Author: Iveta Kovalčíková
Institution: University of Prešov
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3077-9743
Author: Ivana Martinková
Institution: University of Prešov
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4352-2864
Year of publication: 2022
Source: Show
Pages: 17-29
DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.22.67.1.01
PDF: tner/202201/tner6701.pdf

The presented paper focuses on the impact of intervention with the application of the SMARTS program on students’ metacognitive abilities. The metacognitive program SMARTS, which is a product of RILD1 (Research Institute for Learning and Development, Lexington, Massachusetts, the author Lynn Meltzer), was translated, adapted, and pilot-tested in the Slovak educational context conditions. In the form of qualitative intervention case studies, the paper analyses (1) the diagnostic potential of SMARTS revealing deficits in students’ metacognitive abilities (organisationorganization and prioritisationprioritization), (2) an intervention to improve a student’s specific metacognitive ability, (3) outcome (stagnation/progress/regression) of the intervention. The results obtained by direct participatory observation applied in the intervention point to a possible positive impact of the SMARTS program on the observed metacognitive abilities of students.

REFERENCES:

  • Bannert, M., & Mengelkamp, Ch. (2008). Assessment of metacognitive skills by means of instruction to think aloud and reflect when prompted. Does the verbalisation method affect learning? Metacognition and Learning, 3, 39-58. doi: 10.1007/s11409-007-9009-6
  • Bryce, D., Whitebread, D., & Szücs, D. (2015). The relationship among executive functions, metacognitive skills and aducational educational achievement in 5 and 7 years-old children. Metacognition and Learning, 10(2), 181-198. doi: 10.1007/s11409-014-9120-4
  • Delis, D. C., Kaplan, E., & Kramer, J. H. (2001). The Delis-Kaplan executive function system. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.
  • Diamond, A., & Lee, K. (2011). Interventions Shown to Aid Executive Function Development in Children 4 to 12 Years Old. Science, 333, 959-964. doi: 10.1126/science.1204529
  • Engelmann, S., & Carnine, D. (1991). Theory of instruction: Principles and applications. Eugene, OR: ADI Press.
  • Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. doi:10.1037/0003066X.34.10.906.
  • Gioia, G. A. (2002). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) in clinical sample. Child Neuropsychology, 8, 249-257. doi: 10.1076/chin.8.4.249.13513.
  • Gioia, G. A., Isquith, P. K., Guy, S. C., & Kenworthy, L. (2011). BRIEF - Škála hodnotenia exekutívnych funkcií u detí [The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functions in children]. Autor českej verzie [Author of the Czech version] R. Ptáček. Praha: Hogrefe - Testcentrum.
  • Kovalčíková, I. (2017). Kognitívna pedagogika 1 [Cognitive Pedagogy 1]. Prešov: Vydavateľstvo Prešovskej univerzity v Prešove. Kovalčíková, I., Veerbeek, J., Vogelaar, B., Prídavková, A., Ferjenčík, J., Šimčíková, E., & Tomková, B. (2021). Domain-Specific Stimulation of Executive Functioning in Low-Performing Students with a Roma Background: Cognitive Potential of Mathematics, Education Sciences, 11(6), 285-200. doi: 10.3390/educsci11060285
  • Lane, H. C. (2009). Promoting Metacognition in Immersive Cultural Learning Environments. In Jacko, (Ed.), Human-Computer Interaction. Interacting in Various Application Domains (pp. 129-139). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-025839_15
  • Lawson, G. M., & Farah, M. J. (2017). Executive Function as a mediator between SES and academic achievement throughout childhood. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 41(1), 94-104. doi: 10.1177/0165025415603489
  • Levin, H. S., & Hanten, G. (2005). Executive functions after traumatic brain injury in children. Pediatric Neurology, 33(2), 79-93. doi: 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2005.02.002
  • Meltzer, L., Katzir, T., Miller, L., Reddy, R., & Roditi, B. (2004). Academic self-perceptions, effort, and strategy use in students with learning disabilities: Changes over time. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 19(2), 99-108. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5826.2004. 00093.x
  • Meltzer, L. (2014). Teaching Executive Functioning Processes: Promoting Metacognition, Strategy Use, and Effort. In S. Goldstein, & J. A. Naglieri, (Eds). Handbook of Executive Functioning (pp. 445-474). New York: Springer.
  • Miles, D., & Forcht, J. P. (1995). Mathematics strategies for secondary students with learning disabilities or mathematics deficiencies: A cognitive approach. Intervention on School and Clinic, 31, 91-96. doi: 10.1177/105345129503100205
  • Petlák, E., & Schachl, H. (2019). Neurodidactics and its perception by teaching in Slovakia. The New Educational Review, 57(3), 161-172. doi:10.15804/tner.2019.57.3.13.
  • Rodek, V. (2019). Learning and its effectiveness in students´ self-reflection. The New Educational Review, 55(1), 112-120. doi: 10.15804/tner.2019.55.1.09.
  • Susantini, E., Indana, S., & Isnawati (2018). Using metacognitive strategy to teach learning strategies: A study of Indonesian pre-service biology teachers. The New Educational Review, 52(2), 258-268. doi: 10.15804/tner.2018.52.2.20.
  • Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 3-14. doi: 10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0

Wiadomość do:

 

 

© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart