توانایی فراشناختی دانشجویان دانشگاه فرهنگیان درحل مسئله‌های فیزیک: پژوهش کیفی

نویسندگان
فاطمه اصغری 1
سیامک خادمی 2
منصور وصالی 3
1 دانشگاه فرهنگیان پردیس
2 دانشگاه زنجان
3 دانشگاه تربیت دبیر شهید رجایی
چکیده
تاثیر فراشناخت در آموزش و یادگیری مورد تاکید پژوهشگران است. هدف از انجام این پژوهش بررسی دانش و مهارت فراشناختی دانشجویان رشته فیزیک دانشگاه فرهنگیان در حل مسئله‌های مکانیک است. این پژوهش کیفی از نوع پدیدارشناسی تفسیری است و از روش‌های تفکر بلند، مصاحبه و مشاهده در شرایط طبیعی، برای جمع‌آوری داده‌ها و بررسی دانش و مهارت فراشناختی دانشجو- معلمان دانشگاه فرهنگیان استفاده شده است. جامعه آماری با استفاده از نمونه گیری هدفمند شامل تمام دانشجویان ترم اول رشته فیزیک پردیس نسیبه از دانشگاه فرهنگیان تهران، در مجموع چهل و دو نفر دختر، بودند. همچنین سنجش فراشناخت برای حل مسئله‌های مکانیک در بخش سینماتیک انجام شد. در این پژوهش نمونه‌های مورد بررسی شامل دانشجویانی بود که کمتر از شش ماه قبل آزمون ورودی دانشگاه‌ را با موفقیت پشت سر گذاشته بودند. همچنین یک روز قبل از شروع پژوهش در آزمون درس فیزیک پایه1 دانشگاه شرکت کردند، لذا برای حل مسئله مورد نظر در حد قابل قبولی از آمادگی و دانش لازم برخوردار بودند. این تحقیق در سه مرحله انجام شد. در مرحله اول، برای هر دانشجو چند بار و هر بار دو تا سه مسئله در نظر گرفته شد. . در مرحله دوم پژوهش، .با شش نفر از دانشجویان، که علاقه‌ و همکاری بیشتری داشتند، مصاحبه کرد. در مرحله سوم رفتار تمام چهل و دو دانشجو، در طول ترم تحصیلی، هنگام حل مسئله در شرایط طبیعی مشاهده و ثبت شد. . نتایج تحقیق نشان داد که: اغلب دانشجویان مورد بررسی، دارای دانش فراشناختی متوسط و مهارت فراشناختی بسیار ضعیفی بودند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
فراشناخت
حل مسئله
آموزش علوم
آموزش فیزیک

عنوان مقاله English

Metacognitive Abilities of Farhangian University Students to Solve Physics Problems: A Qualitative Study

نویسندگان English

fateme asghari 1
siamak khademi 2
mansour vesali 3
1 farhangian university
2 university of Zanjan
3 Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University
چکیده English

Researchers emphasise the effect of metacognition on learning and teaching. The purpose of this article was to investigate the metacognitive knowledge and skills of physics students at Farhangian University in mechanic's problem solving. This qualitative study is an interpretive phenomenology and the methods of think-aloud protocols, interviewing and observation in natural conditions have been used to collect data and evaluate the metacognitive knowledge and skills of students and instructors at Farhangian University. The sample of the current study were forty two girls in the first semester, who studied physics at the Nasibeh Campus of Farhangian University in Tehran. Metacognitive evaluations were also performed to solve problems in mechanics in the kinematic field. In this study, the samples included students who had successfully passed the university entrance exam in the previous six months. In addition, one day before the start of the research, they participated in the university's basic physics exam, therefore, they had the necessary preparation and knowledge to solve the problems. The study was conducted in three stages. In the first stage, two to three problems were solved by the students with the think-aloud protocols. To familiarize students with the think-aloud protocols, they practiced this method with the help of a researcher. In the second stage, the researcher interviewed six students who were more interested and cooperative. In the third stage, the behavior of all forty-two students was observed and recorded during the academic semester, while solving problems under normal conditions. The results showed that most of the students surveyed had moderate metacognitive knowledge and very poor metacognitive skills

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Metacognition
problem solving
Science Education
Physics Education
Abdullah, F. A. P. (2009). The patterns of physics problem-solving from the perspective of metacognition (Doctoral dissertation). Cambridge University.
Ahmet Oguz Akturk, I. S. (2011). Literature Review on Metacognition and its Measurement, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3731–3736.
Ayazgök, B. & Aslan, H. (2014). The review of academic perception, level of metacognitive awareness and reflective thinking skills of science and mathematics university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141, 781-790.
Dervin, B. (1983). An overview of sense-making research: Concepts, methods, and
results to date. International communications association annual meeting.
Dignath, C. & Büttner, G. (2008). Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students. A meta-analysis on intervention
studies at primary and secondary school level. Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 231-264.
Dori, Y. J., Mevarech, Z., & Baker, D. (2018). Cognition, Metacognition, and Culture in STEM Education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Georghiades, P. (2004). From the general to the situated: Three decades of metacognition. International Journal of Science Education, 26(3), 365-383.
Gok, T. (2010). The general assessment of problem solving processes in physics education. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 2(2), 110-122.
Haller, E. P., Child, D. A., & Walberg, H. J. (1988). Can comprehension be taught? A
quantitative synthesis of “metacognitive” studies. Educational researcher, 17(9), 5-8.
Halliday, Resnick & Jearl walker. (2018). Fundamentals of Physics. Wiley; England.
Haukås, Å. (2018). Metacognition in Language Learning and Teaching. London, England: Taylor & Francis.
Hsu, L., Brewe, E., Foster, T. M. & Harper, K. A. (2004). Resource letter RPS-1: Research in problem solving. American Journal of Physics, 72(9), 1147-1156.
Ince, E. (2018). An Overview of Problem Solving Studies in Physics Education. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(4), 191-200.
Johnson, R. B. (1997). Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education, 118(2), 282-292.
Kadivar. p. (2017). Educational Psychology. Tehran: SAMT. [Persian].
Knight, R. D. (2017). Physics for scientists and engineers. Pearson Higher Ed.
Lai, E. R. (2011). Metacognition: A literature review. Always learning: Pearson research report, 24-64.
Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. Science, 208(4450), 1335-1342.
Leader, W. S. (2008). Metacognition among students identified as gifted or no gifted using the discover assessment (Doctoral dissertation, Arizona University, Arizona, USA). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10150/193777.
Leak, A. E., Rothwell, S. L., Olivera, J., Zwickl, B., Vosburg, J., & Martin, K. N. (2017). Examining problem solving in physics-intensive PhD. research. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(2), 020101,1-13.
Lubliner, S., & Smetana, L. (2005). The effects of comprehensive vocabulary instruction on Title I students' metacognitive word-learning skills and reading comprehension. Journal of Literacy Research, 37(2), 163-200.
Mack, H. G., Spivey, B., & Filipe, H. P. (2019). How to add metacognition to your continuing professional development: Scoping review and recommendations. The Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology, 8(3), 256-263.
Maloney, D. P. (2011). An overview of physics education research on problem solving. Retrieved from https://www.compadre.org/per/items/detail.cfm?ID=11457
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.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, D. A. (1987). Enhancing instructional time through attention to metacognition. Journal of learning disabilities, 20(2), 66-75.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, D. A. (1987). Enhancing instructional time through attention to metacognition. Journal of learning disabilities, 20(2), 66-75.
Pólya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton. New Jersey: Princeton University.
Radmehr, F. (2016). Exploring Students' Learning of Integral Calculus Using Revised Bloom's Taxonomy (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
Rahman, F., & Masrur, R. (2011). Is metacognition a single variable? International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(5), 135-141.
Reif, F. & Scott, L. A. (1999). Teaching scientific thinking skills: Students and computers coaching each other. American Journal of Physics, 67(9), 819-831.
Sabella, M. S. (1999). Using the context of physics problem-solving to evaluate the coherence of student knowledge (Doctoral dissertation, Maryland University Maryland, USA). Retrieved from https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999PhDT441S.
Schneider, W. (2010). Metacognition and memory development in childhood and adolescence. Metacognition strategy use, and instruction, 54-81.
Uzuner, Y. (2008). Metacognitive strategies applied during correcting text‐related answers of three students with hearing loss. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 8(1), 47-54.
Veenman, M. V., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3-14.
White, B. Y., & Frederik Sen, J. R. (1988). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3-118.
Whitebread, D., Coltman, P., Pasternak, D. P., Sangster, C., Grau, V., Bingham, S. Demetriou, D. (2009). The development of two observational tools for assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 63-85.
Zohar, A., & Barzilai, S. (2013). A review of research on metacognition in science education: Current and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 49(2), 121-169.
Zohar, A., & David, A. B. (2008). Explicit teaching of meta-strategic knowledge in authentic classroom situations. Metacognition and Learning, 3(1), 59-82.
Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (Eds.). (2011). Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research (Vol. 40). Springer Science & Business Media.