Category: Metacognitive Instruction

These resources will focus on or contain parts that explore how instructors can be more reflective and intentional about their approaches to teaching in order to maximize student learning.

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

 


Developmental Framework for Teaching Expertise

A group of faculty at the University of Calgary share a framework for growth of teaching expertise that demonstrates that “teaching expertise involves multiple facets, habits of mind (or ways of knowing and being), and possible developmental activities.” They share this framework with the hope that others will share, adapt and use it in their own local contexts. The full paper is also available. Note that they also refer to it as a “framework for self-reflection” for faculty, which means it can be used to support metacognitive instruction.

 

Developing a Learning Culture: A Framework for the Growth of Teaching Expertise

 


Teaching Transformation Through Becoming a Student of Learning

by Patrick Cunningham, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology,
Holly Matusovich & Sarah Williams, Virginia Tech

 Downloadable

Motivations and context:

I teach a variety of Mechanical Engineering courses at a small private undergraduate institution with approximately 2000 students. The courses I teach focus on the application of scientific theory and math to solve engineering problems. Since I started teaching I have been interested in how to help students to learn more deeply in my courses. This eventually led me to a sabbatical in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where I established a research partnership with Dr. Holly Matusovich, and later Ms. Sarah Williams, studying student metacognitive development. We have been interested in how to help students to become more sophisticated and lifelong learners and how to aid instructors in supporting this student development. This collaboration initiated a research-to-practice cycle, where my interest in enhancing student learning led to research on student metacognitive development, and research results have influenced my teaching practice.

Description of the process:

The research-to-practice cycle has transformed my teaching by helping me become a student of learning. For me the process has involved formal educational research, but it does not have to. My implementation of the cycle follows:

  1. Identify what teaching and learning issue you care about and develop partnerships.
  2. Plan the study.
  3. Implement the study and analyze the data.
  4. Interpret the results and use them to direct modifications to your teaching.
  5. Repeat steps 1-4.

I am interested in enhancing student learning and that led to collaborative metacognition research with Dr. Matusovich. Other possible partnerships may be with colleagues, your teaching and learning center, disciplinary education researchers (e.g., engineering or physics education), or even education researchers at your own institution (e.g., educational or cognitive psychology).

We planned the research through the preparation of a successfully funded NSF grant proposal. The process included establishing research questions, specifying study phases, determining what data to collect and how, and planning for data analysis. Even if you are not engaging in formal research, the quality and success of your study will depend on a well laid out plan. As a mechanical engineering professor, my collaborators proved to be indispensable partners for this.

Early in our research, we gathered baseline data through student interviews on how students approach learning in engineering science courses and how they define learning. We have found that students predominantly rely on working and reviewing example problems as a means of learning. This approach to learning falls into the category of rehearsal strategies, where students are seeking to memorize steps and match patterns rather than develop a richer conceptual understanding. While it is important to know facts, results from learning science show rehearsal strategies are insufficient for developing adequate conceptual frameworks that are necessary for transferring concepts to new situations and being able to explain their understanding effectively to others – key aspects of engineering work. To construct such rich conceptual frameworks students also need to engage in elaborative and organizational learning strategies, but students reported underutilization of these strategies. Students’ overreliance on example problems does not align with being able to apply course concepts to real-world problems.

In reviewing the data, I also realized that I might be part of the problem. My teaching and assessments had been primarily organized around working problems with little variation. The research helped me change. I decided to scaffold students’ use of a broader range of monitoring, elaborative, and organizational strategies by changing my approach to teaching. I realized that I could empower my students by helping them learn about and refine their learning skills – even as I teach the content of the course.

I made significant changes to my course. I changed the grade category for “homework” to “development activities” to include the regular homework, and new homework learning check quizzes and video quizzes. These quizzes provided low-stakes opportunities for formative feedback to students about their conceptual understanding. I also changed my classroom activities, engaging students in evaluating and explaining given solutions with errors, recall practice, interrogating examples with “what if” questions and answering them, and creating problems for specific concepts. For the next project steps, we are collecting data on these implementations so the research-to-practice cycle can begin again.

Outcomes:

My students performed at least as well on traditional problem solving exams as students in other sections of the same course. Importantly, they reported feeling more responsible for their learning and that they had to exert more effort in their learning than in other engineering science courses. For me, this has been a more fulfilling teaching experience. Not only have I found that students asked better questions about course content, but I also had more conversations with students about how they can learn more effectively and efficiently. It has added rigor and a clarity of purpose in my teaching that reaches beyond course content.

Lessons learned:

I learned to articulate the differences between my course and other courses and to get buy-in from students as to what I was trying to do. As a teacher, student resistance to change can be hard but it is worth it to improve teaching and learning experiences. Collaborative partnerships help!

Acknowledgement:

The metacognition research was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Nos. 1433757, 1433645, & 1150384. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.


Practicing Metacognitive Instruction Informs Continuous Class Improvement While Reinforcing Student Self-Awareness of Learning

by Lara Watkins (Bridgewater State University
lwatkins@bridgew.edu)

 Downloadable

Motivations and background:

I have been teaching a course titled “Anthropology of race, class and gender” for about five years at a state university. As a course that covers requirements for the core curriculum as well as for anthropology majors, the student population is diverse with first year through final semester students including both majors and non-majors. The course is taught in person with about 25 students per section.

I implemented a series of mid-course reflections for a variety of reasons. (1) I sought to encourage students to reflect upon their learning in the course as a way of helping them to recognize and assess their own learning over time, while (2) simultaneously providing an indicator of the main messages being retained by students to help in course planning for the future. The reflection served as a low stakes evaluation of learning, which then fed into continuous course improvement. Pragmatically, I was interested in (3) if there were specific barriers to student comprehension of the material that might make a substitute reading or focused classroom interventions appropriate. Since student metacognition about their learning can inform metacognitive instruction, I also sought (4) to assess the degree to which students saw value in a particular reading and (5) could link it to other course materials and their own learning, thereby encouraging learning across multiple levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002).

Nuts and Bolts / Procedure:

Each semester, I incorporate four in-class, mid-course reflections. Students completed each pen-and-paper reflection in about five minutes. They had the option of handing in the reflection anonymously or adding their name to the form. Each mid-course reflection was about 3-5 questions long. The first question always asks students to state a few key points that they have learned in that particular section of the course, while the last question always provides students a place to anonymously raise questions and concerns. The middle questions vary depending on my evolving concerns or interests.

The middle questions on the reflection example shared here focused on the use of a full-length book; however, in general, the middle questions focus on a specific aspect of that portion of the course (e.g. a reading, the use of an online learning tool, etc.), that obviously is assigned to deepen learning, but through which student experiences could provide insight on the degree to which there are barriers to this ultimate goal. My goal in this particular example was to find out if students were engaged in the reading, if they were taking away the main ideas, and if there were noted challenges that could be mitigated in future iterations of the course.

Outcomes and Lessons Learned:

  • The first question (which asked for students to summarize what they had learned across a few weeks of the course) provides a useful snapshot of the main messages interpreted and retained by students. Through assessing student summary of information in question one, I have found that students were not able to reiterate key points to the same degree across different portions of the course, thereby suggesting which particular section(s) of the course needed further elaboration and attention in later semesters.
  • For this particular reflection example, I found that the students’ perspectives of the book did not align with my anticipation of their perspective. (The students were more positive than I expected.) Checking in with students throughout the semester helps to give the instructor a tangible and direct indicator of student interpretations of the course and course materials. This can feed into continuous course improvement.
  • This course meets twice a week on Mondays and Wednesdays. A key lesson learned from the student feedback is that they need lengthier readings to be due on the Monday. While this might appear intuitive, instructors sometimes lose sight of student logistics when constructing their syllabi and the multitude of topics to be covered. It also highlights the need to build in multiple, explicit reminders for students to start lengthy readings in advance.
  • Instructors implementing a similar activity in class will want to consider the benefits and drawbacks to allowing for anonymous submission. I chose for the feedback to be anonymous by default so that students would feel comfortable sharing their honest assessments and could clearly let me know if they had not completed the reading without feeling that it would impair their grade in any way. If instructors would like to track progress over time for individual students, then they may desire to have students identify themselves.   I have found it appropriate to individually email students who identify their name and raise a specific question/concern. Students often express gratitude for the personal outreach as it directly addresses a question or concern that they have, thereby decreasing their perceived barriers to success, and it conveys respect and concern for their individual learning trajectory, thereby cultivating a supportive learning climate.

This reflective approach provides a series of quick and useful indicators of student learning that I can use as an instructor to adjust my teaching and better support my students’ learning. A second benefit is that they help center the students’ attention on the metacognitive and higher-order processes of remembering, connecting, analyzing, and evaluating course concepts. Providing short assessments like this at a few time points across the semester is an easy way to “take the pulse” of a particular class and then use that feedback to identify teaching practices that are working well and those that might need to be tweaked. Metacognitive instruction leads to continuous course improvement and, ultimately, to better facilitation of student learning.

Reference

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 212-218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2


Metacognitive Development in Professional Educators

Stewart, Cooper and Moulding investigate adult metacognition development, specifically comparing pre-service teachers and practicing teachers. They used the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory and found that metacognition improves significantly with age and with years of teaching experience, but not with gender or level of teaching (Pre-K though post-secondary ed levels).

Stewart, P. W., Cooper. S. S., & Moulding, L. R. (2007). Metacognitive development in professional educators. The Researcher, 21(1), 32-40.


Advancing Task Involvement, Intrinsic Motivation and Metacognitive Regulation in Physical Education Classes: The Self-Check Style of Teaching Makes a Difference

In a metacognitive field study, Papaioannou, Theodosiou, Pashali, and Digeelidis (2012) found that having 6th grade students use metacognitive techniques (self-check) significantly improved several mastery oriented variables over that of a practice technique in a physical education course. For more information about the article, please see the reference below.

Papaioannou, A., Theodosiou, A., Pashali, M., & Digelidis, N. (2012). Advancing task involvement, intrinsic motivation and metacognitive regulation in physical education classes: the self-check style of teaching makes a difference. Advances in Physical Education, 2(03), 110-118.


Teaching Perspectives Inventory (TPI): The 5 Perspectives

There are a lot of free surveys/inventories “out there” for all sorts of things, most often related to some aspect of personality. If you use them in a reflective manner, they can help you better understand yourself – your . The TPI (also free) offers a chance for you to reflect on your teaching perspectives (one aspect of metacognitive instruction). The TPI suggests 5 perspectives: Transmission, Apprenticeship, Developmental, Nurturing, and Social Reform.

http://www.teachingperspectives.com/tpi/


Making Thinking Visible

Ritchhart, R., Church, M., and Morrison, K. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

In Making Thinking Visible, the authors propose that we must make our students’ thinking visible in order to create places of intellectual stimulation.   To do this, the authors suggest first determining which modes of thinking are necessary for our disciplines or courses.  Then, through a series of research-based thinking routines, we can scaffold and support the development of individuals who can think, plan, create, question, and engage independently as learners.  If you are looking for both inspiration and pragmatic strategies, this book offers ideas that can be applicable to all educational settings and audiences.


The Effects of Metacognition and Concrete Encoding Strategies on Depth of Understanding in Educational Psychology

Suzanne Schellenberg, Meiko Negishi, and Paul Eggen (2011) from the University of North Florida describe a useful method to increase the metacognition of their students. They found that when educational psychology students were taught specific encoding strategies they academically outperformed a control group in learning course material.

Schellenberg, S., Negishi, M., & Eggen, P. (2011). The Effects of Metacognition and Concrete Encoding Strategies on Depth of Understanding in Educational Psychology. Teaching Educational Psychology, 7(2), 17-24.


Changing Epistemological Beliefs in Pre-service Teacher Education Students

Joanne Brownlee, Nola Purdie, and Gillian Boulton-Lewis (2010) describe an interesting method to increase student’s epistemological beliefs using reflective journal assignments. Brownlee and colleagues found that when students engaged in these reflective practices, they had significantly improved their epistemological beliefs over that of students who did not complete these activities.

Brownlee, J., Purdie, N., & Boulton-Lewis, G. (2001). Changing epistemological beliefs in pre-service teacher education students. Teaching in higher Education,6(2), 247-268.


Promoting Student Metacognition

by Kimberly D. Tanner

This article starts out with two student scenarios with which many faculty will easily resonate (one student with poor and one with good learning skills), and which help make the case for the need to incorporate metacognitive development in college courses. Kimberly then shares some activities and a very comprehensive list of questions that instructors might ask students to answer regarding the planning, monitoring and evaluating of their own learning. While Kimberly makes a point of teaching metacognition within the disciplines, these questions are all generic enough to be used in any discipline. Of note in this article, there is a section that discusses metacognitive instruction, and includes a series of questions that faculty should ask of themselves as they plan, monitor and evaluate their teaching.

CBE—Life Sciences Education; Vol. 11, 113–120, Summer 2012

https://www.lifescied.org/doi/full/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0033