1 minute read
Figure 3.5. Relationship between Reflection Types & Course Scores
Metacognitive Focus on more than two of the following and must include point 5: 1. Awareness of own assumptions and/or how one learns 2. Reflecting on own assumptions (why it did/did not change) and/or how one learns 3. Including other ways of thinking (i.e. taking peer’s perspectives, identifying limitations) 4. Seeking to reveal and relate to values, paradigms & culture 5. Awareness of metacognitive processes and meta-thinking
Figure 3.5 indicates there is a general upwards trend where scores increase with the depth of their reflection piece. Specifically, students with descriptive level reflections all had scores below 50 with little or no reflection in their work and only provided brief descriptions of what it was like taking the course. Students with partially reflective pieces had scores ranging from 51 to 63 while students with holistically reflective pieces had course scores ranging from 63 to 84. Those with metacognitive reflections generally scored 85 and above with the exception of CCK and CLE who scored 67 and 78 respectively.
Students with metacognitive reflections, for the most part, scored better for the course, likely due to the ability to use metacognitive processes in their learning and/or dialogical inquiry process. Metacognition can be widely divided into cognitive knowledge and cognitive regulation (Stack & Bound, 2012). Many of these metacognitive reflections involved understanding themselves as a learner and how that affects their performance. A common point discussed was recognising their dominant ways of thinking in the map of inquiry and how it influences their learning.
Neil incorporated other components of cognitive knowledge and cognitive regulation (meta-cognition) in his reflection. Specifically, in the discussion of the data collection process, Neil recognised his way of thinking regarding the data collected and subsequently evaluated his thought process, resulting in his data analysis yielding new information inconsistent with his previous mental schema. This reflective process of considering, what does this mean, appears to contribute to deeper understanding of how to apply theory to practice. Not surprising that with such insights, he scored higher than many other students for the course.
