The cognitive strategies include reviewing, elaborating, organizing and meta ...
more than their differences link (PQ4R-Murder) method .in addition to these ...
Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of Teaching and Learning (ICTL 2009) INTI University College, Malaysia
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF INSTRUCTING THE COGNITIVE AND META COGNITION STRATEGIES ON REMEMBERING AND COMPREHENDING ON STUDENTS OF ISLAMIC AZAD UNIVERSITY BANDARGAZ BRANCH Maasumeh Bagherpour1, Hasan Abdollahzadeh2 and Ahmad Valipour3 1
Islamic Azad University (Bandargaz Branch), Iran (
[email protected]) 2 Payame Noor University, Iran, (
[email protected]) 3 Islamic Azad University (Galougah Branch), Iran (
[email protected])
ABSTRACT The cognitive strategies include reviewing, elaborating, organizing and meta cognition strategies include programming, controlling, supervising and arranging. The major goal of this research is to identify the effects of cognitive and meta cognition strategies on reviewing and comprehending the materials. It used the midexperimental method with the control group including the pre test and post test. The sample comprised of 80 freshman students randomly chosen from educational sciences of this university in two groups: the control group and experimental group. The two groups took the pre test to evaluate the dependent variables (remembering and comprehending the material). Two kinds of scientific texts; an easy one and a difficult one were used. There was no significant difference between two groups in the pre test. The cognitive and meta cognition strategies were instructed to the participants of experimental group and the control group. After instructing, post test (1) was performed on the two groups using the same tests as the pre test but with the content of materials and questions changed. Fifteen days after this test, a post test (2) is performed to evaluate the memorization of pre-learned materials. The content of the materials and questions were the same as the pre test (1). The results were analyzed on the basis of one-tailed ANOVA. The results show that there is positive impact of instructing the cognitive and meta cognition strategies on remembering and comprehending the materials in two kinds of the texts used.
KEYWORDS Cognition, Meta cognition strategies, Remembering, Comprehending
INTRODUCTION One of the purpose of educational system is intellectual ability cultivation of learners and intellectual ability development is pawned this that students understand studied topics. These topics are intellectual materials .in psychology, the learning which it be linked with perception and conception is called significant learning. When student achieved to joint the new information with previous knowledge, it is occurred significant learning. On the basis of basic factor in learning is appeared various kinds of study methods, that their similarities is more than their differences link (PQ4R-Murder) method .in addition to these names, they have scientific aspect, sometimes it is called to another names on these similar methods, like speech reading, memory reinforcement, creative learning and… that also, again none of these methods have not essentially more thing from another study methods. The main purpose of this research is determining of cognitive and meta cognitive strategies effect on student’s 1
reminding and comprehension. These methods are indicated their effectual on improvement and quantity of perception and conception of studied texts. Parlintkar and Brown (1984), Andrese (1988) quoted from Seif (2000), Motevali (1997), Avansian (1998), Ghavam Abadi (1998) and Baezzat (1997), are including persons that emphasized on study skills education. Mayer Vanille (2000) knows learning as a complicated process that it has three major parts: 1- recognition, 2- strategy, 3- affection and also epistemologist indicated to learnable of creativity, problem solution, cognitive and meta cognition strategy on their works. (Heez, 1991; Gelaver, 1991; Hall and Londese, 2001). In the description which Kardash Wamlond, quoted from Var Vedaving (2000) presented about learning strategy, in codification process, covert and obvious activities of information processing is utilized by learners for facilitation in acquisition, saving and pre-learned information accurate retrieval. Ready research is searches answer of these questions: do learning strategies education cause increasing of retention and comprehension of easy scientific text and difficult scientific text? METHOD In method of this semi-experimental research is used from pre-test with post-test project (1) and (2) with control group. For the performance of this project, they have chosen in random 80 freshman of psychology and educational sciences of Islamic Azad University of Bandargaz Branch (the province of Golestan, Iran) in two groups, including experimental group and control group. They have token four pre-test, before specifying of groups. In order to evaluate of dependent variables (reminding and comprehension) they have used two texts of easy scientific and difficult scientific. To participants of experiment group are trained cognitive and meta cognition strategies by using of workshop method and active participation. Control group participated with topics of communicative skills in questioning and answering sessions that it hasn’t any relation with dependent variable of research. After performance of educations, first post-tests are performed for both groups. At this stage, the same performing tests are presented in pre-tests, with this difference that they have changed texts content and questions. After 15 days of these tests, post-test (2) is evaluated for protection evaluation of pre-learning .the content of materials and questions were exactly the same as pre-test (1) .pattern of research projects are followed: E T1 (A.B) * T2 (A.B) T3 (A.B) C T1 (A.B) - T2 (A.B) T3 (A.B) T1= pre-test T2= post-test T3= post-test * =dependent variable E=experimental group C=control group In this research is used from 4 tests of 30 questions of 4 selection for evaluation of learning education effects .before structure of table questionnaire is prepared lessons characteristics .this table have two aspects of purpose and content that questions of questionnaire are prepared and adjusted from that table accured results are analyzed with using of ANOVA.
2
FINDING Table 1. Descriptive statistics of difference scores pre-test and post-test 1, retention and easy scientific comprehension Group Experimental Control Total
N 40 40 80
Mean difference
Standard deviation
-6/67 0/27 -3/2
8/11 5/46 7/69
Standard Confidence distance%95 Error Upper bound lower bound 1/48 0/99 0/99
-9/69 -1/77 -5/19
-3/64 2/3 -1/21
In above table, mean difference scores is equal to -6/67 that is expansion of the increasing 6/67 of post-test score 1 toward pre-test. Also, control group difference is 0/27 that pre-test and post-test of this group is not very different from each other. Table 2. ANOVA of difference scores pre-test and post-test(1) of retention and easy scientific comprehension Variation resources Between group Within group total
Sum of squares 271/07 2770/53 3491/6
df
Mean square
f
Sig.
1 78 79
271 47
15/09
0/000
The result of ANOVA indicated that F score is significant 0/000 level, it means the probability of error 0/000 of experiment group mean is higher than control group mean. So, it can result that education of learning strategy is made increasing of retention and easy comprehensions. Table 3. Descriptive statistics of difference scores of post-test 1 and post-test 2 of retention and easy scientific comprehension Group Experiment al Control Total
N
Mean difference
Standard deviation
Standard error
Confidence distance%95 Upper bound
lower bound
40
4/87
1/1
0/2
-0/36
0/46
40 80
-2/44 2/43
0/83 0/77
0/08 0/1
-0/57 -0/18
0/67 0/22
Mean difference of experiment group is 4/87 and control group is -2/44 .standard deviation of experimental group is 1/1 and control group is 0/83.
3
Table 4. Analysis of one-tailed variance of difference scores of post-test (1) and post-test (2) of retention and easy scientific comprehension Variation resources Between group Within group total
Sum of squares 3/55 35/44 39
df 1 78 79
Mean square 3/55 0/61
f 0/6
Sig. 0/81
In above table, obtained F score is equal with 0/6 that this F score is not significant with the probability of 0/81. from results of variance analysis can result that post-test scores(1) and(2) hadn’t significant and noticeable difference with each other .so, learned skills was maintained in period of learning strategy education during post-test 2. Table 5. Descriptive statistics of difference scores of pre-test and post-test 1 of retention and difficult scientific comprehension Group Experimental Control Total
N
Mean difference
Standard deviation
Standard error
Upper bound
lower bound
-4/53 -0/43 -2/48
5/96 4/49 5/63
1/09 0/82 0/72
-6/76 -2/11 -3/94
2/31 1/24 -1/03
40 40 80
Confidence distance%95
Mean difference of two experiment group is equal to -4/53 and it is equal to -0/43 for control group. mean difference of experimental group, the expansion of this that this group indicated better operation in post-test towards pre-test in retention and difficult scientific comprehension tests. Table 6. Analysis of one-tailed variance of pre-test and post-test difference scores and difficult scientific comprehension Variation resources Between group Within group total
Sum of squares 252/15 1616/83 1868/98
df 1 78 79
Mean square 252/15 27/88
f 9/04
Sig. 0/004
Obtained F score in above table is equal to 9/04 that significant level of that is 0/004, it means there are only 0/004 error probability in significant difference of two groups .from the F test result can result that learning strategy test is caused retention increasing and difficult scientific comprehension of testable.
4
Table 7. Descriptive statistics of post-test 1 and post-test 2 difference scores of retention and difficult scientific comprehension Group
Experiment al Control Total
N
Mean difference
Standard deviation
40
-1/07
5/84
Standar d error 1/07
40 80
1/9 0/41
-1/71 4/13
4/26 5/33
Confidence distance%95 Upper bound
lower bound
-3/25
1/11
-2/65 -1/6
2/25 5/84
Mean difference of experimental group is equal to -1/07 and control group is equal to 1/9, standard deviation of experimental group difference is 5/84 and control group is equal to 1/71. Table 8. Analysis of one-tailed variance of post-test 1 and post-test 2 difference scores and difficult scientific comprehension Variation resources Between group Within group total
Sum of squares
df
Mean square
f
Sig.
1/71 9/9 0/1
1 78 79
1/71 1/71
1
0/32
Calculated F score of above table is equal to 1. this score is not significant with probability of %32 error .it means groups operation is almost similar .from this scores can attain to this results that learned skills of experimental group is maintained during of post-test . DISCUSSION AND CONCLUDING 1- Do learning strategies education cause increasing of retention and easy scientific text comprehension? According to table date (1 and 2), pre-test and post-test difference scores 1 of retention and difficult scientific comprehension are very different to easy other in experimental and control group (mean difference of experimental group was -6/67 and control group was 0/27) that is was an expansion of positive effect of learning educations presentation and increasing of retention scores and scientific comprehension .also, there are not a noticeable difference about table (3 and 4) of pre-test 1 and post-test 2 difference scores of retention and easy scientific comprehension in experimental and control group is equal to 4/87 and 2/44, and it is determined that this score is not significant in ANOVA .then, it can be resulted also that learned topic and strategies is maintained during of educational term to experimental group until post-test 2 and are affected positively on increasing of testable scores in retention and easy scientific comprehension test .hence, learning strategies education is maked increasing retention and easy scientific comprehension and after education, this learned strategies is maintained at least one month .the result of this part of research agree with finding of Moteralli (1997), Avancian (1998), Golbar (2000), Mohr, Alice; Tomei et al., (2000), that is expansion of this point: learning strategies education is caused increasing of retention and scientific comprehension .
5
2- Do learning strategies education cause increasing of retention and scientific comprehension? According to table data (5 and 6), pre-test 1 and post test 2 difference scores are relatively very different to each other in experimental and control groups is -4/35 and control group is 0/43, this difference indicated that experimental group scores in post-test (1) of retention and difficult scientific comprehension is upper limit towards post-test (1) of control group scores that it was due to positive effect of learning strategies education. Also according to tables (7 and 8), mean difference post-test (1) and (2). Mean difference of retention and difficult scientific comprehension in experimental and control group is equal to -0/16 and 2/26. these scores are not very different and also, in variance and analysis is defined that the difference of this score is not significant .from this other we can conclude that learned topics and strategies are maintained during educational term to experimental group. Until post-test (2) and are effected positively on increasing of retention and hard scientific comprehension and these learned strategies is maintained at least one month until after education. With due attention to obtained results, in both questions can be considered to this point that kind of test is not effective in retention and comprehension test scores. It means learning strategies education is effective in retention and comprehension. They result of this research agree with findings of Ibrahim Gavam Abadi (1998), Baezzat (1997), Mashhadi Mighati (1996) and Paris et al. (1986) and Cheynghoos (2005), Jili et al., (2006) that is expansion of this point: learning strategies education is caused increasing retention and scientific comprehension .
REFERENCES Avancian, Ema.(1998). Meta cognition strategies education function on comprehension and learning speed of girls students of daily schools of guidance section of Tehran city. MA thesis, Allame tabatabaei. Baezzat,Fereshteh.(1997). Investigation of learning strategies education and its effect on memory of weak mental deficiency children, MA thesis, Tehran. Cheyng hoo,s (2005). Relationship between using English Learning strategies and English achievement. www.cnki.com.cn/Journal/H-H3-JYWY-2005-02.htm Cleaver ,john.(1991).cognitive psychological for teachers, translation of ali naghi kharrazi.(1998), Tehran, publication of daneshgahi. Conrad Gleber (2000). Effects of meta cognitive training on performance in self-directed learning situations. Delavar, Ali. (2002). Method of inquiry in psychology and educational sciences, Tehran, the publication of virayesh. Delavar, Ali. (2001). Theoretical and scientific fundamentals of research on humanities and social sciences, tehran,roshd publication. Dwyer, Sonya Corbin; Tomei, Noella Piquette; Mohr, Alice,(2000). Efficient learning involves meta cognition that is the active control, coordination, and monitoring of learning processes and strategies 6
Ibrahimi,Ghavam Abedi, Soghra.(1998). Effectiveness of three methods of learning strategies education (bilateral education) direct explanation and thoughts cycle, on comprehension, solution problem, meta cognition knowledge, self-picture education and learning speed in girls students of secondary guidance school with average grade lower than 15, Tehran city, Doctoral thesis, Allameh Tabatabaei. Jilid, Bilangan, Julai (2006). Meta cognitive strategy instruction (MSI) for reading: co regulation of cognition. Motevalli, Seid Mohammad. (1997). Investigation of meta cognition strategies education and its effect on reading,comprehension and learning speed of female high schools students of ferdos city, M.A thesis, Allameh Tabatabaei. Seif, Ali Akbar. (2002). Learning and study methods, Tehran, Doran.
7
