Abstract
Building students’ knowledge of the nature of science (NOS) has potential to improve important elements of science literacy as students learn both a body of scientific knowledge and develop understanding of how that body of knowledge has come to be (Duschl 1990; Peters and Kitsantas 2010a). Over 20 years of evidence has demonstrated that a person’s epistemology plays a role in developing reasoning, connecting evidence and claims, and setting the foundation for learning approaches (Hofer and Pintrich 1997; King and Kitchener 1994). Therefore, an emphasis on teaching NOS in science class is important in developing scientifically literate students. However, teaching a sophisticated understanding of NOS to students has been difficult in part due to unfocused pedagogical approaches offered to teachers. The incorporation of NOS teaching into inquiry-based lessons can be focused by a learning theory, and self-regulated learning theory (SRL) has potential as a helpful tool for incorporation of NOS because the theory explains learning as a goal-directed process whereby a person is required to identify a problem, examine relevant data to inform a solution, develop a solution, and evaluate the solution (Zimmerman 2008). The approach offered in this chapter presents new opportunities to reach students supported by a well-document learning theory.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Butler, D. L., Beckingham, B., & Lauscher, H. J. N. (2005). Promoting strategic learning by eighth-grade students struggling in mathematics: A report of three case studies. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20, 156–174.
Cleary, T. J., & Labuhn, A. (2013). Application of cyclical self-regulation interventions in science-based contexts. In H. Bembenutty, T. J. Cleary, & A. Kitasantas (Eds.), Applications of self-regulated learning across diverse disciplines: A tribute to Barry J. Zimmerman (pp. 89–124). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Cleary, T. J., & Platten, P. (2013). Examining the correspondence between self-regulated learning and academic achievement: A case study analysis [Special Issue]. Educational Research International, 2013.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1987). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics (Technical report no. 403). Cambridge, MA: BBN Laboratories. Centre for the Study of Reading, University of Illinois.
De Corte, E., Mason, L., Depaepe, F., & Verschaffel, L. (2011). Self-regulation of mathematical knowledge and skills. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 155–172). New York: Routledge.
Driscoll, M. P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Duschl, R. (1990). Restructuring science education: The role of theories and their importance. New York: Teachers College Press.
Graham, S., & Harris, H. R. (2005). Improving the writing performance of young struggling writers: Theoretical and programmatic research from the center on accelerating student learning. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 19–33.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (3rd ed., pp. 403–422). New York: Longman.
Henderson, R. W. (1986). Self-regulated learning: Implications for the design of instructional media. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 405–427.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140.
Hogan, K. (2000). Exploring a process view of students’ knowledge about the nature of science. Science Education, 84, 51–70.
Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 551–578.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nargund, V., & Park Rogers, M. A. (2009). That is not where that element goes…ah, the nature of science. Science Scope, 10, 23–29.
Peters, E. E. (2009). Thinking like scientists: Using metacognitive prompts to develop nature of science knowledge. Saarbrücken: Verlag Dr. Müller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG Publishers.
Peters, E. E. (2012). Developing content knowledge in students through explicit teaching of the nature of science: Influences of goal setting and self-monitoring. Science & Education, 21(6), 881–898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9219-1.
Peters, E. E., & Kitsantas, A. (2010a). Self-regulation of student epistemic thinking in science: The role of metacognitive prompts. Educational Psychology, 30(1), 27–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410903353294.
Peters, E. E., & Kitsantas, A. (2010b). The effect of nature of science metacognitive prompts on science students’ content and nature of science knowledge, metacognition, and self-regulatory efficacy. School Science and Mathematics, 110, 382–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00050.x.
Peters-Burton, E. E. (2013). The use of clinical interviews to develop in-service secondary science teachers’ nature of science knowledge and assessment of student NOS knowledge. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 86(6), 229–237.
Peters-Burton, E. E. (2015). Outcomes of a self-regulatory curriculum model: Network analysis of middle school students’ views of nature of science. Science & Education, 24, 855–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9769-3.
Peters-Burton, E. E. (2017). Strategies for learning nature of science knowledge: A perspective from educational psychology. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), History, philosophy and science teaching: New perspectives (pp. 167–193). Dordrecht: Springer.
Peters-Burton, E. E., & Botov, I. S. (2017). Self-regulated learning microanalysis as a tool to inform professional development delivery in real-time. Metacognition and Learning, 12(1), 45–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9160-z.
Sinatra, G. M., & Taasoobshirazi, G. (2011). Intentional conceptual change: The self-regulation of science. In B. J. Zimmerman, B. J, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 203–216). New York: Routledge.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social-cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego: Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Education Research Journal, 45, 166–183.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1997). Developmental phases in self-regulation: Shifting from process goals to outcome goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 29–36.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Peters-Burton, E.E., Burton, S.R. (2020). The Use of Metacognitive Prompts to Foster Nature of Science Learning. In: McComas, W.F. (eds) Nature of Science in Science Instruction. Science: Philosophy, History and Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-57238-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-57239-6
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)