An investigation of prospective science teachers' socio-scientific argumentation processes in terms of metacognition: A causal-comparative study
This study attempts to investigate through causal-comparative research whether socio-scientific argumentation processes of prospective science teachers (PSTs) who had high and low socio-scientific argumentation skills differed from each other in terms of metacognition. The research was conducted with a total of 45 PSTs, 24of whom had high socio-scientific argumentation skills, and 21 had low socio-scientific argumentation skills. Data were gathered using qualitative and quantitative methods. Research results indicated that the PSTs with high socio-scientific argumentation skills displayed more metacognitive behaviors when compared to the PSTs with low socio-scientific argumentation skills and that they used more metacognitive strategies with regard to many components such as planning, decision-making, evaluation, monitoring, and organizing. Furthermore, a statistically significant difference was detected between the scores of the PSTs' metacognitive awareness skills in favor of the PSTs with high socio-scientific argumentation skills. These results demonstrated that the two groups with different socio-scientific argumentation skills differed from each other in terms of metacognition and that the PSTs with high socio-scientific argumentation skills were better in regard with metacognition.
How to Cite
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.