Jennifer A. Livingston
© 1997 by Jennifer A. Livingston

"Metacognition" is one of the latest buzz words in educational psychology, but what exactly is metacognition? The length and abstract nature of the word makes it sound intimidating, yet its not as daunting a concept as it might seem. We engage in metacognitive activities everyday.
Metacognition enables us to be successful learners, and has been associated with intelligence
(e.g., Borkowski, Carr, & Pressley, 1987; Sternberg, 1984, 1986a, 1986b). Metacognition refers to higher order thinking which involves active control over the cognitive processes engaged in learning. Activities such as planning how to approach a given learning task, monitoring comprehension, and evaluating progress toward the completion of a task are metacognitive in nature. Because metacognition plays a critical role in successful learning, it is important to study metacognitive activity and development to determine how students can be taught to better apply their cognitive resources through metacognitive control.
"Metacognition" is often simply defined as "thinking about thinking." In actuality, defining metacognition is not that simple. Although the term has been part of the vocabulary of educational psychologists for the last couple of decades, and the concept for as long as humans have been able to reflect on their cognitive experiences, there is much debate over exactly what metacognition is. One reason for this confusion is the fact that there are several terms currently used to describe the same basic phenomenon (e.g., self-regulation, executive control), or an aspect of that phenomenon (e.g., meta-memory), and these terms are often used interchangeably in the literature. While there are some distinctions between definitions (see Van Zile-Tamsen,
1994, 1996 for a full discussion), all emphasize the role of executive processes in the overseeing and regulation of cognitive processes.
The term "metacognition" is most often associated with John Flavell, (1979). According to
Flavell (1979, 1987), metacognition consists of both metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive experiences or regulation. Metacognitive knowledge refers to acquired knowledge about cognitive processes, knowledge that can be used to control cognitive processes. Flavell further divides metacognitive knowledge into three categories: knowledge of person variables, task variables and strategy variables.

Metacognitive Knowledge
Stated very briefly, knowledge of person variables refers to general knowledge about how human beings learn and process information, as well as individual knowledge of one's own learning processes. For example, you may be aware that your study session will be more productive if you work in the quiet library rather than at home where there are many distractions. Knowledge of task variables include knowledge about the nature of the task as well as the type of processing demands that it will place upon the individual. For example, you may be aware that it will take more time for you to read and comprehend a science text than it would for you to read and comprehend a novel.

Finally, knowledge about strategy variables include knowledge about both cognitive and metacognitive strategies, as well as conditional knowledge about when and where it is appropriate to use such strategies.

Metacognitive Regulation
Metacognitive experiences involve the use of metacognitive strategies or metacognitive regulation (Brown, 1987). Metacognitive strategies are sequential processes that one uses to control cognitive activities, and to ensure that a cognitive goal (e.g., understanding a text) has been met. These processes help to regulate and oversee learning, and consist of planning and monitoring cognitive activities, as well as checking the outcomes of those activities.
For example, after reading a paragraph in a text a learner may question herself about the concepts discussed in the paragraph. Her cognitive goal is to understand the text. Selfquestioning is a common metacognitive comprehension monitoring strategy. If she finds that she cannot answer her own questions, or that she does not understand the material discussed, she must then determine what needs to be done to ensure that she meets the cognitive goal of understanding the text. She may decide to go back and re-read the paragraph with the goal of being able to answer the questions she had generated. If, after re-reading through the text she can now answer the questions, she may determine that she understands the material. Thus, the metacognitive strategy of self-questioning is used to ensure that the cognitive goal of comprehension is met.

Cognitive vs. Metacognitive Strategies
Most definitions of metacognition include both knowledge and strategy components; however, there are a number of problems associated with using such definitions. One major issue involves separating what is cognitive from what is metacognitive. What is the difference between a cognitive and a metacognitive strategy?
Can declarative knowledge be metacognitive in nature? For example, is the knowledge that you have difficulty understanding principles from bio-chemistry cognitive or metacognitive knowledge? Flavell himself acknowledges that metacognitive knowledge may not be different from cognitive knowledge (Flavell, 1979). The distinction lies in how the information is used.
Recall that metacognition is referred to as "thinking about thinking" and involves overseeing whether a cognitive goal has been met. This should be the defining criterion for determining what is metacognitive. Cognitive strategies are used to help an individual achieve a particular goal (e.g., understanding a text) while metacognitive strategies are used to ensure that the goal has been reached (e.g., quizzing oneself to evaluate one's understanding of that text).
Metacognitive experiences usually precede or follow a cognitive activity. They often occur when cognitions fail, such as the recognition that one did not understand what one just read. Such an impasse is believed to activate metacognitive processes as the learner attempts to rectify the situation (Roberts & Erdos, 1993).
Metacognitive and cognitive strategies may overlap in that the same strategy, such as

questioning, could be regarded as either a cognitive or a metacognitive strategy depending on what the purpose for using that strategy may be. For example, you may use a self-questioning strategy while reading as a means of obtaining knowledge (cognitive), or as a way of monitoring what you have read (metacognitive). Because cognitive and metacognitive strategies are closely intertwined and dependent upon each other, any attempt to examine one without acknowledging the other would not provide an adequate picture.
Knowledge is considered to be metacognitive if it is actively used in a strategic manner to ensure that a goal is met. For example, a student may use knowledge in planning how to approach a math exam: "I know that I (person variable) have difficulty with word problems (task variable), so I will answer the computational problems first and save the word problems for last (strategy variable)." Simply possessing knowledge about one's cognitive strengths or weaknesses and the nature of the task without actively utilizing this information to oversee learning is not metacognitive. Metacognition and Intelligence
Metacognition, or the ability to control one's cognitive processes (self-regulation) has been linked to intelligence (Borkowski et al., 1987; Brown, 1987; Sternberg, 1984, 1986a, 1986b).
Sternberg refers to these executive processes as "metacomponents" in his triarchic theory of intelligence (Sternberg, 1984, 1986a, 1986b). Metacomponents are executive processes that control other cognitive components as well as receive feedback from these components.
According to Sternberg, metacomponents are responsible for "figuring out how to do a particular task or set of tasks, and then making sure that the task or set of tasks are done correctly"
(Sternberg, 1986b, p. 24). These executive processes involve planning, evaluating and monitoring problem-solving activities. Sternberg maintains that the ability to appropriately allocate cognitive resources, such as deciding how and when a given task should be accomplished, is central to intelligence.

Metacognition and Cognitive Strategy Instruction
Although most individuals of normal intelligence engage in metacognitive regulation when confronted with an effortful cognitive task, some are more metacognitive than others. Those with greater metacognitive abilities tend to be more successful in their cognitive endeavors. The good news is that individuals can learn how to better regulate their cognitive activities. Most often, metacognitive instruction occurs within Cognitive Strategy Instruction programs.
Cognitive Strategy Instruction (CSI) is an instructional approach which emphasizes the development of thinking skills and processes as a means to enhance learning. The objective of
CSI is to enable all students to become more strategic, self-reliant, flexible, and productive in their learning endeavors (Scheid, 1993). CSI is based on the assumption that there are identifiable cognitive strategies, previously believed to be utilized by only the best and the brightest students, which can be taught to most students (Halpern, 1996). Use of these strategies have been associated with successful learning (Borkowski, Carr, & Pressley, 1987; Garner,
1990).

Metacognition enables students to benefit from instruction (Carr, Kurtz, Schneider, Turner &
Borkowski, 1989; Van Zile-Tamsen, 1996) and influences the use and maintenance of cognitive strategies. While there are several approaches to metacognitive instruction, the most effective involve providing the learner with both knowledge of cognitive processes and strategies (to be used as metacognitive knowledge), and experience or practice in using both cognitive and metacognitive strategies and evaluating the outcomes of their efforts (develops metacognitive regulation). Simply providing knowledge without experience or vice versa does not seem to be sufficient for the development of metacognitive control (Livingston, 1996).
The study of metacognition has provided educational psychologists with insight about the cognitive processes involved in learning and what differentiates successful students from their less successful peers. It also holds several implications for instructional interventions, such as teaching students how to be more aware of their learning processes and products as well as how to regulate those processes for more effective learning.

References
Borkowski, J., Carr, M., & Pressely, M. (1987). "Spontaneous" strategy use: Perspectives from metacognitive theory. Intelligence, 11, 61-75.
Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65-116). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Carr, M., Kurtz, B. E., Schneider, W., Turner, L. A., & Borkowski, J. G. (1989). Strategy acquisition and transfer among German and American children: Environmental influences on metacognitive development. Developmental Psychology, 25, 765-771.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitivedevelopmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E.
Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation and Understanding (pp. 21-29).
Hillside, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Garner, R. (1990). When children and adults do not use learning strategies: Toward a theory of settings. Review of Educational Research, 60, 517-529.
Halpern, D. F. (1996). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking. Mahwah,
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Livingston, J. A. (1996). Effects of metacognitive instruction on strategy use of college students.
Unpublished manuscript, State University of New York at Buffalo.
Roberts, M. J., & Erdos, G. (1993). Strategy selection and metacognition. Educational
Psychology, 13, 259-266.
Scheid, K. (1993). Helping students become strategic learners: Guidelines for teaching.
Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Sternberg, R. J. (1984). What should intelligence tests test? Implications for a triarchic theory of intelligence for intelligence testing. Educational Researcher, 13 (1), 5-15.
Sternberg, R. J. (1986a). Inside intelligence. American Scientist, 74, 137-143.
Sternberg, R. J. (1986b). Intelligence applied. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,
Publishers.
Van Zile-Tamsen, C. M. (1994). The role of motivation in metacognitive self-regulation.
Unpublished manuscript, State University of New York at Buffalo.
Van Zile-Tamsen, C. M. (1996). Metacognitive self-regualtion and the daily academic activities of college students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo.

© 1997 by Jennifer A. Livingston

I. Introduction
In general, metacognition is thinking about thinking. More specifically, Taylor (1999) defines metacognition as “an appreciation of what one already knows, together with a correct apprehension of the learning task and what knowledge and skills it requires, combined with the agility to make correct inferences about how to apply one’s strategic knowledge to a particular situation, and to do so efficiently and reliably.”
The more students are aware of their thinking processes as they learn, the more they can control such matters as goals, dispositions, and attention. Self-awareness promotes self-regulation. If students are aware of how committed (or uncommitted) they are to reaching goals, of how strong
(or weak) is their disposition to persist, and of how focused (or wandering) is their attention to a thinking or writing task, they can regulate their commitment, disposition, and attention (Marzano et al., 1988). For example, if students were aware of a lack of commitment to writing a long research assignment, noticed that they were procrastinating, and were aware that they were

distracted by more appealing ways to spend their time, they could then take action to get started on the assignment. But until they are aware of their procrastination and take control by making a plan for doing the assignment, they will blissfully continue to neglect the assignment.
II. Metacognition and Three Types of Knowledge
To increase their metacognitive abilities, students need to possess and be aware of three kinds of content knowledge: declarative, procedural, and conditional. Declarative knowledge is the factual information that one knows; it can be declared—spoken or written. An example is knowing the formula for calculating momentum in a physics class (momentum = mass times velocity). Procedural knowledge is knowledge of how to do something, of how to perform the steps in a process; for example, knowing the mass of an object and its rate of speed and how to do the calculation. Conditional knowledge is knowledge about when to use a procedure, skill, or strategy and when not to use it; why a procedure works and under what conditions; and why one procedure is better than another. For example, students need to recognize that an exam word problem requires the calculation of momentum as part of its solution.
This notion of three kinds of knowledge applies to learning strategies as well as course content.
When they study, students need the declarative knowledge that (1) all reading assignments are not alike; for example, that a history textbook chapter with factual information differs from a primary historical document, which is different from an article interpreting or analyzing that document. They need to know that stories and novels differ from arguments. Furthermore they need to know that there are different kinds of note taking strategies useful for annotating these different types of texts. And (2) students need to know how to actually write different kinds of notes (procedural knowledge), and (3) they need to know when to apply these kinds of notes when they study (conditional knowledge). Knowledge of study strategies is among the kinds of metacognitive knowledge, and it too requires awareness of all three kinds of knowledge.
III. Metacognition and Study Strategies
Research shows that explicitly teaching study strategies in content courses improves learning.
(Commander & Valeri-Gold, 2001; Ramp & Guffey, 1999; Chiang, 1998; El-Hindi, 1997;
McKeachie, 1988). Research also shows that few instructors explicitly teach study strategies; they seem to assume that students have already learned them in high school—but they haven’t.
(McKeachie, 1988). Rote memorization is the usual learning strategy—and often the only strategy—employed by high school students when they go to college (Nist, 1993).
Study strategies are diverse and don’t work in every context. For example, reading for information acquisition won’t work in a literature course and won’t work if students are supposed to critically evaluate an article. But students who have learned only the strategy of reading to pass a quiz on the information will not go beyond this strategy. Study strategies don’t necessarily transfer into other domains. Students need to know they have choices about which strategies to employ in different contexts. And students who learn study skills in one course need to apply study strategies in other contexts than where they first learned it.

Students need to monitor their application of study strategies. Metacognitive awareness of their learning processes is as important as their monitoring of their learning of the course content.
Metacognition includes goal setting, monitoring, self-assessing, and regulating during thinking and writing processes; that is, when they’re studying and doing homework. An essential component of metacognition is employing study strategies to reach a goal, self-assessing one’s effectiveness in reaching that goal, and then self-regulating in response to the self-assessment.
IV. Monitoring Problems with Learning
When students monitor their learning, they can become aware of potential problems. Nickerson,
Perkins, and Smith (1985) in The Teaching of Thinking have categorized several types of problems with learning.
A. Problems with Process; Making errors in encoding, operations, and goals:
1.Errors in Encoding
Missing important data or not separating relevant from irrelevant data. For example, some literature students will base their interpretation of a poem on just the first stanza.
2.Errors in Operations
Failing to select the right subskills to apply. For example, when proofreading, some students will just read to see if it sounds right, rather than making separatepasses that check for fragments, subject-verb misagreement, and other errors they have learned from experience they are likely to make. Failing to divide a task into subparts. For example, some math students will jump right to what they think is the final calculation to get the desired answer.
3. Errors in Goal Seeking
Misrepresenting the task. For example, students in a speech communication class instead of doing the assigned task of analyzing and classifying group communication strategies used in their group discussions will just write a narrative of who said what.
Not understanding the criteria to apply. For example, when asked to evaluate the support provided for the major claim of an article, students will explain why they liked the article rather than apply appropriate evaluative criteria.
B. Problems with Cognitive Load
Too many subskills necessary to do a task. For example, some students might have not yet learned how to carry out all the steps in a complex nursing procedure.
Not enough automatic, internalized subskills. For example, students in an argument and persuasion class might have to check their notes on how to analyze persuasive strategies because they have not internalized the procedure.
C. Problems with Abilities

Lacking the level of needed mental abilities. For example, students are asked to think abstractly about general concepts and issues, but they can only think concretely about specific situations.
A good way to discover what kind of errors students are making in their thinking processes is to get them to unpack their thinking, to tell you step by step how they are going about the task. By listening to how they are doing the cognitive task, an instructor can detect where the student is going wrong. Asking students to describe their thinking processes also develops their metacognitive abilities—a very necessary skill to improve thinking.
V. Metacognition and Motivation
Metacognition affects motivation because it affects attribution and self-efficacy. When students get results on tests and grades on assignments (especially unexpected results such as failures), they perform a mental causal search to explain to themselves why the results happened. When they achieve good results, students tend to attribute the result to two internal factors: their own ability and effort. When they fail, they might attribute the cause to these same internal factors or they might, in a self-protective rationalization, distance themselves from a sense of personal failure by blaming external causes, such as an overly difficult task, an instructor’s perverse testing habits, or bad luck. This tendency to attribute success to ability and effort promotes future success because it develops confidence in one’s ability to solve future unfamiliar and challenging tasks. The converse is also true. Attributing failure to a lack of ability reduces self-confidence and reduces the student’s summoning of intellectual and emotional abilities to the next challenging tasks; attribution theory also explains why such students will be unwilling to seek help from tutors and other support services: they believe it would not be worth their effort. In addition to blaming failure on external causes, underachievers often “self-handicap” themselves by deliberately putting little effort into an academic task; they thereby protect themselves from attributing their failure to a painful lack of ability by attributing their failure to lack of effort
(Stage et al, 1998) (Click here for a review and summary of Creating Learning Centered
Classrooms by Stage et al.)
VI. Metacognition and At-Risk Students
The last two decades have seen a great deal of research directed towards improving the academic success of at-risk students. As McKeachie (1988) explains, the problems are





Students “enter the higher levels of education with . . . strategies that handicap them in achieving success.” (p. 5)
“[N]either home backgrounds nor schools have helped young adults become aware of alternative ways of approaching learning situations, and of options other than increasing or decreasing one’s effort as one approaches different learning situations” (p. 5)
Teachers give plenty of feedback about the correctness of learning outcomes but not about how to achieve these outcomes.

The use of learning strategies is linked to motivation. When students fail, they tend to assign the cause to something stable and unchangeable—low innate ability—rather than to something they have the ability to change—employing different, more effective, learning strategies.

VII. Five Generalizations from a Review of the Literature of Study Strategies
Simpson and Nist (2000) have conducted a review of the literature on strategic learning in the last 20 years and summarize it in five generalizations:
1. Understanding the task is of great importance
The tasks that students need to perform vary not only among disciplines but among instructors in the same discipline. An effective strategy for preparing for a multiple choice test in biology is different from what is needed to prepare for a history exam with an essay that asks students to synthesize information from several chapters. Yet students often employ the same strategy—and sometimes the least effective strategy—for studying for very different kinds of tests.
Furthermore, many students who perform badly misinterpret the tasks; for example, by misunderstanding what clearly written essay instructions asked them to do. Students need to understand the task accurately in order to use the most effective strategies.
2. What students believe about learning affects their selection of study strategies
“What students believe about learning and studying has an influence on how they interpret the task, how they interact with text, and, ultimately, the strategies they select.”
3. Instructors need to provide good instruction in how to use study strategies
Simpson’s and Nist’s first point in this section is that it takes time to teach explicit use of strategies. In one experiment students were explicitly taught the “metacognitive strategies of planning and evaluating,” but “distinct and significant improvement did not emerge until 4 weeks after the initial instruction.” Second, students should not only be taught what the features of a strategy (declarative knowledge of the strategy) but also procedural and conditional knowledge: the steps to use and when to employ them. Students need to practice on authentic texts from the courseand the texts should be challenging enough so that students will not employ simplistic approaches. Third, practice with strategies should occur within a specific course; isolated study skills courses have limited success. Fourth, instruction in study strategies “should be explicit and direct” and include five features: “(a) strategy descriptions; (b) discussions of why the strategy should be learned and its importance; (c) think-alouds, models, and examples of how the strategy is used, including the processes involved and when and where it is appropriate to apply the strategy; (d) explanations as to when and where it is appropriate to apply the strategy; and (e) suggestions for monitoring and evaluating whether the strategy is working and what to do if it is not.” Instructors should design guided practice where students use the strategies on authentic course tasks and provide feedback.
4. Instructors should teach a variety of strategies that research has shown to be effective.
Researchers have found that four reading and studying strategies are effective:

A. Generate questions and answer them. Students need to be taught how to create higherlevel questions and how to answer them; sometimes this is done in small groups or pairs.
The strategy improves students’ comprehension of the text.
B. Write summaries. Students need to use their own words and be taught the rules of summarizing (which is difficult). “Writer-based summaries not only improve students’ comprehension, but also help them monitor their understanding.”
C. Write elaborations. Ask students to create examples, make analogies, explain relationships between concepts. [The Cornell note-taking method and double-entry notebook are examples of elaborations.]
D. Use organizing strategies. Concept maps, network representations, and other graphic organizers can be effective.
5. Emphasize the cognitive and metacognitive processes that underlie a study strategy.
The value of a strategy lies more in the cognitive and metacognitive processes used than the steps in the strategy itself. The key steps are “elaborating, planning, monitoring, and evaluating.”
VIII. What Instructors Can Do To Help Students.
A. Some Sample Metacognitive Strategies
Learning portfolio. Commander and Valeri-Gold (2001) describe a learning portfolio as a collection of student papers applying learning strategies to their course work. Among the benefits for instructors evaluating student work are that learning portfolios “(a) capture the intellectual substance and learning situation in ways that other methods of evaluation cannot; (b) encourage students to take a role in the documentation, observation, and review of learning; are a powerful tool for improvement; and (d) create a culture of professionalism about learning” (p.6). The chief benefits for students are their actually performing effective learning strategies and the opportunity for self-assessment.
Individual learning plan (ILP) as a contract with the instructor. Linda H. Chiang (1998) describes the process as “setting ILP goals, developing an ILP, monitoring the learning process, writing a reflective journal, conducting one-on-one conferences, and making summative evaluations” (p. 5).
Test Debriefing. Maryellen Weimer (2002) in Learner-Centered Teaching describes how she uses metacognition as she debriefs students after returning an exam in order to give them a sense of control over their learning. She asks students to write down the numbers of questions they missed and then has perform three analyses:
1. Students first go through their notes on the missed questions and determine whether any of these were on days they missed class and had to rely on someone else’s notes.
2. Dr. Weimer then identifies which questions came from the assigned reading and which from her lectures and asks students to identify whether more missed questions came from reading notes or class notes.

3. She then has students look through their exam, check for answers that they changed, and determine how many any of their changes resulted in correct answers. If there is a pattern, it is useful self-knowledge.
Then students write a reflective note to themselves about what they learned from preparing for and taking this exam that will help them prepare for the next one and to describe what steps they will take between now and the next exam. (Click here for a review and summary of Maryellen
Weimer’s Learner-Centered Teaching.)
B. Strategies for Instructors to Use in Teaching Textbook Reading
1. Preview the assigned reading







Have students write down what they already know about the subject of the chapter; briefly discuss
Present an oral summary of the chapter in the previous class
Ask interesting questions that will be answered in the reading assignment
Take a poll on some of the issues addressed in the reading assignment
Emphasize the interest, usefulness, and fit in the course sequence of the chapter

2. Do not repeat the reading in a lecture
Do not make listening to your lecture become the students' reading strategy. It is tempting when students do not or can not read the textbook chapters to make sure the course content is "covered" by telling the students what they should have learned if they had read the textbook. Among the reasons for not lecturing on assigned reading are o o

Your students will not learn to read for comprehension--a needed skill.
As passive learners listening and taking notes, students will not use class time on higher order thinking tasks, such as applying, analyzing, synthesizing, comparing, evaluating. 3. Teach explicitly those study strategies that will be effective in your course





Demonstrate how to do the assigned writing tasks
Provide models
Provide feedback
Make the students’ reading goals clear: read for general or detailed comprehension, read critically, or read for insight.

4. As homework have students write in response to the assigned textbook reading
Write your daily instructions for students in the daily course syllabus
5. Monitor compliance

Develop ways to ensure that students do their daily written homework without burdening yourself with daily feedback or recordkeeping. (See “A Strategy for Getting Students to Do
Their Homework.”)
6. Use the written homework in whole-group or small-group discussions and activities

C. Strategies for Students to Use for Textbook Reading
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Answer instructor-provided questions
Ask and answer student-generated questions
Produce an outline or concept map
Write summaries of each section in the chapter
Use the SQ4R method: Survey the text, formulate questions, read, record notes, recite, reflect 6. Write notes that elaborate on the textbook:
a. Cornell method: one column for key words and concepts, a second column for comments, summaries. Useful for comprehension and later recall.
b. Double-entry method: one column/page for copied passage, adjacent column/page for personal reflections on the passage. Developed by Berthoff (1987); useful for engaging with the text.
c. Simpson and Nist (1990): seven textbook annotation processes








Write brief summaries in the text margins
List ideas (causes, effects, characteristics, etc.)
Identify examples in the margin (write “EX”)
Write key information on graphs and charts
Predict potential test questions
Call attention to confusion with a ? in the margin
Underline key words

7. Connect the reading to a past lecture or to prior knowledge
8. Compare/contrast with another reading
9. Critique/evaluate the reading
10. Apply the chapter content to a scenario or case
11. Write self-assessments of your understanding of the reading. See D. below in next list of topics. D. Sample Reflective Topics for Self-Monitoring and Self-Assessment
Reading for Comprehension
“What do you notice about your reading when you are understanding what you read? What is it that causes you difficulties when you read? In what areas of reading and remembering do you

feel most at ease?” (Soldner, 1997)
“Did any parts of the passage confuse me? What did I do to clarify the confusion?” (Gourgey,
1997)
Associative and Affective Personal Response
“How does this poem make you feel? What in your own life might have influenced how you responded to the poem?” (Newton, 1991)
At the Start of an Online Course





What concerns do you have about the course? How do you plan to deal with your concerns? What are your chief strengths as a learner?How will they help you in an online course?
Read the section "Plan How to Succeed in a Web-Based Course" (in the Syllabus, in
"Course Introduction"). How do you plan to manage your time to do well in this course?
Considering past courses you have taken, what will you need to improve or to continue doing orin order to do well in this course? (Peirce, business writing course)

Sample Topics Connecting Class Activity, Textbook, and Personal Experience
Reflect on what you learned about the group writing process from your experience with the Module One group task on reporting on web sites.
What appropriate advice does chapter 2 (in the section on working in teams and small groups) have that applies to your experience? What went well? What went badly? What would you do differently next time? What helps and hinders your own involvement in group writing projects?

Reflect on what you learned from the Module Two (Employment Messages) reading and writing tasks, even if you had already prepared your résumé before starting this course.
Did you learn anything new? What prior knowledge was reenforced? Did you improve your approach to writing tasks? What was easy/hard? (Peirce, business writing course)
Self-Assessment of Research Paper
To improve your performance on similar future research tasks, write a reflective, self-assessment of your research process for this assignment. At which steps in the process were you most satisfied with how you worked? When were you least satisfied? What skills do you feel you improved? In what ways do you feel more capable? What were the chief obstacles to being efficient? What will you do differently next time? (Peirce, used in various writing courses)

IX. References
Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (1994). Using metacognitive strategies to enhance achievement for at-risk liberal arts students. Journal of Reading, 38, 32-40.

Berthoff, A. E. (1987). Dialectical notebooks and the audit of meaning. In T. Fulwiler
(Ed.), The Journal Book (pp. 11-18). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
Commander, N. E., & Valeri-Gold, M. (2001). The learning portfolio: A valuable tool for increasing metacognitive awareness. The Learning Assistance Review 6(2), 518.

Chiang, L. H. (1998). Enhancing metacognitive skills through learning contracts.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-Western Educational Research
Association, Chicago. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED425 154).
El-Hindi, A. E. (1997). Connecting reading and writing: College learners’ metacognitive awareness. Journal of Developmental Education, 21(2), 10-17.
Gourgey, A. F. (1997). Getting students to think about their own thinking in an integrated verbal-mathematics course. Research and Teaching in Developmental
Education, 14, 49-56.
Hill, M. (1991). Writing summaries promotes thinking and learning across the curriculum—but why are they so difficult to write? Journal of Reading, 34, 536539.
Hacker, D. J. (1998). Definitions and empirical foundations. In D. J. Hacker, J.
Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 1-23). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Marzano, R. J., Brandt, R. S., Hughes, C. S., Jones, B. F., Presseisen, B. Z., Rankin,
S. C., & Suhor, C.(1988). Dimensions of thinking: A framework for curriculum and instruction. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
McKeachie, W. J. (1988). The need for study strategy training. In C. E. Weinstein, E.
T. Goetz, & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation (pp. 3-9). New York: Academic Press.
Newton, E. V. (1991). Developing metacognitive awareness: the response journal in college composition. Journal of Reading, 34, 476-478.
Nickerson, R. S., Perkins, D. N., & Smith, E. E. (1985). The teaching of thinking.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Nist, S. (1993). What the literature says about academic literacy. Georgia Journal of Reading,
(Fall-Winter), 11-18.

Paris, S. G. (1988). Models and metaphors of learning strategies. In C. E. Weinstein,
E. T. Goetz, & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation (pp. 299-321). New York: Academic
Press.

Ramp, L. C. & Guffey, J. S. (1999). The impact of metacognitive training on academic self-efficacy of selected underachieving college students. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Services No. ED432 607).
Simpson, M. L., & Nist, S. L. (1990). Textbook annotation: An effective and efficient study strategy for college students. Journal of Reading, 34, 122-129.

Simpson, M. L., & Nist, S. L. (2000). An update on strategic learning: It’s more than textbook reading strategies. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 43(6).
Retrieved November 8, 2002, from Academic Search Premier.
Soldner, L. B. (1997). Self-assessment and the reflective reader. Journal of College
Reading and Learning, 28, 5-11.
Stage, F. K., Muller, P. A., Kinzie, J., & Simmons, A. (1998). Creating learning centered classrooms: What does learning theory have to say? Higher Education Report vol. 26, number 4. Washington, D. C.: Association for the Study of Higher Education.

Taylor, S. (1999). Better learning through better thinking: Developing students’ metacognitive abilities. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 30(1), 34ff.
Retrieved November 9, 2002, from Expanded Academic Index ASAP.
Metacognitive Skills1

Metacognition refers to learners' automatic awareness of their own knowledge and their ability to understand, control, and manipulate their own cognitive processes.2 Metacognitive skills are important not only in school, but throughout life. For example, Mumford (1986) says that it is essential that an effective manager be a person who has learned to learn. He describes this person as one who knows the stages in the process of learning and understands his or her own preferred approaches to it - a person who can identify and overcome blocks to learning and can bring learning from off-the-job learning to on-the-job situations.
As you read this section, do not worry about distinguishing between metacognitive skills and some of the other terms in this chapter. Metacognition overlaps heavily with some of these other terms. The terminology simply supplies an additional useful way to look at thought processes.
Metacognition is a relatively new field, and theorists have not yet settled on conventional terminology. However, most metacognitive research falls within the following categories:

1. Metamemory. This refers to the learners' awareness of and knowledge about their own memory systems and strategies for using their memories effectively. Metamemory includes (a) awareness of different memory strategies, (b) knowledge of which strategy to use for a particular memory task, and (c) knowledge of how to use a given memory strategy most effectively.
2. Metacomprehension. This term refers to the learners' ability to monitor the degree to which they understand information being communicated to them, to recognize failures to comprehend, and to employ repair strategies when failures are identified.
Learners with poor metacomprehension skills often finish reading passages without even knowing that they have not understood them. On the other hand, learners who are more adept at metacomprehension will check for confusion or inconsistency, and undertake a corrective strategy, such as rereading, relating different parts of the passage to one another, looking for topic sentences or summary paragraphs, or relating the current information to prior knowledge. (See Harris et al., 1988; - add more)
3. Self-Regulation. This term refers to the learners' ability to make adjustments in their own learning processes in response to their perception of feedback regarding their current status of learning. The concept of self-regulation overlaps heavily with the preceding two terms; its focus is on the ability of the learners themselves to monitor their own learning
(without external stimuli or persuasion) and to maintain the attitudes necessary to invoke and employ these strategies on their own. To learn most effectively, students should not only understand what strategies are available and the purposes these strategies will serve, but also become capable of adequately selecting, employing, monitoring, and evaluating their use of these strategies. (See Hallahan et al., 1979; Graham & Harris, 1992; Reid &
Harris, 1989, 1993.)

In addition to its obvious cognitive components, metacognition often has important affective or personality components. For example, an important part of comprehension is approaching a reading task with the attitude that the topic is important and worth comprehending. Being aware of the importance of a positive attitude and deliberately fostering such an attitude is an example of a metacognitive skill.
In the preceding paragraph, metacognition has been described as a conscious awareness of one's own knowledge and the conscious ability to understand, control, and manipulate one's own cognitive processes. This is not quite accurate; but it's difficult to define metacognition more accurately. (It's easier to point out examples of metacognitive activity than to define what it is.) It would be more accurate to say that metacognitive strategies are almost always potentially conscious and potentially controllable (Pressley, Borkowski, & Schneider, 1987). For example, good readers automatically (unconsciously) employ metacognitive strategies to focus their attention, to derive meaning, and to make adjustments when something goes wrong. They do not think about or label these skills while performing them; but if we ask them what they were doing that was successful, they can usually describe their metacognitive processes accurately. In addition, when serious problems arise - as when there is a distraction, when they encounter

extremely difficult or contradictory text, or when they have to advise someone else regarding the same skill - they slow down and become consciously aware of their metacognitive activity.
While it is occasionally useful to consciously reflect on one's metacognitive processes and while it useful to make learners aware of these processes while they are trying to acquire them, these skills become most effective when they become overlearned and automatic. If these skills were not automatic and unconscious, they would occupy some of the effort of the working memory; and this would have the result of making reading, listening, and other cognitive activities less efficient. Therefore, like any other skill that becomes automatic and requires minimal activity in the working memory, metacognitive skills work best when they are overlearned and can operate unconsciously. Learners with good metacognitive skills are able to monitor and direct their own learning processes. Like many other processes, metacognitive skills are learned by applying principles from almost every other chapter in this book. When learning a metacognitive skill, learners typically go through the following steps (Pressley, Borkowski, & Schneider, 1987):
1. They establish a motivation to learn a metacognitive process. This occurs when either they themselves or someone else points gives them reason to believe that there would be some benefit to knowing how to apply the process. (Motivation is discussed in chapter 5).
2. They focus their attention on what it is that they or someone else does that is metacognitively useful. This proper focusing of attention puts the necessary information into working memory (Chapter 6). Sometimes this focusing of attention can occur through modeling (Chapter 12), and sometimes it occurs during personal experience.
3. They talk to themselves about the metacognitive process. This talk can arise during their interactions with others, but it is their talk to themselves that is essential. This self talk serves several purposes: o o o o

It enables them to understand and encode the process (Chapter 6).
It enables them to practice the process (Chapter 3).
It enables them to obtain feedback and to make adjustments regarding their effective use of the process (Chapters 3 and 12).
It enables them to transfer the process to new situations beyond those in which it has already been used (Chapters 3 and 6).

4. Eventually, they begin to use the process without even being aware that they are doing so. This process usually represents a high-level implementation of the phases of learning and instruction described by Gagne and discussed in Chapter 3 of this book. When teachers intervene to help students develop a metacognitive process, they often use the scaffolded instruction

strategies described in chapter 12. In addition, the techniques of cooperative learning and peer tutoring (discussed in Chapter 15) often provide opportunities for students to talk to others about their thought processes; and it is often the process of formulating thoughts in order to express them to others that leads to metacognitive development (Piaget, 1964).
Finally, it is interesting to note an important relationship between the higher order skills of metacognition and the basic or factual skills that may be a part of a specific unit of instruction.
Students typically learn metacognitive skills while they are involved in learning something else.
If they are to do this successfully, it is extremely important that the learners have overlearned the prerequisite content knowledge for the subject matter topic being studied. If that prerequisite knowledge has not been mastered to a sufficient level of automaticity, then the working memory of the learner will be overwhelmed by the subject matter; and the result will be no time for metacognitive reflection.
For example, when children who have largely mastered the prerequisite skills try to solve a word problem in arithmetic, they can afford to talk to themselves about what they are doing, because their working memory is not totally occupied with other demands. That is, well prepared children will have time for metacognitive practice. On the other hand, when children who are missing some of these prerequisite skills try to solve the same problem, their working memory is likely to be totally occupied with a frantic need to find the basic skills and facts needed to solve the problem. If this is the case, they not only have solved the problem less effectively; but they also have little or no time for practicing or developing metacognitive skills.

When teachers and parents try to help students, it is important not to do too much thinking for them. By doing their thinking for the children they wish to help, adults or knowledgeable peers may make them experts at seeking help, rather than expert thinkers. On the other hand, by setting tasks at an appropriate level and prompting children to think about what they are doing as they successfully complete these tasks, adults can help children become independent and successful thinkers (Biemiller & Meichenbaum, 1992). In other words, it is often better to say, What should you do next?" and then to prompt the children as necessary, instead of simply telling them what to do.
The preceding paragraph describes how the intellectual rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Knowledge of factual information and basic skills provides a foundation for developing metacognitive skills; and metacognitive skills enable students to master information and solve problems more easily. If teachers hope to help low-performing students break out of their intellectual imprisonment, they must find a way to help them develop both an automatic grasp of basic skills and effective metacognitive skills to enable self-directed learning.
Misconceptions with regard to specific subject matter were discussed in Chapters 4 and 6.
Wittrock (1991) notes that learners' misconceptions about learning-to-learn skills and about metacognitive strategies are also a critical source of learning problems. For example, a student who adheres to a belief that the best way to learn scientific concepts is to repeat the definitions

ten times each night before going to bed is not as likely to come to an understanding of these concepts as a person who has a more effective conception of how to master these concepts.
Finally, note that a major purpose of this book is to help you develop your metacognitive skills.
In chapter 1 I suggested that you apply various strategies while reading this book. If you have done so, there is a good chance that by now you understand the rationale of many of these principles and can see how they contribute to your own learning. By becoming consciously aware of these strategies and how they work, you will not only be able to use these principles to teach others more effectively, you'll also be able to use them to monitor and improve your own thought processes. That's metacognition!

Footnote:
1. There are numerous definitions and theories of metacognitive skills (e.g., Flavell, 1979;
Corno, 1986).