Comparison of Taiwanese and Canadian Students' Metacognitive Awareness of Science Reading, Text, and Strategies

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 693-713

  Wang, Jing Ru ^a   Chen, Shin Feng ^a   Fang, I ^a   Chou, Ching Ting ^a  

^a NATIONAL PINGTUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Metacognition; Reading comprehension; Science education

Indexed keywords

EID: 84895900780     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2013.826841     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Armbruster, B. B., Anderson, T. H., & Ostertag, J. (1989). Teaching text structure to improve reading and writing. Reading Teacher, 43(2), 130-137.
2. Barton, M. L., & Jordan, D. L. (2001). Teaching reading in science: A supplement to teaching reading in the content areas teacher's manual (2nd ed.). Aurora, CO: McREL.
3. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
4. van den Broek, P., Virtue, S., Everson, M. G., Tzeng, Y., & Sung, Y. C. (2002). Comprehension and memory of science texts: Inferential processes and the construction of a mental representation. In OteroJ.LeónJ. A.GraesserA. C. (Ed.), The psychology of science text comprehension, (pp. 131-154). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Cook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E. (1988). Teaching readers about the structure of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 448-456. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.448
7. Elshout-Mohr, M., & Van Daalen-Kapteijns, M. (2002). Situated regulation of scientific text processing. In OteroJ.LeónJ. A.GraesserA. C. (Ed.), The psychology of science text comprehension, (pp. 223-252). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Ford, C. L., & Yore, L. D. (2012). Toward convergence of metacognition, reflection, and critical thinking: Illustrations from natural and social sciences teacher education and classroom practice. In ZoharA.DoriJ. (Ed.), Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research, (pp. 251-271). DordrechtThe Netherlands: Springer.
9. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
10. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
11. Jacobs, J. E., & Paris, S. G. (1987). Children's metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22(3/4), 255-278.
12. Jenkins, E. W., & Nelson, N. W. (2005). Important but not for me: Students' attitude towards secondary school science in England. Research in Science and Technological Education, 23(1), 41-57. doi: 10.1080/02635140500068435
13. Jimenez, V., Puente, A., Alvarado, J. M., & Arrebillaga, L. (2009). Measuring metacognitive strategies using the reading awareness scale ESCOLA. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 7(2), 779-804.
14. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.
15. Loman, N. L., & Mayer, R. E. (1983). Signaling techniques that increase the understandability of expository prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(3), 402-412. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.75.3.402
16. Mayer, R. E. (1992). Guiding students' cognitive processing of scientific information in text. In PressleyM.HarrisK. R.GuthrieJ. T. (Ed.), Promoting academic competence and literacy in school, (pp. 242-258). New York: Academic Press.
17. McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analysis. Psychological Methods, 7, 64-82. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.64
18. Midgley, C., Eccles, J. S., & Feldlaufer, H. (1991). Classroom environment and the transition to junior high school. In FraserB. J.WalbergH. J. (Ed.), Educational environments: Antecedents and consequences, (pp. 113-139). London: Pergamon.
19. Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students' metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.249
20. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240. doi: 10.1002/sce.10066
21. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2012). Reading science: How a naive view of reading hinders so much else. In ZoharA.DoriY. J. (Ed.), Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research, (pp. 37-56). DordrechtThe Netherlands: Springer.
22. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2010). PISA 2009 results: Executive summary. Paris Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development:Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/54/12/46643496.pdf
23. Pearson, P. D., Moje, E., & Greenleaf, C. (2010). Literacy and science: Each in service of the other. Science, 328(23), 459-463. doi: 10.1126/science.1182595
24. Pereira-Laird, J. A., & Deane, F. P. (1997). Development and validation of a self-report measure of reading strategy use. Reading Psychology, 18, 185-235. doi: 10.1080/0270271970180301
25. Perez, T. M., Majerus, S., & Poncelet, M. (2011). The contribution of short-term memory for serial order to early reading acquisition: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 111(4), 708-723. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2011.11.007
26. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy / science literacy. In AbellS. K.LedermanN. G. (Ed.), Handbook of research on science education, (pp. 729-780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27. Rukavina, I., & Daneman, M. (1996). Acquiring knowledge about competing scientific theories from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 272-287. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.88.2.272
28. Veenman, M. V. J. (2012). Metacognition in science education: Definitions, constituents, and their intricate relation with cognition. In ZoharA.DoriY. J. (Ed.), Metacognition in science education: Trends and current research, (pp. 21-36). DordrechtThe Netherlands: Springer.
29. Walker, B. J. (2008). Diagnostic teaching of reading techniques for instruction and assessment (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
30. Wang, J.-R., Chen, S.-F., Fang, I., & Chou, C.-T. (2009). Evaluating elementary and secondary school science learning environments in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 853-872. doi: 10.1080/09500690701636361
31. Wang, J.-R., Chen, S.-F., Fang, I., & Chou, C.-T. (2012). Development of a test assessing elementary students' comprehension of science texts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(4), 955-973. doi: 10.1007/s10763-011-9307-y
32. Wang, T. (2007, November). Understand Chinese culture and learning. Proceedings of the 2006 Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) conference, Adelaide, Australia.
33. Yore, L. D. (2011, June). Pedagogical content knowledge about science literacy: Elementary, middle, and secondary levels. Keynote address to the Science Education and E-Learning Conference, National Pingtung University of Education, Pingtung, Taiwan.
34. Yore, L. D. (2012). Science Literacy for all-more than a slogan, logo, or rally flag!. In TanK. C. D.KimM.HwangS. (Ed.), Issues and challenges in science education research: Moving forward, (pp. 5-23). DordrechtThe Netherlands: Springer.
35. Yore, L. D., Bisanz, G. L., & Hand, B. M. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 689-725. doi: 10.1080/09500690305018
36. Yore, L. D., Craig, M. T., & Maguire, T. O. (1998). Index of science reading awareness: An interactive-constructive model, test verification, and grades 4-8 results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(1), 27-51. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199801)35:1<27::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-P
37. Yore, L. D., & Treagust, D. F. (2006). Current reality and future possibilities: Language and science literacy-empowering research and informing instruction. International Journal in Science Education, 28, 291-314. doi: 10.1080/09500690500336973
38. Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2012). Introduction. In ZoharA.DoriY. J. (Ed.), Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research, (pp. 1-19). DordrechtThe Netherlands: Springer.