Previous Lecture Complete and continue  

  Resources and References


Quiz. Regarding quiz items number one and two, a growing body of research is making it clear that metacognition is made, not born. Here’s one example of a study that shows that metacognition isn't innate and here's a study that shows how learning strategies like metacognition can be be more important than raw smarts when it comes to gaining expertise.

Marcel Veenman has found that people who closely track their thinking will outscore others who have sky-high IQ levels when it comes to learning something new. His research suggests that in terms of developing mastery, focusing on how we understand is some 15 percentage points more important than innate intelligence.

I wrote on this topic for Harvard Business Review. See here.

Regarding quiz item number three, there's good evidence that self-talk improves learning. The approach revolves around asking oneself explanatory questions like, ”What does this mean? Why does it matter?” One study shows that people who explain ideas to themselves learn almost three times more than those who don’t.

I also wrote on this topic for Harvard Business Review. See here.

Resources. For a quick introduction to metacognition, see this wonderful guide from the Welsh government. Vanderbilt University also has a very helpful guide, although it's a bit academic in tone.

For educators, Edutopia pulled together a nice, in-depth article.

If you want to go deep into metacognition--and it gets deep pretty quickly--see John Dunlosky and Janet Metcalfe. Metacognition, 1st ed. (California: SAGE Publications, Inc, 2008).

Another great, in-depth resource is the Improve with Metacognition blog, which counts many thoughtful researchers and educators among its contributors.

References. In the reading section, the text on "there’s a right way and a wrong way" relied on John D. Bransford and Marcia Johnson, “Contextual Prerequisites for Understanding: Some Investigations of Comprehension and Recall,” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 11, (1972): 717-726.

Also very helpful were Kimberly D. Tanner , “Promoting Student Metacognition.” CBE Life Sciences Education 11, no. 2 (2012): 113–20 and J. Girash “Metacognition and Instruction,” Applying the Science of Learning in Education: Infusing psychological science into the curriculum, Victor. A. Benassi, C. E. Overson, and C. M. Hakala, ed. pp. 152–168. Society for the Teaching of Psychology (American Psychological Association, Division 2), 2014.

For the details on the pre-quizzing, see Lindsey E. Richland, Nate Kornell, and Liche Sean Kao, "The Pretesting Effect: Do Unsuccessful Retrieval Attempts Enhance Learning?," Journal of Experimental Psychology 15, no. 3 (2009): 243.

I also relied on the following:

D. J. Hacker, M. C. Keener, and J. C. Kircher, “Writing is applied Metacognition,” in Handbook of Metacognition in Education, eds. D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and A. C. Graesser (New York: Routledge, 2009), 154-172.

Marcel VJ Veenman, Bernadette H.A.M. Van Hout-Wolters, and Peter Afflerbach, "Metacognition and Learning: Conceptual and Methodological Considerations," Metacognition and Learning 1, no. 1 (2006): 3-14.

Askell-Williams, Helen, Lawson, Michael J., and Grace Skrzypiec. “Scaffolding cognitive and metacognitive strategy instruction in regular class lessons.” Instructional Science 40(2) (2012): 413-443, doi:10.1007/s11251-011-9182-5.

Bracha Kramarski,” Promoting teachers’ algebraic reasoning and self-regulation. With metacognitive guidance” Metacognition and Learning 3, no.2 (2008): 83.

Dharma Jairam and Kenneth A. Kiewra, “An Investigation of the SOAR Study Method” Journal of Advanced Academics 20, no.4 (2009): 602- 629.