metacognition reaction paper 4

Upload: emily-marshman-lander

Post on 03-Jun-2018

216 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/11/2019 Metacognition Reaction Paper 4

    1/2

    The Reder and Ritter article brought out many interesting points. First off, they defined

    metaknowledge as how people determine what they know about a question before they

    actually answer it. They mention that feeling of knowing is a general process that operates

    whenever memory is queried. It is also an automatic process that goes unnoticedunless there

    is a retrieval failure after an assessment that the fact should be in memory. This made me

    question whether metaknowledge (or metacognition processes) can indeed be an unconscious

    process. So far in this course, I have been unconvinced that metacognition can actually occur

    unconsciously. But it seems that when we are asked a question, we unconsciously have a feeling

    of knowing that either allows us to answer the question or not. Although we do not actually

    search for the answer, we may have a feeling of not knowing based on the question cue.

    I interpreted their statement In problem solving, there is a decoupling between feeling of

    knowing and knowing when surface structure does not predict the deep structure of the problem

    to mean that a novice student may have a feeling of knowing for all spring problems if they

    have learned the equation F=-kx. But they will not understand that some spring problems may

    require the use of conservation of energy. Im not sure that is how they meant the statement to

    be interpreted, but that is how I understood it.

    The Reder and Ritter study showed that participants had feeling of knowing judgments

    based on how familiar they were with the problem parts and the co-occurrence of two operands.

    Reder and Ritter feel that co-occurrence information are important for giving a feeling of

    knowing. However, I tried to think of situations where co-occurrence of information could lead

    to an incorrect feeling of knowing. Perhaps a student might see the words velocity and

    acceleration and assume that they know they can solve the problem using kinematics.

    However, the problem might be solved using conservation of momentum. Since the student has

    an immediate feeling of knowing, they dont take the time to search forthe answer because they

    think they know it. I do not know if this is the way to apply this concept to an educational

    setting, but I am trying to make a connection to my own research.

    The Metacognitive Judgments chapter also helped me see that the preliminary feeling of

    knowing that drives strategy choice is based on cue familiarity. I feel this is so important in the

    field of physics because certain terms such as velocity, acceleration, energy, and force are used

    so frequently throughout two semesters of an introductory physics course, but in different

    contexts. Thus, students may feel that they have mastered a topic such as acceleration but are

    unable to apply this topic in a different context. They often over-generalize ideas or misapply

    concepts because they struggle to see the deeper features of the problem solution. Students see

    certain terms and physical situations so often that they may feel they have solved this problem

    before. Thus, they solve the problem based upon their incorrect assumptions rather than the

    deeper conceptual features of the problem. As an instructor, we should actually help students to

    get a feeling of not knowing so that they choose the strategy of calculate rather than

    retrieve. I think this can be done by asking questions along the way throughout the problem

  • 8/11/2019 Metacognition Reaction Paper 4

    2/2

    solving process, such as, Why are you using equation X? or When can concept Y be applied

    and when can it not?