M.P.

Lukie: Fostering Metacognition and Epistemology Through the use

of Mnemonic Strategies

Fostering Student Metacognition and Personal Epistemology in

the Physics Classroom Through the Pedagogical use of
Mnemonic Strategies.
Michael Paul Lukie1
1

Department of Secondary Education, The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada

Abstract
Students can use memorized mnemonic strategies taught to them by their physics teachers as
a way to assist remembering complicated formulas. However, many students might not
develop a deep conceptual understanding of physics as a result of the use of such strategies.
This theoretical paper proposes that physics teachers can use the teaching and understanding
of mnemonic strategies, as one form of cognitive strategy, to foster students' metacognition
and their personal epistemology by focusing their attention on what it 'means' to understand
and to solve physics problems. Research suggests that "many students exhibit a surface
learning to physics, as a result of a predominantly textbook based and lecture style of
teaching" ([11], p. 47) and that "they do not understand the requisite procedures required to
learn and understand that material" ([15], p. 33). The mnemonic device would be presented
as such a requisite procedure, providing the physics teacher with an opportunity to teach
students about their metacognitive knowledge, control, and awareness [2,11] about when,
why, and how to use the mnemonic device. To further such an understanding of the nature of
physics and physics problem solving, it is important that students develop their personal
epistemology, or what Hofer [4] defines as "knowing about knowing" (p. 363). This is
because epistemological understanding is fundamental to students' understanding and critical
thinking development. It is proposed that teachers can use mnemonic devices to develop their
students' epistemological sophistication by elucidating and promoting the epistemological
assumptions that underlie their critical thinking. If the teachers promote a strictly objective
absolutism by providing the student with a mnemonic device to memorize and apply narrowly
then knowledge is seen by students as simply accumulating from textbook like facts and is
disconnected from the human mind. However, if teachers promote a constructivist
epistemology such that the student, after initial exposure to mnemonic devices, is encouraged
to develop their own mnemonic device(s) then knowledge may be seen by students as a
"theory of mind that recognises the primacy of humans as knowledge constructors capable of
generating a multiplicity of valid representations of reality" ([6], p. 22). Since many physics
students also concurrently study mathematics, the transfer and durability of the mnemonic
device is important for other domains and metacognition is seen as a "potential mediator of
improvement" ([3], p. 119) for this transfer. As a result of students developing mnemonic
devices, they will develop their metacognitive skills, personal epistemological sophistication,
and the "knowledge about when and why to select and apply strategies that are most
appropriate for a problem" ([13], p. 448).
Keywords: High School Physics Education, Metacognition, Epistemology, Mnemonic
Strategies

Introduction

ICPE 2014 Proceedings

This theoretical paper proposes that physics teachers might use the teaching and
understanding of mnemonic strategies, as one form of cognitive strategy, to foster students'
metacognition and their personal epistemology by focusing their attention on what it 'means'
to understand and to solve physics problems. Since students who are more adaptively
metacognitive are typically more successful learners than those who are less adaptively
metacognitive ([16], p.4), it is important for physics teachers to promote metacognition as
part of their pedagogical practice. Further, students are typically unaware that there are
different ways of knowing and many students fall into an objectivist epistemology, where
knowledge is considered by them to be contained in textbooks, and "independent of a
thinking being" ([8], p. 1). Objectivism, according to Roth [12] is the "default epistemology"
(p. 26) predominate in most schools and Lorsbach [8] agrees, writing that the objectivist
epistemology is "dominant in most educational settings today" (p.1). Many physics students
are accustomed to learning the truths found in textbooks and science teaching has traditionally
focused on the direct transmission of these science truths [12].
Many physics teachers provide students with mnemonic strategies as a way to assist them
when remembering complicated formulas but many students might not develop a deep
conceptual understanding of physics as a result of the use of such strategies. However, if
teachers promote a constructivist epistemology such that the student, after initial exposure to
mnemonic devices, is encouraged to develop their own mnemonic device(s) then students
may replace the "notion of truth" ([12], p.7) with the "notion of viability" ([12], p. 7) since
there are many alternative constructions of reality that may exist, "none of which can ever
claim truth for itself" (p. 7). Roth [12] contends the "constructivist position is a more mature
form of knowing" (p. 7) and many educators "have accepted constructivism as a more
appropriate set of beliefs to direct teaching and learning" (p. 7).
I have been teaching high school physics at the University of Winnipeg since 2003 but have
only recently begun to incorporate metacognition and student epistemology into my regular
teaching practice. I have begun teaching students about metacognition and their personal
epistemology when I have been teaching mnemonic strategies within the physics kinematics
unit, and have found that my students report a greater understanding about their thinking and
the way they know how they know. This paper is being written for physics teachers who teach
mnemonic strategies to their students and the suggestion is made that the teaching of
mnemonic strategies may be an opportunity to also teach students about metacognition and
epistemology. A brief review of the literature related to metacognition and epistemology is
presented. The mnemonic device is then examined and the extent to which the literature
reports how students use these devices as cognitive strategies to assist their learning and how
metacognition may assist students in retaining these strategies for longer periods of time.
Finally, I present how the mnemonic device may be used by a physic teacher in a classroom
setting to facilitate the instruction of metacognition and student personal epistemology.
Mnemonic Devices
The evidence for the effectiveness of mnemonic devices to support metacognitive skills is
supported in the literature. Thomas [15] writes that "an effective science learner will possess
cognitive strategies for memorizing science material that they consider to be important"
(p.32), and that "these strategies may include the use of acronyms and mnemonics" (p.32).
Kolenick [5] writes that mnemonic devices may be used to assist students in remembering
content information that would be otherwise difficult for students to recall because the
mnemonic helps students to connect, to construct, and to relate their thinking to the content.
Further, Kolenick [5] adds that "the key idea is that by coding information using vivid mental

M.P. Lukie: Fostering Metacognition and Epistemology Through the use

of Mnemonic Strategies
images, students can reliably code both information and the structure of information, thus,
using a type of metacognitive process." (p.58). Levin & Levin [7] suggest that when
mnemonic devices are used to help acquire information, the information is more easily
applied when mnemonic devices are employed. In addition, Wolfe [19] explains that the
mnemonic device assists the learner by helping to link information stored in long-term
memory with new information the brain is receiving. Students who have created their own
mnemonic devices have outperformed comparison students as reported by Mastropieri &
Scruggs [10] and Markowitz & Jensen [9] indicate the use of mnemonic devices may increase
student learning by two to three times. Research with respect to how teachers should use
mnemonics in the classroom indicates that "the important thing to remember is to explain to
the students why the mnemonic device is being used and why it will work" ([5], p. 63).
What is Metacognition
Metacognition is the thinking about one's thinking and it may be defined as one's knowledge,
control, and awareness of one's thinking and learning [14]. It is the process of taking thinking
and making it the object of one's consideration and manipulation so that the thinker may
potentially control their cognition. Cognition refers to thinking skills, processes, and strategies
while metacognition refers to the metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive control, and
metacognitive awareness of these cognitive skills, processes, and strategies ([2,16]).
Metacognitive knowledge is knowledge about the thinking and learning processes and this
knowledge can be either declarative, procedural, or conditional. For a given cognitive skill,
process or strategy, declarative knowledge refers to knowing that a given cognitive strategy
may potentially be used to solve a certain type of problem. Procedural knowledge is
knowledge about how to use the strategy to solve the problem and conditional knowledge
refers to what class of problem the strategy is applicable to. Metacognitive awareness is the
self-awareness the thinker possesses in using a cognitive skill, process or strategy, and
metacognitive control is the control and regulation of the learning process. Finally, as a result
of the thinker making cognition the object of their consideration, the thinker may have a
metacognitive experience [2].
Metacognition and Instruction
A mnemonic device is a thinking skill, process, or strategy used to assist students with
information retention where the mnemonic device facilitates the translation of complicated
information into a form that may be more easily retained by the student. The mnemonic
device becomes metacognitive when the student is able to differentiate between the
declarative, procedural, and conditional metacognitive knowledge necessary to help solve a
physics problem i.e., about when, why, and how to apply the mnemonic device. The student
demonstrates declarative metacognitive knowledge when they recognize that the mnemonic
can be used to solve a certain type of problem, the student demonstrates procedural
metacognitive knowledge when they are able to understand the mechanics of how the
mnemonic is used to help solve a problem, and the student demonstrates conditional
metacognitive knowledge when they are able to demonstrate what class of problem the
mnemonic is applicable to. As a result of students designing their own mnemonic device to
help them remember formulas and help them solve kinematics problems for example, it is
envisaged that students' metacognitve awareness of their thinking will increase. Upon students
reflecting about the thinking processes they attended to in designing their mnemonic device,
many students should report a metacognitive experience resulting from having been

ICPE 2014 Proceedings

stimulated by their teacher to think about mnemonics in a way they had not done so
previously.
Since many physics students also concurrently study mathematics, the transfer and durability
of mnemonic devices is important and metacognition is seen as a "potential mediator of
improvement" ([3], p. 119) for this transfer. Georghiades [3] asserts that metacognition makes
students more actively involved in the learning process, makes them more responsible for
their learning, and has a positive impact on students abilities to both retain and transfer
conceptions over a longer duration. Metacognition allows students to maintain a deeper
understanding of the subject material because the learning process is revisited, students are
encouraged to be reflective, students compare their prior and current conceptions, and
students analyze and have an awareness of their difficulties [3]. Although metacognition
instruction is important for physics teachers to provide to their students, Georghiades [3] does
caution that the metacognitive feedback provided by the teacher to the students should be
appropriate, compatible and accessible.
Student Physics Learning
The research related to student physics learning indicates that the mathematical representation
of physics concepts was a real barrier to student understanding and many students had
difficulty in using models and relationships [1]. Saglam & Millar [17] agree that the
introduction of formulas and other mathematical notations may impede rather than promote
the understanding of basic physics principles. Students are often overwhelmed by a large
number of physics equations and they cannot conceptually understand the relationships
between the variables but they are able to algebraically manipulate them. To mitigate these
student problems, Willms et al. [18] suggests that effective teaching should include learning
tasks that are thoughtfully designed and that require and instil deep thinking while immersing
the student in disciplinary inquiry. Thomas [15] suggests that current best practices in science
teaching should enhance students' conceptual understanding of scientific concepts through
teaching approaches that promote scientific knowledge as a process of inquiry rather than
with students as passive learners. The suggestion is made that metacognition is one of these
best practices and "to improve student's science learning, there is a need to develop and
enhance their adaptive metacognition so that they can learn science more effectively,
efficiently, and with increased understanding across science learning contexts." ([15], p.30).
In addition, Thomas [15] also suggests that the science learning environment should be more
metacognitively orientated. Prosser [11] reported that "students exhibit a surface learning to
physics, as a result of a predominantly textbook based and lecture style of teaching" (p.47),
since students do not make connections between ideas and representations and focus on
memorization with little permanence for what has been learned. The use of mnemonic devices
for helping students solve physics problems should therefore provide students with an
alternative to simply memorizing equations and should help provide students with a more
logical conceptual solution framework.

Epistemology
Epistemology is a theory of knowledge that explains how we know what we know. When
thought becomes aware of itself and under the individual's control, the thinker is put in charge
of their knowing. When the thinker is put in charge of their knowing the thinker is then able to
decide what to believe and is able to update and revise those beliefs as warranted [6]. It is
4

M.P. Lukie: Fostering Metacognition and Epistemology Through the use

of Mnemonic Strategies
very important for students to know what they know and to be able to justify why because the
student's skill in the "conscious coordination of theory and evidence also put them in a
position to evaluate the assertions of others" ([6], p. 23), their teachers, and societal
influences. According to Kuhn [6], the development of a student's epistemological
understanding is a fundamental component of their critical thinking because students must
first recognize the point of thinking before they engage in thinking.
Different Levels of Student Epistemologies
There a number of epistemological levels that are typical to students and the complexity of the
levels may progress from simple realism to more advanced constructivism, but a student may
retain a given level through time. Students who possess a realist epistemology believe that
assertions are direct copies of some given external reality and this reality is directly knowable.
The absolutist understands assertions as facts, either true or false, and they represent a reality
that can be directly knowable. The multiplist believes that assertions are freely chosen
opinions only accountable to the holder of the opinion and therefore reality cannot be directly
knowable. The evaluative epistemology believes assertions are judgements that can be
evaluated by criteria evaluating argument and evidence, suggesting reality is not directly
knowable. The objectivist epistemology contends that external reality can be objectively
known and objective and unconditional truth statements can be made about this reality. The
conceptualization of science in this way is then a search for truths and science is considered as
a way of discovering the laws, principles, and theories associated with reality [8]. Finally, the
constructivist epistemology is a "theory of mind that recognises the primacy of humans as
knowledge constructors capable of generating a multiplicity of valid representations of
reality" ([6], p. 22) where science is seen as the process that assists us in making sense of the
world.
Epistemological Understanding
Epistemological understanding is fundamental to a student's understanding and critical
thinking development. Therefore, the teacher has the responsibility to develop within their
students a sophisticated epistemology that promotes such critical thinking. If the teacher
promotes a strictly objective absolutism then knowledge is seen by students as simply
accumulating from textbook like facts and is disconnected from the human mind. If the
teacher promotes a strictly subjective multiplism then students will conceive knowledge as
subject only to the tastes of the knower where no truth is ever knowable [6]. What is required
is a pedagogy where teachers promote, especially in physics and science, a form of
constructivism where students are allowed to construct their knowledge to advance their
epistemology allowing for multiple representations of reality. Students should be given the
opportunity to try and understand their conception of reality based upon experience so their
conception of reality may progress into a more sophisticated epistemology where theories and
laws arise out of the students attempt to purposefully achieve this understanding [12].
The Dafit Kinematics Acronym
I became interested in investigating the application of metacognition and student
epistemology to the study of mnemonic devices because I was never satisfied with the level of
my students' understanding with the DAFIT kinematics acronym I have previously given to
them. There are many different mnemonic or memory devices used to assist students when

ICPE 2014 Proceedings

solving physics problems and the acronym is a commonly used mnemonic where a word is
formed from the initial letters of words in a series of words. Students are able to apply the
acronym to successfully solve kinematics problems but they may not exhibit a deep level of
conceptual understanding when doing so. Since there are five physics formulas required to
solve kinematics problems, students often find it difficult in determining which formula to
select for a given set of parameters and the DAFIT acronym facilitates the ease of this
selection process. The DAFIT method for solving kinematics problems involves memorizing
a single kinematic formula for each of the five letters D,A,F,I, and T and memorizing the
word DAFIT. The letters represent the variables for displacement, acceleration, final velocity,
initial velocity, and time and they correspond to one of five specific physics formulas, see
Table 1. The way the DAFIT method is used is that for a given kinematics problem, if the
student does not have information about a certain variable then they select the corresponding
formula for that variable associated to the corresponding letter in the acronym. If for example
the problem provides no information about displacement then the formula vf=vi+at is selected
because it is the formula that corresponds to the letter D, the displacement.
Table1. The DAFIT Acronym for Kinematics Formulas
Acronym Letter

Variable

Variable Name [units]

Formula

displacement [m]

vf = vi+at

vf

acceleration [

m
]
s2

d =

1
2
(vi+vf) t

final velocity [

m
]
s

d = vit+

1
2

at2
I

vi

initial velocity [

m
s

d = vft-

1
at2
2

]
T

time [s]

vf2 = vi2+2ad

Fostering Student Metacognition and Personal Epistemology in the Physics

Classroom
To foster student metacognition and epistemology in the physics classroom a lesson may
include the following series of steps.
Fostering Student Epistemology
1)

To initiate a discussion about epistemology the teacher may begin by asking students
the question. How do you know what you know about physics? Some students may
report that they know physics based upon what they have learned from what their
teacher has told them or from memorizing textbook facts, an objectivist epistemology.
Other students may explain that they know physics from experiments or from
experiencing how nature works through their senses, a constructivist epistemology.
When I have asked this question however many students claim that they know physics
from what their teacher tells them and through the memorization of text book facts

M.P. Lukie: Fostering Metacognition and Epistemology Through the use

of Mnemonic Strategies
2)

The teacher could then explain that there are many different ways of knowing but that
using experiments and the senses is a more sophisticated way of knowing physics. In
promoting a constructivist epistemology then, it is important that students are not
given mnemonic devices to memorize but it is important that they create them for
themselves

Fostering Student Metacognition

1)

To initiate a discussion about metacognition the teacher may begin by asking students
the following questions. Have you ever thought about how you think? and What are
some of the thinking strategies you use in school to help you think

2)

The teacher could then describe the acronym as one way to organize thinking,
explaining that there are many different thinking strategies. The metacognition
instruction will consist of the teacher describing how to use the acronym as a cognitive
strategy and will seek to develop students' knowledge, control, and awareness about
how to organize their thinking when using them. The teacher will instruct students on
the use of the acronym indicating that they can also be used to organize information in
physics just as has already been done in their mathematics classes

3)

The teacher will now describe two acronyms from mathematics that students are
already familiar with and the teacher will provide a description of how acronyms work
in these contexts. The FOIL (first, outer, inner, last) acronym for multiplying out
brackets will be analyzed first and then the trigonometric acronym, SOH, CAH, TOA,
for remembering the formulas for right angle triangles, will be analyzed next. The
teacher will explain that the five formulas involved in solving kinematics problems are
difficult to remember and that just as in mathematics, an acronym may be used to help
remember the five kinematics formulas. In addition, the teacher will suggest to
students that a good acronym for kinematics is one that will also help them decide
which of the five formulas to pick when solving problems. Emphasis will be made that
the kinematics acronym should operate similarly to the way the SOH, CAH, TOA
acronym operates in mathematics because it both assists in remembering the formulas
and for selecting the correct formula

4)

The teacher will now challenge students to create their own DAFIT acronym. Students
will be made aware that the acronym is simply a tool to help their thinking and
additional thinking processes are involved when they determine when, why, and how
to apply the acronym to solve physics problems.

5)

Finally, once the students have solved some kinematics problems with their own
acronyms the teacher could reveal the DAFIT method and similarities and differences
could then be discussed.

Conclusion
This paper suggests that mnemonic devices such as acronyms may be used as a pedagogical
opportunity to teach students about metacognition and their personal epistemology. As a result
of students developing mnemonic devices, they will develop their metacognitive skills,
personal epistemological sophistication, and students will be given the requisite
metacognitive tools to facilitate their deeper conceptual understanding when solving
problems. Upon students reflecting about the thinking processes they attended to in designing
acronyms, many students should report a metacognitive experience resulting from having
been stimulated by their teacher to think about acronyms in a way they had not done so
7

ICPE 2014 Proceedings

previously. By challenging students to think about how they know what they know about
physics, student critical thinking may be promoted as they attend to a more sophisticated
constructivist epistemology rather than the objectivist epistemology many students currently
exhibit.
References
[1] Albe, V., Venturini, P., & Lascours, J.: Electromagnetic concepts in mathematical
representation of physics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(2),
(2001), p. 197-203.
[2] Flavel, J. H.: Matacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitivedevelopmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), (1979), p. 906-911.
[3] Georghiades, P.: Beyond conceptual change learning in science education: focusing
on transfer, durability and metacognition. Educational Research, 42(2), (2000), p.
119-139.
[4] Hofer, B.: Personal epistemology research: Implications for learning and teaching.
Journal of Educational Psychology Review, 4(13), (2001), p. 353-383.
[5] Kolencik, P. & Hillwig, S.: Encouraging metacognition, supporting learners through
metacognitive strategies. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing Inc., (2011).
[6] Kuhn, D.: A Developmental Model of Critical Thinking. Educational Researcher,
28(2), (1999), p. 16-25.
[7] Levin, M. E., & Levin, J. R.: Scientific mnemonics: Methods for maximizing more
than memory. American Educational Research Journal, 27, (1990), p. 301-321.
[8] Lorsbach, A.W., & Tobin, K.: Constructivism as a referent for science teaching. In:
F. Lorenz, K. Cochran, J. Krajcik, & P. Simpson (Eds.) Research Matters-to the
Science Teacher. NARST Monograph, Number Five. Manhattan, KS: National
Association for Research in Science Teaching, (1992).
[9] Markowitz, K., & Jensen, E.: The great memory book. San Diego, CA: The Brain
Store, (1999).
[10] Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E.: Enhancing school success with mnemonic
strategies. Intervention in School and Clinic, 33(4), (1998), p. 201-208.
[11] Prosser, M., Walker, P., & Millar, R.: Differences in students' perceptions of
learning physics. Physics Education, 3(1), (1996), p.43-48.
[12] Roth, M.W.: Physics students' epistemologies and views about knowing and
learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(1), (1994), p. 5-30.
[13] Taasoobshirazi, G. & Farley, J.: Construct validation of the physics metacognition
inventory. International Journal of Science Education, 35(3), (2013), p. 447-459.
[14] Thomas, G. P.: Metacognition in Science Education: Past, Present and Future
Considerations. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second
international handbook of science education (pp. 131-44). Dordrecht, Netherlands:
Springer, (2012a).
[15] Thomas, G. P.: The Metacognitive Science Teacher: A Statement for Enhanced
Teacher Cognition and Pedagogy. In F. Ornek & I. M. Saleh (Eds.), Contemporary
science teaching approaches: Promoting conceptual understanding in science (pp. 2953). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, (2012b).
8

M.P. Lukie: Fostering Metacognition and Epistemology Through the use

of Mnemonic Strategies
[16] Thomas, G. P.: The interview as a metacognitive experience for students:
Implications for practice in research and teaching. Alberta Science Education
Journal, 43(1), (2013), p. 4-11.
[17] Saglam, M. & Millar, R.: Upper high school students' understanding of
electromagnetism. International Journal of Science Education, 28(5), (2006), p. 543566.
[18] Willms, J. D., Friesen, S. & Milton, P.: What did you do in school today?
Transforming classrooms through social, academic and intellectual engagement. (First
National Report). Toronto: Canadian Education Association, (2009).
[19] Wolfe, P.: Brain matters: Translating research into classroom practice. Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, (2001).