مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رساني علوم و فناوري - ارزيابي محتواي درسي كتاب ها، راهنماي تدريس و اهداف آموزشي درس علوم دوره ي راهنمايي تحصيلي،از لحاظ ميزان توجه به مؤلفه ها ي فراشناخت و آگاهي هاي فراشناختي دانش آموزان

چكيده لاتين :

Introduction The concept of metacognition was first introduced by Flavel (1976). According to him, metacognition means to actively organize and regulate these processes with respect to cognitive goals. This definition and the scope of its meaning have been changed and expanded to the extent so that we concider some components for this concept. Two main components are; metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive control. Metacognitive knowledge contains declaration knowledge, procedural knowledge and conditional knowledge, aditionally metacognititive control components consists of planning, monitoring, evaluating and revising. The result of many researches show that the instruction of metacognitive awareness is essential for learning at junior high school and following stages; it seems that junior high school curriculum must have special concentration on teaching of this knowledge to the students. This necessity is much more important for sciences education than others. It is obvious that these goals can be achieved when we focus on shuch knowledge in educational curriculum especially in the content and objectives of school syllabus. The basic question that comes to the mind is to what extent do we concentrate on metacognitive awareness in the sciences course of junior high school period? And how much is the studentʹs metacognition awareness? This study tries to respond to these questions and analyzing the elements of curriculum- the content and objectives of sciences courses of guidance school with respect to the emphasis on metacognitive awareness and evaluating the studentʹs metacognitive awareness. Research questions 1- How much do the students of junior high school have metacognitive awareness? 2- How much do the educational objectives of science courses in junior high school put emphasis on metacognitive awareness? 3- How much does the teaching guideline of science course put emphasis on metacognitive awareness? 4- How much does the content of the textbook of science courses in junior high school emphasize metacognitive awareness? 5- What is the relationship between studentsʹ metacognitive awareness and the school curriculum of science courses of junior high scool with repect to the emphasis on metacognitive elements? Methodology This research is a quantitative kind which uses survey approach to investigate the amount of studentsʹ metacognitive awareness and also uses quantitative content analysis for research documents. The target papulation are 65339 guidance school students of Shiraz and the documents include 3 textbooks, 3 teaching guidebooks of science junior high school courses from grade one up to grade three. The sample papulation of this study was 551 subjects who were selected randomly. Two instrumets were used for data collection, the first one was metacognitive awareness questionnaire and the second one was content analaysis checklist. Both instruments have reliability and validity. In order to analyze the data used descriptive statstics indexes - mean and standard deviation- and deductive method - ANOVA and t. test were used. Results In the first question about the evaluation of studentsʹ metacognition awareness, the findings showed that the mean of studentsʹ metacognitive awareness was 3.79 and the standard divation (SD) was 0.61. In the two main catagories of metacognitive knoledge, the mean was 3.83 and SD= 0.65 and for metacognitive control, mean was 3.74 and SD= 0.55. For second question with the emphasis of the educational objectives on metacognitive awareness, the result showed that from 609 analysis units, 130 ones were refered to "metacognitive knowledge" and 349 of them refered to "unrelated case". Among these, 106 were refered to "metacognitive knowledge" and 24 cases were related to "metacognitive control". The content involovement coeficient related to metacognitive index was calculated through dividing the units related to metacognitive indexes to unrelated analysis unit and the results showed that the average of this coeficient is equal to 0.27. Refering to the third question, it means emphasis of teacher guideline of sciences textbooks of junior high school on metacognitive components, the result of content analysis showed that, from 2928 analytical cases, 515 were related to "metacognitive awareness" and 2413 cases wer related to "unrelated cases". Among these, 352 cases were referd to "metacognitive knowledge" and 163 belonged to "metacognitive control". The context involvement coefficient in relation to metacognitive indexes was measured and it was 0.19. For the fourth question, wich focused on the amount of science textbooks emphasis on metacognitive indexes, the results showed that from 2217 cases which were observed in the context, 389 cases were referd to metacognitive categories and 1828 belonged to nonmetacognitive cases. Among the former cases, 266 cases belonged to "metacognitive knowledge" and 123 were related to "metacognitive control". The results were analyzed precisely and it was found that the context involvement coeficient was exactly 0.21. Discussion and conclusion The result showed that in spite of the low frequency of metacognitive indexes in the context of the textbooks, The students acquire 3/78 metacognitive awareness in average and the expectancy total mean (2/5) showed this high average and it was consistant with Reder (1996) and Fishers (2007) results which indicated that some elements of metacognitive awareness was due to the non-planned experiences. Aditionally, it was shown that the average of metacognitive knowledge was more than the average of metacognitive control. This diffrence my be due to the diffrence between theoritical knowledge versus applied knowledge. The result of analysis of educational objectives of science textbooks of junior high school showed that these objectives were more non-metacognive than metacognitive ones. The metacognitive coefficient was about 0.21 which was lower than what we expected. In other words, only 10.5 percent of the whole objectives were metacognitive objectives. The results of analyzing teaching guidline content indicated that the frequency of "non-metaconitive" units observed in the context were much more than metacognitive units and also most of the metaconitive units were related to "metacognitive knowledge". In this regard, the context involvment coeficient related to metacognitive indexes was equal to 0.17. It means that only 8.5 percent of teaching guideline content refered to metacognitive indexes. As metacognitive awareness is completely essential for learning and result in learnersʹ achivment and success, these findings can show the lack of essential metacognitive indexes in science curriculum of junior school. The results of content analysis of science textbooks refering to the amount of emphasis on metacognitive awareness showed that the frequency of metacognitive knowledge indexes was much more than that of metacognitive control. However, in the context of the book the metacognitive concepts were not focused greatly and the context involvement coeffiecient for metacognitive indexes was 0.17, which was lower than what was expected. To interprete this coefficient we can say that only about 8.5 percent of the whole text books was focused on teaching metacognitive awareness. The main reason for the lack of metacognition in the content of this research document is that the authors of text books did not pay attention to the increase of learnersʹ metacognitive awareness. Generally, the results of this research show that the context of the text books under investigation have a low context involvement coefficient regarding to the metacognitive index. However, the average of studentsʹ metacognitive awareness was high. This difference shows that most of the learnersʹ metacognitive performance was unconcious and implicit. In other words, in spite of the metacognitive weakness of the content of the textbook, students use unique metacognitive strategies. This contrast in results can be attributed to the latent curriculum.