Differences between revisions 63 and 64
Revision 63 as of 2018-05-16 08:50:15
Size: 17967
Editor: IstvanToth
Comment:
Revision 64 as of 2018-05-16 09:02:41
Size: 17962
Editor: IstvanToth
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 173: Line 173:
Flavell and Wellman, 1977 - ''Perspectives on the development of memory and cognition'' Flavell and Wellman (1977) - ''Perspectives on the development of memory and cognition''
Line 179: Line 179:
Harris, K. R., Reid, R. R., & Graham, S. (2004). ''Self-regulation among students with LD and ADHD''. In ''Learning About Learning Disabilities (Third Edition)'' (pp. 167-195). Harris, K. R., Reid, R. R., & Graham, S. (2004). ''Self-regulation among students with LD and ADHD''. In ''Learning About Learning Disabilities (Third Edition)'' 167-195.

Metacognition of reading

Definition of Metacognition


First of all, what is metacognition?

  • To put it in a simple way it means « thinking about thinking » (Anderson, 2002)
  • According to Byrd et al. (2001), it is self-awareness of mental process.

⇒ it refers to both the knowledge and the control over our own thinking and learning, an awareness and understanding of one’s own thought processes

According to some studies there are four variables in the metacognition of reading: (Brown and Baker, 1981; Flavell and Wellman, 1977)

  1. The text – features of the material that has to be learned (difficulty,familiarity,interest..etc)

  2. The task – the act of memorizing by the reader.

  3. The strategies- which we will discuss later on.

  4. The learner's characteristics- ability,motivation

The metacognitive strategies of learning/reading involve processes such as (Armbruster et al., 1983):

  • Planning: assessing knowledge before reading : What don’t I know? What do I need from this text?

  • Monitoring: literal reading isn’t enough, connections have to be made in between prior knowledge and the read text: Do I understand what I just read ? We thereby determine whether that new information is relevant or not

  • Summarizing/Evaluating: Is what I am doing working?



Reading strategies


Reading strategies can be used to improve one's understanding of a text, in order to be more effective.

We can differentiate various reading strategies: (Pressley and Afflerbach, 1995)

  1. overview before reading (chuncking/pre-segmenting the reading time)
  2. look for important information and pay greater attention to it (highlighting words)
  3. relate important points to one another
  4. activate and use prior knowledge(combining knowledge)
  5. change strategies when understanding is not good (read out loud...)
  6. monitor understanding and take action to correct inaccuracies in comprehension.(margin notes)

Studies show that unsuccessful students lack this strategic approach to reading (Garcia et al, 1998; Karbalaei, 2010).

It was also found that dyslexic readers (poor text comprehension and spelling abilities) frequently use metacognitive strategies as a compensation to try and understand the text better (Kirby et al, 2008).

Those reading techniques can be studied statistically: we will first consider a possible correlation in between reading techniques & gender, then in a second time we will consider the efficiency differences in between various reading techniques

Statistical approach-Gender correlation

We decided to carry out a statistical research in our second year veterinary class, in order to see what kind of metacognitive strategies were mainly used by our fellow students. The population is of 60 individuals (48 women, 12 men), all second year veterinary students. This ration of 80/20 can be considered representative of our class

Throughout a poll, we collected data concerning the main reading techniques of each individuals →The frequency proportions of reading techniques (in each gender) are displayed in the following Mosaicplot (see Fig.1):

The mosaicplot will display the mainly used reading technique in each gender (i.e: the bigger the "grey square" on the mosaic plot, the larger the frequency (of the related reading technique)).

Mosaicplot.png
Fig. 1
Frequency distribution of the different reading techniques according to the Gender

  • Chunking (or dividing): a sentence is put into phrases by slashes

  • Combining notes: making/gathering notes from different sources (books, internet, former students’ notes…)

  • Margin notes: annotations within the margin, arrow pointing at some specific parts of the text…

We can observe that the distributions (of frequencies here) are similar in between women and men, even though no male individual of the study chose "Read out loud" as a main reading technique.

⇒ It appears that there would be no correlation (independence) in between the chosen reading technique and the individual's gender.

We can now realise a Fisher's exact test in order to test our independence hypothesis:

A fisher exact test of independence can be applied here since our population size is quite small (only 60 individuals) Our null hypothesis here is the independence of reading technique and gender. We obtain a p-value of 0.5602.

Since p>0.05, we cannot rightfully reject this null hypothesis, nor say that the result is significant.

⇒We cannot rightfully conclude that the reading techniques are independent of the gender.

Statistical approach-Reading efficiency

We could also study the correlation in between the chosen reading techniques and the results obtained at examinations. Rather than asking our classmates what were their exam results/grades, we will here use another research (Shikano, 2016)

In this research, the qualitative study is based of 44 Japanese L2 learners at the university level. We can differentiate:

  • 15 participants who scored 1/3 in a summary quiz: so-called "less efficient readers"

  • 10 participants who scored 3/3 in the same quiz: so-called "efficient readers"

QuizJapanese.png
Fig. 2
Reading Efficiencies

In this study, we see a net difference in reading techniques according to the efficiency of the reader.

⇒We could then suppose that highlighting words, underlining sentences and making margin notes would be more efficient than chuncking for example (see fig.2) Through this statistical approaches, one could classify reading techniques in accordance to the efficiency they can provide.



Metacognition of reading and the brain


Looking for the part of the brain responsible for metacognition is like looking for the holy grail. (i.e: Most of the brain related mechanisms remain yet to be discovered)

We don't yet know how it really works. What we know is that the Anterior Cingulate Cortex = ACC is involved in metacognition according to the studies of Luo et al. (2004). They performed the « Aha » experience (the feeling you get when understanding the solution to a problem after spending a lot of time trying to solve it), using MRI imaging to show which parts of the brain were activated in the process. ⇒They have shown that the ACC is related to metacognition & understanding (the ACC is located in the medial frontal lobe, in front of the corpus callosum: yellow area in fig.3).

AnteriorCingulateCortex.png
Fig. 3
Anterior Cingulate Cortex (yellow)

It is also clear that the frontal lobes -especially in the prefrontal cortex- are essential in metacognition. (Pannu and Kaszniak, 2005). The prefrontal cortex is the area managing complex processes like reason or logic.

  • It has been shown that patients with frontal lobe damage have an impaired metacognition. (Shimamura and Squire, 1986; Shimamura, 2000).

Neuroimaging studies showed that prefrontal cortex is active during judgments of learning, feeling of knowing and tip of the tongue states. It was also shown that some drugs impair metacognition, like benzodiazepines, inducing a mild amnesia.(Bacon and Schwartz, 2008)

There is a region in the brain that stays a mystery for scientists but has shown some connection to the human consciousnes: The Claustrum (see Fig.4) is a thin sheet of grey matter highly connected to the rest of the brain. Its name means « hidden away » (Crick and Koch, 2005) because it is hidden in the inner surface of the neocortex in the center of the brain. (Claustrum is in blue on Fig.4)

Claustrum.png
Fig. 4
Claustrum (blue fibers)

Extensive neuron projections have been discovered between the claustrum and the cortex, making it possible to achieve many higher cognitive functions, like problem solving or creativity(Buchanan and Johnson, 2011; Crick and Koch, 2005; Minciacchi et al., 1995; Tanne-Gariepy et al., 2002; Wilhite et al., 1986; Schwartz et al., 2008).

The claustrum also has connections to subcortical structures (Thalamus, Basal ganglia, Brasinstem...) (Arikuni and Kubota, 1985; Berke, 1960; Buchanan and Johnson, 2011; Crick and Koch, 2005; Salerno et al., 1990; Tanne-Gariepy et al., 2002).

  • ⇒ The claustrum would be involved in receiving, assimilating, integrating, and channeling information throughout the brain (Edelstein and Denaro, 2004; Remedios et al, 2014; Torgerson et al., 2015)



Ways to induce awareness of metacognitive learning


We could improve the metacognitive learning skills of individuals within a population by:

  • Introducing -at an early stage of life at school- personality tests to determine what type of learner each individual is

  • How professionals (psychologists; counsellors) guide students with adapted methods according to their own learning capabilities (visual, auditive, etc) and how culture of different countries can affect this. (Volet, 1991)

  • Detect at an early stage whether a child is dyslexic/ autistic/ suffers from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) or any Learning Disability (LD) for instance to help facilitate the knowledge of which type of learning is appropriate to such individuals.(Harris et al, 2004)

  • Incorporating stress management workshops in school to smoothen learning.

A number of self-regulation processes or strategies can be effectively taught to students with deficiencies or difficulties in self-regulation to aid in their development of these capabilities. Children with LDs and ADHD often exhibit problem behavior in the classroom. This may take the form of inappropriate verbalizations, impulsive or inappropriate behaviors, or excessive motor activity. Hence determining the problem at an early stage can help in self-regulation among students and their teachers (Harris et al, 2004)


It would also appear that groups and communities can affect Metacognition:

For example, in communities and countries where people are more conventional and adopt more traditional ways of learning, they are not so open in trying to find out new strategies of learning for a child.

  • ⇒So we believe that in such cases the individual best learning strategy of the child might be neglected. Hence efficiency is decreased.



Conclusion


Metacognition of learning goes beyond the idea of simply adjusting the mind to a specific way of learning. It requires an awareness of higher order thinking, which enables understanding, analysis and control of one's cognitive processes. By acknowledging the involved processes, one can enhance its foccusing ability along with its efficiency. However, the efficiency of the different reading strategies depends on the type of learner the person is: some people are more visual, or auditive etc... So we each have to find appropriated(/better-fitting) ways of studying.

The metacognition of reading will concern the visual areas of the brain (reading activity itself), as well as the prefrontal (reason and logic) and anterior cingulate cortex (where the important informations of the text are being treated and dealt with) and also the Claustrum (problem solving & creativity).Metacognition of learning also demands a deep understanding of the geographical location/culture of the concerned people. Performing early personal tests can help determine what type of learner a person is.



References


Anderson, N. J. (2002). The Role of Metacognition in Second Language Teaching and Learning. ERIC Digest.

Arikuni, T., & Kubota, K. (1985). Claustral and amygdaloid afferents to the head of the caudate nucleus in macaque monkeys. Neuroscience research, 2(4), 239-254.

Armbruster, B. B. (1983). The Role of Metacognition in Reading to Learn: A Developmental Perspective. Reading Education Report No. 40.

Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. Handbook of reading research, 1(353), V394.

Berke, J. J. (1960). The claustrum, the external capsule and the extreme capsule of Macaca mulatta. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 115(3), 297-331.

Buchanan, K. J., & Johnson, J. I. (2011). Diversity of spatial relationships of the claustrum and insula in branches of the mammalian radiation. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1225(1).

Byrd, E. H., Carter, E. C., & Waddoups, S. D. (2000). Taking control of your college reading and learning. Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Cortimiglia, R., Crescimanno, G., Salerno, M. T., & Amato, G. (1991). The role of the claustrum in the bilateral control of frontal oculomotor neurons in the cat. Experimental brain research, 84(3), 471-477.

Crick, F. C., & Koch, C. (2005). What is the function of the claustrum?. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 360(1458), 1271-1279.

Edelstein, L. R., & Denaro, F. J. (2004). The claustrum: a historical review of its anatomy, physiology, cytochemistry and functional significance. Pathology, 104, 368-415.

Flavell and Wellman (1977) - Perspectives on the development of memory and cognition

Furnes, B., & Norman, E. (2015). Metacognition and reading: Comparing three forms of metacognition in normally developing readers and readers with dyslexia. Dyslexia, 21(3), 273-284.

García, G. E., Jiménez, R. T., & Pearson, P. D. (1998). Metacognition, childhood bilingualism, and reading. Metacognition in educational theory and practice, 193-219.

Harris, K. R., Reid, R. R., & Graham, S. (2004). Self-regulation among students with LD and ADHD. In Learning About Learning Disabilities (Third Edition) 167-195.

Karbalaei, A. (2010). A comparison of the metacognitive reading strategies used by EFL and ESL readers. The Reading Matrix, 10(2).

Kirby, J. R., & Savage, R. S. (2008). Can the simple view deal with the complexities of reading?. Literacy, 42(2), 75-82.

Luo, J., Niki, K., & Phillips, S. (2004). The function of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) in the insightful solving of puzzles: The ACC is activated less when the structure of the puzzle is known. Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, 5(2), 195-213.

Minciacchi, D., Granato, A., Antonini, A., Tassinari, G., Santarelli, M., Zanolli, L., & Macchi, G. (1995). Mapping subcortical extrarelay afferents onto primary somatosensory and visual areas in cats. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 362(1), 46-70.

Pannu, J. K., & Kaszniak, A. W. (2005). Metamemory experiments in neurological populations: A review. Neuropsychology review, 15(3), 105-130.

Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading.

Remedios, R., Logothetis, N. K., & Kayser, C. (2014). A role of the claustrum in auditory scene analysis by reflecting sensory change. Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 8, 44.

Schwartz, B. L., & Bacon, E. (2008). Metacognitive neuroscience. Handbook of metamemory and memory, 355-371.

Shikano, M. (2016). Metacognition in Reading: What are you thinking about what you are reading? (アカデミア文学・語学編 100 号記念論文集). アカデミア'. '文学・語学編'= Academia, (100), 13-26.

Shimamura, A. P. (2000). Toward a cognitive neuroscience of metacognition.

Shimamura, A. P., & Squire, L. R. (1986). Memory and metamemory: a study of the feeling-of-knowing phenomenon in amnesic patients. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12(3), 452.

Tanné‐Gariépy, J., Boussaoud, D., & Rouiller, E. M. (2002). Projections of the claustrum to the primary motor, premotor, and prefrontal cortices in the macaque monkey. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 454(2), 140-157.

Torgerson, C. M., Irimia, A., Goh, S. Y., & Van Horn, J. D. (2015). The DTI connectivity of the human claustrum. Human brain mapping, 36(3), 827-838.

Volet, S. E. (1991). Modelling and coaching of relevant metacognitive strategies for enhancing university students' learning. Learning and Instruction, 1(4), 319-336.

Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1990). What influences learning? A content analysis of review literature. The Journal of Educational Research, 84(1), 30-43.

MetacognitionReading (last edited 2018-05-16 09:02:41 by IstvanToth)