EDPSY 526 Metacognition Spring 2006

SYLLABUS

Instructor: Susan B. Nolen
Email:
Office: 322C Miller Hall
Office Hours: 3-4pm Tuesdays and by arrangement
Telephone: 206-616-6378

Course description

Metacognition involves "thinking about thinking." In this seminar course, we will discuss important papers in the field, looking at metacognition as a cognitive and social process, and as knowledge students have about the ways they work. The readings and discussion will emphasize how metacognition contributes to learning in the classroom and how educators can improve their students' metacognitive skill.

From its early days in the 1970s, the field has developed from the study of memory using an information-processing framework to its current state of complexity. We will contrast information-processing and sociocultural theories and methods, metacognition applied to cognition and affect, and descriptive vs explanatory views of metacognitive development.

Before enrolling in this course, you should have taken EDPSY 501 or an equivalent graduate or upper-division course on learning or cognition.

Readings

Readings are available on-line through library e-reserves. You can also find links on the schedule page. To see the schedule of assigned readings, click here or on the link on the left side of this page. Please read assigned readings before coming to class. As a seminar, our success depends on members coming to class prepared to question, discuss, compare, and critique the readings.

Discussion Questions Bulletin Board

Each week you will find discussion questions based on the readings on the class e-post (see Discussion Questions BB button to the left). Questions will be posted (by me or by the group responsible for the following class) no later than Friday evening of the week before. We will use these questions when discussing the readings in class. They will also be useful to you in thinking about what you are reading before class. Feel free to respond to the questions online before or after class.

Grading Policy

My intent is for your course grade to represent the extent of your learning in the course. The grading policy is structured to support that learning.

· All written products may be revised and resubmitted at no penaltyuntil the written work deadline, June 6th. You must return your original submission and my comments with any resubmission.

· Submit work either electronically (via e-submit - button at left) or as hard copy. Your choice. If hard copy, bring to class or leave in my box in 322 before class. If you e-submit, I can easily email you back your comments.

· Late work: If papers are submitted on time, I promise to return them within one week. Late papers go on the bottom of the pile, and if I have time, they will be returned with the others. If not, I will try to return them as soon as possible. This becomes critical at the end of the quarter if you need to resubmit a paper and I have other obligations. So the "penalty" for late work is possibly late feedback. No papers or revisions will be accepted after June 6.

· Incompletes:As per UW policy, grades of "incomplete" will only be given if there is a serious medical or family emergency and you are caught up as of two weeks before the end of the quarter. If you start to fall behind in your work, please come talk to me as soon as possible about possible strategies.

Graded Products

Session leadership - 10%

You will be responsible for preparing an activity and discussion questions based on the readings for one session. You will sign up for a date on the first day of class, and you and the others choosing that date will work together to prepare for your session. Please check in with me with activity ideas and draft questions by Friday morning the week prior -- email is fine, sooner is better. I am happy to work with you on ideas at any time.

· The group should post discussion questions by Friday evening on E-post

· The group will lead the activity and help lead the discussion during class

· Each individual group member will turn in a brief description of the class session, their role in preparing and/or presenting, and a brief reflection on the activity and discussion as teaching/learning activities. (Total about a page, may be sent as an email, check/no check, due one week after your class session).

Thematic Papers - 45%

Short thematic papersare a chance for you to synthesize important ideas from the readings with your own experiences as a researcher and/or practitioner. Your job is to develop a theme (position) while using ideas from the readings critically to support or challenge your own views. Thematic papers will be graded check/not-yet-check, using a checklist of criteria. You may revise and resubmit if you are not satisfied. Detailed instructions, criteria, scoring rubrics plus example papers can be found on the class website. If you decide to resubmit a thematic paper, you must attach the originalsubmission and my comments to the revised version.

2 "checks" = 2.7, 3 "checks" = 4.0

Due Dates: #1 April 18 #2 May 2 #3 May 16

Term Projects - 45%

Term projects are a chance for you to deepen your understanding of metacognition while exploring a problem of interest to you. You will turn in a prospectus, a rough draft, and a final draft, receiving feedback on all three submissions. For more information, click on the links below or in the navigation bar to the left.

· Detailed instructions for projects

· Scoring rubric for projects

Due dates: Prospectus: April 11 Draft: May 2 Final: May 16

Reading Schedule

All readings can be downloaded as pdf files from ereserves.

Week / Topic
1
3/28 / Introduction to metacognition, the course, and each other.
Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development. Current directions in psychological science, 9(5), 178-181.
For background, read ONE of the following
Hacker, D. J. (1998). Definitions and empirical foundations. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, chapter 1, pp. 1-24.
Or
Schraw, G., & Moshman (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 351-371.
2
4/4 / Metacognitive beginnings – where did we come from and how did we get here?
Paris, S. (2002). When is metacognition helpful, debilitating, or benign? In P. Chambres, M. Izaute & P.-J. Marescaux (Eds.), Metacognition: Process, function and use (pp. 105-120). Boston: Kluwer.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). What's all the fuss about metacognition? In Schoenfeld, A. H. (Ed), Cognitive Science and Mathematics Education, pages 189-215.
3
4/11 / Metacognitive development
Brown, A. L., & Reeve, R. A. (1986). Reflections on the growth of reflection in children. Cognitive Development, 1, 405-416.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1983). Child as co-investigator: Helping children to gain insight into their own mental processes. In S. G. Paris, M. Olson, & H. W. Stevenson (Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom. (pp. 61-82) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
4
4/18 / Teaching people to be metacognitive. Guest speaker: Prof. John Frederiksen
Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (2005) A theoretical framework and approach for fostering metacognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 211–223.
The two readings above are on specific interventions. For a more general approach, read ONE of the following (they are short and long versions of the same thing).
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American Educator, 15, Winter, 6-11, 38-46.
Collins, A., Brown J., & Newman, S. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L, Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, Learning, and Instruction: Essays in Honor of Robert Glaser, 453-494. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5
4/25 / Goals and strategies, will and skill
Nolen, S. B. (1996). Why study? How reasons for learning influence strategy selection. Educational Psychology Review, 8(4), 335-355.
Pick TWO of the following three:
Nolen, S. B. (1988). Reasons for studying: Motivational orientations and study strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 5(4), 269-287.
Pintrich, P., & de Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.
Graham, S., & Golan, S. (1991). Motivational influences on cognition: Task involvement, ego involvement, and depth of information processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 187-194.
6
5/2 / Self-regulated learning
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329-339.
Winne, P. H. (1995). Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 173-188.
Commentaries on Winne (1995):
· Boekaerts, M. (1995). Self-regulated learning: Bridging the gap between metacognitive and metamotivation theories. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 195-200.
· Pressley, M. (1995). More about the development of self-regulation: Complex, long-term, and thoroughly social. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 207-212.
7
5/9 / Metamotivation/Emotion control
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of Motivation: Evaluating an Underemphasized Aspect of Self-Regulated Learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 189-205.
Boekaerts, M. (2002). Unraveling the mental representation students make of stressful events (pp. 39-59). In G. S. Gates & M. Woolverton (Eds.), Toward wellness: Prevention, coping, and stress. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Boekaerts, M. (2002a). Intensity of emotions, emotional regulation, and goal framing: How are they related to adolescents' choice of coping strategies? Educational Psychologist, 15(4), 401-412.
8
5/16 / Social contexts and metacognition
Hogan, K. (2001) Collective metacognition: The interplay of individual, social, and cultural meanings in small groups' reflective thinking. In Columbus, F. (Ed.), Advances in psychology research, vol. 7, pages 199-239.
Valot, C. (2002). An ecological approach to metacognitive regulation in the adult. In P. Chambres, M. Izaute & P.-J. Marescaux (Eds.), Metacognition: Process, function and use (pp. 105-120). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
9
5/23 / Open session – the group will decide whether to read new or revisit old stuff.
10 5/30 / Project Sharing: Informal sharing of projects