(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2016)
(2016)
Special Issue - (2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2015)
(2015)
Special Issue - (2015)
(2015)
(2015)
(2015)
(2012)
(2012)
(2012)
Special Issue - (2012)
pp. 817-830 | Article Number: ijese.2018.072
Published Online: December 12, 2018
Abstract
The Philippine’s Department of Education’s goal of ensuring that learners understand disasters and helping them become more vigilant within every home and community so that lives are saved is institutionalized more specifically in the implementation of the K to 12 curriculum of Senior High School (SHS) Core Subject on Disaster Readiness and Risk Reduction (DRRR). This study explored the use of an innovative teaching approach, Metacognitively-Oriented Science Classroom Learning Environments (MOSCLEs), in teaching DRRR in SHS. The mixed method, expansion design was utilized in this study to widen the breadth of understanding of MOSCLEs. The quasi-experimental post-test only design was applied in the quantitative part to determine the significant difference in the students’ level of conceptual understanding of hydrometeorological hazards in MOSCLEs and traditional classroom instruction. For the qualitative study, grounded theory approach was done to explore on the students’ own reflections while learning and the teacher’s reflections while teaching the said subject matter. Results showed that students taught using MOSCLEs gained higher mean score than the students taught using the traditional method, implying that the use of metacognitive strategies enhances concept attainment of the content. Two themes emerged from the template analysis of the student’s reflections: “Students’ metacognitive abilities and skills” and “Teacher’s deliberate actions to develop students’ metacognitive abilities and skills.” These themes imply the development of learners’ metacognitive potentials relies on the teacher’s pedagogical process. From the teacher’s reflections, two themes emerged, “What metacognition is” and “Design of a metacognitively-oriented pedagogy,” which imply that developing the learners’ metacognitive skills requires the processes of planning, monitoring, evaluating and reconstruction of existing ideas. Through MOSCLEs, students learned better and the teacher became more aware of her own teaching process along with the students’ learning process.
Keywords: Disaster Readiness and Risk Reduction (DRRR), metacognitively-oriented science classroom learning environments, metacognition, senior high school, mixed method
References
Alcayna, T., Bollettino, V., Dy, P., & Vinck, P. (2016). Resilience and Disaster Trends in the Philippines: Opportunities for National and Local Capacity Building. PLOS Currents Disasters, 2016 Sep 14. Edition 1. https://doi.org/10.1371/currents.dis.4a0bc960866e53bd6357ac1357d740846
Callan, G. L., Marchant, G. J., Finch, W. H., & German, R. L. (2016). Metacognition, Strategies, Achievement, and Demographics: Relationships Across Countries. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, p. 1485 -1502.
Chauhan, A., & Singh, N. (2014). Metacognition: A Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Education and Psychological Research (IJEPR), 3, Issue 3.
Chiu, M. M., & Kuo, S. W. (2009). Social metacognition in groups: benefits, difficulties, learning, and teaching. Metacognition: New Research Developments, p. 1.
Dignath, C., & Buttner, G. (2008). Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students. A meta-analysis on intervention studies at primary and secondary school level. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 231–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9029-x
Fernandez, G., & Shaw, R. (2014). Youth participation in disaster risk reduction through science clubs in the Philippines. Disasters, 39(2), 279−294. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12100
Flavell, J. H. (1971).First Discussant’s Comments: What Is Memory Development, The Development of Human Development, 14, 272-278. https://doi.org/10.1159/000271221
Georghiades, P. (2000). Beyond conceptual change learning in science education: focusing on transfer, durability, and metacognition. Education Research, 42(2), 119-139. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318800363773
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2004). Multimethod Research Designs. Nursing Research: Principles and Methods, 7th Edition, p. 279.
Thomas, G. P. (2012). The Metacognitive Science Teacher. Contemporary Science Teaching Approaches, p. 29–48.
Welle, T., & Birkmann, J. (2016). The World Risk Index 2016. Retrieved from http://weltrisikobericht.de/wpcontent/uploads/2016/08/WorldRiskReport2016
Young, A., & Fry, J. D. (2008). Metacognitive awareness and academic achievement in college students. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(2), 1-10.