دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی تعلیم بهتر در کلاس درس به همراه ترجمه فارسی
| عنوان فارسی مقاله: | تعلیم بهتر در کلاس درس |
| عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: | Metacognition in the classroom |
| رشته های مرتبط: | علوم تربیتی، روانشناسی، روانشناسی شناخت و مدیریت و برنامه ریزی آموزشی |
| فرمت مقالات رایگان | مقالات انگلیسی و ترجمه های فارسی رایگان با فرمت PDF میباشند |
| کیفیت ترجمه | کیفیت ترجمه این مقاله پایین میباشد |
| توضیحات | ترجمه برخی بخش های این مقاله موجود نمی باشد. |
| نشریه | الزویر – Elsevier |
| کد محصول | f314 |
|
مقاله انگلیسی رایگان |
دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی |
|
ترجمه فارسی رایگان |
دانلود رایگان ترجمه مقاله |
| جستجوی ترجمه مقالات | جستجوی ترجمه مقالات علوم تربیتی |
|
بخشی از ترجمه فارسی مقاله: چکیده |
|
بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی: Abstract Understanding students’ capacity to direct their own learning has been a central topic of discussion among educational practicioners. Researchers argue that the capacity to self-regulate is central to our assumptions about learning, decision making, problem solving, and resource management in education.Basic research questions are “What is self-regulation?” and” what is metacognition?”. In this paper, we first look at various conceptualisations of self-regulation prominent in the educational psychology research literature, then discuss the metacognitive strategies which will enhance their self regulation and compare and contrast the university students’ use of metacognitive strategies in the mother tongue and target language. 1. Metacognition and self regulation Understanding students’ capacity to direct their own learning in school and beyond has been a central topic of discussion among practising educators, policy-makers, and educational researchers alike. Researchers argue that the capacity to self-regulate is central to our assumptions about learning, decision making, problem solving, and resource management in education, and they have promised assessment instruments and intervention programs to promote self-regulation and make learners use their metacognitive strategies. Basic research questions are “What is self-regulation?” and” what is metacognition?”. In this paper, we first look closely at various conceptualisations of self-regulation that are prominent in the educational psychology research literature, then discuss the metacognitive strategies which will enhance their self regulation and compare and contrast the university students’ use of metacognitive strategies in the mother tongue and target language. The notion of metacognition originated in the context of information processing studies in the 1970s. One of the first descriptions of metacognition comes from Flavell (1976), who describes it as ‘one’s knowledge concerning one’s own cognitive processes and products or anything related to them’. He also asserted that metacognition includes ‘the active monitoring and consequent regulation and orchestration’ of information processing activities (Flavell, 1976, p. 232). Baird (1990, p.184) used these ideas to provide the following succinct formulation: ‘Metacognition refers to the knowledge, awareness and control of one’s own learning’. Metacognitive development can therefore be described as a development in one’s metacognitive abilities, i.e. the move to greater knowledge, awareness, transfer of the knowledge and control of one’s own learning. Gunstone (1994) stresses that all learners are metacognitive and that the associated pedagogical goal should be to enhance metacognition. He suggests that enhanced metacognition is a learning outcome in itself, as well as a having a critical impact on the achievement of content-based learning outcomes. He argues that enhanced and appropriate metacognitive abilities will only be achieved by means of an integrative perspective on metacognition, in which metacognitive training is recognised to be intimately bound up in issues of content and context. Some attempts have been made to teach metacognitive skills apart from the context and content within which they are to be used, in socalled ‘study skills’ programmes. This approach rests on an assumption that students will be able to transfer these skills from one context to another. Self-regulated learning, or self-regulation, on the other hand, is “an active, constructive process whereby learners set goals for their learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control their cognition, motivation, and behavior, guided and constrained by their goals and the contextual features in the environment” (Pintrich, 2000b, p. 453). Part of the impetus for studying academic self-regulated learning came from research showing that learners’ skills and abilities did not fully explain student achievement (Zimmerman, 2001), which suggested that factors such as self-regulation and motivation were important. Applying self-regulation to education also broadened its scope beyond the historical emphasis of performance of previously learned actions to actual learning. Our premise is that college students, who are the focus of this paper, have a distinct set of academic goals related to typical academic tasks, and that their knowledge and use of strategies will reflect those factors. College students are responsible for a variety of assignments, from answering questions at the end of a chapter to writing summaries of course topics. The successful completion of these tasks depends on reading. Research also shows that interest and value relate to self-regulation. Students with greater personal interest in a topic and those who view the activity as important or useful are more likely to use adaptive self-regulatory strategies (Pintrich & Zusho, 2002). Research is needed to explore the process whereby these effects occur. We might expect that because interest and value relate positively to perceptions of competence that these students are more likely to set goals and assess their learning progress, which builds self-efficacy and furthers learning. Metacognitive research has shown that metacognition is an important predictor of academic performance; students are able to effectively distinguish information they know and do not know are more likely to review and retain new information (Dunning, Johnson, Ehrlinger, & Kruger, 2003; Dunslosky & Thiede, 1998; Kruger & Dunning, 1999). Metacognitive research has also proved that metacognitive training, even if administered for a short time, can improve performance considerably (e.g., Nietfeld & Schraw, 2002; Thiede, Anderson, & Therriault, 2003). Even more encouraging is that academically weak students are found to benefit from metacognitive training (White & Frederiksen, 1998). Since all students do not spontaneously engage in metacognition, some require explicit training and coaching to learn such skills (Chi, Bassok, Lewis, Reimann, & Glaser, 1989; Lin & Lehman, 1999).In this paper, the aim is to see whether students use the metacognitive reading strategies in the target language and mother tongue without prior training. |