Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effects of meta-cognitive instruction on third and sixth graders solving word problems

  • Original Article
  • Published:
ZDM Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examined the differential effects of a meta-cognitive instruction, called IMPROVE, on third and sixth graders’ solution of word problems. In particular, the study focused on the solution of two kinds of word problems: with consistent and with inconsistent language. Participants were 194 Israeli students who studied in third (N = 110) and sixth (N = 84) grades. All students were administered pre- and post-tests constructed of 16 word problems with consistent and inconsistent language. About half of the students within each grade level were exposed to IMPROVE and the others studied under a ‘traditional’ teaching method. The findings indicate that at both grade levels the IMPROVE students significantly outperformed their counterparts in the control group, but third graders benefited from IMPROVE more than sixth graders. In addition, the study indicates that the gap in achievement between IMPROVE and control groups was larger on word problems with inconsistent language compared to word problems with consistent language. The theoretical and practical implications of the study are discussed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bates, E. T., & Weist, L. R. (2004). Impact of personalization of mathematical word problems on student performance. Mathematics Educator, 14, 17–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., & Op’t Eynde, P. (2000). Self-regulation: A characteristic and a goal of mathematics education. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 687–726). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • De Jager, B., Jansen, M., & Reezigt, G. (2005). The development of metacognition in primary school learning environments. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16, 179–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desoete, A., & Veenman, M. (2006). Meta-cognition in mathematics education. New York: Nova Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dignath, C., Buettner, G., & Langfeldt, H. P. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively? A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programs. Educational Research Review, 3, 101–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrucci, B. J., Yeap, B., & Carter, J. A. (2003). A modeling approach for enhancing problem solving in the middle grades. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 8, 470–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • Focant, J., Gregoire, J., & Desoete, A. (2006). Goal-setting, planning, and control strategies and arithmetical problem solving at grade 5. In A. Desoete & M. Veenman (Eds.), Metacognition and mathematics education (pp. 51–72). New York: Nova Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garner, M. (2006). Old problems with new questions. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) News Bulletin, May/June. http://www.nctm.org/news/content.aspx?id=608.

  • Greeno, J., & Riley, M. (1987). Processes and development of understanding. In R. E. Weinert & P. R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 289–313). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, H. J. (2001). Teaching meta-cognitively. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Meta-cognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 33–68). Boston: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haylock, D., & Thangata, F. (2007). Key concepts in teaching primary mathematics. London: Sage Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegarty, M., Mayer, R. E., & Monk, C. A. (1995). Comprehension of arithmetic word problems: A comparison of successful and unsuccessful problem solvers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 18–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Israel Ministry of Education (2007). The new mathematics curriculum for primary schools. Jerusalem: Israel Ministry of Education (in Hebrew).

  • Jitendra, A. K., Sczesniak, E., & Deatline-Buchman, A. (2005). An exploratory validation of curriculum-based mathematical word problem solving tasks as indicators of mathematics proficiency for third graders. School Psychology Review, 34, 358–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2003). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom: The effects of cooperative learning and meta-cognitive training. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 281–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B., Mevarech, Z. R., & Arami, M. (2002). The effects of meta-cognitive training on solving mathematical authentic tasks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 225–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, A. B. (1989). Training students to represent arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 521–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mevarech, Z. R. (1999). Effects of meta-cognitive training embedded in cooperative settings on mathematical problem solving. The Journal of Educational Research, 92, 195–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mevarech, Z. R., & Amrani, H. (2008). Immediate and delayed effects of meta-cognitive instruction on regulation of cognition and mathematics achievement. Journal of Meta-cognition and Learning, 3, 147–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mevarech, Z. R., & Fridkin, S. (2006). The effects of IMPROVE on mathematical knowledge, mathematical reasoning and meta-cognition. Metacognition and Learning Journal, 1, 85–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (1997). IMPROVE: A multidimensional method for teaching mathematics in heterogeneous classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 365–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalsky, T., Mevarech, Z. R., & Haibi, L. (2009). Effects of meta-cognitive instruction on reading scientific texts. The Journal of Educational Research, 102, 363–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pimm, D. (1991). Discourse analysis and mathematics education: An anniversary of sorts. In N. Ellerton & K. Clements (Eds.), Mathematics and language: A review of language factors in mathematics learning. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimm, D. (1995). Symbols and meaning in school mathematics. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Riley, M. S., Greeno, J. G., & Heller, J. H. (1983). Development of children’s problem-solving ability in mathematics. In H. P. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 153–196). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roebers, C. M., Schmid, C., & Roderer, T. (2009). Metacognition monitoring and control processes involved in primary school children’s test performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 749–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 455–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, E. (1993). What makes certain arithmetic word problems involving the comparison of sets so difficult for children? Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 7–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swee Fong, N., & Lee, K. (2009). The model method: Singapore children’s tool for representing and solving algebraic word problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40, 282–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Stel, M., & Veenman, M. V. J. (2008). Relation between intellectual ability and meta-cognitive skilfulness as predictors of learning performance of young students performing tasks in different domains. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 128–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., van Hout-wolters, B., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Meta-cognitive and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Meta-cognition Learning, 1, 3–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2000). Making sense of word problems. The Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitebread, D. (1999). Interactions between children’s meta-cognitive abilities, working memory capacity, strategies and performance during problem solving. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 489–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. (1999). Defining meta-cognition: A step towards recognising meta-cognition as a worthwhile part of the curriculum. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian Association of Educational Research, held in Melbourne. Available from www.aare.edu/99pap/wil99527.htm.

  • Yan Ping, X. (2007). Word problem solving tasks in textbooks and their relation to student performance. The Journal of Educational Research, 100, 347–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel

    Zemira R. Mevarech, Shirlei Terkieltaub, Tova Vinberger & Vered Nevet

Authors
  1. Zemira R. Mevarech
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shirlei Terkieltaub
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tova Vinberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vered Nevet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zemira R. Mevarech.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Examples of test items: word problems with consistent and inconsistent language

Third Grade

  1. 1.

    Ariel organized a party. He invited 24 children to the party. Ofer invited 14 children more than Ariel. How many children did Ofer invite?

  2. 2.

    Danah had 140 cards. Danah had 20 cards more than Hadar. How many cards did Hadar have?

Sixth Grade

  1. 3.

    Ruth had 57.3 NIS. Jonathan had 13.8 NIS more than Ruth. How much money did Jonathan have?

  2. 4.

    A chocolate bar with nuts costs 6.7 NIS. It costs 3.1 NIS more than a chocolate bar with raisins. How much does a chocolate bar with raisins cost?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mevarech, Z.R., Terkieltaub, S., Vinberger, T. et al. The effects of meta-cognitive instruction on third and sixth graders solving word problems. ZDM Mathematics Education 42, 195–203 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-010-0244-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-010-0244-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation