Engendering Empathy through Literature with Metacognition

by Dr. Marie-Therese C. Sulit, Professor of English and Director of the Honors Program

“Literature is no one’s private ground. It is common ground.”–Virginia Woolf

“Doce me veritatem”/“Teach Me Truth”—Motto of Mount Saint Mary College

INTRODUCTION: CONSIDERING DISPUTATIO A FORM OF METACOGNITION

As a multicultural practitioner of literature, I draw upon both a contemplative-informed pedagogy to create safe and brave spaces, especially for young adults. Given the common ground that literature provides, it is important that participants feel safe so they can be brave and share with the class. I connect literacy with literature through the reading process as follows:

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
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

At any stage of the reading process, a student’s engagement with the narrative text can move between emotional reactions and intellectual responses. In an essay, “Reflection Matters: Using Metacognition to Track a Moving Target,” I highlight contemplative pedagogy, which creates a space between one’s emotional reactions and one’s intellectual responses. These reactions and responses inform students’ engagement with literature—may it be a series of spoken or written remarks, difficult and challenging topics, or an emergent potentially controversial set of themes—that, through metacognition, can shift triggers (emotional reactions) into glimmers (intellectual responses) in classroom discussions.

In another essay, “Identity Matters: Creating Brave Spaces through Disputatio and Discernment,” I discuss disputatio, a contemplative practice of rigorous argumentation particular to Dominican colleges and universities, as “[a] method that seeks to resolve difficult questions and controverted issues by finding the truth in each.” The practice of disputatio requires discernment as a means by which multiple and/or disparate perspectives can be brought to light even as it addresses “urgent questions of justice and peace.” At the Mount, pedagogical practices across disciplines are being called upon to explore and investigate so-called “controversial” issues that run the gamut of the “-isms,” e.g. racism and sexism and other forms of oppression. As a teacher of literature, the discernment intrinsic to disputatio, I believe, is a form of metacognition that can be utilized in the classroom in order to gauge students’ connection to a narrative text and peers as well as themselves. There is no better time than the present to engender empathy, the understanding of another perspective, with metacognition to address these opportunities for change in the classroom. Thus, the engenderment of empathy cannot happen without metacognition.

ENGENDERING EMPATHY THROUGH LITERATURE WITH METACOGNITION

The study and analysis of literature not only brings self-examination for all involved as we move through stories, characters, conflicts, and resolutions but also an examination of history, culture and society. In Literature for Young Adults, for example, the relatability of a narrative text opens up the opportunity for young adults to engage in this process of self-examination through the examination of a piece of literature. In providing the common ground to engender empathy, its challenge lies in its inherent predication that another’s experience of pain, even trauma, cannot be our own, and this challenge can happen within a student, among the students in the class, as well as through the characters. In applying these challenges to literature, I draw upon Lou Agosta (2020) who problematizes one’s ability to be open to another, be it a student with another student and/or a student with a character:

RECEPTIVITY, an emotional contagion, happening through an appropriation of one’s experience;
INTERPRETATION, as projecting one’s experience onto another, be it a character or a peer can happen;
RESPONSE, as becoming lost in translation, where gossiping, talking about, or changing the subject can happen;
UNDERSTANDING, where the labelling or categorizing one’s experience can happen.

With Agosta’s four points, the stages of the reading process are akin to listening: students react and respond accordingly, gauging their reactions and responses. He emphasizes that it is one’s ability to truly listen where empathy can either break down and/or break through. Agosta delineates how empathy works:

EMPATHIC RECEPTIVITY: a gracious and generous listening
EMPATHIC INTERPRETATION: the view from “over there”
EMPATHIC RESPONSIVENESS: the “film” of one’s life—be it a character, a peer, and/or one’s self
EMPATHIC UNDERSTANDING: a break-through, rather than a break-down, to possibility—be it literary, personal, and/or communal

In this course, the students and I discussed a student-selected contemporary novel, Girl in Pieces (2016) written by Kathleen Glasgow. In this controversial novel, the protagonist is a young woman, Charlie, homeless and a self-harmer, who, through her fraught relationships with family and friends, journeys towards self-development and self-discovery. Charlie served as a surrogate for the students who, to varying degrees, identify and dis-identify with aspects of this protagonist. I find myself most successful in engendering empathy and having the students develop their metacognition through low-stakes writing assignments—e.g. paragraph experiments for practice in writing effective paragraphs and online discussion forums that allow for reflection in responding to topics raised in the classroom. Examples include Charlie’s struggle to not self-harm, her choice in lovers, and her decision to move from place to place. High-stakes writing assignments, like short response papers, allow for deeper reflection on topics initially expressed in the paragraph experiments and online discussion forums. Examples include discussing aspects of a toxic relationship, the role of art in her coping strategies and healing practices, the plight of homeless teenagers. Students are compelled to choose between an approach to their literary studies that emphasizes participation, which can be challenging yet rewarding when students are still learning how they learn best and why they seek to learn. All of this cannot happen without the development of their metacognition through these classroom discussions and writing exercises.

Working through this novel with the students necessitated metacognitive exercises in exploring the creative, emotional, and intellectual that enabled some students to turn triggers into glimmers and other students to engender empathy for the characters and their peers who felt safe and brave enough to share their vulnerabilities. By studying and analyzing Charlie, her choices, her outcome, we became a rich and enriched community.

CONCLUSION

Through literature, I find that diversifying the course content and ensuring an inclusive pedagogy presents the opportunity for instilling students with a sense of curiosity through the process of exploration and discovery—one that comes with their self-development. For students to become life-long learners seeking truth, we bear the responsibility for the cultivation of statements, actions, behaviors, and practices that bespeaks a fully realized human being. We can and must continue to assist students in the development of new ways of being in this world as it is.

WORKS CITED

Agosta, L. (2020, September 6). Retrieved from Empathy Lessons: https://empathyinthecontextofphilosophy.com/2020/09/06/the-trouble-with-the-trouble-with-empathy/

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

Woolf, Virginia. “Leaning Tower.” The Moment and Other Essays. HMH Books, 2003.

Spaces for reflection beyond the classroom

By Honorary Associate Professor Anne-Louise Semple, PhD, Macquarie University and Associate Professor Kate Lloyd, PhD, Macquarie University

This is the fifth post in the Reflection for learning develops metacognition series.

The aim of this series is to support educators and learners with their reflective practice as a foundational skill in developing metacognition.

The blogs in the series each focus on a different mode of reflection, with the aim of introducing a spectrum of approaches to reflective practice spanning analytical,

personalistic, critical, and creative. Each blog provides the scholarship underpinning the practice and shares a reflective activity to engage readers experientially.

There are many meaningful ways to engage with, and practice, reflection and a focus of this series is engaging the reader in a range of experiential activities.

The authors of this series are members of the Reflection for Learning circle. We have experimented, practiced and researched Reflection for Learning for over ten years.

The question

This post asks: How can your surrounding environment support reflection?

Reflection and Metacognition

Metacognitive skills involve awareness of what has been learned or needs clarification, and the way you learn (Stanton et al., 2021). Awareness of and reflection on one’s surrounding environment, and one’s place within that, can enhance knowledge and understanding in ways that support metacognition.

Studies on field-based and experiential learning demonstrate the significance that reflection on one’s place/surrounds/environment can have including: increased self-awareness, ability to relate theory to real world practice, and the articulation of learning (Fedesco et al., 2020; Lloyd et al., 2015). Indeed, spending time in nature is known to enhance creativity, critical thinking, problem solving, and it improves attention and focus; it is restorative (Taylor & Kuo, 2008; Rios & Brewer, 2014).

Our experiences during COVID revealed, however, that we can adapt reflection to any environment, be it indoor or out. Encouraging reflection on and in your surrounding environment, wherever you may be, supports mindful awareness and in turn contributes to “implicit knowledge in association with explicit knowledge, and insight into others’ perceptions” (Bolton, 2010, p. 15).

Therefore, taking time to explore your surrounding environment in detail, and your experience of that, can enhance our connection to that place and create new ways of seeing, thinking, doing and being. (See the Reflection as Exploration video.) This self-awareness, which draws on both the physical and physiological, contributes to metacognition as individuals gain an enhanced ability to understand how different things and their location are interconnected, including in relation to themselves (Stolz, 2015; Leigh & Bailey, 2013).

What does this look like in practice?

Whether a place is familiar or unfamiliar, whether you are in the classroom or outside in nature, the mission is simple: start by slowing down and taking time to notice things in your surrounding environment that previously might not have been apparent. “Everything is interesting. Look closer…alter your course…notice patterns…trace things back to their origins…” (Smith, 2008, p.5).

Photo by Nathan Anderson on Unsplash

Document your observations in a way that suits you: use a camera, art supplies, pen and paper, laptop or audio recorder to document an object, a feeling encountered during the exploration, an experience that unexpectedly occurs, or a sense of something that evolves as a result of your exploration.

How can I learn more?

For more information, and to discover other practices including one that engages all five senses as one experiences their surrounding environment, please see our reflection for learning scholarly practice guide.

The online Reflection for Learning video series provides further demonstration:

References

Bolton, G. (2010). Reflective practice: Writing and professional development (3rd ed.). Sage.

Fedesco, H. N., Cavin, D., & Henares, R. (2020). Field-based learning in higher education: exploring the benefits and possibilities. Journal of the Scholarship of Learning and Teaching, 20 (1), 65-84. doi: 10.14434/josotl.v20i1.24877

Harvey M., Lloyd K., McLachlan K., Semple A-L., & Walkerden G. (2020). Reflection for learning: a scholarly practice guide for educators. AdvanceHE. https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/reflection-learning-scholarly-practice-guide-educators

Leigh, J., & Bailey, R. (2013). Reflection, reflective practice and embodied reflective practice. Body, Movement and Dance in Psychotherapy: An International Journal for Theory, Research and Practice, 8(3), 160-171. doi: 10.1080/17432979.2013.797498

Lloyd, K., Howitt, R., Bilous, R., Clark, L., Dowling, R., Fagan, R., Fuller, S., Hammersley, L., Houston, D., McGregor, A., McLean, J., Miller, F., Ruming, K., Semple, A-L., & Suchet-Pearson, S. (2015). Geographic contributions to institutional curriculum reform in Australia: the challenge of embedding field-based learning. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 39(4), 491-503. doi:10.1080/03098265.2015.1103710

Rios, J.M., & Brewer, J., (2014). Outdoor education and science achievement. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 13(4), 234-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1533015X.2015.975084

Smith, K. (2008). How to be an explorer of the world. Portable Life Museum. Penguin Group.

Stanton, J.D., Sebesta, A., J., & Dunlosky, J. (2021). Fostering Metacognition to Support Student Learning and Performance. CBE Life Sciences Education, 20(2), 1-7. doi: 10.1187/cbe.20-12-0289

Stolz, S.A. (2015). Embodied learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 47(5), 474-487. doi: 10.1080/00131857.2013.879694

Taylor, A.F., & Kuo, F.E. (2008). Children with attention deficits concentrate better after walk in the park. J Atten Disord, 12(5), 402-9. doi: 10.1177/1087054708323000

Preparing for reflection with mindfulness

by Dr Greg Walkerden, Honorary Senior Research Fellow, PhD, Macquarie University

This is the second post in the Reflection for learning develops metacognition series.

The aim of this series is to support educators and learners with their reflective practice as a foundational skill in developing metacognition.

The blogs in the series each focus on a different mode of reflection, with the aim of introducing a spectrum of approaches to reflective practice spanning analytical,

personalistic, critical, and creative. Each blog provides the scholarship underpinning the practice and shares a reflective activity to engage readers experientially.

There are many meaningful ways to engage with, and practice, reflection and a focus of this series is engaging the reader in a range of experiential activities.

The authors of this series are members of the Reflection for Learning circle. We have experimented, practiced and researched Reflection for Learning for over ten years.

The question

This post asks: “How do we shift to being deliberately mindful of our experience?”

Reflection and Metacognition

Mindfulness is a metacognitive practice with a very long history. In the written record, it goes back at least to the early Buddhist texts (Kabat-Zinn 2015), and, in the last 50 years, secular uses of being deliberately aware of our own experiencing have flourished (Harvey et al 2020).

At its heart, mindfulness is being aware of what we are experiencing as we are experiencing it, and aware of how we are acting as we act. Doing this deliberately might seem like quite a modest contribution to learning, since, in some ways, we are always aware of what we are experiencing and what we are doing. However, the wide variety of terms in English for being unmindful underline how helpful this shift can be: we may be distracted, tired, troubled, frustrated, disinterested, overwhelmed, burdened, weary, fuzzy, disoriented, anxious, inattentive, discouraged, upset, unmotivated, unnerved, uninterested, procrastinating, frazzled, and on and on.

Being open, attentive and sensitive is not something we can take for granted in ourselves or others. So ways of shifting deliberately to being mindful have a lot to contribute to many of the things we do, and specifically to reflecting on our practice, both as we are practicing – reflecting-in-action – and afterwards – reflecting-on-action (Schön 1987).

What does this look like in practice?

A very simple way of shifting into being mindful is to simply relax, pause, and do any of the following …

think about something enjoyable, slowly, savoring it …
quietly take in the sights and sounds of where you are …
gently follow your own breathing … and if you drift off, gently return …
take a little time to notice how you are feeling, particularly whatever is in the background (usually some amalgam, perhaps of curiosity, comfort, discomfort, doubt, ease, …) … let the background reveal itself …

In a teaching setting, the practice can be that when students hear the sound of a bell, or any other pre-arranged cue, they simply pause, relax, and spend a minute doing one of the above.

Photo by petr sidorov on Unsplash

As these instructions indicate, the heart of being deliberately mindful is pausing, relaxing, and then being aware gently, slowly, quietly – letting what is happening register. There is a great deal of empirical evidence – both in practice traditions and in the research literature – that mindfulness is a metacognitive practice that supports sensitivity, insight, and learning (Kabat-Zinn 2015, Harvey et al 2020). Such practices can be individual or shared.

How can I learn more?

For more detailed instructions for using this simple mindfulness practice in teaching, see our Mindfulness Cues video and the section ‘Mindfulness Cues’ in our guide (2020, p.34).

Two related mindfulness practices that explore mindfulness in nature and in movement are:

Both are very helpful in everyday life and in teaching.

References

Harvey, M., Lloyd K., McLachlan K., Semple A-L., & Walkerden, G. (2020). Reflection for learning: a scholarly practice guide for educators. AdvanceHE. (https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/reflection-learning-scholarly-practice-guide-educators)

Kabat-Zinn, J. (2015). Mindfulness. Mindfulness, 6, 1481–1483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-015-0456-x

Schön, D. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. Jossey-Bass.

The role of reflection for learning and metacognitive development

by Honorary Associate Professor Marina Harvey, PhD, Macquarie University, Series guest editor

This is the first post in the Reflection for learning develops metacognition series.

The aim of this series is to support educators and learners with their reflective practice as a foundational skill in developing metacognition.

The blogs in the series each focus on a different mode of reflection, with the aim of introducing a spectrum of approaches to reflective practice spanning analytical, personalistic, critical, and creative. Each blog provides the scholarship underpinning the practice and shares a reflective activity to engage readers experientially.

photo of a woman sitting at a desk and writing — *Image by Mario Hernandez from Pixabay*

There are many meaningful ways to engage with, and practice, reflection and a focus of this series is engaging the reader in a range of experiential activities.

The authors of this series are members of the Reflection for Learning circle. We have experimented, practiced and researched Reflection for Learning for over ten years in diverse contexts: including most disciplines, at undergraduate and graduate levels, and with students and teachers. Each month we gather and play with a new reflective practice. Those that work we further research, workshop, and practice and now share with you dear reader of the blog. We have found that you need to know your learners and adapt the delivery of the reflective practice to your learners’ needs. The story of our learning circle can be read in our guide (Harvey et al., 2020, pp 8-10).

The question

This post asks: “What is the role of reflection for learning and metacognitive development?”

Reflection and Metacognition

Reflection for learning develops metacognition

Reflective practice is incorporated into university curricula worldwide, and this is because reflective practice supports learning. Three key roles of reflective practice for learning have been identified: academic learning, lifelong learning and skills development (Harvey, et al. 2010).

Academic learning

Reflection can play many roles in supporting academic learning with a key role being praxis, as it enables learners to apply and build connections between theory and practice. Reflective practice can also underpin authentic learning experiences as it enables learners to make connections between their subject or course, their learning activities and their future work. The diverse range of modes of reflective practice and its documentation provide a variety of ways in which learners can document, or evidence, their learning.

Lifelong learning

Last century it was unusual for universities to talk about lifelong learning. In contrast, today graduate capabilities or attributes espoused by universities and higher education institutions make reference to their graduates being lifelong learners (Winchester-Seeto, et al. 2012). Reflective practice can engage learners in transformative, whole person and career development learning, and achieve unintended or spontaneous learning outcomes all aligned with lifelong learning.

Skills development

Communication skills can be developed through reflective writing or journalling and through creative expressions of reflection. Of significance to this blog series, reflection contributes to the higher-order cognitive processes of self-regulation and metacognition (Harvey, Coulson & McMaugh, 2016). Reflection plays a pivotal role in the process of self-regulation (Lyons & Zelazo, 2011). The relationship between reflection and metacognition is synergistic, reciprocal and complementary (Harvey, Coulson & McMaugh, 2016). The development of metacognition is supported by reflective practice by “making formerly unconscious, intangible, or reflexive processes or events explicit” (Desautel, 2009, p. 2001).

What does this look like in practice?

Having students engage in scaffolded reflective practices can support their metacognitive development. Educators can practice reflection to enhance their teaching and career development. There are multiple practices to choose from in our practice guide.

The “Minute paper” is a cognitive based practice closely aligned with metacognitive development. This quick reflective activity asks students two questions:

What was the most significant (useful, meaningful, surprising, etc) thing you learned during this session?
What question(s) remain in your mind at the end of this session?

These questions prompt students to actively monitor their cognitive processes, identifying what they know and what they don’t know. Details and a template for this practice can be found on pp. 40-42 of our guide and the video demonstrating the practice is on Youtube.

How can I learn more?

For more information, and to discover other practices please see our reflection for learning scholarly practice guide.

The online Reflection for Learning video series provides further demonstration of text- and cognitive based practices:

References

Desautel, D. (2009). Becoming a thinking thinker: Metacognition, self-reflection, and classroom practice. Teachers College Record, 111(8), 1997-2020.

Harvey, M., Coulson, D., & McMaugh, A. (2016). Towards a theory of the ecology of reflection: reflective practice for experiential learning in higher education. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 13(2). http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol13/iss2/2

Harvey, M; Coulson, D; Mackaway, T., & Winchester-Seeto, T. (2010). Aligning reflection in the cooperative education curriculum. Australia Pacific Journal of Co-operative education, 11 (3), 137-1 https://www.ijwil.org/files/APJCE_11_3_137_152.pdf

Lyons, K.E., & Zelazo, P.D. (2011). Monitoring, metacognition, and executive function: Elucidating the role of self-reflection in the development of self-regulation. In J. B. Benson (Ed.), Advances in Child Development and Behavior (pp. 379-412). JAI, Volume 40. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-386491-8.00010-4.

Winchester-Seeto, T., Bosanquet, A., & Rowe, A. (2012). Smoke and mirrors: graduate attributes and the implications for student engagement in higher education. In I. Solomonides., A, Reid, & P. Petocz (Eds.), Engaging with learning in higher education (pp. 413-438). Oxfordshire: Libri

Using Ungrading and Metacognition to Foster “Becoming a Learner”

by Matt Recla, PhD, Associate Director of University Foundations at Boise State

This is the 3rd post in the Guest Editor Series, Metacognition, Writing, and Well-Being, Edited by dawn shepherd, PhD, Ti Macklin, PhD, and Heidi Estrem, PhD

Becoming a Learner

When I started teaching a required first-year course years ago, faculty were recommended to include Matthew Sanders’ small text, Becoming a Learner. Though it seemed a distraction from the “real” content of my course, I dutifully added the text. It makes a simple, compelling argument that students should strive to be active learners rather than passive students, exposing common misconceptions about a college education and suggesting helpful corrections. I paired the text with a short assignment to craft three learning goals for the semester, including at least one for our course and at least one for their learning journey more broadly.

I was surprised by the overwhelmingly positive reactions from students. Though assigned at the beginning of the semester, in their reflections on the course months later students still made comments like the following: “I learned so much about myself and what to improve on.” “It really set the tone for the rest of the class.” “It really changed my perspective on how I view my college education.” A few even claimed it was the most valuable part of the course! Reflecting on their past learning experiences and considering concrete goals provided a tool to gain purchase on their educational journey.

I began to wonder, though, whether my teaching techniques and assignments throughout the rest of the course were in harmony with the message of becoming a learner. Sanders exhorts students to be creative and courageous in order to learn (14, 42). Was I helping students do that, or was I penalizing them if they took a risk? He encourages critical thinking and the interconnectedness of learning (15, 35). Was I providing opportunities to make those connections, to reflect on the impact of their learning? These reflections led me to further opportunities for student metacognition. I made two additional changes that, in offering students a greater sense of empowerment in their education, also hopefully contributes to their sense of well-being.

Ungrading

The first change was ungrading, which to my mind was the natural complement to a first-year required course that promotes taking charge of your education. (There are many different ways to ungrade; I was initially guided by Hacking Assessment, and have since benefitted from the edited volume, Ungrading.) I’ve landed for now on a system where students receive no grades until the end of the course. They receive significant feedback on each assignment (based on Mark Barnes’ SE2R feedback approach) from me or a teaching assistant and have unlimited opportunities to revise and resubmit their work. We meet individually with each one of our 100 students at midsemester to hear about their progress and tackle any ongoing challenges. We meet again at semester’s end, and students explain the grade they believe they’ve earned. At least nine times out of ten they assess themselves just as we (instructors) would. When there appear to be gaps in the student’s self-assessment, we have a slightly longer conversation to understand (and rarely, suggest possible corrections to) their rationale.

I have come to see ungrading as part of my own well-being as an educator, as it appropriately shares my responsibility for a student’s grade with them. They are well-positioned to evaluate their performance if I trust them to do so and let them practice. There is a learning curve, and it can at first be frustrating for students who (like myself as a student) are used to finding out “what the teacher wants.” If embraced, though, it encourages for most students more authentic engagement with their learning. Their reflections suggest this augments a feeling of ownership of their education.

Metacognitive Reflection

The second change I adopted is to have students write or record a brief metacognitive reflection along with every major assignment. (My first and last assignments are themselves reflections on their experience, so I don’t assign a reflection on their reflection. That gets confusing for everyone!) The prompt for this brief addendum asks students to think about successes and challenges, both internal and external. (I’ve lost track of the original source for this idea, but I’m grateful!) I show these four areas in a quadrant and invite students to respond to at least one prompt in each area:

Internal

External

Successes

● What did I do to achieve success on this assignment?

● What did I learn from this assessment (in terms of content, skills, and/or about myself)?

● What parts of the assignment worked well for me? Why?

● Where do I think I did best on the assignment or what portion am I particularly proud of?

● Which assignment standards did I meet or exceed? Why do I think so?

Challenges

● What challenges did I face while completing the assignment (outside the assignment itself)?

● How did I overcome those challenges?

● What do I plan to do differently next time as a result?

● What parts of the assignment were most challenging for me to understand? Why?

● How did I overcome those challenges?

● Which assignment standards did I not meet? Why?

Students reflect honestly on their challenges and modestly on their successes. They already may do this internally as they complete their work, but taking the time to record it helps reinforce that intuitive reflection and reveals the interconnectedness of their learning. The reflections often provide helpful context for their work, which may be impacted by any number of factors. In most cases I can affirm their self-assessment and suggest other small shifts as needed. The opportunity for intentional, transparent reflection has induced some “aha!” moments. I’ve seen many students follow through with changes in their time management for future assignments or double-down on areas of skill that were uncovered in reflection, which, because self-generated rather than forced, increases their felt self-efficacy.

Teaching in a COVID (and post-COVID) world

Although I incorporated both of these practices before the global disruptions of the last couple years, I’ve found that both ungrading and metacognitive reflection lend themselves well to teaching in a world unmoored by a pandemic. In the fall semester of 2020 we could see the impacts of a dramatic disruption in students’ learning, transitioning from in-person to primarily or completely virtual. Those impacts have become more pronounced each year since. The flexible design of my course is fairly adaptable to student needs and abilities when they enter the course, and it means that their grade isn’t ruined because they miss something due to unforeseen circumstances.

As they complete assignments and reflect on their progress, I can see them wrestle with the challenges of my course while simultaneously managing their other courses and the numerous obligations of adulthood. When they reflect at the end of the semester and assign themselves a grade, I can see how they comprehensively assess what this small piece of their growth as learners has added up to. I am privileged to work with students with a variety of different experiences and perspectives, and if my classroom provides a space where they can reflect on where they are and continue the lifelong process of becoming learners, I feel that I’ve boosted their well-being and not hindered their journey.

References:

Blum, S. D. (2020). Ungrading: Why Rating Students Undermines Learning (and What to Do Instead). West Virginia University Press.

Sackstein, S. (2015). Hacking assessment: 10 ways to go gradeless in a traditional grades school. Times 10 Publications.

Sanders, M. L. (2018). Becoming a learner: Realizing the opportunity of education. Macmillan Learning Curriculum Solutions.

Student Well-Being Through Reflection and Metacognition in a First-Year Writing Course

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

——–

photo of a bubble floating in front of a blurred background — Image by dsjones from Pixabay

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.

Teaching and Learning Writing Together in a Pandemic

by dawn shepherd, PhD, Ti Macklin, PhD, and Heidi Estrem, PhD, Boise State University

This is the 1st post in the Guest Editor Series, Metacognition, Writing, and Well-Being, Edited by dawn shepherd, PhD, Ti Macklin, PhD, and Heidi Estrem, PhD

———–

It is not hyperbolic to say that “The Pause and The Pivot” of March 2022 has irrevocably changed the three of us (dawn, Ti, and Heidi). In particular, the pause, pivot, and subsequent rethinking of nearly every aspect of our professions has deeply affected how we approach our colleagues and the classroom. The three of us have extensive experience administering large first-year writing programs, as well as decades of teaching behind us. Still, the unprecedented changes brought about by the pandemic shook loose many of our previously held beliefs about quality writing instruction.

Throughout this intensive and extended pandemic period, the three of us have met regularly to commiserate, plan courses, brainstorm ways to support our first-year writing students and instructors, and develop new approaches to teaching. Our collegial, challenging, and deeply supportive professional conversations have enabled us to use the unsettled ground of this time period to prompt new growth for all of us. This professional growth has, in turn, enabled us to develop pragmatic and humane classrooms and relationships with colleagues. To be sure, we would have said our classrooms were humane prior to 2020, and they were – but we attend to the well-being of self, colleagues, and students now like we never have before. One of our richest strategies for calling attention to well-being is through metacognitive discussions that take place in our co-writing and collaborative pedagogical work.

Metacognition has long been recognized as a deeply valuable and critically important practice for first-year writing students and for learning about writing more generally (Hayes, Jones, Gorzelsky, and Driscoll 2018). Indeed, one of the most important aspects of a rich first-year writing course is not only content about writing and practice doing writing but also extensive reflective work on how, when, and why writing changes across contexts (see Gorzelsky, Driscoll, Jones and Hayes 2016; see also Moore and Anson 2016). It is in the thinking about writing that novice writers gain sensitivity to changing rhetorical demands. So, as the three of us have collaborated over the past three years, employing these reflective practices ourselves has been fundamentally important. As program directors (dawn and Heidi) and innovative course designers (dawn and Ti), and as colleagues and friends (all three of us), we constantly and critically approached all of our curricular and pedagogical practices through a lens of metacognition and with a steady eye on making decisions that promote well-being.

This has been layered, intensive, and exhausting work. It has also been one of the richest periods of growth and collaboration of our professional lives. In brief, here are some of the grounding principles we returned to and perspectives that enabled us to thrive in these times:

We can enable, enact, and model healthy decisions. As program directors, dawn and Heidi were keenly aware of the need to encourage healthier work-life choices but sought to make it explicit in crisis times. It was top of mind for us to encourage our colleagues – to give them permission – to scale back assignments, to cull their courses for anything that wasn’t essential, to honor their need for breaks in fully online/remote semesters. Our approach to leadership has always been reflective, iterative, and in service to others. We also tend to work more than we should. This moment required us to enact healthy decisions related to our own workload and self- care, serving a model for others as well. We quickly set up google drive folders for sharing ideas for moving online in late spring 2020 to immediately encourage informal collaboration; we sent regular emails throughout the pandemic designed to both acknowledge the deep challenges of teaching in this time and offer hope and strategies for instructors.
We can change course. We all learned to be differently flexible in this time period, and meeting regularly to check in with each other helped us make visible things that were and weren’t working – and that might need to be adjusted. For example, the three of us were excited about a potential second course innovation for the spring 2022 semester. But as the fall unfolded, we realized together that it wasn’t the right semester for it. So, we adjusted. And let go.
We can learn to live and even thrive in an environment of productive discomfort. Nothing felt comfortable in 2020-2022. We know that learning is uncomfortable, and we strive to help our students to remain resilient when things are hard, and we were forced to face both productive discomfort and trauma, by experiencing them in our own lives and witnessing them in the lives of colleagues and students. In teaching and learning environments as well as workplaces, we don’t always make a distinction between the two. Discomfort can bring growth.

With these ideas in mind, we brought together a number of other colleagues who have also been thinking deeply about the interplay of writing, well-being, and cognition. In the next post, Ti Macklin and three students from her Fall 2021 first-year writing course examine their experiences with a metacognitively-focused English 101 course. Lilly Crolius (graduate student and teaching assistant in the course), Harland Recla (first-year writing student), and Natalie Plunkett (first-year writing student) provide insight into the student experience by discussing how reflection and a focus on transferable writing skills impacted their well-being.

The third post, written by Matt Recla, Associate Director of University Foundations at Boise State, discusses how reflective practices and assessment improved his students’ sense of self-efficacy and well-being. He specifically details how incorporating “ungrading” and metacognitive reflection practices into his required first-year course provides students with a framework to see themselves as life-long learners.

The series ends with a final post from a former Boise State University undergraduate student, Mariah Kidd, who explains how reflective journaling helped her to track her growth as a writer throughout her undergraduate career.

Works Cited

Hayes, Carol, Ed Jones, Gwen Gorzelsky, and Dana Driscoll. “Adapting Writing About Writing: Curricular Implications of Cross-Institutional Data from the Writing Transfer Project,” WPA: Writing Program Administration, 41.2, Spring 2019, pp. 65-88.

Gorzelsky, Gwen, Dana Lynn Driscoll, Joe Paszak, Ed Jones, and Carol Hayes, “Cultivating Constructive

Metacognition: A New Taxonomy for Writing Studies,” in Critical Transitions: Writing and the Question of Transfer, eds Jessie Moore and Chris Anson, Utah State University Press, 2016.

Moore, Jessie and Chris Anson, Critical Transitions: Writing and the Question of Transfer, eds Jessie Moore and Chris Anson, Utah State University Press, 2016.

Using Metacognition to Scaffold the Development of a Growth Mindset

by Lauren Scharff, PhD, U. S. Air Force Academy,*
Steven Fleisher, PhD, California State University,
Michael Roberts, PhD, DePauw University

It conceptually seems simple… inform students about the positive power of having a growth mindset, and they will shift to having a growth mindset.

If only it were that easy!

Black silhouette of a human head with colored neurons inside it — Image by Gordon Johnson from Pixabay

In reality, even if we (humans) cognitively know something is “good” for us, we may struggle to change our ways of thinking, behaving, and automatic emotional reactions because those have become habits. However, rather than throw up our hands and give up because it’s challenging, in this blog we will model a growth mindset by offering a new strategy to facilitate the transition to a growth mindset. The strategy involves metacognitive refection, specifically the use of awareness-oriented and self-regulation-oriented questions for both students and instructors.

Mindset Overview

To get us all on the same page, let’s first examine “mindset,” a term coined by Carol Dweck (2006). This concept proposes that individuals internalize ways of thinking about their abilities related to intelligence, learning, and academics (or any other skill). These beliefs become internalized based on years of living and hearing commentary about skills (e.g., She’s a born leader! or, You’re so smart! or, They are natural math wizzes!). These internalized beliefs subsequently affect our responses and performance related to those skills.

According to Dweck and others, people fall along a continuum (Figure 1) that ranges from having a fixed mindset (“My skills are innate and can’t be developed”) to having a growth mindset (“My skills can be developed”). Depending on a person’s beliefs about a particular skill, they will respond in predictable ways when a skill requires effort, when it seems challenging, when effort affects performance, and when feedback informs performance. The two-part mindset blog posts in Ed Nuhfer’s guest series (Part 1, and Part 2, 2022) provide evidence that the feedback component is especially influential.

Figure 1. Fixed – growth mindset tendencies. (From https://trainugly.com/portfolio/growth-mindset/)

Metacognition to Support Change

As the opening to this blog pointed out, simply explaining the concept of mindset and the benefits of growth mindset to students is not typically enough to lead students to actually adopt a growth mindset. This lack of change is likely even if students say they see the benefits and want to shift to a greater growth mindset. Thus, we need a process to scaffold the change.

We believe that metacognition offers a process by which to do this. Metacognition not only helps us examine our beliefs, but also provides a guide for one’s subsequent behaviors. More specifically, we believe metacognition involves two key processes, 1) awareness, often gleaned through reflection, and 2) self-regulation, during which the person uses that awareness to adjust their behaviors as needed in order to achieve their targeted goal.

Much research (e.g., Isaacson & Fujita, 2006) has already documented the benefits of students being metacognitive about their learning processes. However, we haven’t seen any other work focus on being metacognitive about one’s mindset.

Further, we know that efforts to develop skills are often more successful when they are more narrowly targeted on specific aspects of a broader construct (e.g., Heft & Scharff, 2017). Thus, rather than encouraging students to simply adopt a general “growth mindset,” or be metacognitive about their general mindset for a task, it would be more productive to target how they think about and respond to the specific component aspects of mindset for that task (e.g., challenge, feedback, failure).

Promoting a Growth Mindset Via Metacognition

Below we offer some example metacognitive reflection questions for students and for instructors that focus on awareness and self-regulation related to the feedback component of mindset. For the full set of questions that target all of the mindset components, please go to our full Mindset Metacognition Questions Resource.

We chose to highlight the component of feedback due to Nuhfer et al.’s findings reported in his 2022 guest series. By targeting the specific aspects of mindset, such as feedback, students might more effectively overcome patterns of thinking that keep them stuck in a fixed mindset.

We also include metacognitive reflection questions for instructors because they are instrumental in establishing a classroom environment that either supports or inhibits growth mindset in students. Instructors’ roles are important – recent research has demonstrated that instructor mindset about student learning abilities can impact student motivation, belongingness, engagement, and grades (Muenks, et al., 2020). Yeager, et al. (2021) additionally showed that mindset interventions for students had more impact if the instructors also display growth mindsets. Thus, we suggest that instructors examine their own behaviors and how those behaviors might discourage or encourage a growth mindset in their students.

Student Questions Related to Feedback

(Self-assessment/awareness) How am I thinking about and responding to feedback that implies I need to make changes or improve?
(Self-assessment/awareness) How am I interacting with the instructor in response to feedback? (emotional regulation; comfort versus frustration)
(Self-regulation) How do I plan to respond to feedback I have / will receive?
(Self-regulation) How might I reasonably seek feedback from peers or the instructor when more is needed?

Instructor Questions Related to Feedback

(Self-assessment/awareness) Are students using my feedback? Are there aspects of content or tone of feedback that may be interacting with students’ mindsets?
(Self-assessment/awareness) Am I appropriately focusing my feedback on student performance (e.g., meeting standards) rather than on students themselves (e.g. their dispositions or aptitudes)?
(Self-regulation) When a student approaches me with a question, what do I signal via my demeanor? Am I demonstrating that engaging with feedback can be a positive experience?
(Self-regulation) What formative assessments might I develop to provide students feedback about their progress and learn to constructively use that feedback to support their growth?

Take-aways and Future Directions

We believe the interconnections between mindset and metacognition can go beyond the use of metacognition to examine aspects of one’s mindset. Students can be metacognitive about the learning process itself, which can interact with mindset by providing realizations that adapting one’s learning strategies can promote success. The belief that one can try new strategies and become more successful is a hallmark of growth mindset.

We hope that you utilize the questions above for yourself and your students. Given the lack of research in this area, your efforts could make a contribution to the larger understanding of how to effectively promote growth mindset in students. (If you investigate, let us know, and we would welcome a blog post so you could share your results.) At the very least, such efforts might help students overcome patterns of thinking that keep them stuck in a fixed mindset, and it might help them more effectively cope with the inevitable challenges that they will face, both in and beyond the academic realm.

References

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.

Heft, I. & Scharff, L. (July 2017). Aligning best practices to develop targeted critical thinking skills and habits. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol 17(3), pp. 48-67. http://josotl.indiana.edu/article/view/22600

Isaacson, R.M. & Fujita, F. (2006). Metacognitive knowledge monitoring and self-regulated learning: Academic success and reflections on learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol 6(1), 39-55. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ854910

Muenks, K., Canning, E. A., LaCosse, J., Green, D. J., Zirkel, S., Garcia, J. A., & Murphy, M. C. (2020). Does my professor think my ability can change? Students’ perceptions of their STEM professors’ mindset beliefs predict their psychological vulnerability, engagement, and performance in class. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(11), 2119-2114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000763

Yeager, D.S., Carroll, J.M., Buontempo, J., Cimpian, A., Woody, S., Crosnoe, R., Muller, C., Murray, J., Mhatre, P., Kersting, N., Hulleman, C., Kudym, M., Murphy, M., Duckworth, A.L., Walton, G.M., & Dweck, C.S.(2022). Teacher mindsets help explain where a growth-mindset intervention does and doesn’t work. Psychological Science, 33(1), 18-32. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/09567976211028984

* The views expressed in this article, book, or presentation are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force Academy, the Air Force, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.

Using Metacognition to Facilitate Scholarly Identity

by Anton Tolman, Ph.D., Guest Editor

This is the final and concluding blog for our series. I want to thank my colleagues for their time and effort in this project: Steven Pearlman, Christopher Lee, and Benjamin Johnson. Speaking for all of us, we hope you found our thoughts helpful in enriching your own thinking regarding metacognition and its importance in student learning.

The topics of this series, critical thinking, inclusive classrooms, student motivation, and succeeding with collaborative learning, are all essential themes in local and national discussions right now concerning student engagement and effective teaching. Each of the blogs in the series also touched on resistance to change (faculty or student), either explicitly or implicitly, the role of humility, and the development of metacognitive skills in achieving successful outcomes. Enhancing metacognition in ourselves and in our students is an ongoing progression, a journey, and we are happy to be walking it with you. In this last blog, I address the connection between metacognition and development of students’ personal narrative, their identity as scholars or educated persons. I believe this is the true heart of higher education and the core of its value to society.

You Can’t Change What You Can’t See

This phrase is an axiom in clinical work with clients. Clients often come to see a therapist knowing that things are wrong in their lives, but they don’t understand the reasons why or do not see a path forward to healing. They can’t change their lives for the better until they begin to “see” the nature of their problems, accept responsibility for their own role in those problems, and imagine and start to walk the road ahead.

This axiom applies to students. They usually come to college based on the promise of an economic benefit like higher paying jobs, or because they see a degree as a requirement for future goals. Many, if not most, see the purpose of education as learning facts or information and therefore, see the role of professors as experts who teach them content. When they are confronted with assignments that ask them to use critical thinking, solve problems, or work together, they can become easily frustrated. Thus, the terms “jumping through hoops” and “busy work” are commonly found in student conversations about their classes. These forms of resistance (Tolman & Kremling, 2017) are understandable because many students can’t see that the real goal of higher education is skill development, not content; it is not easily visible to them. Like the therapist’s clients, they won’t make progress until they develop the capacity to recognize the underlying issues and see the path ahead as one of purpose and value.

Student resistance to learning begins to diminish when students evaluate their own attitudes and behaviors and connect those behaviors to their academic performance. When they learn to develop metacognitive skills they can “see” previously unseen patterns in themselves and others: they recognize their own complicity in their academic struggles and begin to grasp that they are not just consumers of external information or persons being judged by some authority figure. This empowers them to assume responsibility, take action on their own, to succeed, to grow, and to become part of a community of learners.

Seeing is Believing: Shifting Identity in Higher Education

In his recent blog, Taraban (2020) describes identity as an ongoing form of development grounded in episodic memory: the story we tell ourselves about who we are. This self-narrated story is strongly shaped by the boundaries of what students “see” as the purpose of education, their personal goals, and how they approach learning. If students’ sense of identity about who they are does not change from that of being consumers of content or “students”, then we have failed them.

If we were to adopt the model of cognitive apprenticeship (Collins, Brown, & Newman, 1987) in our teaching, seeing ourselves more as mentors to students, then our major task becomes to shift their story, their identity, to that of being apprentices, not students. As apprentices, they are learning new skills under the guidance of an expert who cares for them, and who asks them to constantly re-evaluate what they are learning, consider how they are learning it, and when and how to use what they are learning. This entails a transition towards seeing themselves as participating members of the academy, as scholars and educated persons who contribute to society; metacognition is at the core of this identity shift.

Undergraduate research is a great example of this as articulated by Charity-Hudley, Dickter, and Franz (2017). They explain that the mechanism of action of this “high impact” practice on student success and retention, especially for minority or under-represented students, begins as students enter into a mentored relationship with a professor. Moving away from the traditional “student” role enables them to realize there is more to learning besides getting a grade or completing course assignments. Metacognitive activity like learning to reflect and ask their own questions, carry out their own research, generate new data, challenge their own ideas as well as existing ideas in the discipline, and create new understandings, makes them a contributor to knowledge, not just a consumer. They are a scholar, or at least a scholar-apprentice, and those episodic memories begin to shift their own narrative identity — who they see themselves to be, how they interpret their own life and future. Of course, participating in research is not the only path available to this outcome.

This student progression requires creating opportunities for students to develop and use their metacognitive skills. In both Steve Pearlman’s (this blog series) and Hale’s (2012) potent arguments, the development of metacognitive and critical thinking skills is integral to development of a “personal intellectual narrative”; you cannot discuss metacognition without referencing aspects of critical thinking, and you cannot explain critical thinking without referring to the metacognitive processes involved. As Hale (2012) says, cultivation of an “intellectual language” is a key process in this development; it inducts students into the “Great Conversation” and it becomes part of their own personal history of intellectual development. The more we integrate metacognitive opportunities in our classes, and across the curriculum, the more likely we are to observe this transition occur.

Suggestions for Teaching

Here are some thoughts about ways to incorporate metacognitive practices that promote personal narratives in students:

Emphasize transparency and relevance. Explain the purposes of our assignments not just for short-term outcomes (learn something for a grade), but for the long-term (learn something to enhance a career and personal life, contribute to society); define and set expectations about the value of metacognition and its role in professional thinking within your discipline.
Assign metacognitive tasks that require students to evaluate their strengths and weaknesses as learners, identify learning strategies they are using and those they are not, and ask them to connect this information to their personal and career goals. Benjamin Johnson’s description of the Personal Learning Plan (this blog series), based partly on completing practical metacognitive inventories and evaluating how to improve is an example.
Emphasize the value of students thinking about their own development over time and their personal histories; reflective writing assignments, in all fields, are useful for this.
Use inquiry assignments requiring students to develop their own questions, do their own research, and apply it to course content and their lives.
Create opportunities for students to make their own thinking visible to themselves. Encourage them to question their learning, their assumptions, and acknowledge their areas of confusion as a community of learners. Hale (2012) suggests learning logs, real-time student writing of their thinking, questions, and descriptions of how they are approaching content, assignments, and preparation.
Shift your role from “sage on the stage” to a mentor of cognitive apprentices. Model professional thinking; demonstrate metacognition and critical thinking and help the students recognize it and practice it. One way I do this is to ask, and continuously reinforce, that students call me Coach T. In my syllabus I explain the rationale for this: my purpose is to facilitate their learning, give them exercises to improve, and to clarify or assist, but the basic responsibility for their learning, as with any athlete, actor, or musician, lies with themselves.
Evaluate your course design: what are the memories and personal experiences your students will take away relevant to metacognition? Do your assignments focus primarily on content acquisition or do they promote skill development, a sense of growth and progress towards becoming a scholar, ability to speak the intellectual language of the discipline and to reason within its context? What are your course objectives and where do they point your students: towards content, or towards becoming scholars?

These teaching practices help students “connect the dots” and see patterns they did not know existed: how they approach learning, how well they are learning, the purpose of education, and their own intellectual growth and development. Doing this reduces resistance and shifts their understanding of learning and of themselves. When we move our perspective from content to skills and weave metacognitive development into the fabric of our class, we create an environment encouraging the exploration of new personal narratives and identity for our students. This brings us closer towards achieving the potential that higher education has to offer. If you are already doing these things, hone your work, expand your empathy, and become more transparent. If you are not, you can see the road ahead, and you don’t have to travel it alone. Reach out, learn from others, and find greater joy in what you do.

References:

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.

Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1987). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics (Technical Report No. 403). BBN Laboratories, Cambridge, MA.

Hale, E. (2012). Conceptualizing a personal intellectual history/narrative: The importance of strong-sense metacognition to thinking critically. In M.F. Shaughnessy (Ed). Critical Thinking and Higher Order Thinking. Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

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.

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/

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.

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?

Awareness of Fractals Strengthens Metacognition Needed for Enacting Informed Teaching Philosophies

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

Since 2002, I’ve written a theme-based column, “Developers’ Diary,” for The National Teaching and Learning Forum (NTLF). The central theme through all of these columns is “educating in fractal patterns.” Additionally, I facilitated week-long retreats from 1993 to 2010, and still run workshops, both of which employ visualization of a fractal generator as an aid to understanding concepts of teaching and learning. The wonderful “LAMP” (Learning Actively Mentoring Program) program at the University of Wyoming, where I serve as a mentor, continues to incorporate this aid in participants’ development of informed teaching philosophies.

In writing involved with our academic professions, perhaps no documents are so much the products of metacognition as our written teaching philosophies. These come from within us, which may account for their being so challenging to write. The information-gathering and evidence-based kinds of education through which we mastered most of our own education rarely gave us much practice for metacognitive self-assessment and deep self-reflection.

When properly used, the value of a teaching philosophy lies in “shaping” and nurturing the continuous growth of its author’s expertise. Rather than just a statement, the document serves to direct the author’s intention to enact the practices espoused in the philosophy. In this column, I seek to infuse readers’ already developed metacognitive capacities with an added dimension of “fractal awareness.”

Fractals: Why “Y” Why?

A fractal form is one that develops through growing from a “seed” called a generator (Fig. 1). Development involves repeatedly connecting additional generators to the growing structure. Thus, the character of the full form depends on the characteristics of the generator. A generator consists of simple Euclidean parts, perhaps the simplest being a straight-line segment. We enlist Figure 1 to clarify how initiators form generators, and fractal forms grow through recursively adding more and more generators.

Four levels of fractal development: initiator, generator, fractal form, complex fractal form

Figure 1. Development of a branching fractal form from a “Y-shaped” generator and its precursor initiator (from Nuhfer, 2007). Fractal shapes are the most common of all natural forms. Plants, mountains, clouds, coastlines, patterns of natural events in time like rainfall and floods, blood vessels, and the neural networks in our brains are examples of natural fractal forms.

The concept of fractal form is more than an abstract visualization that inspires creatively thinking about the process of becoming educated. The neural connections that develop in our brains through learning really are fractal forms. When we learn, we connect and stabilize fractal neural networks, so a good deal of our thinking and behavior almost surely has fractal qualities. We can enhance our understanding of educating and becoming educated by discovering the fractal qualities that these endeavors exhibit. One of the most important to recognize is that healthy final forms grow from robust generators. In practice, we can build a sturdy generator from a “blueprint” established by writing a well-informed teaching philosophy. If we mindfully practice this philosophy, the strengths and omissions of our “generator” grow into the strengths and blind spots that characterize our practice.

The branching fractals that develop in our brains are certainly more complex than the model in Figure 1, but even that simple figure helps us to understand and explain countless aspects of the process of learning and, over time, developing higher level thinking capacities.

The Philosophy as a Fractal Generator for Teaching, Learning, and Thinking

The statement, “Metacognition is thinking about thinking” always triggers the question, “What do we think about?” The fractal generator (Fig. 2) in use by me for about the past two decades tends to trigger six items for consideration in what to “think about” to build an informed philosophy. The meaning of “informed philosophy” extends beyond a document informed by a solid base of research on teaching, learning, and thinking. The term “informed philosophy,” as used here, is a document that reflects the growing understanding of ourselves in concert with our growth in knowledge, skills, and evidence-based practices.

Three components in blue (Fig. 2) are mostly components of skills and knowledge. Development of strengths in these three areas comes mainly (not wholly) from external sources. These include the research provided from the literature and from our network of colleagues who help us to build our content expertise and our awareness of varied pedagogical approaches and assessment practices. These originate primarily from resources from outside self, and we mostly develop our practice by drawing on these contributions.

Figure 2. A fractal generator model for higher education begins with an initiator that is affect. No deliberate efforts to teach or learn are devoid of affective qualities. Without affective desire to learn to value any of the six areas, such areas will not develop. Practice will then grow from a stunted generator.

The components in red that we call “internal strengths” (Fig. 2) require understanding that develops primarily from within us. The initiator for our generator (Fig. 2) is the red line segment at the base of the generator, which represents our affective feelings. Strong affective interest and enthusiasm may be our most valuable assets for guiding learning efforts to success. We needed to want to do something such as attend college, major in an area that felt attractive and to continue acting to achieve expertise by persevering to develop. That desire comes from within. When our affective passion and cognitive focus align for learning, we are unlikely to fail.

Finding Our Initiators from Within

In starting to write a teaching philosophy, a valuable awareness occurs when we query ourselves about how we obtained our present affective desires for what we aspire to do. Recalling an influential mentor often reveals from whom, when, and where that initial desire occurred. Recollecting a mentor’s valued qualities often reveals that how a teacher now hopes to be remembered began to form with learning to appreciate the power and validity of a particular mentor’s qualities. These recollections usually carry strong emotional ties, and early ideas that produced our conceptions of what constitutes good teaching can be beneficial if they really fit us. They can also be limiting if we unconsciously attempt to imitate a revered mentor rather than advance to develop the teaching that arises from our unique experiences and values.

Cultivating the habit of regular metacognitive conversations with ourselves allows us to confront a query of great importance: “Is what I am doing in the present truly what I most intended to do?” If not, the revised philosophy serves to direct our efforts back to regain doing what we intended to do. That practice allows us to tap the optimal power of affect by doing what a plan of deep introspection revealed that we most wanted to do in our practice. When a troubling event starts to occur, a valuable first reflection is, “Am I actually practicing my philosophy through how I am engaging with this challenge?” Often, we will find that troublesome events occur from a brief moment of inattention that sidetracks us into doing something other than what we intended to do.

Fractals and Uniqueness

In the neural networks that store the well-developed expertise within our brains, the separate neural components are in communication with one another, and they enlist one another to engage successfully with challenges or unexpected changes. Thus, the six areas of the generator (Fig. 2) that grow through our experience should grow to work simultaneously in active practice. Although I’ve found no contributions to research in faculty development that cannot be addressed from within the components of Figure 2, the fractal model is not one of prescriptive development. It does not lead to producing instructors in cookie-cutter fashion who all think alike and teach alike. Indeed, it cannot.

For the same reason that there are neither two trees nor two rainstorms that are alike, there can be no two brains that wire alike. Small differences between individuals’ generators occur through the unique experiences of each person. As these differences influence the replication through the repeated exercise of one’s practice, they guarantee the development of diversity and uniqueness of every teacher, every student, and thus every teaching moment experienced within a class. An internalized awareness that these will never occur again leads to consciously respecting others and valuing the present moment deeply.

We have seen in this brief entry how becoming aware of the pervasiveness of fractals in the physical world and understanding the role of the generator helps the author appreciate the utility of a written teaching philosophy for illuminating one’s own generator. Through the recursive process of repeated implementation, robust generators significantly strengthen one’s practice through time. In our next blog entry, we will examine metacognition’s specific roles in developing each of the six individual components.

Nuhfer, E. B. (2007). “The ABCs of fractal thinking in higher education.” To Improve the Academy (25) 70-89.

Utilizing Student-Coded Exams for Responsive Teaching and Learning

by Dana Melone, Cedar Rapids Kennedy High School

Welcome to the start of a semester for most teachers. My name is Dana Melone and I teach AP Psychology and AP Research at Cedar Rapids Kennedy High School. Most educators will give some sort of multiple-choice test during the semester, and as educators we want our students to use their exams as a learning tool, not just as a summative experience. Unfortunately, many students just pop a graded exam into their folder and move on. Today I would like to give you some strategies you can use as a teacher to get students to learn from their mistakes as well as their correct answers.

pencil laying across a multiple-choice test question

These strategies also give teachers the opportunity to look at their own teaching and find commonalities in the mistakes their students are making. If your students are all making similar mistakes you can reteach this topic in a new way. If mistakes are spread out it may inform you that your students need to work on study skills. Your students can use these examples to examine their own thinking and learning (become more metacognitive) and become advocates for themselves. You and your students utilize metacognitive processes to become better teachers and learners.

Let’s start with the exam itself. Students often get their exam back and struggle to remember what their thinking was when they took it. If you are giving a paper exam, students can use a coded system as they take their test to remember their thinking later. For example, if a student feels they knew the answer to the question and they feel confident in their choice then they can put a checkmark next to that question. If they were able to narrow it down but were not entirely sure they made the right choice they can put a dash next to the question. If they had no idea than they can use an x. This allows students to remember their thinking as they look back at their exam. Students can find out if they are always missing similar style or topic questions that they thought they already knew. They can use these self-coded exams as they get close to finals as a study tool. Students can also take note whether or not their thinking was correct. If they are the ones about which they felt confident wrong, they need to explore that further. Student-coded exams also allow teachers to look at patterns for their own use and modify their teaching appropriately, i.e. be metacognitive in their teaching. For example, teachers can change their focus if a large number of students indicated that they did not know similar concepts or struggled with application questions. Or, if students indicate that they narrowed down to the best two choices but chose poorly, teachers can share strategies to deal with that issue. Why do this? The hope is that students will become more aware of what is working and what isn’t and that by making them more aware, they will make adjustments. By regularly practicing these metacognitive skills, we hope that students will learn to adjust on their own.

Once students get their exam back a next step for many teachers is to have students complete exam corrections. I have seen many formats of exam corrections. The methods that really get students thinking about the content and their own testing strategy produce metacognitive awareness. Here are some methods that you could use individually or combine:

Have students write why they think they got the question wrong. Was it an error in reading the question? Did they not know the content? Did they narrow it down to two but chose incorrectly?
Have students explain why the answer they chose is incorrect or why the correct answer is correct.
Have students rewrite the question to make their wrong answer right.
Have students write a memory aid to help them remember that concept in the future.
Have students write out what they found tricky about that concept.
Have students write out how that concept relates to them or another concept in the course.
Have students categorize the concepts they missed by learning target or standard and draw a conclusion about that target or standard as a whole. Many classrooms are moving to standards-based learning or a select few overrising concepts students must master to be proficient in the course. If you can organize your exam to show students patterns they are making with these standards, it can help them make good study decisions and help you make good teaching decisions.

How can we as educators know if students have gotten the most out of this process? Try including questions on the most commonly missed topics on future exams at no cost to the students. Meaning, do not penalize their score. Make these questions formative to see if they are making progress. Do you have great ideas for test corrections that produce metacognition? Let us know.

Metacognitive support for HIP student learning communities

by John Draeger, SUNY Buffalo State

In a previous post, I argued that metacognition can support undergraduate research because it encourages students to become aware of the inquiry process and it can help students make meaningful adjustments when things go off the rails (Draeger, 2018). Like undergraduate research, student learning communities are on the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) list of high-impact practices (HIP). They make the list because they require multiple interactions between faculty and students about substantive matters as well as frequent, constructive feedback from faculty, and regular, structured processes for reflection and integration (Kuh 2008; Kilgo, Sheets & Pascarella 2015). In a similar vein, this post argues that instructors and students can benefit from being more metacognitive about their involvement in learning communities. While learning communities can take various forms, they involve groups of students taking a common set of courses at the same time with the same instructors. Learning communities aim to integrate learning experiences across courses in the community.

Sample models of student learning communities

Some models of learning communities involve groups of students taking a collection of courses co-taught by the same instructors. The co-teaching model promotes coordination and communication between instructors about course design, instruction, and assessment. Because students and instructors are present for class sessions in each of the courses, there are plenty of opportunities to make cross-disciplinary observations. Students, for example, can watch as instructors approach a common reading from very different points of view. However, the co-teaching model is often not feasible at many institutions. Another model of learning community requires that a cohort of students take some of the same courses taught by the same instructors, but the courses are not co-taught. Because faculty are rarely in the same room at the same time, I would argue that it is all the more important that they take a metacognitive approach to their student learning community involvement.

Strategies for building metacognition into learning communities

At SUNY Buffalo State, we’ve developed a series of workshops and related materials to promote greater coordination and integration across student learning community courses. The following are just a few of those strategies. (Anyone interested in learning more about resource materials can contact me at draegejd@buffalostate.edu).

First, instructors can review the learning outcomes for each of the courses to look for points of similarity and departure. Points of convergence might be around content (e.g., themes that run through each of the courses) or around skills (e.g., reading, writing, critical thinking). Becoming aware of learning outcomes could, for example, lead to a conversation between instructors about how to reinforce what the other is doing. It could also alert them to places where they might inadvertently undermine the other’s efforts. Reviewing the learning goals emphasizes the importance of looking for opportunities to make explicit connections across each course. Awareness isn’t everything, but it can open space for the possibility of making meaningful adjustments.

Second, instructors can share the core ideas that are at the heart of their courses and that organize other course elements (Nosich, 2012). Identifying these fundamental ideas and being explicit about them with students is important because these ideas serve as anchor points, especially when students struggle. However, fundamental ideas can also serve as important landmarks across courses. Even if instructors cannot discuss another’s content with nuance, they can intentionally make connections to the big ideas. Better yet, instructors can take a “integration time-out” by asking students to relate the material in the current class to the fundamental concepts in each of the other courses. In this case, instructors are aware of the importance of integration and looking for opportunities to intentionally make connections with the key elements of another’s course.

Third, instructors can discuss how they approach giving feedback to students. It is no secret that frequent feedback promotes learning within a course, but students can also benefit from instructors being aware of what other instructors are doing. For example, instructors might use slightly different terminology to talk about similar things. Through conversation, they may decide to adopt a common lexicon. In this case, awareness promotes minor adjustments. In other cases, instructors might want to keep to their own way of doing things. However, they might be more explicit about how and why similar situations are being handled differently in different courses. The hope is that this will keep students from inadvertently going off the rails. It can also reinforce the notion that learning can be effective, albeit different, in differing contexts.

Fourth, instructors can explore why and how they promote student reflection. For example, some courses seek to exposure to new ideas, while others consider the complexity of a more focused set of ideas. Within a course, it is important to be explicit with students about the type of reflection between encouraged (e.g., deep, wide). It is also important to be explicit about structured reflections (e.g., deep, wide) across the learning community courses. Is the goal to keep a running list of the various ways the content and skills in each course are similar and different? This approach speaks to the breadth of knowledge across fields of study and captures the sense that individual students can make meaningful connections in a wide variety of ways. Or is the goal to focus on the finding the important connections between the fundamental concepts in each course? This approach speaks to the importance of sustained conversation about a narrow set of issues from multiple points of view. Both forms of reflection can be valuable, but instructors need to be intentional and explicit about structuring those experiences within and across their courses.

HIP student learning communities

If implemented well, learning communities can be HIP because they encourage students to consider the learning connections between their courses. I argue that metacognition can help instructors intentionally design and explicitly structure integrative learning opportunities. Metacognition can also help students become increasingly aware of similarities and differences across academic disciplines. In this way, metacognition and learning communities offer students the opportunity to learn how to make connections within and across fields of inquiry. Because the ability to make such connections is a hallmark of a lifelong learner, promoting metacognition through learning communities has the potential to be highly impactful in a student’s life for years to come.

References

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

Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2009). Developing undergraduate research and inquiry. York: HE Academy.

Kilgo, C. A., Sheets, J. K. E., & Pascarella, E. T. (2015). The link between high-impact practices and student learning: Some longitudinal evidence. Higher Education, 69(4), 509-525.

Kilgo, C. A., & Pascarella, E. T. (2016). Does independent research with a faculty member enhance four-year graduation and graduate/professional degree plans? Convergent results with different analytical methods. Higher Education, 71(4), 575-592.

Kuh, G. D. (2008). Excerpt from high-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Nosich, G. (2012) Learning to think things through: A guide to critical thinking across the disciplines. Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Using Metacognition to Support Graduating High School Seniors with a LD to Prepare and Transition Successfully to College (Part II)

by Mary L. Hebert, PhD
Campus Director, The Regional Center for Learning Disabilities,
Fairleigh Dickinson University

High school commencement ushers forth connotations of caps and gowns, goodbyes to four years of familiar teachers, friends, routine, challenges and successes. While the focus seems to be on completing a phase of one’s life, commencement actually means a beginning or a start. With high school now a chapter completed, the summer months will be spent preparing for the transition to college. ALL students entering college will have similar adjustments. Students with a history of a learning disability however, may benefit from a purposeful, strategic, or more metacognitive plan for the transition.

Students who have had a 504 or Individualized Education Plan (IEP) during their k-12 years, may face concerns that are similar to other students, yet have a heightened sensitivity to things such as academic performance, managing the pace and independence of college life, leaving behind supports and resources that have been familiar and helpful, and wondering where and if resources at college will be available and/or helpful. They will have similar concerns about making new friends like any first year student, but this may be heightened in particular if a student has had social challenges that have accompanied their LD. Students with a history of LD will often express the challenge of finding balance of work, study, time to relax and be social. Findings by Hall and Webster (2008) indicate that college students with LD indicate self-doubt about being able to perform as well as their non-LD college peers. Encouraging an active preparation to foster self-awareness and building strategies of approach will enrich the metacognitive preparation.

In this post, I will continue my series on how we can use metacognitive practices to support LD students during this transition time (see also Part I). Here I will focus on three key areas including academics, social interactions, and finding balance. Prompts in the form of questions are suggested for each area. Metacognition encourages the enrichment of self-awareness through prompts and reflection to create high level critical thinking and concepts that one can apply to a situation and how one functions.

I propose that metacognition can be applied before day one at college and hopefully assist with a more metacognitive approach to the transition prior to stepping onto campus.

Academics:

Most students ponder how college will be different than high school. Students with learning disabilities frequently ponder this more so. College academics will be different. Typically students experience the differences in coursework to be in regard to the degree of independence in preparing and mastering the material and the pace. Students can be encouraged to converse and even better, to list their reflections to prompts which will increase self-awareness about the differences they anticipate and what strategies they might apply to prepare to respond to managing the differences (i.e. encourage metacognition). Prompts that parents, teachers, tutors, and others familiar with the student can consider may include;

How do you think classes will be different in college?
What strategies have you learned in high school that you will bring to college?
What areas do you still have a hard time with?
What resources will there be in college that can help you with these areas?
Have you looked on your college website or reached out for more information for resources you will reach out to for support?
Is there a program on your campus that specifically responds to the needs of students with LD and are do you intend to reach out to this resource?

Supporting a student in answering and reflecting on these prompts will promote a more metacognitive awareness and ultimately help create a plan for the academic tasks of college. It is the student who is least prepared about the differences between high school and college who may face the most difficulty during the transition. Preparation prevents perspiration and is key to the transition.

Social:

If there were one particular common denominator for transitioning first year students, it is the adjustment to their new social arena on campus. No matter who he or she has been friends with or how many or few, they will need to build a new social circle. Supporting an incoming Freshmen to think about and anticipate changes and choices they will have to make will help them adjust and ponder what is going to be important and a priority for them in the adjustment to their social life at college. In preparation to take on the tasks of social adjustment the goal is to enhance the awareness of what skills will be needed to connect with new friends,

For one’s anticipated social adjustment a person familiar and supportive to the student can prompt the student to respond to the following…

How have I been successful in my relationships with peers and authority figures in the past?
Where have I had challenges?
What two areas do I think need to change?
How will these improve how I manage socially?
What activities or interests do I have that may be areas I pursue in college clubs or organizations?
What resources does my new college have that I can use to help me in making social connections?

These and other prompts can channel past experience into helpful reflection, which will not only help a student organize and reflect on challenges in this arena, but also highlight successes and strengths so that these can become a part of a strategy or plan they can put in their college transition ‘toolbox.’

Balance:

Balance is key for us all and truly a never-ending endeavor; however during the first year it is particularly challenging to establish that balance. Students with LD often have a history of structured support in tackling academics, time management, sleep, recreation, etc. College life will usher in a new life of finding a balance more independently. Time management as well as being adequately organized are two of the most commonly discussed issues. They are key factors toward success as well as factors that interfere with it as well. Encourage your student to once again reflect on some prompts to encourage metacognitive reflection and promote a plan of approach. Consider the following:

What is your plan for keeping track of your course work and other commitments (social, clubs, appointments etc)? A traditional planner book? A digital planning system?
What efforts to stay organized have worked in the past? Why/why not?
What has not worked in the past? Why/why not?
How will you fit in sleep, wellness needs, recreation, and other commitments with school work?
What will be challenging in doing this?
What will be the red flags you are having a hard time finding a balance?
What will be your plan of action if you are having a hard time with the balance of college life?
What will be your go to resources on campus and off campus to support you in finding balance?

In conclusion, supportive prompts and reflection will promote awareness, critical thinking, and purposeful planning for these issues in the transition to college. Doing so prior to day one of college is helpful, but it can also be continued as the student enters college and embraces the new realities of college life.

Understanding how one approaches academics is particularly important for a student with a learning disability. This will be key for college wellness and help them navigate the transition. By applying metacognition, the student can be encouraged to not only think about their thinking about these concepts of academics, social development and finding balance but also to discern strategies to apply and increase the value of their perception of capacity to self-manage the challenges ahead. With these skills in hand, self-advocacy is heightened, which is a key element of success for college students with learning disabilities.

Hall, Cathy W. and Raymond E. Webster (2008). Metacognitive and Affective Factors of College Students With and Without Learning Disabilities. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability. 21 (1)

Practicing Metacognition on a Chatbot

by Roman Taraban, Ph.D., Texas Tech University

Cognition involves many kinds of processes. There is categorization, problem solving, decision making, and comprehension, among others. Metacognition may involve these processes, but is different from them. Metacognitive thinking is thinking about the processes themselves (Draeger, 2015). That is, thinking about the processes involved in categorization, comprehension, and so on, and how these processes relate to one’s information processing capabilities. John Flavell, who coined the term metacognition, suggested that metacognitive processing relates not only to the individual thinkers but to others as well: “Metacognitive knowledge is one’s stored knowledge or beliefs about oneself and others as cognitive agents, about tasks, about actions or strategies, and about how all these interact to affect the outcomes of any sort of intellectual enterprise” (Flavell, 1999, p. 906). Consideration of how thinking in another person informs one’s own metacognitive knowledge is seldom considered in discussions of metacognition. In this post, I relate how reflecting on how others process information, specifically, how machines process information, can inform a person’s understanding of how he or she processes information. The metacognitive processes of interest here are those related to language processing, and the specific machine processing relates to that of machine systems called chatbots.

Chatbots are computer programs that interact with a person auditorily or through text. They are designed to communicate as much as possible like humans, in order to convey a sense of natural language communication. Chatbots are typically developed for commercial purposes, to provide customer service, for instance, or information about products or places. You will find chatbots on websites for companies, organizations, and events.

Recently I taught a graduate seminar on psycholinguistics, which is concerned with language acquisition, production, and comprehension. I assigned students the task of building chatbots for an application that interested them, for instance, a chatbot that could inform a user of the movies currently playing around town and show times. After students had built their chatbots and demonstrated them to the class, I assigned a written take-home metacognitive activity in which students had to discuss some aspect of the nature of chatbot language, for example, ways in which chatbot language might reduce moral relativity, constrain language interactions, or homogenize language. Students essentially had to think about the language processing constraints in chatbots and how that might affect their language interactions.

Students built chatbots to do everything from helping a student choose colleges for graduate work, college courses, movies, and restaurants, to guiding workouts or choosing a football game to watch. In their subsequent metacognitive reflection assignment, students had plenty to say:

Chatbots are peculiar devices.
Chatbots do not process language as humans would.
Chatbots, because of their limited cognitive capabilities, cannot respond to novel stimuli in conversations and therefore cannot problem-solve or be socially engaging.
Chatbots have higher potential of providing logical, true and precise answers than humans.
The nature of chatbot language has positive characteristics that reinvent the notion of interaction, and negative characteristics that create many confusions and misinterpretations about the use of a language.

Using chatbots as a foil prompted students to consider the nature of their own language processes. As a few examples:

For example, human communication is not a mere string of words put together to make meaning, rather it employs many other resources which feed communication such as the extralinguistic, paralinguistic and metalinguistic cues in order to achieve successful communication. I think that chatbots cannot perform such complex task as efficiently as most people do.

Although chatbots may serve humans as they interact with them, I think they do so with a structured sort of language which is intended to perform very specific tasks. As human language is inherently relative and creative, I think chatbots need much improvement to sound like humans if we need them to interact more “naturally.” In terms of human language, a unique characteristic is the ability to process linguistic and non-linguistic inputs. As humans we can process such inputs with the help of our background knowledge, working memory and other brain functions. Our judgements are further constrained, shaped or developed by moral relativity, i.e. the philosophical standpoints given or attributed by the cultures and societies we belong.

The students’ reflections on chatbot language processing fit Flavell’s (1999) suggestion that metacognition includes beliefs about others as cognitive agents, that is, as intelligent communicative actors. Often, learning about metacognitive strategies may begin by observing others and implicitly mimicking their behaviors. For instance, as children we may notice someone writing down a phone number or looking up a phone number and we recognize and adopt these specific processes to manage information. Knowledge of the strategies becomes more explicit the first time we fail to apply the strategy and cannot remember a phone number. We observe classmates reviewing notes repetitively and self-testing and adopt these methods of regulating and monitoring study behaviors. We rarely, if ever, create objects like chatbots, as in the present case, and use the objects to reflect on others’ and our own metacognitive processes, as a learning process. However, as AI technology and products become more prevalent, there arise many natural opportunities to think about and compare machines’ processes to our own. Of course, to qualify as metacognitive thinking, reflections on man vs machine processing will have to go beyond superficial comments like “My Alexa is not too smart.” To be metacognitive, thinking has to be about the processes themselves, in the machine and in the person.

The theme of this post is to highlight how metacognition is not only about thinking about one’s own thinking, but also thinking about thinking in the entities – humans or machines – with whom we communicate. Building a chatbot gives students direct contact with the processes in the machine and a bridge to reflecting on their own processes by comparison. It forces students to reflect on strengths and limitations of both kinds of language. There are other instances where this type of metacognitive knowledge comes into play naturally. Take child-directed speech (a.k.a. motherese, baby talk), for instance. Caretakers adjust their intonation, vocabulary, and rhythm when speaking to infant siblings. They have a sense that an infant is processing language differently so they adjust their own processing to accommodate. Similarly, in the classroom or at a conference, we become aware (sometimes depressingly) that our message is not connecting and may try to make adjustments in speed, terminology, examples, etc. The difference between those situations and the present one is that there may not be a moment of deliberate metacognitive reflection – how is the other person processing information compared to how I am processing the information. Flavell reminds us that this, too, is metacognitive. Here I am suggesting that we can make those moments more deliberate, indeed, we can turn them into class assignments!

References

Draeger, J. (2015). Two forms of ‘thinking about thinking’: metacognition and critical thinking. Retrieved from https://www.improvewithmetacognition.com/two-forms-of-thinking-about-thinking-metacognition-and-critical-thinking/.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

Developing Metacognition with Student Learning Portfolios

In this IDEA paper #44, The Learning Portfolio: A Powerful Idea for Significant Learning, Dr. John Zubizarreta shares models and guidance for incorporating learning portfolios. He also makes powerful arguments regarding the ability of portfolios to engage students in meaningful reflection about their learning, which in turn will support a metacognitive development and life-long learning.