1887

Examining the Delivery Modes of Metacognitive Awareness and Active Reading Lessons in a College Nonmajors Introductory Biology Course

    Authors: Kendra M. Hill1,*, Volker S. Brözel1, Greg A. Heiberger1
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Department of Biology and Microbiology, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD 57007
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    • Published 01 May 2014
    • Supplemental materials available at http://jmbe.asm.org
    • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: South Dakota State University, Department of Biology and Microbiology, Box 2104A, Brookings, SD 57007. Phone: 605-688-4560. Fax: 605-688-6677. E-mail: [email protected].
    • ©2014 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology.
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. May 2014 vol. 15 no. 1 5-12. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v15i1.629
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • PDF
    277.88 Kb
  • XML
  • HTML
    59.42 Kb

    Abstract:

    Current research supports the role of metacognitive strategies to enhance reading comprehension. This study measured the effectiveness of online versus face-to-face metacognitive and active reading skills lessons introduced by Biology faculty to college students in a nonmajors introductory biology course. These lessons were delivered in two lectures either online (Group 1: N = 154) or face to face (Group 2: N = 152). Previously validated pre- and post- surveys were used to collect and compare data by paired and independent t-test analysis (α = 0.05). Pre- and post- survey data showed a statistically significant improvement in both groups in metacognitive awareness (p = 0.001, p = 0.003, respectively) and reading comprehension (p < 0.001 for both groups). When comparing the delivery mode of these lessons, no difference was detected between the online and face-to-face instruction for metacognitive awareness (pre- p = 0.619, post- p = 0.885). For reading comprehension, no difference in gains was demonstrated between online and face-to-face (p = 0.381); however, differences in pre- and post- test scores were measured (pre- p = 0.005, post- p = 0.038). This study suggests that biology instructors can easily introduce effective metacognitive awareness and active reading lessons into their course, either through online or face-to-face instruction.

Key Concept Ranking

Beta
0.935785
Stems
0.6408553
Lead
0.625
0.935785

References & Citations

1. Carlston DL Benefits of student-generated note packets: a preliminary investigation of SQ3R implementation Teach Psychol 38 142 146
2. Cooke M, et al 2012 Lecture Capture: first year student nurses’ experiences of a web-based lecture technology Aust J Adv Nurs 29 14 21
3. Ertmer PA, Newby TJ 1996 The expert learner: strategic, self-regulated, and reflective Instr Sci 24 1 24 10.1007/BF00156001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00156001
4. Flavell JH 1976 Metacognitive aspects of problem solving Resnick LB The nature of intelligence 231 236 Erlbaum Hillsdale, NJ
5. Flavell JH 1979 Metacognition and cognitive monitoring Am Psychol 34 906 911 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
6. Ford CL, Yore LD 2012 Toward convergence in critical thinking, metacognition, and reflection: illustrations from natural and social sciences, teacher education, and classroom practice Zohar A, Dori YJ Metacognition in science education: trends in current research, contemporary trends and issues in science education 40 251 271 Springer Netherlands 10.1007/978-94-007-2132-6_11 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2132-6_11
7. Garner R 1987 Metacognition and reading comprehension Ablex Norwood, NJ
8. Hill K, Heiberger G 2012 Abstr. 19th ASM Conference for Undergraduate Educators, abstr. 15-A J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ 13 1 105 123
9. Kennedy-Manzo K 2006 Graduates can’t master college text Educ Wk 25 1 6
10. Lipson MY, Wixson KK 2003 Assessment and instruction of reading and writing disability 3rd ed Longman New York, NY
11. Martino NL, Norris JA, Hoffman PR 2001 Reading comprehension instruction: effects of two types J Dev Educ 25 2 12
12. Mokharti K, Reichard CA 2002 Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies J Educ Psychol 94 249 259 10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.249 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.249
13. Nist S, Holschuh J 2000 Comprehension strategies at the college level Flippo R, Caverly D Handbook of college reading and study strategy research 75 104 Erlbaum Mahwah, NJ
14. Ottenhoff J 2011 Metacognition in liberal education Lib Educ 97 28 33
15. Ridley DS, Schutz PA, Glanz RS, Weinstein CE 1992 Self-regulated learning: the interactive influence of metacognitive awareness and goal-setting J Exp Educ 60 293 306 10.1080/00220973.1992.9943867 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1992.9943867
16. Robinson FP 1946 Effective study 1st ed Harper & Row New York, NY
17. Rogers WD, Ford R 1997 Factors that affect student attitude toward biology Bioscene 23 3 5
18. Russell J, Hollander S 1975 A biology attitude scale Am Biol Teach 37 270 273 10.2307/4445229 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4445229
19. Sanoff AP 2006 What professors think: a perception gap over students’ preparation Chron Higher Edu 52 B9 [Online.] http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i27/27b00901.htm
20. Taraban R, Rynearson K, Kerr M 2000 Analytic and pragmatic factors in college students’ metacognitive reading strategies Read Psychol 25 67 81 10.1080/02702710490435547 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02702710490435547
21. Taraban R, Rynearson K, Kerr M 2000 Metacognition and freshman academic performance J Dev Educ 24 12 20
22. Uno GE 1988 Teaching college and college-bound biology students Am Biol Teach 50 213 216 10.2307/4448711 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4448711
23. White HA Nursing instructors must also teach reading and study skills Read Impr 41 38 50
24. Zohar A, Dori YJ 2012 Metacognition in science education: trends in current research, contemporary trends and issues in science education 40 Springer Netherlands 10.1007/978-94-007-2132-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2132-6

Supplemental Material

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v15i1.629
2014-05-01
2019-02-15

Abstract:

Current research supports the role of metacognitive strategies to enhance reading comprehension. This study measured the effectiveness of online versus face-to-face metacognitive and active reading skills lessons introduced by Biology faculty to college students in a nonmajors introductory biology course. These lessons were delivered in two lectures either online (Group 1: N = 154) or face to face (Group 2: N = 152). Previously validated pre- and post- surveys were used to collect and compare data by paired and independent t-test analysis (α = 0.05). Pre- and post- survey data showed a statistically significant improvement in both groups in metacognitive awareness (p = 0.001, p = 0.003, respectively) and reading comprehension (p < 0.001 for both groups). When comparing the delivery mode of these lessons, no difference was detected between the online and face-to-face instruction for metacognitive awareness (pre- p = 0.619, post- p = 0.885). For reading comprehension, no difference in gains was demonstrated between online and face-to-face (p = 0.381); however, differences in pre- and post- test scores were measured (pre- p = 0.005, post- p = 0.038). This study suggests that biology instructors can easily introduce effective metacognitive awareness and active reading lessons into their course, either through online or face-to-face instruction.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/15/1/jmbe-15-5.xml.a.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v15i1.629&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Figures

Image of FIGURE 1.

Click to view

FIGURE 1.

Pre- and post- survey results, Metacognitive Awareness in Reading Skills Inventory (MARSI) mean scores. The overall analysis within groups shows both groups with significant gains in MARSI scores (online 0.001, and face-to-face 0.003). Error bars depict 95% confidence intervals.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. May 2014 vol. 15 no. 1 5-12. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v15i1.629
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 2.

Click to view

FIGURE 2.

Pre- and post- survey results, Reading Comprehension mean scores. Reading comprehension increased to a significant level in both groups ( 0.001 in all groups). Error bars depict 95% confidence intervals.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. May 2014 vol. 15 no. 1 5-12. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v15i1.629
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 3.

Click to view

FIGURE 3.

Pre- and post- survey results, Reading Comprehension gains. Reading comprehension gains showed no difference between the two groups ( 0.381). Error bars depict 95% confidence intervals.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. May 2014 vol. 15 no. 1 5-12. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v15i1.629
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 4.

Click to view

FIGURE 4.

Pre- and post- survey results, Biology Attitude Scale (BAS) mean scores. Attitudes toward biology in the online group decreased with significance ( 0.001) but did not change significantly in the face-to-face group ( 0.390). Error bars depict 95% confidence intervals.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. May 2014 vol. 15 no. 1 5-12. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v15i1.629
Download as Powerpoint

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error