Emerging trends in pedagogy

1. Metacognitive strategies for appropriate
learning
Muhammad Ayoob Babar
Reg. No. 140-FSS/PHDEDU/F17
Department Of Education
International Islamic University, Islamabad

2.  Definition
 Characteristics
 Pedagogical strategies
 Strengths
 Limitations
 Conclusion
 References
Contents

3. Metacognition
Our ability to know what we know and what we
do not know; how I think; and what helps me learn.
john Flavell (1971)
Meta cognition is thinking about thinking,
knowing “what we know” and what we don’t know.
Paris’s et al. (1996)

4. Meta cognitive knowledge
means having a ‘toolkit’ of
cognitive processes
Meta cognitive regulation
is the management of these
processes

5. Metacognitive Strategies
Plan Monitor Evaluate
Before beginning a task
Set goals, plan the
content sequence
Choose strategies
While working on a task
Check the comprehension
After completing the task
Assess how well you have
accomplish the task
Strategies are skills used for planning, monitoring, and
evaluation the learning activity (Wendon, 1998)

6. A teaching strategy that employs the scientific method in
searching for information
1. Teacher modeling of problem solving steps

7. When posed a question or a
problem, ask the students to think
about an answer .this is done
individually
The students then pair up and
discuss their answers with each
others. Talk about similarities,
dissimilarities, etc
Lastly, the students then share
their answers with the rest of the
class, promoting discussion and
understanding of the topic
2. Think-pair-share

8. 3. Foster Self-reflection
personal reflection during
and after learning
experiences, encourage
learners to critically
analyze their own
assumptions and how this
may have influenced their
learning.
We don't learn from experience, we learn from
reflecting on experience
John Dewey

9. Ask questions that allow
learners
 To reflect on their own
learning processes and
strategies.
4. Ask Questions

10. 5. Encourage Self-questioning
Foster independent
learning by asking
learners to generate their
own questions and answer
them to enhance
comprehension. The
questions can be related
to meeting their personal
goals.

11. Teacher set the goal and then the students are
able to see what they have done and what they
are capable of.
6. Goal setting

12. 7. Activation of Prior Knowledge
KWL
K----stands for what
students KNOW,
W---for what they want to
know,
L---for what they learned

13. 8. Provide Opportunities for Making Errors
When learners are given the opportunity to make
errors while in training, such as during
simulations, it stimulates reflection on the causes
of their errors.
Experience is simply the name we give to mistakes
Oscar Wilde

14. 9. Solve Problems with a Team
Cooperative problem
solving can enhance
metacognitive strategies by
discussing possible
approaches with team
members and learning
from each other

15. Brainstorming encourages
people to think in a free and
open way with no restrictions.
As a result they often generate
more possibilities than they
would using just a structured
approach
10. Brainstorming
Brainstorming gives everyone the opportunity to contribute
his/her ideas, reveal background knowledge

16. Think Aloud help students
learn to monitor their thinking
as they read an assigned
passage.
This process reveals how
much they understand a text.
11. Think Aloud Problem Solving Self- questioning

17. 12. graphic organizers/ Semantic mapping
 Students use story
maps to help them
organize information from
a story.
 They use the story
maps as a guide they retell
the story in graphic form.
E.g. Hare and Tortoise

18. 13. Webbing
 Cause and effect diagram
 Relationship charts among character and actions
 Compare and contrast

19. 14. Story telling and retelling
The teacher tell or read the
relevant stories to the students,
and the students retell the
story in their own words

20. Strengths
 Shapes active rather than passive learners
 Gives learner sense of control over learning
 Learning how to learn.
 Helps to promote “deep learning”
 Engage with material that is to be learned

21. Cont..
Encourage learner to take more responsibility
 develop independent learners who can control their
own learning
 Provides self- monitoring, which is a step-by-step
process of evaluation during the learning process
 Develop higher learning and problem solving skills

22. Limitations
Difficulty in problem solving
 Poor language and communication skills
 Difficulty in obtaining success in society

23.  Teaching metacognitive strategies enabled students
to develop their metacognitive skills and solve simple as
well complex problems easily and without any
hesitation.
Conclusion
 Students solve a complex problem by segmenting it
and then solving through asking a chain of self addressed
questions for clarifying their thoughts and judgments
(Teong, 2000).

24.  Students who stimulate metacognitive processes
easily analyze the requirements of a problem or
learning situation and think about possible and
appropriate strategies for that specific situation
(Schraw et al. 2006).
Cont..

25. References
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological
engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427-445.
Bryant, D. P., Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Ugel, N., Hamff, A., & Hougen, M. (2000). Reading outcomes for
students with and without reading disabilities in general education middle-school content area classes. Learning
Disability Quarterly, 23(4), 238.
 Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children's reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by
working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 31-42.
Caldwell, J., & Leslie, L. (2004). Does proficiency in middle school reading assure proficiency in high school
reading? the possible role of think-alouds. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47(4), 324.
Dole, J. A., & Others, (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction.
Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 239-64.
Eilam, B., Zeidner, M., & Aharon, I. (2009). Student conscientiousness, self-regulated learning, and science
achievement: An explorative field study. Psychology in the Schools, 46(5), 420-432.
Eilers, L. H., & Pinkley, C. (2006). Metacognitive strategies help students to comprehend all text. Reading
Improvement, 43(1), 13-29.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitivedevelopmental inquiry.
American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911.
Freeman, R. (1982, April). Improving the Comprehension of Stories Using Predictive Strategies. Paper presented
at the Annual Meeting of the International Reading Association, Chicago, IL. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Lenz, B. K., Schumaker, J. B., Deshler, D. D., & Beals, V. L. (1984). The word identification strategy (Learning
Startegies Curriculum). Lawrence: University of Kansas.
 Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.

26. Cont..
No Child Left Behind Act of 2002. H.R. 1, 107th Cong., Report 107 -334 (2002).
Paris, S. G., Wasik, B. A. & Turner, J. C. (1996). The development of strategic readers. In R. Barr, M.
I., Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (vol. 2, pp. 609-640).
Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching (3rd ed.). New
York: The Guilford Press.
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, PUB. L. 93-112
Rader, L. A. (2009). Teaching students to visualize: Nine key questions for success. Preventing
School Failure, 54(2), 126-132.
Raphael, T. E. (1986). Teaching question answer relationships, revisited. Reading Teacher, 39(6),
516-22.
Rosenshine, B. (1995). Advances in research on instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 88(5),
262-68.
 Scharlach, T. D. (2008). START comprehending: Students and teachers actively reading text.
Reading Teacher, 62(1), 20-31.
Therrien, W. J., Wickstrom, K., & Jones, K. (2006). Effect of a combined repeated reading and
question generation intervention on reading achievement. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,
21(2), 89-97.
Wagoner, S. A. (1983). Comprehension monitoring: What it is and what we know about it. Reading
Research Quarterly, 18(3), 328-46.

27. Thanks