Visualizing Metacognition in Children Krystalle Dickson ... · VISUALIZING METACOGNITION IN...

Running Head: VISUALIZING METACOGNITION IN CHILDREN

“What Makes You Say That?”

Visualizing Metacognition in Children

Krystalle Dickson

Student Number: 84946136

ECED 508B-61A Review of Research in Educational Methods

University of British Columbia

VISUALIZING METACOGNITION IN CHILDREN

Introduction

In the Spring of 2013, I was fortunate enough to participate in a very interesting

workshop that was developed by Project Zero of Harvard Graduate School of Education entitled

‗Visible Thinking‘- a rapidly growing curriculum practice that promotes teaching children to

think about their thinking (metacognition) as well as how to promote a ―Culture of Thinking‖ in

the classroom by making students thinking visible through different routines (Ritchart, Church &

Morrison, 2011). The course material, both theory and practices, learned revolutionized the way

I ran my Kindergarten classroom and provoked much reflection about how I view the thought

processes of Early Learners. The routines developed by Project Zero – metacognitive or ‗Visible

Thinking‘ routines - seemed very easy to employ in the classroom and after some scepticism, I

decided to try it with my group of children, most of which were English Language Learners.

Instantly I was blown away with the ability of the Visible Thinking routines to reach those

students who I thought to be academically low. It was amazing to see the connections that my

students could make in any concept when given the opportunity to make their thinking visible. It

brought forward my own thinking on how I can use differentiation in a variety of ways in my

own classroom through ‗Visible Thinking‘ and how the whole model of metacognition and

promoting Cultures of Thinking in Early Years classrooms adhered to my own personal

philosophy of children as active meaning-makers and agents of change in a global society.

This paper will clarify what is meant by Visible Thinking and Cultures of Thinking with

a specific emphasis on the Early Years as well as justify the importance behind creating this

culture in classrooms based on accepted theoretical frameworks. It is also my hope to share with

readers routines that can be used in early learning classrooms and what these routines and


mindsets can do to reform current best practices so that metacognition and reflection become

accepted practice in all facilities where quality early learning takes place.

Theories of Metacognitive Development in Children

Some debate remains as to what exactly metacognition means. For the purpose of this

paper, metacognition will be defined as the self-awareness of strategies employed in learning

processes and the revelation of how connections are made with pre-existing ideas. Metacogntion

also ―relates to the human capacity to be self-reflective, to consider how one thinks and knows; it

directs attention to what has been assimilated and understood, and the ways in which this relates

to the process of learning‖ (Jones, 2007, p.571).

Traditional as well as modern theories of child development have maintained that

children are active participants in constructing their own meaning. Piaget, a popular child

development theorist, states that learning goes beyond simple problem solving and that

―children‘s reflection on problems and consideration of possibilities are important aspects of

cognitive development‖ (Fisher, 1998, p. 3). The theories of Lev Vygotsky in relation to how

children develop cognitively were some of the first to look at how children think and acquire

knowledge. He suggested that there were two parts in a child‘s acquisition of concepts and

understanding – automatic unconscious acquisition preceded active conscious control of learning

(Fisher, 1998, p. 2). Vygotsky argued ―that when the process of learning is brought to a

conscious level, children become aware of their own thought processes (which) help them to

gain control over how they learn‖ (Jones, 2007, p.571). Flavell proposes that ―if we can bring the

process of learning to a conscious level, we can help children to be more aware of their own

thought processes and help (children) gain control or mastery over the organization of their


learning‖ (Fisher, 1998, p. 2). Vygotsky‘s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) also briefly

delves into metacognition in Early Learners in that learning can only take place when a child

goes beyond their current level of competence (Fisher, 1998, p. 4) which requires strategies to

process the new learning that takes place outside of their comfort zone. Adey and Shayer support

the view that metacognition, when clearly defined as part of a learning objective, assist in the

transference of knowledge (Fisher, 1998, p. 8). Metacognitive, or Visible Thinking strategies,

provide a perfect bridge for students ready to actively engage in the learning of a new skill or

concept; or to reinforce skills previously learned in another setting or lesson.

Literature Review

What is Visible Thinking?

―Thinking routines are one element of an initiative called

Visible Thinking that we, our colleagues at Project Zero, and

collaborators in various schools have developed. In our research,

we have explored the practicality of using thinking routines and

documentation as classroom learning tools, developed a framework

for pursuing cultural transformation in classrooms and schools,

and devised tools for integrating the arts‖ (Ritchart, 2008, p. 57)

In an attempt to give children ownership of their learning, Visible Thinking is the toolkit that

children are equipped with in order to extend their own individual learning experiences without

treading on the freedom of learning through inquiry. The vocabulary, strategy, routines and

mindsets built into a Visible Thinking classroom become meshed with everyday routines and


learning experiences and promotes students to give value not only to the conclusions they make

through inquiry, but also the process they used to arrive at these conclusions. Going further,

thinking routines provide children with a skill often overlooked in early learners; the ability to

shape, reform and develop the processes they already use intrinsically to investigate the world

around them.

Giving Children „Voice‟ in Learning: Making the Abstract Concrete

While it may be very easy for an adult to express their ‗modus operandi‘ when learning a

new topic or task, for very young learners who may lack the verbal skills, vocabulary, or cultural

capital to do the same; metacognition strategies give children the ‗voice‘ they are trying to

express during conceptual learning. Fisher states that ―children vary in their ability to solve

problems and learn from experience. These individual differences are related to differences of

intelligence, experience and metacognitive processes‖ (Fisher, 1998, p. 8). According to him,

―metacognition helps children make the most of their mental resources‖ (Fisher, 1998, p. 8) in

that we are encouraging them to employ new strategies to help connect information and

encourage self-reflection on the process. As well, watching peers who are more successful in

sharing their metacognitive processes may evoke feelings of similarity in children and allow

them to see different strategies that have been successful in their peers and ones that they can use

in future situations – seeing how ‗someone like them‘ has been successful.

Everything to a young child has the potential of ‗thought‘. ―Thinking routines help

learners ponder topics that might not seem to invite thinking at first glance‖ (Ritchart and

Perkins, 2008, p. 57). Things adults may seem as mundane or invisible due to overexposure,

become wondrous in the eyes of a child. Along this line of though, Perkins (2009) highlighted

the importance of determining what is worth learning and how to educate for the unknown,


because it is impossible to predict the type of jobs and other challenges that our students will

have in 5, 10, or 20 years. Early Childhood Educators need to be exceedingly aware of this

observation. In his view, ―professional education suffers enormously from ―aboutitis‖—that is,

encouraging students to only learn about things, when today‘s world requires individuals who

have the ability to solve problems, feel comfortable with challenges that have no single correct

answer, are able to identify new patterns, and can maintain the high level of curiosity

characteristic of very young children‖ (Salmon and Lucas, 2011, p.364). In addition, educators

should be attempting to move children away from simply learning a concept, but (should) help

them make connections between new and old learning as well as how this new learning was

achieved (Fisher, 1998, p. 2).

To appropriately extend a child‘s thinking, we can encourage students in a more inquiry

based way and lead them to a deeper level of exploration. Metacognition gives ‗voice‘ to even

the youngest learners and helps them have ownership over their own learning and play.

Reflection and metacognition are two skills often overlooked in the Early Years classroom.

Teachers are routinely focused on social, emotional, physical, creative and intellectual

development and may give little thought to thinking processes. Teaching children to make their

thinking ‗visible‘ through thinking routines that can be adapted to Early Learners is a way to

make students aware of how they use different thought processes in play and learning,

connecting this to all trans-disciplinary elements. ―It is often within the process of explaining or

describing what we think that thoughts ‗click‘ into place and we understand what we already

know. In other words, making our implicit thoughts explicit through talk is a powerful learning

tool for both adults and children‖ (Jones, 2007, p.569)


Creating a „Culture of Thinking‟

In their book ‗Making Thinking Visible‘, Ritchart, Church and Morrison (2011) define a

Culture of thinking as ―places where a group‘s collective as well as individual thinking is value,

visible and actively promoted as part of the regular, day-to-day experiences of all group

members‖ (Ritchart et al, p. 219). Crucial in developing a Culture of Thinking is the educational

philosophy of the teacher. The view that teachers hold about their own students is very decisive

in the way an early learning environment is created. Whether or not the teacher sees the child as

an active meaning maker or a passive absorbent ‗sponge‘ is critical in establishing a culture of

thinking. If a teacher does not see a student as capable of taking and replacing materials

independently, playing with meaning, or controlling their own learning, chances are that their

thinking is not valued in the classroom context and therefore a culture of thinking is neither

created nor encouraged.

―The social environment plays an important role in nurturing a culture of thinking in

children as they construct their understandings about the world‘ (Salmon, 2008, p.457). Creating

a culture of thinking should take priority in any place of Early Learning. Salmon points out that,

―although children share developmental characteristics, each child is unique and his or her

individuality is a product of the interplay of nature and nurture‖ (Salmon, 2007, p,457). Surely

something every educator is familiar with is the idea of differentiation and its implicit connection

to best practice or developmentally appropriate practice. Just as all adults learn differently, so do

all children. In connection to Vygotsky‘s ZPD theory, the gap between what children can do

independently and that of their learning goal is minimized when setting up a classroom culture


where pedagogy is clearly linked to helping children move through this gap. Therefore, beliefs

about teaching, learning and assessing need to reflect metacognitive practices. (Jones, 2007, p.

575). Reflection about thinking strategies will help children move through these zones more

comfortably and authentically when there investigations and inquiries during this period are

valued in a risk-free environment.

To facilitate a classroom ‗Culture of Thinking‘, teaching metacognition and the language

of thinking needs to be explicitly infused into the planning and teaching of all early learning

classrooms (Fisher, 1998, p. 10). One of the easiest examples of this is to use challenge

questioning. Here, teachers inquire into the child‘s thought processes by simply asking ‗Why?‘

As it is simple in nature, it is devoid of all bias and leading and allows students to tell you why it

is they think a certain way. An approach to extend this challenge questioning and dig dipper into

a thought process is to ask the question several times after each response. Children will soon

become familiar with the idea of extending their thinking and work it into independent play and

inquiry. Repetition of thinking strategy vocabulary will lead students to internalize said

vocabulary and children begin to create a perception and ‗label‘ of their thinking strategies

(Costa, 1987, p.30). However, Jones (2007) is quick to remind us that ―metacognition is a

complex process‖ that involves a myriad of tools, skills and strategies. The development of

which is dependent on several factors:

A task must be worthy of serious thought

Thinking of the children must be appreciated and valued in a culture of respect

There must be sufficient time for children to communicate their thoughts

(Jones, 2007, p.572).


When looking at this from an Early Learning perspective, all of these factors are

continuously present. To a young child beginning to learn about the world, literally everything is

worthy of serious thought. Envision a group of pre-schoolers looking out their classroom

window at the first snowfall of the season. To many, it may be the first one they will consciously

remember. This act of snowfall is in itself worthy of thought as it an environmental change

which is also visually stimulating. A teacher engaged in a classroom ‗Culture of Thinking‘

would encourage thought provocations from her students using some of the Visible Thinking

routines developed by Project Zero. The afternoon may be spent recording the children‘s

thoughts and extending their thinking by asking them ‗Why they think so?‘ in order to encourage

and promote connections. Displaying these ‗thoughts‘ for all children to recall at a later time give

value to their thinking an promote ownership in their own classroom ‗Culture of Thinking‘.

Implications for Practice

There are many things in the Early Childhood profession that could be changed or enhanced

through the use of metacognitive strategies in the classroom.

Evaluating Assessment Practices

By rethinking how we analyze what a student knows and how they show this knowledge,

we can improve the assessment practices used in many Kindergarten classrooms around the

world. Not only should knowledge and conceptual understanding be assessed, but also should

thinking and learning processes. ―Implicit in the nature of formative assessment is the

development of metacognitive awareness which is required if pupils are to assess themselves and

understand how to improve‖ (Jones, 2007, p.574). While this may sound very academic in the

pre-school setting, many Kindergarten teachers are faced with the daunting task of finding the


balance between play-based learning and the rigorous academic curriculum borne from

standardized test anxiety of administration. Visible Thinking and metacognitive routines are key

to exploring students‘ knowledge without the use of ‗pen and paper‘ testing that has no place in

an Early Years program. Please see Appendix A for assessment tasks using Visible Thinking

routines.

Emphasis on Oral Development in the Early Years

The very nature of Thinking Routines promote oral language development as children

discuss and share their thoughts and ideas in a nurturing environment. Talk is fundamental in the

process of making thinking visible in the early years, as children are always thinking, but may

have difficulty communicating their thinking. Therefore it is important to promote quality

interactions that enrich thought processes. The challenge questioning routine is an example of

how oral language builds not only thought processes but gives children necessary vocabulary for

future reference.

Rethinking differentiation

Just as all children learn differently, they also think differently and this needs to be

valued in an Early Childhood environment in order to encourage positive self-esteem.

Metacognitive routines intrinsically allow for different levels of thoughts and connections to be

valued in an unbiased matter and therefore differentiation occurs naturally as there are no right or

wrong answers in the exploration of a topic or concept. ―Some children are more competent at

learning effective strategies and applying them appropriately, while others who seem more

intelligent can be remarkably unintelligent in their approach to learning‖ (Fisher, 1998, p. 2).

Visible Thinking routines allow ―students who previously believed they lacked a voice or that


their ideas weren‘t valued participate more actively and confidently‖ (Ritchart and Perkins, 2008,

p.60), which has been demonstrated in many studies carried out in schools where Visible

Thinking has been employed by teachers. Please see Appendix B for an example of how

different connections can be made by children in a way not clearly evident to their peers.

Routines, Scheduling and Use of Classroom Environment to Promote Metacognition

―Activities assume the feature of routine when they happen over and over again‖

(Salmon, 2008, p.459). By building the ‗Culture of Thinking‘ classroom from day one, teachers

can promote independent growth of thinking strategies in their students. ―Routines benefit

learning because they build a sense of trust and confidence in students when they begin to

identify patterns that help them predict what is going to happen‖ (Salmon, 2008, p.459). As

students become familiar with the environment that promotes and values their own thinking, they

become more confident in sharing ideas, taking risks and making connections. ―By asking

students what they think they know rather than what they ‗know‘ the prompt uses conditional

language that suggests possibilities and openness rather than absolutes‖ (Ritchart and Perkins,

2008, p.60).

This can also be considered with inclusion and differentiation in mind. In an environment

of English Language Learners (ELL), the success of thinking routine is palpable as 3 and 4 year

olds begin to ―express their thinking in their first language, giving the teacher a notion of what

the children know, and allowing her to scaffold their language and thoughts‖ (Salmon, 2008, p.

459). Even if a child may not be 100% comfortable speaking English, they can still engage in

―personal thoughts rather than definitive knowledge‖ (Ritchart and Perkins, 2008, p.60). Please


see Appendix C to see examples of how a Visible Thinking routine can be modified for ELL

students.

Promoting Active Global Citizenship

Perhaps the most important goal of metacognitive routines is to promote in the earliest

learners attitudes of compassion, respect and tolerance. As students engage in shared thinking

and Visible Thinking routines, they are beginning to practice those crucial skills needed in

today‘s Global community. Children also begin to see the ―flexibility of thought and an

appreciation for the variety of ways to solve a problem‖ (Costa, 1987, p.32) which is a skill

integral to working in group settings. Creating a ‗Culture of Thinking‘ helps promote an

interconnectedness amongst their peers that will encourage skills such as co-operation and

problem solving among children; as well as prompt discussions about differences and

similarities. As Early Childhood Educators, we must be conscious of the demands of society 20

years from now as well as the skills we wish to impart on our learners today to make a positive

impact in this future world.

Conclusion

During the development of metacognition as a separate and equally valued process in

education, many experts have weighed in on the benefit of including this technique in young

children. I can conclude that metacognitive strategies are essential in an Early Learning

environment. They are most effective and easily implemented in the Early Years through arts

(including play and drawing/painting). It can also be said that ‗Visible Thinking‘ helps teachers

in differentiated instruction and helps give a ‗voice‘ to each child. While ‗thinking about their

thinking‘ may present challenges to early learners, especially ones that had never been


challenged to ‗think‘ before, the results are nothing short of astonishing. One of my four-year-old

students said to me, after 3 months of my attempt at creating my own classroom ‗Culture of

Thinking‘; ‗Miss, I think my thought is becoming bigger‘; this from a child whose first language

is not English. The depth of this simple sentence stopped me dead in my tracks. I employed my

challenge questioning to extend this conversation: ‗What makes you say that?‘ I asked her very

casually. ‗Well,‖ she said, ―sometimes before I wouldn‘t think, and just say. Now I think before

and my answers are better‖. While it certainly was not my goal to put value on a specific answer

in my classroom, I was happy to know I was building a culture where, whatever answer she had

said in class, was considered ‗better‘ in her mind.

In my experience, Early Childhood Educators do not often give our youngest learners

enough credit to show us what they know. Using metacognitive strategies helps us (and has

helped me) bring a lot of my less-verbal children‘s knowledge, thinking and synthesizing to the

surface. I can definitely see how thinking about how they think and teaching children how to

extend their thinking can lead to more critical though and prompt further independent

exploration, instilling in our youngest learners an intrinsic value on lifelong learning.


References

Colcott, D., Russell, B., & Skouteris, H. (2009). Thinking about thinking: innovative pedagogy

designed to foster thinking skills in junior primary classrooms. Teacher Development, 13

(1), 17-27.doi: 10.1080/13664530902858477

Costa, A.L.(1987). Teaching the language of thinking. Educational Leadership, 45 (2), 29-33.

Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/ehost/detail?sid

=c97f7fd5-0a29-4e95-a355 1115652a6f84%40sessionmgr4004&vid=3&hid=4107

&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=ulh&AN=8524256

Fisher, R. (1998). Thinking about thinking: Developing metacognition in children. Early Child

Development and Care, 141, 1-15. doi: 10.1080/0300443981410101

Jones, D. (2007). Speaking, listening and assessing: The teacher‘s role in developing

metacognitive awareness. Early Child Development and Care, 177, 569-579. doi:

10.1080/03004430701378977

Ritchhart, R., & Perkins, D. (2008). Making thinking visible. Educational Leadership, 65 (5),

57-61. Retrieved from http://www.visiblethinkingpz.org/VisibleThinking_html_

files/06_AdditionalResources/makingthinkingvisibleEL.pdf

Ritchart, R., Church, H. & Morrison, M. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to promote

engagement, understanding and independence for all learners. San Fransisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass Publishing.

Salmon, A. (2008). Promoting a culture of thinking in the young child. Early Childhood

Education Journal, 35, 457-461. doi: 10.1007/s10643-007-0227-y

http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/ehost/detail?sid%20=c97f7fd5-0a29-4e95-a355

http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/ehost/detail?sid%20=c97f7fd5-0a29-4e95-a355

http://www.visiblethinkingpz.org/VisibleThinking_html_%20files/06_AdditionalResources/makingthinkingvisibleEL.pdf

http://www.visiblethinkingpz.org/VisibleThinking_html_%20files/06_AdditionalResources/makingthinkingvisibleEL.pdf


Salmon, A., & Lucas, T. (2011). Exploring young children‘s conceptions about thinking. Journal

of Research in Childhood Education, 25, 364-375. doi: 10.1080/02568543.2011.60520


Appendix

Appendix A: Using Visible Thinking in Assessment Practice ………………………… Page 17

Appendix B: Showing Different Connections Through Visible Thinking …………….. Page 18

Appendix C: Modified Visible Thinking for ELL ………………………………………Page 19


Appendix A

Using Visible Thinking in Assessment Practice

In this Thinking routine, Kindergarten students were asked to complete a ‗Painted Reflection‟

which posed the question ‗Which Earth resource do you think is the most important and why?‘.

The value of asking what the child thinks as opposed to an absolute ‗what is‘, allows the child to

make connections with prior learning and complete an assessment required in the school.

During their time of reflection, I conferenced with each student and wrote down their

thinking along the side of their page. This Painted Reflection is one in a series of reflections we

have done throughout the year on various topics.

*Names have been changed to protect privacy.

(Painted Reflections is a routine adapted from Harvard Graduate School of Education‘s Project

Zero. Reference: Ritchart, R., Church, H. & Morrison, M. (2011). Making thinking visible: How

to promote engagement, understanding and independence for all learners. San Fransisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass Publishing.)

Aidan* chose trees

―because it give us

breathing. If we have no

trees, we have no air‖

Tala* chose water

―because if we have no

water to drink we would

die‖

Faris* could not chose

only one ―because rain

gives water to the plants to

grow‖ and ―if we don‘t

have sun it will be dark‖


Appendix B

Showing Different Connections Through Visible Thinking

This Thinking Routine called ‗Generate, Sort, Connect‟ asked the Kindergarten students to

reflect on their learning from our unit about Ocean Animals and Conservation. First students

were asked to write or draw (showing

differentiation) anything about what we had

learned so far in the unit on the pink papers.

As a class, we sorted them into categories

that were similar and labelled the categories

as a class (Ocean Animals, Conservation, and

Polluted Ocean) shown in the green writing.

After sorting, we made connections between

the different categories (shown in the orange

writing). Here is where I was able to see the deeper conceptual understandings and connections

some students could make (ideas of conservation) as opposed to ‗surface layer‘ knowledge

(specific ocean animals). This activity was the first to ‗sell‘ me on Visible Thinking as it was my

lower academic students who made these deeper connections.

(Generate, Sort, Connect is a routine adapted from Harvard Graduate School of Education‘s

Project Zero. Reference: Ritchart, R., Church, H. & Morrison, M. (2011). Making thinking

visible: How to promote engagement, understanding and independence for all learners. San

Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishing.)


Appendix C

Modified Visible Thinking for ELL Students

This Thinking Routine entitled ‗I See, I Think, I Wonder‘

allowed for children who may not be native English speakers to

have their thinking made visible by the teacher transcribing their

ideas onto paper for the class to refer to. I made sure to ensure an

even sampling of student abilities in transcribing these thoughts

about Earth.

In the „Chalk Talk‟ routine students were invited to walk

silently among different tables that had the word of a

resource in the centre. They were asked to write or draw

something related to that topic on the paper and move around

to the other 5 centres (sun, air, land, water and plants).


Afterwards, we looked at our friends thinking and examined some of the samples. One in

particular showed a very deep connection, and in fact the student‘s answer needed some

translations as the student did not know the English word for ‗axe‘ or ‗chop‘. He said, ‗If we

‗chop‘ the tree down with the ‗axe‘, we will have no more air to breathe‘. This answer would

have been lost to me if I had simply asked him how we depend on plants as this answer would

not have occurred in the expected responses of ‗oxygen, food, or medicine‘.

(I See, I Think, I Wonder and Chalk Talk are routines adapted from Harvard Graduate School

of Education‘s Project Zero. Reference: Ritchart, R., Church, H. & Morrison, M. (2011). Making

thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding and independence for all learners.

San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishing.)

Here you can see the man cutting

down the tree with an axe. There is an

‗x‘ to the right of the tree. The student

identified the ‗x‘ to mean ‗No! We

should not do this!‘

Visualizing Metacognition in Children Krystalle Dickson ... · VISUALIZING METACOGNITION IN...

Documents

Transcript of Visualizing Metacognition in Children Krystalle Dickson ... · VISUALIZING METACOGNITION IN...