Metacognition and learning to learn

As Richard Bennett suggests in Chapter 4, the notion that teachers should develop better ways of helping children learn how to learn was funda- mental to Papert’s (1980) constructionism and to the educational development of LOGO. In 2004, David Miliband, the UK Minister for School Standards, commissioned a report to clarify the concept of ‘learning to learn’. The working group included leading academics and head teachers and in their final report they argued:

[While] the more precise specification of the family of practices that constitute learning to learn must await both further psychological research and educational developments. We are for the present con- vinced that a very important or senior member of the family, one we regard as at the core of learning to learn, is metacognition . . . Much of what teachers do in helping students to learn how to learn consists of strengthening their metacognitive capacity, namely the capacity to monitor, evaluate, control and change how they think and learn. This is

a critical feature of personalised learning (Hargreaves 2005: 7, 18)

In Chapter 6 David Whitebread has argued that the ability to deal with higher order and more abstract relationships is dependent upon the use of language and other forms of symbolic representation. The implications of

ICT IN THE EARLY YEARS

this for ICT education are identified further by Janet Cooke and John Woollard (Chapter 7) who describe projects in which children have been given specific play experiences to aid the development of symbolism. Cooke and Wollard cite research that shows that this supports the children’s development of problem-solving and early literacy. Computers provide a means by which young children may be supported in their manipulation of symbols and representations on the screen in a useful manner that allows them to distance themselves from the signifying objects. Screen-based activities might therefore support the processes of verbal reflection and abstraction (Forman 1984). This is a theme specifi- cally addressed by Bowman et al. (2001) in the US National Research Council’s report Eager to Learn: Educating our Preschoolers. The report strongly endorses the application of computers in early childhood:

Computers help even young children think about thinking, as early proponents suggested (Papert 1980). In one study, pre-schoolers who used computers scored higher on measures of metacognition (Fletcher- Flinn and Suddendorf 1996). They were more able to keep in mind a number of different mental states simultaneously and had more sophis- ticated theories of mind than those who did not use computers

(Bowman et al. 2001: 229) The Concise Dictionary of Psychology defines metacognition as: ‘having

knowledge or awareness of one’s own cognitive processes’ (Statt 1998). Metacognition has been associated with effective learning in numerous contexts (Larkin 2000), and the concept has also been applied by educa- tors seeking to design effective pedagogy. There is a general consensus that metacognition develops as the individual finds it necessary to describe, explain and justify their thinking about different aspects of the world to others (Perner et al. 1994; Lewis et al. 1996; Pelligrini et al. 1997). For most children such a ‘theory of mind’ develops at about 4 years 6 months (Tan- Niam et al. 1999). Research shows that children’s pretend play becomes reciprocal and complementary at about the same time (Howes and Matheson 1992). Research has established that a child with a ‘theory of mind’ is able to understand that other people have minds of their own; that other individuals have their own understandings and motivations; and that they usually act according to their individual understanding and motivations even when they are mistaken.

It can be seen from the above that those applications likely to be effective in supporting the development of metacognition are also those most effective in supporting socio-dramatic play. These are also the applications that tend to be more effective in supporting communication and collaboration.

As Katz and Chard (1996) have suggested perhaps the greatest contribu- tion of Reggio Emilia to early childhood education is in their use of the

TOWARDS A FUTURE EARLY YEARS ICT CURRICULUM

‘documentation’ of children’s experience as a standard element in class- room practice. Documentation typically includes samples of a child’s work at several different stages of completion; photographs show work in pro- gress; comments are written by the teacher or other adults working with the children; transcriptions of children’s discussions and comments; and explanations of intentions about the activity and comments made by the parents are recorded.

Documentation provides a means by which children are encouraged to reflect upon their own work and that of their peers. They therefore; ‘become even more curious, interested, and confident as they contemplate the meaning of what they have achieved’ (Malaguzzi 1993: 63). It provides

a means by which the children’s ideas and work may be validated. When the children’s efforts, intentions, and ideas are shown so clearly to be taken seriously this encourages them to approach their work with greater responsibly, energy and commitment.

Documentation provides a means of communication with parents which may often lead to them to become more involved in their child’s learning and may even lead to parents re-examining the assumptions that they have made regarding their own role in the child’s education (Malaguzzi 1993: 64). Documentation also provides information for practitioner research and can serve to sharpen and focus the teachers’ attention on the learning that is taking place within their setting.

Metacognition and learning to learn