Emphasizing Two Underutilized Dimensions of Learning:

Metacognition and Motivation

Saundra Yancy McGuire, Ph.D.

Director, Center for Academic Success
Associate Dean, University College
Adjunct Professor, Department of Chemistry
Louisiana State University

Abstract

Teaching students about metacognition or thinking about the thought process often provides the
tools necessary to turn mediocre or failing academic performance into excellent performance.
Metacognition allows students to diagnose their own learning deficiencies and develop strategies
to attack them. This paper presents strategies to help faculty teach students metacognitive skills.
It also discusses the factors that motivate students to attempt deeper learning. The dramatic
improvement realized by four students is presented as evidence that when students are taught
metacognitive skills they become motivated and empowered to excel academically. Attached is
a list of resources.

Introduction

Students generally enter college with a number of misconceptions. Most have spent very little
time studying outside of class in high school. They are entirely unaware of the difference
between memorizing information and learning concepts, and they expect that the behaviors that
earned them A’s in high school will have the same result at the university level. In addition,
students think they have good evidence that they don’t need to study to earn high grades. The
Higher Education Research Institute’s study of entering freshmen at one large western public
university found that over 46% of the students reported earning an “A” average in high school.
However, only 34% of these students reported studying or doing homework six or more hours
per week in their senior year of high school. Furthermore, 70% of these students felt that their
academic ability was above average, or in the upper 10% of people their age. (Sax, Lindholm,
Astin, Korn,, and Mahoney, 2003). The combination of these factors: a) students’ lack of
understanding of the difference between memorization and learning, b) their overconfidence in
their academic ability, and c) their minimal effort at studying during their senior year of high
school puts them on a collision course with academic failure. However, this collision course can
be avoided if students are taught why and how to change their academic behaviors, and are
motivated to make a commitment to using their newly acquired strategies.

Teaching Students the Difference between Studying and Learning

When a group of LSU students was asked to explain the difference between studying and
learning, they posited that studying would involve forcing yourself to memorize uninteresting
information, whereas learning would involve gaining insight into material of interest to you.
They all agreed that learning was fun but studying was tedious. They further indicated that
learning could and often does happen in the absence of studying, and studying does not
necessarily result in learning. It was evident during the discussion that these students had not
previously reflected on the difference between studying and learning, but that after the discussion
they clearly understood the difference. This understanding was the first step in helping them to
turn unwelcome and tedious study sessions into engaging and interesting learning sessions. They
began to understand why a greater investment of time devoted to their academics was necessary
for success.

Teaching students about metacognition and metacognitive strategies has proven to be very
effective at helping students understand why their behavior should be changed if they want to
succeed academically. Metacognition involves thinking about thinking. It involves the ability
to 1) be consciously aware of oneself as a problem solver, 2) monitor and control one’s mental
processing, 3) recognize when one is simply memorizing facts and formulas and not
understanding the application of the information, and 4) to know that knowledge and
understanding are not handed out by an instructor, but must be constructed by the learner.
(See http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/Metacog.htm for a brief overview of
metacognition.) Introducing students to constructivist learning theory has also proven quite
useful in helping them to develop metacognitive strategies. For information on constructivist
learning theory see http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/constructivism.html. )

The examples of four LSU students provide the evidence that when students are taught how to
learn their performance usually takes an immediate and dramatic turn for the better. The
performance of the four students, contrasting their performance before and after being taught
metacognitive strategies, is shown below. (The after performances are underlined.)

¾ Travis, junior psychology student

Test scores: 47, 52, 82, 86

¾ Robert, freshman chemistry student

Test scores: 42, 100, 100, 100

¾ Aimee, junior oranic chemistry student

Test scores: 54, 82, 76, 78

¾ Terrence, junior Bio Engineering student

Cumulative GPA (after four semesters) 1.67, 3.54 (fall 2003),
3.80 (spring 2004)

When interviewed, each of these students indicated that understanding the difference between
the way they had been studying before being taught metacognitive skills and the way they
studied after they were taught metacognitive skills, was the reason for their immediate and
drastic improvement in their performance.

How Can Students Be Taught that Memorizing and Learning are Different?
Cognitive psychologists make a distinction between rote learning and meaningful learning
(Ausubel, Novak, and Hanesian, 1978). Rote learning is verbatim memorization and is not
necessarily accompanied by any understanding of the terms. Students are unable to explain
information that is learned by rote, and they are not able to paraphrase the information in their
own words. Meaningful learning, on the other hand, is learning that is tied to previous
knowledge, and it is understood well enough to be manipulated, paraphrased, and applied to
novel situations. Most learning is neither completely rote nor entirely meaningful and can be
placed on a rote-meaningful learning continuum (Ausubel, 1968).

Although most students enter college not knowing the difference between rote learning
and meaningful learning, when they are taught this distinction they are able to implement
strategies that promote meaningful learning. When they fully understand the difference between
memorizing facts and formulas for a test and working to understand the course concepts and how
the concepts relate to each other, students’ greater conceptual understanding and their success on
problem solving tasks and examinations increases substantially.
One particularly effective way to present the different types of learning is through a
discussion of the hierarchy of learning levels, shown below, similar to Bloom’s taxonomy
(Bloom, 1956).

Figure 1

Although faculty generally assumes that students know that memorizing information is not the
same as learning, this assumption is unwarranted. Formally introducing them to differences in
the levels of learning is crucial to developing the understanding of this distinction in today’s
students.

What Learning Strategies Can Students Be Taught?

The Center for Academic Success at Louisiana State University has had great success teaching
students to use The Study Cycle with Intense Study Sessions. The four-step process is described
below.

THE STUDY CYCLE

Step 1: Preview or pre-read the information that will be covered in class before class.
Spending 10 – 15 minutes reviewing chapter material (concentrating on the bold-face print,
italicized writing, figures, graphs, diagrams, etc.) prepares the mind to receive and comprehend
the material that will be discussed in lecture. These previewing provides background knowledge
for what will be covered in the lecture. Cognitive scientists have empirically demonstrated the
importance of background knowledge to understanding and acquiring new information
(Bransford, Brown, and Cocking, 2000).
Step 2: Go to class, and actively participate in lecture.
This step needs to be explicitly stated because the absenteeism in large introductory science
classes is often extremely high (approaching 50% after mid-semester).

Step 3: Review and process class notes as soon after class as possible.
Spending 10 – 15 minutes reviewing and reworking lecture notes shortly after the lecture
provides the mechanism for the information to be transferred from short-term to long-term
memory, significantly improving retention.

Step 4: Use Intense Study Sessions

Intense Study Sessions are concentrated study sessions of approximately 60 minutes duration.
During this short, but focused, study time, a considerable amount of learning can be
accomplished. The Intense Study Session consists of four segments, each of which is important
for the session to have the maximum effect on learning.
a). 2 – 5 minutes: Set goals for the next 40 minutes
b). 35 – 38 minutes: Work to accomplish the goals that were set.
c). 10 minutes Review what was studied
d). 10 minutes Take a break
Most students find that The Intense Study Sessions are real “procrastination busters” –
providing a means for targeted study sessions that are efficient and “doable”. Short, focused
sessions are more effective than three to four hour study marathons during which there is little
meaningful learning accomplished.

How can Students be Motivated?

Whereas knowledge of metacognitive strategies is a necessary condition for academic success, it

alone is not sufficient. Students must be motivated to expend the time and effort to implement
the strategies. Many instructors think that students must come to a course with their own
motivation to succeed and that the instructor plays a minimal role in student motivation.
However, Eric Hobson (2001) has shown that faculty members have a very large impact on both
positive and negative student motivation. He has found that the instructor’s attitude and the
course structure account for 49% of positive motivation and for 58% of negative motivation. In
discussions at LSU, students have indicated several course characteristics that either increase or
decrease their motivation for the course. These are presented below as motivation boosters and
motivation busters.

Motivation Boosters
• Partial credit for partially correct answers
 • Letting students use their own problem solving method
• Somewhat flexible grading scale based on student performance
• Demonstrated personal interest in having EVERY student succeed!

Motivation Busters
• Multiple choice tests with no opportunity for partial credit
• Requiring students to use one problem solving method
• Absolute grading scale with no flexibility
• Attitude that most students are not prepared to do well and probably won’t!

When students find that they can increase their learning by using metacognitive strategies, and
that instructors have structured the course in a way that motivates the students to excel, most
students can shift their paradigm from simply memorizing information to perform well on a test
or quiz to learning the material for conceptual understanding. This results in an increase in
critical thinking, problem solving skills, test performance, and grades!

What Additional Resources are Available to Students?

The campus learning support center, found on many campuses, is a very important but
underutilized resource to help students develop metacognitive skills. Instructors can partner
with the learning center to have learning strategies information presented in classes and to assist
individual students. Often students will utilize the learning center if their instructor recommends
it, but most are not likely to visit it on their own.

Final Note: Please visit theLSU’s Center for Academic Success Website at
http://www.cas.lsu.edu/. We have on-line workshops that will introduce instructors and students
to effective learning and study strategies. Our students can change their attitudes and behaviors
about learning. However, we must help them do this by teaching them strategies and holding
them accountable for meaningful learning.

References and Resources

Ausubel, D. P. (1968) Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York, NY: Holt,
Reinhart and Winston.
Ausubel, D.P., Novak, J., and Hanesian, H. (1978). Psychology: A cognitive view. New York,
NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Bloom, B.S. (Ed.)., (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. The classification of
educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay.
Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., Cocking, R.R. (Eds.) , How people learn: brain, mind,
experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Bruer, J.T. (2000). Schools for thought: A science of learning in the classroom. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Hobson, Eric (2003), Motivating Students to Perform in Large Classes, presented at the
Professional and Organizational Development (POD) Network Conference, 2001.
Robinson, Adam (1993). What smart students know. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.
Sax, L.J., Lindholm, J. A., Astin, A.W., Korn, W.S., and Mahoney, K.M. (2003) “The American
Freshman: National Norms for Fall 2002”. Los Angeles, CA: Higher Education Research
Institute.

Website for the Center for Academic Success at Louisiana State University.
http://www.cas.lsu.edu/