Views of the Use of Self-directed Metacognitive Questioning during Pair Programming in Economically Deprived Rural Schools

References

• Anderson, D., & Nashon, S. (2007). Predators of knowledge construction: Interpreting students’ metacognition in an amusement park physics program. Science Education, 91(2), 298–320. doi: 10.1002/sce.20176
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berenson, S., Slaten, K., Williams, L., & Ho, C. (2004). Voices of women in a software engineering course: Reflections on collaboration. ACM Journal of Educational Resources in Computing, 4(1), 1–18. doi: 10.1145/1060071.1060072
   Google Scholar
• Bipp, T., Lepper, A., & Schmedding, D. (2008). Pair programming in software development teams – an empirical study of its benefits. Information and Software Technology, 50(3), 231–240. doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2007.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breed, E. A. (2010). ’n Metakognitiewe onderrigleerstrategie vir paarprogrammeerders ter verbetering van kennisproduktiwiteit. Doctoral thesis. Potchefstroom, RSA: North-West University.
   Google Scholar
• Chalmers, C., & Nason, R. A. (2003). Developing primary students’ group metacognitive processes in a computer supported collaborative learning environment. Paper presented at the AARE – NZARE Joint Conference, November 29–December 3, Auckland, New Zealand. Retrieved October 20, 2010, from http://www.aare.edu.au/03pap/nas03501.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Joseph, N. (2009). Metacognition needed: Teaching middle and high school students to develop strategic thinking skills. Preventing School Failure, 54(2), 99–103. doi: 10.1080/10459880903217770
   Google Scholar
• Katira, N., Williams, L., Wiebe, E., Miller, C., Balik, S., & Gehringer, E. (2004). On understanding compatibility of student pair programmers. In Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE Symposium on Computer Science Education, March 3–7 (pp. 7–11). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Kramarski, B. (2004). Making sense of graphs: Does metacognitive instruction make a difference on students’ mathematical conceptions and alternative conceptions? Learning and Instruction, 14(6), 593–619. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. doi: 10.3102/00028312040001281
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramarski, B., Mevarech, Z. R., & Arami, M. (2002). The effects of metacognitive instruction on solving mathematical authentic tasks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 225–250. doi: 10.1023/A:1016282811724
   Google Scholar
• Kramarski, B., Mevarech, Z. R., & Lieberman, A. (2001). Effects of multilevel versus unilevel metacognitive training on mathematical reasoning. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(5), 292–300. doi: 10.1080/00220670109598765
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mentz, E., Bailey, R., Havenga, M., Breed, B., Govender, D., Govender, I., … Dignum, V. (2012). The diverse educational needs and challenges of Information Technology teachers in two black rural school. Perspectives in Education, 30(1), 70–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mevarech, Z. R. (1999). Effects of metacognitive training embedded in cooperative settings on mathematical problem solving. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(4), 195–205. doi: 10.1080/00220679909597597
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mevarech, Z., & Fridkin, S. (2006). The effects of IMPROVE on mathematical knowledge, mathematical reasoning and meta-cognition. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 85–97. doi: 10.1007/s11409-006-6584-x
   Google Scholar
• Nicolescu, R., & Plummer, R. (2003). A pair programming experiment in a large computing course. Romanian Journal of Information Science and Technology, 6(1–2), 199–216.
   Google Scholar
• Nieuwenhuis, J. (2007). Qualitative research designs and data gathering techniques. In K. Maree (Ed.), First steps in research (pp. 69–97). Pretoria, RSA: Van Schaik.
   Google Scholar
• Nonyane, J., & Mlitwa, N. (2008). ICT access and use in rural schools in South Africa: A case study in Mpumalanga Province. Section 1: IS, ICT & E-commerce, E-health, E-learning, 1, 94–104.
   Google Scholar
• Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89–101. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3602_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. J. (2001). Metacognition, abilities, and developing expertise: What makes an expert student? In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and practice (pp. 247–260). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Veenman, M. V. J., & Spaans, M. A. (2005). Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learning and individual differences, 15(2), 159–176. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2004.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, L., & Upchurch, R. (2001a). Extreme programming for software engineering education? Paper presented at the 31st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, October 10–13, Reno, NV. doi: 10/1109/FIE.2001.963882
   Google Scholar
• Williams, L., & Upchurch, R. (2001b). In support of student pair-programming. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33(1), 327–331.
   Google Scholar