See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/262115959

Development and evaluation of metacognition in early childhood education

Article  in  Early Child Development and Care · August 2014

DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2013.861456

CITATIONS READS

35 2,797

3 authors:

Athanasia Chatzipanteli Vasilis Grammatikopoulos

University of Thessaly International Hellenic University
22 PUBLICATIONS   107 CITATIONS    52 PUBLICATIONS   497 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Athanasios Gregoriadis
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
45 PUBLICATIONS   330 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Πρόγραμμα Μεταπτυχιακών Σπουδών «Δια Βίου Μάθηση και Ηγεσία στην Εκπαίδευση-Επιστήμες της Αγωγής» - Master Course “Lifelong Learning
and Leadership in Education-Education Sciences” View project

Master’s degree in "Education Sciences" School of Early Childhood Education. Faculty of Education. Aristotle University of Thessaloniki View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Athanasia Chatzipanteli on 10 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [Democritus University of Thrace]
On: 11 December 2013, At: 09:28
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Early Child Development and Care

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gecd20

Development and evaluation of

metacognition in early childhood
education
a b
Athanasia Chatzipanteli , Vasilis Grammatikopoulos & Athanasios
c
Gregoriadis
a
Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University
of Thessaly, Greece
b
Department of Preschool Education, University of Crete, Greece
c
Department of Preschool Education, Aristotle University of
Thessaloniki, Greece
Published online: 27 Nov 2013.

To cite this article: Athanasia Chatzipanteli, Vasilis Grammatikopoulos & Athanasios Gregoriadis ,
Early Child Development and Care (2013): Development and evaluation of metacognition in early
childhood education, Early Child Development and Care, DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2013.861456

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2013.861456

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013
 Early Child Development and Care, 2013
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2013.861456

Development and evaluation of metacognition in early childhood

education
Athanasia Chatzipantelia* , Vasilis Grammatikopoulosb and
Athanasios Gregoriadisc
a
Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Thessaly, Greece;
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013

b
Department of Preschool Education, University of Crete, Greece; cDepartment of
Preschool Education, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
(Received 4 September 2013; final version received 29 October 2013)

The aim of the present study is to provide information and suggest ways to improve
and evaluate metacognition in early childhood. Metacognition is important to
learning and knowledge transfer and preparing students to become lifelong
learners is a main aim of schooling. The engagement of young students in
metacognitive thinking is considered necessary, as they seem capable of
developing fundamental forms of metacognition after the age of three. The
development of metacognitive skills helps young children to become thoughtful
about their learning process. Specifically, the implementation of interesting
activities in an enjoyable manner that develops young children’s high-order
thinking could help them to enhance metacognitive skills and become effective
learners. Physical activities during reciprocal and self-check teaching styles are
such activities that could guide young students to reflect on their own learning
and realise what they are doing.
Keywords: metacognition; early childhood; physical activities

1. Introduction
1.1 Metacognition
1.1.1 Metacognition in daily life
Metacognition refers to a high level of thinking that involves active control over the
cognitive processes engaged in learning and consists of two components: (a) knowl-
edge of cognition and (b) regulation of cognition (Schraw, 2002). Knowledge of cogni-
tion includes: (i) declarative, (ii) procedural, and (iii) conditional knowledge and refers
to what individuals know about themselves as cognitive processors. Declarative knowl-
edge relates to knowledge about oneself as a learner and the factors that influence his
performance. Procedural knowledge is the knowledge of how to perform a specific task
and conditional knowledge refers to knowing when and why to use a skill or strategy
(Schraw, 2002). Regulation of cognition refers to how well students can control their
learning mechanism and includes three essential skills: (a) planning, that has to do
with the appropriate selection of strategies for an effective performance, (b) monitoring,
that concerns a person’s awareness of comprehension and task performance, and (c)

*Corresponding author. Email: atchatzip@yahoo.gr

© 2013 Taylor & Francis

 2 A. Chatzipanteli et al.

evaluating, that is about the product appraisal of a student’s work and the efficiency of
his own learning (Schraw, 2002).
Studies have established the importance of metacognition in the acquisition of
learning skills (Alexander, Fabricius, Fleming, Zwahr, & Brown, 2003; Hartman,
2002), and researchers agree that people with high level of metacognitive knowledge
and skills have the ability to solve problems effectively (Gourgey, 2010). Such an
ability occurs because knowledge about cognition influences individuals’ selection of
learning strategies (Pillow, 2008), and the use of appropriate strategies in problem-
solving situations (Glaser & Chi, 1988).
Metacognition is considered essential to student success, as studies have found that
students who use metacognitive abilities, learn and remember more than others (Wool-
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013

folk, 1998) and diagnose problems and correct them (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987),
discover the best ways to reinforce what they have learned (Vandergrift, 2005).

1.1.2 Metacognition in the early years

Researchers claim that metacognition plays a critical role in students’ memory and
when neuroscientists talk about young children’s metacognition, they mean infrastruc-
tural elements such as working memory rather than higher order components such as
planning or organisation (Denckla, 2003). According to Flavell (2000), young children
before the age of one year, begin to develop a ‘theory of mind’ with an understanding of
mental phenomena and the ability to estimate mental states such as desires and inten-
tions. Around the age of four, children begin to understand knowledge as part of a pro-
cessing system that enables them to appreciate the importance of information and
understand what is important for acquiring knowledge (Perner, 1991).
Metacognitive vocabulary and general meta-memory are improved over the pre-
school and kindergarten years (Weinert & Schneider, 1999). Four-year-old children
can apply mental procedures such as ‘knowing’, ‘thinking’, or ‘remembering’, although
they seem to have limited understanding of the concept of memory (Schneider & Lockl,
2002). Some aspects of memory monitoring appear as early as three-and four- year-old
children, especially on tasks they find more interesting (Lyons & Ghetti, 2008; Schnei-
der & Lockl, 2008). Whitebread et al. (2009), found that children of the same age can
exhibit verbal and non-verbal metacognitive behaviours during problem-solving and
regulation of emotional and affective states. They are able to understand the effort to
remember (O’Sullivan, 1993), and the difference between difficult and easy item-
pairs (Dufrense & Kobasigawa, 1989). Also, they can show conditional knowledge
such as to allocate their attention in accordance with task demands (Miller, 1985).
Preschool children can apply simple strategic approaches to remember and recall
items, when the tasks are meaningful to them (Schneider & Lockl, 2002). By the age
of four, children can use simple steps to regulate their own learning, and at the age
of six, they can reflect with accuracy on their own cognition (Schraw & Moshman,
1995). Blöte, Resing, Mazer, and Van Noort (1999) who investigated organisational
strategies of four-year-olds found that their behaviour was highly strategic, and that
they had the ability to transfer their strategies in new tasks.
First graders exhibited the highest level of metacognition after an instructional pro-
gramme in science units that involved 170 students in grades 1–6 over a period of three
years (Hennessey, 1999). Meta-components, strategies of successful learning, are
related to experience (Flavell, Green, & Flavell, 1995) and motivational aspects of
metacognition are related to students’ interest in task (Magiera, 2008).
 Early Child Development and Care 3

1.1.3 Evaluation of metacognition in early childhood

The assessment instruments which are used in early childhood education are obser-
vations, inner speech, semi-structured interviews, visible thinking routines, draw and
write–tell techniques (Annevirta & Vauras, 2006; Fernyhough & Fradley, 2005; Ritch-
hart, Turner, & Hadar, 2009; Salmon & Lucas, 2011; Whitebread et al., 2009; Winsler,
Manfra, & Diaz, 2007).

1.2 Developing metacognition

1.2.1 Strategies for metacognition
Many researchers have investigated strategies that can improve metacognition in learning
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013

(Schneider, 2008). Metacognitive awareness can be promoted by modelling metacognitive

skills during instruction (Kramarski & Mevarech, 2003). ‘Retrieval practice,’ where stu-
dents write down as much information as they can recall from the study task according
to a generic prompt (Karpicke & Blunt, 2011). Metacognitive questions (Kramarski &
Mevarech, 2004), self-questioning, and think-aloud protocols (Martini, Wall, & Shore,
2004), mental images and charts (McIntosh, 1986), metacognitive prompting (Chatzipan-
teli & Digelidis, 2011), and strategies such as imaging, focusing attention, executing, and
evaluating (Lidor, 2004) are considered important in promoting high-order thinking.
Apart from the support provided by various strategies, researchers highlight the
value of social interaction for promoting cognitive development and that is why they
recommend the use of cooperative learning structures for encouraging development
of metacognitive skills (Kramarski & Mevarech, 2003; Kuhn & Dean, 2004; Martinez,
2006). Iskala, Vauras, and Lehtinen (2004) claimed that peer learning enhances stu-
dents’ metacognitive processes. The ‘self-check teaching style’ in physical education
seems to develop metacognitive activities (Papaioannou, Theodosiou, Pashali, & Dige-
lidis, 2012). In this teaching style, students monitor and evaluate their performance
based on criteria sheets that the teacher has prepared including the essential elements
to a successful performance (Mosston & Ashworth, 2002). Other researchers suggest
that reciprocal teaching style, a peer-learning approach, could promote metacognition
(Theodosiou & Papaioannou, 2006). During reciprocal teaching, students work in
pairs and give feedback to each other based on criteria sheets (Mosston & Ashworth,
2002). Finally, Luke and Hardy (1999) claim that guided discovery is an important
method in promoting metacognition.

1.2.2 Promoting metacognition in early years

The development of metacognitive abilities in early years is important because these
abilities improve children’s awareness about their learning. Enabling students to
acquire such abilities could reduce the differences in learning between younger and
older children (White & Frederiksen, 1998). Preschoolers are not totally unaware of
their thinking and have the ability to use simple metacognitive strategies like planning,
monitoring, or persistence when they are facing challenging tasks (McLeod, 1997).
Several metacognitive techniques are studied in early years such as the drawing–
telling technique which encourage self-reflection, and enable young children to verba-
lise or show evidence of mental activity (Kendrick & McKay, 2002; Salmon, 2008a).
Visible thinking routine that stimulates dialogic thinking (Ritchhart, 2002), ‘think-
aloud’ technique and self-questioning (Fisher, 1998), the awareness of their own
 4 A. Chatzipanteli et al.

thinking (Carpendale & Lewis, 2004; Ritchhart et al., 2009; Salmon, 2008a, 2008b),
pretend play, and metacognitive questions such as ‘what kind of thinking did you
do’ or ‘what did you think about? Why?’ assist children to become conscious of
their thoughts and feelings (Flavell, 1988; Schwartz & Parks, 1994).
Metacognitive teaching strategies such as ‘reciprocal teaching’ can encourage the
construction of metacognitive theories and activities (Brown & Palincsar, 1989;
Schraw & Moshman, 1995). Children’s conceptions of thinking have been connected
with the influence of social interaction (Carpendale & Lewis, 2004). Specifically, peer
interactions can create behavioural outcomes and cognitive products that young stu-
dents could not create on their own (Ashley & Tomasello, 2001). Metacognitive beha-
viours in young children (aged three to five years) emerge in learning activities as they
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013

work in pairs or small groups (Whitebread, Bingham, Grau, Pino Pasternak, & Sang-
ster, 2007). Peer tutoring can also promote metacognitive activities such as monitoring
and control (Shamir & Lazerovitz, 2007).

1.2.3 Activities to promote metacognition in early childhood

Educators could improve young children’s metacognition in activities where children
have increased motivation and engagement, such as physical activities. Through phys-
ical activities students develop social, emotional, and cognitive skills (Pellegrini &
Smith, 1998). They express themselves, they develop skills and their imagination,
and they face problems and solve them. Specifically, physical activities during recipro-
cal and self-check teaching styles could guide young students to use simple metacog-
nitive strategies like monitoring and evaluating, strategies that reflect on their own
learning and realise what they are doing.
More specifically, when educators want to teach a movement or a rule to young stu-
dents firstly they must choose a simple exercise or game. Afterwards they have to write
down in the criteria sheet the skill/rule in the detail they believe it is necessary for an
effective performance. In cases where young students cannot read, educators can add
cartoons in order to show students the correct movement. On the other hand, students
have to read the criteria or watch the cartoons. In reciprocal teaching style, students
work in pairs and one of them, the observer has to assess the doer’s performance
based on criteria. In self-check teaching style, the doer has to assess his own perform-
ance enhancing a kinaesthetic awareness.
These processes help students to be more cognitively engaged in the task because
they do not perform only a motor skill but they understand better what is correct and
incorrect. They also learn how to perform effectively as they check and evaluate per-
formances. Adopting such activities is the best way to promote metacognition in this
age, where children can employ rudimentary forms of metacognitive skills (Pappas,
Ginsburg, & Jiang, 2003).
In an effort to provide examples that could help early childhood educators, two
physical activities that promote metacognition are presented in the appendix. Prac-
titioners implementing these activities can observe if young children can evaluate effec-
tively their peers or themselves according to criteria sheets that are being provided.

2. Conclusion
Metacognition is a very important concept concerning the acquisition of learning skills
and knowledge transfer as children can use it in a more flexible manner, and in new
 Early Child Development and Care 5

areas of learning. Young children using metacognitive abilities and behaviours learn
and remember more efficiently than others and become more strategic, flexible, and
productive in their learning process. Evidence shows that there is a positive relationship
between young children’s self-regulation and high achievement, while poor self-
regulation seems to be a predictor of future problems in school (Ponitz et al., 2008).
So, teachers need to help children develop metacognitive awareness from the early
childhood. Metacognition is teachable and educators could assist their students, even at
a very young age, as it seems that younger children also have the ability to estimate
mental states. Young children’s capacity for metacognition was found to increase
when they participate in enjoyable tasks.
Physical activities during reciprocal and self-check teaching styles could be adopted
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013

to promote children’s metacognition, since children prefer to learn through movement

and games. During the reciprocal teaching style students work in pairs and give feed-
back to each other while in self-check style they evaluate their own executions based on
criteria sheets that include the essential elements for a successful performance (Mosston
& Ashworth, 2002). Implementing ways of working such as the use of these teaching
styles could help young students enhance metacognitive strategies such as monitoring
and evaluating.
Watching cartoons about the specific elements of a motor skill or rules of a game on
criteria sheets is more powerful than watching or listening to their educator. In this way
they learn about concepts, strategies (declarative knowledge), they realise how to
perform a skill or play a game (procedural knowledge) more enjoyably, and they
focus their attention on how tasks are accomplished.
The evaluation of their classmates’ performance gives young students the opportu-
nity to learn from the mistakes of others and that leads them to learn how to plan their
own performance (planning) effectively. All these guide them to become autonomous
and effective individuals.
Educators have the obligation to implement interesting activities in an enjoyable
manner that could develop young students’ high-order thinking and enable them to
become self-regulated and autonomous learners for their entire life.

Notes on contributors
Athanasia Chatzipanteli received both her PhD and MSc through Democritus University of
Thrace, Greece. Her PhD dissertation was entitled: ‘Teachings styles and Metacognition’,
while her master’s degree was centred around ‘Music and Movement Programs in Pre-
schools/Primary Schools’. Currently, she works as a teaching assistant at University of Thessaly,
Greece; the main areas of her research being: pupil-centred teaching styles and metacognition in
preschool/elementary/secondary education-physical education. To date, she has published in 15
peer-reviewed national and international journals, and has conducted 20 presentations in
national and international congress proceedings.

Vasilis Grammatikopoulos, PhD is a lecturer in Educational Evaluation at the University of

Crete, School of Education, Department of Preschool Education, Greece. In the past, he was
postdoctoral teaching fellow at the Liverpool Hope University, UK and University of Macedo-
nia, Greece. He was also academic scholar at the University of Thessaly, Greece for nine years.
He has participated in numerous funded national and international research projects, and his
main research interests are: educational evaluation, early childhood education evaluation, evalu-
ation of physical activity in early childhood education. He has great experience in pre and in-
service teacher training as he has taught in many training courses. He has published over 20
research papers in peer-reviewed international journals and is a member of the American Evalu-
ation Association and American Educational Research Association.
 6 A. Chatzipanteli et al.

Athanasios Gregoriadis, PhD is a lecturer of Early Childhood Education at Aristotle University

of Thessaloniki, Department of Early Childhood Education, Greece. He teaches courses both in
bachelor and master’s Degrees. His main research interests are teacher–child relationships, early
childhood curricula, and the evaluation of early childhood environments. He has participated
and is currently participating as a coordinator and key staff member in five funded international
and national research projects during the last seven years. He has published over 15 research
papers in peer review international journals, and he is a member of the American Educational
Research Association.

References
Alexander, J., Fabricius, W., Fleming, V., Zwahr, M., & Brown, S. (2003). The development of
metacognitive causal explanations. Learning and Individuals Differences, 13, 227–238.
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013

Annevirta, T., & Vauras, M. (2006). Developmental changes of metacognitive skill in elemen-
tary school children. Journal of Experimental Education, 74(3), 197–225.
Ashley, J., & Tomasello, M. (2001). Cooperative problem-solving and teaching in preschoolers.
Social Development, 7(2), 143–163.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Blöte, A. W., Resing, W. C. M., Mazer, P., & Van Noort, D. A. (1999). Young children’s organ-
izational strategies on a same-different task: A microgenetic study and a training study.
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 74, 21–43.
Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1989). Guided, cooperative learning and individual knowledge
acquisition. In L. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction (pp. 393–451).
Hillsdate, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Carpendale, J. I. M., & Lewis, C. (2004). Constructing an understanding of mind: The develop-
ment of children’s social understanding within social interaction. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 27, 79–151.
Chatzipanteli, A., & Digelidis, N. (2011). The influence of metacognitive prompting on stu-
dents’ performance in a motor skills test in physical education. International Journal of
Sports Science and Engineering, 5, 93–98.
Denckla, M. B. (2003). ADHD: Topic update. Brain & Development, 25(6), 383–389.
Dufrense, E. R., & Kobasigawa, Y. (1989). Children’s spontaneous allocation of study time.
Differential and sufficient aspects. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 47, 274–296.
Fernyhough, C., & Fradley, E. (2005). Private speech on an executive task: Relations with task
difficulty and task performance. Cognitive Development, 20(1), 103–120.
Fisher, R. (1998). Thinking about thinking: Developing metacognition in children. Early Child
Development and Care, 141, 1–15.
Flavell, J. H. (1988). The development of children’s knowledge about the mind: From cognitive
connections to mental representations. In J. W. Astington, P. L. Harris, & D. R. Olson
(Eds.), Developing theories of mind (pp. 244–267). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Flavell, J. H. (2000). Development of children’s knowledge about the mental world.
International Journal of Behavioral Development, 24, 15–23.
Flavell, J., Green, F., & Flavell, E. (1995). Young children’s knowledge about thinking.
Monographs for the Society for Research in Child Development, 60, (1, Serial No 243).
Glaser, R., & Chi, M. T. H. (1988). Overview. In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Farr (Eds.).
The nature of expertise (pp. xv-xxviii). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gourgey, A. (2010). Metacognition in basic skills instruction. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.),
Metacognition in learning and instruction (pp. 17–32). New York, NY: Springer.
Hartman, H. (2002). Metacognition in learning and instruction. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hennessey, M. G. (1999, April). Probing the dimensions of metacognition: Implications for
conceptual change teaching-learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA.
Iskala, T., Vauras, M., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Socially-shared metacognition in peer learning?
Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 1, 147–178.
Karpicke, J. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elabora-
tive studying with concept mapping. Science, 331, 772–775.
 Early Child Development and Care 7

Kendrick, M., & McKay, R. (2002). Uncovering literacy narratives through children’s drawings:
An illustrative example. Canadian Journal of Education, 27(1), 45–60.
Kramarski, B., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2003). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom:
The effects of cooperative learning and metacognitive training. American Educational
Research Journal, 40(1), 281–310.
Kuhn, D., & Dean, D. (2004). A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice.
Theory into Practice, 43(4), 268–273.
Lidor, R. (2004). Developing metacognitive behaviour in physical education classes: The use of
task-pertinent learning strategies. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 9(1), 55–71.
Luke, I., & Hardy, C. (1999). Appreciating the complexity of learning in physical education:
The utilization of a metacognitive ability conceptual framework. Sport, Education and
Society, 4(2), 175–191.
Lyons, K. E., & Ghetti, S. (2008, May). Preschoolers introspect on subjective certainty:
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013

Metacognitive development in early childhood. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of

the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction Special Interest
Group 16: Metacognition, Ioannina, Greece.
Magiera, M. (2008). Metacognition in solving complex problems: A case study of situations and
circumstances that promp metacognitive behavior. Chicago, Il: ProQuest LLC.
Martinez, M. E. (2006). What is metacognition? Phi Delta Kappan, 87(9), 696–699.
Martini, R., Wall, A. E., & Shore, B. M. (2004). Metacognitive processes underlying psycho-
motor performance in children with differing psychomotor abilities. Adapted Physical
Activity Quarterly, 21, 248–268.
McIntosh, W. J. (1986). The effect of imagery generation on science rule learning. Journal of
Research on Science Teaching, 23(1), 1–9.
McLeod, L. (1997). Young children and metacognition: Do we know what they know they know?
And if so, what do we do about it? Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 22(2), 6–11.
Miller, P. H. (1985). Metacognition and attention. In D. L. Forrest-Presley, G. E. MacKinnon, &
T. G. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition, & human performance (pp. 181–221). New
York: Academic Press.
Mosston, M., & Ashworth, S. (2002). Teaching physical education (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Benjamin Cummins.
O’Sullivan, J. T. (1993). Preschoolers’ beliefs about effort, incentives, and recall. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 55, 396–414.
Papaioannou, A., Theodosiou, A., Pashali, M., & Digelidis, N. (2012). Advancing task involve-
ment, intrinsic motivation and metacognitive regulation in physical education classes: The
self-check style of teaching makes a difference. Advances in Physical Education, 2, 110–118.
Pappas, S., Ginsburg, H. P., & Jiang, M. (2003). SES differences in young children’s metacogni-
tion in the context of mathematical problem solving. Cognitive Development, 18(3), 431–450.
Pellegrini, A. D., & Smith, P. K. (1998). Physical activity play: The nature and function of a
neglected aspect of play. Child Development, 69(3), 577–598.
Perner, J. (1991). Understanding the representational mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Pillow, B. H. (2008). The development of children’s understanding of cognitive activities. The
Journal of Genetic Psychology, 169, 297–321.
Ponitz, C. C., McClelland, M. M., Jewkes, A. M., Connor, C. M., Farris, C. L., & Morrison, F. J.
(2008). Touch your toes! Developing a direct measure of behavioral regulation in early
childhood. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23, 141–158.
Ritchhart, R. (2002). Intellectual character: What it is, why it matters, and how to get it.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ritchhart, R., Turner, T., & Hadar, L. (2009). Uncovering students’ thinking about thinking.
Metacognition and Learning, 4(2), 145–159.
Salmon, A. (2008a). Promoting a culture of thinking in the young child. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 35, 457–461.
Salmon, A. (2008b). Creating a culture of thinking in the young child. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 35(5), 457–461.
Salmon, A. K., & Lucas, T. (2011). Exploring young children’s conceptions about thinking.
Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25(4), 364–375.
Schneider, W. (2008). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children and adoles-
cents: Major trends and implications for education. Mind, Brain and Education, 2, 114–121.
 8 A. Chatzipanteli et al.

Schneider, W. & Lockl, K. (2002). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children

and adolescents. In T. Perfect & B. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition (pp 224-
257). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Schneider, W., & Lockl, K. (2008). Procedural metacognition in children: Evidence for devel-
opmental trends. In J. Dunlosky & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and
memory (pp. 391–409). New York: Erlbaum.
Schraw, G. (2002). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.),
Metacognition in learning and instruction (pp. 17–32). Champaign, IL: Springer.
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7
(4), 351–371.
Schwartz, R., & Parks, D. (1994). Infusing the teaching of critical and creative thinking in
elementary instruction. Pacific Grove, CA: Critical Thinking Press.
Shamir, A., & Lazerovitz, T. (2007). A peer mediation intervention for scaffolding self-regu-
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013

lated learning among children with learning disabilities. European Journal of Special
Needs Education, 22, 255–273.
Theodosiou, A., & Papaioannou, A. (2006). Motivational climate, achievement goals and meta-
cognitive activity in physical education and exercise involvement in out-of-school settings.
Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7, 361–380.
Vandergrift, L. (2005). Relationships among motivation orientations, metacognitive awareness
and proficiency in L2 listening. Applied Linguistics, 26, 70–89.
Weinert, F. E., & Schneider, W. (Eds.). (1999). Individual development from 3 to 12: Findings
from the Munich Longitudinal Study. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making
science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118.
Whitebread, D., Bingham, S., Grau, V., Pino Pasternak, D., & Sangster, C. (2007). Development
of metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children: Role of collaborative and
peer-assisted learning. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 6(3), 433–455.
Whitebread, D., Coltman, P., Pino Pasternak, D., Sangster, C., Grau, V., Bingham, S., … &
Demetriou, D. (2009). The development of two observational tools for assessing metacogni-
tion and self-regulated learning in young children. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 63–85.
Winsler, A., Manfra, L., & Diaz, R. M. (2007). “Should I let them talk?”: Private speech and task
performance among preschool children with and without behavior problems. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 22(2), 215–231.
Woolfolk, A. (1998). Educational psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
 Early Child Development and Care 9

Appendix
Description of ACTIVITY 1

Main goal: To improve metacognitive activities such as

monitoring, evaluation, and reflection
Teaching style: Reciprocal ACTIVITY 1
Other objectives: Equipment: At the end of the lesson,
To assist young children Coloured construction paper preschoolers:
in (red for circles and green for • Will be able to evaluate their
• developing stability squares), tape classmate
skills and • Will be able to perform stability
• improving creativity skills
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013

• learning geometric • Will be able to recognise

shapes such as: circles geometric shapes: circles and
and squares squares
Content – description Points of emphasis
Name of activity: circles and squares Students have to check how many
Divide students into pairs. One student from each pair will times their classmates perform
perform the activity and the other will assess his peer the right balance in the right
Cut small shapes of paper in circles (red colour) and shape
squares (green colour). Tape shapes on the floor in the
movement area in a small distance between them. Ask
children to move around the room. When the educator
claps hands, children have to stand on one foot and get a
body shape in the red circles and balance on one foot
and one hand getting a body shape in the green squares
Their peers are given criteria sheets where a student/
cartoon stands on one foot in the red circle, etc. and they
have to check if the performance of their couple is
correct

Evaluation:
The educator checks if the preschoolers evaluated their classmates effectively
(Is your friend standing on one foot in the red circle? How many times?)
(Is your friend standing on one foot and one hand in the green square? How many times?)
Ask children what other stability skill they themselves could perform
Ask children about the geometric shapes
 10 A. Chatzipanteli et al.

Description of ACTIVITY 2

Main goal: To improve metacognition

• declarative knowledge (rules of a game-boundaries)
• metacognitive activities such as monitoring,
evaluation, and reflection
Teaching style: reciprocal, self-check ACTIVITY 2
Other objectives: Equipment: At the end of the lesson, preschoolers:
• To develop locomotor skills in 4 cones (for • Will be able to evaluate their classmate
setting appropriate boundaries) • Will be able to monitor their
boundaries performances and evaluate
themselves
• Will be able to acquire more
Downloaded by [Democritus University of Thrace] at 09:28 11 December 2013

information about the rules of a game

(boundaries)
Content – description Points of emphasis
Name of activity: quick chase Boundaries on your mind
Divide students into pairs. One student from each
pair will perform the activity and the other will
assess his peer. The students who are outside have
to check if their peers get out of boundaries
One child of each couple remains outside the game in
order to evaluate the other who plays the game
The object is to tag or touch 5 players who are then
out of the game
The first player who is tagged has to become the new
person who chases the others (hunter)
Move inside the boundaries
In the criteria sheet the educator can draw a cartoon
that is not allowed to get out of boundaries

Evaluation:
Did you get out of boundaries?
Did your classmate get out of boundaries?

View publication stats