An 8-Layer Model for Metacognitive Skills in Kindergarten

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for

researchers?

A: Excellent

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Very good

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

A: Very good

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Very good

Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Very good

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Very good

Comments:

This is an adequately detailed review of the recent 8-layer model for metacognitive skills in kindergarten. The analysis and inference drawn are apt and insightful.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Very good

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of the author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Very good

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Very good

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Good

Comments: Several minor issues were noted –

·       Some words were misspelled, e.g., “Maslow”, “specifically”, “considered”, “beliefs”, “understanding” and so on.

·       In the last sentence of the 2^nd paragraph of the Introduction, “are taught” must be replaced with “taught”, and “long have” must be replaced with “have long”.

·       In the 1^st sentence of the 5^th paragraph of the Introduction, “workforce” must be replaced with “professional life”.

·       In the 2^nd sentence of the 5^th paragraph of the Introduction, “place” must be replaced with “scope”.

·       Incorrect prepositions were used in some places, e.g., In the 1^st sentence of the 3^rd point of the Aims and Methodology, “on” must be replaced with “in”, in the 2^nd sentence of Development of metacognitive skills in kindergarten: The Eight-Layer Model under Research Findings, “with” must be replaced with “as”.

·       In the 3^rd sentence of the 1^st paragraph of Cognitive and metacognitive knowledge in theory under Research Findings, “of them builds” must be replaced with “building”.

·       In the 2^nd sentence of the 5^th paragraph of Cognitive and metacognitive knowledge in theory under Research Findings, “while defining metacognition” must be replaced with “by definition”.

·       In the last sentence of the 8^th paragraph of Cognitive and metacognitive knowledge in theory under Research Findings, “placed” must be replaced with “laid”.

·       In the 1^st sentence of the 5^th paragraph of Cognitive Factors in kindergarten education under Research Findings, “developing” must be replaced with “development”.

·       In the 3^rd sentence of the 2^nd paragraph of The role of metacognition in kindergarten education under Research Findings, “projects familiar to them” must be replaced with “familiar projects”.

·       The 4^th sentence of the 2^nd paragraph of The role of metacognition in kindergarten education under Research Findings must be re-written as “Research by Whitebread and his partners (2007) showed that even much young children (aged 3 to 5 years) in a familiar context of collaborative activities involving peer interaction reveal early forms of orientation, design and reflection, especially when the project is appropriate and matches their interests and levels of understanding”.

·       In the last sentence of the 2^nd paragraph of The role of metacognition in kindergarten education under Research Findings, “works” must be replaced with “activities”.

·       In the 3^rd sentence of the 4^th paragraph of The role of metacognition in kindergarten education under Research Findings, “significantly develop metacognitive potentials” must be replaced with “develop significant metacognitive potential”.

·       The closing brackets at the end of the 3^rd and 4^th sentences of the 4^th paragraph of The role of metacognition in kindergarten education under Research Findings must be removed.

·       In the 1^st sentence of the last paragraph of The role of metacognition in kindergarten education under Research Findings, “Recently,  in Greece, the  Greek Curricula” must be replaced with “Currently,  in Greece, the  curricula”.

·       In the 3^rd sentence of the last paragraph of The role of metacognition in kindergarten education under Research Findings, “, but also in other chapters, suggests” must be replaced with “and also other chapters suggest”.

·       In the 4^th sentence of Self regulation-Self actualization under The role of metacognition in kindergarten education under Research Findings, “makes more possible” must be replaced with “increases the possibility of”.

·       In the 6^th sentence of Self-assessment - Emotional and motivational regulation-Universal knowledge under The role of metacognition in kindergarten education under Research Findings, “succesive” must be replaced with “successful”.

·       There were issues with articles (“a”, “an”, and “the”), punctuations, hyphens, and tense in several places. 

Further comments on the paper

Comments: This review article tried to show that metacognitive skills in preschoolers are a sophisticated process that requires the proper development and collaboration of cognitive functions. This is significant as the new metacognitive based taxonomy could be applied to the field of preschool education in order to support teachers to teach metacognitive skills as well as to assess children to have better learning outcomes.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team