Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Epistemological beliefs are standards for adaptive learning: a functional theory about epistemological beliefs and metacognition

Abstract

Empirical studies reveal a close relationship between epistemological beliefs (EBs) and metacognition. For example, more ‘sophisticated’ beliefs are associated with more self-reported monitoring strategies. This relationship is also advocated theoretically. Nevertheless, exactly how and why EBs impact learning is still an open question. In accordance with others (for example Muis 2007; Muis and Franco 2009) we conceive the COPES Model (Winne and Hadwin 1998) as an appropriate answer to the how question. Within that model, epistemological beliefs are conceptualized as ‘internal conditions of learning’ and they are embedded into recursive processes of self- regulation. With regard to the why question, we assume that EBs function as general ideas about knowledge for the apprehension of the content to be learnt. Such apprehension allows for the calibration of learning to different learning tasks. We review two clusters of studies on the preparatory and the enactment stages of learning testing this apprehension and calibration hypothesis.

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

Notes

  1. 1.

    In concurrence with the most widely used conceptual framework (Hofer and Pintrich 1997) we use the term “epistemological beliefs”. It should be noted that the terminology of researchers interested in personal epistemology is not united and controversial discussed (e.g. Hofer 2001). To give an example, recently the term ‘epistemic beliefs’ is often used as an alternative (e.g., Muis 2007) and it is argued that this term is more correct in its literal denotations (Greene et al. 2008). However, detailing this controversial discussion about terminology is beyond the scope of this paper.

  2. 2.

    Note that this is a rough description of the normative assumptions underlying most of the recent research on epistemological beliefs. There are good arguments for a less black and white account on what makes up ‘sophisticated’ epistemological beliefs. We have suggested elsewhere (Bromme et al. 2008) to conceive those beliefs ‘sophisticated’ which allow for a context appropriate shift between the knowledge as given facts – view and the knowledge as preliminary and socially shared -view.

  3. 3.

    The conceptual relationship between ‘self-regulation’ and ‘metacognitive skill’ has been discussed controversially. Veenman et al. (2006, p. 4) have described that self-regulation has been conceived as a subordinate component of metacognition as well as a concept superordinate to metacognition (the latter position for example also held within the COPES model (see below). For a detailed discussion, see Dinsmore, Alexander, & Loughlin 2008).

References

  1. Almahasneh, R. (2006). The effects of beliefs about knowledge and learning on students’ self-regulated studying (Doctoral dissertation, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada). Dissertation Abstracts International, 68(2-A), 483.

  2. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., et al. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing. A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.

  3. Bartholomé, T., Stahl, E., Pieschl, S., & Bromme, R. (2006). What matters in help-seeking? A study of help effectiveness and learner-related factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 113–129.

  4. Bendixen, L. D. (2002). A process model of epistemic belief change. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 191–208). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

  5. Bendixen, L. D., & Hartley, K. (2003). Successful learning with hypermedia: the role of epistemological beliefs and metacognitive awareness. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 28(1), 15–30.

  6. Bereiter, C. (1985). Toward a solution of the learning paradox. Review of Educational Research, 55(2), 201–226.

  7. Bereiter, C. (1990). Aspects of an educational learning theory. Review of Educational Research, 60(4), 603–624.

  8. Boekaerts, M. (1999). Metacognitive experiences and motivational state as aspects of self-awareness: review and discussion. European Journal of Psychology of Education, XIV(4), 571–584.

  9. Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2005). The relationship between epistemological beliefs, implicit theories of intelligence, and self-regulated learning among Norwegian postsecondary students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 539–565.

  10. Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2006). Constructing meaning from multiple information sources as a function of personal epistemology. Information Design Journal, 14(1), 56–67.

  11. Bromme, R., Kienhues, D., & Stahl, E. (2008). Knowledge and epistemological beliefs: An intimate but complicate relationship. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge, and beliefs: epistemological studies across diverse cultures (p. 423–444). New York: Springer.

  12. Bromme, R., Pieschl, S., & Stahl, E. (2009). Epistemological beliefs and students’ adaptive perception of task complexity. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  13. 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. 65–115). London: Erlbaum.

  14. Buehl, M. (2008). Assessing the multidimensionality of students’ epistemic beliefs across diverse cultures. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs. Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 65–112). New York: Springer.

  15. Buehl, M. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2001). Beliefs about academic knowledge. Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 385–418.

  16. Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: their change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 203–221.

  17. Cano, F., & Cardelle-Elawar, M. (2008). Family environment, epistemological beliefs, learning strategies, and academic performance. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs. Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 219–240). New York: Springer.

  18. Clarebout, G., Elen, J., Luyten, L., & Bamps, H. (2001). Assessing epistemological beliefs: Schommer’s questionnaire revisited. Educational Research and Evaluation, 7, 53–77.

  19. Dahl, T. I., Bals, M., & Turi, A. L. (2005). Are students’ beliefs about knowledge and learning associated with their reported use of learning strategies? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 257–273.

  20. DeBacker, T. K., Crowson, H. M., Beesley, A. D., Thoma, S. J., & Hestevold, N. L. (2008). The challenge of measuring epistemic beliefs: an analysis of three self-report instruments. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 281–312.

  21. Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P. A., & Loughlin, S. M. (2008). Focusing the conceptual lens on metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 391–409.

  22. Efklides, A., & Vauras, M. (1999). Introduction. European Journal of Psychology of Education, XIV(4), 455–459.

  23. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87(3), 215–251.

  24. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(19), 906–911.

  25. Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2007). A theoretical review of Winne and Hadwin’s model of self-regulated learning: new perspectives and directions. Review of Educational Research, 77(3), 334–372.

  26. Greene, J. A., Azevedeo, R., & Torney-Purta, J. (2008). Modeling epistemic and ontological cognition: philosophical perspectives and methodological directions. Educational Psychologist, 45(3), 142–160.

  27. Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2003). Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 53–90.

  28. Hartley, K., & Bendixen, L. D. (2003). The use of comprehension aids in a hypermedia environment: investigating the impact of metacognitive awareness and epistemological beliefs. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(3), 275–289.

  29. Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 378–405.

  30. Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: Implications for learning and teaching. Educational Psychology Review, 13(4).

  31. Hofer, B. K. (2004). Epistemological understanding as a metacognitive process: thinking aloud during online-searching. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 43–55.

  32. 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(1), 88–140.

  33. Jacobson, M. J., & Jehng, J.-C. (1999). Epistemological beliefs instrument: Scales and items. Retrieved June 20, 2007, from http://mjjacobson.net/publications/Epist_Beliefs_Instrument98.PDF.

  34. Kardash, C. M., & Howell, K. L. (2000). Effects of epistemological beliefs and topic-specific beliefs on undergraduates’ cognitive and strategic processing of dual-positional text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 524–535.

  35. Kellogg, R. T. (1994). The psychology of writing. New York: Oxford University Press.

  36. Kienhues, D., Bromme, R., & Stahl, E. (2008). Changing epistemological beliefs: the unexpected impact of a short-term intervention. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 545–565.

  37. King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2002). The reflective judgment model: Twenty years of research on epistemic cognition. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 37–62). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

  38. Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition: a three-level model of cognitive processing. Human Development, 26, 106–116.

  39. Kitchener, K. S. (1986). The reflective judgement model: Characteristics, evidence and measurement. In R. A. Mines & K. S. Kitchener (Eds.), Adult cognitive development: Methods and models (pp. 76–91). New York: Praeger.

  40. Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Sciences, 9(5), 178–181.

  41. Limón, M., & Mason, L. (eds). (2002). Reconsidering conceptual change. Issues in theory and practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

  42. Mason, L., & Boldrin, A. (2008). Epistemic metacognition in the context of information searching on the web. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs. Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 377–404). New York: Springer.

  43. Muis, K. R. (2007). The role of epistemic beliefs in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 173–190.

  44. Muis, K., & Franco, G. (2009). Epistemic profiles and metacognition: Support for the consistency hypothesis. Metacognition and Learning.

  45. Murray, T. (2003). MetaLinks: authoring and affordances for conceptual and narrative flow in adaptive hyperbooks. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13(Special Issue on Adaptive and Intelligent Web-Based Systems), 199–233.

  46. Neber, H., & Schommer-Aikins, M. (2002). Self-regulated science learning with highly gifted students: the role of cognitive, motivational, epistemological, and environmental variables. High Ability Studies, 13(1), 59–74.

  47. Nelson, T. O. (1999). Cognition versus metacognition. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of cognition (pp. 625–641). Cambridge: The MIT.

  48. Nelson, T. O., & Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people’s judgements of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: the “delayed-JOL effect”. Psychological Science, 2(4), 267–270.

  49. Paulsen, M. B., & Feldman, K. A. (1999). Epistemological beliefs and self-regulated learning. Journal of Staff, Program, 16, 83–91.

  50. Pieschl, S. (2009). Metacognitive calibration - an extended conceptualization and potential applications. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 3–31.

  51. Pieschl, S., Bromme, R., Porsch, T., & Stahl, E. (2008a). Epistemological sensitisation causes deeper elaboration during self-regulated learning. International perspectives in the learning sciences: Cre8ting a learning world. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference for the Learning Sciences - ICLS 2008, Vol. 2 (pp. 2-213–2-220). London: Lulu Enterprises.

  52. Pieschl, S., Stahl, E., & Bromme, R. (2008b). Epistemological beliefs and self-regulated learning with hypertext. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 17–37.

  53. Pieschl, S., Bromme, R., Porsch, T., & Stahl, E. (2009). Does an epistemological sensitization cause better adaptation to task complexity? Manuscript submitted for publication.

  54. Rozendaal, J. S., de Brabander, C. J., & Minnaert, A. E. (2001, September). Boundaries and dimensionality of epistemological beliefs. Paper presented at the biannual conference of the European Association of Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI), Fribourg, Switzerland.

  55. Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498–504.

  56. Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 8, 634–56.

  57. Schommer, M., Crouse, A., & Rhodes, N. (1992). Epistemological beliefs and mathematical text comprehension: believing it is simple doesn’t make it so. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 435–443.

  58. Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351–371.

  59. Schraw, G., Bendixen, L. D., & Dunkle, M. (2002). Development and validation of the Epistemic Belief Inventory (EBI). In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 261–251). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

  60. Sinatra, G. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (eds). (2003). Intentional conceptual change. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

  61. Stahl, E. (2002). Methods for assessing cognitive processes during the construction of hypertexts. In R. Bromme & E. Stahl (Eds.), Writing hypertext and learning. Conceptual and empirical approaches (pp. 177–196). Amsterdam: Pergamon.

  62. Stahl, E., & Bromme, R. (2007). CAEB. An instrument to measure connotative aspects of epistemological beliefs. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 773–785.

  63. Stahl, E., Pieschl, S., & Bromme, R. (2006). Task complexity, epistemological beliefs and metacognitive calibration: an exploratory study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(4), 319–338.

  64. Stahl, E., Bromme, R., Stadtler, M., & Jaron, R. (2007). Learning by hypertext writing: Effects of considering a single audience versus multiple audiences on knowledge acquisition. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), M. Torrance, L. van Waes & D. Galbraith (Volume Eds.), Writing and cognition: Research and applications (studies in writing Vol. 20, pp. 307–321). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

  65. Stallmann, F. (2007). The influence of epistemological beliefs and academic self-concept on metacognitive calibration in German 12th Graders. Unpublished diploma thesis, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany.

  66. Urhahne, D., & Hopf, M. (2004). Epistemologische Überzeugungen in den Naturwissenschaften und ihre Zusamenhänge mit Motivation, Selbstkonzept und Lernstrategien. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 10, 70–86.

  67. Veenman, M. V. J. (2005). The assessment of metacognitive skills: What can be learned from multi-method designs? In C. Artelt & B. Moschner (Eds.), Lernstrategien und Metakognition: Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis (pp. 77–99). Münster: Waxmann.

  68. Veenman, M. 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.

  69. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277–304). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

  70. Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531–566). San Diego: Academic.

  71. Wood, P., & Kardash, C. M. (2002). Critical elements in the design and analysis of studies of epistemology. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 231–260). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Rainer Bromme.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bromme, R., Pieschl, S. & Stahl, E. Epistemological beliefs are standards for adaptive learning: a functional theory about epistemological beliefs and metacognition. Metacognition Learning 5, 7–26 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-009-9053-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Epistemological beliefs
  • Metacognitive knowledge
  • Self-regulated learning
  • Preparatory phase
  • Phases of learning
  • Learning paradox