by Ti Macklin, PhD, Department of Writing Studies Lecturer; Lilly Crolius, graduate student (Texas A&M University-Commerce); Harland Recla, first-year writing student; and Natalie Plunkett, first-year writing student, Boise State University.

This is the 2nd post in the Guest Editor Series, Metacognition, Writing, and Well-Being, Edited by dawn shepherd, PhD, Ti Macklin, PhD, and Heidi Estrem, PhD

——–

In summer of 2020, it was clear that business as usual was not going to work in terms of preparing graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) to teach first-year writing (FYW) and for FYW students entering Boise State University. Students would likely be coming to class still in pandemic isolation and their needs would be unlike anything we had experienced as teachers. As FYW administrators, dawn shepherd and Heidi Estrem worked with Ti Macklin (an experienced instructor and teacher of the GTA pedagogy course) to develop a fully online course specifically designed to support both of these student populations. 

This blog post examines the experiences of Ti Macklin, Lilly Crolius (graduate student and teaching assistant in the course), Harland Recla (FYW student), and Natalie Plunkett (FYW student).

Metacognition Through Reflection

For Ti, building the online FYW course, English 101 (ENGL 101), centered on metacognition as a means of supporting the well-being of all of the students involved in the course; both graduate and undergraduate. Her pedagogy focuses on the notion that improvement as writers comes from self-awareness, so reflection was built into every module of the course, with students working to answer the overarching question of “how do we improve as writers instead of simply improving individual pieces of writing?” The table below highlights the deliberately reflective elements of the course:

 

Class Activity	Reflection
Four Unit Course Structure	●      Unit 1 – reflect on who they are as writers/what their relationship is with writing ●      Unit 2 – reflect on how they became the writers they are ●      Unit 3 – reflect on and identify the transferable skills they developed through the course ●      Unit 4 (the final portfolio) – reflect on their learning in the course, examine their growth as writers and students, and look ahead to the next FYW course
Weekly Self-Assessment Journal	Students reflect at the end of each module on what was most helpful, what they learned, what they’re struggling with, and what adjustments they might make for future modules
Weekly Writing and Rhetoric Activity	Students are introduced to a new concept/term each week and, at the end of the lesson, are asked to reflect on how they might use this concept in the class and outside of the class
Weekly Course Readings and Discussion Boards	Course readings are designed to encourage students to reflect on their own writing processes, literacy experiences, and experiences with transfer
Final Portfolio Reflection	Students reflect on the culminating activity at the end of each unit and consider what changes they would make if they were to include this piece in the final portfolio.

All three students (graduate teaching assistant Lilly, Harland, and Natalie) were unaware of the concept of metacognition at the beginning of the semester. However, as the semester went on, they all realized that the focus on reflection was impacting both their writing and their well-being. Lilly noticed changes in the FYW students’ writing as the semester progressed. Through examining themselves and their abilities, and being encouraged by the support of creativity and personal interests in their assignments, their writing showed evidence that they were able to see connections between writing for our class and other situations (both academic and non-academic) thus cementing the concept of metacognition as a transferable learning and life skill.      

The FYW students’ experiences were similar to Lilly’s. Harland began to understand the concept of metacognition about mid-semester when he realized that dedicating a large amount of time to reflection wasn’t something he was accustomed to, so it began to stand out as the course went on. Natalie found that, because the instruction on metacognition was subtle, it took a few weeks for students to fully understand that they were consistently doing metacognitive work whether they realized it or not.

Harland and Natalie also recommend that, even though it would mean adding more terminology to the course, it would be worth making metacognition even more explicit. Harland suggests that describing the purpose of metacognition in the course would demonstrate to students that metacognition can yield helpful adjustments in both learning and behaviors, thus making the concept and its function more obvious. Natalie adds that pointing out the overtly metacognitive work that students did at the end of each module in addition to the subtle work throughout the module makes this deeply reflective and challenging work seem much more manageable and possible.

Metacognition and Well-Being

When asked how their learning/thinking/writing processes changed as a result of ENGL 101, all three students indicated that their well-being was positively impacted. For example, for Harland, this style of learning shifted his life outside of class because he spent time reflecting upon the methods he used to think and learn. He specifically noticed that the metacognitive focus of the course boosted his well-being as it gave him a sense of control over the knowledge he absorbs.

Likewise, for Natalie, the focus on metacognition impacted her well-being by fostering and supporting her self-confidence in her writing skills and ideas. This boost largely came from when she realized that she was thinking of the concepts in the ENGL 101 course in her spare time and found herself applying them to other courses and areas of her life.

For Lilly, the experience as a graduate instructor within this class and learning about these ideas encouraged her to apply her learning in much more thoughtful ways. It made learning more engaging and highlighted how meaningful and valuable it could be, giving her clarity. Her job as a GTA became less stressful once she realized that there was a clear purpose for everything done in the English 101 class that she could use elsewhere.

All three students believe that their writing processes evolved significantly as a result of the course. Natalie went from quickly completing assignments within the due date to soaking in what was being taught and feeling more fulfilled and confident in her learning. Harland echoes this and adds that he became more comfortable with his own process, which resulted in a boost in his overall well-being.

As a student, Lilly found that reflection helped her to see that her writing was part of a bigger picture. No matter what is being written, she felt like there was a place for it in the world. Even if it never sees the light of day, it’s an opportunity for improvement and growth.

The Takeaway

In the midst of the isolation of the pandemic, people were turning inward and hiding from the world, which became a cycle of solitude and stagnation. The consistent reflective opportunities of this English 101 course introduced and amplified the notion of metacognition, thus pulling both the GTAs and the FYW students back into the world. By reflecting on themselves as writers, these students were able to connect to various places in their lives where they hadn’t previously made associations.

It is worth noting that this productive introspection took place in a class of 300 students in an asynchronous, fully online course. The students worked in semester-long groups of 10, each with an assigned GTA, in order to provide as much educational and human support to both the GTAs and the FYW students as possible. The reflection that Heidi, dawn, and I mention in the introduction to this blog series allowed us to rethink the size and shape of FYW classes while holding on to the essential elements of the course, like metacognition, that make a class a writing class. 

Student Readings on Reflection, Metacognition, & Transfer

Allen, Sarah. “The Inspired Writer vs. the Real Writer.” Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, Volume 1, https://writingspaces.org/essays

Brandt, Deborah. “Sponsors of Literacy.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 49, no. 2, 1998, pp. 165–185. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/358929. Accessed 13 July 2020.

Carillo, Ellen C. “Writing Knowledge Transfers Easily.” Bad Ideas About Writing, edited by Cheryl E. Ball & Drew M. Loewe, p. 34-37.

Driscoll, Dana Lynn and Roger Powell. “States, Traits, and Dispositions: The Impact of Emotion on Writing Development and Writing Transfer Across College Courses and Beyond.” Composition Forum, vol. 34, 2016. Accessed 21 July 2020.

Rose, Mike. “Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Stifling of Language: A Cognitivist Analysis of Writer’s Block.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 31, no. 4, 1980, pp. 389–401. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/356589. Accessed 1 June 2020.

Rosenberg, Karen. “Reading Games: Strategies for Reading Scholarly Source.” Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, Volume 2, https://writingspaces.org/essays

Robertson, Liane, Kara Taczak, and Kathleen Blake Yancey. “Notes toward A Theory of Prior Knowledge and Its Role in College Composers’ Transfer of Knowledge and Practice.” Composition Forum, vol. 26, 2012. Accessed 21 July 2020.

Tomlinson, Barbara. “Cooking, Mining, Gardening, Hunting: Metaphorical Stories Writers Tell about Their Composing Processes.” Metaphor & Symbolic Activity, vol. 1, no. 1, Mar. 1986, p. 57.