Change Instead of Continuity: Using Metacognition to Enhance Student Motivation for Learning

by Benjamin A. Johnson, Ph.D., Utah Valley University

“New occasions teach new duties”
James Russell Lowell

In 2020, as we start a new decade, continuity appears to have taken a backseat to change. While change rapidly spreads through and disrupts such areas as health (including a viral pandemic), education, culture, economy, and technology, continuity offers stability, knowledge gained from the past on the human condition and peoples’ capacity to flourish. In this current climate of change, the expression, “new occasions teach new duties” resonates well (Lowell, 1890, p. 184) and appears to have a double meaning for our situation: not only do the events or “new occasions,” require us to “teach new duties,” but the “new occasions” can actually teach us “new duties.” As students navigate the many disruptions in our schools and communities, they urgently need professors who encourage metacognitive strategies to assess and enhance student motivation for engagement and learning.

It seems that student resistance and motivation not to engage is often driven by the motivation to maintain continuity, to stay in safe territory, to avoid anxiety. Students are often motivated to do what is familiar, such as engaging in surface approaches to learning: to memorize, recite, or do the minimum. As students advance through their majors, they may become more intrinsically motivated because they see the courses as relevant to their career goals. Even then, they can become overwhelmed at exams, and may have other priorities that push them towards continuity. On the other hand, effective teaching and engaged learning is all about change. Considering the current pandemic and the sudden transition to online and hybrid learning, faculty and students must be metacognitively aware as never before.

A 2-Step Framework for Change

Some students will not come prepared to class, will not engage at a high level with the assignments, and will not take owernship for their own learning. This can be extremely challenging for professors. Rather than staying frustrated, here is a two-step framework a professor could cultivate to enhance student strengths and encourage positive change:

Step 1: Become more broadly aware of student resistance behaviors, including types and contributing factors.

Step 2: Create self-assessment opportunities for students to become more self-aware of their own openness to change.

Step 1: Identifying Student Resistance to Change

The Forms of Student Resistance Matrix (Tolman & Kremling, 2017) below offers insight on how students may reveal their motives for resistance to learning. The matrix categorizes fundamental forms of resistance, each with different emotional foundations. It shows that students in the accommodation/anxiety (“Preserving Self”) column want continuity, education delivered in the way they find comfortable and familiar, while those in the anger/frustration (“Asserting Autonomy”) column seek change and validation.

Once we have identified types of student resistance, we can effectively focus our energy on helping students think metacognitively about their own learning needs and goals, and help them evaluate their own contributions to obstacles to their success (such as use of relatively ineffective learning strategies). As they better understand their own needs and challenges through self-assessment, they are more likely to decrease their resistance to learning.

Forms of Student Resistance Matrix
Adapted from Tolman & Kremling, 2017

Asserting Autonomy
(Seeking Change)

Pushing against external influence
Emotions: anger, frustration, resentment

Preserving Self
(Seeking Continuity)

Trying to accommodate to external influence
Emotions: anxiety, fear

Active Resistance

Arguing or disagreeing with professor in the classroom
Repeatedly asking for the rationale for assignments
Saying they paid for the class and want it taught how they like
Inciting other students to rebel or not collaborate; disrupting class activities
Complaining to higher authority

Repeatedly asking for detailed clarification of grading criteria
Taking over group assignments to ensure an adequate grade
Arguing with the professor over grades received, seeking additional points or consideration
Focus on surface approach to learning

Passive Resistance

Refusing to come to class
Refusing to participate during in-class exercises (does not get into groups, does not comply with assignment tasks)
Does not turn in assignments at all or is consistently late
Complaining about the professor to other students

Expressing concerns about working with others
Avoidance of conflicts and refusing to resolve situations or bring them to the professor’s awareness
Minimal participation in class (withdrawn, doesn’t speak or give feedback, lets others make all decisions)

Step 2: Student Self-Assessment—Helping Students Recognize Stages of Change

Helping students assess their own openess to adopting new behaviors is key to supporting their learning. Self-assessment helps them recognize that their own attitudes and choices shape their educational outcomes and that their learning is not simply a product of their professors’ work. One assessment tool that can help students self-assess and self-regulate is the TTM Learning Survey (Tolman & Kremling, 2017), based on Prochaska and DiClemente’s (1983) Transtheoretical Model (TTM). Most often utilized in clinical settings, TTM theory provides a useful model for understanding a person’s path towards adopting new behaviors. TTM readiness to change stages include precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, and maintenance.

Assigning the TTM-LS along with a Personal Learning Plan (PLP; a reflective follow-up exercise that asks the individual to identify how to improve and to plan for the semester) may help students work metacognitively to identify their readiness to change (Tolman & Kremling, 2017). Part of the PLP requires the student to evaluate their stage of readiness to change and then describe how they can move forward and overcome their own forms of resistance. I have observed that using these instruments two to three times during the semester improves student metacognition, as evidenced by student reflections.

Additionally, by working through these self-reflective activities, students become more intentional or mindful about their own motivation to change, providing them multiple opportunities to think through their own behavior and learning. Though students may advance or step up higher through the stages of change, they may also revert back to a previous stage. Professors should help them view this regression as developmental and invite them to persist.

Surveys and reflective assignments like the TTM-LS and PLP help students think more about why they might not be not willing to adopt new behaviors and help them acknowledge their own reluctance to change their learning strategies (Tolman & Kremling, 2017; Yanqun, 2019).

Using the Forms of Student Resistance matrix above (Tolman & Kremling, 2017), an actively resisting autonomous student (left column) may acknowledge in their PLP that when they become frustrated, they request the professor be available regularly to explain the rationale for assignments. On the other hand, an actively resisting preserving-self (or an anxious) student (right column) might respond with fear to conform to the expectations of the professor while arguing for a better grade. Self-assessment helps the student better understand their own motivations, fears, and goals, so they can then move forward more deliberately.

This focus on intentionality is a core aspect of genuine metacognitive thinking because it can help students accept their own role in learning—understanding that what they choose to do shapes how they learn and that the main responsibility for learning resides with them, not with the professor. Once students begin to recognize their patterns of resistence and strategies for overcoming this obstacle, they will take more ownership over their learning. Assessments like these help students to shift their education from something that is being forced on them externally (by parents, society, employers) to something that they can personally control (Perry, et al., 2019).

Asking Students to Think Metacognitively Requires Change

Due to changes in this pandemic year, we can also invite students to become more metacognitive about:

technology use: their feelings toward new technology used for virtual or hybrid class settings and their level of mastery of that technology
learning on their own (less interaction in the classroom) – what works and what doesn’t
monitoring their own progress and anxieties in this dynamic environment

The more we support their metacognitive skills in these areas, the more willing they may be to intentionally make this shift. For example, as universities phase into more online learning, students who are motivated not to engage in new learning strategies may struggle to adapt. They may resist actively participating in online learning in its many forms. Professors can implement surveys such as the TTM-LS and a PLP to open the door to key conversations about students’ goals, what they hope to achieve from the class, and especially, how they might need to adapt to become successful in the new modality.

Learning in itself is a process of change, and as students use metacognition to accept rather than resist learning as an individual responsibility, their motivation can shift for the better. At its core, metacognition is about being open to seeing new possibilities and being willing to change (moving from the precontemplation to contemplation stage, for instance). As students practice self-assessment, they can accept the need for change and embrace “new duties.”

References

Lowell, J. R. (1890). Poems. Riverside Press. (Original poem published 1844)
Perry, J., Lundie, D., & Golder, G. (2019) Metacognition in schools: What does the literature suggest about the effectiveness of teaching metacognition in schools? Educational Review, 71(4), 483-500.
Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C.C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51(3), 390-395.
Tolman, A. O., & Kremling, J. (2017). Why students resist learning: A practical model for understanding and helping students. Stylus.
Yanqun, Z. (2019). The Significance and Instruction of Metacognition in Continuing Education. International Forum of Teaching & Studies 15(1), 29-37.

Metacognition and the Fish in the Water

by Steven J. Pearlman, Ph.D. The Critical Thinking Initiative

As the saying goes, you cannot ask a fish about water. Having had no other environmental experience as a counter reference, the fish cannot understand what water is because the fish has never experienced what water isn’t.

Cognition—broadly meaning that the mind is working—is to homo sapiens as water is to fish. So steeped are we in the water of our own cognitive processing that we cannot recognize it. Even though we all possess an extensive list of examples of other people failing to think well, we nevertheless lack an internal reference point for being devoid of thought; every consideration we might make of what it would be like to not-think can only happen through the process of thinking about it.

This is the difference between metacognition, which is being intentionally self-aware of what we are doing when we are thinking, and critical thinking, which, loosely speaking, is the capacity to reason through problems and generate ideas. In one sense, we seem to do just fine thinking critically without that metacognitive awareness. We solve problems. We invent the future. We cure diseases. We build communities. But in another all-too-real sense, we struggle, for if we lack the metacognitive acumen to understand what critical thinking is, then we equally lack the capacity to improve our capability to do it and to monitor and evaluate our progress.

The Problem and the Need

Case in point, even though research shows that critical thinking is typically listed among necessary outcomes at educational institutions, “it is not supported and taught systematically in daily instructions” because “teachers are not educated in critical thinking” (Astleitner, 2002). Worse than that, one study of some 30 educators found that not a single one could provide “a clear idea of critical thinking” (Choy & Cheah, 2009). Thus, even though “one would be hard pressed to construct a serious counterargument to the claim that we would like to see students become careful, rigorous thinkers as an outcome of the education we provide them. … By most accounts, we remain far from achieving it” (Kuhn, 1999).

But we do need to achieve that rigorous thinking, because nothing is arguably more important than improving our overall capacity to think. To do so, we must seek to understand the relationship between critical thinking and metacognition, for though interrelated, they’re not the same. In fact, we can think critically without being metacognitive, but we cannot be metacognitive without thinking critically. And that might make metacognition the seminal force of true critical thinking development.

Some Classroom Examples

Consider, for example, asking a student, “What is your thinking about the assigned readings about the Black Lives Matter movement”? Were the student to respond with anything substantive, then we could loosely say the student exercised at least some critical thinking, such as some analysis of the sources and some evaluation of their usefulness. For example, were the student to state that “by referencing statistics on black arrests, source A made a more compelling argument than source B,” then we could rightly say that the student generated some critical thinking. But we cannot say that the student engaged in any metacognitive effort.

But what if the student responded, “Because of its use of statistics on black arrests, Source A changed my thinking about the Black Lives Matter because I was previously unaware of the disparities between white arrest rates and black arrest rates”? Is that metacognitive? Not truly. Even though the student was aware of a change in their own thoughts, they expressed no self-awareness of the internal thinking process that catalyzed that change. There is not necessarily a meaningful distinction between what that student did and someone who says that they had not liked mashed potatoes until they tried these mashed potatoes. They recognized a shift in thought, but not necessarily the underlying mechanism of that shift.

However, if the student responded as follows, we would begin to see metacognition on top of critical thinking: “I realized upon reading Source A that I held a tacit bias about the issue, one that was framed from my own experience being white. I had been working under the assumption that race didn’t matter, and it wasn’t until the article presented the statistics that my thinking was impacted enough for me to become aware of my biases and change my position.” In that sentence, we see the student metacognitively recognizing an aspect of their own thinking process, namely their personal biases and the relationship between those biases and new information. As Mahdvi (2014) said, “Metacognitive thoughts do not spring from a person’s immediate external reality; rather, their source is tied to the person’s own internal mental representations of that reality, which can include what one knows about that internal representation, how it works, and how one feels about it.” And that’s what this example demonstrates: the student’s self-awareness of “internal mental representations of … reality.”

The Value of Metacognition to Critical Thinking

When metacognition is present, all thinking acts are critical because they are by nature under reflection, and scrutiny. While one could interpret a love poem without being metacognitive, one could not be metacognitive about why they interpret a poem a certain way—such as in considering one’s biases about “love” from their personal history—without thinking critically. Since metacognition can only happen when we are monitoring our thinking about something, the metacognition inherently makes the thinking act critical.

Yet, even though metacognition infuses some measure of criticality to thinking, metacognition nevertheless isn’t synonymous with critical thinking. Metacognition alone does not successfully critique existing ideas, analyze the world, develop meaningful questions, produce new solutions, etc. So, we can think without being metacognitive, but if we want to improve our thinking—if we want to understand and enhance the machinations of our mind—then we must seek and attain the metacognitive skills that reveal what our mind is doing and why it is doing it.

Accomplishing that goal requires an introspective humility. It means embracing the premise that our own thinking process is at best always warped, if not often mortally wounded, by our biases, predisposition, and measures of ignorance. It means that we often cannot efficiently solve problems unless we first solve for ourselves, and that’s not easy to do for a bunch of fish who are steeped in the waters cognitive.

References

Astleitner, H. (2002). Teaching Critical Thinking Online. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29(2), 53-76.

Choy, S.C. & Cheah, P.K. (2009). Teacher perceptions of critical thinking among students and its influence on higher education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20(2), 198-206.

Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 16-25.

Madhavi, M. (2014). An Overview: Metacognition in Education. International Journal of Multidisciplinary and Current Research, 2.

How Metacognition Can Foster Inclusivity in the Classroom

by Christopher Lee; Snow College

Kelly Field (2018) reports that “A growing body of research suggests that students who feel they belong at their college are more likely to remain there [and] that first-generation and minority students are less likely to feel a connection to their colleges” (para. 27). As an instructor at a 2-year college, I recognize the important role that my institution plays in functioning as a bridge to further educational opportunities, particularly for underrepresented students. Crucial to this mission is ensuring that I do my part to facilitate a classroom environment in which these students feel valued and included.

Inclusivity means working to ensure that curricula and teaching practices don’t exclude marginalized minority students and help to close existing achievement gaps. It means not only valuing diversity but creating a space for diverse groups of students to actually feel included. It entails serious introspection from faculty (before we even enter the classroom) about implicit biases we may hold toward others, opportunities for privileged students to examine their attitudes about underprivileged peers, and opportunities for minority students to critically reflect on their own academic abilities. An inclusive classroom, then, is contingent on honest metacognitive reflection from both faculty and students.

Faculty: Holding Up the Mirror

Inclusivity requires holding the mirror up to ourselves as instructors and asking how our behaviors, teaching practices, and curriculum choices may confirm or exacerbate student feelings of exclusion. As we strive for an inclusive classroom – in relation to race, class, gender identity, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, age, culture, or ideology – it’s critical that we examine the hidden biases we may hold about certain groups of students and recognize how these biases manifest in the classroom.

It’s one thing to acknowledge that we may have negative biases, but can we actually identify and control them? Patricia Divine’s (cited in Nordell, 2017) research suggests that it is possible to identify and mitigate biases, noting that they can be overridden, but not overwritten. In other words, completely removing our biases doesn’t seem to be a realistic goal, but we can moderate them, once recognized. Divine offers a model for faculty that incorporates key components of metacognitive thinking.

First, we must become aware of our own implicit biases. Although there’s no silver bullet, the Implicit Association Test at Harvard’s Project Implicit can be a useful resource. Second, we must become concerned about the implications and outcomes of our biases, acknowledging that there are very real and harmful consequences to holding unchecked biases. Finally, we must work to replace biases with more productive attitudes that align with our conscious or aspirational values. Subsequently, we can design strategies to monitor and assess our progress.

Metacognitive Practices for Students

The work of creating an inclusive, “decolonized” classroom (Seward, 2019) can’t be reduced to a short and simple list; however, these three practical suggestions can be effectively implemented in any course in an effort to utilize the benefits of metacognition toward increasing inclusivity.

Assign Reflective Exercises: Start students reflecting on their thinking processes and assumptions early in the semester, particularly in relation to their abilities and potentially flawed preconceptions about themselves, others, and college. I have students write a short essay about their writing and thinking processes, previous experiences with English courses, including negative internalized experiences, and their expectations about our current class. Students can choose to share their thoughts and experiences openly with each other, demystifying the idea that there’s one “correct” (i.e. white, male, middle class, etc.) way to approach writing, thinking, and other academic skills. Previous negative experiences aren’t necessarily exclusive to them individually and won’t act as permanent barriers to their educational goals.

With opportunities to metacognitively reflect, students are more likely to feel included in the classroom environment, early on, if they see a variety of effective approaches to learning tasks. With this understanding, they need not feel pressure to conform to the norms of a hidden curriculum (Margolis, 2001).

Invite Former Underrepresented Students to Speak: Former students, particularly those who are underrepresented, can be a powerful reference point and model for current students, in both bolstering the self-efficacy of underrepresented students and busting negative minority stereotypes held among other students. Encourage students who have successfully navigated your course to candidly discuss successes, failures, and effective learning strategies. This could be followed-up with a quick one-minute reflection paper that students complete in which they acknowledge their own struggles and make plans for addressing them.

Although we need to be careful not to inappropriately spotlight students (which usually results from us “volunteering” students), this can help underrepresented students to feel more represented and included. We can also use underrepresented student work as models, particularly work that reinforces the idea that there can be multiple ways to reach course goals.

Engage Students in High Impact Practices: Design projects that allow for greater engagement. Opportunities to participate in undergraduate research, for instance, require students to design, monitor, and adjust their work with faculty mentoring and peer feedback. I incorporate such research opportunities in my freshmen research writing courses to various degrees. As Draeger (2018) notes, “undergraduate research allows students the opportunity to become co-inquirers within an existing scholarly conversation” (para. 4). Actively contributing to an existing academic conversation, rather than passively reporting, requires a number of metacognitive traits, such as identifying and working to mitigate existing biases about topics, assessing what they already know or think they know, how to weigh and prioritize information (including where research gaps exist in the broader conversation), and how to adjust a research question when source material presents new and often contradictory evidence. I scaffold assignments with reflective components to serve as individual checkpoints along this path.

First generation and other minority students, in particular, have been shown to benefit from undergraduate research because of increased interactions with faculty and the institution, developing closer relationships with peers, and the opportunity to challenge existing knowledge and power structures with their own primary research contributions (Charity Hudley et al., 2017). These outcomes help to alleviate some of the most prominent barriers to an inclusive classroom.

Practices like these, in addition to reflecting on our own potentially excluding attitudes and behaviors, can aid us in shaping our classroom spaces to be more inclusive and, ideally, help further serve the mission of colleges and universities in recruiting, retaining, and advancing minority students.

References

About Us. (2011). Project Implicit. Retrieved July 7, 2020, from https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/aboutus.html

Draeger, J. (2018, June 22). Metacognition supports HIP undergraduate research. Improve with Metacognition. https://www.improvewithmetacognition.com/metacognition-supports-hip-undergraduate-research/

Field, K. (2018, June 3). A third of your freshmen disappear. How can you keep them? The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/A-Third-of-Your-Freshmen/243560

Charity Hudley, A.H., Dickter, C.L., & Franz, H.A. (2017). The indispensable guide to undergraduate research: Success in and beyond college. New York: Teachers College Press.

Margolis, E. (2001). The hidden curriculum in higher education. New York: Routledge.

Nordell, J. (2017, May 7). Is this how discrimination ends? The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/05/unconscious-bias-training/525405/

Seward, M. (2019, April 11). Decolonizing the Classroom: Step 1. National Council of Teachers of English. https://ncte.org/blog/2019/04/decolonizing-the-classroom/

Series Introduction – Ways Metacognition Can Enhance Student Success

by Anton O. Tolman, Ph.D., Utah Valley University Guest Editor

There appears to be growing interest among faculty and researchers on the topic of metacognition. This is evidenced, in part, by increasing research and published works related to the subject such as Saundra and Stephanie McGuire’s (2015) book regarding teaching students how to learn. Other recent works (e.g., Doyle & Zakrajsek, 2018; Bain, 2012) are aimed primarily at students, encouraging them to recognize how the brain works and how they can adopt behaviors and strategies that will enhance their learning. These are laudable efforts that provide a solid foundation for faculty to introduce to students thereby increasing students’ chances of success. Yet, faculty and others who approach metacognition only from the perspective of enhancing student learning strategies or behaviors (process metacognition) are missing the opportunity for a deeper understanding of metacognition’s central role in learning.

With a broader understanding, all faculty and staff who have contact with students can promote and advocate for metacognitive skill development in general education, course development, across programs and curricula, and as valued skills in students’ personal and professional lives.

Three Ways Metacognition Can Enhance Student Success

Here are three quick examples of how metacognition furthers student success as well as promoting the overarching goals of colleges and universities:

Fostering process metacognition helps students understand how they learn and promotes the acquisition and development of effective learning strategies across subjects (including General Education) as well as within the major. This promotes content mastery and improved academic skills and performance as well as transfer across knowledge domains, but only if the use of these skills is perceived as valued by instructors across courses and within the major. Otherwise, students tend to see this emphasis as restricted to a particular course or professor. If student advisors also encouraged buy-in of the value of these skills and their value to professional careers, this could also have a significant impact.
Metacognition reduces student resistance to learning. Students, especially in their first years, often see themselves as consumers, functioning primarily in a passive “student” role they know well and are comfortable with. Resistance to learning is ubiquitous in education and plays a major role in decreasing student motivation to learn. Resistance arises due to systemic influences (see Tolman & Kremling, 2017), one of which is the lack of metacognitive awareness (see Figure below).

Students’ lack of self-awareness of learning strategies, their relative effectiveness, and the ability to monitor and evaluate their learning (beyond grades) naturally leads to negative classroom situations, frustration, and anxiety. In their consumer or “student” role, pushed in part by social expectations and institutional culture, many believe that if they have put in good effort, they should receive excellent grades. If this does not occur, natural targets of that frustration are the instructor (she doesn’t teach well), the content (I’m no good at this subject), or the generalization that they do not belong in college.

Promoting student metacognition, especially, shifts the responsibility for learning back towards the student who hopefully realizes they can succeed by using better learning approaches and encourages them to seek help when they realize they have not mastered important skills or concepts. This also increases student motivation and desire to learn and can curtail the sense that they do not belong. Instructors, advisors, and others who emphasize the relevance of metacognitive skills in professional careers, or even effective parenting, can help students see value and meaning in using these skills in many environments and across their lives.

Another vital aspect of metacognition is that in becoming self-aware of their own motives, approaches, level of resistance, and personal responsibility, students begin to shift their personal narrative and identity away from that of consumer to that of someone capable of success. They begin to see themselves as someone who can be a lifelong learner and a learned person in their profession and in society. Taraban (2020; Taraban & Blanton 2008) described this process of personal narrative development as inherently metacognitive. In addition, Hale (2012) likewise explores the powerful interdependent relationships between metacognition, critical thinking, and personal narrative.

These relationships are so interdependent and so potent, they underlie the documented effectiveness of what are called “high impact practices” in learning and retention. A good example of this is the power of undergraduate research, an enterprise heavily laden with metacognitive experiences if done well, to shape students’ personal narratives and create a new sense of identity as a scholar, as someone capable of asking their own questions and finding answers. These experiences are especially powerful for first-generation and minority students as clearly described by Charity Hudley, Dickter, and Franz (2017) and the work of Tarabon and Blanton (2008).

Overview of this Guest Editor Series

Even with these limited examples, it should become obvious that metacognition is central to successful learning. The purpose or goal of this Mini-series is to explore several pivotal aspects of learning in higher education related to student resistance and motivation and to encourage all faculty and students to explore these boundaries. In the upcoming blogs, you will hear from the following authors on several important subjects:

Christopher Lee on How Metacognition Can Facilitate Student Inclusion in the Classroom
Steven Pearlman on Metacognition and the Fish in the Water
Benjamin Johnson on Change Instead of Continuity: Using Metacognition to Enhance Student Motivation for Learning
Anton Tolman on Boosting the Effectiveness of Collaborative Learning Using Metacognition

I will conclude the series with a blog focusing primarily on personal narrative and self-identity. Above, I noted that student resistance is a common occurrence in our classrooms. However, resistance is not limited to students. It is time that we, as professors, go beyond the constraints of thinking of ourselves as “content experts” and consider the broader scope of what we are capable of achieving by promoting metacognition in our assignments, our curriculum, across the major, and our institutions. We hope this blog series will help you see some new possibilities.

References

Bain, K. (2012). What the Best College Students Do. Belknap Press.

Charity Hudley, A.H., Dickter, C.L., & Franz, H.A. (2017). The Indispensable Guide to Undergraduate Research: Success In and Beyond College. New York: Teachers College Press.

Doyle, T. & Zakrajsek, T.D. (2018). The New Science of Learning: How to Learn in Harmony with Your Brain (2^nd Ed). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

McGuire, S. Y. & McGuire, S. (2015). Teach Students How to Learn: Strategies You Can Incorporate Into Any Course to Improve Student Metacognition, Study Skills, and Motivation. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

Taraban, R., & Blanton, R. L. (Eds.). (2008). Creating Effective Undergraduate Research Programs in Science: The Transformation from Student to Scientist. New York: Teachers College Press.

Taraban, R. (2020, June 25). Metacognition and the Development of Self. ImproveWithMetacognition.com. https://www.improvewithmetacognition.com/metacognition-and-self-identity/

Tolman, A.O. & Kremling, J. (2017). Why Students Resist Learning: A Practical Model for Understanding and Helping Students. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

Identity Matters: Creating Brave Spaces through Disputatio and Discernment

by Marie-Therese C. Sulit, Associate Professor of English and Director of the Honors Program, Mount Saint Mary College

Six months ago, colleges and universities across America—and the world—shut down in an effort to curb the COVID-19 Pandemic even as the unjust deaths of Black Americans likewise instigated a call-and-response from administrators. Calls for racial awareness, couched within various campus initiatives under the banner of “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” [DEI], have been issued to address and investigate variegated forms of institutional racism. As we follow social-distancing protocols on campus, how can those of us particularly invested in DEI continue to create a space for healthy and honest discourse within our diverse and divergent campus communities?

CREATING A SPACE FOR DISPUTATIO

In the opening piece of this mini-series, I bridge reflection with metacognition in order to address the place of the affective, and contemplative, pedagogy within the teaching and learning climate of a classroom amidst this pandemic. In this closing piece, I seek to highlight disputatio as a contemplative practice particular to Dominican colleges and universities like Mount Saint Mary College. “A method that seeks to resolve difficult questions and controverted issues by finding the truth in each,” the strengths of disputatio reflect its conceptual complexity in accounting not only for one’s “talents” and “abilities,” particularly in rigorous argumentation, but also in addressing “urgent questions of justice and peace” (A Vision in Service of Truth 5). In other words, the contemplative nature of self-examination inherent in disputatio is synonymous with metacognitive reflection or reflective metacognition.

The focus on “urgent questions of justice and peace” affirms disputatio as a tool for answering the call of the Black Lives Matter movement on our home campuses. More so, the cultivation of disputatio, as a “rigorous exploration of multiple ways of resolving a question,” necessitates a process of discernment of “the truth” in “truth-seeking endeavors” predicated on understanding multiple and disparate perspectives (A Vision in Service of Truth 5). This is to say, disputatio, by design, honors those diverse and divergent stakeholders on our campus communities–voices that must be at the table as we move forward with DEI initiatives at the college.

PRACTICING DISPUTATIO THROUGH READING LITERATURE

How we represent ourselves and our situations, in and out of the classroom, is both an interpretive and political act when we consider how we, as people, in particular situations, can be re-presented and/or mis-represented through our institutional structure and through our use of language within the teaching-and-learning environment. As a multicultural practitioner in literature, I teach literature through the prisms of history, culture, and society. I deploy the following steps that ascribe forms of literacy to the reading process with the understanding that the subject matter can reveal one’s conscious and unconscious biases as participants listen, reflect, and respond; one can only know one’s own position through understanding the positions of others.

Basic Literacy, or Reading the Lines: discerning the basic plot of a story on your terms (based on our personal experiences and responses) and articulating the “who, what, when, and where” of that story in our speech and prose, via in-person and computer-mediated communication.
Critical Literacy, or Critically Reading between the Lines: discerning the deeper meaning of the story on its terms and articulating the “how and why” of that story through the background of the story itself and our present historical, literary, and political moment.
Multicultural Literacy, or Reading Critically against the Lines: discerning the gaps and omissions of that story on its and our own terms and articulating ways of filling in these gaps and omissions by posing alternative readings.

Of course, understanding the multiple truths in this reading process is predicated on students feeling safe enough to honestly share the lenses through which they read. If we consider our classroom and our campus as “safe,” then that “safe space” can be fraught as both the common and the contested ground on which all of us stand.

FROM A “SAFE” PLACE TO A “BRAVE” SPACE: ENTER … DISCERNMENT

To further the contemplative practice of disputatio, I begin the processes of reflection cum metacognition utilizing “Crosswalk Prompts,” created by fellow multicultural practitioner, Dr. Paul Gorski. These prompts run the gamut in inquiring about all components of one’s identity: race and ethnicity, socio-economic class and education, to gender and sexuality, religion and spirituality. Students and the instructor respond to questions by either standing or raising a hand to self-identify. For example, “If you worry semester to semester whether you’ll be able to afford your college tuition” or “If an educator, counselor, or other authority figure ever discouraged you from pursuing a particular field of study or profession.” Students and the educator are required to look around the room to see who among them are standing or sitting. Thus, each individual’s subject positions are established from the onset for ensuing lively, and at times challenging, dialogues to be held throughout the semester. Given the sensitive nature of some of the questions, it is important that participants feel safe so they can be brave and share with the class. Thus, in contradistinction to the word “safe,” the word, “brave,” conceptually allows for one’s vulnerability and exposure within and throughout the classroom.

Applying the contemplative, cum argumentative, practice of disputatio, disciplinary parameters provide the structure to discern “the truth” and “truth-seeking endeavors” within a specific classroom through its course content. Metacognition constitutes both disputatio and discernment, thus including both a form of argumentation and a means by which multiple and/or disparate perspectives can be brought to light. Thus, the processes of reflective metacognition, or metacognitive reflection, provide the methodology for one and all in a particular site to discern the components of their own “baggage” between and among others.

CONCLUSION

Currently, the Mount stands poised on its own DEI Initiative, integrated into its Strategic Plan for 2020-2025, which includes objectives and focus areas guiding the establishment of Implementation Teams and their respective leaders, for the curriculum, the institutional structure and organization, and the students. Various co- and extra-curricular initiatives are underway to encourage and promote awareness about DEI, including a Knight Reading Initiative centering Winona Guo and Priya Vulchi’s Tell Me Who You Are (2020), a set of personal narratives centering on race, culture, and identity.

As this college-wide reading initiative unfolds this fall, it is up to each discipline to determine for themselves how to integrate these components into their curriculum. To facilitate this process, I offer tools for teaching multicultural literature through the steps of the reading process and identifying the subject positions of all classroom participants as readers. In moving forward, it is my hope that disputatio and discernment will guide debates and discussions of any particular narrative. It is also my hope that metacognitive reflection, or reflective metacognition, at the heart of disputatio will guide all our campus’s conversations as we continue to discern who and what is at stake in our larger work of cultivating justice and peace.

WORKS CITED

The Dominican Charism in American Higher Education: A Vision in Service of Truth. Dominican University. 2012.

Gorski, Paul C. PhD. “Crosswalk Prompts.” 11 September 2012. Hand-Out.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank my colleagues—Megan Morrissey, Gina Evers, and Charles Zola—for supplementing my lone voice with theirs. I would also like to thank our editors, Lauren Scharff and John Drager, for giving us the opportunity to share our work at Mount Saint Mary College with the readers of “Improve with Metacognition.”

Contemplation and Service as Metacognition: The Dominican Scholars of Hope

by Charles Zola, Assistant to the President in Mission Integration, Director of the Catholic and Dominican Institute, and Associate Professor of Philosophy

High Impact Practices (HIPs) and Learning Communities (LCs)

The AAC&U identified Several High-Impact Practices (HIPs) designed to significantly improve student success (Brownell and Swaner xiii). One type of HIP is a living learning community (LLC) where faculty and students engage in a more focused and intentional way than is normally experienced in traditional courses. LLCs can take various forms, and in 2016, the Catholic and Dominican Institute of Mount Saint Mary College launched a LLC inspired by the heritage and mission of the school entitled, The Dominican Scholars of Hope (DSH) Program.

Open to all Mount students regardless of religious affiliation, the program cultivates the Dominican value of contemplation in the lives of students. This post provides an overview of how reflective engagement in the diverse requirements of the program heightens members’ self-awareness and actualizes their capacity for self-improvement and ability to contribute to the community.

Background: Dominican Contemplation and the Four Dominican Pillars

Study and contemplation engage all of reality in the pursuit of the true and the good for the sake of others. … Dominicans have engaged the reality of the world and sought a deeper truth through assiduous study and contemplation. Dominican pedagogy, then, is a union of study and contemplation in the service of truth, wherever it leads.” (The Dominican Charism in American Higher Education.)

Since its founding in the 13th-century, Saint Dominic de Guzman recognized the essential contribution that formal academic study and contemplation had in fulfilling the objectives of the Order. For nearly eight centuries, these values shaped the intellectual tradition of the Dominicans and the schools that they founded. The Dominican intellectual tradition articulates an intimate connection between the intellectual and practical ends of life mediated through community and service.

Dominican saint and scholar Saint Thomas Aquinas weighed the merits between scholarly activity and service. Reasoning that it is better to illuminate than to shine, Aquinas argued what has been gained in study and contemplation is meant to be shared with others: contemplare et contemplate aliis trader (to contemplate and to share with others what has been contemplated). Consequently, the Dominican ethos is structured around four main values or pillars: spirituality, study, community, and service.

The Dominican Scholars of Hope and Metacognition

The objectives of the DSH program are similar to those proposed for LCs in the LEAP initiative, but refracted through the prism of Dominican higher education’s emphasis on the four pillars. As such, the program has the following objectives: 1. cultivate students’ academic development through membership in a supportive learning community that is conducive to study and scholarship; 2. foster students’ personal, spiritual, and social development through community-building activities; 3. foster students’ character formation through participation in programs related to community service and social justice.

DSH programming aims to cultivate a contemplative disposition in the students, guiding and encouraging them to develop habits of mind and heart that align with the practices and outcomes of metacognition, cultivating awareness and using that awareness to guide actions.

~Spirituality~

The Dominican tradition understands spirituality as a means to gain deeper awareness of self, the world and God. In turn, self-awareness intimately links to the deeper existential questions of life concerning meaning and purpose.

Weekly meditation and journaling promotes this objective. Weekly meetings begin with time for quiet reflection and communal prayer. Students are provided a brief explanation of a religiously based theme, followed by reflective questions that invite students to consider how the values or lessons illustrated by the theme may relate to their own lives or the larger community.

After a period of quiet reflection and contemplation, students are invited to share their thoughts with the group. Student feedback varies, but often students share personal feelings of stress or anxiety related to school, personal issues, or current events. Other times, students express recognition of their limitations and see, in this kind of prayer or religious meditation, the means by which they find inner strength and resiliency to face whatever might challenge them.

In addition to the public, communal meditation, students are also strongly encouraged to journal. Each year, members receive a bound journal, with the expectation that they will use it to record their personal thoughts throughout the year. This type of reflection may be more compelling to students who are introverted and reluctant to share their thoughts in the weekly meditation period.

The experiences of communal reflection and journaling provides an opportunity wherein students are able to assess their personal values in light of spirituality. In doing so, they can recalibrate, redirect or recommit to their values.

~Community and Service~

Free to select the type of service event that best suits their schedules, members of the DSH are required to participate in three community service events per academic year. Afterward, students submit a reflection on their participation. The reflection exercise asks them to consider three main points in order to heighten their awareness of the impact of their service and how that might affect them going forward:

What circumstances or conditions created the need to offer service to others?
What impact do you see your service having in the lives of others?
In what ways has your service changed any of your attitudes about others, the world, or yourself?

In reading and commenting on the students’ reflections on service, I have been struck by how much the students empathize with the plight of those who are less fortunate than they are. Their reflection helps to engender a greater understanding of and appreciation for their own ability to help others, and, more importantly, a greater sensitivity to the needs of others.

~Study~

The DSH program neither offers nor requires any particular courses. However, the program encourages students to view education in a more holistic way that is not limited to a traditional classroom setting and major requirements. This objective coincides with the Dominican ideal that values contemplation as an “engage[ment] in the reality of the world.”

Free to choose from a broad range of approved events, members are required to write three formal reflection exercises per academic semester that are based upon an academic or co-curricular activity. Among these are communal field trips to educational sites, attending guest lectures, artistic performances, participation in campus workshops, or extra-curricular activities.

The reflection exercise asks students consider several points:

What did they learn, and did it relate to a subject they are currently studying?
Did the event make them more interested in learning more about the topic?
Did their views or perspectives change because of the event?
Will their future actions change because of what they learned or experienced?

The students’ papers are returned with comments and become part of their individual portfolio. At the end of the academic year, students review their portfolio that also includes their community service reflections. They then engage in a summary and evaluative reflection, considering how they have developed and matured through participation in the program’s requirements.

Conclusion

In my estimation, the end-of-the-year reflective summation best reveals the metacognitive value of the program. Similar to Aristotle’s definition of god as “thought thinking itself,” the students’ annual review challenges them to develop awareness of how their own ideas and values may have been strengthened, developed, or transformed over the course of the year.

Personal change and development rarely occur in one moment or due to one event; it is usually a gradual process. The portfolio review provides students the opportunity to view themselves over a short span of time using their own reflective narrative as the means to gain a better sense of themselves and the unique contribution that they can make to social justice and the common good.

WORKS CITED

Brownell, J.E., and L. E. Swaner. 2010. Five High Impact Practices: Research on Learning Outcomes, Completion, and Quality. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.

The Dominican Charism in American Higher Education: A Vision in Service of Truth. 2013. Dominican Higher Education Colloquium: 11.

Training Tutor-Learners in Contemplation: Reflection in the Writing Center

by Gina R. Evers, M.F.A., Director of the Writing Center, Mount Saint Mary College

REFLECTION AS BENCHMARK

An institution that foregrounds “contemplation” as one of its core Dominican values, Mount Saint Mary College is no stranger to conversations around metacognition. I chime in as the founding director of our on-campus Writing Center. Our mission is to provide supplemental writing instruction, which we do through one-on-one, peer-facilitated consultations. I train and mentor a staff of seven undergraduate writing tutors, who conduct an average of 614 consultations every academic year.

As peer tutors, my team moves fluidly between learning and teaching as they participate in ongoing tutor training while simultaneously advising their writers. This makes training complex, as their roles as tutor-learners shifts to those of tutor-teachers the moment they sit down for an appointment.

So how do I know whether I’ve effectively trained my tutors to not only navigate their dual roles but also to be successful in the one-to-one teaching of writing? My benchmark has become reflection itself. While I certainly equip my team with the necessary grammatical concepts, rhetorical awareness, and writing process theory, I’ve designed this writing instruction within pedagogically reflective structures. Anyone can train in comma usage – no doubt a valuable communication skill – but training in reflection allows the tutor to determine whether and how a lesson on the comma might benefit their writer. When my tutors engage in authentic and honest self-observation, reflection, and ultimately metacognition during our staff meetings, they demonstrate the requisite skill to be effective teachers of writing.

TUTOR-LEARNERS REFLECT ON WRITING CENTER WORK

I asked my tutors for their insights on the role of reflection in tutor training during a recent staff meeting. During our meeting, we discussed assessment scholars Elizabeth Barkley and Claire Major’s comparison of student-learning outcomes to archery. Barkley and Major say a learning goal is an archer seeing their target; a learning objective is an archer aiming for their target, and a learning outcome is an archer hitting their target.

Applying this to the Writing Center, my tutors were quick to extend the analogy. The archer is one of our writers, who comes to us for assistance wielding the bow of writing skills. With our training on how to use the bow, the writer is able to hit their target: a “good” paper. But, as my tutor Leanna astutely noted, if all we do is teach writers to produce “good” papers, once they’re in a new environment they won’t be able to use the bow independently, making the target suddenly elusive and strange.

In his foundational 1984 essay, Stephen North notes that a writing center “represents the marriage of … [writing] as a process … [and] that writing curricula need to be student-centered” (North 49-50). In the Writing Center, it’s the tutors who tailor our writing curricula to every individual writer who walks through our doors. We understand that the writing process is distinct for every individual writer and for every individual writing project they undertake.

North understands this too, and that understanding fuels his dictum that writing centers create “better writers, not better writing (50, emphasis mine). That is to say, because curricula is tailored to each individual, and because that individual’s process varies based on their current project, we have to focus on the individual and their skill set – the archer and their technique in using the bow – in order for them to be able to navigate any future writing project that might be coming their way. In order for the Writing Center to truly support our writers in this, its tutors must be equipped with tools to assess and reflect on what each individual writer needs before teaching them that content.

REFLECTIVE PEDAGOGIES IN WRITING TUTOR TRAINING

For tutor training, my staff and I meet for a two-hour seminar each week. During these meetings, I structure reflection on writing center scholarship, reflection on the tutors’ own writing and writing process, as well as reflection on tutoring skills. The common denominator is clear:

Writing Center Scholarship. No tutor training program would be complete without covering foundational theories in the one-to-one teaching of writing, and discussions of the readings ask tutors to thoughtfully reflect on their own tutoring practices in light of the scholarship, thereby connecting writing center theory to writing center practice.
Writing Instruct-shops. A term of my own invention, the writing instruct-shop blends three modes of writing instruction: in-classroom instruction, the writing consultation, and the writing workshop. Using one of the tutor’s pieces of academic writing as the text, I facilitate these instruct-shops to simultaneously practice tutoring skills (borrowing from the writing consultation model), improve tutors’ writing skills (borrowing from the writing workshop model), and gain fluency with the identification and application of components of the writing process, rhetorical concepts, and grammatical conventions (borrowing from the traditional classroom model). Because the tutors’ works are at the center of these conversations, reflection on the duality of their roles as tutor-learners and tutor-teachers emerges.
Triumphs & Challenges. As a regular agenda item, tutors share the details of one recent writing consultation that left them feeling triumphant as well as one that was particularly challenging. We spend about an hour hearing these reflections and discuss how to revise tutoring techniques for future consultations.

It is pedagogical nomenclature to say that teaching, like writing, is a “reflective practice”; however, I can say with certainty that tutor training is an environment where the rubber meets the road. My tutors concurred: “It’s the reflection that allows us to become better tutors.” Even if you have a challenging session, reflecting on it and asking for help will give you the skills to do something differently next time.

TUTORS AS THE FIRST LINK: A CHAIN OF REFLECTING

The ability to reflect before proceeding is the benchmark of an effectively trained writing tutor. Returning to Barkley and Major, this means that, at least in my work, the target is teaching my students how to reflect before charging through the challenge at hand. Armed with insights from their reflection, the tutors are able to more effectively choose individualized pedagogies to teach their writers. In other words, tutor reflection evolves into tutor metacognition as they adapt skills they’ve learned as tutor-learners and then put them to use as tutor-teachers. My tutor Leanna calls this evolution “a chain of reflecting.” I build reflection into tutor training, my tutors think metacognitively as they transform insights they’ve learned into teaching strategies, and writers then have tools of reflection at their disposal for both their writing projects and the challenges of everyday life. Reflection is the ultimate transferrable skill.

WORKS CITED

Barkley, Elizabeth F. and Claire H. Major. Learning Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Faculty, Jossey-Bass, 2016.

North, Stephen M. “The Idea of a Writing Center.” The St. Martin’s Sourcebook for Writing Tutors, Edited by Christina Murphy and Steve Sherwood, Fourth Edition, Bedford St. Martin’s, 2011, pp. 44-58.

Metacognition and First-Year Students

by Megan Morrissey, Assistant Director of Student Success, Mount Saint Mary College

MY OWN INTRODUCTION TO METACOGNITION

“But, Meg, how am I supposed to remember this stuff?”

I heard this question quite frequently throughout my first year in 2012-2013 as a part-time Academic Coach, a new position for me in higher education. The core values of my job included:

developing holistic relationships with my students
assisting them in feeling more confident as a college student both academically and personally
aiding in their overall transition to college life

Armed and prepared with questions and exercises I thought would help my students open up to me, I used an intake form that posed logistical questions, like their contact information and intended major, as well as questions that spoke to their interests and self-awareness. However, what became apparent to me is that this generation of students was craving skills that would help them retain information in more meaningful ways, and my focus was to support them in becoming more metacognitive.

For my student meetings, my toolkit included ways to learn and many inventories that tested students’ learning styles. Although these strategies might have worked for an initial exam, giving them a good place to start, these were not enough to help them fully understand key concepts they would be seeing over and again, throughout the semester, and the rest of their college career. They used the skills I gave them to cram information and facts in for that first test, and then they would push all of it aside to do the same thing for the next exam, never truly immersing themselves in the material and understanding the concepts themselves.

THE FEAR OF ASKING QUESTIONS

[In high school] “I didn’t have to study. I paid attention and got good grades.”

Prevalent in secondary education, the “teach to the test” mentality that some educators have is understandable. Being evaluated by standardized test scores, teachers and administrators feel the need to educate their students on exactly what to expect. However, what happens when these students get to college and suddenly the answers to the exam are not so black and white? When they need to defend an answer instead of just memorizing a Power Point slide? When professors want them to immerse themselves in the material? What scared my students the most was their faculty encouraging them to ask questions in class and/or share their informed opinions on what they thought about the material.

Coupled with an intimidation of new faculty, many students face a real imposter syndrome coming into college and feel as if they do not truly belong there. My students have told me that they “don’t want to bother their professors” or are afraid of asking “dumb questions” and risk having faculty look at them in a negative way. My students also struggled with figuring out specifically how to word questions to faculty to get the clarification they need. In order to help them with this task, I would ask them in our meetings to explain what they might be having trouble with in class, asking my own questions to ensure I understood what they needed. Then, we would do a role-play:

My students play their professor, and I play the student.
They give me the absolute worst things that they think their faculty might say and I, in turn, show them how to navigate the situation and get their questions answered.
We then switch roles so that they can practice and anticipate their own reactions and responses.

HOW DO HIGH-ACHIEVING STUDENTS DO IT?

The role-playing exercises I used with my students to ease their anxiety in relating to their faculty led me to think more about how other higher achieving students were able to perform at such a caliber. A study from Iowa State University investigated academic achievement, achievement goals and beliefs about learning surrounding study strategies. The researchers concluded that competence, it seems, can be found both through performance, i.e. the results of an exam or quiz, and through reflection in comparing the actual results achieved to their own expectations (Geller et. al., 2018). Four patterns of achievement goals constitute the development of student competence:

They cultivate a personal sense of having learned the material.
They create the greatest link with metacognitive skills.
They monitor their own progress.
They adjust their study habits accordingly.

To achieve more, successful students engaged in metacognition, assessing the work they have already successfully retained, creating questions to more accurately understand the material they have yet to master and adjusting as needed. They also relied on study skills that included self-testing and planning out their study schedules to avoid procrastinating and cramming.

SUPPORTING STUDENTS WITH ANXIETY

In order to address a rise in the number of students with anxiety-related health issues, we deploy a reverse design in developing several strategies to help them cope. I assist them in the following tasks and activities:

creating a structured study schedule, working backwards from when their exam is, breaking down how much material they feel they can handle in a day, and
rehearsing, i.e. going to the actual classroom, when empty, and creating a practice test (using questions from their professors, textbooks and/or the internet), having them sit in their seat, and taking the practice test in the time they’re usually allotted. This activity not only facilitates the comprehension of the test material, but also anticipates the coping mechanisms they will use in case they get anxious, e.g. deep breathing, repeating a mantra they have created, and scanning the test to see what answers they absolutely know. This process of focusing awareness on their state of mind (specifically looking at when, where, how and why their anxiety peaks) and then using that to adjust their behaviors is another form of metacognition.

HOW CAN FACULTY HELP?

“If metacognition is the answer to being a more engaged and high achieving learner, what strategies can be utilized in class to better assist them in engaging in metacognition?”

Instructors can be powerful influencers by incorporating strategies in their courses and explicitly encouraging metacognitive practices. A study done by Wilson and Bai (2010) at the University of Central Florida concluded that educators need to make metacognition a priority in their lessons and demonstrate the flexibility of these learning strategies in order to show students that they need to reflect and think about how they are retaining information. These reflections can include the following:

active discussions and think-alouds
asking students to hand in questions anonymously before class—concepts, ideas, and points-of information—that they may not have understood from the previous lesson and/or homework assignment
incorporating reflective writing at the end of each class session and to guide them in making connections in what they have been learning

CONCLUSION

My students often come into my office during the first few days of their new journey at our institution. Their emotions are raw and they’re terrified of making any type of mistake. In bridging reflective practices with the development of students’ metacognitive skills, the power, for me, lies in asking purposeful, thoughtful questions and, thus, guiding them as they confront their fear of asking questions and learn to ask questions themselves. Metacognitive skills assist them in building self-confidence in and out of the classroom.

WORKS CITED

Geller, Jason, et al. “Study strategies and beliefs about learning as a function of academic achivement and achievement goals.” Memory (2018): 8. Article.

Wilson, Nancy S. and Haiyan Bai. “The relationships and impact of teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and pedagogical understandings of metacognition.” Metacognition Learning (2010): 20. Study.

How Metacognitive Instructors Can Use Their Learning Management System to Facilitate Student Learning

by John Draeger and Brooke Winckelmann

This essay explores ways instructors can be metacognitive about course design, including selecting tools in the Learning Management System (LMS) to support student learning. It offers strategies for being intentional about learning within the LMS and examples of online modules that can be directly incorporated into course instruction or can be self-contained, student-directed, and stand alone. These examples serve as a blueprint for creating predictable structures that offer guidance and opportunities for students to learn about their own learning. We also argue that purposeful use of LMS tools can provide opportunities for instructor to monitor student progress toward learning goals and make adjustments to their instructional method when appropriate.

Draeger, J., & Winckelmann, B. (2020). How Metacognitive Instructors Can Use Their Learning Management System to Facilitate Student Learning. Journal of Teaching and Learning With Technology, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.14434/jotlt.v9i1.29159

Reflection Matters: Using Metacognition to Track a Moving Target

INTRODUCTION: A CALL FOR CONTEMPLATIVE PEDAGOGY

“Study: one must truly learn how to do it.”—Fr. Guido Vergauwen, OP

Everyday mitigating factors, such as distractions, pressures, insecurities and anxieties, can become manifest in the teaching-and-learning classroom climate on the parts of both instructors and students and, thus, can exacerbate the challenges that all already face in that place. However, the philosophy and praxis of contemplative pedagogy allows everyone to focus on the present and engage in the moment in order to address whatever needs tending to in that instant.

The practices of contemplative pedagogy creates a space within one’s intellectual and emotional reactions to course content and/or whatever informs one’s engagement therein—be it a spoken or written remark, a difficult topic, or an emerging theme. These practices bridge reflection (or contemplation), as the serious consideration of one’s thoughts, sentiments, and emotions, with metacognition, which highlights the awareness and understanding of one’s thought processes in the development of one’s skills sets. Integrating reflection with metacognition holds the potential in creating a rich teaching-and-learning environment.

AN ANALOGY: TARGET PRACTICE

In order to create and cultivate this kind of climate and culture, I draw upon Elizabeth F. Barkley and Claire H. Major’s analogy of target practice, in Learning Assessment Techniques (2015). Here, Barkley and Major differentiate Goals (broader plans) and Objectives (steps, methods, and tools in achieving goals) from Outcomes (the results from the execution and delivery of objectives)—all of which are applicable outside of higher education.

Teaching & Learning Goals: See the target.

Teaching & Learning Objectives: Aim for the target.

Teaching & Learning Outcomes: Hit the target.

While I can establish these determinants for any class in which I find myself, what is essential is that the students articulate their own determinants for any class in which they find themselves with me. Within the first week of classes, I deploy a set of assignments that connect reflection with metacognition:

a questionnaire for creating a climate for teaching and learning that asks the students various questions that account for best and worst practices on the parts of students and instructors;
a set of diagnostic paragraphs that require the students to reflect on their perceptions of self and others, and study habits and lifestyle issues that may affect their course;
guidelines that determine what failure and success looks and feels like from the students’ perspectives.

Here, allow me to extend Barkley and Major’s useful metaphor of target practice in emphasizing that the practice itself anticipates two goals: cultivating a sense of discipline through practice and hitting the target. In her Faculty Focus essay, “Enhancing Learning through Zest, Grit and Sweat,” Lolita Paff applies these terms to the teaching and learning opportunities and practices that inform our pedagogy (November 14, 2018).

zest equates with the cultivation of curiosity;
grit represents the tenacity in meeting a challenge;
sweat embodies the work ethic embodied in the intellectual labor itself.

For instructor and student alike, motivation itself informs zest, grit and sweat as part and parcel of one’s metacognitive reflection (or reflective metacognition) when assessing one’s failure or success in a course.

A TIME FOR CONTEMPLATION: PANDEMIC PEDAGOGY DURING COVID-19

“Listening is an encounter. And an encounter is like a crossroads—our own and that of the person who is listening to us.”—Sr. Jeanne-Marie de Menibus

Throughout the course of a semester, I adopt reflection with metacognition in order to gauge where we are with where we need to be by the end of the semester. On any given day, I check-in with the students to ask the following formative questions:

What works?
What does not work?
What needs to be amended, revised, and/or updated altogether?

However, this past March of 2020, the auspicious timing of COVID-19 with Spring Break necessitated The Pause and The Pivot in adapting our instructional delivery to the virtual arena—Pandemic Pedagogy—across all grade levels in the United States. Here, allow me to borrow the language of public health that guides all of us in this pandemic: the above questions, so typical for me at this juncture in every semester, compelled me to truly cull and glean—triage—what was and was not essential in the course in order to gauge where all of us—students, colleagues, family and friends, and myself—were at that time. Always, first and foremost, the need for authentic communication—a check-in—fosters a mindset that encourages simply asking questions, in a classroom, in a meeting, in a heightened conversation even as it also necessitates a slowing down to hold still and listen in contemplation.

Requisite course evaluations function as a Pandora’s Box of sorts insofar as their usefulness as authentic assessment tools in shaping one’s pedagogy while holding one accountable for their philosophy and praxis. Typically, and to counterbalance course evaluations, I deploy a closing commentary that asks student to reflect upon the course. This reflection, approached as a professional letter to me, runs the gamut of prompts that solicit specific pieces of information: the reading selections, the various assessment tools, e.g. exams (instructor- and student-created), writing assignments (low- and high stakes), and their own thoughts and suggestions for future students.

At the close of this semester, and in emulating practices across other American colleges and universities, I added a few formative questions in order to enhance the processes of metacognitive reflection (or reflective metacognition) in the following:

involvement or engagement
motivation or passion
a literacy skill honed throughout the semester
a new technological, practical, or communicational skill honed (in the virtual classroom)
a practice, an activity, or an idea for me to sustain (in an actual or virtual classroom)

CONCLUSION: THE GREAT PAUSE

How does one protest a problem without first mentioning it?—A Zen Koan

In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity.—Albert Einstein

In discerning what is and is not essential in a course, in going remote these days, the “business as usual” approach strikes me as intensely odd because The Old Normal was not always working, was not always effective, and was not always … good. Living in The New Normal has exposed the underpinnings and trappings of The Old Normal in such startling ways that for some of us tracking a moving set of targets—the curves of a pandemic, work-at home adjustments, updates in our pedagogical practices through technology—necessitates holding still in contemplation.

WORKS CITED

de Menibus, Jeanne-Marie, OP. “A Contemplative Listens and Teaches.” Towards the Intelligent Use of Liberty: Dominican Approaches in Education. Edited by Gabrielle Kelly, OP, and Kevin Saunders, OP. 2014. 99-102.

Vergauwen, Guido, OP. “The Charism of Study in the Education of Dominicans.” Towards the Intelligent Use of Liberty: Dominican Approaches in Education. Edited by Gabrielle Kelly, OP, and Kevin Saunders, OP. 2014. 89-98.

Integrating Reflection into Our Everyday Practices with Authenticity: A Discussion Series on Metacognition

In “Integrating Reflection into Our Everyday Practices with Authenticity: A Discussion Series on Metacognition,” educators across the Mount Saint Mary College discuss the place of reflection within their own professional development and that of their students in their processes of metacognition.

As Associate Professor of English and Director of the Honors Program, Marie-Therese C. Sulit offers the opening and closing pieces to this series, which meditate and deliberate over the current political, historical, social, and cultural climate of this pandemic during a national election year in America.

In her introductory piece, Marie-Therese C. Sulit draws upon the practices of contemplative pedagogy in order to conceptually bridge reflection with metacognition, particularly during COVID-19.

As Assistant Director of the Office for Student Success, Megan Morrissey discusses the training of academic coaches and coaching of students in facilitating the development of new study strategies for new achievement goals.

As Director of the Writing Center, Gina Evers considers the ways in which teaching and learning are woven together through reflection in her tutor training program.

As Assistant to the President in Mission Integration, Director of the Catholic and Dominican Institute, and Associate Professor of Philosophy, Charles Zola discusses the Four Pillars of Dominican Spirituality, particularly the role of reflection, through his work with the Dominican Scholars of Hope.

In her concluding piece, Marie-Therese C. Sulit discusses disputatio, a metacognitive method of investigation that not only embodies the Dominican Intellectual Tradition but also the reflective practices of contemplative pedagogy, as a means to explore the implications for curricular and campus reform at the Mount.

This miniseries explores the dimensions of metacognition across two tiers—within our classrooms and our offices—through our own professional development in tandem with our students and our colleagues: in short, why we do what we do and how we do it on an everyday basis.

Connecting Emotional Intelligence with Metacognition

by Gina Burkart, Ed.D., Learning Specialist, Clarke University

Emotional intelligence has been receiving lots of attention in the news. In fact, recent research has shown that higher levels of emotional intelligence can lead to salary increases (Rode, Arthaud-Day, Rmaswami, & Howes, 2017). So what exactly is emotional intelligence? It is the ability to recognize, think about, and regulate how one’s thoughts and emotions are impacting one’s behaviors and habits. These characteristics link it with metacognition because it correlates with our ability to think about what we do, how we do it, and how we think about our own thinking and whether or not we even engage in metacognition.

Nuhfer (2017) also addressed this relationship when he explored how affect governs how we think and feel, and determines how we filter the world and operate—thus controlling our success and failure. Additionally, studies are showing that guiding college students in developing emotional intelligence leads to increases in retention and persistence of college students (Mendez, Aronold, Erjavec, & Lopez, 2018-2019). Likewise, research indicates holistic interventions that focus on non-cognitive factors might make the biggest difference in helping students recover academically (Friedlander, Reid, Shupak, & Cribbie, 2007).

Emotional intelligence and metacognition both can be developed through careful curriculum development that allows space in the classroom for both introspective and group work. This blog post shares some examples of collaborative work with our campus learning center – these efforts help students find productive cognitive and emotional strategies that foster new habits and support their success.

Strategies for Embedding Metacognition Linked with Emotional Intelligence into the Classroom

Embedding emotional intelligence and metacognition into a college classroom might seem overwhelming or be perceived as taking time away from necessary content. However, many strategies can be quickly and easily embedded into existing curriculum and increase learning and efficacy of students. Each of the processes I describe below have components to 1) bring awareness to feelings related to academic performance, 2) identify possible strategies, and 3) support emotional self-regulation in enacting strategies.

Journaling based on the Six Seconds Emotional Intelligence Model

I have found the Six Seconds Emotional Intelligence Model to be a useful tool to facilitate metacognition and emotional intelligence throughout the semester. The model guides students in knowing self, choosing self, and giving self to establish what is needed or what feelings are occurring, how the student will respond based on what is needed and how he or she is feeling, and why that is the appropriate action.

This model can be used in a variety of courses to assign an easy 5-minute journal prompt at the beginning of each class period. For example, I have students use What, How, and Why to reflect on and write about how they are feeling (aspect of emotional intelligence) and what they are learning on index cards. I collect them immediately after the 5 minutes has passed. During small group work, I quickly read through the cards and write quick suggestions/feedback upon them and then return the cards to the students. It also helps me keep my pulse on how the class is feeling (instructor emotional intelligence). For example, a student might write:

What Feeling: Not confident in class participation, feel anxious
How Respond: More time spent reading the class assignments before class (My comment to student—Great idea! SQ3R would be an efficient and effective strategy to review the chapter 30 minutes before class)
Why: If I am familiar with the material, I will have confidence and participate. My participation grade and learning of the material will improve.

Identifying and Appropriately Responding to Distorted Thoughts

Because emotions are based on thoughts, and thoughts can be inaccurate, I have found it very helpful to teach students about distorted thoughts and how to correct them. I spend two class periods on this in the college study strategy course that I teach. During week three (the week research shows us students decide to leave college) of the College Study Strategy course, I introduce students to different types of distorted thoughts (e.g. overgeneralization – one negative event is seen as a pattern; comparative thinking – you measure yourself by others’ ability even if that comparison may be inaccurate), ask them to share experiences, and then have them record and counter the experiences throughout the week in a response journal. Additionally, I have them identify in a chart examples of distorted thoughts in characters of stories, shows, or movies they have watched. We then discuss them in class the following week. This approach has also been integrated into the Introduction to Physical Therapy course and the Introduction to Nursing course.

I also facilitate workshops on the topic of distorted thoughts, tailoring the content to the course curriculum. Handout 1 can be a helpful resource for facilitating this with students—and can be incorporated into the Six Second model. Additionally, I assign journal reflections based on student self-identified, distorted thoughts that occur throughout the week (See Handout 2).

Summary

In thinking about how to integrate emotional regulation and metacognition strategies into curriculum, it is helpful to recall that people are intrinsically motivated when they have a deeper understanding of self, one aspect of which is the emotional self. Recent research has shown that students with high levels of intrinsic motivation are more productive, persistent, and have higher levels of emotional wellbeing (Froiland, Oros, Smith, & Hirchert, 2012).

Embedding these types of emotional intelligence and metacognition assignments need not be complex or complicated. The more frequently students engage in the process of thinking about what they are doing and feeling, and make adjustments to their practices based on that thinking, the more likely this will become an automatic practice. Actually, making emotional self-regulation quick and routine will make identification and control of emotions a productive habit for the students and professors. And, ultimately, it will increase learning, persistence and carry over into the students’ personal lives and careers.

References

Friedlander, L..J., et al. (2007) Social support, self-esteem, and stress as predictors of adjustment to university among first-year undergraduates. Journal of College Student development, 48(3), 259-274.

Froiland, J. M., Oros, E., Smith, L. & Hirchert, T. (2012). Intrinsic motivation to learn: The nexus between psychological health and academic success. Contemporary School Psychology, 16, 91-101.

Mendez, S., Arnold, C. Erjavec, P., Lopez, L. (2018-2019). Does emotional intelligence predict persistence among students on academic probation? Journal of Student Affairs, 107-117. https://sahe.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2019/09/SAHE-journal-2019.pdf#page=54

Rode, J. C., Arthaud-Day, M. L., Ramawami, A., Howes, S. (2017). A time-lagged study of emotional intelligence and salary. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 101, 77-89. Retrieved from https://paperdownload.me/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/5535-time-lagged-emotional-intelligence-salary.pdf

Learning in Pandemic Times

In this video, Dr. Stephen Chew shares a model about how people learn, and highlights key points about memory that will benefit students as they are trying to learn and cope, especially in stressful times like we are experiencing with the Covid pandemic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOKG2LrnwYo&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR3gTAiimRTNoNRNJiPGp4IdAQIH0-4JjlEd6iwd4mER1KeXQmQ3TAKEAFM

Want to Kick Start a Conversation about Metacognition? Assign the Blind Draft

by Amy Ratto Parks, Ph.D., University of Montana

Although many of us feel held in suspense about the state of teaching and learning in the fall, there is one thing I know for sure: I will still be using the Blind Draft assignment. The Blind Draft is a homework assignment that requires students to compose a short draft into a completely blackened computer screen; without any visual cue from the writing, they quickly become aware of their thinking. This single assignment builds classroom community, grounds students in their own minds and bodies, introduces them to a new way of understanding themselves as learners, and kicks off a course-long conversation about metacognition.

Right now, teaching and learning are happening in a remarkably distracting set of circumstances. National and global issues lead us into internet news and social media cultures that have had wide-ranging and varied impacts on teachers and students in Western cultures. Through the visually dominant world inside our screens we are propelled forward (Brockman, 2011) away from our own minds and bodies and into carefully sculpted Instagram lives, snappy Twitter feeds and sharp info graphics. But in order for teaching and learning to happen well, our minds have to move away from the glossy surface and focus on the task at hand. We know that students who are able to monitor their attention by developing skills in attention literacy (Brockman, 2011) also demonstrate strong meta-cognitive awareness and are positioned for a productive learning experience (Tarricone, 2011).

The Blind Draft offers students an initial small step into meeting their own minds as learners. It creates a unique and memorable composing and revision experience that provides a platform for experience-based reflection and conversation about how differently individual student’s minds might respond to novel learning challenges (Yancey, 1998). Those conversations provide an opening into a discussion about how metacognitive concepts help us understand how to navigate writer’s block, writing anxiety, and other common writing barriers. Supporting a sustained conversation about how students respond to writing challenges will help athleticize their attention (Caldwell, 2018), build personal understanding, and help them develop an increased sense of agency (Negretti, 2012) over their own identities and abilities as writers.

The Assignment

One of the most beautiful things about the Blind Draft is the simplicity of its design, however, it does work best with a bit of set up at the start because students immediately question the simplicity.

The set up

Because students focus so carefully on their grades, there is an underlying sense of risk in any work assigned in a class. Therefore, it is important to frame the assignment as an experiment where the goal is to participate in the experiment so that you all will have something interesting to talk about during the next class. You will also want to think of a very (very) general writing prompt such as, write about “you and food” or “you and happiness” for students to respond to in their drafts.

The directions

In general, the work happens in three parts: 1) Students type in response to the prompt without being able to see what they’re typing for 15 minutes. 2) They revise the messy blind draft. 3) They reflect briefly on their own writing behavior You might offer them the following directions:

Step 1: Compose (Note: The blind drafting process works best when typing on a computer)

Set a timer for 15 minutes.
Open and save a blank document. (Note: Saving the document before typing is important because sometimes typing blindly leads one to delete the entire document!)
Make a mental note of the writing prompt.
Turn off or cover the screen.
Type without stopping for 15 minutes.
Print or save document as “blind draft.” (Note: This will be your preference depending on whether you are collecting hard copy or electronic versions. The important thing is simply that they specify which draft was the blind draft and which was the revision. It seems as though that would be obvious, but sometimes it isn’t.)

Step 2: Revise

Revise the draft into 1-2 page essay. (You can keep everything from the first draft or nothing at all and rearrange as you please.)
Print or save document as “revised blind draft.”

Step 3: Reflect

List the kinds of changes you made between drafts.
Did you like this exercise? Hate it? Something in between?
Where did you rest your eyes without a screen to study?
Print or save document as “reflection.”

These instructions often cause laughter or anxiety — or both. Students need reassurance that yes, that first draft will be a terrific and spectacular mess, and that yes, that is the goal; they also appreciate a reminder that the second draft allows them to share a stronger more controlled version of their writing.

Student Responses

It turns out that students either love or hate this assignment; there is very little in between. I begin the discussion of the drafts by asking people to raise their hands if they hated this assignment, then if they loved it, and this initial question is often enough to begin a robust conversation about how differently they engaged with the writing. Why would some people feel constrained by this and other feel liberated? Right from the start, they are plenty baffled by anyone who had an experience that differed from their own.

Specifically, students say similar things about the assignment. Mostly, they notice everything their minds were doing besides writing. The often found themselves asking:

How long is 15 minutes? They report that they fixate on wondering how much time has passed and whether or not they are writing quickly. (In other words, am I doing a good job?)
How much am I writing? They report fixating on how much they have written, even when there is no assigned length requirement. (In other words, am I doing a good job?) They also realize that while they were distracted by the blind writing, they didn’t notice how much they were writing. Some students report writing less than they imagined, but most write more (and often report that they had no idea how often they’re thinking about page length rather than the topic of the writing).
Why did I try to fix the errors? In every class, students will laughingly recount trying to backspace and delete an error – even when they are not sure they made an error. They describe trying to count backward the correct number of letters to fix a spelling mistake even when they realize that it is unlikely that they will have actually corrected the error. (In other words, am I doing a good job?)

Take-away Messages

In a mini-lecture afterward, I explain that:

The human cognitive processes are messy and unpredictable (Flavell, 1976). Therefore, we need to expect a certain amount of confusion or chaos in the learning process. Reinforcing this early in a class helps students normalize challenge and difficulty.
The cognitive processes that inform writing of any kind are also are messy and unpredictable (Flower & Hayes, 1981). Therefore, we also need to leave room for some confusion and chaos in the writing process! This idea normalizes the fact that writing is always challenging and pushes back against the myth that writing is just easy for some people.
The process of writing is not linear – it’s recursive. We don’t just write; we write, re-read, write, re-read (Olive, 2014). Therefore, though we all want to sit down and “hammer out” an essay, strong writing doesn’t happen that way.
Our eyes don’t stay on the words we’re typing; they are skipping back and ahead (de Smet, M. J. R., Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L. (2018). Therefore, if you’re on a first draft and haven’t written much, your eyes keep looking back and ahead at nothing which can induce panic and mental paralysis.
It is important to sometimes “write badly” (Ballenger, 2018). Leaving space for chaos in drafting allows us to become aware of our own mental processes, thoughts and ideas – and can make space for new connections and ideas to come forward.

You might wonder what I do after collecting this assignment since it produces a lot of material at once. Since the goal was the experience of the work, I do not line edit their writing or respond to each draft; instead, I thank them for investing in the experiment and I reinforce how beautifully messy their blind drafts were. The students really do take quite a risk by just turning in something as messy as a blind draft and it is nice to remind them that by turning it in that have confronted the chaos of their own writing minds, and therefore, have already done a good job.

Perhaps more importantly, the Blind Draft assignment helps them develop a sustained awareness of how their minds are working while writing and for many students that extends into their ability to monitor their thinking and behavior while completing other academic tasks (i.e. metacognition).

Works Cited

Ballenger, B. P. (2018). The curious writer. Boston: Pearson.

(2011) Is the internet changing the way we think? The net’s impact on our minds and future. Brockman, John (Ed.) New York, NY. Harper Perennial.

Caldwell, C. (2018). Bodyfulness. Boulder, CO: Shambhala.

de Smet, M. J. R., Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L. (2018). Exploring the Process of Reading During Writing Using Eye Tracking and Keystroke Logging. Written Communication, 35(4), 411–447. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088318788070

Olive, T. (2014). Toward a parallel and cascading model of the writing system: A review of research on writing processes coordination. Journal of Writing Research, 6(2), 173-194. doi:10.17239/jowr-2014.06.02.4

Negretti, R. (2012). Metacognition in student academic writing: A longitudinal study of Metacognitive awareness and its relation to task perception, self-regulation, and evaluation of performance. Written Communication, 29(2), 142–179.

Tarricone, P. (2011). The taxonomy of metacognition. New York: Psychology Press.

Yancey, K.B. (1998). Reflection in the writing classroom. Logan: Utah State University Press.

Metacognition and the Development of Self-Identity

by Roman Taraban, Ph.D. Texas Tech University

The question “What do you want to be when you grow up” should be familiar to all of us, as well as the typical responses: a firefighter, a pilot, a doctor, a nurse, a teacher, an astronaut. We playfully pose this question to children, not fully realizing we are inquiring about their ultimate self-identity – the deep and personal awareness of who they are. Children may not have a self-identity beyond “child,” “son” “daughter,” “student,” “soccer goalie,” “Girl Scout.” But over time, that will change.

So when does self-identity emerge, and how does metacognition help it along its developmental path? In this post, I propose that the emergence of self-identity is a lifelong process that begins in early childhood and has strong underpinnings in memory research. Flavell (1987) brings in the metacognitive factor, in part, through his discussion of metacognitive experiences. We all have self-identity, however, we know little about how to monitor and regulate it metacognitively in order to develop and maintain a healthy and adaptive sense of self.

Who Am I? Where Is My Life Going?

Self-identity emerges out of a specific kind of memory, known as episodic memory. Episodic memory enables a person to recall personally experienced events and to re-live those experiences in the here-and-now (Tulving, 2002). Fivush (2011) refers to the organized coherent sense of self that emerges from episodic experiences as autobiographical memory. Autobiographical memory allows a person to construct an evolving life story that creates a coherent sense of self-identity, of who we are. Thinking about these memory processes would seem to be a perfect place for metacognition to play a major role.

Autobiographical memory and, with it, narrative identity, develop starting in early childhood. A child’s identity is influenced, in part, by the opportunities for relating personal events through conversations with caregivers and friends. Mothers who are elaborative with their children before their preschool years have children who produce more coherent self-narratives by the end of their preschool years (Fivush, 2011). One way, for example, is by asking open-ended questions with some guiding information – e.g., What did we do at the park today? Parents, teachers, and friends continue to shape identity long into adulthood with the questions they ask and the personal experiences that they share. These interactions prompt reflections on one’s own experiences and resonate to the questions Who am I? Where is my life going?

Metacognitive Experiences

John H. Flavell, an American developmental psychologist, labeled higher-level cognition as metacognition and is regarded as a founding scholar in metacognitive research. A major component in Flavell’s theory is a metacognitive experience, which is “any kind of [a]ffective or cognitive conscious experience that is pertinent to the conduct of intellectual life” (Flavell, 1987, p. 24). Flavell suggests that there is a developmental element in individuals’ adaptive responsiveness to these experiences: “As one grows older one learns how to interpret and respond appropriately to these experiences” (p. 24). When do we have metacognitive experiences? According to Flavell, “when the cognitive situation is something between completely novel and completely familiar…where it is important to make correct inferences, judgments, and decisions” (p. 24).

The question of how and when self-identity evolves in college students was explored in an edited book on undergraduate research experiences (Taraban & Blanton, 2008). Students’ responses have the character of metacognitive experiences – i.e., conscious experiences in which inferences, judgments, and decisions are critical. It is metacognitive experiences like these that help us to theoretically bridge the development of self-identity from the nurturing discourses of mothers with young children, to the choice of fields of study in high school and college, and ultimately to a relatively stable identity as an adult professional:

Wyatt McMahon: Thus, as I grew up, when people asked me what I wanted to be, I realized that I wanted to help improve society, but I was not sure how.

Robin Henne: Before the tour [of Texas Tech Biology], I had no idea that research was even possible for biology majors; following the tour, I was convinced that research was what I wanted to do for my career.

Susan Harrell Yee: When I first started as a freshman at Texas Tech University, I chose environmental engineering as my major. It seemed a wise decision – I liked math and I liked ecology, and environmental engineering seemed to be a logical combination of the two. But after a single day, I knew the engineering route was not for me.

Engineering Identity

An area of great interest in current scholarly research involves engineering identity. Engineering educators are interested in how engineering students view themselves early on in their training (Loshbaugh & Claar, 2007), as well as what it means more generally to think of oneself as an engineer (Godwin, 2016; Morelock, 2017). The poignancy of this issue struck me when leading a discussion with graduate engineering students. The topic of discussion was, in part, personal narrative, which is the autobiographical narrative we create about ourselves and which is the basis of self-identity. It was evident from their comments that embracing a self-identity was not instantaneous upon choosing professional training. The following conveyed a sense of the struggle:

For the majority of my life, I have always been a “student” studying to become insert profession.

I sometimes to this day don’t consider myself as an engineer. I feel like throughout my time [here], I’ve always just been an “engineering student”.

I have struggled to see myself as an engineer but the older I get and the more secure I become in my field the easier it is to own and step into that narrative.

The Role of Metacognition

We are surrounded by instances of introspection regarding self-identity. Neal Diamond, the 20^th century pop singer, presented his reflections as an existential crisis: I am…I said. Walt Whitman, the 19^th century poet, gave a transcendental response in 52 parts in “Song of Myself,” and Reverend William Holmes Borders, Sr., a civil-rights activist, in the 1950s proclaimed “I Am Somebody” in a poem of self identity. Although we all have a sense of self-identity, very little explicit attention has been given in research to ways of metacognitively monitoring and guiding the development of a healthy and adaptive sense of self. This is one area where extending metacognitive theory beyond its current bounds could have a significant role in helping us to know who we are and to reach our true potential.

References

Fivush, R. (2011). The development of autobiographical memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 559-582.

Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert, & R. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 21-29). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Godwin, A. (2016). The development of a measure of engineering identity. In Proceedings, ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, LA.

Loshbaugh, H., & Claar, B. (2007). Geeks are chic: Cultural identity and engineering students’ pathways to the profession. In Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, HI.

Morelock, J. R. (2017). A systematic literature review of engineering identity: Definitions, factors, and interventions affecting development, and means of measurement. European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(6), 1240-1262.

Taraban, R., & Blanton, R. L. (Eds.). (2008). Creating effective undergraduate research programs in science: The transformation from student to scientist. New York: Teachers College Press.

Tulving, E. (2002). Episodic memory: From mind to brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 1-25.

The Power of Social Discourse While Teaching Online during a Pandemic: Using an Online Discussion Board to Engage Metacognition

by Gina Burkart, Ed.D., Learning Specialist, Clarke University

The recent shift to online learning has resulted in class discussions taking place on an online discussion board; while some may not realize it, the discussion board can be a strategic resource for facilitating metacognition in the classroom (Burkart, 2010). This practice is supported by a range of pedagogical research. Eflkides (2008) reminded us of the interrelatedness of self and social within the workings of metacognition. And, research shows that metacognition grows based on the continuous flow of information through cognitive systems of self and other. This growth is further enriched through the use of language for reflection upon and communication of these processes with others (Efklides, 2008; Burkart, 2010; Ruffman, Slade, & Crow, 2002). Additionally, assigned discussion on the online discussion board fulfills the criteria that VanZile-Tamsen and Livingston (1999) found to increase positive motivation in students: self-efficacy, sense of control, relevance, emphasis on learning.

silhouette image of 4 people with one talking and the others listening

Creating Metacognitive Prompts

Key to the success of this approach is the creation of effective discussion prompts. Fostering metacognitive awareness and self-regulation begins with a reflection of self within the context of the course curriculum and then calls for a reflection of self through the lens of others by prompting for a response to a classmate’s discussion post (Burkart, 2010). In a literature course this might look something like:

“Which character of the story did you relate with most? Why? Also, respond to one of your classmates using text from the story for support.”

In responding to another student’s post, students see themselves through the lens of other. Crossley (2000) reminded us in her explorations of narrative analysis that reflection of self is also social. How we see ourselves “relies on the feedback and evaluations we receive from others” (p. 12). Crossley (2000), like Bogdan and Biklen (2003), used George Herbert Mead’s (1962/1934) research on self. She referred to Mead’s (1962/1934) metaphor of “the looking glass self” (p. 12) to illustrate our tendency to see ourselves through the eyes of others. To further this metaphor, one might imagine the online discussion board as “a looking glass self.” This provides instructors and students with a useful tool for not only examining how students perceive their selves and their learning, but also for how students interact with others and influence each other as they engage in the reflexive behavior of learning (Burkart, 2010).

Looking at students’ responses to each other allows students to use their classmates’ experiences to frame their own experiences. For example, consider the following student’s response to a classmate:

I’ve struggled with my anxiety as well and test taking has always been my weakness. Maybe if you try to relax and take deep breathes in and out before a test it can help with your test anxiety. This has helped me in the past, by doing this I realized that I was more calm than usual especially when I try to get my mind off things.

By sharing awareness of their own anxiety and struggles, the student is reflecting upon herself in relation to the other student’s experience. The student then reflects upon strategies that she has tried and offers the other student guidance. This online sharing allows the student to find value in strategies that she has already tried and also reinforces to both students (and the entire class) that they are not alone in their struggles with anxiety.

In this reflexive and reflective behavior, students are metacognitively making choices about their behaviors and their classmates’ behaviors without realizing they are engaging in metacognition. This shows that curriculum can seamlessly embed metacognition into learning, and the online discussion board is a useful tool for doing so.

Student Discussion as a Tool for Monitoring Metacognitive Processing

As a professor, the online discussion is also a tool for monitoring students’ metacognitive processing. It allows teachers to adjust teaching based on the needs of the class, i.e. engage in metacognitive instruction. For example, after seeing several posts and responses regarding anxiety, I often choose to focus on anxiety and resources for dealing with anxiety and test anxiety in the next class period. In this regard, the discussion board also becomes an important tool in meta-motivational monitoring (Miele & Scholer, 2018). It allows the professor to oversee the accuracy of the students’ “self, task and strategy knowledge” (p. 3) and intervene or reinforce through responses to the students on the discussion board or in shaping and/or reshaping of curriculum in the classroom.

For example, in an introductory literature course, the discussion board was used to help students reflect on self and how self unfolded in their narratives while they used literary techniques and strategies to shape their narratives and connect with an audience. They also were to reflect specifically on the writing and revision process. After students wrote their creative nonfiction narrative, they were asked to respond to the following question in 150 words and then to a classmate’s post in 50 words:

“What new self-epiphanies emerged for you while writing and revising your narrative?”

The student responses to the prompt revealed that the creative nonfiction narrative assignment was a powerful tool for metacognition in that it made them think about their writing choices more intentionally. In the revision and editing processes, the students had to rethink self and rethink the shape of their narrative and how they told it based on feedback they received from their audience. This online activity guided students in a powerful metacognitive reflection while they commented on how their story connected or did not connect with an audience, revisions they would make in the use of literary devices to better connect with their audience, and revisions they needed to make in writing technique.

With each reading of their narrative and reflection of comments from classmates in regards to their narratives, the students reflected on self and perception of self. Additionally, students reflected on self while they read each other’ posts and comments. As mentioned previously, this reflexive, mirror effect also results in a metacognitive reflection of self. When students read about how other students are changing and growing, they are prompted to reflect on and make similar changes of self. Thus, self, revision of the narrative, revision of technique, revision of the narrative, and revision of writing all became intertwined on the discussion board and prompted metacognitive growth.

References

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (4^th ed). Boston: Pearson Education Group, Inc.

Burkart, G. (2010, Dec). First-Year College Student Beliefs about Writing Embedded in Online Discourse: An Analysis and Its Implications to Literacy Learning. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA.

Burkart, G. (2010, May). An analysis of online discourse and its application to literacy learning, The Journal of Literacy and Learning. Retrieved from http://www.literacyandtechnology.org/uploads/1/3/6/8/136889/jlt_v11_1.pdf#page=64

Crossley, M. (2000). Introducing narrative psychology: Self, trauma, and the construction of meaning. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.

Efklides, A. (2008). Metacognition: Defining its facets and levels of functioning in relation to self-regulation and co-regulation. European Psychologist, 13 (4), 277-287. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232452693_Metacognition_Defining_Its_Facets_ad_Levels_of_Functioning_in_Relation_to_Self -Regulation_and_Co-regulation

Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist.

Miele, D. B. & Scholer, A. A. (2018). The role of metamotivational monitoring in motivation regulation, Educational Psychologist, 53(1), 1-21.

Ruffman, T., Slade, L., & Crowe, E. (2002). The relation between children’s and mothers’ mental state language and theory-of-mind understanding. Child Development, 73, 734-751.

VanZile-Tamsen, C. & Livingston, Jennifer. J. A. (1999). The differential impact of motivation on the self-regulated strategy use of high- and low-achieving college student. Journal of College Student Develompment, (40)1, 54-60. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net /publication/232503812_The_differential_impact_of_motivation_on_the_self-regulated_strategy_use_of_high -_and_low-achieving_college_students

What Pandemics Can Teach Us about Critical Thinking and Metacognition

by Stephen L. Chew, Ph.D. Samford University (slchew@samford.edu)

Critical thinking leads to fewer errors and better outcomes, fueling personal and societal success (Halpern, 1998; Willingham, 2019). The current view is that critical thinking is discipline specific and arises out of subject expertise. For example, a chess expert can think critically about chess, but that analytical skill does not transfer to non-chess situations. The evidence for general critical thinking skills, and our ability to teach them to students, is weak (Willingham, 2019). But these are strange times that challenge that consensus.

The world is currently dealing with COVID-19, a pandemic unprecedented in our lifetime in scope, virulence, and level of contagion. No comprehensive expertise exists about the most effective policies to combat the pandemic. Virologists understand the virus, but not the epidemiology. Epidemiologists understand models of infection, but not public policy. Politicians understand public policy, but not viruses. We are still discovering the properties of COVID-19, fine tuning pandemic models, and trying out new policies. As a result, different countries have responded to the pandemic in different ways. Unfounded beliefs and misinformation have proliferated to fill the void of knowledge, which range from useless to counterproductive and even harmful.

graph with virus molecule and question marks

The Relationship between Metacognition and Critical Thinking

If critical thinking can only occur with sufficient expertise, then virtually no one should be able to think critically about the pandemic, yet I believe that critical thinking can play a vital role. In this essay, I argue that metacognition is a crucial element of critical thinking and, because of this, critical thinking is both a general skill and teachable. While critical thinking is most often seen (and studied) in situations where prior knowledge matters, it is in unprecedented situations like this pandemic where more general critical thinking skills emerge and can make a crucial difference in terms of decision making and problems solving.

I’m building on the work of Halpern (1998) who argued that critical thinking is a teachable, general, metacognitive skill. She states, “When people think critically, they are evaluating the outcomes of their thought processes – how good a decision is or how well a problem is solved” (Halpern, 1998, p. 451). Reflection on one’s own thought processes is the very definition of metacognition. Based on Halpern’s work, we can break critical thinking down into five core components:

Predisposition toward Engaging in Thoughtful Analysis
Awareness of One’s Own Knowledge, Thought Processes and Biases
Evaluation of the Quality and Completeness of Evidence
Evaluation of the Quality of the Reasoning, Decision Making, or Problem Solving
An Ability to Inhibit Poor and Premature Decision Making

Predisposition toward Engaging in Thoughtful Analysis

Critical thinking involves a personal disposition toward engaging in thoughtful analysis. Strong critical thinkers display this tendency in situations where many people do not see the need, and they engage in more detailed, thorough analysis than many people feel necessary (Willingham, 2019). The variation in the predisposition to think analytically has been on display during the pandemic. Some people simply accept what they hear or read without verifying its validity. In social media, they might pass along information they find interesting or remarkable without distinguishing between valid information, conspiracy, opinion, and propaganda.

The penchant for complex thinking as a habit can be developed and trained. Our educational system should reinforce the value of detailed analysis in preventing costly errors and should give students extensive practice in carrying it out within whatever field the student is studying.

Awareness of One’s Own Knowledge, Thought Processes and Biases

Critical thinking requires insight into the accuracy of what one knows and the extent and importance of what one doesn’t know. It also involves insight into how one’s biases might influence judgment and decision making (West et al., 2008). Metacognition plays a major role in accurate self-awareness.

Self-awareness is prone to serious error and bias (Bjork et al., 2013; Metcalfe, 1998). Greater confidence is not the same as greater knowledge. Metacognitive awareness can be poor and misleading (McIntosh et al., 2019). The good news, though, is that poor self-awareness can be overcome through proper experience and feedback (Metcalfe, 1998).

In this pandemic, key critical thinking involves understanding the implications of what we know and continue to discover about COVID-19. One example is the exponential growth rate of COVID-19 infection. Effective responding to the exponential growth involves taking aggressive preventative measures before there is any symptomatic evidence of spread, which, intuitively, seems like an overreaction. Confirmation bias made it easy to accept what people wanted to be true as fact and reject what they did not want to be true as unlikely. Thus, people often ignored warnings about distancing and avoiding large gatherings until the pandemic was well underway.

Recognizing one’s own biases and how to avoid them is a general skill that can be developed through education. Students can be taught to recognize the many biases that can undermine rational, effective thinking (Kahneman, 2011). For example, students can learn to seek out disconfirming evidence to counter confirmation bias (Anglin, 2019). To guard against overconfidence, students can learn to assess their understanding against an objective standard (Chew, 2016).

Evaluation of the Quality and Completeness of Evidence

Critical thinkers understand the importance of evaluating the quality and completeness of their evidence, which involves a metacognitive appraisal. Do I have data of sufficient quality from sufficiently representative samples in order to make valid decisions? What data am I missing that I need? The quality of evidence continues to be of immense concern in the U.S. because of the lack of rapid testing for COVID-19. Critical thinkers understand that data vary in reliability, validity and measurement error. Early in the pandemic, some people believed that COVID-19 was milder than the flu. These people accepted early estimates at face value, without understanding the limitations of the data. What counts for valid data is one aspect of critical thinking that is more discipline specific. Critical thinkers may not be able to evaluate the quality of evidence outside their area of expertise, but they can at least understand that data can vary in quality and it matters greatly for making decisions.

Non-critical thinkers consider data in a biased manner. They may search only for information that supports their beliefs and ignore or discount contradictory data (Schulz-Hardt et al., 2000). Critical thinkers consider all the available data and are aware if there are data they need but do not have. During the pandemic, there were leaders who dismissed the severity of COVID-19 and waited too long to order a quarantine, and there were leaders who wanted to remove the quarantine restrictions despite the data.

Evaluation of the Quality of the Reasoning, Decision Making, or Problem Solving

Critical thinking includes evaluating how well the evidence is used to create a solution or make a decision (e.g. Schwartz et al. 2005). There are general metacognitive questions that people can use to evaluate the quality of any argument. Have all perspectives been considered? Have all alternative explanations been explored? How might a course of action go wrong? Like judgments of evidence, judgments of the strength of an argument is fraught with biases (e.g. Gilovich, 2008; Kraft et al., 2015; Lewandowsky et al., 2012). People more readily accept arguments that agree with their views and are more skeptical of arguments they disagree with, instead of considering the strength of the argument. The pandemic has already spawned dubious studies with selection bias, lack of a control group, or lack careful control, but the “findings” of these studies are embraced by people who want them to be true. Furthermore, people persist in beliefs in the face of clear contradictory evidence (Guenther & Alicke, 2008).

Students should learn about the pitfalls of bias and motivated cognition regardless of their major. Critical thinking involves intellectual humility, an openness to alternative views and a willingness to change beliefs in light of sufficient evidence (Porter, & Schumann, 2018).

An Ability to Inhibit Poor and Premature Decision Making

The last component of a critical thinker is resistance to drawing premature conclusions. Critical thinkers know the limitations of their evidence and keep their reasoning and decision making within its bounds (Noone et al., 2016). They resist tempting but premature conclusions. The inhibitory aspect of critical thinking is probably the least well understood of all the components and deserves more research attention.

Metacognition Supports Critical Thinking

Metacognition, the ability to reflect on one’s own knowledge, plays a crucial role in critical thinking. We see it in the awareness of one’s own knowledge (Component 2), awareness of the quality of evidence and possible biases (Component 3) and the evaluation of the strength of an argument (Component 4). If we wish to teach critical thinking, we need to emphasize these metacognitive skills, both as part of a student’s training in a major and as part of general education. The other two components of critical thinking, the predisposition to engage in critical thinking and the inhibition of premature conclusions, are habits that can be trained.

Critical thinking is hard to do. It takes conscious mental effort and requires overcoming powerful human biases. No one is immune to bad decisions. I assert that critical thinking is a general, teachable skill, especially in situations where decisions have to be made in unprecedented conditions. The pandemic shows that critical decisions often have to be made before sufficient evidence is available. Critical thinking leads to better outcomes by making the best use of available evidence and minimizing error and vulnerability to bias. In these situations, critical thinking is a vital skill, and metacognition plays a major role.

References

Anglin, S. M. (2019). Do beliefs yield to evidence? Examining belief perseverance vs Change in response to congruent empirical findings. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 82, 176–199. https://doi-org.ezproxy.samford.edu/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.02.004

Bjork, R.A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013) Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417-444. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4efb/146e5970ac3a23b7c45ffe6c448e74111589.pdf

Chew, S. L. (2016, February). The Importance of Teaching Effective Self-Assessment. Improve with Metacognition Blog. Retrieved from https://www.improvewithmetacognition.com/the-importance-of-teaching-effective-self-assessment/

Gilovich T. (2008). How We Know What Isn’t So: Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life (Reprint edition). Free Press.

Guenther, C. L., & Alicke, M. D. (2008). Self-enhancement and belief perseverance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(3), 706-712. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2007.04.010

Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Disposition, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53(4), 449-455.

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Kraft, P. W., Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2015). Why people ‘don’t trust the evidence’: Motivated reasoning and scientific beliefs. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 658(1), 121–133. https://doi-org/10.1177/0002716214554758

Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012). Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(3), 106–131. https://doi-org.ezproxy.samford.edu/10.1177/1529100612451018

Metcalfe, J. (1998). Cognitive optimism: Self-deception or memory-based processing heuristics? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(2), 100–110. https://doi-org.ezproxy.samford.edu/10.1207/s15327957pspr0202_3

McIntosh, R. D., Fowler, E. A., Lyu, T., & Della Sala, S. (2019). Wise up: Clarifying the role of metacognition in the Dunning-Kruger effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(11), 1882–1897. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000579

Noone, C., Bunting, B., & Hogan, M. J. (2016). Does mindfulness enhance critical thinking? Evidence for the mediating effects of executive functioning in the relationship between mindfulness and critical thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.02043

Porter, T., & Schumann K., (2018) Intellectual humility and openness to the opposing view, Self and Identity, 17(2), 139-162, DOI: 10.1080/15298868.2017.1361861

Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., Lüthgens, C., & Moscovici, S. (2000). Biased information search in group decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(4), 655–669. https://doi-org /10.1037/0022-3514.78.4.655

Schwartz, D., Bransford, J., & Sears, D. (2005). Efficiency and innovation in transfer. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 1-51). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

West, R. F., Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2008). Heuristics and biases as measures of critical thinking: Associations with cognitive ability and thinking dispositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 930–941. https://doi-org/10.1037/a0012842

Willingham, D. T. (2019). How to Teach Critical Thinking. Education Future Frontiers, New South Wales Department of Education.

Critically Thinking about our Not-So-Critical Thinking in the Social World

By Randi Shedlosky-Shoemaker and Carla G. Strassle, York College of Pennsylvania

When people fail to engage in critical thinking while navigating their social world, they inevitably create hurdles that disrupt their cultural awareness and competence. Unfortunately, people generally struggle to see the hurdles that they construct (i.e., bias blind spot; Pronin, Lin, & Ross, 2002). We propose metacognition can be used to help people understand the process by which they think about and interact with others.

a photo montage of face images from a large variety of people

The first step is to reflect on existing beliefs about social groups, which requires people to examine the common errors in critical thinking that they may be engaging in. By analyzing those errors, people can begin to take down the invisible hurdles on the path to cultural awareness and competency. Using metacognition principles collected by Levy (2010), in this post we discuss how common critical thinking failures affect how people define and evaluate social groups, as well as preserve the resulting assumptions. More importantly, we provide suggestions on avoiding those failures.

Defining Social Groups

Social categories, by their very nature, are social constructs. That means that people should not think of social categories in terms of accuracy, but rather utility (Levy, 2010, pp. 11-12). For example, knowing a friend’s sexual orientation might help one consider what romantic partners their friend might be interested in. When people forget that dividing the world into social groups is not about accurately representing others but rather a mechanism to facilitate social processes, they engage in an error known as reification. In relation to social groups, this error can also involve using tangible, biological factors (e.g., genetics) as the root cause of social constructs (e.g., race, gender). To avoid this reification error, people should view biological and psychological variables as two separate, but complementary levels of description (Levy, 2010, pp. 15-19), and remember that social categories are only important if they are useful.

Beyond an inappropriate reliance on biological differences to justify the borders between social groups, people often oversimplify those groups. Social categories are person-related variables, which are best represented on a continuum; reducing those variables to discrete, mutually exclusive groups, creates false dichotomies (Levy, 2010, pp. 26-28). False dichotomies, such as male or female, make it easier to overlook both commonalities shared by individuals across different groups as well as differences that exist between members within the same group.

Overly simplistic dichotomies also support the assumption that two groups represent the other’s polar opposite (e.g., male is the polar opposite of female, Black is the polar opposite of White). Such an assumption means ignoring that individuals can be a member of two supposedly opposite groups (e.g., identify as multiple races/ethnicities) or neither group (e.g., identify as agender).

Here, metacognition promotes reflection on the criteria used for defining group memberships. In that reflection, people should consider whether the borders that they apply to groups are too constraining, leading them to misrepresent individuals with whom they interact. Additionally, people should consider ways in which seemingly different groups can have shared features, while also still maintaining some degree of uniqueness (i.e., similarity-uniqueness paradox, Levy, 2010, pp. 39-41). By appreciating the nature and limitations of the categorization process, people can reflect upon whether applications of group memberships are meaningful or not.

Evaluating Social Groups

Critical thinking failures that occur when defining social categories are compounded when people move from describing social groups into evaluating those social groups (i.e., evaluative bias of language, Levy, 2010, pp. 4-7). In labeling social others, people often speak to what they have learned to see as different. As more dominant groups retain the power to set the standards, people may learn to use the dominant groups as the default (i.e., cultural imperialism; Young, 1990). For example, when people describe others as “that older woman”… “that kid”… “that blind person”… and so on – their chosen label conveys what they see as divergent from the status quo. By becoming more aware of the language they use, people simultaneously become more aware of how they think about social others based on social grouping. In monitoring and reflecting on language, metacognition affords us a valuable opportunity to adapt thinking through language.

Changing language can be challenging, however, particularly when people find themselves in environments that lack diversity. Frequently, people find themselves surrounded by others who look, think, and act like them. When surrounded by others who largely represent one’s self, unreflective attempts to make sense of the world may naturally echo their point of view. This is problematic for two reasons: first, people tend to rely more on readily available information in decision-making and judgments (i.e., availability heuristic, Tversky & Kahneman, 1974).

Further, with one’s own views reflected back at them, people easily overestimate how common their beliefs and behaviors are (i.e., false consensus effect, Ross, Greene, & House, 1977). That inaccurate assessment of “common” can lead people to conclude that such beliefs and behaviors are also “good”. Conversely, what is seen as different or uncommon, relative to the self, becomes “bad” (i.e., naturalistic fallacy, Levy, 2010, pp. 50-51).

By pausing to assess the variability of perspectives people have access to, metacognition allows people to consider what perspectives they are missing. In that way, people can more intentionally seek out ideas and experiences that may be different from their own.

Preserving Assumptions

Though not easy, breaking away from one’s point of view and seeking out diverse perspectives can also address another hurdle that people create for themselves: specifically, the tendency to preserve one’s existing assumptions (i.e., belief perseverance phenomenon; e.g., Ross & Anderson, 1982). Change takes work, and not surprisingly, people often choose the path of least resistance – that is, to make new information fit into the system we already have (i.e., assimilation bias, Levy, 2010, pp. 154-156).

Further, people tend to seek out information that supports existing beliefs while disregarding or discounting disconfirming information (i.e., confirmation bias, Levy, 2010, pp. 164-165). Given the habit of sticking to what fits with existing beliefs, people develop an illusion of consensus. Existing beliefs are reinforced when people fail to realize that such beliefs inadvertently influence behaviors, which in turn shape interaction, thereby creating situations that further support, rather than challenge, existing belief systems (i.e., self-fulfilling prophecy, e.g., Wilkins, 1976).

This tendency then, to protect what one already “knows” speaks to the necessity of metacognition to challenge one’s existing belief system. When people analyze and question their existing beliefs they can begin to recognize where revision of those existing beliefs is needed and choose to acquire new perspectives to do so.

Summary

So many of the critical thinking failures above occur without much effortful or conscious awareness on our part. Engaging in metacognition, and non-defensively addressing the unintentional errors one makes, allows people to break down common hurdles that disrupt cultural awareness and competency. It’s when people critically reflect upon their thought processes, identifying the potential errors that may have shaped their existing perspectives, that they can begin to change how they think and feel about social others. In terms of developing a heightened sense of cultural awareness and competency, metacognition then helps us all realize that the world is a much more complex though interesting place.

References

Levy, D.A. (2010). Tools of critical thinking: Metathoughts for psychology. Waveland Press.

Pronin, E., Lin, D. Y., & Ross, L. (2002). The bias blind spot: Perceptions of bias in self versus others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 369-381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202286008

Ross. L., & Anderson, C. (1982). Shortcomings in the attribution process: On the origins and maintenance of erroneous social assessments. In D. Kahneman, P. Siovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge Univ. Press.

Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977).The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 279-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-X

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 27, 1124-1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124

Wilkins, W. E. (1976). The concept of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Sociology of Education, 49, 175–183. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112523

Young, I. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton University Press.

Pandemic Metacognition: Distance Learning in a Crisis

By Jennifer A. McCabe, Ph.D., Center for Psychology, Goucher College

The college “classroom” certainly looks different these days. Due to campus closures in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, we no longer travel to a common space to learn together in physical proximity. Though most of us have transitioned to online instruction, there was insufficient time to prepare for this new model – instead, we are in the midst of “emergency distance learning,” with significant implications for teacher and student metacognition.

image of person at computer under emergency red light

New Demands for Self-regulation

Now that certain overt motivators are no longer present, self-regulated learning is more critical than ever (e.g., Sperling et al., 2004; Wolters, 2003). Students are no longer required to hand in work during class, to engage in in-person class discussions about learned material, or to come face-to-face with instructors who know whether students are keeping up with the course. Instead they must figure out how to engage in the work of learning (and to know it is, indeed, still supposed to be work), away from the nearby guidance of instructors, other on-campus support sources, and peers. What are the effects of isolation on student metacognition? We can only find out as the situation evolves, and it will surely prove to be a complex picture. Though some will continue to succeed and even find new sources of motivation and revised strategies during this unusual time, others may experience a decline in metacognitive accuracy in the absence of typically available sources of explicit and implicit feedback on learning.

What metacognitive and motivational challenges face students who began the semester in a traditional in-person classroom, and now log in to a device to “go to class?” When I invited my (now online) students to report their experiences in preparing for our first web-based exam, many reported that the learning strategies themselves do not feel different as implemented at home, but that they are especially struggling with motivation and time management. Though these are common issues for college students even in the best of (face-to-face) circumstances, it seems they may be magnified by the current situation. For example, distractions look very different at home. Even if students already had figured out a system to manage distractions, and to channel their motivation to find focused time to implement effective learning strategies, this campus-based skill set may not translate to their current settings. Students need to recognize barriers to learning in this new context, and should be supported in developing (perhaps new or at least tweaked) strategies for academic success.

Regarding time management, online course deadlines may be timed differently – perhaps more flexibly or perhaps not – on different days of the week (instead of in a class meeting), late at night (or early in the morning), or over the weekend. Students must strategically allocate their time in a manner different from traditional classroom learning. This is compounded by the fact that some courses meet synchronously, some are completely asynchronous, and some are a hybrid. Managing this new schedule requires the metacognitive skill of recognizing how long different types of learning will take, applying the appropriate strategies, and – oh yes – fitting all that in with other non-academic demands that may change day to day. Planning is especially challenging – and anxiety-provoking – with so much unknown about the future.

Stretched Too Thin to Think Well

Looming over the learning, we cannot forget, is the actual threat of the virus, and the myriad ways it is impacting students’ mental and physical health. In my cognition classes, we discuss the implications of cognitive load, or the amount of our limited attentional resources (and therefore working memory capacity) being used for various tasks in a given moment; this current load determines how much is left over for tasks central to learning and performance goals (e.g., Pass et al., 2003). If working memory is consumed with concerns about one’s own health or the health of loved ones, financial concerns, caregiving needs, food availability, or even basic safety, it is no surprise that the ability to focus on coursework would be compromised. Intrusive worries or negative thoughts may be particularly troublesome right now, and again leave fewer resources available for learning new information. Instructors may want to consider evidence-based educational interventions – such as writing about worries to manage anxiety – that have been effective in clearing ‘space’ in mental load for learning tasks (Ramirez & Beilock, 2011).

Most importantly, we all need to understand (and accept) the limitations of our cognitive system, the implications of having limited attentional resources, and how to most effectively manage this shifting load. To better support students in metacognitive awareness, instructors across disciplines can incorporate information about cognitive load management and self-regulated learning strategies as part of their courses.

Teachers should also think carefully about the line between desirable difficulties – those learning conditions that are challenging, slow, and error-prone, but lead to stronger long-term retention – and undesirable difficulties – those challenges that are simply hard but do not result in better learning (e.g., Yan et al., 2017). When faced with a choice to add work or effort, consider whether it is part of the learning that relates to the core learning outcomes for the class. If it does not, given the current uniquely high-load circumstances we find ourselves in, drop it.

Further, be explicit and transparent with students about why assignments were retained or changed (ideally connecting these to those core objectives), and share with them your thought process about course-related design and assessment decisions. Most of all, communicate early and often with students about expectations and assessments to help them with motivation, scheduling, and cognitive load. Acknowledge that this is a highly atypical situation, show compassion, allow flexibility as you can, and let them know we are all learning together.

Imperative Explicitness

Metacognition in the time of COVID-19 must be even more intentionally brought from the implicit “hidden curriculum” of college to the explicit. Factors important to student metacognition, including self-regulated learning, should be named as a skill set central to academic (and life) success. Help them better understand their own learning and memory processes, and how strategies may need to evolve in changing circumstances, which for now means “emergency distance learning.” Perhaps a silver lining is that this investment in metacognitive flexibility will pay off in supporting students’ future endeavors. For teachers, this unexpected transition just might help us improve our student-centered approaches – wherever our classrooms may exist in the future.

Suggested References

Pass, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1

Ramirez, G., & Beilock, S. L. (2011). Writing about testing worries boosts exam performance in the classroom. Science, 331(6014), 211-213. https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.1199427

Sperling, R. A., Howard, B. C., Staley, R., & DuBois, N. (2004). Metacognition and self-regulated learning constructs. Educational Research and Evaluation, 10(2), 117–139. doi:10.1076/edre.10.2.117.27905

Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 189–205. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3804_1

Yan, V. X., Clark, C. M., & Bjork, R. A. (2017). Memory and metamemory considerations in the instruction of human beings revisited: Implications for optimizing online learning. In J. C. Horvath, J. Lodge, & J. A. C. Hattie (Eds.), From the Laboratory to the Classroom: Translating the Learning Sciences for Teachers (pp. 61-78). Routledge.

Fractals and Teaching Philosophies (Part 2): Some Reflection on the Value of Metacognition

by Dr. Ed Nuhfer, California State Universities (retired)

Our previous blog contribution introduced the nature of fractals and explained why the products of intellectual development have fractal qualities. Our brain neurology is fractal, so fractal qualities saturate the entire process of intellectual development. Read the previous blog now, to refresh any needed awareness.

The acts of drafting and using a written philosophy are metacognitive by design. Rare use of philosophies seems symptomatic of undervaluing metacognition. When we operate from a written philosophy, each day offers a practice of metacognition through asking: “Did I practice my philosophy?” That involves considering where we might not have exercised one of the fractal generator’s six components (Figure 1) and then resolve to do so at the next opportunity. Doing so instills the habits of mind needed to do what we intended. Such metacognitive practice is very different from engaging challenges as separately packaged events, without using the “thinking about thinking” needed to understand how our practice was consistent with what we wanted to do. In teaching, we find some of our most significant difficulties appear when we find ourselves doing the opposite of what we most wanted to do. We get into those difficulties by not being aware of the decisions that brought us there.

One possible application of metacognition lies in a large-scale challenge that affects all schools – the annual evaluation of faculty for retention and promotion often reveals chronic problems. How might the standard practices faculty typically experience differ from a practice in which faculty employed written teaching philosophies as a way to address this annual challenge?

WHY Do We Do Annual Review of Faculty?

A metacognitive approach would start with a reflection of the reasons WHY schools go through the prickly annual ritual of evaluating faculty and the outcomes that they hope to attain from doing it. A recent discussion on a faculty development listserv showed that almost no institutions have satisfying answers to “WHY?” For many, an unreflective approach to annual review commonly defaulted to ranking the faculty according to their scores from student ratings forms, sometimes from just one global item on the forms. Asking “WHY?” resulted in the following personal email from an accomplished faculty member: “The main rationale seems in practice often to be simply ‘We have to determine annual merit scores to determine salary increases, and so we have to generate a merit score for teaching (and for research and for service).’”

Given such an annual review process, the faculty will focus on becoming “better teachers” by focusing on raising their student ratings scores, but is that the primary outcome that institutions want? Would we write that “to obtain high student ratings” as a reason that we teach in our teaching philosophies? If we sincerely want effective teaching and student learning, is there a better answer to “WHY?”

Employing Written Philosophies – An Alternate Approach

More specifically, consider which outcome of the following you would choose to expend efforts for yourself or your colleagues: 1) to try to achieve higher student ratings or 2) to improve their mastery of some things labeled in Figure 1 that are known to increase student learning? For example, if a faculty member chose for one year to produce better learning by expanding his knowledge of pedagogy to permit the matching of different kinds of instruction to specific types of content, could that be preferable? Suppose another faculty member discovered that particular stages of adult thinking existed. What if she aspired in the coming year to gain an understanding of this literature, and she focused in the coming year on designing some lessons that helped students to discover the level of thinking they had reached and what their next higher stage might be? Might that be preferable to trying to achieve higher ratings?

Illustration of components (thinking, teaching, learning) in the fractal generator for faculty and students (by Ed Nuhfer)

Figure 1. We repeat the graphic from Part 1, Figure 2 here. This representation of a philosophy as a fractal generator is somewhat analogous to a stem cell in that it contains all the essential components to produce whatever we need. Metacognition allows us to identify something of value to our current practice. Then for a year, we articulate a philosophy that includes a focus to develop that area.

When we begin to be metacognitive concerning WHY we should want to do annual evaluations and how we should use student input, things should emerge that differ from merely sorting faculty into categories in order to dispense rewards and penalties. Some positive outcomes might be enhancing awareness of how we could design our annual evaluations to help make our institutions more fit places in which to teach and learn, or to provide our graduates with better capacity for life-long learning. In such cases, the nature of annual review changes from an inspection of each faculty member’s popularity with her or his students at the end of their courses into a metacognitive process designed to produce valued outcomes. Management expert Edwards Deming warned particularly about trying to “inspect in” quality at the end of an event or process. Deming’s 14 principles can be condensed into just one concept: “Be metacognitive.” Remain aware of what you most wanted to do when you take any actions to do it.

Changing the Annual Review Format: Embed Metacognition

“Be metacognitive” represents a significant change in most institutional thinking. So, how might we enact this change? One approach would be to design the annual review more like a self-directed contract for practice. Faculty write the philosophies that they intend to practice. A graphic generator like Figure 1 can assist understanding what one now does lots of and too little of. They pick a specific area that they want to do more of and articulate their intent to develop some additional strength in that area. They also articulate WHY they chose this emphasis and what outcome they seek to achieve.

When faculty start their term, they share with their students the emphasis and the outcome through the written syllabus of each class. During the semester, their practice now achieves a metacognitive quality. They regularly reflect on their practice and monitor themselves on whether they are practicing as intended. Their annual review of teaching then becomes a report with parts somewhat like the following.

Did they practice their stated philosophy?
How did their students respond?
How did their practice change, and did that contribute to revisions in their philosophy?
What is their written contractual plan and philosophy for the coming year?

Weighing the Alternatives

Of the two models of annual evaluations shared above, over-reliance on student ratings for faculty evaluation answers the WHY question with: “We maintain universities so that students can rate the faculty and so that faculty will strive to be rewarded for higher ratings.” Such absurdities arise whenever we practice with no better answers to “WHY?”

As a final thought, consider how an end-of-the-course grade for a student is analogous to annual evaluation for a faculty member. How might teaching students to write their learning philosophies improve their design for learning?