Journal of Education and Training Studies

Vol. 3, No. 5; September 2015

ISSN 2324-805X E-ISSN 2324-8068
Published by Redfame Publishing
URL: http://jets.redfame.com

The Relationship between Preservice Elementary Mathematics Teachers'

Beliefs and Metacognitive Awareness
Lynn Cecilia Hart1, Dilek Sezgin Memnun2
1
College of Education, Georgia State University, GSU, USA
2
Faculty of Education, Uludag University, Turkey
Correspondence: Dilek Sezgin Memnun, Uludag University, Faculty of Education, Gorukle, Nilufer, Bursa, Turkey

Received: May 25, 2015 Accepted: June 15, 2015 Online Published: July 1, 2015
doi:10.11114/jets.v3i5.840 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11114/jets.v3i5.840

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the metacognitive awareness and the beliefs about mathematics teaching and
learning of preservice elementary mathematics teachers and to explore the relationship between the two. The
Metacognitive Awareness Instrument (MAI) and the Mathematics Beliefs Instrument (MBI) were implemented with 118
elementary mathematics preservice teachers studying in a large urban university in northwestern Turkey during the
2011-2012 academic year. Statistical analysis results revealed that elementary mathematics preservice teachers
knowledge about cognition and regulation of cognition specific domains of metacognition did predict together their
beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning.
Keywords: beliefs about mathematics, metacognition, metacognitive awareness, preservice teachers
1. Introduction
1.1 The Problem
Metacognition is a critical component of effective learning. It allows students to be aware of and regulate their thinking,
control their decision-making and control their learning (Kuiper, 2002; Lucangeli, & Cornoldi, 1997; Schraw &
Graham, 1997). Students who have high metacognitive awareness levels are aware of their performances and perform
better in learning (Swanson, 1990). Those students plan their study, sequence, and obtain information about their
cognitive processes. Metacognition increases their academic success (Cardelle-Elawar, 1992; Schraw &
Sperling-Dennison, 1994). It is important, therefore, to examine metacognitive awareness and explore how to develop
awareness. Additionally, affective variables such as beliefs, excitement and enthusiasm also affect students learning
(McLeod, 1992). In this study we examine the metacognitive awareness and beliefs about mathematics teaching and
learning of preservice elementary mathematics teachers to explore the relationship.
1.2 Importance of the Problem
Beliefs are the personal values and judgments that are formed through past experiences of individuals (Raymond, 1997).
There is a critical interaction between beliefs, attitudes, and behavior (Taskin-Can, Canturk-Gunhan, & Ongel-Erdal,
2005). An individuals beliefs can form the base from which positive attitudes and behaviors emerge and these
behaviors are important in the learning process (Kloosterman & Stage, 1992). Accordingly, mathematical beliefs can
also have a negative influence on learning and the success of individuals (Kloosterman, 1991; Kloosterman & Cougan,
1994; Thompson, 1984). Because of the importance of developing positive mathematical beliefs during school life
(Raymond, 1997), beliefs are emphasized in different curriculum standards from various nations (National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics, 2000 [U.S.]; Ministry of Education, 2008, [Turkey]). Finally, teachers play an important role
in the development of their students' mathematical beliefs (Carter & Norwood, 1997).
In general terms metacognition is thought of as thinking about thinking (Akin, Abaci, & Cetin, 2007; Blakey & Spence,
1990; Livingston, 1997). Cross and Paris (1988) define metacognition as the knowledge and control children have
over their own thinking and learning activities (p.131). Martinez (2006) defines metacognition as the monitoring and
control of thought (p. 696).

70
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 3, No. 5; 2015

While exact definitions vary slightly, several researchers (Schraw & Sperling-Dennison, 1994; Schraw, Crippen, &
Hartley, 2006; Schraw & Moshman, 1995; Pintrich, 2002) agree that metacognition includes two domains: Knowledge
about cognition and regulation of cognition. Knowledge about cognition is the acquired knowledge about ones
cognitive processes, including the beliefs related to cognitive aims and personal skills, and the selection and
organization of an appropriate strategy or strategies used in the cognitive process. This knowledge helps individuals
understand which strategies are efficient and effective for problem solving in mathematics education (Akin, Abaci, &
Cetin, 2007; Artzt & Armour-Thomas, 1992; Jacobs & Paris, 1987; Livingston, 1997; Pintrich, 2002; Schraw, Crippen,
& Hartley, 2006; Sperling et al., 2004). Regulation of cognition relates to selection of appropriate strategies,
organization of cognitive resources, identification of mistakes during a performance, evaluation of the effectiveness of
learning strategies, and rejection of strategies that are not appropriate (Schraw & Moshman, 1995; Schraw &
Sperling-Dennison, 1994; Zimmerman, 1989). This domain involves the self-awareness of performance as a learner
tackles a problem, their analysis of whether their performance is effective or not, predictions about their performances
in the future, and the learners evaluation of the effectiveness of their own learning and regulation processes (Everson &
Tobias, 1998; Nietfeld, Cao, & Osborne, 2005; Schraw & Moshman, 1995; Zimmerman & Paulsen, 1995). In brief,
metacognitive awareness allows individuals to become aware of and regulate their thinking and decision-making,
makes it easier for individuals to control their learning, and supports reflective thought (Kuiper, 2002; Schraw &
Graham, 1997).
Individuals who have a high level of metacognitive awareness are aware of their performances and typically perform
better in mathematical problem solving (Swanson, 1990). These individuals plan their work, sequence and obtain
information about their cognitive processes, and therefore increase their performance and success (Schraw &
Sperling-Dennison, 1994). Because of that, metacognitive awareness supports learning and affects success in a positive
way (Cardelle-Elawar, 1992; Kuiper, 2002; Lin, 2001). Additionally, teachers can play an important role in the
development of their students' metacognitive abilities and awareness. Teacher can increase students mindfulness about
the importance of metacognitive awareness and provide opportunities to make metacognition transparent during
problem solving (Butler & Winne, 1995; Thomas & McRobbie, 2001). Finally, preservice teachers need to develop
their own metacognitive awareness if they are to nurture that in their future students.
1.3 Related Literature
1.3.1 Mathematical Beliefs
The beliefs of elementary preservice teachers about mathematics have been examined in several studies of university
teacher education programs. Aksu (2008) explored the differences in the self-efficacy beliefs of primary preservice
teachers with respect to several variables. He found that while the teachers generally had high self-efficacy beliefs
regarding mathematics, there were no significant differences with respect to gender, graduation type or the departments
of study. In another study, Philipp et al. (2007) looked at the content knowledge and beliefs of preservice primary
school teachers after engaging in various interventions. They indicated that preservice teachers developed more
sophisticated beliefs about mathematics, teaching, and learning when they were provided with opportunities to learn
about children's mathematical thinking while they were learning the mathematics. Several studies (Author, 2002; Swars
et al., 2007; Szydlik, Szydlik, & Benson, 2003; Wilkins & Brand, 2004), examined the impact of a change in the culture
of mathematics content/methods courses that were designed to foster autonomous mathematical behaviors. They
evaluated the effectiveness of these courses on preservice teachers beliefs about teaching and learning. Two of the
studies (Author, 2002; Wilkins & Brand, 2004) found a positive relationship between participating in a well organized
mathematics methods courses and change in preservice teachers beliefs. Swars et al. (2007) found that the preservice
teachers' pedagogical beliefs became more cognitively oriented and teaching efficacy beliefs for mathematics were
strengthened. They also found a positive relationship between pedagogical and teaching efficacy beliefs. Finally,
Szydlik, Szydlik and Benson (2003) attributed changes in teachers beliefs to specific classroom social norms and
socio-mathematical norms that included a broadening of the acceptable methods of solving problems, a focused
explanation and argument, and the opportunity to generate mathematics as a classroom community. In sum, beliefs play
an important role in behavior and learning. Teachers play an important role in developing beliefs in students, and
teachers beliefs can be changed to be more cognitively aligned to support student learning.
1.3.2 Metacognitive Awareness
Several studies have investigated the metacognitive knowledge and awareness of elementary preservice teachers.
Metallidou (2009) found that preservice teachers with strong metacognitive knowledge had an increased incidence of
using specific problem-solving strategies and producing appropriate strategies. Okcuoglu and Kahyaoglu (2007) found
that the organization and inspection strategies usage of the teachers in the study were better than their planning and
evaluation strategies. Ozsoy and Gunindi (2011) analyzed preservice teachers metacognitive awareness and found that

71
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 3, No. 5; 2015

the preservice elementary teachers in the study had mid-level awareness. In other studies (Author, 2012; Yavuz &
Memis, 2010), researchers investigated self-efficacy perceptions, measured the metacognitive awareness levels of
elementary mathematics preservice teachers, and explored the differentiation of awareness levels according to course
grades. Author (2012) indicated that most of the elementary mathematics teacher trainees had relatively high levels of
awareness and there was a low level, positive relationship between their metacognitive awareness levels and course
grades. Yavuz and Memis (2010) found that the preservice teachers in their study had sufficient self-efficacy with
metacognitive awareness being rather high.
1.3.3 Metacognition and Beliefs
Limited studies have looked at metacognition and beliefs together (Bendixen & Hartley, 2003; Guven & Belet, 2010).
In both of these studies, the relationship of preservice elementary teachers metacognition and beliefs were examined,
together with student achievement. Bendixen and Hartley (2003) examined the relationship between epistemological
beliefs, metacognition, and student achievement in a hypermedia learning environment. They indicated that reading
comprehension, grade point average and fixed ability, omniscient authority and quick learning components related to
epistemological beliefs significantly predicted posttest performance of preservice elementary teachers. Guven and Belet
(2010) looked at determining opinions of primary school teacher trainees' metacognition and epistemological beliefs.
They found that teacher trainees who believed learning as effort rather than ability were more metacognitively aware
and monitored their learning. Neither of the studies explores the potential relationship between beliefs and
metacognitive awareness.
1.4 Research Questions
The present study explores the relationship between beliefs about teaching and learning mathematics and the
metacognitive awareness of elementary mathematics preservice teachers. Therefore, we raise the following research
questions:
1. Is there a significant relationship between beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning and metacognitive
awareness, specifically the subdomains of knowledge about cognition and regulation of cognition?
2. What is the ability of a model containing knowledge about cognition and regulation of cognition domains
related to metacognitive awareness in predicting elementary mathematics preservice teachers beliefs about
mathematics teaching and learning?
2. Methods
This section includes sets of data and statistical analyses about the research model, the students who participated in the
study, and the measurement tools.
2.1 Participants
The participants of this study consisted of 118 elementary mathematics preservice teachers enrolled in a teacher
preparation program in a large urban university in the northwestern Turkey. The Faculty of Education grants several
4-year degrees in teacher preparation areas. The program in which the participants were enrolled was the undergraduate
program in elementary mathematics teaching during 2011-2012 academic year.
The participants had demographics that were typical of this program; they were preservice teachers in college (N=118:
20-22 years old [108]; females [98]). Ethnicity was not collected.
2.2 Instruments
Two instruments were used to measure participants' metacognitive awareness and beliefs about mathematics teaching
and learning: the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory- MAI (1994) and the Mathematics Beliefs Instrument-MBI
(2002). The psychometric properties of the MAI and MBI instruments are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Instrumentations used in the study
Instruments Descriptors Reliability
MAI Knowledge about Cognition average scores range from 2.47 to 4.94 Cronbach alpha= .88
Regulation of Cognition average scores range from 2.37 to 4.66 Cronbach alpha= .93
Total MAI average scores range from 2.52 to 4.75 Cronbach alpha= .92
MBI Total MBI average scores range from 2.07 to 3.57 Cronbach alpha= .71

72
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 3, No. 5; 2015

The MBI was adapted from previous work of Schoenfeld (1989), and Zollman and Mason (1992) by the Author (2002).
This instrument is a 30-item instrument in which all of the items are presented on a 4-point Likert scale. This
instrument measures the consistency of individuals' beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning with the NCTM
Curriculum and Evaluation Standards, their beliefs about teaching and learning mathematics within and outside the
school setting, and individuals' perceptions of their effectiveness as a mathematics teacher and learner. Written as a
4-point Likert scale, the highest point value that could be obtained for this instrument is 120 and the lowest point is 30.
Eight language experts translated the MBI into Turkish. Three mathematics educators organized the translated items.
Each item was confirmed and used in this research. Cronbach Alpha coefficient for the MBI was calculated as .71 for the
data. Since the value of the instrument was above .70 we determined that the instrument was reliable (Buyukozturk,
2010: 171).
The MAI was developed by Schraw and Sperling-Dennison (1994) and transcribed into Turkish by Akin, Abaci, &
Cetin (2007). This inventory is a 52-item scale in which all of the items are presented on a 5-point Likert scale. It does
not contain negative items, and constitutes eight sub-domains, grouped under two domains: knowledge about cognition
and regulation of cognition. (Artzt & Armour-Thomas, 1992, Schraw & Sperling-Dennison, 1994). Knowledge about
cognition domain includes 17 items, and regulation of cognition domain includes 35 items. Written as a 5-point Likert
scale, the highest point value that could be obtained for this instrument is 260 and the lowest point is 52. Each item for
the Turkish version was confirmed and used in this research. The internal consistency reliability coefficient was .95 for
the Turkish version of the inventory (Akin, Abaci & Cetin, 2007). Cronbach Alpha coefficient for this instrument was
calculated as .92 for the data obtained from this study. They were calculated as 0.88 (knowledge about cognition) and
0.93 (regulation of cognition) for the two domains.
2.3 Data Collection and Analysis
The MAI and the MBI were administered to preservice teachers while attending geometry, calculus, or statistics courses
for preservice teachers in the spring semester of the 2011-2012 academic year. Preservice teachers who volunteered to
participate in this study completed the MAI and the MBI within 40 minutes. Each participant coded the surveys
responses independently.
Responses for MAI items were coded as 1=never to 5=always for all items and total points were calculated for
knowledge about cognition and regulation of cognition domains separately. Additionally, MBI items were coded as
1=strongly disagree to 4=strongly agree for positive items and reverse coded for negative items, and total points were
calculated. The awareness levels or belief average scores of preservice teachers were found by dividing the total points
obtained on the instrument by the number of items in the instrument. Higher average scores indicate stronger, positive
mathematical beliefs more consistent with the NCTM Standards or higher levels of metacognitive awareness.
Pearson correlations were calculated using the metacognitive awareness and mathematical belief average scores to
show the relationship between beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning and each of the domains related to
metacognitive awareness. Correlations were deemed significant at the a priori alpha level of .01. Multiple linear
regression analysis was used to investigate whether or not average scores for knowledge about cognition and regulation
of cognition domains related to the metacognitive awareness can predict preservice teachers' beliefs about mathematics
teaching and learning average scores. The data were analyzed using the SPSS 14.0 program.
3. Results
Correlation analysis results for beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning (contains beliefs with the NCTM
Curriculum and Evaluation Standards within and outside the school setting, and perceptions of the effectiveness as a
teacher and learner), metacognitive awareness and its domains (knowledge about cognition and regulation of cognition)
average scores are given in Table 2.
Table 2. Correlations between predictor variables and criterion variable (MBI)
Beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning
Knowledge about cognition .296*
Regulation of cognition .025
* p< .01

Elementary mathematics preservice teachers' knowledge about cognition average scores had a significant, low-level
positive correlation with MBI scores (r =.296, p= .001, n=118), while regulation of cognition average scores did not
correlate with preservice teachers' MBI scores (r =.025, p =.784, n=118).
We ran regression analysis in order to determine whether or not the two domain average scores related to the

73
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 3, No. 5; 2015

metacognitive awareness (knowledge about cognition, regulation of cognition) can predict preservice teachers' beliefs
about mathematics teaching and learning average scores. The results are included in Table 3.
Table 3. Model summary of multiple regression analysis
Beliefs
Metacognitive awareness B p
Knowledge and cognition 0.342 0.597 .000
Regulation and cognition -0.221 -0.412 .001
2
R=0.408 R =0.167 F(2,115)=11.496 p= .000
* p< .01

Elementary mathematics preservice teachers knowledge about cognition and regulation of cognition domain average
scores did predict together their beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning scores [p=.000, df=2, F(2,115)=
11.496]. However, this result may not generalize beyond the population under study, as evidenced by the low R square
value (R2=0.167) reported in this research. The R square value reveals that the two domains related to metacognitive
awareness (knowledge about cognition and regulation of cognition) together accurately predict 16.7% of the beliefs
about mathematics teaching and learning of elementary mathematics preservice teachers. Besides, the analysis results
showed that both of the domains are important predictors of beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning. The two
predictor variables both showed significant contributions to the regression model: knowledge about cognition (B=0.342,
=0.597, p=.000), and regulation of cognition (B=-0.221, =-0.412, p=.001). Regulation of cognition variable provided
a negative contribution to this regression model while the knowledge about cognition variable provided a positive
contribution.
4. Conclusions and Discussion
The cognitive and affective experiences of preservice teachers are vital in mathematics education (Bingham-Brown,
2012). Metacognitive awareness and mathematical beliefs are developed during those experiences, and are critically
important for mathematics education (Kloosterman, 1991; Kloosterman & Cougan, 1994; Lucangeli, & Cornoldi, 1997;
Schraw & Sperling-Dennison, 1994). Metacognitive awareness increases students ability to organize and control their
learning process, and therefore increases success in learning (Cardelle-Elawar, 1992; Kuiper, 2002; Schraw &
Sperling-Dennison, 1994). Similarly, mathematical beliefs are critical in determining what and how students interpret
and benefit from the learning experience (Kloosterman, 1991; Kloosterman & Stage, 1992). Additionally, teachers are
important for the development of their students' mathematical beliefs and metacognitive awareness (Carter & Norwood,
1997). Because of this critical relationship, we assessed the beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning and the
metacognitive awareness of preservice elementary teachers and we explored the relationship between the two.
In the present study, elementary mathematics preservice teachers' beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning
correlated positively with the knowledge about cognition domain of metacognitive awareness. The regression analysis
results showed that knowledge about cognition was a significant predictor of their beliefs about mathematics teaching
and learning. These findings have optimistic implications, particularly in the context of the learning process in
mathematics education since knowledge about cognition domain is related to the knowledge about cognitive processes
and management of cognition (Cross & Paris, 1988; Livingston, 1997). Knowledge about cognition is related to
knowledge about which strategy learners will use and how it will be used for cognitive work (Jacobs & Paris, 1987;
Pintrich, 2002; Sperling et al., 2004). We know that mathematical beliefs affect mathematics learning and success
(Kloosterman & Cougan, 1994; Thompson, 1984). In the light of this finding, it is probable that elementary preservice
teachers with high knowledge of cognition who can control their cognitive processes, and choose an appropriate strategy
or strategies may have more positive beliefs. Differently, preservice teachers' beliefs about mathematics teaching and
learning did not have a significant correlation with their regulation of cognition variable while this variable is a
significant predictor of their mathematical beliefs. As previously noted, this variable provided a negative contribution to
the regression model. We conclude, at least for these participants, that metacognitive awareness does affect mathematical
beliefs of elementary mathematics preservice teachers.
5. Implications
These findings suggest that preservice teachers who have a high level of metacognitive awareness may (1) have beliefs
about mathematics teaching and learning sufficiently that are more consistent with reform perspectives in mathematics
education, (2) be more successful in providing experiences for their students that develop positive beliefs about
mathematics, and (3) be able to support their students academic success. These preservice teachers will most likely use
their metacognitive abilities more effectively in their practice (Ekiz & Yigit, 2007; Marshall, 2003). Having knowledge

74
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 3, No. 5; 2015

about metacognitive processes and using these processes in effective and productive ways increases the metacognitive
awareness levels of individuals (Marshall, 2003). That suggests that future research should be initially focused on not
only the development of metacognitive awareness but also different variables such as grades in school. In addition,
different activities could be suggested to develop and support knowledge, skills and awareness of metacognition in future
studies.
Having a high level of metacognitive awareness is a significant aspect of being a highly effective teacher in
mathematics education. Given that metacognition is related to the mathematical beliefs of elementary mathematics
preservice teachers, enhancing teachers metacognitive awareness is important in developing appropriate, productive
beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning. Additionally, positive mathematical beliefs are needed to be a strong
mathematics teacher and affect mathematics success of their students (Kloosterman, 1991; Kloosterman & Stage, 1992;
Thompson, 1984). Therefore, the development of increased metacognitive awareness should go hand in hand with
developing positive mathematical beliefs. Preservice elementary teachers metacognition and beliefs were examined
together in very few studies (Bendixen & Hartley, 2003; Guven & Belet, 2010). Because of that, future studies could
focus on the development of productive mathematical beliefs of preservice teachers, especially elementary preservice
teachers depending on the increased metacognitive awareness. University education programs need to focus on the
development of preservice teachers metacognitive awareness levels with respect to their effectiveness as a mathematics
teacher or learner.
References
Akin, A., Abaci, R., & Cetin, B. (2007). The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the metacognitive
awareness inventory. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 7(2), 671-678.
Aksu, H. H. (2008). Preservice teachers self-efficacy beliefs towards mathematics teaching. Abant zzet Baysal
niversitesi Eitim Fakltesi Dergisi, 8(2), 161-170.
Artzt, A. F., & Armour-Thomas, E. (1992). Development of a cognitive-metacognitive framework for protocol analysis
of mathematical problem solving in small groups. Cognition and Instruction, 9(2), 137-175.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0902_3
Bendixen, L. D., & Hartley, K. (2003). Successful learning with hypermedia: The role of epistemological beliefs and
metacognitive awareness. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 28(1), 15-30.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/2Y7C-KRDV-5U01-UJGA
Bingham-Brown, A. (2012). Non-traditional preservice teachers and their mathematics efficacy beliefs. School Science
and Mathematics, 112(3), 191-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00132.x
Blakey, E. & Spence, S. (1990). Developing metacognition. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information
Resources. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED327218).
Butler, D., & Winne, P. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational
Research, 65, 245-281. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543065003245
Buyukozturk, S. (2010). Sosyal bilimler iin veri analizi el kitab. Ankara, Turkey: Pegem.
Cardelle-Elawar, M. (1992). Effects of teaching metacognitive skills to students with low mathematics ability. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 8, 109-121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(92)90002-K
Carter, G., & Norwood K. S. (1997). The relationship between teacher and student beliefs about mathematics. School
Scienee and Mathematics, 97(2), 62-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1997.tb17344.x
Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of childrens metacognition and reading
comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.131
Ekiz, D., & Yigit, N. (2007). An investigation of student teachers views of the teacher education models from the angle
of different teacher education programs and genders. Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences
(TrkEitimBilimleriDergisi), 5(3), 543-557.
Everson, H. T., & Tobias, S. (1998). The ability to estimate knowledge and performance in college: A metacognitive
analysis. Instructional Science, 26(1-2): 65-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1003040130125
Guven, M., & Belet, S. D. (2010). Primary school teacher trainees opinions on epistemological beliefs and
metacognition. Primary Education Online, 9(1), 361-378.
Hart, L. C. (2002). Prospective teachers beliefs and practice after participating in an integrated content/methods course.
School Science and Mathematics, 102(1), 4-11.

75
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 3, No. 5; 2015

Jacobs, J. E., & Paris, S. G. (1987). Childrens metacognition about reading: issues in definition, measurement, and
instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22, 255-278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1987.9653052
Kloosterman, P. (1991). Beliefs and achievement in seventh grade mathematics. Focus on Learning Problems in
Mathematics, 13(3), 3-15.
Kloosterman, P., & Cougan, M. C. (1994). Students beliefs about learning school mathematics. Primary School
Journal, 94(4), 375-388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/461773
Kloosterman, P., & Stage, F. K. (1992). Measuring beliefs about mathematical problem solving. School Science and
Mathematics, 92, 109-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1992.tb12154.x
Kuiper, R. (2002). Enhancing metacognition thought: The reflective use of self-regulated learning strategies. The
Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 33(2), 78-87.
Lin, X. (2001). Designing metacognitive activities. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(2), 23-40.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02504926
Livingston, J. A. (1997). Metacognition: An overview. Retrieved October 21, 2008
http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shull/CEP564/Metacog.htm
Lucangeli, D., & Cornoldi, C. (1997). Mathematics and metacognition: What is the nature of the relationship?
Mathematical Cognition, 3(2), 121-139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/135467997387443
Marshall, M. (2003). Metacognition thinking about thinking is essential for learning. Teachers.Net Gazzette, 4(3).
McLeod, D. B. (1992). Research on affect in mathematics education: A reconceptualization. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.),
Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp.575-596). New York, NY: MacMillan.
Metallidou, P. (2009). Preservice and in-service teachers metacognitive knowledge about problem solving strategies.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 76-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.07.002
Ministry of Education (2008). Primary mathematics course curriculum book for 6-8 grades (lkogretim matematik dersi
68. siniflar ogretim programi kitabi). Ankara, Turkey: MEB.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Curriculum and evaluation standards. Reston, VA: Author.
Nietfeld, J. L., Cao, L., & Osborbe, J. W. (2005). Metacognitive monitoring accuracy and student performance in the
postsecondary classroom. The Journal of Experimental Education, 74(1), 728.
Okcuoglu, V., & Kahyaoglu, M. (2007). lkretim retmenlerinin bilitesi renme stratejilerinin belirlenmesi.
Sleyman Demirel niversitesi Sosyal Bilimler EnstitsDergisi, 2(6), 129-146.
Ozsoy, G., & Gunindi, Y. (2011). Preservice preschool teachers metacognitive awareness. Primary Education Online,
10(2), 430-440.
Philipp, R. A., Ambrose, R., Lamb, L. L. C., Sowder, J. T., Schappelle, B. P., Sowder, L., Thanheiser, E., & Chauvot, J.
(2007). Effects of early field experiences on the mathematical knowledge and beliefs of prospective elementary
school teachers: An experimental study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(5), 438-476.
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 219-225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3
Raymond, A. M. (1997). Inconsistency between a beginning primary school teachers mathematics beliefs and teaching
practices. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(6), 552-575.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1989). Explorations of students mathematical beliefs and behaviour. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 20(4), 338-355. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/749440
Schraw, G., & Graham, T. (1997). Helping gifted students develop metacognitive awareness. Roeper Review, 20, 4-8.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783199709553842
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 351-371.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02212307
Schraw, G., & Sperling-Dennison, R. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 19, 460-470. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part
of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111-136.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8

76
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 3, No. 5; 2015

Sezgin-Memnun, D., & Hart, L. C. (2012). Elementary school mathematics teacher trainees metacognitive awareness
levels: Turkey case. Journal of International Education Research, 8(2), 173-182.
Sperling, R. A., Howard, B. C., Staley, R., & DuBois, N. (2004). Metacognition and self-regulated learning constructs.
Educational Research and Evaluation, 10(2), 117-139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1076/edre.10.2.117.27905
Swanson, H. L. (1990). Influence of metacognitive knowledge and aptitude on problem solving. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 82(2), 306-314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.2.306
Swars, S., Hart, L. C., Smith S. Z., Smith, M. E., & Tolar, T. (2007). A longitudinal study of primary preservice
teachers mathematics beliefs and content knowledge. School Science and Mathematics, 107(8), 325-335.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2007.tb17797.x
Szydlik, J. E., Szydlik, S. D., & Benson, S. R. (2003). Exploring changes in preservice primary teachers mathematical
beliefs. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 6(3), 253-279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1025155328511
Taskin-Can, B., Canturk-Gunhan, B., & Ongel-Erdal, S. (2005). Fen bilgisi ogretmen adaylarinin fen derslerinde
matematigin kullanimina yonelik oz yeterlik inanclarinin incelenmesi (Examination of self-efficacy beliefs towards
using mathematics in science lessons of prospective teachers). Journal of Pamukkale University Education Faculty,
17, 47-52.
Thomas, G. P., & McRobbie, C. J. (2001). Using a metaphor for learning to improve students metacognition in the
chemistry classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 222259.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200102)38:2<222::AID-TEA1004>3.0.CO;2-S
Thompson, A. G. (1984). The relationship of teachers conceptions of mathematics and mathematics teaching to
instructional practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 105-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00305892
Wilkins, J. L. M., & Brand, B. R. (2004). Change in preservice teachers beliefs: An evaluation of a mathematics
methods course. School Science and Mathematics, 104(5), 226-232.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2004.tb18245.x
Yavuz, D., & Memis, A. (2010). Investigation of self-efficacy perception and metacognitive awareness of preservice
teachers. The International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 1(1), 12-27.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 81(3), 329-339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329
Zimmerman, B. J., & Paulsen, A. S. (1995). Self-monitoring during collegiate studying: an invaluable tool for academic
self-regulation. In P. R. Pintrich (Ed.), Understanding Self Regulated Learning: New Directions in College
Teaching and Learning Number 63 (pp. 13-27). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219956305
Zollman, A., & Mason, E. (1992). The standards beliefs instrument (SBI): Teachers beliefs about the NCTM
standards. School Science and Mathematics, 92(7), 359-364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1992.tb15609.x

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

77