Using technology to improve metacognition skills
Technology offers ways to address metacognitive weakness. For example, an inherent problem of cognitive activity is that it is not easily available for examination. This is clearly true for the teacher. You cannot see what is going on as a student attempts to understand a text or solve a math problem. In a way, what researchers seem to be learning about metacognition, would seem to indicate that many learners have a similar problem. They also have difficulty identifying problems as they occur. In certain situations, teachers have developed strategies allowing them to make educated guesses about the mental processing of students. For example, a teacher may attempt to determine where a student is going wrong in solving math problems by requesting that a student show her work. This external record of the problem-solving process may reveal clues experienced teachers can use to identify a problem. Math teachers can gain insight into flaws in student cognitive functioning by interpreting the steps students have taken as they work.
We will return to this concept of an externalized product multiple times in the following material. A short preview is provided here to demonstrate a connection to the challenge of effective metacognition. Using technology to create a product that is based on the skills and knowledge that is being acquired both encourages engagement with what is to be learned and serves as an indicator of what has been accomplishment. Think of it this way. What is a test, but an externalized product? The assumption is that if a student is unable to produce a quality product, the knowledge or skills evaluated have not been mastered. Why not use this concept of an externalized product more creatively? Instead of just using an externalized product as an evaluative device at the end of the learning process, why not generate products as part of the learning process in ways that both encourage the processes of learning and also highlight knowledge and skill deficiencies that require more attention. The various technologies we consider, e.g., computers, digital cameras, the Internet, offer opportunities not just for taking in information, but also for generativity. Educators and those preparing to become educators may have already encountered concepts such as "writing to learn" which represents an example of product creation to encourage learning and evaluative processes. Here, we will propose a more general version of this technique we like to describe as authoring to learn. Again, the process of authoring and the product produced can reveal misunderstandings and lack of knowledge. The production process itself can be self correcting. In writing a paper, you may discover that you do not completely understand something you are trying to write about. To write this part of your paper you may then need to do some more work. One of our core contentions is that attempting to use knowledge increases the likelihood that knowledge deficiencies will become apparent and hence such tasks are a way of supporting metacognitive capabilities.
More traditional uses of computer technology demonstrate other attempts to address failed metacognition. An interesting controversy over the years has involved the distinction between computer-control versus learner control (Milheim & Martin, 1991) - can the learner or the instructional system make the most productive adjustments in learning activities? Here is an example of how this question might be answered. The tutorial, a form of traditional computer-based instruction, tends to make heavy use of questions. Students are presented with several screens of information and then are asked questions about the information just covered. If the student does poorly on the questions, a program using computer control might automatically move the student into some material attempting to explain the same information in a different way. A program allowing learner control would likely give student feedback on performance and then give the learner the option of selecting review material or continuing to the next section.
Empirical studies of computer-based instruction frequently demonstrate an advantage for computer control over learner control (Milheim & Martin, 1991; Steinberg, 1989). Such findings are frustrating to those who advocate what they believe are motivational and learning advantages of allowing the learner to fine-tune instruction to personal needs. Allowing the learner a great deal of control is not necessarily the best solution in process. Of course, if you note that this comparison confounds metacognition with motivation, you may also be recognizing an important educational reality.
There may be a productive alternative. Learner control with advisement is a technique that allows the learner to make decisions after considering suggestions provided by the computer. In a study evaluating the effectiveness of computer advisement (Tennyson, 1980), students were learning the physical concepts of force, power, velocity, and speed. They first learned formal definitions for each concept. They were then provided with examples and asked to determine which of the four concepts would explain each example. In the learner control condition, students worked with examples until they felt prepared for the posttest. In the computer control condition, the computer made decisions about how many examples were required, using a mathematical model based on pretest performance, and performance on the examples. In the third condition, the learner made the decision to take they posttest but was provided the same information that provided the basis for the computer control decision. This study and others have demonstrated that learner control with advisement is superior to unaided learner control (Tennyson, 1980; Tennyson & Buttrey, 1980). Without advisement, students tended to terminate study of the lessons more quickly, possibly indicating that they had over-estimated their level of mastery.
A possible advantage of learner control with advisement is that this combination of computer monitoring and learning decision making based on advice potentially allows for the development of metacognition and "learning-to-learn" skills. Students are put in the situation of thinking about the decisions they make as the attempt to master the assigned material. Heightened sensitivity to the processes and the successes and failures of learning may allow the student to develop new planning, regulating, and evaluating skills.