Sekizinci ve Dokuzuncu Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Üstbiliş Becerileri ile Rutin Olmayan Problemleri Çözme Başarıları: Kosova ve Türkiye Örneği

Year 2020, Volume: 3 Issue: 2, 154 - 172, 25.12.2020

Bünyamin Aydın , Emre Dinc , Dilek Sezgin Memnun , Münevver Moyu Yıldırım

https://doi.org/10.47477/ubed.818879

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Kosova'da ve Türkiye'de öğrenim görmekte olan sekizinci ve dokuzuncu sınıf öğrencilerinin üstbiliş farkındalık ve yeti düzeyleri ile rutin olmayan problem çözme başarılarının karşılaştırılması amacıyla yapılmıştır. Ayrıca, sekizinci ve dokuzuncu sınıf öğrencilerinin üstbiliş farkındalık ve yeti düzeyleri ile rutin olmayan matematiksel problemleri çözme başarıları arasındaki ilişkiler de bu araştırma kapsamında araştırılmıştır. Araştırmanın verileri, bu çalışmaya katılan öğrencilere üstbiliş farkındalık ve üstbiliş yeti anketleri ile rutin olmayan problem çözme testinin uygulanması ile toplanmıştır. Yapılan analizler sonucunda, Kosova ve Türkiye'de öğrenim görmekte olan sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin üstbiliş farkındalık kapsamındaki bilişin düzenlenmesi-yeti düzeyleri ile rutin olmayan problemleri çözme başarıları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı düzeyde farklılığa ulaşılmıştır. Bununla birlikte, Kosova ve Türkiye'de öğrenim görmekte olan dokuzuncu sınıf öğrencilerinin üstbiliş farkındalık ve yeti düzeyleri ile rutin olmayan problem çözme başarıları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı düzeyde farklılıklar bulunamamıştır. Ayrıca, araştırmaya katılan öğrencilerin rutin olmayan problemleri çözme başarıları ile üstbiliş farkındalık ve yetileri arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı düzeyde ilişkilere ulaşılamamıştır.

Keywords

Üstbiliş, Üstbiliş farkındalık, üstbiliş yeti, Problem çözme, Rutin olmayan problem

Supporting Institution

Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Koordinasyon Birimi

Thanks

Bu makale Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi tarafından desteklenen 171210026 nolu araştırma projesinden üretilmiştir.

Metacognitive Skills and Non-Routine Problem Solving Achievements of Eighth and Ninth Grade Students: Kosovo and Turkey Samples

Abstract

In this research, it was aimed to compare the metacognitive awareness and ability levels with non-routine problem solving success of eighth and ninth grade students who were continued their education in Kosovo and Turkey. Additionally, it was examined the relationships among the metacognitive awareness, metacognitive ability and non-routine problem solving success levels of eighth and ninth grade students. The data of the research was obtained from the applications of the metacognitive awareness and ability surveys and non-problem solving tests. The analysis indicated that there was statistically significant difference between Kosovan and Turkish eighth grade students' levels of cognition regulation-ability within the scope of metacognitive awareness and their success in solving non-routine problems. However, there were no significant differences between Kosovan and Turkish ninth grade students' metacognitive awareness and ability levels, and non-rotine problems. Besides, there was no statistically relationships between students' success in solving non-routine problems and their metacognitive awareness and abilities.

Keywords

Metacognition, Metacognitive awareness, Metacognitive ability, Problem solving, Non-routine problem

References

• Ajisuksmo, C. R. P., & Saputri, G. R. (2017). The influence of attitudes towards mathematics, and metacognitive awareness on mathematics achievements. Creative Education, 8, 486-497. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2017.83037
• Akın, A., Abacı, R., & Çetin, B. (2007). The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the metacognitive awareness inventory. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 7(2), 671-678.
• Anggo, M., Suhar, M., & Kansil, Y. E. Y. (2019). Student’s metacognitive activities in solving mathematics problems. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Advanced Multidisciplinary Research (ICAMR 2018), 227. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research. https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/icamr-18/55916844
• Arsuk, S. (2019). Yedinci sinif öğrencilerine verilen üstbiliş destekli problem çözme öğretiminin problem çözme başarisi ve üstbiliş becerilere etkisi (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Uludağ Üniversitesi, Bursa, Türkiye.
• Arum, R. P., Widjajanti, D. B., & Retnawati, H. (2019). Metacognitive awareness: how it affects mathematical problem-solving process. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1320. IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1320/1/012054
• Aşık, G., & Erktin, E. (2019). Metacognitive experiences: Mediating the relationship between metacognitive knowledge and problem solving. Education and Science, 44(197), 85-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2019.7199
• Aydın, U., & Ubuz, B. (2010). Üstbiliş Yetiler Envanteri'nin Türkçeye uyarlaması: Geçerlik çalışması. Eğitim ve Bilim, 35(157), 35-45.
• Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive skills and reading. Technical report No. 188. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED195932.pdf
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
• Davidson, J. E., Deuser, R., & Sternberg, R. J. (1994). The role of metacognition in problem solving. In J. Metcalf, & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Desoete, A., Roeyers, H., & Buysse, A. (2001). Metacognition and mathematical problem solving in grade 3. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(5), 435-447. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940103400505
• Erbaş, A. K., & Okur, S. (2012). Researching students’ strategies, episodes, and metacognitions in mathematical problem solving. Quality & Quantity, 46(1), 89-102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-010-9329-5
• Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
• Gray, S. S. (1991). Ideas in practice: Metacognition and mathematical problem solving. Journal of Developmental Education, 14(3), 24-28. www.jstor.org/stable/42775523
• Izzati, L. R., & Mahmudi, A. (2018). The influence of metacognition in mathematical problem solving. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1097. IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1097/1/012107
• Jacobse, A. E., & Harskamp, E. G. (2012). Towards efficient measurement of metacognition in mathematical problem solving. Metacognition and Learning, 7, 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-012-9088-x
• Kan, A. (2009). Ölçme sonuçları üzerinde istatistiksel işlemler. H. Atılgan (Ed.), Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme (ss.397–456). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Kramarski, B., & Mizrachi, N. (2006). Online discussion and self-regulated learning: Effects of instructional methods on mathematical literacy. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 218-231. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.4.218-231
• Lee, N. H., Yeo, D. J. S., & Hong, S. E. (2014). A metacognitive-based instruction for Primary Four students to approach non-routine mathematical word problems. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46, 465-480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0599-6
• Lestari, W., Pratama, L. D., & Jailani, J. (2018). Metacognitive skills in mathematics problem solving. DAYA MATEMATIS: Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Matematika, 6(3), 286-295. https://doi.org/10.26858/jds.v6i3.8537
• Livingston, J. A. (2003). Metacognition: An overview. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED474273
• Martinez, M. E. (2006). What is metacognition? Phi Delta Kappan, 87(9), 696–699. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170608700916
• Özcan, Z. C. (2016). The relationship between mathematical problem-solving skills and self-regulated learning through homework behaviours, motivation, and metacognition. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47(3), 408-420. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1080313
• Özcan, Z. C., & Gümüş, A. E. (2019). A modeling study to explain mathematical problem-solving performance through metacognition, self-efficacy, motivation, and anxiety. Australian Journal of Education, 63(1), 116-134. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944119840073
• Özcan, Z. C., İmamoğlu, Y., & Bayraklı, V. K. (2017). Analysis of sixth grade students’ think-aloud processes while solving a non-routine mathematical problem. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 17(1), 129-144. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2017.1.2680
• Özsoy, G. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between metacognition and mathematics achievement. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12, 227-235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-010-9129-6
• Özsoy, G., & Ataman, A. (2009). The effect of metacognitive strategy training on mathematical problem solving achievement. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 1(2), 67-82. https://www.iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/278
• Pennequin, V., Sorel, O., Nanty, I., & Fontaine, R. (2010). Metacognition and low achievement in mathematics: The effect of training in the use of metacognitive skills to solve mathematical word problems. Thinking & Reasoning, 16(3), 198-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2010.509052
• Polya, G. (1973). How to solve it (2nd ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Pugalee, D. K. (2001). Writing, mathematics, and metacognition: Looking for connections through students’ work in mathematical problem solving. School Science and Mathematics, 101(5), 236-245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2001.tb18026.x
• Rakhmatova, A. A. (2020). The impact of tutors’ metacognitive awareness on students’ metacognitive awareness and academic performance (Unpublished master thesis). Mississippi State University, United States.
• Schneider, W., & Artelt, C. (2010). Metacognition and mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 42, 149-161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-010-0240-2
• Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460-475.
• Sperling, R. A., Howard, B. C., Miller, L. A., & Murphy, C., (2002). Measures of children's knowledge and regulation of cognition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 51- 79.
• Susilo, M. B., & Retnawati, H. (2018). An analysis of metacognition and mathematical self-efficacy toward mathematical problem solving ability. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1097. IOP Publishing.
• Sweeney, C. M. (2010). The metacognitive functioning of middle school students with and without learning disabilities during mathematical problem solving (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Miami University, United States.
• Teong, S. K. (2003). The effect of metacognitive training on mathematical word‐problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(1), 46-55. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00005.x
• Yang, C. T. & Lee, S. Y. (2013). The effect of instruction in cognitive and metacognitive strategies on nonth-grade students' metacognitive abilities. New Waves-Educational Research & Development, 16(1), 46-55.