Why Teachers Need Metacognition Training?

The goal of this paper is to explore the cognitive and metacognitive skills of teachers engaged in cogni-tive training. One of the best-known stand-alone cognitive programs is "Instrumental Enrichment" (IE) developed by Feuerstein, Rand, Hoffman, and Miller. Similar to other cognitive programs, the main em-phasis on IE research has always been on the change that occurs in students' performance. Little is known of teachers' acquisition of IE problem-solving skills and even less of their metacognitive performance associated with this acquisition. In the present study, 28 teachers were pre-and post-tested before and after 90 hours of IE training. The tests included items similar but not identical to those used during the IE training. The analysis of pre-test problem solving demonstrated that a relatively large number of teachers experienced difficulty in solving at least some of the IE tasks. The even greater difficulty was observed in the teachers’ articulation of their problem-solving strategies in a written form. The comparison of pre-and post-test results indicates statistically significant improvement not only in the teachers’ cognitive problem solving but also in their metacognitive skills. These changes, however, did not reach the level of a complete cognitive or metacognitive mastery. The possible reasons for differences in the two sub-groups of teachers are discussed

1. Bruer, J. (1993). Schools for thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Burden, R. and Williams, M. (Eds.) (1998). Thinking through the curriculum. London: Routledge.
3. Davydov, V.V. (2008). Problems of developmental instruction: A theoretical and experimental psychological study. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
4. Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., Hoffman, M. and Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental Enrichment. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
5. Greiff, S., Wustenberg, S., Csapo, B., Demetriou, A., Hautamaki, J., Graesser, A.C., Martin, R. (2014). Domain-general problem-solving skills and education in the 21st century, Educational Research Review 13, 74—83
6. Higgins, S. (2015). A recent history of teaching thinking. In R.Wegerif, L. Li, & J.C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of Research on Teaching Thinking (pp. 19—28). Oxon, UK: Routledge.
7. Kozulin, A. (2000). Diversity of Instrumental Enrichment applications. In A. Kozulin and Y. Rand (Eds.) Experience of Mediated Learning (pp. 257—273). Oxford: Pergamon.
8. Kozulin, A. (2015). The impact of cognitive education training on teachers’ cognitive performance. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 14(2), 252— 262.
9. Zohar, A. & Barzilai S. (2015). Metacognition and teaching higher-order thinking (HOT) in science education. In R. Wegerif, L. Li, & J.C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of Research on Teaching Thinking (pp. 229—242). Oxon, UK: Routledge.
10. Zohar, A., & Lustov, E. (2018). Challenges in addressing metacognition in professional development programs in the context of instruction of higher-order thinking. In Y. Weinberger & Z. Libman (Eds.), Contemporary pedagogies in teacher education and development (pp. 87—100). London: IntechOpen.
11. Zuckerman, G. (2003). The learning activity in the first years of schooling: The developmental path toward reflection. In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V. & Miller, S. (Eds.). Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp. 177—199). New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Zuckerman, G. (2018). “I know what I don’t know”: Toward the reflective elementary classroom. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology,17 (3), 260—277.