). Learning, remembering and understanding. In J. H. Flavell & E. M. Markman (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology 3 (pp. 77–166). New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
  10. Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. C. (1988). Developmental and instrumental analysis of children's metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 131–142. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Department of Education and Science (DES). (1985). Science at age 15 – Science report for teachers No. 5. London: HMSO. Google Scholar
  12. Detterman, D. K., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (1993). Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Google Scholar
  13. Donaldson, M. (1978). Children's minds. London: Fontana. Google Scholar
  14. Donelly, J. F., & Welford, A. G. (1989). Assessing pupils' ability to generalise. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 161–171. Google Scholar
  15. Engel-Clough, E., & Driver, R. (1986). A study of the consistency in the use of students' conceptual frameworks across different tasks contexts. Science Education, 70(4), 473–496. Google Scholar
  16. Flavell, J. H. (1971). First discussant's comments. What is memory development the development of? Human Development, 14, 272–278. Google Scholar
  17. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911. Google Scholar
  18. Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 21–29). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  19. Georghiades, P. (1999). Take your class skiing! Primary Science Review, 58, 15–16. Google Scholar
  20. Georghiades, P. (2000). Beyond conceptual change learning in science education: Focusing on transfer, durability and metacognition. Educational Research, 42(2), 119–139. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Georghiades, P. (2001a). Dimensions of ‘meta-Conceptual Change Learning’ in science education: The role of metacognition in the durability and contextual use of primary pupils' conceptions. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Surrey, Roehampton, England. Google Scholar
  22. Georghiades, P. (2001b). ‘Situated metacognition’ and the ‘metacognitive instances’ approach: Towards the integration of metacognitive thinking into school science. In D. Psillos, P. Kariotoglou, V. Tsefles, G. Bisdikian, G. Fassoulopoulos, E. Hatzikraniotis, & M. Kallery (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Science Education in the Knowledge Based Society (pp. 392–396). Thessaloniki, Greece: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki & European Science Education Research Association. Google Scholar
  23. Georghiades, P. (2002). Making children's scientific ideas more durable, Primary Science Review, 74, 24–27. Google Scholar
  24. Georghiades, P. (2004). Making pupils' conceptions of electricity more durable by means of situated metacognition. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 85–99. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Georghiades, P., & Parla-Petrou, E. (2001, September). Diverse use of concept mapping across two domains: The cases of primary food and science education. Paper presented at the annual conference of the British Educational Research Association, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom. Google Scholar
  26. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306–355. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gunstone, R. F. (1991). Constructivism and metacognition: Theoretical issues and classroom studies. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 129–140). Bremen, Germany, IPN. Google Scholar
  28. Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (Eds.). (1998). Metacognition in educational theory and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  29. Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1991). Beyond modularity: Innate constraints and developmental change. In S. Carey & R. Gelman (Eds.), The epigenesis of mind (pp. 171–197). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  30. McKeachie, W. J. (1987). Cognitive skills and their transfer: Discussion. International Journal of Educational Research, 11(6), 707–712. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Millar, R., & Driver, R. (1987). Beyond process. Studies in Science Education, 14, 33–62. Google Scholar
  32. Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (Eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000. Science education for the future. London: King's College. Google Scholar
  33. Murphy, P. & Schofield, B. (1984). Science at age 13. Science report for teachers (No. 3). London: HMSO. Google Scholar
  34. Nunes, T., Schliemann, A., & Carraher, D. (1993). Street mathematics and school mathematics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  35. Palmer, D. (1993). How consistently do students use their alternative conceptions? Research in Science Education, 23, 228–235. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16–25. Google Scholar
  37. Rogoff, B. (1984). Introduction: Thinking and learning in social context. In B. Rogoff & J. Lave (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 1–8). London: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
  38. Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1989). Rocky roads to transfer: Rethinking mechanisms of a neglected phenomenon. Educational Psychologist, 24, 113–142. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). What's all the fuss about metacognition? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 189–215). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  40. Solomon, J. (1983). Learning about energy: How pupils think in two domains. European Journal of Science Education, 5(1), 49–59. Google Scholar
  41. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L. H. T. West & A. L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change (pp. 211–231). London: Academic Press. Google Scholar
  42. Swanson, H. L. (1990). Influence of metacognitive knowledge and aptitude on problem solving, Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2), 306–314. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Toh, K. A., & Woolnough, B. E. (1994). Science process skills: Are they generalisable? Research in Science and Technological Education, 12(1), 31–42. Google Scholar
  44. Tytler, R. (1994). Consistency of children's use of science conceptions: Problems with the notion of ‘conceptual change.’ Research in Science Education, 24, 338–347. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. van der Meer, F.-B., & Mastik, H. (1993). Transference to real-life contexts: Conditions for experiential learning from simulation. In F. Percival, S. Lodge, & D. Saunders (Eds.), Simulation and gaming yearbook – Developing transferable skills in education and training (Vol. 1, pp. 75–83). London: Kogan Page. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ministry of Education and Culture of CyprusNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations