Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Metacognition in joint discussions: an analysis of the patterns of interaction and the metacognitive content of the networked discussions in mathematics

  • Published:
Metacognition and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine metacognition in computer-supported collaborative problem solving. The subjects of the study were 13-year-old Finnish secondary school students (N = 16). The Knowledge Forum learning environment was used to support student pairs’ problem-solving task involving polygons in a geometry course. The data consist of the student pairs’ posted computer notes (n = 95). To examine metacognition in a social context in the networked discussions, the features and patterns of networked interaction, the metacognitive content of the computer notes and their relations were examined. To examine the features of networked interaction, the social network analysis measures were used. The patterns of networked interaction were displayed with the multidimensional scaling technique. In the analysis, metacognitive contents of the computer notes were categorized as metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive skills, and not metacognitive. Further, with the correspondence analysis, we examined how the student pairs’ metacognitive activity was distributed. The results of the study revealed that the metacognitive activity varied among participants, although some aspects of metacognition such as planning were never encountered. It was found that there is a relation between metacognitive activity and the features of interaction. The student pairs who monitored and evaluated the ongoing discussions had a strategically optimal position in the communication network.

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

  • Aleven, V., McLaren, B., Roll, I., & Koedinger, K. (2004). Toward tutoring help-seeking. Applying cognitive modeling to meta-cognitive skills. In J. C. Lester, R. M. Vicari, & F. Paraguacu (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems, 7th international conference, ITS 2004 (pp. 227–239). Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Artz, A. F., & Armour-Thomas, E. (1992). Development of cognitive-metacognitive framework for protocol analysis of mathematical problem solving in small groups. Cognition and Instruction, 9, 137–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Soloway, E., & Krajick, J. (1996). Learning with peers: from small group interaction to collaborative communities. Educational Researcher, 25(8), 37–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other mysterious mechanisms. In F. Weinert, & R. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding (pp. 65–115). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L. (1994). The advancement of learning. Educational Researcher, 23(8), 4–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L., Ash, D., Rutherford, M., Nakagawa, K., Gordon, A., & Campione, J. (1996). Distributed expertise in the classroom. In G. Salomon (Ed.). Distributed cognitions. Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 188–218). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L., Bransford, J., Ferrara, R., & Campione, J. (1983). Learning, remembering and understanding. In P. Mussen (Ed.). Handbook of child psychology 3 (pp. 77–166). J. Flavell & E. Markman (Vol. Eds). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analysis of verbal data: a practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, I., Land, S., & Turgeon, J. (2005). Scaffolding peer-questioning strategies to facilitate metacognition during online small group discussion. Instructional Science, 33, 483–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A., & Scardamalia, M. (1998). Discourse about ideas: monitoring and regulation in face-to-face and computer-mediated environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 6(2), 93–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, J. E., & Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Smart Problem Solving: How Metacognition Helps. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practise (pp. 47–68). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., Entwistle, N., & Van Merriëboer, J. (2003) Powerful learning environments: unravelling basic components and dimensions. Amsterdam: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P., & Traum, D. (2006). Sharing solutions: persistence and grounding in multimodal collaborative problem solving. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 121–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garofalo, J., & Lester, F. K. Jr. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16(3), 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2002). Socially mediated metacognition: creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 193–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenacre, M. (1984). Theory and applications of correspondence analysis. Orlando: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenacre, M., & Blasius, J. (1994). Correspondence analysis in the social sciences. San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurme, T.-R., & Järvelä, S. (2005). Students’ activity in computer supported collaborative problem solving in mathematics. International Journal of Computers for mathematical learning, 10, 49–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iiskala, T., Vauras, M., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Socially-shared metacognition? Hellenic Journal of Psychology 1, 147–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä, S., Veermans, M., & Leinonen, P. (2006). Investigating students' engagement in a computer-supported inquiry—a process-oriented analysis. Submitted.

  • Jermann, P. R. (2004). Computer support for interaction regulation in collaborative problem solving. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Faculty of psychology and educational sciences, Geneva University, Switzerland. Available online: http://craftsrv1.epfl.ch/~colin/thesis-jermann.pdf (2nd June, 2006).

  • Jost, J. T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Nelson, T. O. (1998). Social metacognition: an expansionist review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(2), 137–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1990). Enchancing peer interaction and learning in the classroom through reciprocal questioning. American Educational Research Journal, 27(4), 664–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, T., Hall, R., & Miyake, N. (2002). CSCL 2. Carrying forward the conversation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehtinen, E. (2003). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An approach to powerful learning environments. In E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, & J. Van Merriëboer (Eds.), Powerful learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions (pp. 35–54). Amsterdam: Pergamon.

  • Levine, J. L., Resnick, L. B., & Higgins, E. T. (1993). Social foundations of cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 585–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipponen, L. (2002). Exploring foundations for computer-supported collaborative learning. In G. Stahl (Ed.). Computer-supported collaborative learning: foundations for a CSCL community. Proceedings of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 2002 Conference (pp. 72–81). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mäkitalo, K. (2006). Interaction in Online Learning Environments: How to support collaborative activities in higher education settings. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Institute for Educational Research, Jyväskylä University, Finland.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, R. S. (1994). Adaptive help seeking: A strategy of self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk, & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: issues and educational applications (pp. 283–301). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nurmela, K., Lehtinen, E., & Palonen, T. (1999). Evaluating CSCL log files by social network analysis. In C. Hoadley, & J. Roschelle (Eds.), Computer support for collaborative learning (pp. 434–444). Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1954). The construction of reality in the child. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1978). The development of thought: equilibration of cognitive structures. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ploetzner, R., Dillenbourg, P., Preier, M., & Traum, D. (1999). Learning by explaining to oneself and to others. In P. Dillenbourgh (Ed.). Collaborative learning: cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 103–121). Amsterdam: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B., Levine, J. M., & Teasley, S. D. (1993). Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1998). Individual and social aspects of learning. Review of Research in Education, 23, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996a). Adaptation and understanding. A case for new cultures of schooling. In S. Vosniadau, E. De Corte, R. Glaser & H. Mandl (Eds.), International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments (pp. 149–164). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996b). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 249–268). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). What’s All the Fuss About Metacognition? In A. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 189–215). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook for Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, (pp. 334–370). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science 26, 113–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. (1991). Social network analysis: a handbook. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vauras, M., Iiskala, T., Kajamies, A., Kinnunen, R., & Lehtinen, E. (2003). Shared regulation and motivation of collaborating peers: a case analysis. Psychologia, 46(1), 19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 21–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Unit for Educational Technology, The Department of Educational Sciences and Teacher Education, University of Oulu, P.O. BOX 2000, FIN-90014, Oulu, Finland

    Tarja-Riitta Hurme & Sanna Järvelä

  2. Faculty of Education, University of Turku, Assistentinkatu 5, FIN-20014, Turku, Finland

    Tuire Palonen

Authors
  1. Tarja-Riitta Hurme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tuire Palonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sanna Järvelä
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tarja-Riitta Hurme.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hurme, TR., Palonen, T. & Järvelä, S. Metacognition in joint discussions: an analysis of the patterns of interaction and the metacognitive content of the networked discussions in mathematics. Metacognition Learning 1, 181–200 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-9792-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-9792-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation