Abstract
AbstractInstructional methods incorporating metacognitive or open-ended elements have been gaining popularity, but synergies between the two have rarely been explored. Created with the aspiration to boost students’ knowledge of the knowledge creation process, a conceptually new and structurally open-ended instructional model is proposed here. For that purpose, the squares on Heer’s version of the Bloom taxonomy pyramid were turned into steps on which the class climbed from its base to the top. Each step stepped on opened the content initially hidden from view, but corresponding to cognitive and knowledge dimensions intersecting at it, thus turning the content coverage into an open-ended adventure. Both the students in undergraduate and graduate programs in bioengineering and the faculty peers were in favor of the open-ended model of instruction and, based on distributed online surveys, they preferred it over traditional lecturing. In agreement with the adventurous character of the instructional method, frequent detours and diversions from the straight path of the subject were demonstrated as vehicles for the creative thought. As the students ascended along the learning taxonomy pyramid, the content became less foundational and more in need of discussion, analysis and weighing of pros and cons. At the same time, the students would get increasingly connected with the ideas of broader epistemological and ontological relevance. The intellectual pinnacle of the class was achieved at the peak of the pyramid, where the metacognitive and the creative intersected. There, the students were acquainted with the penultimate learning objective, which is the necessity for a professional to question the premises of one’s profession through one’s professional output, alongside providing practical results therewith.
Highlights
Instructional methods incorporating metacognitive or open-ended elements have been gaining popularity, but synergies between the two have rarely been explored
Even though metacognitive effects were discoursed on by philosophers since Plato (Worley, 2018) and the metacognitive process was the subject of intense interest in cybernetics (Ashby, 1952) and constructivism (Fox & Riconscente, 2008) since the 1950s, metacognition was defined as a term in the 1970s by Flavell (1976) and in the following decade the first reports on its positive effects on learning appeared (Erwin, 1985; Baird, 1986; Biggs, 1988)
Open-ended curricula have not been the standard accompaniments of education
Summary
Instructional methods incorporating metacognitive or open-ended elements have been gaining popularity, but synergies between the two have rarely been explored. While the number of articles published annually has been steadily increasing for the separate topics of metacognition and open-endedness in the context of learning, their combined use has been minimal (Figure 1), demonstrating a miniscule increase in the last year, but still averaging at 2.7 articles per year in the last decade (2008–2017) and containing only two entries for the preceding period of time, i.e., up to 2007. This trend suggests a gap in the knowledge on combination of these two concepts in the educational realm, which this study will address
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
