Posted at 12.15.2018
In this reflective project I have chosen to explore standard Q28: Support learners to think about their learning, identify ; concentrating specifically on the integration of metacognitive strategies into a collection of lessons. These strategies included making peer and self-evaluation a recognised part of each lesson. Making pupils alert to what they have learnt, mirroring pupils' responses, and modelling exemplary metacognitive thought procedures by thinking aloud.
The fact of metacognition is considering thinking; having a knowledge of what you already know and what you do not know, knowing how to learn and acquire new knowledge, knowing which ways of use and when to utilize them (Wilson & Bai, 2010). Metacognitive skills can be trained to pupils of any age group and potential, and research shows that pupils with metacognitive skills perform better in school (Sternberg, 1998). The reason why I am considering cultivating metacognition is basically because it improves pupils' critical thinking skills (Ku & Ho, 2010). In order to train metacognitive skills the educator must first develop a learning environment where pupils are anticipated to participate in reflective and evaluative activities (Leat & Lin, 2007).
The metacognitive strategies were trialled with a class of thirty top-set Time 8 ladies over an interval of fourteen days (six lessons); coinciding with the start of a new science topic: Chemical substance Reactions and Materials.
At the start of the first lesson pupils were given a self-evaluation checklist for all of the concepts these were going to be taught during the subsequent series of lessons. They were then given the possibility to write down any prior understanding of these concepts, and also to tick off any they noticed confident with already. Pupils were instructed to place the checklist at the front of their data files for use down the road in the lessons and through the rest of the unit.
A three-stage self-evaluation framework was devised in order to market pupils' metacognition at well-defined point within each lessons. In the beginning of each lesson all pupils were expected to record the training goals (as communicated by the professor) in the correct space on the checklist. About two-thirds of the way through the lesson, pupils were advised to consider whether or not they were meeting the training aims. Pupils used a traffic light system of red, orange and renewable coloured pages of their planners to converse their replies to the teacher. Pupils not get together learning targets were asked to write down what actions they might have to take in order to meet them At the end each lesson pupils were given time to recognize what that they had learnt and exactly how they would treat areas of weakness.
When planning fifty minute lessons, thirty percent of the total lesson time needed to be assigned to the three five-minute self-evaluation stages. In hindsight, it may have been a more efficient use of time to either self-evaluate almost every other lesson, or even to assign self-evaluation within the class' regular research. Starting and finishing lessons with a metacognitive process is commensurate with the three-part lessons composition of starter, main and plenary that seems to be in vogue. Inserting a metacognitive activity in the midst of a lesson may appear to disrupt the natural stream, but the anticipated change to an habitual process could serve as a chance for a few pupils to refocus their attention and make better use of the rest of the lesson time than they in any other case may have done.
During the first lessons in the sequence the introduction and explanation of the self-evaluation system required a substantial portion of the lessons time. I don't think there would have been any way around this. I had developed anticipated that during each of the following lessons pupils would become more accustomed to the machine and would therefore need less instruction. However, some pupils have been absent from the initial lesson in which the system was presented and required additional educator period to bring them up to date. I don't feel that this would be an issue if the machine had been applied over a significantly longer time range, as pupils would inevitably become familiar with the format of checklist and how and when to fill it in independently. Furthermore, various pupils would either lose or forget to bring their checklists to lessons, hence requiring substitute checklists and shedding information which they should have accumulated. For these pupils it is clear that they might not maintain a position to reap the full benefits of completing the self-evaluations when enough time came to get ready for his or her end of device test. I think that all of the pupils got a degree of appreciation for the actual benefits of this product, but some more so than others. Through the Year 8 assessment nighttime several parents provided positive responses after having noticed the checklists in the child's data file. The general feeling was that the parents approved of pupils pondering critically about their own learning.
At the finish of the series of lessons, pupils who had been regularly doing the self-evaluation checklist could actually easily identify spaces in their learning. These gaps could then be tackled during revision the time allocated to plan the finish of product test.
I think that if I had been teaching useful lessons, and in this unit there weren't any, I'd have found it much more difficult to allocate a time slot for self-evaluation during the lesson.
This three-part platform is obviously an explicit method of artificially imposing a metacognitive activity upon the pupils. However, it is just a typical part of my every day educating style to think out loud, also to encourage pupils to do the same when answering problems. That is an established way of enhancing pupils' metacognitive talents, that i find comes quite by natural means. By thinking aloud the professor is modelling the type of operations, lines of reasoning, and questions which they are going after and thinking about in order to attain the solution to a problem. By mimicking an exemplar under the direction and elicitation of the instructor, pupils can assimilate this skill and use it independently.
I feel that pupils often do not know how to take on a problem for which they down know the answer immediately off side. Some will just sit down there and await the instructor to come over to them and intervene. Others would unthinkingly throw their hand into the air and expect to be told the response straight away. It is often frustrating whenever i find that a pupil hasn't even attemptedto form a procedure for finding an answer. Without explicit training most won't automatically know the types of questions they have to be requesting of themselves, and are much too easily waylaid or disheartened by recognized unfamiliarity whenever a known problem is placed in an substitute context. I was not been able to measure or quantify pupils' metacognitive skill and I think this could be the basis of an interesting research enquiry, however, I did so notice that pupils were generally more persistent after the sequence of lessons. Particular pupils who previously would have quit straight away were at least attempting to employ problems more before asking for assistance. I think that metacognitive capacity is intrinsically linked with pupils' drive and self-efficacy. In my experience, pupils who are not sure how to overcome an issue can feature this inability with their own incompetence, that will invariably start a pattern of negative opinions using their self-esteem.
Working with such pupils on a person basis I was able to give them the assurance and necessary individualised scaffolding to attempt new problems. I often commenced by asking them to believe aloud so that I possibly could see just how they were getting close a particular problem. I would then ask them if indeed they could think of an alternative way to deal with the same problem, or even to ask one of these friends how they would address the same problem. This has been a strategy that i have always used, but during this series of lesson I have placed much more emphasis on pupils posting their thought operations with the other person e. g. with a think, pair, talk about style activity.
As a rsulting consequence having taught a series of lessons with a strong emphasis on simple metacognitive strategies, I am determined to keep using these strategies and to look for new ones which complement or supersede them.