Psychological Development and Education ›› 2018, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (2): 181-190.doi: 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2018.02.07

Previous Articles     Next Articles

The Relationship of Constructivist Pedagogy and Metathinking: The Mediating Role of Cognitive Holding Power

CHI Liping1, ZONG Zheng2, XIN Ziqiang2, CHEN Yinghe3   

  1. 1. School of Child Development and Education, China Women's University, Beijing 100101;
    2. School of Sociology and Psychology, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 100081;
    3. Institute of Developmental Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875
  • Online:2018-03-15 Published:2018-03-15

PDF (PC)

Abstract: Constructivist pedagogy may exert more cognitive holding power on students, so as to make them think more about their thinking process, i.e., to strengthen their metathinking. In the present study, the constructivist pedagogy evaluation questionnaire, the cognitive holding power questionnaire, and the scales of general metathinking and situational metathinking were administrated to a sample of 381 students in the grades of 5, 8, and 11 to explore the relationship among constructivist pedagogy, cognitive holding power and metathinking. It was found that (1) scores of constructivist pedagogy could positively predict levels of participants' general metathinking and situational metathinking; and (2) the first order cognitive holding power partly mediated the prediction relations, when adding the first order cognitive holding power as the only mediator; (3) while adding the second order cognitive holding power as the only mediator into the original direct path from constructivist pedagogy to general metathinking and situational metathinking, the direct path became not significant, whereas the mediating path was significant; (4) when the first and second order cognitive holding power were added into the direct path at the same time, constructivist pedagogy could only predict the level of the second order cognitive holding power, and the latter could affect participants' general metathinking and situational metathinking.

Key words: constructivist pedagogy, first order cognitive holding power, second order cognitive holding power, metathinking

CLC Number: 

  • G442

Baeten, M., Dochy, F., Struyven, K., Parmentier, E., & Vanderbruggen, A. (2016). Student-centred learning environments:An investigation into student teachers' instructional preferences and approaches to learning. Learning Environments Research, 19(1), 43-62.

Bay, E., Bagceci, B., & Cetin, B. (2012). The effects of social constructivist approach on the learners' problem solving and metacognitive levels. Journal of Social Sciences, 8(3), 343-348.

Conner, L. N. (2014). Students' use of evaluative constructivism:Comparative degrees of intentional learning. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(4), 472-489.

de Jager, B., Jansen, M., & Reezigt, G. (2005). The development of metacognition in primary school learning environments. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(2), 179-196.

Desch, I., Basten, M., Großmann, N., & Wilde, M. (2017). Gender differences in perceived fulfillment of the process characteristics moderated in constructivist learning environment:The effects of autonomy support in student selection. Journal for Educational Research Online, 9(2), 156-182.

Efklides, A. (2006). Metacognition and affect:What can metacognitive experiences tell us about the learning process?Educational Research Review, 1(1), 3-14.

Hsu, L. L., & Hsieh, S. I. (2014). Factors affecting metacognition of undergraduate nursing students in a blended learning environment. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 20(3), 233-241.

Hwang, Y. S., & Vrongistinos, K. (2002). Elementary in-service teachers' self-regulated learning strategies related to their academic achievements. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29(3), 147-154.

Iofciu, F., Miron, C., & Antohe, S. (2012). Constructivist approach of evaluation strategies in science education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 292-296.

Karpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C., & Roediger Ⅲ, H. L. (2009). Metacognitive strategies in student learning:Do students practise retrieval when they study on their own? Memory, 17(4), 471-479.

Loyens, S. M. M., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Schmidt, H. G. (2008). Relationships between students' conceptions of constructivist learning and their regulation and processing strategies. Instructional Science, 36, 445-462.

Luckay, M. B., & Laugksch, R. C. (2015). The development and validation of an instrument to monitor the implementation of social constructivist learning environments in grade 9 science classrooms in South Africa. Research in Science Education, 45(1), 1-22.

Özerba?, M. A. (2015). Evaluation of new primary education curriculum based on constructivist learning approach through the viewpoints of teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 2292-2300.

Pintrich, P. R., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance.Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.

Pennequin, V., Sorel, O., Nanty, I., & Fontaine, R. (2010). Metacognition and low achievement in mathematics:The effect of training in the use of metacognitive skills to solve mathematical word problems. Thinking & Reasoning, 16(3), 198-220.

Quiles, C., Verdoux, H., & Prouteau, A. (2014). Assessing metacognition during a cognitive task:Impact of "on-line" metacognitive questions on neuropsychological performances in a non-clinical sample. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 20(5), 547-554.

Schneider, W., & Lockl, K. (2002). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children and adolescents. In T. Perfect, & B. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.

Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351-371.

Sperling, R. A., Howard, B. C., Miller, L. A., & Murphy, C. (2002). Measures of children's knowledge and regulation of cognition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(1), 51-79.

Stevenson, J. C. (1986). Adaptability:Theoretical considerations. Journal of Structural Learning, 9(2), 107-117.

Stevenson, J. C. (1990). Conceptualisation and measurement of cognitive holding power in technical and further education learning settings. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education. Sydney, New South Wales.

Stevenson, J. C. (1998). Performance of the cognitive holding power questionnaire in schools. Learning and Instruction, 8(5), 393-410.

Tenenbaum, G., Naidu, S., Jegede, O., & Austin, J. (2001). Constructivist pedagogy in conventional on-campus and distance learning practice:An exploratory investigation. Learning and Instruction, 11(2), 87-111.

Tunca, N. (2015). The regression level of constructivist learning environment characteristics on classroom environment characteristics supporting critical thinking. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 60, 181-200.

Wen, M. L., Tsai, C. C., Lin, H. M., & Chuang, S. C. (2004). Cognitive-metacognitive and content-technical aspects of constructivist Internet-based learning environments:a LISREL analysis. Computers & Education, 43(3), 237-248.

Whitebread, D., Coltman, P., Pasternak, D. P., Sangster, C., Grau, V., Bingham, S., Almeqdad, Q.,& Demetriou, D. (2009). The development of two observational tools for assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children. Metacognition Learning, 4(1), 63-85.

Xin, Z. Q., & Zhang, L. (2009). Cognitive holding power, fluid intelligence, and mathematical achievement as predictors of children's realistic problem solving. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(1), 124-129.

Yildirim, A., & Yilmaz, S. S. (2016). The effect of context:Based chemical equilibrium on grade 11 students' learning, motivation and constructivist learning environment. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 11(9), 3117-3137.

陈英和, 韩瑽瑽. (2012). 儿童青少年元认知的发展特点及作用的心理机制.心理科学,35(3), 537-543.

董奇, 林崇德. (2011).中国儿童青少年心理发育标准化测验简介. 北京:科学出版社.

姜英杰. (2008). 元认知:理论质疑与界说.东北师大学报:哲学社会科学版, (2), 135-140.

黎坚, 唐云, 张厚粲. (2008). 元认知的调节过程及其领域一般性问题的分析.心理科学,31(3), 748-750.

牛华伟, 张厚超. (2009). 数学建模在经济管理中的应用.牡丹江教育学院学报, (5), 62-63.

王彦华. (2012). 运用构建主义思想提升微积分教学的有效性.数学学习与研究:教研版, (3), 15-16.

辛自强, 池丽萍. (2005). 认知压力促进知识建构:另眼看减负.教育科学研究, (9), 52-55.

辛自强, 池丽萍, 张丽. (2006). 建构主义视野下的教学评估.教育研究, (4), 55-60.

辛自强, 林崇德. (2006). 创新素质培养的建构主义视角.中国教育学刊, (5), 5-8.

辛自强, 宁良强, 池丽萍. (2005). 认知压力与建构主义数学教学的关系.心理科学,28(6), 1324-1329.

辛自强, 张睆, 李福洪, 陈英和. (2016). 一般元思维与情境元思维量表的编制.心理技术与应用,4(6), 365-375.

张志戎. (2006). 基于建构主义的微积分教学.湖州师范学院学报,28(2), 138-140.
[1] WANG Mingzhong, WANG Mengran, WANG Jing. Interparental Conflict Compromises Adolescents' Academic Achievement: The Indirect Roles of Effortful Control and Classroom Engagement [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2018, 34(4): 434-442.
[2] GAO Ruiyan, NIU Meixin, YANG Tao, ZHOU Xinlin. The Accuracy and Form of Fraction Magnitude Representation for 4 to 8 Graders [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2018, 34(4): 443-452.
[3] ZHANG Jie, HUANG Bijuan, SI Jiwei, GUAN Dongxiao. Relationship between Math Anxiety and Mathematical Achievement in Township Pupils: The Chain Mediating Roles of Mathematical Self-efficacy and Metacognition [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2018, 34(4): 453-460.
[4] HONG Wei, LIU Rude, ZHEN Rui, JIANG Shuyang, JIN Fangkai. Relations between Achievement Goal Orientations and Mathematics Engagement among Pupils: The Mediating Roles of Academic Procrastination and Mathematics Anxiety [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2018, 34(2): 191-199.
[5] LIU Ying, CHAI Xiaoyun, GONG Shaoying, SANG Biao. The Influence of Parents' Autonomous Motivation on Primary School Students' Emotions in Mathematics Homework:The Role of Students' Autonomous Motivation and Teacher Support [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2017, 33(5): 577-586.
[6] MA Xiaofeng, ZHOU Aibao, YANG Xiaoe. Cue Strength: The Important Variables of The Examination of Retrieval Practice Effect Mechanism [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2017, 33(3): 313-320.
[7] JIANG Hong, LYU Houchao. Adolescent's Future Time Perspective and Academic Achievement: The Mediating Role of Grit [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2017, 33(3): 321-327.
[8] WEI Shuhua, SONG Guangwen, ZHANG Dajun. The Social Cognition Processing Characteristics on Occupational Events in Teachers with Different Levels of Professional Identity [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2017, 33(1): 45-55.
[9] WANG Daoyang, LU Xiang, YIN Xin. The Association of Negative Academic Emotions on Perceived Academic Self-efficacy of Migrant Children: The Moderating Role of Emotion Regulation Strategies [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2017, 33(1): 56-64.
[10] PAN Bin, ZHANG Liang, ZHANG Wen-xin, JI Lin-qin. The Relationship of Academic Underachievement, Academic Pressure and Effortful Control among Adolescents: A Cross-lagged Study [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(6): 717-724.
[11] ZHANG Xiaohui, ZHAO Hongyu. The Roles of Educational Policy Satisfaction and Faculty Support on Pre-service Teachers' Professional Identity: The Mediating Effect of Teaching Motivation [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(6): 725-732.
[12] LI Liping, WU Xinchun, XIONG Cuiyan, CHENG Yahua, NGUYEN ThiPhuong. Effects of Metalinguistic Awareness and Rapid Automatized Naming on Character Dictation for Pupils [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(6): 698-705.
[13] WANG Cuicui, XU Qinfang, TAO Sha. The Validity of the RTI Model for Identifying Learning Disabilities and the Moderators: A Meta-analysis of the Past Two Decades' Studies [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(6): 706-716.
[14] WANG Yuxin, XIE Heping, WANG Fuxing, AN Jing, HAO Yanbin. Text-Picture Integration in Multimedia Learning: A Meta-Analysis of the Spatial Contiguity Effect [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(5): 565-578.
[15] WANG Wei, LEI Li, WANG Xingchao. The Relationship of College Students' Proactive Personality and Academic Performance: The Mediating Roles of Academic Self-efficacy and Academic Adjustment [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(5): 579-586.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
Copyright 2018 © Editorial office of Psychological Development and Education
Supported by Beijing Magtech Co.Ltd