Self-efficacy refers to one’s judgment of one’s own capabilities to reach certain attainments (Bandura, 1993; Bandura, 1997). Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk-Hoy (2001) define teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as “a teacher’s belief related to capacity or ability to construct the desired learning outcomes”. Second factor is metacognition defined by Flavell as the regulation of and knowledge about cognitive activities (Flavell, 1979). Metacognition abilities develops early stages of problem solving process with accurate representations and the planning of problem solving (Desoete & Veenman, 2006). Teacher beliefs as self-efficacy, educational experiences are given as teacher characteristics that affect the introduction of metacognition in teachers’ teaching practices (Şeker, Ader, 2015).

The purpose of this study is to describe pre-service teachers’ profiles regarding factors affecting their promotion of students’ metacognition and their self-efficacy. Four factors from the Framework for Analyzing Mathematics Teaching for the Advancement of Metacognition-FAMTAM (Ader, 2009) and two factors from the Turkish version of Teachers Self Efficacy Scale (TSES) developed by the Tschannen-Moran, and Hoy, (2001). (Sevgi, 2015) were used to see the relations between the factors of self-efficacy and metacognition.

This study is a survey study. Pre-service teachers filled the FAMTAM (Şeker, Ader, 2018) and The Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale developed by Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk (2001) was adapted to Turkish by Sevgi (2015). The original scale which consists of three sub-dimensions such as “efficacy for student engagement”, “efficacy for instructional strategies” and “efficacy for classroom management” and 12 items is a nine-point Likert scale. Four factors in Ader’s (2018) FAMTAM framework as (1) The Teachers’ Conceptualization of Metacognition Scale; (2) The Teachers’ Perceptions of Students’ Features and Needs Scale; (3) The Distribution of Mathematical Authority Scale; and (4) The External Pressure Perceived by Teachers Scale. The first three Scales have a five-point Likert-scale: completely disagree (1); disagree (2); neutral (3); agree (4); and completely agree (5). The External Pressure Perceived by Teacher Scale is also five-point Likert-scale: (1) no impact; (2) little impact; (3) neutral; (4) partially impact; (5) high impact. The present study was guided by three questions. First, what are profiles of Turkish pre-service teachers’ metacognition and differentiate depending on gender and grade level? Second, what are the relationships between their metacognition and their teacher self-efficacy and differentiate depending on gender and grade level? Third, is each dimension of teacher self-efficacy explained by different sets of metacognition? The first research question was explored by descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations) and within-subject ANOVAs and Bonferroni multiple comparisons as post hoc tests. The second research question was analyzed by correlations. The last research question was examined by stepwise multiple regressions. 500 preservice mathematics and science teachers were filled the instruments. Their age is span a range of 18 years old to 25 years old. Approximately, 80% of them are female and %20 of them are male preservice teachers. Their grade levels range is 1 to 4.

Expected outcomes of this study are given below: • Pre-service teachers’ levels of teacher self-efficacy and their metacognition are at “good” levels. • Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of teacher self-efficacy do not vary by gender, they vary according to the levels of grade and the significant variance is between the 4th grade and others, in favor the 4th grade students. • Metacognition at the whole scale level vary by grade and gender, when the sub-dimensions of the scale was analyzed, a significant variance was found. • A significant correlation wasn’t found between pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and their metacognition. The suggestions formulated on the results of the study are as follows: • Teaching programs and environments which will foster pre-service teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy should be developed. • Instructors, teachers, and pre-service teachers should be provided with opportunities of training in order to increase the use of metacognitive skills and strategies in cognitive processes. • Various studies can be conducted on this topic. The limitations and suggestions for future research are as follows. • This study relied on pre-service teachers’ self-reports about metacognition and teacher efficacy. Their actual teaching behaviors’ were not included as variables. • Future studies should investigate preservice or in-service teachers’ metacognition in actual teaching settings and how the behavior’s affect their teaching practices and children’s achievement.

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117–148. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. Desoete, A., & Veenman, M. (2006). Metacognition in Mathematics: Critical issues in nature, theory, assessment and treatment. In A. Desoete & M. Veenman (Eds.), Metacognition in mathematics education (pp. 1–10). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers. Kim, Y. H., (2011) Prospective early childhood educators’ meta-cognitive knowledge and teacher self-efficacy: exploring domain-specific associations, Educational Psychology, 31:6, 707-721, DOI: 10.1080/01443410.2011.599924 Şeker, V., and E. Ader. (2015). “A Study for Profiling Mathematics Teachers regarding Factors Affecting Promotion of Students’ Metacognition.” In Proceedings of the Ninth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, edited by K. Krainer and N. Vondrova, 3129–3135. Prague, Czech Republic. Şeker, V. & Ader, E., (2018) Profiling Mathematics Teachers Regarding Factors Affecting Promotion of Students’ Metacognition. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi, 35(1), 51-70.