Development of metacognitive competencies of students in the process of constructing mathematical problems for younger students

The article presents a description of the study of the effectiveness of methodological tools aimed at developing metacognitive competence in future elementary school teachers in the classroom on the methodology of teaching mathematics to younger students.

The aim of the study is to empirically test the effectiveness of a set of methodological techniques used in the classroom on the methodology of teaching mathematics to future elementary school teachers as a means of developing their metacognitive competencies. The hypothesis of the study is the assumption that one of the effective means of developing metacognitive competencies in future elementary school teachers is special classes for compiling original scenarios of verbal mathematical problems for younger students. A professionally developed verbal composition of a mathematical problem sets the vector of mental activity for the younger student. It requires the developer to build a forecast of the child’s mental actions, determine algorithms and levels of difficulty in obtaining the right solution. The study used methods for testing students’ cognitive characteristics (intelligence) and peer review of their “metacognitive knowledge”, “metacognitive skills”, “metacognitive experience” and “metacognitive strategies”. The methodological solutions implemented in the classroom have shown their effectiveness. For the practice of preparing future primary school teachers, it is important that the well-organized development of compositions of textual mathematical problems for younger students is an effective means of developing their metacognitive competencies.

1. Grigorenko EL. Creativity: А challenge for contemporary education. Comp Educ. 2019; 55(1): 116-132. doi: 10.1080/03050068.2018.1541665

2. Tikhomirova TN, Kuzmina YuV, Malykh SB. Developmental trajectories of information processing speed in primary school age: A longitudinal study. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal. 2020; 41(2): 26-38. (In Russ.). doi: 10.31857/S020595920008507-3

3. Agnoli S, Mancini G, Pozzoli T, Baldaro B, Russo PM, Surcinelli P. The interaction between emotional intelligence and cognitive ability in predicting scholastic performance in schoolaged children. Pers Individ Differ. 2012. 53(5): 660-665. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.05.020

4. Savenkov AI, Romanova МА. The main factors in the development of the intellectual and creative potential of the individual. Tambov University Review. Series: Humanities. 2009; 7(75): 234-238. (In Russ.). doi: 10.1051/shsconf/20219804003

5. Baptista J, Osório A, Martins EC, Verissimo M, Martins C. Does social-behavioral adjustment mediate the relation between executive function and academic readiness? J Appl Dev Psychol. 2016; 46: 22-30. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2016.05.004

6. Savenkov AI, Karpova SI, Sukhova EI. Model of development of children’s giftedness in the Russian education system. Psychology and Education. 2018; 55(2): 74-84.

7. Banshchikova TN, Sokolovsky MP, Morosanova VI. Strategies for overcoming stressful situations: Psychometric characteristics of the Russian version of the methodology. Siberian Journal of Psychology. 2020; 76: 55-77. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17223/17267080/76/4

8. Smirnova PV. Development of metacognitive skills of younger schoolchildren in the course of project-based research training. Psikhologiya odarennosti i tvorchestva: Sbornik nauchnykh trudov II mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy onlayn-konferentsii (Moskva, 27 noyabrya 2020 g.). Moscow; 2020: 160-163. (In Russ.).

9. Flavell J. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist. 1979; 34(10): 906-911. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

10. Falikman МV. How to use knowledge of your abilities correctly. URL: https://vbudushee.ru/library/metapoznanie-kakpravilno-ispolzovat-znaniya-o-svoikh-sposobnostyakh/ [date of access: 23.11.2021]. (In Russ.).

11. Stanciu M, Dumitriu C, Clipa O, Ignat AA, Mâţă L, Brezuleanu C-O. Experimental research on metacognitive competence development at freshmen students from three Romanian universities. Procedia. Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2011; 29: 1914-1923. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.441

12. Nbina JB, Viko B. The effect of instruction in metacognitive self-assessment strategy on chemistry self-efficacy and achievement of senior secondary school students in Rivers State, Nigeria. Academic Leadership: The Online Journal: 2010; 8(4): 19.

13. Yang C, Bai L. The use of metacognitive strategies by Chinese PhD students of social sciences in Australian universities. Int J Educ Res. 2019; 97: 43-52. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2019.06.007

14. Popandopulo A, Fominykh N, Kudesheva A. Do educators need metacognitive skills in today’s educational environment? Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2021; 41: 100878. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100878

15. Song JHH, Loyal S, Lond B. Metacognitive Awareness Scale, Domain Specific (MCAS-DS): Assessing metacognitive awareness during raven’s progressive matrices. Front Psychol. 2021; 11: 607577. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.607577

16. Purpura DJ, Schmitt SA. Cross-domain development of early academic and cognitive skills. Early Child Res Q. 2019; 46: 1-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.10.009

17. Rittle-Johnson B, Zippert EL, Boice KL. The roles of patterning and spatial skills in early mathematics development. Early Child Res Q. 2019; 46: 166-178. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.03.006

18. Glizburg VI. Topological factors in the development of mathematical talent. Psikhologiya odarennosti i tvorchestva. Moscow; 2019: 433-436. (In Russ.).

19. Kalinchenko AN, Romanova MA. Elements of logic in elementary school. Nachal’naya shkola. 2020; 9: 66-67. (In Russ.).

20. Postavnev VM, Postavneva IV, Dvoinin AM, Romanova MA. General and particular cognitive abilities as predictors of a child’s academic success in the early stages of education. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology. 2020; 4(54): 64-73. (In Russ.). doi: 10.25688/2076-9121.2020.54.4.05

21. Dvoinin AM, Savenkov AI, Postavnev VM, Trotskaya ES. Cognitive predictors of academic achievement in preschool and primary school children. Voprosy Psychologii. 2020; 6: 106-116. (In Russ.).

22. Kutbiddinova RA, Eromasova AA, Romanova MA. The use of interactive methods in the educational process of the higher education institution. Int J Environ Sci Educ. 2016; 11(14): 6557-6572.

23. Tarricone P. The taxonomy of metacognition. London: Psychology press; 2011. doi: 10.4324/9780203830529

24. Abdelrahman RM. Metacognitive awareness and academic motivation and their impact on academic achievement of Ajman University students. Heliyon. 2020; 6(9): e04192. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04192