Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 22 no. 2 (2024)

Metacognitive Learning in Solving Mathematical Word Problems

Joseph Reyes | Zenaida Reyes

Discipline: Mathematics

 

Abstract:

The metacognition in mathematics learning on solving word problems, explicitly described the solving strategies using metacognition anchored from the two metacognitive components. The students’ knowledge of cognition in mathematics learning in terms of declarative knowledge utilized specific metacognitive strategies such as activating concepts on the problem and identifying and determining concepts and information techniques which include specific implication of strategies that elaborate concepts such as reading and recalling, translating, identifying mathematical concepts, determining the needed information, and understanding the leading question. Students’ procedural knowledge in mathematics learning utilized specific metacognitive strategies such as substituting, representing, and organizing process, which include specific implication of strategies that elaborate concepts to the substitution process, use of representation while solving, and organizing solution coherently and logically. Substituting, representing, and organizing process is the execution of plan, strategy, model, idea, decision, or method and the realization of an application of the subject. Students’ conditional knowledge in mathematics learning utilized specific metacognitive strategies such as questioning the problem and their own practices, which include specific implication of strategies that elaborate concepts to question the problem, consistent practice to develop familiarity, solution appropriateness, exploring possible solutions, and thinking of ways to approach the problem. Students’ regulation of cognition in mathematics learning in terms of planning utilized specific metacognitive strategies such as breaking down, illustrating, and labelling and thinking about the information, formula, and steps which include specific implication of strategies that elaborate concepts to write down the information in the problem, determine the required formula, think about the steps before solving, breakdown the problem, draw illustration, and put labelling. Students’ monitoring regulation in mathematics learning utilized specific metacognitive strategies such as making sense of their own work and verifying solutions, which include specific implication of strategies that elaborate concepts to second thoughts during and after solving, recognizing errors in the solution, familiarity towards the problem, checking of works step by step, reflecting from time to time, and use of scratch to draft solutions. Students’ evaluating regulation in mathematics learning utilized specific metacognitive strategies such as reviewing and revising which include specific implication of strategies that elaborate concepts to review calculations and procedures, use strategies to check answers, draw conclusions, think of alternative ways after completing a task, and revising solutions if not correct.



References:

  1. Abelson, R. (1979). Differences between belief system and knowledge systems. Cognitive Science, 3, pp. 355-366.
  2. Ainley, J., Pratt, D., & Hansen, A. (2006). Connecting engagement and focus in pedagogic task design. British Educational Research  Journal, 32(1), 23–38.
  3. Aisami, R. S. (2015). Learning Styles and Visual Literacy for Learning and Performance. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 538– 545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.508
  4. Akin, A., Abaci, R., & Cetin, B. (2007). The Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory.  Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 7, 671–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.158 
  5. Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). Assessing metacognition in an online community of inquiry. Internet and Higher Education, 14(3),  183–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.01.005
  6. Alexander, P. (1997). Mapping the multidimensional nature of domain learning: The interplay of cognitive, motivational, and strategic forces. In M. Maeher, P. Pintrich, Advances in motivation and achievement 4, pp. 213–250. Greenwich: CT: JAI Press.
  7. Alsup, J., & Sprigler, M. (2003). A comparison of traditional and reform mathematics curricula in an eighth-grade classroom.  Education, 123(4), 689-694
  8. Amado Gama, C. (2005, March). Integrating Metacognition in Interactive Learning Environments, Sussex, the US, University of  Sussex.
  9. Ambrose, R., Clement, L., Philipp, R., & Chauvot, J. (2004). Assessing prospective elementary school teachers’ beliefs about  mathematics and mathematics learning: Rationale and development of a constructed‐response‐format beliefs survey. School Science  and Mathematics,104(2), 56‐69.
  10. Aminah, M. & Sabandar (2011). The Potency of Metacognitive Learning to Foster Mathematical Logical Thinking. Presented at  International Seminar and the Fourth National Conference on Mathematics Education 2011. Department of Mathematics Education,  Yogyakarta State 
  11. Anderson, N. J. (2008). Metacognition and good language Learners. In C. Griffith, Lessons from Good Language Learners, pp. 99- 109. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  12. Anghileri, J. (2006). Scaffolding practices that enhance mathematics learning. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, pp. 33– 52.
  13. Annevirta, T., & Vauras, M. (2001). Metacognitive knowledge in primary grades: a longitudinal study. European Journal of Psychology  of Education, 16, 257–282. 
  14. Baker, L. (1989). Metacognition, comprehension monitoring, and the adult reader. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 1, 3–38.
  15. Balcikanli, C. (2011). Metacognitive Awareness Inventory for Teachers. Electronic Journal of Research in Education and Psychology,  9(3), 1309-1332, ISSN: 1696-2095
  16. Ball, D. (1990). The mathematical understandings that prospective teachers bring to teacher education. The Elementary School Journal,  90(4), 449-466. Doi: 10.1086/461626M
  17. Ball, D., & Bass, H. (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics.  In J. Boaler (Ed.), multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics, pp. 83–104. Westport, CT: Ablex.
  18. Ball, D., Hill, H., & Bass, H. (2005). Knowing mathematics for teaching: Who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade,  and how can we decide? American Educator, 29(3), p. 14. 
  19. Ball, D., Thames, M., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education,  59(5), pp. 389-407.
  20. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., ..., & Tsai, Y. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge,  cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133–180.
  21. Baylor, A. L. (2002). Expanding preservice teachers’ metacognitive awareness of instructional planning through pedagogical agents.  Educational Technology Research & Design, 50(2), 5–22. 
  22. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The Psychology of Written Composition, Erlbaum, Hill- sdale, NJ Beswick, K. (2006). The importance of mathematics teachers’ beliefs. Australian Mathematics Teacher, 62(4),17-22.
  23. Biemiller, A., & Meichenbaum, D. (1998). The consequences of negative scaffolding for students who learn slowly – A commentary  on C. Addison Stone’s “The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities.” Journal of Learning Disabilities  31, 365-369
  24. Bilasano, T. et al. (2008). Correct Mathematics. Educational Resources Corp. 11- B Sunrise Drive, Brgy. Bagong Lipunan Crame,  Cubao, Quezon City.
  25. Blakey M, Spence S (1990). Developing Metacognition. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Resources Information Center [ED327218].
  26. Block, C. C. (2006). What are metacognitive assessments? In S. E. Israel, C. C. Block, K. L. Bauserman, & K. Kinnucan-Welsh (Eds.),  Metacognition in literacy learning: Theory, assessment instruction, and professional development, pp. 83–100. New Jersey: Lawrence  Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  27. Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets: Unleashing students’ potential through creative Math, inspiring messages and innovative  teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  28. Boekaerts, M., & Simons, P. R. (1995). Leren en instructie: Psychologie van de leerling en het leerproses. Assen: Van Gorcum.
  29. Borko, H., & Livingston, C. (1989). Cognition and improvisation: Differences in mathematics instruction by expert and novice teachers.  American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 473-498. 
  30. Brookhart, S. M. (2009). Editorial: Special issue on the validity of formative and interim assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues  and Practice, 28(3), 1-4. 
  31. Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues  in reading comprehension (pp. 453–482). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  32. Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self- regulation and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert and  R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation, and Understanding, pp. 65–116. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  33. Buchmann, M. (1987). Teaching knowledge: The lights that teachers live by. Oxford Review of Education, 13, 151–164.
  34. Butterfield, B. (2012). An experienced teacher’s conceptual trajectory for problem solving. In J. Dindyal, L. P. Cheng & S. F. Ng (Eds.),  Mathematics education: Expanding horizons (Proceedings of the 35th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group  of Australasia), pp. 154-161. Singapore: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Adelaide, SA. 
  35. Cai, J., & Moyer, J. (2009). Developing algebraic thinking in earlier grades: some insights from international comparative studies. In  Greenes, C.E., Rubenstein, R. (eds.), Algebra and algebraic thinking in school mathematics:(Seventieth Yearbook). Reston, VA:  NCTM: 169- 180
  36. Callan, G. L., Marchant, G. J., Finch, W. H., & German, R. L. (2016). Metacognition, strategies, achievement, and demographics:  Relationships across countries. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16, 1485–1502.
  37. Camahalan, F. M. G. (2006). Effects of self regulated learning on mathematics achievement on selected Southeast Asian children.  Journal of Instructional Psychology, 33(3), 194-205. 
  38. Cardelle-Elawar, M. (1992). Effects of teaching metacognitive skills to students with low mathematics ability. Teaching and Teacher  Education, 8(2), 109-121.
  39. Carr, M., Kurtz, B. E., Schneider, W., Turner, L. A., & Borkowski, J. G. (1989). Strategy acquisition and transfer: Environmental  influences on metacognitive development. Developmental Psychology, 25, 765–771.
  40. Chapin, S., O’Connor, C., & Anderson, N. (2003). Classroom Discussions: Using Math Talk to Help Students Learn. Math Solutions  Publications: Sausalito, CA
  41. Charalambos, C., Philippou, G., and Kyriakides, L. (2002). Towards understanding teachers’ philosophical beliefs about mathematics.  Paper presented at the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME), Norwich UK
  42. Charalambous, C. (2010). Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching and Task Unfolding: An Exploratory Study. The Elementary School  Journal, 110(3), 247–278.
  43. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  44. Chin, C. (2006). Classroom interaction in science: Teacher questioning and feedback to students’ responses. International Journal of  Science Education, 28(11), 1315- 1346. doi: 10.1080/09500690600621100 
  45. Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in  Science Teaching, 44(6), 815-843. 
  46. Clark, K. F., & Graves, M. F. (2005). Scaffolding students’ comprehension of text. The Reading Teacher, 58 (6), 570–580.
  47. Clark, S. K., (2012). Embedding Academic Literacy in First-Year Units of Study [Adobe Digital Editions version]. Retrieved from  http://www.acu.edu.au/__data/ assets/pdf_file/0007/421684/a cad-lit.pdf
  48. Coffman, J. L., Ornstein, P. A., McCall, L. E., & Cur- ran, P. J. (2008). Linking teachers’ memory relevant language and the  development of children’s memory skills. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1640–1654.
  49. Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences. (2001). The mathematical education of teachers. Washington, DC: American  Mathematical Society.
  50. Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences. (2012). Issues in mathematics education: Vol. 17. The mathematical education of  teachers II. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
  51. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Los  Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  52. Costa, A. L. (1984). Mediating the metacognitive. Educational Leadership, 11, 57-62.
  53. Creswell, J. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  54. Creswell, J. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage  Publications, Inc.
  55. Cross, D., & Paris, S. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension.  Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131-142.
  56. Culaste, I. (2011). Cognitive Skills of Mathematical Problem Solving of Grade 6 Children. International Journal of Innovative disciplinary Research.
  57. Dela Cruz, R.C. (2019). DepEd to improve education quality after PH’s poor PISA ranking. Philippine News Agency. Retrieved from  https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1087967
  58. Delclos, V.R., & Harrington, C. (1991). Effects of strategy monitoring and proactive instruction on children‟s problem-solving  performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 35–42. 
  59. Demirel, M. Tuncel, I. & Tuncel, Z. A. (2010). A Study on Quality Teaching-Learning Process in Elementary Education in Turkey: A  Case Study. American-Eurasian Journal of Scientific Research 5 (1).
  60. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2003). (eds) The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues. Second Edition. London: Sage.
  61. Desoete, A. (2007). Evaluating and improving the mathematics teaching-learning process through metacognition. Electronic Journal  of Research in Educational Psychology, N. 13 Vol. 5(3), 2007, ISSN: 1696-2095.
  62. Desoete, A. (2008). Multi-method assessment of metacognitive skills in elementary school children: How you test is what you get.  Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9026-0
  63. Desoete, A., & Roeyers, H. (2006). Metacognitive macro evaluations in mathematical problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 16,  12-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.
  64. Dewey, J. ([1897], ‘My Pedagogic Creed’, in Dewey, J. (1940) Education Today, New York: Greenwood Press.
  65. Diaz, R. M., Neal, C. J., & Amaya-Williams, M. (1990). The social origins of self- regulation. In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and  education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 127-154).New York: Cambridge University  Press.
  66. Ding, M., Li, X., Piccolo, D., & Kulm, G. (2007). Teaching interventions in cooperative learning mathematics classes. The Journal of  Educational Research, 100, 162-175. 
  67. Dochy, F.J.R.C. (1993, April). An alternative to the assessment of domainspecific knowledge: Profile analysis. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta.
  68. Dougherty, B. (1990). Influences of Teacher Cognitive Conceptual Level on Problem-Solving Instruction. In G. Booker et al. (Ed.),  proceedings of Fourteenth International Conference for Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 119-126). Oaxtepec, Mexico:  International study group for the Psychology of mathematics education.
  69. du Toit, S., & Kotze, G. (2009). Metacognitive strategies in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Pythagoras, 70, 57–67.
  70. Eisenhart, M., Borko, H., Underhill, R., Brown, C., Jones, D., & Agard, P. (1993). Conceptual Knowledge Falls through the Crack:  Complexities of Learning to Teach Mathematics for Understanding. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24, 8-40.
  71. English, L., (2006). Mathematical modeling in the primary school: Children’s construction of a consumer guide. Educational Studies  in Mathematics, 63, 303–323.
  72. Ernest, P. (1991). The philosophy of mathematics education. London: Falmer.
  73. Evans, B. (2003). Early childhood (K-5) pre-service teachers’ beliefs about mathematics, teaching mathematics, and learning  mathematics. Dissertation. Georgia Southern University. ProQuest Document Information and Learning.
  74. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2014). Improving adolescent literacy: Content area strategies at work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. 
  75. Fisk, P. (2017). Education 4.0 ... the future of learning will be dramatically different, in school and throughout life. Retrieved from  http://www.thege- niusworks.com/2017/01/future-education-young-ev- eryone-taught-together
  76. Flavell, J. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. F. Resnick (Ed.), the nature of intelligence (pp. 231–235). Hillsdale:  Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  77. Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist,  34(10), 906-911.
  78. Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation and Understanding. Hillside, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  79. Galbraith, P., Stillman, G., Brown, J., & Edwards, I. (2007). Facilitating middle secondary modelling competencies. In C. Haines, P.  Galbraith, W. Blum, & S. Khan (Eds.), Mathematical modeling: Education, engineering and economic (pp. 130–140). Chichester, UK:  Horwood.
  80. Garner, R. (1990). When children and adults do not use learning strategies: Toward a theory of settings. Review of Educational  Research, 60(4), 517–529. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543060004517
  81. Garner, R., & Alexander, P. A. (1989). Metacognition: Answered and unanswered questions. Educ. Psychol. 24: 143–158.
  82. Garofalo, J. & Lester, F. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring and mathematical performance. Journal for Research in  Mathematics Education, 16
  83. Getman-Eraso, J. K. (2017). Close Reading: Engaging and Empowering History Students through Document Analysis on ePortfolio.  International Journal of EPortfolio, 7(1), 29–42. 
  84. Glaser, R., & Baxter, G. P. (2000). Assessing Active Knowledge. Erasmus, 1522(310), 1–16. Retrieved from  http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.17.90
  85. Glenberg, A. M., Sanocki, T., Epstein, W., & Morris, C. (1987). Enhancing calibration of comprehension. J. Exp. Psychol.: Gen. 116:  119–136
  86. Golafshani, N. (2005). Secondary teachers’ professed beliefs about mathematics, mathematics teaching and mathematics learning:  Iranian perspective. University of Toronto.
  87. Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Reenshaw, P. (2000). A money problem: A source of insight into problem solving action. International  Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning. 80.
  88. Gopinath, S. (2014). Metacognitive Awareness in Teaching and Teaching Competency: A Survey on Student Teachers at Secondary  Level. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSRJRME), 4(4), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.9790/7388- 0445333
  89. Greenbank, P. (2003). The role of values in educational research: the case for reflexivity. British Educational Research Journal, 29(6).
  90. Griffith, P., & Ruan, J. (2005). What is metacognition and what should be its role in literacy instruction? In S. Isreal, C. Block, K.  Bauserman, & K. Kinnucan-Welsch (Eds.), Metacognition in literacy learning: theory, assessment, instruction, and professional  development (pp. 3–18). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  91. Guilford, J. P. (2007). Creativity: A quarter century of progress. In I. A. Taylor & J. W. Getzels (Eds.), Perspectives in creativity (pp.  37-59). New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.
  92. Hacker, D. J. (1998). Self-regulated comprehension during normal reading. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and A. C. Graesser,  Metacognition in educational theory and practice, pp. 165-191. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  93. Hacker, D., Dunlosky, J. & Graesser, A. eds. (1998) Definitions and empirical foundations. Metacognition in educational theory and  practice pp. 1-23. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 
  94. Haider, A. H. & Naqabu, K.A. (2008). Emiratii Hih School Students’ Understanding of Stoichiometry and the Influence of  Metacognition on their Understanding. Research Science & Technological Education, 26(2), 215 – 237.
  95. Hall, L. (2005). Teachers and content area reading: Attitudes, beliefs and change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 403-414.
  96. Hansson, O. (2005). Preservice teachers’ view on y = x + 5 and y = x² expressed through the utilization of concept maps: A study of  the concept of function. In H.L. Chick & J.L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th PME International Conference, 3, 97-104.
  97. Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Brindle, M., & Sandmel, K. (2009). Metacognition and Children’s Writing. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and  A. C. Graesser, Handbook of Metacognition in Education (pp. 131-153). New York: Routledge.
  98. Harris, K. R., Santangelo, T., & Graham, S. (2010). Metacognition and Strategies instruction in Writing. In H. S. Schneider and W.  Waters, Metacognition, Strategy Use, and Instruction, pp. 226-256. London, The Guilford Press.
  99. Hart, L. (2002). Pre-service teachers’ beliefs and practice after participating in an integrated content/ methods course. School Science  and Mathematics, 102 (1). 4-15.
  100. Haskell, R., (2001). Transfer of Learning. Academic Press, San Diego.
  101. Hatano, G. (1988). Social and motivational bases for mathematical understanding. New Directions for Child Development, 41, 55–70. Hembree, R. (1992). The nature, effects, and relief of mathematics anxiety. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 33-46.
  102. Hennessey, M. (1999). Probing the dimensions of metacognition: Implications for conceptual change teaching-learning. Paper  presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA.
  103. Herbal-Eisenmann, B. A., & Breyfogle, M. L. (2005). Questioning our “Patterns” of Questioning. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle  School, 10(9), 484-489. doi: 10.2307/41182145

  104. Herman, J. L., & Heritage, M. (2007, June). Moving from piecemeal to effective formative assessment practice: Moving pictures on  the road to student learning. Paper presented at the annual Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) National Conference on  Large Scale Assessment, Session 143, Nashville, TN. 
  105. Hershkowitz, R., & Vinner, S. (1984). Children’s concepts in elementary geometry. A reflection of teacher’s concepts? In B. Southwell  (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th PME International Conference, 63-69.

  106. Hill, H., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American  Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371-406.
  107. Holland Joyner, M. H., & Kurtz-Costes, B. (1997). Metamemory development. In N. Cowan (Ed.), The development of memory in  childhood (pp. 275–300). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
  108. Houssart, J. (2002). Simplification and repetition of mathematical tasks: A recipe for success or failure? The Journal of Mathematical  Behavior, 21(2), 191–202. 
  109. Hunter, R. (2008). Facilitating communities of mathematical inquiry. In M. Goos, R. Brown, & R. Makar (Eds.), Navigation currents  and charting directions (Proceedings of the 31st annual Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia conference, Vol. 1, pp.  31-39). Brisbane Australia: MERGA.
  110. Iiskala, T., Vauras, M., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Socially shared metacognition in peer learning? Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 1, 147– 178.
  111. Israel, S. E. (2007). Thinking Metacognitively. Using Metacognitive Assessments to Create Individual Reading Instruction.  International Reading Association.
  112. Jaafar, W., & Ayub, A. (2010). Mathematics self-efficacy and metacognition among university students. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 519-524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.071
  113. Jacob, J. E. & Paris, S. G. (1987). Children’s metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction.  Educational psychologist, 22, 255-278.
  114. Jang, S.T. & Horn, A.S. (2017). The relative effectiveness of traditional and alternative teacher preparation programs: A review of  recent research. Midwestern Higher Education Compact. Retrieved from  http://www.mhec.org/sites/mhec.org/files/teacherprep2_20170301.pdf
  115. Jonassen, D. H. (2003). Designing research-based instruction for story problems. Educational Psychology Review, 15 (3), 267–296.
  116. Justice, E. M., & Weaver-McDougall, R. G. (1989). Adult’s knowledge about memory: Awareness and use of memory strategies across  tasks. J. Educ. Psychol. 81: 214–219.
  117. Karpicke, J. (2012). Retrieval-based learning: active retrieval promotes meaningful learning. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 21 (3), 157–163. Killen, R. (2000). Teaching strategies for outcomes-based education. Landsdowne: Juta.
  118. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (2001). Adding it up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics. Washington, DC: National  Academy Press.
  119. King, A. (1991) Improving lecture comprehension: effects of a metacognitive strategy. Applied Cognitive Psychology 5, pp. 331-346.
  120. Kirbulut, Z. D. (2014). Modeling the relationship between high school students’ chemistry self-efficacy and metacognitive awareness.  International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 9(2), 177–196. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2014.210a
  121. Kitchener, K. (1986). The reflective judgment 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.
  122. Kluwe, R. H. (1987). Executive decisions and regulation of problem-solving behavior. In F. E. Weinert, & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.),  Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 31–64). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum. 
  123. Kolić-Vehovec, S., & Bajšanski, I. (2006). Metacognitive strategies and reading comprehension in elementary-school students. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 21(1983), 439–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173513
  124. Kramarski, B. (2008). Promoting teachers’ algebraic reasoning and self-regulation with metacognitive guidance. Metacognition and  Learning, 3(2), 83– 99.
  125. Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: an overview. Theory Pract. 41 (4), 212–218.
  126. Kron-Sperl, V., Schneider, W., & Hasselhorn, M. (2008). The development and effectiveness of memory strategies in kindergarten and  elementary school: Findings from the Würzburg and Göttingen longitudinal studies. Cognitive Development, 23, 79– 104.
  127. Ku, K. Y. L., & Ho, I. T. (2010). Metacognitive strategies that enhance critical thinking. Metacognition and Learning, 5(3), 251–267.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9060-6
  128. Kuhlthau (19910. Investigating patterns in information seeking: concepts in context, in: Exploring the contexts of information  behaviour, T.D. Wilson and D.K. Allen, eds, London: Taylor Graham, 1999, pp. 10–20. 

  129. Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(5), 178-181.C Kuhn, D., & Dean, D. (2004). A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice. Theory into Practice, 43(4), 268-273.
  130. Lai, E. et al. (2012). Assessing 21st Century Skills: Integrating Research Findings. National Council on Measurement in Education.  Vancouver, B.C.: Pearson Education.
  131. Lai, E. R. (2011). Metacognition: A Literature review research report. Research Reports. New York, NY: Pearson. Retrieved from  http://www.datec.org.uk/CHAT/chatmeta1.htm
  132. Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Tompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Classroom assessment: Minute by minute, day by day. Educational  Leadership, 63(3), 19-25. 
  133. Leat, D., & Lin, M. (2007). Developing pedagogy of metacognition and transfer: some signposts for the generation and use of  knowledge and the creation of research partnerships. British Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 383–414.
  134. Lee, C. B., Teo, T., & Bergin, D. (2009). Children’s use of metacognition in solving everyday problems: An initial study from an Asian  context. Australian Educational Researcher, 36(3), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03216907
  135. Lester, F. K. (1982). Building bridges between psychological and mathematics education research on problem solving. In F. K. Lester  & J. Garofalo (Eds.), Mathematical problem solving (pp. 55–85). Philadelphia: The Franklin Institute Press.
  136. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1986). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. New Directions  for Program Evaluation, 1986(30), 73- 84. doi: 10.1002/ev.1427
  137. Lorch, R. F., Lorch, E. P., & Klusewitz, M. A. (1993). College students’ conditional knowledge about reading. J. Educ. Psychol. 85:  239–252.
  138. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics: Teachers’ Understanding of Fundamental Mathematics in China and  the United States. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  139. Martinez, M. (2006). What is metacognition? Phi Delta Kappan, 696-699.
  140. Mayer, R. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory Pract. 41 (4), 226–232.
  141. McCormick, C. B. (2003). Metacognition and Learning. In W. Reynolds, M. Weiner, GE Miller, Handbook of Psychology, pp. 79- 102. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  142. McCormick, R. (1997). Conceptual and procedural knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(1-2),  141-159.
  143. Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  144. Mestre, J. (2002). Transfer of Learning; Issues and Research Agenda (Report of a workshop held at the National Science Foundation:  Department of Physics). University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
  145. Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (2003). The effects of metacognitive training versus worked out examples on students’ mathematical  reasoning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(4), 449– 471.
  146. Miles M., & Huberman A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
  147. Miller, P. H. (1985). Metacognition and Attention, In Forrest-Pressley, D. L., McKinnon, E. G., and Waller T. G. (eds.), Metacognition,  Cognition, and Human Performance, Academic Press, New York, pp. 181–221.
  148. Mintzes, J., Wandersee, J., & Novak, J., (2005). Epilogue: meaningful learning, knowledge restructuring and conceptual change: on ways of teaching science for understanding. In: Mintzes, J.J., Wandersee, J.H., Novak, J.D. (Eds.), Teaching Science for Understanding.  Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 327–350.
  149. Mokos, E., & Kafoussi, S. (2013). Elementary Students’ Spontaneous Metacognitive Functions in Different Types of Mathematical Problems. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education REDIMAT -Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 2(2), 242–267.  https://doi.org/10.4471/redimat.2013.29 
  150. Montague, M., (2005). Solve It! Strategy instruction to improve mathematical problem- solving. Learning Disabilities Re- search and  Practice. 27(2), 23-30. 
  151. Moodley, P. (1992). Psychotropic medication and ethnicity: An inpatient survey. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 27,  95–101.
  152. Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2005). The effectiveness of the use of learning support assistants in improving the mathematics achievement  of low achieving pupils in primary school. Educational Research, 45(3), 219–230.
  153. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2014). Principles to Actions: Ensuring Mathematical Success for All. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  154. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM] (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  155. National Mathematics Advisory Panel (2008). Foundation of success: the final report of the national mathematics advisory. Washington  DC: US Department of Education.
  156. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Why investigates metacognition? In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition.  Knowing about knowing (pp. 1–25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  157. Nilson, L. B. (2013). Creating self-regulated learners: Strategies to strengthen student’s self-awareness and learning skills. Sterling,  VA: Stylus. 
  158. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2019). PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework, PISA, OECD  Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en.
  159. Ogena, E, B., et.al. (2010). Performance of Philippine High Schools with Special Science Curriculum in the 2008 Trends in  International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS-Advanced). Presented at the 11th National Convention on Statistics (NCS),  Philippines. Retrieved on 2013 from goo.gl/RZyX8Z.
  160. Onovughe, G., & Hannah, A. (2011). Assessing ESL students’ awareness and application of metacognitive strategies in comprehending  academic materials. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS), 2(5), 343–346.
  161. Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (1998). Curriculum: Foundations, principles and issues (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

  162. Özsoy, G. (2010). An investigation of the relationship between metacognition and mathematics achievement. Asia Pasific Education  Review, 12(2), 227-235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12564-010-9129-6
  163. Özsoy, G. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between metacognition and mathematics achievement. Asia Pacific Educational  Review, 12, 227–235. doi:10.1007/s12564-010-9129-6
  164. Ozsoy, G., & Ataman, A. (2009). The Effect of meta-cognitive strategy training on mathematical problem-solving achievement.  International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, Vol. 1, Issue 2.
  165. Panaoura, A., Philippou, G., & Christou, C. (2003, March). Young pupils’ metacognitive ability in mathematics. Paper presented at the  Third Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education. Retrieved from  http://www.dm.unipi.it/~didattica/CERME3/proceedings/Groups/ TG3/TG3_Panaoura_cerme3.pdf 
  166. Papinczak, Z., Dingle, G. A., Stoyanov, S., Hides, L., & Zelenko, O. (2015). Young people’s uses of music for wellbeing. Journal of  Youth Studies, 18(9), 1119–1134.
  167. Paris, S. & Winograd, P. (1990). Promoting metacognition and motivation of exceptional children. Remedial and Special Education,  11(6), 7-15
  168. Paris, S. G., Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 293–316.
  169. Pedone, R., (2017). Development of a self-report measure of metacognition: the metacognition self-assessment scale (msas). Instrument  description and factor structure. Clinical Neuropsychiatry (2017) 14, 3, 185-194
  170. Pepin, B. (1999). Epistemologies, beliefs and conceptions of mathe matics teaching and learning: The theory, and what is manifested  in mathematics teachers’ work in England, France and Germany. TNTEE Publications, 2(1), 127-146.
  171. Perry, N. E. (1998). Young children’s self-regulated learning and contexts that support it. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4),  715–729.
  172. Philipp, R., Ambrose, R, Lamb, L., Sowder, J., Schappelle, B., & Sowder, L. (2007). Effects of early field experiences on the mathematical content knowledge and beliefs of prospective ele- mentary school teachers: An experimental study. Journal for Research  in Mathematics Education, 38, 438–46.
  173. Philling-Cormick, J. & Garrison, D. R. (2007). Self-Directed and Self-Regulated Learning: Conceptual Links. Canadian Journal of  University Continuing Education, 33, No. 2, 13-33.
  174. Pintrich, P. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessment. Theory into Practice, 41, 219-225.
  175. Pintrich, P. R., Wolters, C. A., & Baxter, G. P. (2000). Assessing metacognition and self- regulated learning. In G. Schraw & J. C.  Impara (Eds.), Assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning (pp. 43–97). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
  176. Polya, G. (1985). Mathematical Discovery: On Understanding, Learning and Teaching Problem Solving Combined Edition. New York:  Wiley.
  177. Polya, G. 1971. How to Solve It. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. pp.55-57.
  178. Pope, M. & Scott, E. (1984). Teachers’ epistemology and practice. In R. Halkes, & J. K. Olson (Eds.), Teachers thinking: A new  perspective on persisting problems in education, (112-122). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
  179. Presley, M., Borkowski, J. G., & Schneider, W. (1987). Cognitive strategies: Good strategy users coordinate metacognition and knowledge. In R. Vasta, & G. Whilehurst (Eds.), Annals of Child Development (pp. 80-129). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. 
  180. Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension strategies instruction. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research based best practices (pp. 11–27). New York: Guilford Press.
  181. Pressley, M. & Harris, K. R. (2006). Cognitive strategies instruction: from basic research to classroom instruction. In P. A. Alexander  et al. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 265– 286). New York: Macmillan.
  182. Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ:  Erlbaum. 
  183. Pressley, M., & Ghatala, E. S. (1990). Self-regulated learning: Monitoring learning from text. Educ. Psychol. 25, 19–33.
  184. Pressley, M., Forrest-Pressley, D. L., Elliott-Faust, D., & Miller, R. (1985). Children’s use of cognitive strategies: How to teach  strategies and what to do if they can’t be taught. In M. Pressley, and J. C. Brained, Cognitive learning and memory in children: Progress  in cognitive development research, pp. 1-47. New York, Springer.
  185. Pulmones, R. (2008). Learning Chemistry in a Metacognitive Environment. The Asia- Pacific Education Researcher, 16(2), 165–183.  https://doi.org/10.3860/taper.v16i2.258 
  186. Putney, L. (2010). Case study. In N. Salkind (Ed.), Encyclopedia of research design (pp. 116-120). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE  Publications.
  187. Rahman, F. (2011). Comparison of Teachers and Students Self Perception About Metacognition. Empirical Evidence from Pakistan, 7(2), 292–310.
  188. Ratner, C. (1991). Vygotsky’s sociohistorical psychology and its contemporary applications. New York: Plenum Press.
  189. Raymond, A. (1993). Understanding Relationships between Beginning Elementary Teachers’ Mathematics Beliefs and Teaching  practices. Abstract from: ProQuest File: Dissertation Abstracts Item: 9404352
  190. Reyes J.D. Mathematics Anxiety and Self-Efficacy: A Phenomenological Dimension. Journal of Humanities and Education  Development (JHED), 2019. Vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 22–34. URL: https://mail.theshillonga.com/index.php/jhed/article/view/9/4
  191. Reyes, J. D. C. (2019). Team-Pair-Solo: An Experimental Approach in Teaching Random Variables and Discrete Probability  Distributions. Journal of Humanities and Education Development (JHED), 1(1), 35-45. Retrieved from  http://www.theshillonga.com/index.php/jhed/article/view/8
  192. Reyes, J. D., (2019). Increasing Self-efficacy and Alleviating Anxiety using Touch Math and Instructional Games: An Intervention for  Low Performing Seventh Graders. Journal of Humanities and Education Development (JHED). ISSN: 2581-8651. Vol-1, Issue-2, Mar  – Apr 2019. Retrieved from https://theshillonga.com/index.php/jhed/article/view/13
  193. Reyes, J. D., (2019). Mathematical Performance of Freshman Students’ vis-à-vis Admission test Results. Journal of Humanities and  Education Development (JHED). ISSN: 2581-8651. Vol-1, Issue-3, May – Jun 2019. Retrieved from  https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/jhed.1.3.5
  194. Reyes, J. D., (2020). Effectiveness of Concrete-Representational-Abstract sequence of instruction in probability on select-groups of  eight graders. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation. Volume 2; Issue 1; January-February; 2021;  Page No. 438-443.
  195. Reyes, J. D., (2021). An Experimental Research on Traditional and Collaborative Approaches of Selected Groups of Grade Eight  Learners in a Sample of Secondary School. International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management (IJAEM), 3(1), 557- 567
  196. Reyes, J. D., Insorio, A. O., Ingreso, M. V., Holario, F. F., & Gutierres, C. R., (2019). Conception and Application of Contextualization  in Mathematics Education. International Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics, 2019, 6(1), 1-18. Retrieved from  https://dergipark.org.r/en/download/article-file/664590
  197. Reyes, J.D., Cabrera, G.A., & Ocampo, N.D. (2021). Curricular Perspectives of Selected Mathematics: A descriptive cross-sectional  non-experimental research. Eurasian Journal of Teacher Education, 2(3), 160-176.
  198. Reynolds, R. E. (1992). Selective attention and prose learning: Theoretical and empirical research. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 4, 345–391.
  199. Samuelsson, J. (2008). Student Teachers’ Experiences with Math Education.  www.usca.edu/essays/vol192007/samuelsson%5B1%5D.pdf.
  200. Santrock, John W. (2011). A topical approach to life-span development (4th Edition). New York City: McGraw Hill. 
  201. Saraç, S., & Karakelle, S. (2012). On-line and off-line assessment of metacognition. International Electronic Journal of Elementary  Education, 4(2), 301–315.
  202. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63 Schleicher, A. (2018). PISA 2018: Insights and Interpretations
  203. Schneider, W. & Lockl, K. (2002). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children and adolescents. In Perfect, T. &  Schwartz, B. (Eds.), Applied metacognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  204. Schneider, W. (2008). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children and adolescents: Major trends and implications for  education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 2(3), 114-121.
  205. Schoenfeld, A. (1987). What’s all the fuss about metacognition? In A.H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive Science and Mathematics  Education. Hillside, New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
  206. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1983). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D.  A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334–370). New York: Macmillan.
  207. Schraw, G. & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351-371. Schraw, G. (1994). The effect of metacognitive knowledge on local and global monitoring. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 19, 143–154. Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 113-125.
  208. 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(1–2), 111–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8
  209. Schreiber, F. J. (2005). Metacognition and self-regulation in literacy. In S. Isreal, C. Block, K. Bauserman, & K. Kinnucan-Welsch  (Eds.), Metacognition in literacy learning: theory, assessment, instruction, and professional development (pp. 215–240). Mahwah:  Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  210. SEI-DOST & MATHTED, (2011). Framework for Philippine mathematics teacher education. Manila: SEI-DOST & MATHTED.  ISBN 978-971-8600-47-4
  211. Seraphin, K., & Philippoff, J. (2012). Metacognition as means to increase the effectiveness of inquiry-based science education. Science  Education International, 23(4), 366–382. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx
  212. Serra, M. J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009) Effective implementation of metacognition. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.),  Handbook of Metacognition in Education. (pp. 278-298). New York, NY: Routledge.
  213. Shemwell, J. T., Chase, C. C., & Schwartz, D. L. (2015). Seeking the general explanation: a test of inductive activities for learning and  transfer. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(1), 58–83. doi:10.1002/tea.21185.
  214. Shepard, L. (2005). Linking formative assessment to scaffolding. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 66-71.  Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge a teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, pp. 1-22.
  215. Simon, M. (1991). Initial development of prospective elementary teachers’ conceptions of mathematics pedagogy. In F. Furinghetti  (Ed.), Proceedings of the 15th PME International Conference, 2, 40-47.
  216. Slife, B. D., & Weaver, C. A, 111 (1992). Depression, cognitive skill, and metacognitive skill in problem solving. Cognit. Emotion 6,  1–22.
  217. Staub, F., & Stern, E. (2002). The nature of teachers’ pedagogical content beliefs matters for students’ achievement gains: Quasi experimental evidence from elementary mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 344-355.
  218. Steinberg, R., Empson, S., & Carpenter, T. (2004). Inquiry into children’s mathematical thinking as a means to teacher change. Journal  of Mathematics Teacher Education, 7, 237–267.
  219. Stillman, G., & Mevarech, Z. (2010). Metacognition research in mathematics education: From hot topic to mature field. ZDM  Mathematics Education, 42, 145-148. http://dx.doi.org /10.1007/s11858-010-0245-x
  220. Sullivan, P., Mousley, J., & Zevenbergen, R. (2006). Teacher actions to maximize mathematics learning opportunities in heterogeneous  classrooms. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(1), 117–143. 
  221. Sungur, S., & Senler, B. (2009). An analysis of Turkish high school students’ metacognition and motivation. Educational Research and  Evaluation, 15(March 2015), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610802591667
  222. Tanner, H. & Jones, S. (2000). Becoming a Successful Teachers of Mathematics. London and New York: Routledge Falmer. Tei, E., & Stewart, O. (1985). Effective studying from text: applying metacognitive strategies. Forum for Reading, 16(2), 46–55.
  223. Teo, T., & Bergin, D. (2009). Children’s Use of Metacognition in Solving Everyday Problems: An Initial Study from an Asian Context,  36(02), 89–102. 
  224. Teong, S. K. (2003). The effect of metacognitive training on mathematical word-problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted  Learning, 19(1), 46–55.
  225. Terry, W. (2006). Learning and memory: basic principles, processes and procedures. Third edition Allyn and Bacon, Boston/Upper  Saddle River.
  226. Thames, M., & Ball, D. (2010). What math knowledge does teaching require? Teaching Children Mathematics, 17(4), 220-229.
  227. Thompson, A. (1984). The Relationship of Teachers’ Conceptions of Mathematics and Mathematics Teaching to Instructional Practice.  Educational Studies in Mathematics, 5(2), 105- 127.
  228. Tishman, S., Perkins, D., & Jay, E. (1995). The thinking classroom: teaching and learning in a culture of thinking. Needham, MA:  Allyn & Bacon
  229. Turan, S., Demirel, O., & Sayek, I. (2009). Metacognitive awareness and self-regulated learning skills of medical students in different  medical curricula. Medical Teacher, 31(10), e477–e483. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159090319352
  230. Veenman, M. V. J. (2005). The assessment of metacognitive skills. In B. Moschner & C. Artelt (Eds.), Lernstrategien und  Metakognition: Implikationenfür Forschung und Praxis (pp. 75–97). Berlin: Waxmann.
  231. Veenman, M. V. J., Bavelaar, L., De Wolf, L., & Van Haaren, M. G. P. (2014). The on-line assessment of metacognitive skills in a  computerized learning environment. Learning and Individual Differences, 29, 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.01.003
  232. Veenman, M. V. J., van Hout-Wolters, B., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological  considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 3–14.
  233. Verschaffel, L. (1999). Realistic mathematical modelling and problem solving in the upper elementary school: Analysis and  improvement. In J. H. M. Ha- mers, J. E. H. Van Luit, & B. Csapo (Eds.), Teaching and learning thinking skills. Contexts of learning  (pp. 215–240). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
  234. Walshaw, M., & Anthony, G. (2008). The role of pedagogy in classroom discourse: A review of recent research into mathematics.  Review of Educational Research, 78, 516-551. 
  235. Watson, A., & De Geest, E. (2005). Principled teaching for deep progress: Improving mathematical learning beyond methods and  material. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58, 209–234.
  236. Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2006). Seeing an exercise as a single mathematical object: Using variation to structure sense-making.  Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 8, 91–111.
  237. Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessment to inform and improve student performance. San Francisco, CA:  Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.
  238. Wiliam, D. (2005, April). The integration of formative classroom assessment with instruction. Paper presented at the AERA annual  meeting, Montreal. 
  239. Wiliam, D. (2007). Keeping Learning on Track: Formative assessment and the regulation of learning. In F. K. Jr. Lester (Ed.), Second  Handbook of Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 1053-1098. Greenwich, Conn.: Information Age Publishing.
  240. Wilkins, J. (2008). The relationship among elementary teachers’ content knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and practices. Journal of  Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(2), 139‐164.
  241. Williams, J. P. & Atkins J. G. (2009). The Role of Metacognition in Teaching Reading Comprehension to Primary Students. In D. J.  Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and A. C. Graesser, Handbook of Metacognition in Education (pp. 26-44). New York: Routledge.
  242. Willis, J. (2007). The neuroscience of joyful education. Educational Leadership, 64, 1–4. Retrieved from  http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational- leadership/summer07/vol64/num09/The-Neuroscience-of-Joyful-Education.aspx 
  243. Wilson, N. S., & Bai, H. (2010). The relationships and impact of teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and pedagogical understandings  of metacognition. Metacognition and Learning, 5(3), 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9062-
  244. Woolfolk, A. E. (1998) Educational psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

  245. Yildiz, E., Akpinar, E., Tatar, N., & Ergîn, Ö. (2009). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the metacognition scale for  primary school students. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri, 9(3), 1591–1604. 
  246. Yin, R. (2003). Applications of case study research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  247. Young, A., & Fry, J. D. (2008). Metacognitive awareness and academic achievement in college students, 8(2), 1–10.
  248. Yu Y, et al. (2012) Histone H3 lysine 56 methylation regulates DNA replication through its interaction with PCNA. Mol Cell 46(1):7- 17
  249. Zawilinski, L. (2009). HOT Blogging: A Framework for Blogging to Promote Higher Order Thinking. The Reading Teacher, 62(8),  650–661. https://doi.org/10.1598/rt.62.8.3
  250. Zepeda, C. D., Richey, J. E., Ronevich, P., & Nokes-Malach, T. J. (2015). Journal of Educational Psychology. Direct Instruction of  Metacognition Benefits Adolescent Science Learning, Transfer, and Motivation: An In Vivo Study. Journal of Educational Psychology,  107(4), 954–970. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000022
  251. Zhang, L. J. (2009). Title Chinese senior high school EFL students’ metacognitive awareness and reading-strategy use Chinese senior  high school EFL students’ metacognitive awareness and reading-strategy use. Source Reading in a Foreign Language, 21(1), 37- 59.  Retrieved from https://repository.nie.edu.sg/bitstream/10497/16307/1/RFL-21-1- 37_a.pdf
  252. Zhao, N., Valcke, M., Desoete, A., & Verhaeghe, J.P. (2011). A multilevel analysis on predicting mathematics performance in Chinese  primary schools: Implications for practice. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 20(3), 503-520.
  253. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 64-70.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
  254. Zimmerman, B. J., & Risemberg, R. (1997). Becoming a self-regulated writing: A social cognitive perspective. Contemporary  Educational Psychology, 22, 73–101. 
  255. Zohar, A. (2006). The nature and development of teachers’ metastrategic knowledge in the context of teaching higher order thinking.  The Journal of Learning Sciences, 15(3), 331–377.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic