Etapas del proceso sol-gel para el sistema TEOS Etanol-Agua

This chapter began by e xamining briefly the quantity o f metacognitive activity engaged i n by Form 1 students during an information retrieval task. Although the literature

generally associates higher levels of metacognitive activity '

with better academic performance, no significant

correlations were found between students' ranking in terms of the quantity of metacognitive codes assigned to

on PAT Study and Reference Skills, Reading Comprehension or Reading Vocabulary.- However, it must be recognised that whereas much of the literature discusses metacognition in terms of strategy use, the present study included

examination of the components of knowledge essential to strategy development as well as their application.

I f one considers the above findings in light of the

view held by Garner (1987) that metacognition is essential to the development of strategies as well as to their application, the assumption that there are metacognitive and non-metacognitive students becomes untenable� The overall quantity of metacognitive activity is unimportant, rather there appear to be differences in the quality of

the knowledge brought to bear on tasks and these would seem to constrain the quality of the metacognitive activity that can be applied in a learning situation. Moreover,

metacogni tion is not an all or nothing affair. As Resnick (1987) points out, high order thinking processes develop along side those considered in the past to be more basic to learning and it follows that they will vary in their sophistication and consistency of application. Distinctions between students' levels of academic performance and

metacognitive functioning must rest partially on the

content of their metacognitive knowledge and the flexibility wi th which they apply it during cogni ti ve tasks.

As a result of the interview technique used in data collection, the number of responses on any one aspect of the learning situation was small. What is more important here is the r ange of knowledge that students brought to the task.

In general the 23 students disclosed more of their knowledge and beliefs about the materials they must use than about the learning activity or the criterial task. Despite some students having a preference for using

encyclopaedias for information retrieval tasks, all students expected to locate appropriate materials through use of

the catalogue and Dewey system. Levels of understanding of the l ibrary system supported c onfident, efficient

information retrieval by very few students.

Misunderstandings centring on the relationship of subject heading cards, Dewey numbers and the books actually on the shelf led to reduced expectations concerning the number of books to be found by several students. Further, only

three students appeared to come to the task with accurate knowledge of the shelving conventions which dictate the visual search patterns necessary to purposeful location of target materials.

Students were sometimes surprised when the layout and language used in texts failed to meet their expectations, particularly when keywords from their questions proved to be ineffective in accessing information. The unvoiced assumption seemed to be that books would match their reading levels, levels of prior topic knowledge and be organized according to their conception of the topic.

With regard to the learning activity itself, i.e. retrieving and using information, most students assumed they knew what was involved (answer between 3 and 8 questions) despite the fact the task was very poorly defined. Only five of them specifically sought information on how many questions were to be attempted and only five tested the limits of content in any way. That the learning activity can be adjusted to meet criteria for the

evaluation of learning appeared to be totally unrecognised except for four students who were concerned to formulate questions interesting to an unspecified audience. Without knowledge of the relationship between learning activities and their intended outcome it would seem to be rather difficult to define sub-goals and plan action appropriately. Evaluation of progress on the overall task would also

appear to be impeded.

This perceived lack of continuity between the learning activity and criteria I task is also reflected in the

students' attitude to the contract used to record their path through information s eeking. Most apparently viewed this in a very flexible manner, changing questions in

response to the information f ound with n o dire consequences expected.

Information retrieval tasks are evidently extremely complex and provide a grand arena in which metacogni ti ve abilities can come to the fore. That the students made few comments about the nature of the learning activity and criterial task is not too surprising since they lack

familiarity with such learning activities. Books and library systems are more familiar and provoked the disclosure of more knowledge, both accurate and inaccurate. However, this knowledge is only part of that brought to bear on information retrieval tasks. The following chapter will

examine metacogni ti ve knowledge (including tactical knowledge and the children's perceptions of themselves as learners) together with the executive control processes that co­ ordinate the whole information retrieval task.