The Significance of Metacognitive Learning Skills in Teacher Training and Their Relations to Chaos Management

  • Murat Özdemir
  • Ebru Gülcemal
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Complexity book series (SPCOM)


The number of knowledge pieces, skills, attitudes, and behaviors is exponentially increasing because the present age is the age of information, which makes it mandatory for individuals to acquire these knowledge pieces, skills, attitudes, and behaviors for an efficient learning process. In view of the changing education system, teachers need to be experienced, tolerant, and unbiased and are also expected to be individuals who can research and solve educational problems, retrieve and exploit information, have a high level of thinking and reasoning capability, and can perform effective analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.

Thus, metacognition is among the crucial skills, especially teachers should attain. Metacognition can be listed among the important factors in educating conscious individuals with a higher level of awareness of their own mental processes. Efforts to educate conscious individuals in educational systems have given way to the emergence of the concept of “metacognition” and have gained significant momentum thanks to the related research studies. Accordingly, the present study attempts to discuss the importance of metacognitive learning skills enabling individuals to learn how to learn individually and develop awareness of their learning process and allowing for self-evaluation through self-monitoring and their relations to chaos management. The researcher has employed a theoretical analytical research model to describe and analyze the present condition. To this end, document analysis, a qualitative data collection method, was used.


Cognition Metacognition Metacognitive skills Learning skills Teacher training Chaos management 


  1. Adıgüzel, A. (2008). The level of actualization of the standards of education programmes in the education faculties. (Not published doctoral thesis. Anadolu University Education Sciences Institute, Eskişehir).Google Scholar
  2. Aras, S. & Sözen, S. (2012). The examination of teacher training programmes in South Korea, Finland and Turkey. X. National science and maths teaching congress. Nigde: Nigde University.Google Scholar
  3. Bagceci, B., Dös, B., & Sarıca, R. (2011). The levels of metacognitive awareness of elementary students with the examination of the relation between the academic success. Mustafa Kemal University Social Studies Institute Magazine, 8(16), 551–566.Google Scholar
  4. Baird, J. R., & Mitchell, I. J. (1986). Improving the quality of teaching and learning: Alcn Australian case study -the peel project. Melbourne: Monash University.Google Scholar
  5. Baltas, Z. (2004). How the e- learners learn? Metacognition. Magazine, 20(1), 11–15.Google Scholar
  6. Basic teaching skills of the teachers need to be found. Access Date: 25/11/2015.Google Scholar
  7. Bayraktaroglu, S., & Kutanis, R. (2002). Through the learner state organizations. Kocaeli University Social Sciences Institute Magazine, 3(1), 51–65.Google Scholar
  8. Blakey, E., & Spence, S. (1990). Developing metacognition. Syracuse: ERIC Information Center Resources [ED327218].Google Scholar
  9. Bonner, J. (1988). Implications of cognitive theory for instructional design: Revisited. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 36(1), 3–14.Google Scholar
  10. Borkowski, J. G., & Muthukrishna, N. (1992). Moving metacognition into the classroom: Working models’ and effective strategy teaching. In M. Pressley, K. R. Harris, & J. T. Guthrie (Eds.), Promoting academic competence and literacy in schools (pp. 477–501). San Diego: Academic Press, chpt 17.Google Scholar
  11. Bransford, J., Brown, D., Cocking, A. L., & R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Commission on behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington: Natıonal Academy Press.Google Scholar
  12. Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self- regulation, and other even more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  13. Bulbul, M. S. (2007). Chaos and education. Ankara: Beyazkalem Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Cakıroglu, A. (2007). Metacognition. Turkey Social Researches Magazine, 11(2), 21–27.Google Scholar
  15. Canakcı, & Özdemir. (2000). The effects on the point of view of teacher student roles and the school experience I lesson teacher candidates’ teaching learning concepts. Elementary Online Magazine, 4(1), 73–80.Google Scholar
  16. Candan, A. S. (2005). Metacognitive and teaching history. Kastamonu Education Magazine, 13(2), 327–332.Google Scholar
  17. Consciousness, creating in the brain. (2015) Access Date: 03/04/2016.
  18. Demir, Ö., & Kaya, H. İ. (2014). The examination of the ideas teacher candidates about the teacher sufficiences in terms of scientific approach. Coaching Educational Sciences Researches Magazine. Internationalı E-Magazine, 4(2), 68–91.Google Scholar
  19. Demir, Ö., & Ozmen, S. K. (2011). The examination of metacognitive information levels of university students in terms of different changeables. Cukurova University Social Sciences Institute Magazine, 20(3), 145–160.Google Scholar
  20. Dienes, Z., & Perner, J. (1999). A theory of implicit and explicit knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Dogan, A. (2013). Metacognition and metacognitive teaching. Middle Eastern & African Journal of Educational Research, 3(1), 6–20.Google Scholar
  22. Doganay, A. (1997). The use of the information about metacognitive awareness during listening to the teacher. Cukurova University Education Faculty Magazine, 2(15), 34–42.Google Scholar
  23. Doganay, A., & Demir, Ö. (2009). The cognitive coaching in the teacher training. Education Faculty Magazine, 22(2), 717–739.Google Scholar
  24. Doganay, A., & Kara, Z. (1995). The size of thinking: A model for the teaching and the programme. Cukurova University Education Faculty Magazine, 1(11), 21–32.Google Scholar
  25. Dunlop, J. C., & Grabinger, R. S. (1996). Rich environment for the active learning in the higher education. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructing learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 65–82). Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  26. El-Hindi, A. E. (1996). Enhancing metacognitive awareness of college learners. Reading Horizons, 37(1), 214–230.Google Scholar
  27. Emrahoğlu, N., & Öztürk, A. (2010). The impact of cognitive awareness of the candidate science teachers to their academic successes. Cukurova University Social Sciences Institute Magazine, 19(2), 18–30.Google Scholar
  28. Ergin, H. (2005). Teaching thinking to children. Access Date: 02/12/2015.
  29. Ertürk, A. (2012). Chaos theory: Reflections in the management and education. Education Magazines, 20(3), 849–868.Google Scholar
  30. Fidan, N. (1996). Teaching and learning at school. İstanbul: Alkım Publishments.Google Scholar
  31. Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculation about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding (pp. 21–29). Hillside: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  32. Gauld, C. (1986). Model, meters and memory. Research in Science Education, 16(1), 49–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gelen, İ. (2004). The impact of the cognitive awareness strategies to the Turkish lesson attitude understanding what you read and persistency. (not published doctorate thesis. Cukurova University, Adana).Google Scholar
  34. Gleick, J. (2000). Chaos (F. Uçcan, trans.) (Ninth ed.). Ankara: TUBITAK Publishments.Google Scholar
  35. Goleman, D. (1998). Educational intelligence on the job. İstanbul: Varlık Publishments.Google Scholar
  36. Gündüz, G. (2002). Confusion chaos and shape farmings. Ankara: ODTU Developing Foundation Publishing.Google Scholar
  37. Gunter, H. (1995). Jurassic management: Chaos and management development in educational institutions. Journal of Educational Administration, 33(4), 5–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (2009). A growing sense of agency. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Hismanoğlu, M. (2000). Language learning strategies in foreign language learning and teaching. The Internet TESL, 6(8), 1–12.Google Scholar
  40. Kana, F. (2015). The levels of metacognitive awareness of the Turkish teachers candidates. Academic Social Researches Magazine, 3(17), 66–81.Google Scholar
  41. Karip, E., & Köksal, K. (1996). Developing the effective education systems. The Education Administration Magazine of Theory and Practice, 2(2), 245–247.Google Scholar
  42. Kazancı, O. (1989). The critical thinking and teaching education. İstanbul: Kazancı Publishments.Google Scholar
  43. Koriat, A. (2007). Metacognition and consciousness. In P. D. Zelazo, M. Moscovitch, & E. Thompson (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of consciousness (pp. 289–325). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kuiper, R. (2002). Enhancing metacognition through the reflective use of self-regulated learning strategies. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 33(2), 78–87.Google Scholar
  45. Kumar, A. E. (1998). The influence of metacognition on managerial hiring decision making: Implications for management development. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia).Google Scholar
  46. Leblebicier, N. H., & Yapıcı, M. (2007). Teachers’ views with regard to new primary school curriculum. Elementary Education Online, 6(3), 480–490.Google Scholar
  47. Marzano, R., Brandt, R. S., Hughes, C. S., Jones, B. F., Presseisen, B. Z., Rankin, S. C., & Suhor, C. (1988). Dimensions of thinking: A framework for curriculum and instruction. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  48. Melanlıoğlu, D. (2011). The impact of the metacognitive strategies to the 2nd grade elementary students’ listening abilities. (not published doctorate thesis. Gazi University Education Sciences Institute, Ankara).Google Scholar
  49. Muhtar, S. (2006). The effect of metacognitive strategic in reading education to the student success. (Ankara University Social sciences Institute Department of Linguistics, not published post graduate thesis, Ankara).Google Scholar
  50. Namlu, A. G. (2004). Developing the metacognitive learning strategies’ measurement tool: Validity and reliability study. Anadolu University Social Sciences Magazine, 4(2), 13–21.Google Scholar
  51. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: Theoretical framework and new findings. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 26(1), 125–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Numanoğlu, G. (1999). Information society- education new identifications. University Education Sciences Faculty Magazine, 32(1–2), 341–350.Google Scholar
  53. O’Neil, H. F., & Abedi, J. (1996). Reliability and validity of a state metacognitive inventory: Potential for alternative assessment. The Journal of Educational Research, 89(11), 234–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ormrod, J. E. (2012). Human learning. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  55. Ozbay, M., & Bahar, M. A. (2012). Advanced readers and meta-cognitive training. International Journal of Turkish Literature Culture Education, 1(1), 158–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ozden, Y. (2000). Learning and teaching. Ankara: Pegem Publishments., (4. Press).Google Scholar
  57. Ozden, Y. (2006). New values in education. (6th. Press). Ankara: Pegem Publishments.Google Scholar
  58. Ozsoy, G. (2008a). Metacognition. Turkish Journal of Educational Sciences Autumn, 6(4), 713–740.Google Scholar
  59. Ozsoy, G. (2008b). Metacognitive. Journal of Education Sciences Magazine Autumn, 6(4), 713–740.Google Scholar
  60. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1987). Enhancing instructional time through attention to metacognition. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(2), 66–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Radford, M. (2006). Researching classrooms: Complexity and chaos. British Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 177–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schraw, G., & Graham, T. (1997). Helping gifted students develop metacognitive awareness. Roeper Review, 20(1), 4–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(1), 351–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schunk, D. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and achievement behaviors. Educational Psychology Review, 1(3), 173–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Semerci, N. B. (2005). Problem based learning and teacher training. National Education Three Months Education and Social Studies Magazine, 166(33).
  66. Sendurur, Y., & Akgül, B. D. (2002). Teaching music and cognitive success in children. Gazi University Education Faculty Magazine., 22(1), 165–174.Google Scholar
  67. Sisman, M., & Tasdemir, I. (2008). Turkish education system and school management(2nd Press). Ankara: Pegem Academy.Google Scholar
  68. Smith, F. (1994). Understanding reading. Hillsdale. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  69. Sönmez, V. (2000). Introducing to the teaching profession. Ankara: Anı Publishments.Google Scholar
  70. TDK. (2015). Turkish Language Institute Spelling Dictionary.Google Scholar
  71. Teacher general sufficiencies. Access Date: 05/12/2015.
  72. Tunca, N., & Sahin, S. A. (2014). The relation between learning strategies and self sufficiency beliefs. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 4(1), 47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Uckun, G., Demir, B., & Yüksel, A. (2013). The examination of the control abilities from the metacognitive awareness levels of the academic administrators of the vocational high schools. Education in the 21st Century and Society Magazine, 3(5), 19–35.Google Scholar
  74. Ushijima, T. M. (1996). Five states of mınd scale for cognitive coaching: A measurement study. (Unpublished PhD Dissertation. University of Southern California Faculty of School of Education, USA).Google Scholar
  75. Victor, A. M. (2004). The effects of metacognitive instruction on the planning and academic achievement of first and second grade children. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, II Graduate College of the Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago).Google Scholar
  76. YOK. (1998). YOK/world bank developing the national education project teacher training of pre-service. Ankara: Higher Education Institute Publishments.Google Scholar
  77. Yurdabakan, İ. (2002). Approaches about globalisation and education. Education Researches, 6(1), 61–64.Google Scholar
  78. Yurdakul, B., & Demirel, O. (2011). The addition of constructivist learning to the learners’ metacognitive awareness. International Education Programmes and Teaching Studies Magazine, 1(1), 71–85.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hacettepe UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations