Metacognitive awareness level of Pysics Teachers in Johor Bahru
Tahap kesedaran Metakognitif Guru Fizik Johor Bahru
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37134/jpsmm.vol11.2.8.2021Keywords:
Physics education, Metacognition, Teachers’ metacognition, Metacognitive Awareness Inventory for Teacher (MAIT)Abstract
Research on metacognition has been mostly done focusing on students compared to teachers. It is a trend found in both national and international literature. Research on teachers’ metacognition is important because they are the main core of education and their metacognition can influence the teaching practiced. Therefore, this research was done to identify the level of metacognitive awareness of Physics teachers in Johor Bahru. Besides, the differences in scores across years of teaching and gender were also discovered. 70 teachers in Johor Bahru were involved. The instrument used was the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory for Teachers (MAIT) that has been given out online. Result from the study indicates that the respondents obtain a higher score in metacognitive regulation (4.04) compared to metacognitive knowledge (4.01). It was also found that respondents with teaching experience lower than 5 years have a higher min rank (min = 35.82) compared to those with more than 5 years experience (min = 35.38) with an insignificant difference (U=478.5, p=.937). Men have higher metacognitive scores (min = 42.68) compared to women (min = 32.82). Statistical test indicates significant difference for gender (U=348, p=.034). Overall, teachers’ metacognition was found to be at a good level. Further study needs to be done to find out more about teachers’ metacognition using different approaches. The MAIT instrument that has been translated in this study is suitable to be adopted into researching teachers’ metacognition in general for a population. This study can also be adapted for a preliminary framework in introducing metacognition element into teachers’ education.
Downloads
References
Abdellah, R. (2014). Metacognitive Awareness and its Relation to Academic Achievement and Teaching Performance of Pre-Service Female Teachers in Ajman University in UAE. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 174 (2015) 560 – 567.
Balcikanli, C. (2011). Metacognitive Awareness Inventory for Teachers (MAIT). Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9(3), 1309-1332.
Bambang, S. (2015). Science Education in Malaysia: Challenges in the 21st Century. A Paper Presented at 1st International Seminar on Science Education (ISSE) 2015 on 31 October 2015 at Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Bunyamin, M. A. H. & Finley, F. (2016). STEM Education in Malaysia: Reviewing the Current Physics Curriculum. International Conference of Association for Science Teacher Education.
Cihanoglu, M. O. (2013). Metacognitive Awareness of Teacher Candidates. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences. 46 (2012) 4529-4533.
Cross, D. R. & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental And Instructional Analyses of Children’s Metacognition and Reading Comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131-142.
Damar, S. Y., Ozdemir, O. F., & Unal, C. (2015). Pre-Service Physics Teachers’ Metacognitive Knowledge about Their Instructional Practices. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(5), 1009-1026. Iser Publication.
Feldon, D. F. (2007). Cognitive Load and Classroom Teaching: The Double-Edged Sword of Automaticity. Educational Psychologist, 42(3).
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.
Gopinath, S. (2014). Metacognitive Awareness in Teaching and Teaching Competency: A Survey on Student Teachers at Secondary LevelN. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME), 4(4), 33–35.
Hartman, H. J. (Ed.) Metacognition in Learning and Instruction: Theory, Research, and Practice. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.149 -169. 2001.
Hidayah, I., & Zanaton, H. I., (2017) Strategi Metakognitif untuk Kemahiran Berfikir Aras Tinggi Dalam Proses Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran. Simposium Pendidikan Diperibadikan. Fakulti Pendidikan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Idris, N., Abdullah, N., & Sembak, S. (2019). Metacognition Awareness and Conceptual Understanding of Mathematical Problem Solving (23 - 40). Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Dan Matematik Malaysia, 5(2), 23-40
In’am, A., Abdul Ghani, S., & Saad, N. S. (2012). Development of Mathematics Teaching and Learning Model Based on Metacognitivef (23 - 37). Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Dan Matematik Malaysia, 2(1), 23-37.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2013a). Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025 (Pendidikan Prasekolah Hingga Lepas Menengah). Putrajaya: Kementrian Pendidikan Malaysia.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2013b). Spesifikasi Kurikulum Fizik Tingkatan 5. Putrajaya: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2015). Laporan TIMSS 2015-Trends In International Mathematics and Science Study. Putrajaya: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.
Lai, E. R. (2011). Metacognition: A Literature Review (pp. 1-41, Rep.). Pearson.
Lewis, Regina, "Predictors of U.S. Teachers' Use of Metacognition in Mathematics Instruction" (2016). Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies. 2411.
Lin, X., Schwartz, D. L., & Hatano, G. (2005). Toward Teachers’ Adaptive Metacognition. Educational Psychologist. 40(4), 245-255.
Mai, M.Y. (2015). Science Teachers Self Perception about Metacognition. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 5(1).
Memnun, D. S. & Akkaya, R. (2009). The Levels of Metacognitive Awareness of Primary Teacher Trainees. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. 1919–1923
Mulendema, P., Ndhlovu, Z. & Mulenga, H. (2016). Perceptions and Attitudes of Student Teachers and Their Cognitive-Metacognitive Awareness in Mathematics in Colleges of Education in Zambia. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(27).
Peteranetz, M. S. Fostering Metacognition in the Middle School Classroom: An Exploration of Teachers’ Practices. Master Thesis. University Of Nebraska; 2014.
Razak, A. F. I. & Rahman, N. A. (2020). Triangulation of Stimulated Reflection and Interview in Assessing Physics Teacher’s Metacognitive Knowledge. Buletin Persatuan Pendidikan Sains dan Matematik Johor, 29(1).
Row, B. N., Subramaniam, S. & Sathasivam, R. V. (2016). When students say “I just couldn’t think”: Challenges in Teaching Skilful Thinking. The Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(2).
Sabine, L. & Everitt, B. S. A Handbook of Statistical Analyses using SPSS. CRC Press LLC. Wshington. 2004.
Schraw, G. & Dennison, R.S. (1994). Assessing Metacognitive Awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19 (4), 460-475.
Schraw, G. & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive Theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351-371.
Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting Self-Regulation in Science Education: Metacognition as Part of a Broader Perspective on Learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111-139.
Sumintono, B. (2016). Science Education in Malaysia: Challenges in the 21st Century. In International Seminar on Science Education (ISSE).
Veenman, M. V. J. Metacognition in Science Education: Definitions, Constituents and Their Intricate Relation with Cognition. Springer Netherlands. In: Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (Ed). Metacognition in Science Education: Trends in Current Research. Springer Netherlands. 21-31; 2012.
Wilson, N. S. & Bai, H. (2010). The Relationships and Impact of Teachers’ Metacognitive Knowledge and Pedagogical Understandings of Metacognition. Metacognition and Learning, 5(3):269-288.
Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (ed). Metacognition in Science Education: Trends in Current Research. Springer Netherlands. 2012.
