Evaluating the effects of the analogical learning approach on eighth graders’ learning outcomes: the role of metacognition

IF 3.2 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Chia-Yu Wang
{"title":"Evaluating the effects of the analogical learning approach on eighth graders’ learning outcomes: the role of metacognition","authors":"Chia-Yu Wang","doi":"10.1039/D2RP00074A","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Teaching with analogies is an important pedagogy that helps learners construct abstract conceptions through reasoning with something familiar. Heat concepts were chosen for this study because they have an intangible nature and involve complex mechanisms that often challenge school-aged learners. Learning this kind of complex concept with analogies involves complicated mental processes that could demand learners’ metacognitive abilities; yet, to date, the influence of metacognition has been left unexamined. This study therefore investigated how metacognition differentially affected adolescents’ processes and outcomes of analogical learning about abstract heat concepts. Eighty-three eighth graders participated in the study and attended two units of Teaching-With-Analogies on specific heat and heat transfer. This study adopted a mixed-method approach along with within-group comparisons. Among them, eight individuals from each of the high-, moderate- and low-metacognitive groups were interviewed to explore the utilized metacognitive activities and their relation with the ability to reason with analogies. The quantitative findings revealed that analogies benefited the moderate metacognitive learners, and yet did not alter the conceptual understanding of the high and low metacognitive cohorts. A unique explanatory power of metacognition was also observed on the learners’ post conceptual understanding, in addition to on their prior knowledge. Verbal process data illustrated that metacognitive abilities substantially influenced every stage of solving heat problems with analogies. The differential outcomes of the analogical learning approach were explained by in-depth case analyses considering the use of prior knowledge and the absence of metacognition during analogical reasoning. Metacognitive characteristics of the dynamic analogy-inferring process for different metacognitive groups were synthesized. The associated implications for the analogical learning approach and accommodations for adolescents of different levels of metacognition are also discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":69,"journal":{"name":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","volume":" 2","pages":" 535-550"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2023/rp/d2rp00074a","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Teaching with analogies is an important pedagogy that helps learners construct abstract conceptions through reasoning with something familiar. Heat concepts were chosen for this study because they have an intangible nature and involve complex mechanisms that often challenge school-aged learners. Learning this kind of complex concept with analogies involves complicated mental processes that could demand learners’ metacognitive abilities; yet, to date, the influence of metacognition has been left unexamined. This study therefore investigated how metacognition differentially affected adolescents’ processes and outcomes of analogical learning about abstract heat concepts. Eighty-three eighth graders participated in the study and attended two units of Teaching-With-Analogies on specific heat and heat transfer. This study adopted a mixed-method approach along with within-group comparisons. Among them, eight individuals from each of the high-, moderate- and low-metacognitive groups were interviewed to explore the utilized metacognitive activities and their relation with the ability to reason with analogies. The quantitative findings revealed that analogies benefited the moderate metacognitive learners, and yet did not alter the conceptual understanding of the high and low metacognitive cohorts. A unique explanatory power of metacognition was also observed on the learners’ post conceptual understanding, in addition to on their prior knowledge. Verbal process data illustrated that metacognitive abilities substantially influenced every stage of solving heat problems with analogies. The differential outcomes of the analogical learning approach were explained by in-depth case analyses considering the use of prior knowledge and the absence of metacognition during analogical reasoning. Metacognitive characteristics of the dynamic analogy-inferring process for different metacognitive groups were synthesized. The associated implications for the analogical learning approach and accommodations for adolescents of different levels of metacognition are also discussed.

评价类比学习方法对八年级学生学习成果的影响:元认知的作用
类比教学是一种重要的教学方法,它可以帮助学习者通过对熟悉事物的推理来构建抽象概念。本研究选择热概念,因为它们具有无形的性质,涉及复杂的机制,往往挑战学龄学习者。学习这种带有类比的复杂概念涉及复杂的心理过程,可能需要学习者的元认知能力;然而,迄今为止,元认知的影响尚未得到研究。因此,本研究探讨了元认知对青少年抽象热概念类比学习过程和结果的差异影响。83名八年级学生参与了这项研究,并参加了两个单元的比热和传热类比教学。本研究采用混合方法及组内比较。选取高、中、低元认知组各8人进行访谈,探讨元认知活动的使用情况及其与类比推理能力的关系。定量研究结果显示,类比对中等元认知学习者有利,但对高、低元认知学习者的概念理解没有影响。除了对学习者的先验知识的解释外,元认知对学习者的后概念理解也有独特的解释能力。言语过程数据表明,元认知能力实质上影响了用类比解决热问题的每个阶段。类比学习方法的不同结果通过深入的案例分析来解释,考虑到在类比推理过程中使用先验知识和缺乏元认知。综合了不同元认知群体动态类比推理过程的元认知特征。类比学习方法的相关含义和适应不同水平的元认知青少年也进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
26.70%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal for teachers, researchers and other practitioners in chemistry education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信