• التاريخ: 19-12-2014
  • المشاهدات: 4503

برجاء مساعدتى فى ترجمة هذه الصفحة

قاعة المواضيع الاجنبيه ( غير العربية )
Schwanenflugel, 1995). Metacognitive skills emerge at the age of 8 to 10 years, and expand during the years thereafter (Berk, 2003; Veenman & Spaans, 2005; Veenman et al., 2004). Moreover, certain metacognitive skills, such as monitoring and evaluation, appear to mature later on than others (e.g., planning). Research by Whitebread (1999; EARLI conference in Cyprus, 2005), however, has shown that the behavior of very young children (say, 5 yr. olds) may reveal elementary forms of orientation, planning and reflection if the task is appropriated to their interests and level of understanding. This means that our model of metacognitive development needs some revision. Most likely, metacognitive knowledge and skills already develop during preschool or early-school years at a very basic level, but become more sophisticated and academically oriented whenever formal educational requires the explicit utilization of a metacognitive repertoire. Evidently, we need to know more about what components of metacognition develop when and under what conditions (cf. Thorpe & Satterly, 1990). Moreover, we need to know how the development of a metacognitive component contributes to the subsequent development of other ones. For instance, longitudinal research by Lockl and Schneider (this issue) reveals that a higher level of Theory-of-Mind leads to improved metamemory in the following years, even when confounding factors are controlled for. Similar research for sequential developmental effects in other components of metacognition is needed. Alexander et al. (1995; this issue) showed that metacognitive knowledge develops along a monotonic incremental line throughout the school years, parallel to the development of intellectual ability of students. The impact of intelligence neither increases, nor diminishes over the years. Similarly, Veenman et al. (2004) obtained similar results for the development of metacognitive skills in relation to intellectual ability. In other word, intelligence only gives students a head start in metacognition, but it does not further affect its developmental course. It seems that metacognitive skills initially develop in separate domains, and later on become generalized across domains (Veenman & Spaans, 2005). We need to determine the processes that are responsible for this transfer across domains along the developmental trajectory. These processes include, amongst others, high road transfer (Salomon & Perkins, 1989), and linking metacognition through instruction and feedback provided by teachers (see below). Additionally, examination of the connection of metacognitive development in formal educational settings and other settings is needed. Assessment of Metacognition The evolution in understanding metacognition is paralleled by an evolution in our understanding of assessments that are suitable for measuring and describing metacognition (Pellegrino, Chudowsky, & Glaser, 2002). Many methods for the assessment of metacognition are being used, such as questionnaires (Pintrich & de Groot, 1990; Thomas, 2003), interviews (Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990), the analysis of thinking-aloud protocols (Afflerbach, 2000; Veenman, Elshout & Groen, 1993), observations (Veenman & Spaans, 2005), stimulated recall (cf. Van Hout- Wolters, 2000), on-line computer-logfile registration (Veenman et al., 2004), and eye-movement registration (Kinnunen & Vauras, 1995). All these assessment methods have their pros and cons. For instance, questionnaires are easy to