The development of student metacognition has the potential to provide some of the greatest learning gains in science classes, even outstripping the contribution of general intelligence. However, some science educators not only struggle with successfully prompting students to develop metacognition, but also find understanding the concept itself problematic. This struggle is compounded by models for metacognition that are in broad agreement about its nature, but vary widely in essential elements and the relationships between elements. This article presents a synthesis of metacognition studies in science education and further afield that draws together non-contested elements into a readily understood hierarchy of metacognitive knowledge and skills. The hierarchical framework comprises, from the foundation level, self-Aware of cognition, self-Monitor cognition, self-Evaluate cognition, self-Regulate cognition and self-Transfer cognition (AMERT). As a preliminary test of its viability, the AMERT framework is used to analyse interview data in which there was evidence of rich metacognitive thinking by students in the fourth, research-focused, year of a science degree. The degree used the six facets of the Research Skill Development (RSD) framework as labels for cognition. Rich epitomizing statements were found in interviews for each level of the AMERT hierarchy, providing tentative evidence of its viability for understanding metacognitive processes. The AMERT hierarchy of metacognition provides opportunities for teaching and learning, teacher action research, and research teams to investigate metacognition in the contexts of school and university science programs.

No abstract