task in education meaning

• Erasmus+ Resources

9.4 /10 on 38.000 verified reviews

Introduction to Task-Based Learning (TBL)

What is a task and what is the best way to define and describe Task-Based Learning?

Do you think that incorporating meaningful tasks is a good way to motivate your learners?

Written by Sheila Corwin

Teacher Trainer in Florence

Task-Based Learning: what it is?

Task-Based Learning (TBL) is all about your students creating, producing, or designing something in class… it could be anything… anything at all. TBL includes the 21st Century skills of Communication, Collaboration, Creativity, and Critical Thinking (4C’s) and can also be described as a short interactive assignment that results in a finished product.

The Task part of Task-Based Learning has been (more or less) defined by linguistic scholars as:

• things people do in everyday life (Long, 1985).
• a goal-oriented activity that leads to an outcome or result (Willis, 1996).
• a completed work plan which can be assessed (Ellis, 2003).

What kind of activity is a task?

In 2007, Jane Willis and her husband Dave Willis came up with the following criteria in their book Doing Task-Based Teaching (pp. 12-14) which can be used to discern a task:

• Will the activity engage learners’ interest?
• Is there a primary focus on meaning?
• Is there a goal or an outcome?
• Is success judged in terms of the result?
• Is completion a priority?
• Does the activity relate to real-world activities?

If your answer is yes to all the questions, you can be sure that the classroom activity you have in mind is task-like.

Task-Based Learning and Task-Based Language Teaching

TBL is an approach to teaching that was originally used by second or foreign-language teachers. It is an approach that stems from Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) – a language teacher methodology – which emerged in the 1970s.

Language teachers originally adopted Task-Based Learning for a variety of reasons with the most important being the desire to make their classrooms more student-centered, communicative, and collaborative by incorporating more interactive tasks.

Task-Based Learning (TBL) is also known as Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) and Task-Based Instruction (TBI). Its principal focus is on the completion of meaningful tasks. Such tasks can include creating a poster, producing a newsletter, video, or pamphlet, or designing a map of the school or neighborhood.

The Task Cycle > Task / Plan / Report

The TBL formula includes the following stages:

The teacher introduces the topic and gives students clear instructions and guidelines on what they will be doing during the three-part task cycle (below). This phase will give students a clear understanding of what will be expected of them and include any important knowledge or details they need to know.

This is also a good time to lead into the task by brainstorming or asking questions about the topic. Teachers can also get students ready for the task by presenting an example of the task or introducing a picture, audio, or video which will be useful in completing the task.

Students get ready to do the task. Students are given what they need to complete the task (handouts and written instructions) and are assigned to work in pairs or small groups while the teacher monitors and offers encouragement when necessary. The teacher’s role is typically limited to one of a coach, guide, and facilitator.

Students work on the task in pairs or small groups and prepare to report or present their results or product. They make important decisions about their presentation and assign each person in the group with a part of the task to present, so everyone takes responsibility during the report stage. The group rehearses its presentation. The teacher walks around, helps if needed, and takes notes on anything that needs to be addressed after the presentations.

Report/Present

Students present their findings to the class in the form of a presentation. The rest of the class listens to the reports and writes down feedback which will be given to the presenters after all reports have been heard. The class can also ask questions or provide some quick oral feedback after each presentation. The teacher also gives feedback on the content as well. Students vote on the best presentation, report, or product.

After presenting their completed task, others in the class can offer constructive feedback.

Several ways to do so include:

• Two stars and a wish – two positive things about the presentation and one suggestion,
• The 3, 2, 1, Formula – Three likes, Two suggestions, and One question.
• Finally, feedback can be given based on things like the content of the presentation, use of visuals, eye contact, etc.

How to create your own TBL lesson

Here is a template for creating your own Task-Based Learning lesson or activity:

• Design a ……………………………………
• Create a …………………………………….
• Produce a …………………………………..
• Task: What would you like your students to design, create, or produce?
• Plan: What specific instructions will you give your students for doing this task and what guidelines should they follow during their planning stage?
• Report/Present: What do you want your students to report or present and how much time will you give them to explain or present their ideas?

There are many different TBL interpretations so don’t hesitate to make it your own.

An example of Task-Based Learning Activity

Jane Willis (1996) came up with A Framework for Task-Based Learning that includes coming up with tasks that revolve around a certain topic. This can be very useful for teachers looking for task ideas to engage their students during a lesson.

See the example to follow:

Topic: Travel

• Listing : List three reasons why people love to travel.
• Ordering, Sorting, and Classifying : Put pictures of different travel destinations in order from the most desired to the least desired destination. Sort travel destinations from the northern to the southern hemisphere. Classify destinations by languages people speak.
• Comparing or Matching: Compare different countries. Match people to their country of origin.
• Problem Solving: Think of three low-budget travel destinations.
• Creative Task : Create a travel poster or find out about different countries and become an expert on a country that you would like to travel to in the future.
• Share Personal Experiences : Share stories about past travel destinations. Write a poem about your favorite place and share it with the class.

6 Advantages of Task-Based Learning

• Students are at the center of learning.
• Students are working on something that is personal and relevant to them.
• Students gain practice in collaborating with others and making group decisions.
• Students spend a lot of time communicating.
• Students take on responsibility for engaged learning .
• TBL is enjoyable , motivating, and a great place to start for teachers thinking about incorporating more Project Based Learning at their schools or classrooms.

Task-Based Learning has many interpretations and you, the teacher, can adapt and make anything your own. Although TBL was originally developed with language teachers in mind, the core of every Task-Based Learning lesson, as the name suggests, is the task.

A Task-Based approach offers an alternative for teachers who are interested in creating a more student-centered environment in their classroom. In a task-based class, the lesson is based on the completion of a central task and its presentation.

TBL incorporates all 4C’s and is a great way to get students used to working on Project Based Learning (PBL) because it includes many of the same skills but, in a smaller, more digestible way.

Whereas PBL requires working on a project for an extended period, TBL can be done in one or two lessons and can be a good starting point for teaching students how to communicate, collaborate and work on presentations with others.

• Willis D. and J. Willis (2007) Doing Task-based Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press
• Willis J. (1996) A Framework for Task-based Learning. Harlow: Longman Pearson Education

8 thoughts on “ Introduction to Task-Based Learning (TBL) ”

Hello, I do not use project-based learning techniques with my lessons. However, I have successfully used other methods and techniques.

Hi Mehmet, TBL or Task Based Learning is a very small PBL and can be a good place to start for teachers who are interested in incorporating more communication, collaboration, creativity, and collaboration between students in their classrooms.

Yes, I think that collaborative method and game-based learning develop students’ creativity. Of course, we can say that these also contribute to many more mental development of children.

Thanks to Sheila i met in’Florence in January 2018, I use Willis´s model to set up TBL in class…it does work very well.

Now I am a teacher trainer and I teach them how to set up this pedagogical method in class.

So glad you’ve found this approach useful to you in both your own classroom and in your training of other teachers. By the way, I have very fond memories of you in my teacher training classroom, Chantal. =)

I find it more helpful for teachers and useful to students

It’s great to have formulas.

I think all of my students have a delay, but i don´t care too much, everyone is different. Thanks to this method they can continue learning easier and faster. It´s very frecommended to follow a procces so you don´t get mix-up.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me via e-mail if anyone answers my comment.

Hey! You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Learning Tasks: Turning a Dry Subject into an Engaging Experience

H ow do you teach a dry subject effectively, particularly in the workplace? In what ways can you engage your students when your content has a high level of abstraction? What strategies are most effective to bring “learning to task”?

In the next pages, I provide some practical tips and advice about the design and use of learning tasks — experiential, hands-on activities — based on my 15 years of experience as an adult educator and leaning heavily on the contributions of Jane Vella in this field. In Taking Learning to Task: Creative Strategies for Teaching Adults (Jossey-Bass, 2000), Vella describes “a different approach, where teaching and learning are integrated and where the learning task is the overall design.” These learning tasks introduce learners to the intricacies of applying what they have learned to their daily work. Despite some disadvantages (they can take a little longer than lectures and can be messier to handle), I believe that learning tasks are an effective way to teach for results. This article will discuss:

Use the learning tasks ideas outlined in this article to design workplace training sessions that foster collaborative learning and “unlearning.”

1. What “mind shift” is necessary to be able to teach with learning tasks;

2. What is a learning task;

3. What are the four types of learning tasks that, properly sequenced, can generate engagement and fun, no matter what the content you teach;

4. How to debrief a learning task to maximize its learning potential for your students.

So-called “domain knowledge” (concepts, facts, and procedures), while often necessary, seems largely insufficient to empower people to solve problems at work.

Why Learning Tasks

I am biased! My personal way to train in the workplace emphasizes results through group work, learners’ autonomy, and a new role for the trainer as a facilitator of learning rather than a conveyer of content. My biases bring me to see collaboration/diversity and hands-on experiences/action as necessary conditions for learning to take place.

These biases come from my direct observation. So-called “domain knowledge” (concepts, facts, and procedures), while often necessary, seems largely insufficient to empower people to solve problems at work. Adult learners generally are not interested in formal knowledge — the “knowing about” the entire background behind what they are learning. Rather, they are focused on “knowing how,”, “knowing when,” and “knowing if in order to improve their own ability to solve problems, often with limited time and incomplete information, in the context of their day-to-day tasks. The result of this focus is the creation of new meanings, new connections, and new expertise with the qualities of immediate returns, clear transferability, and evident usefulness. Learning tasks support this kind of integration.

In addition, I have noticed that by using learning tasks, aside from helping trainees acquire the necessary skills on the subject at hand, we build a true organizational ability to learn through action and reflection. This kind of learning involves the creation of knowledge rather than the consumption of data. Learning tasks thus nurture students’ capacity for actively integrating new concepts into their existing work practice on a given subject.

Building Blocks for Creating Expertise

Learning tasks are not just fun games and activities that supplement lectures or exercises to practice the content. They are a different way to teach altogether, where the tasks themselves are the whole shebang. According to Vella, “A learning task is a way to structure dialogue. It is an open question put to members of a small group who have been given all the resources they need to respond.” She also says, “A learning task is a way of ensuring engagement of learners with the new content.”

Learning tasks are based on the assumption that new expertise is built through experiences. They expose learners to situations where they can safely practice the content they are learning and collaboratively nurture their own ability to solve problems with their new skills. The work of designing learning tasks is turning content elements into problem-solving experiences set to resemble the learners’ work context. Three key moments make up a learning task: instructions, task, and debrief.

1. The Instructions (5 percent of the total time for the lesson) are given by the trainers to present the activity, demonstrate its basic components, and provide guidance on how to perform it (see “Learning Task Instructions”). So, for example, for a task I assign in my “Emotional Intelligence of Team Results” workshop, I say to students:

• Introduction, Goal, and Reason: “Have you ever thought about what the one thing is that gets you going? Self-awareness is a key skill to build your emotional intelligence. In the next task, we are focusing on your self-knowledge, which the ancients Greeks considered the source of all wisdom. By doing this, we are gaining the clarity required to start building your emotional IQ.”
• Instructions 1: “I invite you to read the poem on page 23 and individually write in your learning journals the responses to the three questions that you find there. I will then ask you to share your thoughts with a person you have never worked with before.”
• Instructions 2:, “Again, Step 1: Read the poem on page 23. Step 2: Write down your answers to the three questions in your learning journals. Step 3: When I ring the bell, please turn to a person you normally do not work with and share your answers. You have 15 minutes for this task.”
• Question:, “Any questions?”

LEARNING TASK INSTRUCTIONS

• INTRODUCTION, GOAL, REASON
• INSTRUCTIONS 1 (what to do, how much time, what happened in the end, and so on)
• INSTRUCTIONS 2 (repeat)

There is an art in giving good, specific, clear instructions. Instructors present the activity and the materials and check people’s understanding of how to proceed. They clearly state why they selected the activity and what they hope it will accomplish. It is imperative to provide clear goals for the exercise (for example, “We are doing this task for these reasons . . .”), because the smallest omission or lack of clarity will make people practice the wrong way, will thwart their chances of success, and will undermine their learning. Trainers also need to state what the reward is for the activity, that is, what positive outcome will come from doing it right.

2. The Task is the actual exercise (55 percent of the total time for the lesson). Participants work on solving a problem to practice the content to be learned. The task always comes with written resources and materials. For instance, in the previous example, I ask people to go to page 23 to read a poem. The task is about reading, reflecting, and sharing as a way to experientially build self-awareness.

3. The Debrief is the review/ debriefing phase (40 percent of the total time of the lesson). The instructors facilitate a conversation after the activity has taken place that outlines key questions to drive the group’s learning. For instance, in the same example, we can ask students if they liked the poem or not, whether the exercise came easy or not, if it holds some meaning, what they discovered in conversations, and so on. I can share my observations (, “I notice a kind of relief in the room, am I right?”) or my experience (, “I selected this poem because . . .”). The reflection is the critical “harvesting” moment of the learning; below, we will look at strategies that can help maximize its effectiveness.

Four Kinds of Tasks

Jane Vella talks about four kinds of learning tasks and how they should be sequenced to build an effective learning experience:

1. We start with an INDUCTIVE learning task. With this kind of task, we “invite learners to qualify where they are at present in terms of the content, where they begin their study, and what the present conception of the topic includes.” An inductive learning task can be used as a warm-up, but it is never an icebreaker. My inductive learning tasks start the work of learning and demonstrate that I care about how the learners’ backgrounds and knowledge inform their work in the class. By showing this interest right from the start — in the crucial first three minutes that shape people’s perceptions of the entire program — I establish a level of respect for them and for the rich experience they bring.

For example, in a class on effective time management, I opened the session by having participants fill out a form that included the following questions: “What do you hope to learn from this class? What are your time wasters? What situations do you hope to improve with more effective time management skills?” In a customer service workshop, I asked the trainees: “Tell me about your experience with bad customer service.” In an online train-the-trainer course, I requested that attendees send in advance the name of an instructor who made a difference in their lives and why. This step creates a climate that is conducive to learning.

2. We create opportunities for learners to experience the content with an INPUT learning task , in which they meet the new materials hands-on. For example, I once taught a class on federal records management (talk about a dry subject!). Rather than present records management definitions and concepts with a PowerPoint slideshow, I broke the group into teams and gave each team a set of cards with 20 key concepts in federal records management. I encouraged them to sort the ones they were familiar with from the ones that they didn’t know. I told them that in 15 minutes, we would hear the “provisional definition” of the concepts and asked them to pass the cards with concepts they were not familiar with to the other tables. We invited the agency’s Records Management Officer to provide guidance. We only needed his expertise for five key concepts, as the groups pooled their knowledge and managed to come up with the correct definitions for most of the terms on their own.

3. With an IMPLEMENTATION learning task, we invite participants to do something with the new content. This kind of task solicits the learners’ participation, asking them to “wear” the learning and run with it for their own purposes, from their own perspectives. For learners, it is a great chance to bring the content into their own lives; for trainers, it is an opportunity to verify that students have really absorbed the material.

In my “Dialogue as Facilitative Leadership” workshop, I ask trainees to write their own list of possible questions to ask someone with whom they disagree. The questions are based on the concept of open versus closed; the challenge is to ask open questions in response to aggressive statements like “No way” or “This is totally wrong!” The simulation that follows requires trainees to respond to interruptions and defensive statements only with the questions they have designed. In a class about supervisory skills, I created five brief stories that illustrated dilemmas for the main characters similar to the ones the learners were facing in supervising their own staffs. Each case finished with key questions; participants then chose either A or B as a course of action.

4. With an INTEGRATION learning task , we move into the actual use of the skill in the workplace. In a class about a new performance system, for example, I encouraged learners to write the three things they learned in the class, their own plan with dates for implementing it, and the factors they anticipated could derail their efforts, including the potential for routine to take over and cause them to return to their set ways. The conversation about implementation also raised the idea of “enablers,” such as 30- and 60-day follow- ups by web conference and plans for involving the learners’ supervisors in defining and ensuring the ongoing use of the class content.

The Learning Task Debrief

“There was a person constantly talking and disrupting the class. Unfortunately, that person was the instructor.”

Task-based learning is grounded in the assumption that the quality of the learning process depends largely on the quality of the questions we as trainers ask during the dialogue that follows the action. According to World Café founders Juanita Brown and David Isaacs, learning questions “enable us to challenge our underlying assumptions in constructive ways. With a simple and consistent focus on questions that matter, casual conversations are transformed into collective inquiry.” Indeed, learning takes place even after the task has been executed, through a dialogue in which powerful questions unleash the team’s ability to reflect.

The rule is simple. After performing any learning task, always involve students in a learning dialogue, because it is only through conversation that the experience is distilled in usable learning.

The dialogue that follows a learning task allows people to “talk the learning out,” to express it, to verbalize it, to give it words, to reflect on it. Here we make learning visible through several iterations in order to produce an output, an actual shareable product. No matter how imperfect or partial this product is, it is nevertheless “owned” and serves as a basis for further learning.

For example, in a class on systems thinking, I introduce causal loop diagrams through a learning dialogue. Without explaining the concepts of reinforcing and balancing loops, I distribute a document called “Peter Russell’s Credit Report,” explaining that this fictional gentleman’s poor credit rating can be traced back to the interplay of two variables: the amount of debt and the number of credit-card transactions. I draw a reinforcing loop of those two variables and explain that this is another way to describe his situation. I then distribute other sample artifacts that illustrate similar situations and ask them to read them at their tables (for example, “Jenny’s Diet” is about the interplay of variables in weight-loss decisions; “Mark Is Always Late!” focuses on the interplay between people’s perceptions of others and reality, and so on). After students have read the stories, I ask them to jot down the variables they see in action, identifying the loops similar to the one I have written on the wall. The focus is on getting them to verbalize their understanding in order to introduce the new ideas “balancing loop” and “reinforcing loop.”

For each kind of task (inductive, input, implementation, or integration), I have identified four partial sets of questions (see “Questions for Prompting Learning Dialogues” on p. 5). You can use these questions in the dialogue that debriefs the learning tasks to ensure a rich and productive conversation around the task experience.

• After an INDUCTIVE learning task (one that starts the training session and evokes previous learning), the trainers’ focus is on listening and clarifying, while probing the rich experience participants bring to the class. The instructor ensures that trainees fully participate in the activity and prepare them for plunging into the content. By conducting a learning dialogue right after an inductive learning activity, trainers establish a safe space for everyone to speak. The conversation also gives people a chance to articulate what they already know about the content and review their experience with it.
• After an INPUT learning task (one that presents new content), trainees ask a lot of questions. In this phase, instructors clarify the concepts presented as new content and invite participants to describe what happened during the activity, to explain the content or their thinking about it, and to extract meaning and knowledge from the experience. Depending on the content or context of the task, much of the dialogue after these input activities involves clarifying the input and ensuring understanding. Instructors focus on articulating the content, making sure that people participate, and tolerating a few mistakes.
• After an IMPLEMENTATION learning task (one that centers on applying what participants have learned in their own context), the dialogue meets the content in its most challenging aspect: application. This conversation normally raises a lot of questions, comments, opinions, and disagreements, allowing for multiple perspectives to emerge. In my experience, after an implementation task, you can expect a learning dialogue to go anywhere most likely to disputing the key learning ideas and assumptions. For example, in our class “The Virtual Trainer,” which is about teaching using web-conferencing technologies, when we ask participants to structure a lesson plan that makes for effective online engagement, the conversation often goes back to the benefits of doing face-to-face sessions and to the importance of understanding the audience’s needs in order to select the right training media. By allowing trainees to express these different perspectives, which normally enrich the perspective of everyone involved, we honor the freedom of the learning process. In these situations, instructors need to use their emotional intelligence, negotiation skills, and conflict management abilities to ensure that group members give fair consideration to the concepts being taught and that they do their share of work or analysis.
• After an INTEGRATION learning task (one that brings the learning into the trainees’ work life), the dialogue normally addresses the future. In this phase, the conversation should clearly identify two or three specific actions that students can implement immediately, individually or as a group, as a follow-up after the class.The rule is simple. After performing any learning task, always involve students in a learning dialogue, because it is only through conversation that the experience is distilled in usable learning.

QUESTIONS FOR PROMPTING LEARNING DIALOGUES

After inductive learning tasks:.

To get learners ready to learn by evoking past experience, hopes, and expectations

• What was the theme of your past experience in one word?
• What is your attitude on the subject based on your past experience?
• What behaviors have worked/have not worked for you in the past in this area?
• What do you hope to learn about this subject that you know is important?
• What do you know about this subject that you know is true?
• What would you like to explore about the subject?
• What will you need to forget in order to learn this?
• Why are you excited/not excited about being here?
• Where will you be using what you learn about the subject?
• What do you hope to change as a result of your learning?

After Input Learning Tasks

To get learners to describe or interpret what happened during the activity

• How was it? (easy or difficult, etc.)
• What happened during the activity? I noticed . . .
• Who was really into it? How did you like this part?

To get learners to verbalize content or thinking

• Can you summarize . . . ? How would you describe . . . ?
• What happened as you did . . . ?
• I noticed you took this action. Why did you decide to do it?
• How would you describe the problem you were dealing with?
• How close do you think you have come to achieving what you wanted to achieve?
• How successful do you think you were?
• How do you see your role in this activity?
• How does this part relate to you?
• Why were there differences between what happened during the activity and your expectations?
• What actions will you take as a result of . . . ?
• What will you do differently next time?

After Implementation Learning Tasks

• How was it? (easy, difficult, etc.)
• What do you need to consider when using this approach?
• What can you do right now to ensure you apply this tool?
• How are your current skills/information/knowledge/attitude giving you the results you want?
• What data make you say that this approach is difficult to use in real life?
• What would you need to see to agree with this idea?
• What is needed for you to change your mind?

After Integration Learning Tasks

• What do you think will simplify the application process for you?
• What obstacles might you encounter as you apply this approach?
• What problems do you anticipate?
• What could be a quick victory in doing this work?
• How can we support you in implementing this learning?
• Who do you need to enlist to make sure this really happens?
• What specific actions can you take to have a greater chance of success?
• How will you know if you have succeeded?

In conclusion, when we design a class using learning tasks, our lesson plan looks like an accordion. The basic sequence “Instructions–Task–Debrief is the building block of the program; as such, it is repeated several times. First, we position an “Instructions–Inductive Task–Debrief block, then an “Instructions–Input Task–Debrief.” An “Instructions–Implementation Task–Debrief follows, and we close with “Instructions–Integration Task– Debrief.” Organized and assembled in various fashions, those elements create powerful learning programs.

A Learning Community

“Learning cannot be designed. Ultimately it belongs to the realm of experience and practice . . . It slips through the cracks; it creates its own cracks. Learning happens, design or no design.”

We know that telling is the least effective way to teach. In these pages, I have provided an alternative practice through the use of learning tasks. Our basic assumption is that trainers don’t need to spoon-feed concepts to trainees. Trainers should become experts in finding great, creative, new ways to have people learn something, rather than being experts in what people learn. Yes, the trainer needs to know about the content. But that’s not enough.

By shifting focus from conveying content to creating a learning experience, the job of a trainer becomes:

• Setting up learning tasks that allow trainees to experience the content first-hand;
• Giving clear instructions about the tasks to be performed;
• Being a resource during the actual tasks as well as sitting back and letting trainees do the work;
• Facilitating learning conversations by debriefing the task through the use of great questions.

Trainers who use a task-centered approach play yet another role they support the creation of a community of learners.

Trainers who use a task-centered approach play yet another role — they support the creation of a community of learners. A key element is building a sense of openness and trust in the group. A well-executed debrief after a learning task is essentially an exercise in community building.

When trainers see knowledge as book knowledge — facts and trivia — and individuals as lonely learners mandated to absorb something, then they don’t perceive the need for dedicating time to building a learning community. With this mindset, it is not surprising that community-building work is often ignored and dropped in favor of more “meaningful” activities. But the fact is that learning communities are the very engine that makes learning turn into change for organizations. Without it, the organizations we work with can’t reap the full benefits of new approaches.

Training adults by using learning tasks embraces the action/reflection paradigm, develops real-world learning as situated expertise, and builds communities of learners. Besides, by spreading the joy of learning, training professionals can have a profound, positive impact on organizational change. And, isn’t that what our work is all about?

• Start turning your own materials from “things learners need to know” into “things learners need to do” by using the examples provided in the article.
• Create mini-scripts for giving instructions on your learning tasks so you can provide learners with unequivocal understanding of what they are supposed to do.
• Select a few of the questions provided for designing your own learning dialogues.
• Give up control in your classes and enjoy the ride.
• Take the content of this article and come up with your own ideas.

Related Articles

Toyota’s current crisis: the price of focusing on growth not quality.

For the past 15 years or so, I have told audiences a story about how my perception of…

Seeing Your Company as a System

Bank failures, health insurance rate hikes, and the troubles of auto manufacturers provide recent examples of the vulnerability…

People in Context, Part II

The first part of this article, which appeared in the previous issue of The Systems Thinker (May 2010, Vol.

Changing Our Systems by Changing Our Brains: The Leverage in Mindfulness

According to recent findings in neuroscience, not only do sensory experiences and actions change the brain’s physical structure,…

Sign up to stay in the loop

Receive updates of new articles and save your favorites..

• First Name *
• Last Name *
• Password * Enter Password Confirm Password

SMART Goals in Education: Importance, Benefits, Limitations

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Learn about our Editorial Process

The SMART Goals framework is an acronym-based framework used in education to help students set clear and structured goals related to their learning.

The framework stands for:

• Specific – The goal is clear and has a closed-ended statement of exactly what will be achieved.
• Measurable – The goal can be measured either quantitatively (e.g. earning 80% in an exam) or qualitatively (e.g. receiving positive feedback from a teacher).
• Achievable – The goal is not too hard and can reasonably be met with some effort and within the set timeframe.
• Relevant – The goal is relevant to the student’s learning and development.
• Time-Based – A clear timeframe is set to keep you on task.

(If you’re a teacher, you might prefer to read my article on goals for teachers ).

The SMART Goals Framework in Education

The framework has had multiple variations over time. However, the most common framework is in the format: specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-based.

1. Specific

Your goal needs to be specific. This means that you need to note a clear target to aspire toward rather than something that is vague.

For students, this is important to clarify exactly what it is you’re aiming for.

Some strategies for making sure your goal is specific include:

• State what, when, where, why, and how your goals will be achieved
• State what the goal will look like when it is achieved
• Focus on the “vital few” [1] things that you want to see done to have your goal achieved

Sometimes, this may also be stated as “strategic” rather than “specific”.

See our in-depth article on examples of specific goals for students to get more ideas!

2. Measurable

Your goal needs to be measurable. This ensures that you can identify improvements from the baseline as well as know when the goal has been met.

Your objectives can be formative, summative, or a mix of both.

A formative assessment is an assessment that takes place part-way through the project. It assesses where you’re at and how much more you need to do. Formative assessments allow you to pivot and make small adjustments to your action to make sure you meet the final goal.

A summative assessment is an assessment at the end of the project to see if you met your goal. This is the final measure of success or failure.

A measurable goal may also be qualitative or quantitative.

A quantitative goal will have a grade or numerative evaluation, such as 80% on a test.

A qualitative goal will be based on a subjective evaluation, such as getting a positive report card from a mentor, or, attaining the confidence to do a public speech.

See our in-depth article on examples of measurable goals for students to get more ideas!

3. Attainable

Your goal needs to be attainable. This means that it can’t be something that’s impossible to achieve. You need to know you’ll be able to reach your goals in order to sustain motivation.

This could be compared to the goldilocks principle . Goldilocks didn’t like porridge that was too cold or too hot. It had to be just right.

In education, we use the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) to explain how to promote student development and motivation. The ZPD refers to learnable content that is not too easy and not too hard.

In this zone, students can do tasks with the support of teachers and have the motivation to work because they know the content is attainable with some effort.

4. Relevant

Often also written as ‘realistic’, a relevant goal is one that makes sense to your situation. If you are setting goals in your class, your teacher would expect that the goal was about your education and not something irrelevant to class.

Your goal should also be one that is consistent with your life plan and will help you get to where you need to be. This will help you to sustain motivation and ensure the goal makes sense in the long term.

While having personal goals unrelated to your coursework is great, it’s not relevant to the lesson that you’re doing within the class on the day, so remember to set your goal so it’s related to your learning.

5. Time-Based

Setting a time by which you want to meet your goals helps to keep you on track and accountable to yourself. Without time-based end goals, you may delay your goals and lose momentum.

You can also set intermittent milestones to help keep yourself on track. This can ensure you don’t let other shorter-term and more pressing tasks get in the way and get you off track.

SMARTER Goals Add-On

Some scholars have provided additional steps to the framework. One common one is to add ‘ER’ [2] :

6. Exciting

You are more likely to achieve a goal if you make it exciting. This will motivate you to carry out your plan.

An example of excitement added to a goal would be to create some self-rewards if it is completed, like “If I complete the goal I will take myself out for dinner.”

The ‘E’ is also often added when the goals are for teachers or leaders who are setting goals for their students or staff. By making the goal exciting, they’ll be able to get buy-in from students and staff.

7. Recorded

The ‘R’ often stands for ‘Recorded’ and asks you to show how you are going to record progress.

This one is somewhat similar to ‘Measurable’ but expands on it by asking not only how you’re going to measure success, but how are you going to record progress. Keeping a journal, for example, can help you record progress and reflect on the process of chasing your coals.

The Importance of SMART Goals in Education

Goal setting helps students and teachers to develop a vision for self-improvement . Without clear goals, there is no clear and agreed-upon direction for learning.

For this reason, goals have been used extensively in education. Examples include:

• Curriculum outcomes
• Developmental milestones
• Standardized testing
• Summative and formative assessments

The SMART framework, however, tends to be a student-led way of setting goals. It enables students to reflect on what they want to achieve and plan how to achieve these goals.

As a result, the framework doesn’t just help students articulate what they want out of their education. It also provides a range of soft skills for students such as:

• Motivation for growth
• Reflective practice
• Self Evaluation
• Structured analytical thinking

Read Also: Examples of SMART Goals for Students

SMART Goals Advantages and Disadvantages

Benefits of smart goals.

The SMART framework is widely used because it helps students to clarify their goals and how they are going to go about achieving them. Often, students start with a vague statement of intention, but by the end of the session, they have fleshed out their goals using the SMART template.

Some benefits of the template include:

Limitations of SMART Goals

While the framework is easy to use and implement, it does face a few limitations. One major downside is that it doesn’t account for the importance of incrementalism in self-improvement. Students need to break down their goals into a series of milestones.

Some limitations of the template include:

SMART Goals Template

Get the Google Docs Template Here

SMART goals help students to reflect on what they want from their education and how to achieve it. They provide a template and framework for students to go into more depth about their goals so they are not simply vague statements, but rather actionable statements of intent.

A lesson where you get your students to set out their goals will often have students leaving the class with a much deeper understanding of what they want out of their education and how they might go about getting it.

Read Also: A List of Long-Term Goals for Students and A List of Short-Term Goals for Students

[1] O’Neil, J. and Conzemius, A. (2006). The Power of SMART Goals: Using Goals to Improve Student Learning . London: Solution Tree Press.

[2]  Yemm, G. (2013). Essential Guide to Leading Your Team: How to Set Goals, Measure Performance and Reward Talent . Melbourne: Pearson Education. pp. 37–39.

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 10 Reasons you’re Perpetually Single
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 20 Montessori Toddler Bedrooms (Design Inspiration)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 21 Montessori Homeschool Setups
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 101 Hidden Talents Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Request a Consultation
• Workshops and Virtual Conversations
• Technical Support
• Course Design and Preparation
• Observation & Feedback

Teaching Resources

Glossary of Pedagogical Terms

Resource overview.

A quick reference and guide to pedagogical terms.

In this list you will find definitions for commonly used pedagogical terms. This list and the associated references and resources provide an overview of foundational concepts, teaching strategies, classroom structures, and philosophies. This page is meant as a quick reference and initial guide to these topics that may both answer a question and spark your curiosity to explore more deeply.

Active Learning : A teaching and learning approach that “engages students in the process of learning through activities and/or discussion in class, as opposed to passively listening to an expert. It emphasizes higher-order thinking and often involves group work.” (Freeman et.al. 2014)

Asynchronous Instruction:  Asynchronous instruction is the idea that students learn similar material at different times and locations. The term is often associated with online learning where students complete readings, assignments, or activities at their own pace and at their own chosen time.  This approach is particularly useful when students are spread across different time zones or may have limited access to technology.

Authentic Assessment:  Assessments in which student learners demonstrate learning by applying their knowledge to authentic, complex, real-world tasks or simulations. Proponents of authentic assessment argue that these types of knowledge checks “help students rehearse for the complex ambiguities of the ‘game’ of adult and professional life” (Wiggins, 1990, p.1).

Further Resources:

• Authentic Assessment . Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning, Indiana University Bloomington.
• Wiggins, G. (1998). Ensuring authentic performance.  Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance . Jossey-Bass, p. 21-42.

Backwards Design:  A course design process that starts with instructors identifying student learning goals and then designing course content and assessments to help students achieve these goals. Rather than starting with exams or set textbooks backwards design argues that “one starts with the end—the desired results (goals or standards) and then derives the curriculum from the evidence of learning (performances) called for by the standard and the teaching needed to equip students to perform” (Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J., 1998)

Blended or Hybrid Course:   Blended or hybrid courses are “classes in which some percentage of seat time has been reduced and replaced with online content and activities” (Darby & Lang 2019, p.xxix). These courses continue to meet in-person for some percentage of the class time but content, activities, assessments, and other ways for students to engage with content are delivered online. It is important to note that these courses are intentionally designed to utilize both in-person and online class time to achieve effective student learning.

• Ko, S. and Rossen, S., (2017)  Teaching Online A Practical Guide , Routledge

Bloom’s Taxonomy:  Bloom’s Taxonomy is a cognitive framework of learning behaviors organized hierarchically in six categories: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, evaluation, and synthesis. Bloom’s taxonomy is often used as a helpful tool to create learning objectives that help define and measure the learning experience for both student and instructor. (Anderson, 2001, Bloom, 1956, Krathwohl, 2002)

Classroom Assessment Techniques (CATs):  “An approach designed to help teachers find out what students are learning in the classroom and how well they are learning it. This approach is learner-centered, teacher-directed, mutually beneficial, formative, context-specific, ongoing, and firmly rooted in good practice”. Through using a CAT the instructor is able to gather formative feedback on students learning to inform future teaching. (Angelo & Cross 1993)

Classroom Climate:  “The intellectual, social, emotional, and physical environments in which our students learn” (Ambrose et al., 2010, p. 170). Course climate is determined by factors like faculty-student interaction, the tone the instructor sets, course demographics, student-student interactions, and the range of perspectives represented in course content.

Cognitive Load:  Cognitive load refers to the demands and limitations on working memory storage given the limited amount of information processing that can occur simultaneously in the verbal and the visual processing channels of the brain. (Mayer & Moreno 2003, Schnotz & Kürschner 2007)

Collaborative Learning : an umbrella term that covers many different methods in which students work together to solve a problem, complete a task, or create a product. Collaborative learning is founded in the concept that learning and knowledge building is social and requires active engagement from students.  (Smith & MacGregor 1992)

Constructivism:  A theory of learning popularized in the twentieth century that argues that knowledge is actively constructed rather than passively absorbed by learners. Constructivists contend that when learners acquire new knowledge, it is through a dynamic process in which the learner recreates existing mental models, situating this new information in terms of what they already know. Social constructivists additionally recognize the role of social interaction (co-construction) and communication as key forces in learning. Foundational constructivists include John Dewey, Lev Vygotsky, Jerome Bruner, and Jean Piaget. Constructivist pedagogical strategies are grounded in constructivist theory and often include opportunities for experiential learning, active exploration, student interaction, and reflection. Courses designed around this principle emphasize connections among course concepts and themes and support students in forming relationships between this new knowledge and what they already know.  See also zone of proximal development  and  student-centered teaching .

• Bruner, J.S. (1974).  Toward a theory of instruction . Harvard UP.
• Eyler, J. (2018). “Sociality”  How humans learn: The science and stories behind effective college teaching . West Virginia P.

Vygotsky, L. (1978).  Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes . Harvard UP.

Culturally Responsive Pedagogy:  A pedagogical framework where instructors center students’ cultural identities as an important aspect of learning. Those committed to this framework deliberately work to make connections between course content and students’ lived experiences in order to prompt student involvement and motivation. Culturally responsive course design includes cooperative, student-centered instruction and diverse course readings from a variety of voices and perspectives, particularly those voices which may fall outside of traditional collegiate canons (Landson-Billings 2006).

• Burnham, K. (2019)  Culturally Responsive Teaching Strategies . Northeastern University Graduate Programs Blog
• Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). “But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy.”  Theory into Practice 34 (3), 159-165.

  Experiential Learning:  Experiential learning is a process by which students develop knowledge and skills from direct experience, usually outside a traditional academic setting.  Examples include: internships, study abroad, community-based learning, service learning, and research opportunities. The concept was introduced by David Kolb in 1984 and combines both a cognitive and behavioral approach to learning (Kolb 1984).

Further Resource:

• Tran, M. (2016).  Making a Case for Experiential Learning . Pearson.

Fixed Mindset:  Mindset refers to the beliefs and attitudes held by a person and can affect their learning outcomes and achievement. Individuals with a fixed mindset (also referred to as entity theory) are outcomes-focused, don’t view intellectual ability as being malleable, and give up quickly on learning a new skill when learning becomes more challenging and difficult (Dweck, 2008, Dweck & Master 2008, Rattan et. Al. 2012, Yeager 2012).  See also growth mindset.

  Flipped Classroom:  A flipped classroom is a teaching approach where students a first exposed to content before coming to a class session and then spend class time engaging more deeply with the ideas and concepts (Brame, 2013). This model encourages the use of active learning during in-person class sessions to allow students to explore concepts, solve problems, and discuss ideas with each other and the instructor.

Formative Assessment:  Formative assessment is the process of providing feedback to students during the learning process.  These are often low stakes activities that allow the instructor to check student work and provide feedback.  An instructor writing comments and suggestions on a draft version of a paper is an example of formative assessment (Weimer 2013).

Growth Mindset:  Mindset refers to the beliefs and attitudes held by a person and can affect their learning outcomes and achievement.  Individuals with a growth mindset (also referred to as incremental theory) are process-focused, assess their performance relative to mastery of the material, and believe that intellectual ability is malleable.  Having a growth mindset involves sustained effort toward learning new knowledge and reflection on past failures so that one can increase their knowledge and ability (Dweck, 2008, Dweck & Master 2008, Rattan et. Al. 2012, Yeager 2012).  See also fixed mindset.

  Hidden Curriculum:  The hidden curriculum is a collection of unwritten norms, values, rules, and expectations that one must have awareness of in order to successfully navigate educational settings, but which remain unknown to those who have not been socialized into the dominant discourse (Smith, 2015, p.9). The hidden curriculum includes an understanding of school structures,resources, financial aid systems, and institutional rules, along with an awareness of cultural expectations for participating in class and communicating with peers and instructors. See also  social belonging  and  transparent assignments .

• Ostrove, J. & Long, S. (2007). “Social class and belonging: Implications for college adjustment.”  The review of higher education 30 (4).
• Hidden Curriculum . The Glossary of Education Reform.

Inclusive Teaching:  a mode of teaching that intentionally designs course content and curricula to engage with students of diverse backgrounds, abilities, and lived experiences. The ultimate goal of inclusive teaching is to create a learning environment where all students feel valued and supported to succeed.

• Inclusive Teaching Strategies . Center for Teaching Innovation, Cornell University.
• Making excellence inclusive . Association of American Colleges and Universities. (n.d.)
• Strategies for Inclusive Teaching . Center for Teaching and Learning, Washington University in St. Louis.   

Inquiry-Based Learning:  Inquiry-based learning is an umbrella term that includes pedagogical strategies such as problem-based learning and case-based learning that prioritize students exploring, thinking, asking, and answering content questions with peers to acquire new knowledge through a carefully designed activity.  Such activities build in opportunities for students to authentically engage in and apply the scientific process as scientists rather than following a predetermined protocol (LaForce et.al., 2017, Yew & Goh 2016).  See also problem-based learning, project-based learning.

  Learning Management System (LMS):  A Learning Management System is a platform that enables instructors to organize and distribute course materials in a digital format.  While features may vary, a typical LMS allows instructors to communicate with students, share readings, create and collect assignments, assess student work and post grades.  An LMS may be used to compliment a face-to-face course or for an entirely online course. Popular platforms include Canvas, Blackboard, and Moodle.

Learning Objective/Learning Goal/Learning Outcome:  statements that articulate the knowledge and skills you want students to acquire by the end of the course or after completing a particular unit or assignment. Learning objectives help instructors to shape course content and assessments as well as increase transparency for students by clearly communicating expectations.

• Articulate Your Learning Objectives . Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence & Educational Innovation, Carnegie Mellon University

Metacognition:  Metacognition involves metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive regulation.  Metacognitive knowledge is defined as thinking or having an awareness of one’s cognitive processes.  Metacognitive regulation is the active monitoring of one’s cognition through planning (identifying appropriate learning strategies), monitoring (forming an awareness of one’s task performance) and evaluating (assessing and refining one’s learning through reflection) (Lai, 2011, Tanner, 2012).

Motivation:  An individual’s “personal investment” in reaching a desired state or outcome as “seen in the direction, intensity, persistence, and quality of what is done and expressed” (Maeher, M.L. & Meyer, H.A., 1997, p. 373). Research suggests that motivation plays a vital role in directing and sustaining student learning. The most motivated students see value in the task, believe that they can accomplish the task, and feel that they are in a supportive environment (Ambrose et al, 2010, p. 80).

• Lazowski, R.A. & Hulleman, C.S. (2016). “Motivation interventions in education: A meta-analytic review.”  Review of Educational Research 86 (2) 602-640.

Object-Based Learning (OBL):  Object-based learning (OBL) is a teaching method whereby students engage with authentic or replica material objects in their learning in order to gain discipline-specific knowledge or to practice observational or practical skills that can be applied in various fields. “Objects” can include a number of different material items often housed in museums: specimens, works of art, architectural forms, relics, manuscripts and rare books, archival documents, or artifacts of various kinds. Research on OBL suggests that “objects can inspire, inform, fascinate and motivate learners at all stages of their education” (Jamieson, 2017, p. 12).

• Chatterjee, H. J. (2016).  Engaging the senses: Object-based learning in higher education . Routledge.

Pedagogy:  Pedagogy is the method, practice and study of effective teaching. In order to be effective, instructors must have both subject-based knowledge and pedagogic knowledge and skills (Barkley & Major, 2016).

Problem-Based Learning:   A form of student-centered teaching that focuses on having students work through open-ended problems to explore course material. Students are asked to define the problem as part of the process, research content outside of class time and iterate solutions to arrive at their final response (Nilson, L.B., 2016)

Project-Based Learning:  A form of student-centered teaching that engages students with course content as they work through a complex project. These projects are typically real-world scenarios and multifaceted. Project-based learning encourages interdisciplinary conversations and groups work.

• What is PBL?.  Buck Institute for Education: PBL Works.

Retrieval Practice:  Retrieval practice involves retrieving new knowledge from memory in order for durable retention in long-term memory.  The process is supported by experiments which explore student’s recall of new material.  Retrieval practice can take the form of frequent, low-stakes quizzes, or students may employ methods like flashcards for self-testing (Brown et.al. 2014,  retrievalpractice.org ).

  Scaffolding:  A process by which instructors build on a student’s previous experience or knowledge by adding in specific timely support structures in the form of activities or assignments for students to master new knowledge or skills and achieve learning goals (Greening, 1998, Hmelo-Silver et.al. 2007).  See also Zone of Proximal Development.

  Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL):  an approach to college-level teaching that frames teaching as a form of scholarly inquiry. Through engaging in SoTL instructors examine their students’ learning to innovate and engage in knowledge-sharing with colleagues (Huber 2013). Instructors who engage in SoTL as part of their teaching are encouraged to reflect on personal assumptions and curiosities about how their students learn. Then consider how to test the validity of these ideas. Examples of SoTL projects include exploring the impact of implementing a single active learning strategy, considering the impact of reflection on student learning, determining the impact of a complete course restructure (Poole 2018).

Social Belonging:  Social belonging is a state when students feel welcomed and included into a community where they can engage freely and foster positive relationships with others (Walton & Cohen, 2011).

  Summative Assessment:  Summative assessment is the process of measuring a student’s learning at the conclusion of a course (or a portion of the course). Summative assessments are typically associated with grades and can take the form of quizzes, exams or papers.

Stereotype Threat:  Stereotypes are negative generalizations about groups of people.  When students are subtly or overtly made aware (primed) of these stereotypes while performing challenging academic tasks in domains that are important to them, students begin to underperform in these tasks.  Anxiety about confirming a negative stereotype creates additional cognitive load that reduces the capacity of working memory in the brain (Aronson et.al. 1999, Steele & Aronson 1995).

Student-centered teaching : Instructor-center teaching refers to instructors teaching content solely through a passive approach such as lecturing while students listen and take notes with minimal interaction with other students.  Student-centered teaching, however, consists of instructors using a wide range of pedagogical approaches for students to learn and actively engage with the course content by having students construct knowledge with peers through collaboration, discussion, group projects, and problem solving (Felder & Brent 1996, Freeman et.al. 2007, Handelsman et.al. 2007).  See also inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, project-based learning, constructivism, zone of proximal development.

  Student Engagement:  Student engagement describes the ways in which students take part in the learning process and the development of their own knowledge. An increase in student engagement is thought to be linked to an increase in student learning. Student engagement is often tied to active learning techniques and student motivation (McVitty 2015).

• Student Engagement . The Glossary of Education Reform.

Synchronous instruction:  Synchronous instruction is the idea that students learn material at the same time.  Examples of synchronous instruction might include lectures, discussions or collaborative activities. When applied to remote learning, students must be online at the same time.  This approach can be disadvantageous if students are spread across different time zones or have limited access to technology.

  Teaching Development Plan (TDP):  a written document that helps instructors focus on teaching specific career goals. A TDP encourages instructors to set goals, and periodically reflect on both progress and barriers faced while working towards these goals.

Threshold Concept:  Thresholds are crucial barriers in the learning process where students often get “stuck”. These ideas are essential to understanding a particular discipline and progress in the discipline can be blocked until that barrier to understanding has been overcome. Examples of discipline-based threshold concepts include deep time in geology or the idea of constructed narrative in history (Meyer & Land 2006, Pace 2017).

Transfer:  A cognitive process by which a learner takes what they’ve learned in one context and successfully applies it to another. Transfer is often broken down into “near transfer” (transfer of knowledge to a similar task or context) and “far transfer” (transfer of knowledge to novel tasks or contexts). Given that a central purpose of education is for students to take what they have learned into other classes and then into their lives beyond school, this has long been a critical area of study in educational and educational psychology research (Perkins & Salomon 2012).

• Transfer of Knowledge to New Contexts . Poorvu Center for Teaching and Learning, Yale University
• Building Knowledge Through Transfer . Center for Advancing Teaching and Learning Through Research, Northeastern University.

Transparent Assignment Design:  An inclusive teaching practice first proposed by Mary-Ann Winkelmes and her instructional development and research team at UNLV, transparent assignments help students understand the purpose of the assessment, clearly describe the task and how it should be accomplished, and plainly define criteria for success. Assignment transparency has been shown to significantly boost student success in terms of academic confidence, sense of belonging, and metacognitive awareness of skill development (Winkelmes et al. 2016).  See also social belonging  and  hidden curriculum.

• Hutchins, P., Winkelmes, M. “Transparency in Leaching and Learning”.  PDF of Powerpoint slides.
• Winkelmes, M. et al. (2015). “Benefits (some unexpected) of transparently designed assignments.”  National Teaching & Learning Forum 24 (4), 4-6.

Universal Design for Learning (UDL):  Universal Design for Learning is a framework to improve and optimize teaching and learning for all people based on scientific insights into how humans learn.  Designing a course according to UDL principles is centered on the key concepts of: engagement, representation, and action & expression.  These are sometimes summarized as the Why, What and How of learning (Murawski & Scott 2019, Tobin 2018,  CAST .org).

  Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD):  This developmental zone stands between what the learner can already do on their own and what they cannot yet do. It is the range in which a learner is able to move from point A to point B with assistance from peers or an instructor; in other words, the zone in which learning takes place. The concept was originally described in the work of Soviet psychologist and social constructivist, Lev Vygotsky (Vygotsky 1978).  See also constructivism  and  scaffolding .

Ambrose, S. et al. (2010).  How learning works: Seven research-based principles for  smart teaching . Jossey-Bass.

Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR. (2001).  A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives . Longmans.

Angelo, T. A. & Cross, K.P. (1993).  Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers.  2nd Ed. Jossey Bass

Aronson, J., Lustina, M. J., Good, C., Keough, K., Steele, C. M., & Brown, J. (1999). When White Men Can’t Do Math: Necessary and Sufficient Factors in Stereotype Threat.  Journal of Experimental Social Psychology . 35, 29-46.

Barkley, E.F. and C.H. Major (2016).  Learning Assessment Techniques: a handbook for college faculty.   Jossey Bass.

Bloom BS. (1956).  Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals.  Longmans.

Brame, C., (2013). Flipping the classroom. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved 6/11/20 from http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/flipping-the-classroom/.

Brown, Peter C., H.L Roediger, M.A. McDaniel (2014).  Make it stick: the science of successful learning.  Harvard University Press.

Darby, F., Lang, J.M. (2019).  Small Teaching Online: Applying Learning Science in Online Classes . Jossey-Bass

Dweck, C. (2008).  Mindsets and math/science achievement . Carnegie Foundation.

Dweck, C. S., & Master, A. (2008). “Self-theories motivate self-regulated learning”. In Schunk, D. H. Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.),  Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications  (pp. 31–51). Taylor & Francis.

Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (1996). Navigating the bumpy road to student-centered instruction.  College teaching ,  44 (2), 43-47.

Freeman, S., O’Connor, E., Parks, J. W., Cunningham, M., Hurley, D., Haka, D., Dirks, C. & Wenderoth, M. P. (2007). Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology.  CBE—Life Sciences Education ,  6 (2), 132-139.

Greening, T. (1998) Scaffolding for Success in Problem-Based Learning,  Medical Education Online , 3(1), 4297

Handelsman, J., Miller, S., & Pfund, C. (2007).  Scientific teaching . Macmillan.

Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: a response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark 2006.  Educational psychologist ,  42 (2), 99-107.

Huber, M. (2013).  What is the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning?  Stanford Teaching Commons. Retrieved on 6/11/2020 from  https://teachingcommons.stanford.edu/teaching-talk/what-scholarship-teaching-and-learning-mary-huber

LaForce, M., Noble, E., & Blackwell, C. (2017). Problem-based learning (PBL) and student interest in STEM careers: The roles of motivation and ability beliefs.  Education Sciences ,  7 (4), 92.

Lai, E.R. (2011). Metacognition: A Literature Review.  Pearson’s Research Reports.  Retrieved on 6/11/2020  from  https://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/Metacognition_Literature_Review_Final.pdf

Jamieson, A. (2017). “Object-based learning: A new way of teaching arts west.”  University of Melbourne Collections 20  (June).

Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview.  Theory Into Practice , 41(4), 212-218.

Kolb, D. A. (1984).  Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development.  Prentice-Hall.

Landson-Billings, G. (2006). “Yes, but how do we do it? Practicing culturally relevant pedagogy.”  White teachers/Diverse classrooms: A guide to building inclusive schools, promoting high expectations, and eliminating racism , p. 29-41 Stylus Publishing.

Maehr, M.L. & Meyer, H.A. (1997). “Understanding motivation and schooling: Where we’ve been, where we are, and where we need to go.”  Educational Psychology Review,  9(4) 358-375.

Mayer, R.E. & Moreno, R. (2003) Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning,  Educational Psychologist , 38(1), 43-52.

Meyer, J and R. Land (2006).  Overcoming barriers to student understanding: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge . Routledge.

Murawski, W. and K.L. Scott (2019).  What really works with Universal Design for Learning.  Corwin.

Nilson, L.B. (2016).  Teaching at Its Best: A Research-Based Resource for College Instructors 4 th  ed.  Jossey-Bass.

Pace, D. (2017).  Decoding the Disciplines: seven steps to increased student learning . Indiana University Press

Perkins, D.N. & Salomon. (2012). “Knowledge to go: A motivational and dispositional view of transfer.”  Educational Psychologist,  47(3), 248-258.

Poole, G. (2018). “Using Intuition, Anecdote, and Observation: Rich Sources of SoTL Projects” in  SoTL in Action: Illuminating Critical Moments of Practice  edited by Chick, N.L. Sylus Publishing.

Rattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). “It’s ok—not everyone can be good at math”: Instructors with an entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students.  Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 48(3), 731-737.

Schnotz, W., & Kürschner, C. (2007). A reconsideration of cognitive load theory.  Educational psychology review , 19(4), 469-508.

Smith, B. (2015).  Mentoring at-risk students through the hidden curriculum of higher education.  Lexington Books.

Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans.  Journal of personality and social psychology , 69(5), 797.

Tanner, K. D. (2012). Promoting student metacognition.  CBE—Life Sciences Education , 11(2), 113-120.

Tobin, T.J. (2018)  Reach Everyone, Teach Everyone: Universal Design for Learning in Higher Education.  West Virginia University Press.

Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2011). A brief social-belonging intervention improves academic and health outcomes of minority students.  Science , 331(6023), 1447-1451.

Weimer, M. (2013).  Learner-centered teaching: five key changes to practice.  John Wiley & Sons.

Wiggins, G. (1990) “The case for authentic assessment”  Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation,  2 ( 2).

Wiggins, G., McTighe, J. (1998). “What is Backward Design?” from  Understanding by Design . Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

  Winkelmes, M. et al. (2016). “A teaching intervention that increases underserved college students’ success.”  Peer Review  (Winter/Spring).

Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed.  Educational Psychologist , 47 (4), 302–314.

Yew, E. H., & Goh, K. (2016). Problem-based learning: An overview of its process and impact on learning.  Health Professions Education , 2(2), 75-79.

What Is Education For?

Read an excerpt from a new book by Sir Ken Robinson and Kate Robinson, which calls for redesigning education for the future.

Your content has been saved!

What is education for? As it happens, people differ sharply on this question. It is what is known as an “essentially contested concept.” Like “democracy” and “justice,” “education” means different things to different people. Various factors can contribute to a person’s understanding of the purpose of education, including their background and circumstances. It is also inflected by how they view related issues such as ethnicity, gender, and social class. Still, not having an agreed-upon definition of education doesn’t mean we can’t discuss it or do anything about it.

We just need to be clear on terms. There are a few terms that are often confused or used interchangeably—“learning,” “education,” “training,” and “school”—but there are important differences between them. Learning is the process of acquiring new skills and understanding. Education is an organized system of learning. Training is a type of education that is focused on learning specific skills. A school is a community of learners: a group that comes together to learn with and from each other. It is vital that we differentiate these terms: children love to learn, they do it naturally; many have a hard time with education, and some have big problems with school.

There are many assumptions of compulsory education. One is that young people need to know, understand, and be able to do certain things that they most likely would not if they were left to their own devices. What these things are and how best to ensure students learn them are complicated and often controversial issues. Another assumption is that compulsory education is a preparation for what will come afterward, like getting a good job or going on to higher education.

So, what does it mean to be educated now? Well, I believe that education should expand our consciousness, capabilities, sensitivities, and cultural understanding. It should enlarge our worldview. As we all live in two worlds—the world within you that exists only because you do, and the world around you—the core purpose of education is to enable students to understand both worlds. In today’s climate, there is also a new and urgent challenge: to provide forms of education that engage young people with the global-economic issues of environmental well-being.

This core purpose of education can be broken down into four basic purposes.

Education should enable young people to engage with the world within them as well as the world around them. In Western cultures, there is a firm distinction between the two worlds, between thinking and feeling, objectivity and subjectivity. This distinction is misguided. There is a deep correlation between our experience of the world around us and how we feel. As we explored in the previous chapters, all individuals have unique strengths and weaknesses, outlooks and personalities. Students do not come in standard physical shapes, nor do their abilities and personalities. They all have their own aptitudes and dispositions and different ways of understanding things. Education is therefore deeply personal. It is about cultivating the minds and hearts of living people. Engaging them as individuals is at the heart of raising achievement.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasizes that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights,” and that “Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.” Many of the deepest problems in current systems of education result from losing sight of this basic principle.

Schools should enable students to understand their own cultures and to respect the diversity of others. There are various definitions of culture, but in this context the most appropriate is “the values and forms of behavior that characterize different social groups.” To put it more bluntly, it is “the way we do things around here.” Education is one of the ways that communities pass on their values from one generation to the next. For some, education is a way of preserving a culture against outside influences. For others, it is a way of promoting cultural tolerance. As the world becomes more crowded and connected, it is becoming more complex culturally. Living respectfully with diversity is not just an ethical choice, it is a practical imperative.

There should be three cultural priorities for schools: to help students understand their own cultures, to understand other cultures, and to promote a sense of cultural tolerance and coexistence. The lives of all communities can be hugely enriched by celebrating their own cultures and the practices and traditions of other cultures.

Education should enable students to become economically responsible and independent. This is one of the reasons governments take such a keen interest in education: they know that an educated workforce is essential to creating economic prosperity. Leaders of the Industrial Revolution knew that education was critical to creating the types of workforce they required, too. But the world of work has changed so profoundly since then, and continues to do so at an ever-quickening pace. We know that many of the jobs of previous decades are disappearing and being rapidly replaced by contemporary counterparts. It is almost impossible to predict the direction of advancing technologies, and where they will take us.

How can schools prepare students to navigate this ever-changing economic landscape? They must connect students with their unique talents and interests, dissolve the division between academic and vocational programs, and foster practical partnerships between schools and the world of work, so that young people can experience working environments as part of their education, not simply when it is time for them to enter the labor market.

Education should enable young people to become active and compassionate citizens. We live in densely woven social systems. The benefits we derive from them depend on our working together to sustain them. The empowerment of individuals has to be balanced by practicing the values and responsibilities of collective life, and of democracy in particular. Our freedoms in democratic societies are not automatic. They come from centuries of struggle against tyranny and autocracy and those who foment sectarianism, hatred, and fear. Those struggles are far from over. As John Dewey observed, “Democracy has to be born anew every generation, and education is its midwife.”

For a democratic society to function, it depends upon the majority of its people to be active within the democratic process. In many democracies, this is increasingly not the case. Schools should engage students in becoming active, and proactive, democratic participants. An academic civics course will scratch the surface, but to nurture a deeply rooted respect for democracy, it is essential to give young people real-life democratic experiences long before they come of age to vote.

Eight Core Competencies

The conventional curriculum is based on a collection of separate subjects. These are prioritized according to beliefs around the limited understanding of intelligence we discussed in the previous chapter, as well as what is deemed to be important later in life. The idea of “subjects” suggests that each subject, whether mathematics, science, art, or language, stands completely separate from all the other subjects. This is problematic. Mathematics, for example, is not defined only by propositional knowledge; it is a combination of types of knowledge, including concepts, processes, and methods as well as propositional knowledge. This is also true of science, art, and languages, and of all other subjects. It is therefore much more useful to focus on the concept of disciplines rather than subjects.

Disciplines are fluid; they constantly merge and collaborate. In focusing on disciplines rather than subjects we can also explore the concept of interdisciplinary learning. This is a much more holistic approach that mirrors real life more closely—it is rare that activities outside of school are as clearly segregated as conventional curriculums suggest. A journalist writing an article, for example, must be able to call upon skills of conversation, deductive reasoning, literacy, and social sciences. A surgeon must understand the academic concept of the patient’s condition, as well as the practical application of the appropriate procedure. At least, we would certainly hope this is the case should we find ourselves being wheeled into surgery.

The concept of disciplines brings us to a better starting point when planning the curriculum, which is to ask what students should know and be able to do as a result of their education. The four purposes above suggest eight core competencies that, if properly integrated into education, will equip students who leave school to engage in the economic, cultural, social, and personal challenges they will inevitably face in their lives. These competencies are curiosity, creativity, criticism, communication, collaboration, compassion, composure, and citizenship. Rather than be triggered by age, they should be interwoven from the beginning of a student’s educational journey and nurtured throughout.

From Imagine If: Creating a Future for Us All by Sir Ken Robinson, Ph.D and Kate Robinson, published by Penguin Books, an imprint of Penguin Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House, LLC. Copyright © 2022 by the Estate of Sir Kenneth Robinson and Kate Robinson.

Professor Jack C. Richards

Difference between task, exercise, activity.

Submitted by Jayanta Das, India

What is the difference between a task, an exercise and an activity?

Professor Richards Responds:

These terms are understood differently depending on who defines them. I use them as follows:

An exercise is a teaching procedure that involves controlled, guided or open ended practice of some aspect of language. A drill, a cloze activity, a reading comprehension passage can all be regarded as exercises.

The term activity is more general and refers to any kind of purposeful classroom procedure that involves learners doing something that relates to the goals of the course. For example singing a song, playing a game, taking part in a debate, having a group discussion, are all different kinds of teaching activities.

A task is normally defined as follows:

• It is something that learners do, or carry out, using their existing language resources or those that have been provided in pre-task work.
• It has an outcome which is not simply linked to learning language, though language acquisition may occur as the learner carries out the task.
• It is relevant to learners’ needs.
• It involves a focus on meaning.
• In the case of tasks involving two or more learners, it calls upon the learners’
• use of communication strategies and interactional skills.
• It provides opportunities for reflection on language use.

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• « Autonomy
• Modern American English School in Antigua, Guatemala »

• Request a Demo

Educators Blog

What is a Performance Task?

By Jay McTighe,

A performance task is any learning activity or assessment that asks students to perform to demonstrate their knowledge, understanding and proficiency. Performance tasks yield a tangible product and/or performance that serve as evidence of learning. Unlike a selected-response item (e.g., multiple-choice or matching) that asks students to select from given alternatives, a performance task presents a situation that calls for learners to apply their learning in context.

Performance tasks are routinely used in certain disciplines, such as visual and performing arts, physical education, and career-technology where performance is the natural focus of instruction. However, such tasks can (and should) be used in every subject area and at all grade levels.

 Performance tasks can be used to engage students in meaningful learning. Since rich performance tasks establish authentic contexts that reflect genuine applications of knowledge, students are often motivated and engaged by such “real world” challenges.

When used as assessments, performance tasks enable teachers to gauge student understanding and proficiency with complex processes (e.g., research, problem-solving, and writing), not just measure discrete knowledge. They are well suited to integrating subject areas and linking content knowledge with the 21st Century Skills such as critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, communication, and technology use.   New research shows that such performance tasks lead to deeper understanding and can improve student achievement up +39%.

To learn how educators can create and implement effective performance tasks that drive student achievement, visit www.PerformanceTask.com .

  Jay McTighe is a nationally recognized educator and author of the award-winning and best-selling Understanding by Design series with Grant Wiggins.

Editors Note: This is an excerpt from the article " What is a Performance Task ( Part  1)" published on the PerformanceTask.com blog. 

Subscribe to the #1 PBL Blog!

Receive new articles in the world of Project Based Learning, STEM/STEAM, and College & Career Readiness. 

• Project-Based Learning (371)
• STEM/STEAM (171)
• College and Career Readiness (57)
• Professional Learning (53)
• Career-Connected Learning (39)
• Social and Emotional Learning (38)
• Computer Science (16)
• Assessment (7)
• Highlights (7)

Subscribe to our blog

Use GRASPS for Real-World Assessment

Innovative educators understand that there is more to learning than processed worksheets and tests.

Innovative educators understand that there is more to learning than processed worksheets and tests. That's why real-world tasks and assessments are finally making it out of just the elite schools and are becoming more prevalent in mainstream education.  At the  Tech & Learning Leadership Summit  experts in the area of technology and education came together to discuss a variety of topics including how technology supports bringing real learning experiences to the classroom. 

G.R.A.S.P.S. Model

One model popular among attendees was one adapted from Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe.  It is called GRASPS, which is an acronym standing for:

• Provide a statement of the task. Establish the goal, problem, challenge, or obstacle in the task.
• Possible sentence starters:
• Your task is to… The goal is to… The problem or challenge is… The obstacle to overcome is…
• Define the role of the students in the task. State the job of the students for the task.
• You are… You have been asked to… Your job is…

A: Audience

• Identify the target audience within the context of the scenario. Example audiences might include a client or committee. 
• Your clients are… The target audience is… You need to convince…

S: Situation

• Set the context of the scenario. Explain the situation.
• The context you find yourself in is… The challenge involves dealing with…

P: Products or Performances

Tech & Learning Newsletter

Tools and ideas to transform education. Sign up below.

• Clarify what the students will create and why they will create it,
• You will create a … in order to… You need to develop a … so that 

S: Standards

• Provide students with a clear picture of success. Identify specific standards for success. Issue rubrics to the students or develop them with the student.
• Your performance needs to… Your work will be judged by… Your product must meet the following standards… A successful result will… 

Note that it is unnecessary to use all or even any of the sentence starters. You can replace a prompt with your own. These are provided to help the learning designer think about the task. Generally one sentence starter can be used to write 

cross posted at The Innovative Educator  

Lisa Nielsen  ( @InnovativeEdu ) has worked as a public-school educator and administrator since 1997. She is a prolific writer best known for her award-winning blog,  The Innovative Educator . Nielsen is the author of  several books and her writing has been featured in media outlets such as  The New York Times , The Wall Street Journal ,  Tech&Learning , and  T.H.E. Journal .   

Lisa Nielsen  ( @InnovativeEdu ) has worked as a public-school educator and administrator since 1997. She is a prolific writer best known for her award-winning blog, The Innovative Educator . Nielsen is the author of several books  and her writing has been featured in media outlets such as The New York Times,  The Wall Street Journal , and Tech & Learning.  

Disclaimer : The information shared here is strictly that of the author and does not reflect the opinions or endorsement of her employer.

Should Digital Literacy Be Its Own Classroom Subject?

Kaibot: How to Use It to Teach

4 Tips for Designing AI-Resistant Assessments

Most Popular

• 2 Kaibot: How to Use It to Teach
• 3 4 Tips for Designing AI-Resistant Assessments
• 4 High School Math Students Used A GPT-4 AI Tutor. They did Worse.
• 5 The Top 4 State Edtech Trends According To SETDA

Defining Pedagogic Tasks: Issues and Challenges

Cite this chapter.

• Virginia Samuda 2 &
• Martin Bygate 2  

Part of the book series: Research and Practice in Applied Linguistics ((RPAL))

651 Accesses

1 Citations

At the beginning of this book, we proposed a set of general elements to describe what we broadly mean by ‘task’. We did so to provide an initial point of reference for talking about issues relating to the use of tasks in general education and human sciences research. As we further narrow the focus in our consideration of tasks as a pedagogic tool for second language learning, we revisit the construct of ‘task’ and attempt a more precise definition than the general elements we offered in Chapter 1. To this end, we:

Invite consideration of why a more precise definition might be desirable.

Explore some of the ways that task have been defined in the literature.

Highlight issues and challenges involved in arriving at an adequate task definition.

Offer a working definition of our own.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Lancaster University, UK

Virginia Samuda & Martin Bygate

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2008 Virginia Samuda and Martin Bygate

About this chapter

Samuda, V., Bygate, M. (2008). Defining Pedagogic Tasks: Issues and Challenges. In: Tasks in Second Language Learning. Research and Practice in Applied Linguistics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230596429_6

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230596429_6

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London

Print ISBN : 978-1-4039-1187-2

Online ISBN : 978-0-230-59642-9

eBook Packages : Palgrave Language & Linguistics Collection Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Posted by TryThisTeaching
• Categories Toolkit
• Date 5th January 2014
• Comments 8 comments

• D irected/ d edicated 
• I mprovement/Independent
• R eflection 

[learn_press_profile]

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

Tag: Diagnostics , feedback; , marking

Previous post

Acrostic Relay

Hexagons/flexagons, you may also like.

Racism in Schools – How to take actions

You GANTT do that!

We help you, help them.

Where is the relationship to Design Technology? We do this ALL the time but no one credits us with having done so……

Leave A Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Getting Started
• Introduction
• The Teacher
• The Learner

Foreign Language Teaching Methods: Speaking

Lesson 3: designing communicative tasks.

• What is a Task?
• Design Principles
• Unsuccessful Tasks
• Analyzing Tasks
• Review and Reflect

What Is a Task?

Defining a "task."

Duration: 01:31

This lesson focuses on defining what a task is. And actually there's been a lot written on this in the literature on task-based language teaching. Some people say that a task is not really a language unit at all, that it's really a unit of activity. But how we're going to define a task in this lesson is: a human activity (that is, you are going to be doing something) that is goal-directed (that is, you're doing something to accomplish a particular goal). But the real crux here is it's going to require interaction -- interaction between two people -- partners -- or a small group.

So for example, say you want to hire a job candidate. You have an opening in your company and you need to hire somebody. That's a task. And, if you break it down, the first thing you are going to do you might review some resumes, you might post the job, you go over the resumes that you get from the applicants. You then have to match their qualifications to the actual job. And then as a group you're going to have to have that difficult decision-making process and come to some kind of agreement. So that's a pretty good example of what I mean here by task. There is an activity, you're hiring somebody, and the activity is goal-oriented and it requires interaction among a small group.

A task is (1) a classroom activity or exercise that has (a) an objective attainable only by the interaction among participants, (b) a mechanism for structuring and sequencing interaction, and (c) a focus on meaning exchange; (2) a language learning endeavor that requires learners to comprehend, manipulate, and/or produce the target language as they perform some set of workplans. (Lee 2000:32)

Lee, J. 2000. Tasks and Communicating in Language Classrooms . New York: McGraw-Hill.

Tell us what you think and help us improve this page.

Send a comment

Name (optional)

Email (optional)

Comment or Message

CC BY-NC-SA 2010 | COERLL | UT Austin | Copyright & Legal | Help | Credits | Contact

CC BY-NC-SA | 2010 | COERLL | UT Austin | http://coerll.utexas.edu/methods

Created by the Great Schools Partnership , the GLOSSARY OF EDUCATION REFORM is a comprehensive online resource that describes widely used school-improvement terms, concepts, and strategies for journalists, parents, and community members. | Learn more »

Scaffolding

In education, scaffolding refers to a variety of instructional techniques used to move students progressively toward stronger understanding and, ultimately, greater independence in the learning process. The term itself offers the relevant descriptive metaphor: teachers provide successive levels of temporary support that help students reach higher levels of comprehension and skill acquisition that they would not be able to achieve without assistance. Like physical scaffolding, the supportive strategies are incrementally removed when they are no longer needed, and the teacher gradually shifts more responsibility over the learning process to the student.

Scaffolding is widely considered to be an essential element of effective teaching, and all teachers—to a greater or lesser extent—almost certainly use various forms of instructional scaffolding in their teaching. In addition, scaffolding is often used to bridge learning gaps —i.e., the difference between what students have learned and what they are expected to know and be able to do at a certain point in their education. For example, if students are not at the reading level required to understand a text being taught in a course, the teacher might use instructional scaffolding to incrementally improve their reading ability until they can read the required text independently and without assistance. One of the main goals of scaffolding is to reduce the negative emotions and self-perceptions that students may experience when they get frustrated, intimidated, or discouraged when attempting a difficult task without the assistance, direction, or understanding they need to complete it.

Scaffolding vs. Differentiation As a general instructional strategy, scaffolding shares many similarities with  differentiation , which refers to a wide variety of teaching techniques and lesson adaptations that educators use to instruct a diverse group of students, with diverse learning needs, in the same course, classroom, or  learning environment . Because scaffolding and differentiation techniques are used to achieve similar instructional goals—i.e., moving student learning and understanding from where it is to where it needs to be—the two approaches may be blended together in some classrooms to the point of being indistinguishable. That said, the two approaches are distinct in several ways. When teachers scaffold instruction, they typically break up a learning experience, concept, or skill into discrete parts, and then give students the assistance they need to learn each part. For example, teachers may give students an excerpt of a longer text to read, engage them in a discussion of the excerpt to improve their understanding of its purpose, and teach them the vocabulary they need to comprehend the text before assigning them the full reading. Alternatively, when teachers differentiate instruction, they might give some students an entirely different reading (to better match their reading level and ability), give the entire class the option to choose from among several texts (so each student can pick the one that interests them most), or give the class several options for completing a related assignment (for example, the students might be allowed to write a traditional essay, draw an illustrated essay in comic-style form, create a slideshow “essay” with text and images, or deliver an oral presentation).

The following examples will serve to illustrate a few common scaffolding strategies:

• The teacher gives students a simplified version of a lesson, assignment, or reading, and then gradually increases the complexity, difficulty, or sophistication over time. To achieve the goals of a particular lesson, the teacher may break up the lesson into a series of mini-lessons that progressively move students toward stronger understanding. For example, a challenging algebra problem may be broken up into several parts that are taught successively. Between each mini-lesson, the teacher checks to see if students have understood the concept, gives them time to practice the equations, and explains how the math skills they are learning will help them solve the more challenging problem (questioning students to check for understanding and giving them time to practice are two common scaffolding strategies). In some cases, the term guided practice may be used to describe this general technique.
• The teacher describes or illustrates a concept, problem, or process in multiple ways to ensure understanding. A teacher may orally describe a concept to students, use a slideshow with visual aids such as images and graphics to further explain the idea, ask several students to illustrate the concept on the blackboard, and then provide the students with a reading and writing task that asks them articulate the concept in their own words. This strategy addresses the multiple ways in which students learn—e.g., visually, orally, kinesthetically, etc.—and increases the likelihood that students will understand the concept being taught.
• Students are given an exemplar or model of an assignment they will be asked to complete.  The teacher describes the exemplar assignment’s features and why the specific elements represent high-quality work. The model provides students with a concrete example of the learning goals they are expected to achieve or the product they are expected to produce. Similarly, a teacher may also model a process—for example, a multistep science experiment—so that students can see how it is done before they are asked to do it themselves (teachers may also ask a student to model a process for her classmates).
• Students are given a vocabulary lesson before they read a difficult text.  The teacher reviews the words most likely to give students trouble, using metaphors, analogies, word-image associations, and other strategies to help students understand the meaning of the most difficult words they will encounter in the text. When the students then read the assignment, they will have greater confidence in their reading ability, be more interested in the content, and be more likely to comprehend and remember what they have read.
• The teacher clearly describes the purpose of a learning activity, the directions students need to follow, and the learning goals they are expected to achieve. The teacher may give students a handout with step-by-step instructions they should follow, or provide the scoring guide or rubric that will be used to evaluate and grade their work. When students know the reason why they are being asked to complete an assignment, and what they will specifically be graded on, they are more likely to understand its importance and be motivated to achieve the learning goals of the assignment. Similarly, if students clearly understand the process they need to follow, they are less likely to experience frustration or give up because they haven’t fully understood what they are expected to do.
• The teacher explicitly describes how the new lesson builds on the knowledge and skills students were taught in a previous lesson. By connecting a new lesson to a lesson the students previously completed, the teacher shows students how the concepts and skills they already learned will help them with the new assignment or project (teachers may describe this general strategy as “building on prior knowledge” or “connecting to prior knowledge”). Similarly, the teacher may also make explicit connections between the lesson and the personal interests and experiences of the students as a way to increase understanding or engagement in the learning process. For example, a history teacher may reference a field trip to a museum during which students learned about a particular artifact related to the lesson at hand. For a more detailed discussion, see relevance .

Alphabetical Search

Using Metacognitive Strategies in Education: The Complete Guide

Understanding Metacognition is essential for teachers guiding their students to a deeper understanding of the topics taught and their own understanding of how they learn, but what is it and how does it work?

What is Metacognition? Metacognition pertains to a student’s ability to self-critique their approach to a task and adapt their thinking to improve their understanding. The metacognition cycle guides students to improve the way they learn; 1. Assess the task. 2. Evaluate strengths and weaknesses. 3. Plan the approach. 4. Apply strategies. 5. Reflect.

What is Metacognition?

How often do you reflect on your own thoughts and behaviors?

As a colleague of mine recently put it to a group of assembled teachers:

Think about how you got here today. Have you been here before? How did you choose which way to get here – method, route etc?

Metacognition is often simply referred to as thinking about your thinking.

Teaching metacognitive strategies to students improves their higher-order thinking and increases their ability to make maximum progress.

Effective teaching is the best way to improve outcomes, especially for disadvantaged students.

The best teachers need a working knowledge and understanding of the most effective strategies in order to maximize the efficiency of their classrooms and the quality of the teaching and learning interactions therein.

By the end of this article, you may feel that you are “the converted” and you have been preached at; hopefully, no conversion is necessary if we all want to be effective teachers!

A lot of strategies that are now huddled under the umbrella of Metacognition and Self-Regulation are the same strategies many effective teachers have been employing, possibly in different guises or without conscious awareness in their classrooms for many years.

What Is the Research Behind Metacognition?

The term metacognition has been used to describe our own understanding of how we perceive, remember, think, and act, that is, what we know about what we know. ( Metacognition: Knowing about Knowing edited by Janet Metcalfe and Arthur P. Shimamura (1994)).

Thinking About Thinking

Metacognitive knowledge is the knowledge of yourself as a learner – how you learn best; the strategies you have at your disposal; the tasks you have to complete and how you complete them.

Metacognitive strategies help us plan, monitor, and evaluate our learning.

Metacognition as a concept is nothing new, the term itself was first coined in the 1970s by John Flavell. Over the years there has been much debate around the precise definition and the component parts.

Piaget’s Influence

In 1963, Flavell was the first to publish in English a study on the research and work of Piaget ( The Developmental Psychology of Jean Piaget ), from this, the science of cognitive development was born.

Looking back with the perspective we now have; the work of Lev Vygotsky on his Zone of Proximal Development , specifically the transition from a learner being directed by a “more knowledgeable other” to the learner becoming capable of understanding their own cognitive abilities would be considered metacognitive development.

Essentially, Metacognition is the ability we have to use our existing knowledge to plan strategies for approaching tasks, take necessary steps to problem solve, reflect on and evaluate results, and modify our approaches as required.

In an excellent article in the most recent copy of Impact Magazine for the CCT James Mannion defines it as ‘monitoring and controlling your thought processes’.

Mannion also urges us to be careful around the over-simplification of the concept; however, we can distil the basics.

Metacognitive Strategies in Education

Metacognition is one of the aspects students need in order to become self-regulated learners; it is important to remember that developing the former does not automatically create the latter.

Before setting off on anything classroom-based that you call a ‘metacognitive strategy’ you must have a basic grasp of the ways students develop their own metacognitive skills as a learner, and you must model these in your own practice.

Don’t fall into the trap of designing generic or explicit ‘metacognition’ lessons or ‘Study Skills’ sequences.

Embed the concepts more deeply in your subject-specific practice and focus on wanting the students to be more effective independent learners, reflecting on their approaches and regulating their behavior appropriately to ensure maximum success and optimized outcomes.

Why Is Metacognition Important?

One of the key conclusions drawn by the National Academy of Sciences in their “ How People Learn II ” report from 2018 is that:

“Successful learning requires coordination of multiple cognitive processes that involve different networks in the brain. In order to coordinate these processes, an individual needs to be able to monitor and regulate his own learning. The ability to monitor and regulate learning changes over the life span and can be improved through interventions”.

The EEF Guidance Report tells us that evidence and research suggest 7 months+ of progress “when used well” and that there is a lot of potential, “particularly for disadvantaged students”.

“When used well” is key, as is “potential”; we need to ensure that strategies and interventions designed to promote metacognitive awareness in students are supported by professional development for teachers.

Teachers should be guided in how best to embed these strategies into their classroom environments and day-to-day teaching and learning interactions.

These ideas around appropriate implementation are explored Joke vanVelzenin in “ Metacognitive Learning; Advancing Learning by Developing General Knowledge of the Learning Process “.

“In today’s schools, most students are taught how to summarize, take notes, and read for understanding, though mostly without specifically being taught how to figure out by themselves when and why these learning techniques can be most effective.

Without obtaining a thorough understanding of the reasons behind the effectiveness of learning techniques, in that general knowledge of the learning process is being developed, learning can be hindered and become unnecessarily difficult, particularly, where new and unfamiliar learning tasks are concerned.

This makes the development of general knowledge of the learning process essential for lifelong learning.”

Metacognition in the Classroom

The EEF report is keen to point out to us that much less is known about effective implementation of metacognitive strategies in the classroom.

However, we can group together a range of approaches and opportunities that relate well to encouraging students to develop their metacognitive awareness.

One area where we can have immediate success is in the creation and management of appropriate resources. Encouraging students to use them effectively, thoughtfully and productively; this latter phrase encapsulates the metacognitive approach nicely.

So, what can we try?

Retrieval Practice

When done well and used appropriately retrieval practices help activate prior knowledge, ascertain prior knowledge and also give students practice at using previously learnt material effectively.

Thus speeding up the cognitive transfer from long-term to working memory and therefore embedding the learning more deeply.

Problem Solving

Worked examples and problem pairs are just a couple of examples of how modelling and articulating the process of using knowledge helps students better understand how to apply the range of metacognitive strategies.

We can also, as teachers make sure that we use questions to allow students to develop their reasoning and explain their answers. We can stimulate debate, press for depth and ‘design better conversations’ for learning.

Backwards Fading and Progressive Modelling

Both of these strategies can help students to the correct process by holding their hand through it in the first instance then gradually removing the level of support until the process becomes more natural and ‘automatic’.

Does this remind you of anyone?

Vygotsky perhaps!

If we adopt Rosenshine’s suggestions around introducing new material in small steps we ensure that we do not overload student working memory and we, therefore, do not hinder performance.

The end goal as a teacher is to fade ourselves and the resources away at an appropriate speed until students reach the level of performance that allows for proper independence.

This cannot and should not be done too quickly!

As well as the tools required to complete the task we can (and should) also teach the management of the task and which strategies are most effective in which situations.

In order to further the support that moves students towards independent and ‘self-regulated’ learning, we should ensure that we are designing those appropriate resources.

Resources that are streamlined, efficient and uncomplicated; ones that show an understanding of cognitive load and student working memory.

7 Examples of Metacognitive Questions Students Should ask Themselves

• What should I do first?
• Is something confusing me?
• Could I explain this to someone else?
• Do I need help to understand this?
• Where did I go wrong?
• Does this relate to other situations or prior knowledge?
• How can I do it better?

Metacognition Strategies

We can try getting students to reflect and evaluate their own learning experiences more with simple prompts :

-What concepts from today’s class did you find difficult to understand?

-Specifically, what will you do to improve your understanding of the concepts that were difficult?

We can also support students with their resource management. We can give them a range of well-taught and modeled study strategies that they can choose from when revising, for example; flashcards, MCQs, elaboration, self-quizzing and concept maps.

Giving them a well-structured study guide, they can work on what strategies work best for them.

Metacognition in action!

We can then ask them to articulate the success (or not) of their independent study to help them identify those strategies that are working and those that are not.

By setting goals and monitoring progress towards them, students become more aware of their own thinking and learning.

Perkins’ four levels of Metacognitive Learner (1992) can be a really useful template for not only identifying the different needs of students but also then enabling more focused and targeted intervention and support.

The Metacognition Cycle

• Assess the task.
• Evaluate strengths and weaknesses.
• Plan the approach.
• Apply strategies.

Metacognition in CPD (Continuing Professional Development)

As mentioned earlier, institutions themselves need to recognize the potential of appropriately designed interventions to support metacognition.

In my view, this starts at the top and with the teachers themselves.

Focused, evidence-informed professional learning opportunities that are iterative and delivered by those with the appropriate knowledge, supported by frameworks and discussion models that help coach and develop staff delivery.

Simply ascribing a school’s ‘metacognitive approach’ to the creation of a one-off generic Study Skills program will not be effective.

The approach needs to be outward-facing and collegiate, with staff collaborating on the delivery of strategy as well as assessing its impact, perhaps in small focused Learning Groups.

When embarking on any form of action research in this way it will be key to ensure that the parameters are clear and precise and that there is a concrete idea of what ‘success’ looks like i.e. how its impact can be measured otherwise.

As with all CPD, be aware of the needs of those in the room and their own skills. How ‘novice’ are they? What support do they need? If teachers can develop and improve their own metacognition then they are better equipped to help develop it in others.

We need to distil the complexity of metacognition into steps that students and teachers can understand; as novice learners, we are initially poor in making judgements about our own learning, and as with anything our expertise increases over time and through experience.

If we want students to be able to become truly independent learners and to be able to think for themselves, we must teach them to think in a metacognitive way.

We don’t need to make huge changes to what we do, just tweak our teaching to set them up with the self-reflective questioning techniques.

What are your thoughts on metacognition in education? Comment below and let me know.

Similar Posts:

• 35 of the BEST Educational Apps for Teachers (Updated 2024)
• Discover Your Learning Style – Comprehensive Guide on Different Learning Styles
• 15 Learning Theories in Education (A Complete Summary)

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment.

Motivation in Education: What It Takes to Motivate Our Kids

Many traditional public schools do not offer much in terms of autonomy nor allow students to learn at their own speed.

The regimens often undermine students’ inclination to pursue topics that interest them and deeply engage them.

The grading systems used in most schools further discourage them from self-directed learning that is borne out of enjoyment of the process and passion for the subject matter.

Develop a passion for learning. If you do, you will never cease to grow.

Anthony J. D’Angelo

A comprehensive understanding of motivation is desperately needed to:

• Promote engagement in our classrooms
• Foster the motivation to learn and develop talent
• Support the desire to stay in school rather than drop out
• Inform teachers how to provide a motivationally supportive classroom climate

This article addresses major topics in the science of motivation as it applies to educational settings and the process of learning in general, and includes examples of motivational assessments for teachers and classroom interventions for students.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Goal Achievement Exercises for free . These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients create actionable goals and master techniques to create lasting behavior change.

This Article Contains:

Motivation in education, theories of motivation in education, motivation and learning, motivation and creativity, motivation at its best: the flow classroom, motivation and what gets in the way, motivational resources for teachers, 3 state-of-the-art interventions, a take-home message.

We all come into the world with a natural curiosity and a motivation to learn, yet some lose those abilities as they grow older. Many factors shape our individual inclinations toward the process of learning, and education is a critical context that can influence our later attitudes toward the acquisition of knowledge and growth.

True learning is a lifelong process. But to continuously achieve, our children must find it enjoyable and rewarding to learn so they can develop a sustained level of motivation necessary for long-term achievement.

Curiosity and motivation to learn are the forces that enable students to seek out intellectual and experiential novelty and encourage students to approach unfamiliar and often challenging circumstances with anticipation of growth and expectation to succeed.

There is no end to education. It is not that you read a book, pass an examination, and finish with education. The whole of life, from the moment you are born to the moment you die, is a process of learning.

Jiddu Krishnamurti

In the context of education, students’ levels of motivation are reflected in their engagement and contribution to the learning environment.

Highly motivated students are usually actively and spontaneously involved in activities and find the process of learning enjoyable without expecting any external rewards (Skinner & Belmont, 1993). On the other hand, students who exhibit low levels of motivation to learn will often depend on the rewards to encourage them to participate in activities they may not find enjoyable.

According to Malone and Lepper (1987), seven factors drive motivation:

• Competition
• Cooperation
• Recognition

Many of these are present in games, but more on that later. Current trends in educational psychology draw attention not only to cognitive development, but also the students’ motivation and preference as the fundamental factors in fostering effective learning and achievement.

Lack of motivation, a significant barrier to academic success that exhibits itself through feelings of frustration and annoyance, hinders productivity and wellbeing in the long run. Several factors influence the motivational level in learning, such as the ability to believe in the effort, the unawareness of the worth, and characteristics of the academic tasks (Legault, Green-Demers, & Pelletier, 2006).

The following section discusses intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and other related theories in learning motivation.

Motivation itself has a vast scope, and several motivational theories are relevant to the learning domain. The following theories contribute to the essential outcomes of the learning process without being dependent on any other theories in the education domain:

• Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation theory
• Self-determination theory (SDT)
• The ARCS model
• Social cognitive theory
• Expectancy theory

Self-determination theory and the ARCS model are widely utilized in the motivation domain for learning discipline. The implementation level of theories such as social cognitive theory and expectancy theory is still in initial stages but can significantly contribute to understanding motivation in learning as well as other aspects of life where motivation is crucial.

1. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation theory

According to Ryan and Deci (2000), intrinsic motivation defines an activity done for its own sake without the anticipation of external rewards and out of a sense of the sheer satisfaction it provides.

The right level of challenge, adequate skills, sense of control, curiosity, and fantasy are some key factors that can trigger intrinsic motivation. When combined with willpower and a positive attitude, these elements can help sustain motivation over time.

Some studies show that intrinsic motivation and academic achievement share significant and positive correlates (Pérez-López & Contero, 2013). Intrinsic motivation can direct students to participate in academic activities to experience the fun, challenge, and novelty away from any external pressure or compulsion and without expectations of rewards (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Success is no accident. It is hard work, perseverance, learning, studying, sacrifice and most of all, love of what you are doing or learning to do.

In contrast, extrinsic motivation describes activities students engage in while anticipating rewards, be they in the form of good grades or recognition, or out of compulsion and fear of punishment (Tohidi & Jabbari, 2012).

Motivation can be cultivated extrinsically at the initial stage, particularly when it comes to activities that are not inherently interesting, as long as the ultimate goal is to transform it into intrinsic motivation as the learning process unfolds. The rationale for this has to do with a short shelf life and a potential dependence on rewards.

Although extrinsic motivation can initially spark a high level of willpower and engagement, it does not encourage perseverance and is challenging to sustain over time due to hedonic adaptation. Finally, external rewards or compliments undermine the possibility that students will engage in the educational activities for their own sake or to master skills or knowledge.

Nevertheless, both types of motivation have their place in the process of learning. While intrinsic motivation can lead to greater levels of  self-motivation , extrinsic motivation often offers that initial boost that engages students in the activity and can help sustain motivation throughout the process of learning over time (Li & Lynch, 2016).

It is no easy undertaking to guide students to learn how to be highly motivated , face challenges, understand the process, and be able to apply their newfound knowledge in real-life circumstances.

2. Self-determination theory

Self-determination theory addresses intrinsic and extrinsic motivation further. It explains it in terms of self-regulation, where extrinsic motivation reflects external control of behavior, and inherent motivation relates to true self-regulation (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

SDT tells us that intrinsic motivation is closely related to the satisfaction of basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and illustrates how these natural human tendencies relate to several key features in the learning process.

Here, autonomy is related to volition and independence, and competence is associated with the feeling of effectiveness and self-confidence in pursuing and accomplishing academic tasks. Relatedness provides the feeling of safety and connectedness to the learning environment, where students’ academic performance and motivation are enabled and enhanced (Ulstad, Halvari, Sorebo, Deci, 2016).

Learning is not attained by chance, it must be sought out for with ardor and attended to with diligence.

Abigail Adams

Self-determination theory evolved out of five other sub-theories that further support its claims.

First, the cognitive evaluation theory, which explains the effects of external consequences on internal motivation, draws our attention to the critical roles autonomy and competence play in fostering intrinsic motivation by showing how they are vital in education, arts, sports, and many other domains.

Second, organismic integration theory and causality orientations theory further explain motivation as occurring along a spectrum, from an amotivational stage toward motivational states where the focus is on competence.

Next, basic psychological needs theory, which classifies human needs into three primary psychological needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness), shows how the satisfaction of those needs is crucial for engagement, motivation, healthy progress, and wellbeing among students (Gagné & Deci, 2014).

Finally, goal contents theory shows the relationship between fundamental needs satisfaction and wellbeing based on intrinsic and extrinsic goal motivation, where intrinsic goals lead to greater achievement and better academic performance, especially within the educational environment (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

3. ARCS model

ARCS is an acronym for attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction. The ARCS model is an approach to instructional design that focuses on the motivational aspects of the learning environment by addressing four components of motivation (Keller, 1987):

• Arousing interest
• Creating relevance
• Developing an expectancy of success
• Increasing satisfaction through intrinsic and extrinsic rewards

The ARCS model stresses capturing students’ attention as critical to gaining and sustaining their engagement in learning and shows how this can be accomplished through the use of attractive and stimulating media or learning material that is relevant to their experiences and needs.

It recognizes how confidence is related to students’ anticipation of success and how positive feelings about the learning process lead to greater satisfaction from the acquisition of knowledge (Keller, 2008).

4. Social cognitive theory

Social cognitive theory (SCT), implemented today in various domains from education and communication to psychology, refers to the acquisition of knowledge by direct observation, interaction, experiences, and outside media influence (Bryant & Zillmann, 2002).

It rests on the assumption that we construct meaning and acquire knowledge through social influence, from daily communication to the use of the internet, and explains the relationships between behavior, social and physical environment, and personal factors.

SCT illustrates how people gain and maintain several behavioral patterns and provides basic intervention strategies like interactive learning, which allows students to gain confidence through practice (Bandura, 1989).

5. Expectancy theory

Expectancy theory, originally developed to explain how the work environment can motivate employees, strives to show the relationship between the expectations of success and anticipation of rewards, and the amount of effort expended on a task and how it relates to overall performance (HemaMalini & Washington, 2014).

Simply put, expectancy theory explains motivation as a choice based on the expectation of the results of selected behavior.

The expectancy theory explains motivation in terms of reasons we engage in specific behaviors, where we expect that effort will lead to better performance, which in turn will lead to valued rewards.

Download 3 Free Goals Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients create actionable goals and master techniques for lasting behavior change.

Download 3 Free Goals Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

• Email Address *
• Your Expertise * Your expertise Therapy Coaching Education Counseling Business Healthcare Other
• Phone This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

If our kids are motivated, they learn better and retain more of what they learned. Although this sounds obvious, the reality is more nuanced, and the research shows that not all motivations are created equal.

The literature on goal achievement recognizes two primarily and distinctly different types of goals: mastery and performance. Some of our children are driven to master materials, skills, and develop their competence; others strive to perform well in comparison to others (Dweck, 1986; Nicholls, 1984).

Mastery goals and performance goals represent the same overall quantity of motivation, but they are qualitatively distinct types of motivation.

Murayama and Elliot (2011) conducted a series of behavioral experiments to examine how these two different types of motivation influence learning.

In their study, participants were engaged in a problem-solving exercise and received a surprise memory test related to the task. Those in the mastery goal condition were told that the purpose of the task was to develop their cognitive ability, while those in the performance goal condition were told that their goal was to demonstrate their ability relative to other participants.

Members in the performance goal condition showed better performance on an immediate memory test, but when the memory was assessed one week later, those in the mastery goal condition outperformed those who were motivated by competition.

Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever.

Mahatma Gandhi

Although the results of the study clearly indicated that performance goals help short-term learning and mastery orientation facilitates learning over time, Murayama felt this needed further testing.

A longitudinal survey data on more than 3,000 children in grade 7 in German schools were analyzed using latent growth curve modeling and showed that items that focus on the performance aspect of learning, where the students said they worked hard in math because they wanted to get good grades, predicted a higher immediate math achievement score.

Similarly, items focusing on the mastery aspect of learning, where students reported investing a lot of effort in math because they were interested in the subject, predicted the growth in math achievement scores over three years (Murayama, Pekrun, Lichtenfeld, & vom Hofe, 2013).

This convergent evidence that mastery-based motivation supports long-term learning, whereas performance-based motivation only helps short-term learning and the underlying mechanisms of this time-dependent effect of motivation is currently being examined with some additional neuroimaging and behavioral experiments (Ikeda, Castel, & Murayama, 2015; Murayama et al., 2013).

Our students’ ability to generate novel and useful ideas and solutions to everyday problems is a crucial competence in today’s world and requires high levels of motivation and a good dose of creativity.

Although creativity is to some extent tied to personality traits, it is also influenced by the supportive aspects of the student’s environment, sense of mastery of the domain or medium the student is working in (which may or may not influence self-efficacy), and finally by levels of motivation and their intrinsic versus extrinsic characteristics.

Thanks to Theresa Amabile (1996), who studied the creativity of commissioned versus non-commissioned artistic works, we know a lot about the link between intrinsic motivation and creativity.

Csíkszentmihályi, who studied creative and accomplished people for over a decade, concluded that genuinely creative people work for work’s own sake, and if they make a public discovery or become famous, that is a bonus. What drives them, more than rewards, is the desire to find or create order where there was none before.

When talking about students in school, protecting and supporting intrinsic motivation is one important thing we can do to promote creativity and learning. Although we may want to quickly conclude that the higher the student’s intrinsic motivation, the more creative and original they will be, the real explanation of the relationship between motivation and creativity is more difficult than many overly optimistic accounts have claimed.

Real creativity can only emerge once we have mastered the medium or domain in which we work. An idea or product that deserves the label ‘creative’ arises from the synergy of many sources and not only from the mind of a single person, according to Csíkszentmihályi.

Learning and innovation go hand in hand. The arrogance of success is to think that what you did yesterday will be sufficient for tomorrow.

William Pollard

Creativity is an important source of meaning in our lives, as all the things that are interesting, important, and human are the results of creativity. The genuinely creative accomplishment is seldom the result of a sudden insight but comes after years of hard work.

Our educational system emphasizes the use of logic, where one correct statement proceeds to the next and finally to the right solution. While this approach is sufficient most of the time, when we have a particularly tricky situation, it may not give us the leap forward we need.

Thinking outside of the box, or what Edward de Bono (1967) calls lateral thinking, can be used when we have exhausted the possibilities of normal thought patterns.

It is not enough to have some awareness of lateral thinking, de Bono (1995) asserts; we have to practice it. Most of his books consist of techniques to try to get us into lateral thinking mode. Here are a few we can test in our classrooms:

• Generating alternatives — To have better solutions, you must have more choices to begin with.
• Challenging assumptions — Though we need to assume many things to function normally, never questioning our assumptions leaves us in thinking ruts.
• Quotas — It helps to come up with a certain predetermined number of ideas on an issue. Often, it is the last or final idea that is the most useful.
• Analogies — Trying to see how a situation is similar to an apparently different one is a time-tested route to better thinking.
• Reversal thinking — Reverse how we see something – that is, see its opposite – and we may be surprised at the ideas it may liberate.
• Finding the dominant idea — Not an easy skill to master but extremely valuable in seeing what matters in a book, presentation, conversation, and so on.
• Brainstorming — Not lateral thinking itself, but provides a setting for that kind of thinking to emerge.
• Suspended judgment — Deciding to entertain an idea just long enough to see if it might work, even if it is not attractive on the surface.

Creativity results from a complex interaction between a person and their environment or culture. Real learning and creativity require student engagement, which involves a combination of motivation, concentration, interest, and enjoyment derived from the process of learning itself – qualities that are essential to flow (Shernoff, Csikszentmihalyi, Shneider, & Shernoff, 2003).

Fostering student engagement that leads to the experience of complete absorption in the task at hand, also known as the state of flow, can bring about deeper learning. Although not an easy task, teachers can infuse more flow into their classrooms.

It requires that students connect to their goals, specifically intrinsic goals. Goals such as social connection, self-acceptance, and physical fitness are growth oriented.

In sharp contrast to goals that are driven by judgment or approval of others, intrinsically motivated pursuits are those that are inherently satisfying because they often are likely to satisfy innate psychological needs of autonomy, relatedness, and competence.

Shernoff et al. (2003) followed students through different classes to observe what kinds of activities and teacher instruction produced the most flow.

Interestingly, they found that achieving flow was not determined by any particular type of activity but rather by the mix of challenge and support teachers provide. The study showed that student engagement was high when they were appropriately challenged, which usually involved complex goals and high teacher expectations as well as support and positive interactions (Shernoff et al., 2003).

Shernoff et al. (2003) observed that when teachers pointed out the relevance of lesson goals to students’ lives by centering lessons on real-world problems, made sure students had the skills and materials to reach these goals, monitored progress, provided feedback, and developed good rapport with students, their students experienced more flow and learned better.

In addition, teachers who modeled enthusiasm for the material and used humor were particularly engaging to students, even when lecturing. Shernoff believes that learning is about desire rather than capacity and argues that today’s schools, with their focus on grades, fail to take advantage of kids’ intrinsic desires to learn.

If we want kids to get excited about learning and commit to deeper study, they need to be motivated to learn and enjoy the process.

Shernoff (as quoted in Suttie, 2012)

The researchers found that students were most engaged in school while taking tests, doing individual work, and doing group work.

Students were less likely to experience flow when listening to lectures or watching videos. Particularly when the activities were under their control and relevant to their lives, students reported being most engaged and in a better mood.

Shernoff et al. (2003) concluded that teachers could encourage more flow in their classrooms through lessons that offer choice, are connected to students’ goals, and provide both challenges and opportunities for success that are appropriate to students’ level of skill.

Shernoff et al.’s (2003) findings seem to suggest that the chance students will experience flow will often be determined by the person standing at the head of the class. Students’ engagement fluctuates a great deal depending on their teachers. The key, says Shernoff, is for teachers to make learning goals attainable based on the students’ skill levels and to encourage student autonomy while providing positive feedback.

“Teachers would be better off thinking about how they can affect the learning environment and play more of a coaching role instead of thinking about what information they are going to impart,” says Shernoff (Suttie, 2012) and suggests the following approach to the cultivation of flow in the classroom:

• Challenge without overwhelming. An activity must be challenging at a level just above students’ current abilities. If a challenge is too hard, students will become anxious and give up; if it’s too easy, they’ll become bored. It’s crucial to find the sweet spot. Students may require a lesson to be scaffolded, breaking it down into manageable pieces, to find the right balance.
• Create interest through making assignments relevant to students’ lives. Encourage students to discover the relevance for themselves, as interest in the subject is a fundamental part of flow.
• Support their autonomy and encourage choice. When students are given an opportunity to choose their activities and work with autonomy, they will engage more with the task.
• Provide structure by setting clear goals and give feedback along the way. Students help define their goals and remain aware of how or whether their efforts are moving toward the goal.
• Foster positive relationships by valuing their inputs.
• Cultivate deep concentration and foster a feeling of complete absorption by limiting distractions and interruptions.
• Create an experience through hands-on exercises through making things, solving problems, and creating artwork. Stay away from lectures or videos.
• Model enthusiasm for the subject, make them laugh, and speak their language.

All of this resonates with Csíkszentmihályi’s original research on flow, which found that there must be a good balance between the level of challenge required by the activity and the skills of the person engaged in it.

The flow theory explains how, when the challenge is too great, the student can become anxious, and if the task is too easy, the student will be bored. Csíkszentmihályi’s findings also show that to cultivate flow even further, the goal of the activity should be clear and feedback ongoing, so that students can adjust their effort over time.

Shernoff et al.’s (2003) findings were further validated by Ellwood and Abrams (2018), who studied specifically how the promotion of flow experiences can foster enhanced student motivation and greater achievement outcomes.

Clearly defined goals, immediate feedback, and most importantly, the perfect balance between challenge and skills led to greater motivation and ultimately greater achievement. Incorporating the experience of flow was positively related to the success of inquiry-based science (Ellwood & Abrams, 2018).

World’s Largest Positive Psychology Resource

The Positive Psychology Toolkit© is a groundbreaking practitioner resource containing over 500 science-based exercises , activities, interventions, questionnaires, and assessments created by experts using the latest positive psychology research.

Updated monthly. 100% Science-based.

“The best positive psychology resource out there!” — Emiliya Zhivotovskaya , Flourishing Center CEO

The discussion of student motivation, especially for those who may be reluctant or resistant, would not be complete without understanding the mechanics of what gets in the way.

The learned helplessness theory relies on the components of contingency, cognition, and behavior to explain the motivational dynamics underlying helplessness. The theory of learned helplessness explains behaviors characteristic of lack of self-efficacy and expectancies of no or low control over future outcomes (Reeve, 2018).

It is the opposite of the sense of competence and autonomy and is often representative of low self-esteem and a pessimistic worldview.

Be curious, not judgmental.

Walt Whitman

Its three components explain the mechanism for how helplessness is learned and how it often leads to depression. The contingency component explains the link between action taken by a person and its subsequent outcome, ranging in degrees of objective control available to a person.

The cognition component of learned helplessness refers to our cognitive interpretations, our beliefs, and the associated feelings that amount to a personal sense of control. In the case of learned helplessness, these are characterized by loss of hope, resignation, loss of self-esteem, and fear of global implications of failures and negative events.

Here, the pessimistic attribution styles distinguish those who believe that adverse outcomes were caused by them, that they will endure, and that they cannot be changed or brought under control from those who have an optimistic attitude toward bad outcomes and see them as caused by the environment, temporary, and changeable.

These attributions, in turn, affect motivation and can exhibit themselves in case of learned helplessness through lack of effort in future undertakings, procrastination, and in some instances, through the avoidance of similar situations altogether (Reeve, 2018).

Unfortunately, lollipops and stickers will probably not do the trick. This requires us to periodically reflect on what is already working so we can tweak our existing motivational strategies and maybe even pick up a few new ones along the way.

It’s possible to help all students, even the most reluctant and resistant, to choose to invest in their learning. The motivation checklist below, courtesy of Mindsteps (2011), is a great way to evaluate where you can improve motivation levels in your classroom, and together with the reflection exercise, these can serve as a roadmap for the future.

Motivation checklist

Build a classroom worth investing in

• I have created a classroom that is most conducive to the way my students learn best.
• I am clear about what currencies the lesson demands.
• I have made sure that the lesson does not privilege my currencies as the only acceptable forms of currency.
• I have worked out ways to make explicit the currencies required by the lesson.
• I have examined my classroom to make sure that I am not unintentionally creating barriers to investing.
• I have removed all classroom barriers to investing.
• I am helping students who do not have the required currencies or a viable alternative to acquire the currencies they need.
• I have built in-classroom structures that offer students autonomy of task, time, team, and technique.
• I have built in-classroom structures that offer students mastery.
• I have built in-classroom structures that offer students a sense of purpose.
• I have built in-classroom structures that foster a sense of belonging.

Uncover and address the reasons students resist

• I have identified students’ reasons for resisting investing.
• I have addressed students’ fear of failure by including specific strategies to build students’ resilience.
• I have addressed a lack of relevance for students by personalizing content.
• I have addressed students’ lack of trust by deliberately building relationships with students.
• I have looked for ways to demonstrate value on students’ terms rather than my own terms.

Ask for the investment

• I have clearly defined the long-term investment goal.
• I have asked for an investment that is directly connected to the goal.
• I have asked for a specific investment.
• I have proposed the highest realistic investment students can make at the time.
• I have proposed a meaningful investment.
• I have helped students set specific goals.
• I have asked these students to make an investment.
• I have held these students accountable to their investment.
• I look for ways to help my students continue to invest in the classroom using their new currencies.

Reflections on motivation

• How do unmotivated students currently behave in your classroom? What do they do (or not do)?
• How do you think these unmotivated behaviors affect students’ individual ability to learn and the classroom environment as a whole?
• Imagine that a miracle occurred and that you walked into class one day to find that all of your students’ motivation problems had been solved. Describe what this would look like for a typical class. What would your students be doing differently?
• Take a closer look at the “miraculously motivated” class you’ve described above. What specific investments of time, effort, and attention do you envision students making?
• How do you think the specific investments you’ve identified would affect your classroom environment?
• How might you respond to students differently if they were suddenly motivated? What specific behavioral changes would they notice in you?
• Describe the last time you saw your “unmotivated” students invest in your class even for a little bit of time.
• Look closer at this motivated episode and consider what about it might have been different. What was different about the activity, the classroom environment, and your behavior that might have motivated your “unmotivated” students to invest in your class? (Mindsteps, 2011).

The secret to motivating your child – Jennifer Nacif

We know from the study of motivation that trying to change personal characteristics within the students themselves is not likely to produce results. Our college students are dropping out of school at a high rate because they feel that the school ignores them and their unique concerns.

This suggests that it would be more helpful to design interventions that provide students with highly responsive relationships, rather than trying to change the students themselves.

Instead of interventions that are geared toward increasing students’ GPA, it would be more practical to design ways to support students’ interest in school, encourage them to pursue intrinsic goals, offer students the opportunity to envision attractive possible future selves, and provide an experience to develop a growth mindset, to name a few.

An effective intervention includes a supportive social context and high-quality interpersonal relationships.

The following three interventions represent three success stories in the effort to translate motivation and emotion theory into convenient state-of-the-art intervention programs.

The first intervention illustrates a needs-based intervention, the second a cognition-based intervention, and the third an emotion-based intervention. See our articles on What Is Motivation? , Motivation Science , and Theories of Motivation for detailed explanations of these components of motivation.

Intervention 1: Satisfying psychological needs

Everyone experiences the three basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and these three needs energize and vitalize classroom engagement and learning.

Unfortunately, students in many classrooms receive instruction and are asked to write papers, complete projects, and learn new skills in ways that leave their psychological needs unmet.

One group of researchers developed a needs-based intervention program to help teachers develop a motivating style capable of supporting students’ psychological needs.

Specifically, they developed, implemented, and tested the merits of an autonomy-supportive intervention program (Cheon, Reeve, & Moon, 2012; Cheon, Reeve, & Song, 2016).

Autonomy-supportive teachers do the following:

• Take their students’ perspective
• Listen empathically to what students say
• Utilize instructional strategies that nurture inner motivational resources
• Teach in students’ preferred way
• Provide explanatory rationale
• Use invitational language
• Display patience
• Acknowledge and accept students’ expressions of negative affect

These are not commonly occurring classroom events, but these instructional strategies can be learned. The step-by-step intervention program was designed to help teachers learn the “how-to” of autonomy-supportive teaching.

The autonomy-supportive intervention program was delivered in three parts.

• Part 1 was a three-hour morning workshop offered before the beginning of the semester. During the workshop, teachers learned about their motivating style, the benefits of autonomy support, and the costs of interpersonal control.
• Part 2 was a three-hour afternoon workshop to learn the “how-to” of autonomy support. Teachers watched videotapes of other teachers (professional actors) modeling the six evidence-based autonomy-supportive instructional behaviors.
• Part 3 was a two-hour group discussion in which teachers shared their actual experiences in trying to implement autonomy-supportive teaching in their classrooms.

To assess the validity and effectiveness of the intervention program, the students completed questionnaires to report their perceptions of their teacher’s motivating style as well as their motivation and classroom functioning throughout the semester.

Also, a group of trained raters visited each teacher’s classroom midway through the semester to rate objectively how frequently teachers used autonomy-supportive instructional behaviors during their instruction.

The results below show that the intervention produced its intended effect in helping teachers in the experimental group teach in a more autonomy-supportive way and generated positive benefits.

Overall, this intervention is a success story because it shows that teachers can learn how to support students’ psychological needs satisfaction, and when they do, their students benefit in many important ways, including increased motivation.

The interventions below also translate motivation theory into practical application, although in a somewhat less direct fashion. Nevertheless, they have the potential to improve the social context necessary for motivation to thrive.

Intervention 2: Increasing a growth mindset

Another state-of-the-art intervention is a cognition-based intervention intended to help a growth mindset in kids in thinking about people’s personalities and was developed by a group of researchers to address adolescent aggression. Specifically, the researchers developed, implemented, and tested the merits of a growth mindset workshop (Yeager, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2013).

Some adolescent aggression is unprovoked, but most occurs as retaliation to peer conflict, social exclusion, and victimization. In a conflict, adolescents generally make a personality-like evaluation of the other person’s character and, as a victim, see the other as an aggressor who cannot change.

This belief often leads to aggressive retaliation; harming the aggressor seems deserved. But when a victim sees the aggressor as someone who can change, then this belief tends to reduce aggressive retaliation and open up the possibility for a prosocial response.

A study designed to test an intervention to increase a growth mindset showed that adolescents who embrace a fixed mindset, a belief that people cannot change their personalities, would be more likely to be aggressive than adolescents who adopt a growth mindset.

Over three weeks, 111 ninth- and tenth-grade students in several different high schools in the San Francisco area attended lectures and engaged in activities to teach them the science of a growth mindset.

They learned about how the brain changes with learning, that personalities can also change because they live in the brain, and that thoughts and feelings can change as well. The students also all engaged in activities to help them think about peer conflict and aggression.

Students also completed a questionnaire assessing the growth mindset two weeks before the start of the intervention and again two weeks after the intervention ended, and played a “cyber ball” activity in which they suffered an experience of peer exclusion.

After the peer exclusion experience, participants were allowed to behave aggressively and retaliate or in a prosocial way and write a friendly note.

Results from the three-week intervention report the evidence that the intervention produced its intended effect:

• Adolescents in the experimental group endorsed the growth mindset significantly more than adolescents in the control group.
• When provoked, adolescents in the experimental group showed more prosocial behavior than adolescents in the control group.
• Teachers rated adolescents in the experimental group as significantly less aggressive than adolescents in the control group.

Overall, the study showed that a school-based intervention that taught adolescents the science of the growth mindset was able to take the anger- and aggression-based edge out of peer conflict so that aggressive retaliation became less likely while prosocial behavior response became more likely.

Intervention 3: Promoting emotion knowledge

The third intervention speaks to the role emotions play in motivational states. Students with unsophisticated emotion knowledge are at risk of developing maladaptive behavior problems such as interpersonal conflict, classroom disruptive behavior, aggressive behavior, and the absence of social competence.

Emotion knowledge involves a capacity to recognize emotional expressions in others, produce a correct label for those emotional expressions, and articulate the causes of basic emotions.

If children could develop their emotion knowledge and learn how to utilize their positive emotions (e.g., interest, joy) better, then they would be better positioned to regulate their negative emotions (e.g., fear, anger) and maladaptive behavior problems.

Izard, Trentacosta, King, and Mostow (2004) developed an emotion-based intervention in the form of a preschool program to deliver an “Emotions Course” and an “Emotion-Based Prevention Program” to promote children’s emotion knowledge.

In the Emotions Course, children engaged in activities like puppet shows that provided opportunities to label basic emotions. Children also drew faces of emotional expressions to depict different emotions and their intensity levels.

The point of the Emotions Course was to increase children’s skill in decoding and recognizing others’ emotional expressions.

In the Emotion-Based Prevention Program, children engaged in activities that created mild emotions like reading books about characters who have emotional episodes as teachers helped them articulate their feelings, understand the causes of these emotions, and take appropriate action to regulate them.

To regulate anger, for instance, children were taught to hug a pillow to reduce anger-generated arousal, take three deep breaths, and then use words to negotiate.

The study to test the effectiveness of the intervention to promote emotion knowledge recruited 177 preschool students and 26 teachers who were involved in a low-income preschool Head Start program in the rural mid-Atlantic states. The Emotions Course and Emotion-Based Prevention Program were delivered in three parts:

• A two-hour workshop before the semester began to help teachers learn how to teach the Emotions Course in their classroom
• Biweekly observation of the teacher’s classroom by a member from the research team to provide a post-class consultation to refine and improve the teacher’s delivery of the Emotions Course and Emotion-Based Prevention Program
• Monthly meetings between parents and researchers to discuss the Emotions Course content and its instructional strategies. In these meetings, parents discussed teachers’ instructional techniques to help children understand, regulate, and utilize basic emotions.

The validity and effectiveness of the intervention program were assessed in three ways, and all the measures were scored the week before the intervention began and again at the end of the intervention.

• The children took an emotion knowledge test where they viewed a photograph of a facial expression and identified the emotion.
• Teachers rated the children on both emotion knowledge and frequency of expressing positive emotions like interest and joy during class.
• Trained raters objectively scored the frequency with which each child displayed negative emotional episodes during class.

Results from the 20-week Emotions Course and Emotion-Based Prevention Program showed that the intervention produced its intended effect and produced positive benefits.

• Teachers rated that the children in the experimental group expressed positive emotions significantly more frequently after 20 weeks.
• Raters scored the children in the same group as displaying a considerably lower number of negative emotional episodes over the same period.
• Teachers rated children in their class as displaying fewer post-intervention negative emotions and more post-intervention social competence.
• Parents rated the children in the experimental group as displaying less post-intervention aggressive behavior and less post-intervention depressive behavior at home than parents of children in the control group.

Overall, this intervention was a success story because it showed that children could increase their emotion knowledge, and, when they do, they increase their capacity for effective emotion regulation.

17 Tools To Increase Motivation and Goal Achievement

These 17 Motivation & Goal Achievement Exercises [PDF] contain all you need to help others set meaningful goals, increase self-drive, and experience greater accomplishment and life satisfaction.

Created by Experts. 100% Science-based.

One reason why the study of motivation matters is because researchers have been able to design and implement successful interventions to improve lives, for students as well as their teachers and parents.

Many of the studies discussed in this article showed that students who sensed more teacher support for autonomy felt more competent and less anxious, reported more interest and enjoyment in their work, and produced higher quality work.

By providing lessons that offer choice, are connected to students’ goals, and provide both challenges and opportunities for success that are appropriate to students’ level of skill, teachers were able to foster a positive learning environment and positive teacher–student relationships.

I am still learning.

Michelangelo

Tell us about your favorite way to motivate students or share a story of what motivates you if you’re still learning.

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Goal Achievement Exercises for free .

• Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity . Westview.
• Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44 (9), 1175–1184.
• Bauer, K. N., Orvis, K. A., Ely, K., & Surface, E. A. (2016). Re-examination of motivation in learning contexts: Meta-analytically investigating the role type of motivation plays in the prediction of key training outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 31 (1), 33–50.
• Bryant, J., & Zillmann, D. (Eds.). (2002).  Media effects: Advances in theory and research  (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Moon, I. S. (2012). Experimentally based, longitudinally designed, teacher-focused intervention to help physical education teachers be more autonomy supportive toward their students.  Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology ,  34 (3), 365–396.
• Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Song, Y. G. (2016). A teacher-focused intervention to decrease PE students’ amotivation by increasing need satisfaction and decreasing need frustration.  Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology ,  38 (3), 217–235.
• de Bono, E. (1967).  The use of lateral thinking . Penguin Books.
• de Bono, E. (1995). Teach yourself to think.  Penguin Books.
• Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning.  American Psychologist ,  41 (10), 1040–1048.
• Ellwood, R., & Abrams, E. (2018). Student’s social interaction in inquiry-based science education: How experiences of flow can increase motivation and achievement.  Cultural Studies of Science Education ,  13 , 395–427.
• Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2014). The history of self-determination theory in psychology and management. In M. Gagné (Ed.),  The Oxford handbook of work engagement, motivation, and self-determination theory  (pp. 1–9). Oxford University Press.
• HemaMalini, P. H., & Washington, A. (2014). Employees’ motivation and valued rewards as a key to effective QWL from the perspective of expectancy theory. TSM Business Review, 2 (2), 45–54.
• Ikeda, K., Castel, A. D., & Murayama, K. (2015). Mastery-approach goals eliminate retrieval-induced forgetting: The role of achievement goals in memory inhibition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41 , 687–695.
• Izard, C. E., Trentacosta, C. J., King, K. A., & Mostow, A. J. (2004). An emotion-based prevention program for Head Start children. Early Education and Development ,  15 (4), 407–422.
• Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 10 (3), 2–10.
• Keller, J. M. (2008). First principles of motivation to learn and e3‐learning. Distance Education, 29 (2), 175–185.
• Legault, L., Green-Demers, I., & Pelletier, L. (2006). Why do high school students lack motivation in the classroom? Toward an understanding of academic motivation and the role of social support.  Journal of Educational Psychology ,  98 (3), 567–582.
• Li, T., & Lynch, R. (2016). The relationship between motivation for learning and academic achievement among basic and advanced level students studying Chinese as a foreign language in years 3 to 6 at Ascot International School in Bangkok, Thailand. Human Sciences Scholar ,  8 (1).
• Malone, T. W., & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In R. E. Snow & M. J. Farr (Eds.),  Aptitude, learning, and instruction volume 3: Cognitive and affective process analyses  (pp. 223–253). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• MindSteps. (2011). Motivation checklist . Retrieved from https://mindstepsinc.com/motivation/
• MindSteps. (2011).  Reflections on motivation.  Retrieved from https://mindstepsinc.com/motivation/
• Murayama, K., & Elliot, A. J. (2011). Achievement motivation and memory: Achievement goals differentially influence immediate and delayed remember-know recognition memory.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin ,  37 (10), 1339–1348.
• Murayama, K., Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., & vom Hofe, R. (2013). Predicting long-term growth in students’ mathematics achievement: The unique contributions of motivation and cognitive strategies.  Child Development ,  84 (4), 1475–1490.
• Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance.  Psychological Review ,  91 (3), 328–346.
• Pérez-López, D., & M. Contero (2013). Delivering educational multimedia contents through an augmented reality application: A case study on its impact on knowledge acquisition and retention. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12 (4), 19–28.
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 25 , 54–67
• Shernoff, D. J., Csíkszentmihályi, M., Shneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School Psychology Quarterly ,  18 (2), 158–176.
• Skinner, E., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effect of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year.  Journal of Educational Psychology ,  85 (4), 571–581.
• Suttie, J. (2012, April 16).  Can schools help students find flow?  Greater Good Magazine. Retrieved from https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/can_schools_help_students_find_flow
• Tohidi, H., & Jabbari, M. M. (2012). The effects of motivation in education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , 31 , 820–824.
• Ulstad, S. O., Halvari, H., Sorebo, O., & Deci, E. L. (2016). Motivation, learning strategies, and performance in physical education at secondary school.  Advances in Physical Education ,  6 (1), 27–41.
• Yeager, D. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2013). An implicit theories of personality intervention reduces adolescent aggression in response to victimization and exclusion. Child Development ,  84 (3), 970–988.

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

Please, can you help me with the citation of this article. How can I cite it in references and where was it publish?

Hi Alexander,

Thanks for your question.

Please use the reference below when citing this article, thanks 🙂

Souders, B. (2020). Motivation in Education: What It Takes to Motivate Our Kids. PositivePsychology.com. Retrieved from https://positivepsychology.com/motivation-education/

Kind regards, -Caroline | Community Manager

This is great! Thank you so much! Could you please share the names of the researchers who did the first intervention? Thanks much in advance!

Hi Gulnora,

Glad you enjoyed the post! These researchers are Sung Hyeon Cheon, Johnmarshall Reeve, Yong-Gwan Song and Ik Soo Moon across the following two papers:

Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Song, Y. G. (2016). A teacher-focused intervention to decrease PE students’ amotivation by increasing need satisfaction and decreasing need frustration. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 38 (3), 217-235.

Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Moon, I. S. (2012). Experimentally based, longitudinally designed, teacher-focused intervention to help physical education teachers be more autonomy supportive toward their students. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 34 (3), 365-396.

Hope this helps!

– Nicole | Community Manager

wonderful thank you so much

Excellent! Thanks, Carlos

Intrinsic and and extrinsic quotation of Tohidi and Jabbari date are a little odd…I know it is from 2012, but you make a typo there and come as 2021.

I am reading this article today and it is still not being corrected. Make me laugh. 🙂

However, THANKS for the article, it is well covered.

Hi Lucy and Rosario,

Whoops! Thank you for the prompt — this has now been corrected. 🙂

One more little typo: When the ARCS model is explained, the reference is “(Keller, 1983)” instead of 1987. It’s correct in the references though. Thanks for the article!

Thanks, LS! I’ve also corrected this.

Excellent concept

It’s nice peace of information for the motivation of our kids

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

How to Encourage Clients to Embrace Change

Many of us struggle with change, especially when it’s imposed upon us rather than chosen. Yet despite its inevitability, without it, there would be no [...]

Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory of Motivation

Motivation is vital to beginning and maintaining healthy behavior in the workplace, education, and beyond, and it drives us toward our desired outcomes (Zajda, 2023). [...]

SMART Goals, HARD Goals, PACT, or OKRs: What Works?

Goal setting is vital in business, education, and performance environments such as sports, yet it is also a key component of many coaching and counseling [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (52)
• Coaching & Application (39)
• Compassion (23)
• Counseling (40)
• Emotional Intelligence (22)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (18)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (16)
• Mindfulness (40)
• Motivation & Goals (41)
• Optimism & Mindset (29)
• Positive CBT (28)
• Positive Communication (23)
• Positive Education (37)
• Positive Emotions (32)
• Positive Leadership (16)
• Positive Parenting (14)
• Positive Psychology (21)
• Positive Workplace (35)
• Productivity (16)
• Relationships (46)
• Resilience & Coping (39)
• Self Awareness (20)
• Self Esteem (37)
• Strengths & Virtues (29)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (33)
• Theory & Books (42)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (54)

3 Goal Achievement Exercises Pack

the encyclopaedia of pedagogy and informal education

What is teaching? A definition and discussion

In this piece Mark K Smith explores the nature of teaching – those moments or sessions where we make specific interventions to help people learn particular things. He sets this within a discussion of pedagogy and didactics and demonstrates that we need to unhook consideration of the process of teaching from the role of ‘teacher’ in schools.

Contents : introduction • what is teaching • a definition of teaching • teaching, pedagogy and didactics • approaching teaching as a process • structuring interventions and making use of different methods • what does good teaching look like • conclusion •  further reading and references • acknowledgements • how to cite this piece, linked piece: the key activities of teaching, a definition for starters : teaching is the process of attending to people’s needs, experiences and feelings, and intervening so that they learn particular things, and go beyond the given., introduction.

In teacher education programmes – and in continuing professional development – a lot of time is devoted to the ‘what’ of teaching – what areas we should we cover, what resources do we need and so on. The ‘how’ of teaching also gets a great deal of space – how to structure a lesson, manage classes, assess for learning for learning and so on. Sometimes, as Parker J. Palmer (1998: 4) comments, we may even ask the “why” question – ‘for what purposes and to what ends do we teach? ‘But seldom, if ever’, he continues: ‘do we ask the “who” question – who is the self that teaches?’

The thing about this is that the who, what, why and how of teaching cannot be answered seriously without exploring the nature of teaching itself.

What is teaching?

In much modern usage, the words ‘teaching’ and ‘teacher’ are wrapped up with schooling and schools. One way of approaching the question ‘What is teaching?’ is to look at what those called ‘teachers’ do – and then to draw out key qualities or activities that set them apart from others. The problem is that all sorts of things are bundled together in job descriptions or roles that may have little to do with what we can sensibly call teaching.

Another way is to head for dictionaries and search for both the historical meanings of the term, and how it is used in everyday language.  This brings us to definitions like:

Impart knowledge to or instruct (someone) as to how to do something; or Cause (someone) to learn or understand something by example or experience.

As can be seen from these definitions we can say that we are all teachers in some way at some time.

Further insight is offered by looking at the ancestries of the words. For example, the origin of the word ‘teach’ lies in the Old English tæcan meaning ‘show, present, point out’, which is of Germanic origin; and related to ‘token’, from an Indo-European root shared by Greek deiknunai ‘show’, deigma ‘sample ( http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/teach ).

Fostering learning

To make sense of all this it is worth turning to what philosophers of education say. Interestingly, the question, ‘What is teaching?’ hasn’t been a hotbed of activity in recent years in the UK and USA. However, as Paul Hirst (1975) concluded, ‘being clear about what teaching is matters vitally because how teachers understand teaching very much affects what they actually do in the classroom’.

Hirst (1975) makes two very important points. For him teaching should involve:

• Setting out with the intention of someone learning something.
• Considering people’s feelings, experiences and needs. Teaching is only teaching if people can take on what is taught.

To this we can add Jerome Bruner’s insights around the nature of education, and the process of learning and problem solving.

To instruct someone… is not a matter of getting him to commit results to mind. Rather, it is to teach him to participate in the process that makes possible the establishment of knowledge. We teach a subject not to produce little living libraries on that subject, but rather to get a student to think mathematically for himself, to consider matters as an historian does, to take part in the process of knowledge-getting. Knowing is a process not a product. (1966: 72)

We can begin to weave these into a definition – and highlight some forms it takes.

A definition : Teaching is the process of attending to people’s needs, experiences and feelings, and intervening so that they learn particular things, and go beyond the given.

Interventions commonly take the form of questioning, listening, giving information, explaining some phenomenon, demonstrating a skill or process, testing understanding and capacity, and facilitating learning activities (such as note taking, discussion, assignment writing, simulations and practice).

Let us look at the key elements.

Attending to people’s feelings, experiences and needs

Considering what those we are supposed to be teaching need, and what might be going on for them, is one of the main things that makes ‘education’ different to indoctrination. Indoctrination involves knowingly encouraging people to believe something regardless of the evidence (see Snook 1972; Peterson 2007). It also entails a lack of respect for their human rights. Education can be described as the ‘wise, hopeful and respectful cultivation of learning undertaken in the belief that all should have the chance to share in life’ (Smith 2015). The process of education flows from a basic orientation of respect – respect for truth, others and themselves, and the world ( op. cit. ). For teachers to be educators they must, therefore:

• Consider people’s needs and wishes now and in the future.
• Reflect on what might be good for all (and the world in which we live).
• Plan their interventions accordingly.

There are a couple of issues that immediately arise from this.

First, how do we balance individual needs and wishes against what might be good for others? For most of us this is probably something that we should answer on a case-by-case basis – and it is also something that is likely to be a focus for conversation and reflection in our work with people.

Second, what do we do when people do not see the point of learning things – for example, around grammar or safety requirements? The obvious response to this question is that we must ask and listen – they may have point. However, we also must weigh this against what we know about the significance of these things in life, and any curriculum or health and safety or other requirements we have a duty to meet. In this case we have a responsibility to try to introduce them to people when the time is right, to explore their relevance and to encourage participation.

Failing to attend to people’s feelings and experiences is problematic – and not just because it reveals a basic lack of respect for them. It is also pointless and counter-productive to try to explore things when people are not ready to look at them. We need to consider their feelings and look to their experiences – both of our classroom or learning environment, and around the issues or areas we want to explore. Recent developments in brain science has underlined the significance of learning from experience from the time in the womb on (see, for example Lieberman 2013). Bringing people’s experiences around the subjects or areas we are looking to teach about into the classroom or learning situation is, thus, fundamental to the learning process.

Learning particular things

Teaching involves creating an environment and engaging with others, so that they learn particular things. This can be anything from tying a shoe lace to appreciating the structure of a three act play. I want highlight three key elements here – focus, knowledge and the ability to engage people in learning.

This may be a bit obvious – but it is probably worth saying – teaching has to have a focus. We should be clear about we are trying to do. One of the findings that shines through research on teaching is that clear learning intentions help learners to see the point of a session or intervention, keep the process on track, and, when challenging, make a difference in what people learn (Hattie 2009: location 4478).

As teachers and pedagogues there are a lot of times when we are seeking to foster learning but there may not be great clarity about the specific goals of that learning (see Jeffs and Smith 2018 Chapter 1). This is especially the case for informal educators and pedagogues. We journey with people, trying to build environments for learning and change, and, from time-to-time, creating teaching moments. It is in the teaching moments that we usually need an explicit focus.

Subject knowledge

Equally obvious, we need expertise, we need to have content. As coaches we should know about our sport; as religious educators about belief, practice and teachings; and, as pedagogues, ethics, human growth and development and social life. Good teachers ‘have deep knowledge of the subjects they teach, and when teachers’ knowledge falls below a certain level it is a significant impediment to students’ learning’ (Coe et. al. 2014: 2).

That said, there are times when we develop our understandings and capacities as we go. In the process of preparing for a session or lesson or group, we may read, listen to and watch YouTube items, look at other resources and learn. We build content and expertise as we teach. Luckily, we can draw on a range of things to support us in our efforts – video clips, web resources, textbooks, activities. Yes, it might be nice to be experts in all the areas we have to teach – but we can’t be. It is inevitable that we will be called to teach in areas where we have limited knowledge. One of the fascinating and comforting things research shows is that what appears to count most for learning is our ability as educators and pedagogues. A good understanding of, and passion for, a subject area; good resources to draw upon; and the capacity to engage people in learning yields good results. It is difficult to find evidence that great expertise in the subject matter makes a significant difference within a lot of schooling (Hattie 2009: location 2963).

Sometimes subject expertise can get in the way – it can serve to emphasize the gap between people’s knowledge and capacities and that of the teacher. On the other hand, it can be used to generate enthusiasm and interest; to make links; and inform decisions about what to teach and when. Having a concern for learning – and, in particular, seeking to create environments where people develop as and, can be, self-directed learners – is one of the key features here.

Engaging people in learning

At the centre of teaching lies enthusiasm and a commitment to, and expertise in, the process of engaging people in learning. This is how John Hattie (2009: location 2939) put it:

… it is teachers using particular teaching methods, teachers with high expectations for all students, and teachers who have created positive student-teacher relationships that are more likely to have the above average effects on student achievement.

Going beyond the given

The idea of “going beyond the information given” was central to Jerome Bruner’s explorations of cognition and education. He was part of the shift in psychology in the 1950s and early 1960s towards the study of people as active processors of knowledge, as discoverers of new understandings and possibilities. Bruner wanted people to develop their ability to ‘go beyond the data to new and possibly fruitful predictions’ (Bruner 1973: 234); to experience and know possibility. He hoped people would become as ‘autonomous and self-propelled’ thinkers as possible’ (Bruner 1961: 23). To do this, teachers and pedagogues had to, as Hirst (1975) put it, appreciate learner’s feelings, experiences and needs; to engage with their processes and view of the world.

Two key ideas became central to this process for Jerome Bruner – the ‘spiral’ and scaffolding.

The spiral . People, as they develop, must take on and build representations of their experiences and the world around them. (Representations being the way in which information and knowledge are held and encoded in our memories). An idea, or concept is generally encountered several times. At first it is likely to be in a concrete and simple way. As understanding develops, it is likely to encountered and in greater depth and complexity. To succeed, teaching, educating, and working with others must look to where in the spiral people are, and how ‘ready’ they are to explore something. Crudely, it means simplifying complex information where necessary, and then revisiting it to build understanding (David Kolb talked in a similar way about experiential learning).

Scaffolding . The idea of scaffolding (which we will come back to later) is  close to what Vygotsky talked about as the zone of proximal development. Basically, it entails creating a framework, and offering structured support, that encourages and allows learners to develop particular understandings, skills and attitudes.

Intervening

The final element – making specific interventions – concerns the process of taking defined and targeted action in a situation. In other words, as well as having a clear focus, we try to work in ways that facilitate that focus.

Thinking about teaching as a process of making specific interventions is helpful, I think, because it:

Focuses on the different actions we take .   As we saw in the definition, interventions commonly take the form of questioning, listening, giving information, explaining some phenomenon, demonstrating a skill or process, testing understanding and capacity, and facilitating learning activities (such as note taking, discussion, assignment writing, simulations and practice).

Makes us look at how we move from one way of working or communicating to another . Interventions often involve shifting a conversation or discussion onto a different track or changing the process or activity. It may well be accompanied by a change in mood and pace (e.g. moving from something that is quite relaxed into a period of more intense activity). The process of moving from one way of working – or way of communicating – to another is far from straightforward. It calls upon us to develop and deepen our practice.

Highlights the more formal character of teaching . Interventions are planned, focused and tied to objectives or intentions. Teaching also often entails using quizzes and tests to see whether planned outcomes have been met. The feel and character of teaching moments are different to many other processes that informal educators, pedagogues and specialist educators use. Those processes, like conversation, playing a game and walking with people are usually more free-flowing and unpredictable.

Teaching, however, is not a simple step-by-step process e.g. of attending, getting information and intervening. We may well start with an intervention which then provides us with data. In addition, things rarely go as planned – at least not if we attend to people’s feelings, experiences and needs. In addition, learners might not always get the points straightaway or see what we are trying to help them learn. They may be able to take on what is being taught – but it might take time. As a result, how well we have done is often unlikely to show up in the results of any tests or in assessments made in the session or lesson.

Teaching, pedagogy and didactics

Earlier, we saw that relatively little attention had been given to defining the essential nature of teaching in recent years in the UK and North America. This has contributed to confusion around the term and a major undervaluing of other forms of facilitating learning. The same cannot be said in a number of continental European countries where there is a much stronger appreciation of the different forms education takes. Reflecting on these traditions helps us to better understand teaching as a particular process – and to recognize that it is fundamentally concerned with didactics rather than pedagogy.

Perhaps the most helpful starting point for this discussion is the strong distinction made in ancient Greek society between the activities of pedagogues (paidagögus) and subject teachers (didáskalos or diadacts). The first pedagogues were slaves – often foreigners and the ‘spoils of war’ (Young 1987). They were trusted and sometimes learned members of rich households who accompanied the sons of their ‘masters’ in the street, oversaw their meals etc., and sat beside them when being schooled. These pedagogues were generally seen as representatives of their wards’ fathers and literally ‘tenders’ of children (pais plus agögos, a ‘child-tender’). Children were often put in their charge at around 7 years and remained with them until late adolescence. As such pedagogues played a major part in their lives – helping them to recognize what was wrong and right, learn how to behave in different situations, and to appreciate how they and those around them might flourish.

Moral supervision by the pedagogue (paidagogos) was also significant in terms of status.

He was more important than the schoolmaster, because the latter only taught a boy his letters, but the paidagogos taught him how to behave, a much more important matter in the eyes of his parents. He was, moreover, even if a slave, a member of the household, in touch with its ways and with the father’s authority and views. The schoolmaster had no such close contact with his pupils. (Castle 1961: 63-4)

The distinction between teachers and pedagogues, instruction and guidance, and education for school or life was a feature of discussions around education for many centuries. It was still around when Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) explored education. In On Pedagogy (Über Pädagogik) first published in 1803, he talked as follows:

Education includes the nurture of the child and, as it grows, its culture. The latter is firstly negative, consisting of discipline; that is, merely the correcting of faults. Secondly, culture is positive, consisting of instruction and guidance (and thus forming part of education). Guidance means directing the pupil in putting into practice what he has been taught. Hence the difference between a private teacher who merely instructs, and a tutor or governor who guides and directs his pupil. The one trains for school only, the other for life. (Kant 1900: 23-4)

It was later – and particularly associated with the work of Herbart (see, for example, Allgemeine pädagogik – General Pedagogics, 1806 and Umriss Pädagogischer Vorlesungen , 1835 – Plan of Lectures on Pedagogy and included in Herbart 1908) – that teaching came to be seen, wrongly, as the central activity of education (see Hamilton 1999).

Didactics – certainly within German traditions – can be approached as Allgemeine Didaktik (general didactics) or as Fachdidaktik (subject didactics). Probably, the most helpful ways of translating didaktik is as the study of the teaching-learning process. It involves researching and theorizing the process and developing practice (see Kansanen 1999). The overwhelming focus within the didaktik tradition is upon the teaching-learning process in schools, colleges and university.

To approach education and learning in other settings it is necessary to turn to the pädagogik tradition . Within this tradition fields like informal education, youth work, community development, art therapy, playwork and child care are approached as forms of pedagogy. Indeed, in countries like Germany and Denmark, a relatively large number of people are employed as pedagogues or social pedagogues. While these pedagogues teach, much of their activity is conversationally, rather than curriculum, -based. Within this what comes to the fore is a focus on flourishing and of the significance of the person of the pedagogue (Smith and Smith 2008). In addition, three elements stand out about the processes of the current generation of specialist pedagogues. First, they are heirs to the ancient Greek process of accompanying and fostering learning. Second, their pedagogy involves a significant amount of helping and caring for. Indeed, for many of those concerned with social pedagogy it is a place where care and education meet – one is not somehow less than the other (Cameron and Moss 2011). Third, they are engaged in what we can call ‘bringing situations to life’ or ‘sparking’ change (animation). In other words, they animate, care and educate (ACE). Woven into those processes are theories and beliefs that we also need to attend to (see Alexander 2000: 541).

We can see from this discussion that when English language commentators talk of pedagogy as the art and science of teaching they are mistaken. As Hamilton (1999) has pointed out teaching in schools is properly approached in the main as didactics – the study of teaching-learning processes. Pedagogy is something very different. It may include didactic elements but for the most part it is concerned with animation, caring and education (see what is education? ). It’s focus is upon flourishing and well-being. Within schools there may be specialist educators and practitioners that do this but they are usually not qualified school teachers. Instead they hold other professional qualifications, for example in pedagogy, social work, youth work and community education. To really understand teaching as a process we need to unhook it from school teaching and recognize that it is an activity that is both part of daily life and is an element of other practitioner’s repertoires. Pedagogues teach, for example, but from within a worldview or haltung that is often radically different to school teachers.

Approaching teaching as a process

Some of the teaching we do can be planned in advance because the people involved know that they will be attending a session, event or lesson where learning particular skills, topics or feelings is the focus. Some teaching arises as a response to a question, issue or situation. However, both are dependent on us:

Recognizing and cultivating teachable moments. Cultivating relationships for learning. Scaffolding learning – providing people with temporary support so that they deepen and develop their understanding and skills and grow as independent learners. Differentiating learning – adjusting the way we teach and approach subjects so that we can meet the needs of diverse learners. Accessing resources for learning. Adopting a growth mindset.

We are going to look briefly at each of these in turn.

Recognizing and cultivating teachable moments

Teachers – certainly those in most formal settings like schools – have to follow a curriculum. They have to teach specified areas in a particular sequence. As a result, there are always going to be individuals who are not ready for that learning. As teachers in these situations we need to look out for moments when students may be open to learning about different things; where we can, in the language of Quakers, ‘speak to their condition’. Having a sense of their needs and capacities we can respond with the right things at the right time.

Informal educators, animators and pedagogues work differently for a lot of the time. The direction they take is often not set by a syllabus or curriculum. Instead, they listen for, and observe what might be going on for the people they are working with. They have an idea of what might make for well-being and development and can apply it to the experiences and situations that are being revealed. They look out for moments when they can intervene to highlight an issue, give information, and encourage reflection and learning.

In other words, all teaching involves recognizing and cultivating ‘learning moments’ or ‘teaching moments’.

It was Robert J Havinghurst who coined the term ‘teachable moment’. One of his interests as an educationalist was the way in which certain things have to be learned in order for people to develop.

When the timing is right, the ability to learn a particular task will be possible. This is referred to as a ‘teachable moment’. It is important to keep in mind that unless the time is right, learning will not occur. Hence, it is important to repeat important points whenever possible so that when a student’s teachable moment occurs, s/he can benefit from the knowledge. (Havinghurst 1953)

There are times of special sensitivity when learning is possible. We have to look out for them, to help create environments that can create or stimulate such moments, be ready to respond, and draw on the right resources.

Cultivating collaborative relationships for learning

The main thing here is that teaching, like other parts of our work, is about relationship. We have to think about our relationships with those we are supposed to be teaching and about the relationships they have with each other. Creating an environment where people can work with each other, cooperate and learning is essential. One of the things that has been confirmed by recent research in neuroscience is that ‘our brains are wired to connect’, we are wired to be social (Lieberman 2013). It is not surprising then, that on the whole cooperative learning is more effective that either competitive learning (where students compete to meet a goal) or individualistic learning (Hattie 2011: 4733).

As teachers, we need to be appreciated as someone who can draw out learning; cares about what people are feeling, experiencing and need; and breathe life to situations. This entails what Carl Rogers (in Kirschenbaum and Henderson 1990: 304-311) talked about as the core conditions or personal qualities that allow us to facilitate learning in others:

Realness or genuineness . Rogers argued that when we are experienced as real people -entering into relationships with learners ‘without presenting a front or a façade’, we more likely to be effective. Prizing, acceptance, trust . This involves caring for learners, but in a non-possessive way and recognizing they have worth in their own right. It entails trusting in capacity of others to learn, make judgements and change. Empathic understanding . ‘When the teacher has the ability to understand the student’s reactions from the inside, has a sensitive awareness of the way the process of education and learning seems to the student, then again the likelihood of significant learning is increased’.

In practical terms this means we talk to people, not at them. We listen. We seek to connect and understand. We trust in their capacity to learn and change. We know that how we say things is often more important than what we say.

Scaffolding

Scaffolding entails providing people with temporary support so that they deepen and develop their understanding and skills – and develop as independent learners.

Like physical scaffolding, the supportive strategies are incrementally removed when they are no longer needed, and the teacher gradually shifts more responsibility over the learning process to the student. (Great Schools Partnership 2015)

To do this well, educators and workers need to be doing what we have explored above – cultivating collaborative relationships for learning, and building on what people know and do and then working just beyond it. The term used for latter of these is taken from the work of Lev Vygotsky – is working in the learner’s zone of proximal development .

A third key aspect of scaffolding is that the support around the particular subject or skill is gradually removed as people develop their expertise and commitment to learning.

Scaffolding can take different forms. It might simply involve ‘showing learners what to do while talking them through the activity and linking new learning to old through questions, resources, activities and language’ (Zwozdiak-Myers and Capel, S. 2013 location 4568). (For a quick overview of some different scaffolding strategies see Alber 2014 ).

The educational use of the term ‘scaffolding’ is linked to the work of Jerome Bruner –who believed that children (and adults) were active learners. They constructed their own knowledge. Scaffolding was originally used to describe how pedagogues interacted with pre-school children in a nursery (Woods et. al . 1976). Bruner defined scaffolding as ‘the steps taken to reduce the degrees of freedom in carrying out some task so that the child can concentrate on the difficult skill she is in the process of acquiring’ (Bruner 1978: 19).

Differentiation

Differentiation involves adjusting the way we teach and approach subjects so that we can meet the needs of diverse learners. It entails changing content, processes and products so that people can better understand what is being taught and develop appropriate skills and the capacity to act.

The basic idea is that the primary educational objectives—making sure all students master essential knowledge, concepts, and skills—remain the same for every student, but teachers may use different instructional methods to help students meet those expectations. (Great Schools Partnership 2013)

It is often used when working with groups that have within them people with different needs and starting knowledge and skills. (For a quick guide to differentiation see BBC Active ).

Accessing resources for learning

One of the key elements we require is the ability to access and make available resources for learning. The two obvious and central resources we have are our own knowledge, feelings and skills; and those of the people we are working with. Harnessing the experience, knowledge and feelings of learners is usually a good starting point. It focuses attention on the issue or subject; shares material; and can encourage joint working. When it is an area that we need to respond to immediately, it can also give us a little space gather our thoughts and access the material we need.

The third key resource is the internet – which we can either make a whole group activity by using search via a whiteboard or screen, or an individual or small group activity via phones and other devices. One of the good things about this is that it also gives us an opportunity not just to reflect on the subject of the search but also on the process. We can examine, for example, the validity of the source or the terms we are using to search for something.

The fourth great resource is activities. Teachers need to build up a repertoire of different activities that can be used to explore issues and areas (see the section below).

Last, and certainly not least, there are the standard classroom resources – textbooks, handouts and study materials.

As teachers we need to have a range of resources at our fingertips. This can be as simple as carrying around a file of activities, leaflets and handouts or having materials, relevant sites and ebooks on our phones and devices.

Adopting a growth mindset

Last, we need to encourage people to adopt what Carol Dweck (2012) calls a growth mindset. Through researching the characteristics of children who succeed in education (and more generally flourish in life), Dweck found that some people have a fixed mindset and some a growth mindset.

Believing that your qualities are carved in stone— the fixed mindset —creates an urgency to prove yourself over and over. If you have only a certain amount of intelligence, a certain personality, and a certain moral character—well, then you’d better prove that you have a healthy dose of them. It simply wouldn’t do to look or feel deficient in these most basic characteristics…. There’s another mindset in which these traits are not simply a hand you’re dealt and have to live with, always trying to convince yourself and others that you have a royal flush when you’re secretly worried it’s a pair of tens. In this mindset, the hand you’re dealt is just the starting point for development. This growth mindset is based on the belief that your basic qualities are things you can cultivate through your efforts. Although people may differ in every which way—in their initial talents and aptitudes, interests, or temperaments—everyone can change and grow through application and experience. (Dweck 2012: 6-7)

The fixed mindset is concerned with outcomes and performance; the growth mindset with getting better at the task.

In her research she found, for example, that students with a fixed mindset when making the transition from elementary school to junior high in the United States, declined – their grades immediately dropped and over the next two years continued to decline. Students with a growth mindset showed an increase in their grades ( op. cit. : 57). The significance of this for teaching is profound. Praising and valuing achievement tends to strengthen the fixed mindset; praising and valuing effort helps to strengthen a growth mindset.

While it is possible to question elements of Dweck’s research and the either/or way in which prescriptions are presented (see Didau 2015), there is particular merit when teaching of adopting a growth mindset (and encouraging it in others). It looks to change and development rather than proving outselves.

Structuring interventions and making use of different methods

One of the key things that research into the processes of teaching and educating tells us is that learners tend to like structure; they want to know the shape of a session or intervention and what it is about. They also seem to like variety, and changes in the pace of the work (e.g. moving from something quite intense to something free flowing).

It is also worth going back to the dictionary definitions – and the origins of the word ‘teach’. What we find here are some hints of what Geoff Petty (2009) has talked about as ‘teacher-centred’ methods (as against active methods and student-centred methods).

If we ask learners about their experiences and judgements, one of things that comes strongly through the research in this area is that students overwhelming prefer group discussion, games and simulations and activities like drama, artwork and experiments. At the bottom of this list come analysis, theories, essays and lectures (see Petty 2009: 139-141). However, there is not necessarily a connection between what people enjoy doing and what produces learning.

Schoolteachers may use all of these methods – but so might sports workers and instructors, youth ministers, community development workers and social pedagogues. Unlike schoolteachers, informal educators like these are not having to follow a curriculum for much of their time, nor teach content to pass exams. As such they are able to think more holistically and to think of themselves as facilitators of learning. This means:

Focusing on the active methods in the central column; Caring about people’s needs, experiences and feeling; Looking for teachable moments when then can make inputs often along the lines of the first column (teacher-centred methods); and Encouraging people to learn for themselves i.e. take on projects, to read and study, and to learn independently and be self-directed (student-centred methods).

In an appendix to this piece we look at some key activities of teaching and provide practical guidance. [See key teaching activities ]

What does good teaching look like?

What one person sees as good teaching can easily be seen as bad by another. Here we are going to look at what the Ofsted (2015) framework for inspection says. However, before we go there it is worth going back to what Paul Hirst argued back in 1975 and how we are defining teaching here. Our definition was:

Teaching is the process of attending to people’s needs, experiences and feelings, and making specific interventions to help them learn particular things.

We are looking at teaching as a specific process – part of what we do as educators, animators and pedagogues. Ofsted is looking at something rather different.  They are grouping together teaching, learning and assessment – and adding in some other things around the sort of outcomes they want to see. That said, it is well worth looking at this list as the thinking behind it does impact on a lot of the work we do.

Inspectors will make a judgement on the effectiveness of teaching, learning and assessment by evaluating the extent to which: teachers, practitioners and other staff have consistently high expectations of what each child or learner can achieve, including the most able and the most disadvantaged teachers, practitioners and other staff have a secure understanding of the age group they are working with and have relevant subject knowledge that is detailed and communicated well to children and learners assessment information is gathered from looking at what children and learners already know, understand and can do and is informed by their parents/previous providers as appropriate assessment information is used to plan appropriate teaching and learning strategies, including to identify children and learners who are falling behind in their learning or who need additional support, enabling children and learners to make good progress and achieve well except in the case of the very young, children and learners understand how to improve as a result of useful feedback from staff and, where relevant, parents, carers and employers understand how learners should improve and how they can contribute to this engagement with parents, carers and employers helps them to understand how children and learners are doing in relation to the standards expected and what they need to do to improve equality of opportunity and recognition of diversity are promoted through teaching and learning where relevant, English, mathematics and other skills necessary to function as an economically active member of British society and globally are promoted through teaching and learning.

We see some things that many will not disagree with like having high expectations of learners, knowing what the needs of the group may be, having expertise in the area being taught; recogniting diversity and having a concern for equality of opportunity; and so on. We may also see the role that assessment plays in reinforcing learning and helping to shape future learning. However, there are things we may disagree with. Perhaps more importantly there are all sorts of things missing here. For example, why is there an emphasis on economic activity as against social, religious and political participation? Another issue, for many of you reading this, is possibly the way in which little account is made of the extent to which learners take responsibility for their own learning. They are encouraged to contribute to learning but not own it.

Good teaching is rather more than technique according to Parker J. Palmer . Good teaching, he says, ‘comes from the identity and integrity of the teacher’ (Palmer 1998: 11). It is the way we are experienced, our enthusiasm, our care, our knowledge, our interest in, and concern for, people that is the key to whether we are felt to be good teachers. As Jackie Beere (2012) and others have argued we need to be present as people in the classroom or learning environment.

This is not to say that technique isn’t important. It is. We need to be skilled at scaffolding learning; creating relationships and environments for learning; and catching teaching moments. It is just that these skills need to be employed by someone who can be respected, is experienced as real and is wise.

In this piece we have made a plea to explore teaching as a process rather than something that is usually approached as the thinking and activity associated with a particular role – the school teacher. As has been argued elsewhere a significant amount of what those called school teachers do is difficult to classify as education (see What is education? ). Even the most informal of educators will find themselves teaching. They may well work hard at building and facilitating environments where people can explore, relate and learn. However, extending or deepening that exploration often leads to short, or not so short bursts of teaching or instructing. For example, as sports coaches or outdoor educators we may be both trying to develop teamwork and build particular skills or capacities. As a specialist or religious educators we might be seeking to give information, or introduce ideas that need some explanation. These involve moments of teaching or instructing. Once we accept this then we can hopefully begin to recognize that school teachers have a lot to learn from other teachers – and vice versa.

We also need to unhook ‘pedagogy’ from school teaching within English language discussions – and to connect it with the tradition of didactics. One of the problems with the false link of school teaching to pedagogy is that it is impairing a proper discussion of pedagogy. However, that may change a little in the UK at least with the development of professional standards for social pedagogy and the emergence of graduate and post-graduate study in the area.

Further reading and references

Check out the Teaching and Learning Toolkit . The Educational Endowment Foundation has produced a very accessible review of the evidence concerning different things that schools do. Many of the things that schools do have little or no evidence to support them e.g. streaming and setting, insisting on school uniform, using performance related pay. Some things are very productive like giving feedback; teaching specific strategies to set goals, and monitor and evaluate academic development; peer tutoring; and early years’ intervention.

Key teaching activities . This infed page outlines 9 key activities and why they are central to the process of teaching.

Alber, R. (2014). 6 Scaffolding Strategies to Use With Your Students, Eductopia . [ http://www.edutopia.org/blog/scaffolding-lessons-six-strategies-rebecca-alber . Retrieved February 9, 2016].

BBC Active (2010). Methods of Differentiation in the Classroom .   London: Pearson Education .  [ http://www.bbcactive.com/BBCActiveIdeasandResources/MethodsofDifferentiationintheClassroom.aspx . Retrieved: January 31, 2016]

Beere, J. (2012). The Perfect Ofsted Lesson Bancyfelin: Independent Thinking Press.

Bruner, J. S. (1960). The Process of Education . Cambridge MA.: Harvard University Press.

Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review , 31, 21-32.

Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a Theory of Instruction , Cambridge, MA.: Belkapp Press.

Bruner, J. (1973) Going Beyond the Information Given , New York: Norton.

Bruner, J. S. (1978). The role of dialogue in language acquisition. In A. Sinclair, R., J. Jarvelle, and W. J.M. Levelt (eds.) The Child’s Concept of Language. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Bruner, J. S. (1996). The Culture of Education . Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

Capel, S., Leask, M. and Turner T. (eds.) (2013). Learning to teach in the secondary school. A companion to school experience . 6e. Abingdon: Routledge.

Castle, E. B. (1961). Ancient Education and Today . Harmondsworth: Pelican.

Coe, R. et. al. (2014). What makes great teaching. Review of the underpinning research. London: The Sutton Trust. [ http://www.suttontrust.com/researcharchive/great-teaching/ . Retrieved December 20, 2014].

Covington, M. V. (2000). ‘Goal theory, motivation and school achievement: An integrative review’, Annual Review of Psychology , 51:171-200.

Cowley, S. (2011). Teaching for Dummies . Chichester: John Wiley.

Davey, A. G. (1972) ‘Education or indoctrination’, Journal of Moral Education 2 (1):5-15.

Department for Education and Skills. (2004a). Pedagogy and Practice: Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School, Unit 6 Modelling . London: Department for Education and Skills. [ http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110809101133/http://wsassets.s3.amazonaws.com/ws/nso/pdf/c60e7378e118be7f7d22d7660f85e2d8.pdf . Retrieved: February 25, 2016]

Department for Education and Skills. (2004b). Pedagogy and Practice: Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School, Unit 7 Questioning . London: Department for Education and Skills. [ http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110809101133/http://wsassets.s3.amazonaws.com/ws/nso/pdf/027c076de06e59ae10aeb9689a8a1c04.pdf . Retrieved: February 25, 2016]

Department for Education and Skills. (2004c). Pedagogy and Practice: Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School, Unit 8 Explaining . London: Department for Education and Skills. [ http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110809101133/http://nsonline.org.uk/node/96982?uc=force_uj . Retrieved: February 25, 2016].

Department for Education and Skills. (2004d). Pedagogy and Practice: Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School, Unit 10 Group work . London: Department for Education and Skills. [ http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110809101133/http://nsonline.org.uk/downloader/100963eebbb37c81ada6214ed97be548.pdf . Retrieved: February 25, 2016]

Department for Education and Skills. (2004e). Pedagogy and Practice: Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School, Unit 11 Active engagement techniques . London: Department for Education and Skills. [ http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110809101133/http://nsonline.org.uk/node/96205?uc=force_uj . Retrieved: February 25, 2016].

Department for Education and Skills. (2004f). Pedagogy and Practice: Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School, Unit 12 Assessment for learning . London: Department for Education and Skills. [ http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110809101133/http://nsonline.org.uk/downloader/2deff878cffd2cdcd59a61df29e73105.pdf . Retrieved: February 25, 2016].

Didau, D. (2015). What if everything you knew about education was wrong? Bancyfelin: Crown House Publishing.

Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindset . London: Robinson.

Gervis and Capel (2013). ‘Motivating pupils’ in S. Capel e t. al. (eds.) Learning to teach in the secondary school. A companion to school experience . 6e. Abingdon: Routledge.

Great Schools Partnership (2013). ‘Differentiation’, S. Abbott (ed.) The Glossary of Education Reform . [ http://edglossary.org/differentiation/ . Retrieved February 10, 2016].

Great Schools Partnership (2015). ‘Scaffolding’, S. Abbott (ed.) The Glossary of Education Reform . [ http://edglossary.org/scaffolding/ . Retrieved February 10, 2016].

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement . Abingdon: Routledge.

Hamilton, D. (1999). ‘The pedagogic paradox (or why no didactics in England?)’, Pedagogy, Culture & Society , 7:1, 135-152. [ http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14681369900200048 . Retrieved: February 10, 2012].

Havinghurst, R. J. (1953). Human Development and Education . London: Longman, Green.

Herbart, J. F (1892). The Science of Education: its general principles deduced from its aim and the aesthetic revelation of the world , translated by H. M. & E. Felkin. London: Swann Sonnenschein.

Herbart, J. F., Felkin, H. M., & Felkin, E. (1908). Letter and lectures on education: By Johann Friedrich Herbart ; Translated from the German, and edited with an introduction by Henry M. and Emmie Felkin and a preface by Oscar Browning. London: Sonnenschein.

Hirst, P. (1975). What is teaching? In R. S. Peters (ed.) The Philosophy of Education . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Jeffs, T. and Smith, M. K. (2018) Informal Education .London: Educational Heretics.

Kant, I. (1900). Kant on education (Ueber pa?dagogik) . Translated by A. Churton. Boston: D.C. Heath. [ http://files.libertyfund.org/files/356/0235_Bk.pdf . Accessed October 10, 2012].

Kansanen, P. (1999). ‘The “Deutsche Didadtik” and the American research on teaching’ in B. Hudson et. al. (eds.) Didadtik-Fachdidadtik as science(s) of the teaching profession ? Umeå Sweden: TNTEE Publications. [ tntee.umu.se/publications/v2n1/pdf/2_1complete.pdf . Retrieved: February 26, 2016].

Kirschenbaum, H. and Henderson, V. L. (eds.) (1990). The Carl Rogers Reader . London: Constable.

Lieberman, M. D. (2013). Social. Why Our Brains Are Wired to Connect . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nuthall, G. A. (2007). The hidden lives of learners . Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.

Ofsted (2015). The common inspection framework: education, skills and early years. London: Ofsted. [ https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/461767/The_common_inspection_framework_education_skills_and_early_years.pdf . Retrieved May 28, 2018]

Palmer, P. J. (1998). The Courage to Teach. Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Petty, G. (2009). Teaching Today. A practical guide . Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.

Smith, M. K. (2012). ‘What is pedagogy?’, The encyclopedia of pedagogy and informal education. [ https://infed.org/mobi/what-is-pedagogy/ . Retrieved: February 25, 2012].

Smith, M. K. (2015). What is education? A definition and discussion. The encyclopedia of pedagogy and informal education . [ https://infed.org/mobi/what-is-education-a-definition-and-discussion/ . Retrieved: February 25, 2016].

Snook, I.  (1972). Concepts of Indoctrination: Philosophical Essays . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Wilson, L. (2009) Practical Teaching. A guide to PTLLS and DTLLS . Andover: Cengage.

Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology , 17(2), 89-100.

Wragg, E. C. and Brown, G. (2001). Questioning in the Secondary School . London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Young, N. H. (1987). ‘Paidagogos: The Social Setting of a Pauline Metaphor’, Novum Testamentum 29: 150.

Zwozdiak-Myers, P. and Capel, S. (2013). Communicating with Pupils in Capel, S., Leask, M. and Turner T. (eds.) Learning to teach in the secondary school. A companion to school experience . 6e. Abingdon: Routledge.

Acknowledgements

The section ‘teaching, pedagogy and didactics’ draws heavily on another piece written by Mark K Smith for infed.org ( see Smith 2012 ).

The ACE diagram is taken from Smith, M. K. (forthcoming). Working with young people in difficult times (Chapter 1). https://infed.org/mobi/working-with-young-people-in-difficult-times/

Picture:   Group project by Brande Jackson . Flickr | ccbyncnd2 licence

How to cite this piece : Smith, M. K. (2018). ‘What is teaching?’ in The encyclopedia of pedagogy and informal education . [ https://infed.org/mobi/what-is-teaching/ . Retrieved: insert date].

© Mark K Smith 2016, 2018.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 08 June 2021

Metacognition: ideas and insights from neuro- and educational sciences

• Damien S. Fleur   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4836-5255 1 , 2 ,
• Bert Bredeweg   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5281-2786 1 , 3 &
• Wouter van den Bos 2 , 4  

npj Science of Learning volume  6 , Article number:  13 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

41k Accesses

54 Citations

11 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Human behaviour
• Interdisciplinary studies

Metacognition comprises both the ability to be aware of one’s cognitive processes (metacognitive knowledge) and to regulate them (metacognitive control). Research in educational sciences has amassed a large body of evidence on the importance of metacognition in learning and academic achievement. More recently, metacognition has been studied from experimental and cognitive neuroscience perspectives. This research has started to identify brain regions that encode metacognitive processes. However, the educational and neuroscience disciplines have largely developed separately with little exchange and communication. In this article, we review the literature on metacognition in educational and cognitive neuroscience and identify entry points for synthesis. We argue that to improve our understanding of metacognition, future research needs to (i) investigate the degree to which different protocols relate to the similar or different metacognitive constructs and processes, (ii) implement experiments to identify neural substrates necessary for metacognition based on protocols used in educational sciences, (iii) study the effects of training metacognitive knowledge in the brain, and (iv) perform developmental research in the metacognitive brain and compare it with the existing developmental literature from educational sciences regarding the domain-generality of metacognition.

Similar content being viewed by others

A methodological perspective on learning in the developing brain

An fMRI study of error monitoring in Montessori and traditionally-schooled children

Neural alignment predicts learning outcomes in students taking an introduction to computer science course

Introduction.

Metacognition is defined as “thinking about thinking” or the ability to monitor and control one’s cognitive processes 1 and plays an important role in learning and education 2 , 3 , 4 . For instance, high performers tend to present better metacognitive abilities (especially control) than low performers in diverse educational activities 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 . Recently, there has been a lot of progress in studying the neural mechanisms of metacognition 10 , 11 , yet it is unclear at this point how these results may inform educational sciences or interventions. Given the potential benefits of metacognition, it is important to get a better understanding of how metacognition works and of how training can be useful.

The interest in bridging cognitive neuroscience and educational practices has increased in the past two decades, spanning a large number of studies grouped under the umbrella term of educational neuroscience 12 , 13 , 14 . With it, researchers have brought forward issues that are viewed as critical for the discipline to improve education. Recurring issues that may impede the relevance of neural insights for educational practices concern external validity 15 , 16 , theoretical discrepancies 17 and differences in terms of the domains of (meta)cognition operationalised (specific or general) 15 . This is important because, in recent years, brain research is starting to orient itself towards training metacognitive abilities that would translate into real-life benefits. However, direct links between metacognition in the brain and metacognition in domains such as education have still to be made. As for educational sciences, a large body of literature on metacognitive training is available, yet we still need clear insights about what works and why. While studies suggest that training metacognitive abilities results in higher academic achievement 18 , other interventions show mixed results 19 , 20 . Moreover, little is known about the long-term effects of, or transfer effects, of these interventions. A better understanding of the cognitive processes involved in metacognition and how they are expressed in the brain may provide insights in these regards.

Within cognitive neuroscience, there has been a long tradition of studying executive functions (EF), which are closely related to metacognitive processes 21 . Similar to metacognition, EF shows a positive relationship with learning at school. For instance, performance in laboratory tasks involving error monitoring, inhibition and working memory (i.e. processes that monitor and regulate cognition) are associated with academic achievement in pre-school children 22 . More recently, researchers have studied metacognition in terms of introspective judgements about performance in a task 10 . Although the neural correlates of such behaviour are being revealed 10 , 11 , little is known about how behaviour during such tasks relates to academic achievement.

Educational and cognitive neuroscientists study metacognition in different contexts using different methods. Indeed, while the latter investigate metacognition via behavioural task, the former mainly rely on introspective questionnaires. The extent to which these different operationalisations of metacognition match and reflect the same processes is unclear. As a result, the external validity of methodologies used in cognitive neuroscience is also unclear 16 . We argue that neurocognitive research on metacognition has a lot of potential to provide insights in mechanisms relevant in educational contexts, and that theoretical and methodological exchange between the two disciplines can benefit neuroscientific research in terms of ecological validity.

For these reasons, we investigate the literature through the lenses of external validity, theoretical discrepancies, domain generality and metacognitive training. Research on metacognition in cognitive neuroscience and educational sciences are reviewed separately. First, we investigate how metacognition is operationalised with respect to the common framework introduced by Nelson and Narens 23 (see Fig. 1 ). We then discuss the existing body of evidence regarding metacognitive training. Finally, we compare findings in both fields, highlight gaps and shortcomings, and propose avenues for research relying on crossovers of the two disciplines.

Meta-knowledge is characterised as the upward flow from object-level to meta-level. Meta-control is characterised as the downward flow from meta-level to object-level. Metacognition is therefore conceptualised as the bottom-up monitoring and top-down control of object-level processes. Adapted from Nelson and Narens’ cognitive psychology model of metacognition 23 .

In cognitive neuroscience, metacognition is divided into two main components 5 , 24 , which originate from the seminal works of Flavell on metamemory 25 , 26 . First, metacognitive knowledge (henceforth, meta-knowledge) is defined as the knowledge individuals have of their own cognitive processes and their ability to monitor and reflect on them. Second, metacognitive control (henceforth, meta-control) consists of someone’s self-regulatory mechanisms, such as planning and adapting behaviour based on outcomes 5 , 27 . Following Nelson and Narens’ definition 23 , meta-knowledge is characterised as the flow and processing of information from the object level to the meta-level, and meta-control as the flow from the meta-level to the object level 28 , 29 , 30 (Fig. 1 ). The object-level encompasses cognitive functions such as recognition and discrimination of objects, decision-making, semantic encoding, and spatial representation. On the meta-level, information originating from the object level is processed and top-down regulation on object-level functions is imposed 28 , 29 , 30 .

Educational researchers have mainly investigated metacognition through the lens of Self-Regulated Learning theory (SRL) 3 , 4 , which shares common conceptual roots with the theoretical framework used in cognitive neuroscience but varies from it in several ways 31 . First, SRL is constrained to learning activities, usually within educational settings. Second, metacognition is merely one of three components, with “motivation to learn” and “behavioural processes”, that enable individuals to learn in a self-directed manner 3 . In SRL, metacognition is defined as setting goals, planning, organising, self-monitoring and self-evaluating “at various points during the acquisition” 3 . The distinction between meta-knowledge and meta-control is not formally laid down although reference is often made to a “self-oriented feedback loop” describing the relationship between reflecting and regulating processes that resembles Nelson and Narens’ model (Fig. 1 ) 3 , 23 . In order to facilitate the comparison of operational definitions, we will refer to meta-knowledge in educational sciences when protocols operationalise self-awareness and knowledge of strategies, and to meta-control when they operationalise the selection and use of learning strategies and planning. For an in-depth discussion on metacognition and SRL, we refer to Dinsmore et al. 31 .

Metacognition in cognitive neuroscience

Operational definitions.

In cognitive neuroscience, research in metacognition is split into two tracks 32 . One track mainly studies meta-knowledge by investigating the neural basis of introspective judgements about one’s own cognition (i.e., metacognitive judgements), and meta-control with experiments involving cognitive offloading. In these experiments, subjects can perform actions such as set reminders, making notes and delegating tasks 33 , 34 , or report their desire for them 35 . Some research has investigated how metacognitive judgements can influence subsequent cognitive behaviour (i.e., a downward stream from the meta-level to the object level), but only one study so far has explored how this relationship is mapped in the brain 35 . In the other track, researchers investigate EF, also referred to as cognitive control 30 , 36 , which is closely related to metacognition. Note however that EF are often not framed in metacognitive terms in the literature 37 (but see ref. 30 ). For the sake of concision, we limit our review to operational definitions that have been used in neuroscientific studies.

Metacognitive judgements

Cognitive neuroscientists have been using paradigms in which subjects make judgements on how confident they are with regards to their learning of some given material 10 . These judgements are commonly referred to as metacognitive judgements , which can be viewed as a form of meta-knowledge (for reviews see Schwartz 38 and Nelson 39 ). Historically, researchers mostly resorted to paradigms known as Feelings of Knowing (FOK) 40 and Judgements of Learning (JOL) 41 . FOK reflect the belief of a subject to knowing the answer to a question or a problem and being able to recognise it from a list of alternatives, despite being unable to explicitly recall it 40 . Here, metacognitive judgement is thus made after retrieval attempt. In contrast, JOL are prospective judgements during learning of one’s ability to successfully recall an item on subsequent testing 41 .

More recently, cognitive neuroscientists have used paradigms in which subjects make retrospective metacognitive judgements on their performance in a two-alternative Forced Choice task (2-AFC) 42 . In 2-AFCs, subjects are asked to choose which of two presented options has the highest criterion value. Different domains can be involved, such as perception (e.g., visual or auditory) and memory. For example, subjects may be instructed to visually discriminate which one of two boxes contains more dots 43 , identify higher contrast Gabor patches 44 , or recognise novel words from words that were previously learned 45 (Fig. 2 ). The subjects engage in metacognitive judgements by rating how confident they are relative to their decision in the task. Based on their responses, one can evaluate a subject’s metacognitive sensitivity (the ability to discriminate one’s own correct and incorrect judgements), metacognitive bias (the overall level of confidence during a task), and metacognitive efficiency (the level of metacognitive sensitivity when controlling for task performance 46 ; Fig. 3 ). Note that sensitivity and bias are independent aspects of metacognition, meaning that two subjects may display the same levels of metacognitive sensitivity, but one may be biased towards high confidence while the other is biased towards low confidence. Because metacognitive sensitivity is affected by the difficulty of the task (one subject tends to display greater metacognitive sensitivity in easy tasks than difficult ones and different subjects may find a task more or less easy), metacognitive efficiency is an important measure as it allows researchers to compare metacognitive abilities between subjects and between domains. The most commonly used methods to assess metacognitive sensitivity during retrospective judgements are the receiver operating curve (ROC) and meta- d ′. 46 Both derive from signal detection theory (SDT) 47 which allows Type 1 sensitivity, or d’ ′ (how a subject can discriminate between stimulus alternatives, i.e. object-level processes) to be differentiated from metacognitive sensitivity (a judgement on the correctness of this decision) 48 . Importantly, only comparing meta- d ′ to d ′ seems to give reliable assessments metacognitive efficiency 49 . A ratio of 1 between meta- d’ ′ and d’ ′, indicates that a subject was perfectly able to discriminate between their correct and incorrect judgements. A ratio of 0.8 suggests that 80% of the task-related sensory evidence was available for the metacognitive judgements. Table 1 provides an overview of the different types of tasks and protocols with regards to the type of metacognitive process they operationalise. These operationalisations of meta-knowledge are used in combination with brain imaging methods (functional and structural magnetic resonance imaging; fMRI; MRI) to identify brain regions associated with metacognitive activity and metacognitive abilities 10 , 50 . Alternatively, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be used to temporarily deactivate chosen brain regions and test whether this affects metacognitive abilities in given tasks 51 , 52 .

a Visual perception task: subjects choose the box containing the most (randomly generated) dots. Subjects then rate their confidence in their decision. b Memory task: subjects learn a list of words. In the next screen, they have to identify which of two words shown was present on the list. The subjects then rate their confidence in their decision.

The red and blue curves represent the distribution of confidence ratings for incorrect and correct trials, respectively. A larger distance between the two curves denotes higher sensitivity. Displacement to the left and right denote biases towards low confidence (low metacognitive bias) and high confidence (high metacognitive bias), respectively (retrieved from Fig. 1 in Fleming and Lau 46 ). We repeat the disclaimer of the original authors that this figure is not a statistically accurate description of correct and incorrect responses, which are typically not normally distributed 46 , 47 .

A recent meta-analysis analysed 47 neuroimaging studies on metacognition and identified a domain-general network associated with high vs. low confidence ratings in both decision-making tasks (perception 2-AFC) and memory tasks (JOL, FOK) 11 . This network includes the medial and lateral prefrontal cortex (mPFC and lPFC, respectively), precuneus and insula. In contrast, the right anterior dorsolateral PFC (dlPFC) was specifically involved in decision-making tasks, and the bilateral parahippocampal cortex was specific to memory tasks. In addition, prospective judgements were associated with the posterior mPFC, left dlPFC and right insula, whereas retrospective judgements were associated with bilateral parahippocampal cortex and left inferior frontal gyrus. Finally, emerging evidence suggests a role of the right rostrolateral PFC (rlPFC) 53 , 54 , anterior PFC (aPFC) 44 , 45 , 55 , 56 , dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) 54 , 55 and precuneus 45 , 55 in metacognitive sensitivity (meta- d ′, ROC). In addition, several studies suggest that the aPFC relates to metacognition specifically in perception-related 2-AFC tasks, whereas the precuneus is engaged specifically in memory-related 2-AFC tasks 45 , 55 , 56 . This may suggest that metacognitive processes engage some regions in a domain-specific manner, while other regions are domain-general. For educational scientists, this could mean that some domains of metacognition may be more relevant for learning and, granted sufficient plasticity of the associated brain regions, that targeting them during interventions may show more substantial benefits. Note that rating one’s confidence and metacognitive sensitivity likely involve additional, peripheral cognitive processes instead of purely metacognitive ones. These regions are therefore associated with metacognition but not uniquely per se. Notably, a recent meta-analysis 50 suggests that domain-specific and domain-general signals may rather share common circuitry, but that their neural signature varies depending on the type of task or activity, showing that domain-generality in metacognition is complex and still needs to be better understood.

In terms of the role of metacognitive judgements on future behaviour, one study found that brain patterns associated with the desire for cognitive offloading (i.e., meta-control) partially overlap with those associated with meta-knowledge (metacognitive judgements of confidence), suggesting that meta-control is driven by either non-metacognitive, in addition to metacognitive, processes or by a combination of different domain-specific meta-knowledge processes 35 .

Executive function

In EF, processes such as error detection/monitoring and effort monitoring can be related to meta-knowledge while error correction, inhibitory control, and resource allocation can be related to meta-control 36 . To activate these processes, participants are asked to perform tasks in laboratory settings such as Flanker tasks, Stroop tasks, Demand Selection tasks and Motion Discrimination tasks (Fig. 4 ). Neural correlates of EF are investigated by having subjects perform such tasks while their brain activity is recorded with fMRI or electroencephalography (EEG). Additionally, patients with brain lesions can be tested against healthy participants to evaluate the functional role of the impaired regions 57 .

a Flanker task: subjects indicate the direction to which the arrow in the middle points. b Stroop task: subjects are presented with the name of colour printed in a colour that either matches or mismatches the name. Subjects are asked to give the name of the written colour or the printed colour. c Motion Discrimination task: subjects have to determine in which direction the dots are going with variating levels of noise. d Example of a Demand Selection task: in both options subjects have to switch between two tasks. Task one, subjects determine whether the number shown is higher or lower than 5. Task two, subjects determine whether the number is odd or even. The two options (low and high demand) differ in their degree of task switching, meaning the effort required. Subjects are allowed to switch between the two options. Note, the type of task is solely indicated by the colour of the number and that the subjects are not explicitly told about the difference in effort between the two options (retrieved from Fig. 1c in Froböse et al. 58 ).

In a review article on the neural basis of EF (in which they are defined as meta-control), Shimamura argues that a network of regions composed of the aPFC, ACC, ventrolateral PFC (vlPFC) and dlPFC is involved in the regulations of cognition 30 . These regions are not only interconnected but are also intricately connected to cortical and subcortical regions outside of the PFC. The vlPFC was shown to play an important role in “selecting and maintaining information in working memory”, whereas the dlPFC is involved in “manipulating and updating information in working memory” 30 . The ACC has been proposed to monitor cognitive conflict (e.g. in a Stroop task or a Flanker task), and the dlPFC to regulate it 58 , 59 . In particular, activity in the ACC in conflict monitoring (meta-knowledge) seems to contribute to control of cognition (meta-control) in the dlPFC 60 , 61 and to “bias behavioural decision-making toward cognitively efficient tasks and strategies” (p. 356) 62 . In a recent fMRI study, subjects performed a motion discrimination task (Fig. 4c ) 63 . After deciding on the direction of the motion, they were presented additional motion (i.e. post-decisional evidence) and then were asked to rate their confidence in their initial choice. The post-decisional evidence was encoded in the activity of the posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC; meta-knowledge), while lateral aPFC (meta-control) modulated the impact of this evidence on subsequent confidence rating 63 . Finally, results from a meta-analysis study on cognitive control identified functional connectivity between the pMFC, associated with monitoring and informing other regions about the need for regulation, and the lPFC that would effectively regulate cognition 64 .

Online vs. offline metacognition

While the processes engaged during tasks such as those used in EF research can be considered as metacognitive in the sense that they are higher-order functions that monitor and control lower cognitive processes, scientists have argued that they are not functionally equivalent to metacognitive judgements 10 , 11 , 65 , 66 . Indeed, engaging in metacognitive judgements requires subjects to reflect on past or future activities. As such, metacognitive judgements can be considered as offline metacognitive processes. In contrast, high-order processes involved in decision-making tasks such as used in EF research are arguably largely made on the fly, or online , at a rapid pace and subjects do not need to reflect on their actions to perform them. Hence, we propose to explicitly distinguish online and offline processes. Other researchers have shared a similar view and some have proposed models for metacognition that make similar distinctions 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 . The functional difference between online and offline metacognition is supported by some evidence. For instance, event-related brain potential (ERP) studies suggest that error negativities are associated with error detection in general, whereas an increased error positivity specifically encodes error that subjects could report upon 69 , 70 . Furthermore, brain-imaging studies suggest that the MFC and ACC are involved in online meta-knowledge, while the aPFC and lPFC seem to be activated when subjects engage in more offline meta-knowledge and meta-control, respectively 63 , 71 , 72 . An overview of the different tasks can be found in Table 1 and a list of different studies on metacognition can be found in Supplementary Table 1 (organised in terms of the type of processes investigated, the protocols and brain measures used, along with the brain regions identified). Figure 5 illustrates the different brain regions associated with meta-knowledge and meta-control, distinguishing between what we consider to be online and offline processes. This distinction is often not made explicitly but it will be specifically helpful when building bridges between cognitive neuroscience and educational sciences.

The regions are divided into online meta-knowledge and meta-control, and offline meta-knowledge and meta-control following the distinctions introduced earlier. Some regions have been reported to be related to both offline and online processes and are therefore given a striped pattern.

Training metacognition

There are extensive accounts in the literature of efforts to improve EF components such as inhibitory control, attention shifting and working memory 22 . While working memory does not directly reflect metacognitive abilities, its training is often hypothesised to improve general cognitive abilities and academic achievement. However, most meta-analyses found that training methods lead only to weak, non-lasting effects on cognitive control 73 , 74 , 75 . One meta-analysis did find evidence of near-transfer following EF training in children (in particular working memory, inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility), but found no evidence of far-transfer 20 . According to this study, training on one component leads to improved abilities in that same component but not in other EF components. Regarding adults, however, one meta-analysis suggests that EF training in general and working memory training specifically may both lead to significant near- and far-transfer effects 76 . On a neural level, a meta-analysis showed that cognitive training resulted in decreased brain activity in brain regions associated with EF 77 . According to the authors, this indicates that “training interventions reduce demands on externally focused attention” (p. 193) 77 .

With regards to meta-knowledge, several studies have reported increased task-related metacognitive abilities after training. For example, researchers found that subjects who received feedback on their metacognitive judgements regarding a perceptual decision-making task displayed better metacognitive accuracy, not only in the trained task but also in an untrained memory task 78 . Related, Baird and colleagues 79 found that a two-week mindfulness meditation training lead to enhanced meta-knowledge in the memory domain, but not the perceptual domain. The authors link these results to evidence of increased grey matter density in the aPFC in meditation practitioners.

Research on metacognition in cognitive science has mainly been studied through the lens of metacognitive judgements and EF (specifically performance monitoring and cognitive control). Meta-knowledge is commonly activated in subjects by asking them to rate their confidence in having successfully performed a task. A distinction is made between metacognitive sensitivity, metacognitive bias and metacognitive efficacy. Monitoring and regulating processes in EF are mainly operationalised with behavioural tasks such as Flanker tasks, Stroop tasks, Motion Discrimination tasks and Demand Selection tasks. In addition, metacognitive judgements can be viewed as offline processes in that they require the subject to reflect on her cognition and develop meta-representations. In contrast, EF can be considered as mostly online metacognitive processes because monitoring and regulation mostly happen rapidly without the need for reflective thinking.

Although there is some evidence for domain specificity, other studies have suggested that there is a single network of regions involved in all meta-cognitive tasks, but differentially activated in different task contexts. Comparing research on meta-knowledge and meta-control also suggest that some regions play a crucial role in both knowledge and regulation (Fig. 5 ). We have also identified a specific set of regions that are involved in either offline or online meta-knowledge. The evidence in favour of metacognitive training, while mixed, is interesting. In particular, research on offline meta-knowledge training involving self-reflection and metacognitive accuracy has shown some promising results. The regions that show structural changes after training, were those that we earlier identified as being part of the metacognition network. EF training does seem to show far-transfer effects at least in adults, but the relevance for everyday life activity is still unclear.

One major limitation of current research in metacognition is ecological validity. It is unclear to what extent the operationalisations reviewed above reflect real-life metacognition. For instance, are people who can accurately judge their performance on a behavioural task also able to accurately assess how they performed during an exam? Are people with high levels of error regulation and inhibitory control able to learn more efficiently? Note that criticism on the ecological validity of neurocognitive operationalisations extends beyond metacognition research 16 . A solution for improving validity may be to compare operationalisations of metacognition in cognitive neuroscience with the ones in educational sciences, which have shown clear links with learning in formal education. This also applies to metacognitive training.

Metacognition in educational sciences

The most popular protocols used to measure metacognition in educational sciences are self-report questionnaires or interviews, learning journals and thinking-aloud protocols 31 , 80 . During interviews, subjects are asked to answer questions regarding hypothetical situations 81 . In learning journals, students write about their learning experience and their thoughts on learning 82 , 83 . In thinking-aloud protocols, subjects are asked to verbalise their thoughts while performing a problem-solving task 80 . Each of these instruments can be used to study meta-knowledge and meta-control. For instance, one of the most widely used questionnaires, the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) 42 , operationalises “Flavellian” metacognition and has dedicated scales for meta-knowledge and meta-control (also popular are the MSLQ 84 and LASSI 85 which operate under SRL). The meta-knowledge scale of the MAI operationalises knowledge of strategies (e.g., “ I am aware of what strategies I use when I study ”) and self-awareness (e.g., “ I am a good judge of how well I understand something ”); the meta-control scale operationalises planning (e.g., “ I set a goal before I begin a task ”) and use of learning strategies (e.g., “ I summarize what I’ve learned after I finish ”). Learning journals, self-report questionnaires and interviews involve offline metacognition. Thinking aloud, though not engaging the same degree self-reflection, also involves offline metacognition in the sense that online processes are verbalised, which necessitate offline processing (see Table 1 for an overview and Supplementary Table 2 for more details).

More recently, methodologies borrowed from cognitive neuroscience have been introduced to study EF in educational settings 22 , 86 . In particular, researchers used classic cognitive control tasks such as the Stroop task (for a meta-analysis 86 ). Most of the studied components are related to meta-control and not meta-knowledge. For instance, the BRIEF 87 is a questionnaire completed by parents and teachers which assesses different subdomains of EF: (1) inhibition, shifting, and emotional control which can be viewed as online metacognitive control, and (2) planning, organisation of materials, and monitoring, which can be viewed as offline meta-control 87 .

Assessment of metacognition is usually compared against metrics of academic performance such as grades or scores on designated tasks. A recent meta-analysis reported a weak correlation of self-report questionnaires and interviews with academic performance whereas think-aloud protocols correlated highly 88 . Offline meta-knowledge processes operationalised by learning journals were found to be positively associated with academic achievement when related to reflection on learning activities but negatively associated when related to reflection on learning materials, indicating that the type of reflection is important 89 . EF have been associated with abilities in mathematics (mainly) and reading comprehension 86 . However, the literature points towards contrary directions as to what specific EF component is involved in academic achievement. This may be due to the different groups that were studied, to different operationalisations or to different theoretical underpinnings for EF 86 . For instance, online and offline metacognitive processes, which are not systematically distinguished in the literature, may play different roles in academic achievement. Moreover, the bulk of research focussed on young children with few studies on adolescents 86 and EF may play a role at varying extents at different stages of life.

A critical question in educational sciences is that of the nature of the relationship between metacognition and academic achievement to understand whether learning at school can be enhanced by training metacognitive abilities. Does higher metacognition lead to higher academic achievement? Do these features evolve in parallel? Developmental research provides valuable insights into the formation of metacognitive abilities that can inform training designs in terms of what aspect of metacognition should be supported and the age at which interventions may yield the best results. First, meta-knowledge seems to emerge around the age of 5, meta-control around 8, and both develop over the years 90 , with evidence for the development of meta-knowledge into adolescence 91 . Furthermore, current theories propose that meta-knowledge abilities are initially highly domain-dependent and gradually become more domain-independent as knowledge and experience are acquired and linked between domains 32 . Meta-control is believed to evolve in a similar fashion 90 , 92 .

Common methods used to train offline metacognition are direct instruction of metacognition, metacognitive prompts and learning journals. In addition, research has been done on the use of (self-directed) feedback as a means to induce self-reflection in students, mainly in computer-supported settings 93 . Interestingly, learning journals appear to be used for both assessing and fostering metacognition. Metacognitive instruction consists of teaching learners’ strategies to “activate” their metacognition. Metacognitive prompts most often consist of text pieces that are sent at specific times and that trigger reflection (offline meta-knowledge) on learning behaviour in the form of a question, hint or reminder.

Meta-analyses have investigated the effects of direct metacognitive instruction on students’ use of learning strategies and academic outcomes 18 , 94 , 95 . Their findings show that metacognitive instruction can have a positive effect on learning abilities and achievement within a population ranging from primary schoolers to university students. In particular, interventions lead to the highest effect sizes when they both (i) instructed a combination of metacognitive strategies with an emphasis on planning strategies (offline meta-control) and (ii) “provided students with knowledge about strategies” (offline meta-knowledge) and “illustrated the benefits of applying the trained strategies, or even stimulated metacognitive reasoning” (p.114) 18 . The longer the duration of the intervention, the more effective they were. The strongest effects on academic performance were observed in the context of mathematics, followed by reading and writing.

While metacognitive prompts and learning journals make up the larger part of the literature on metacognitive training 96 , meta-analyses that specifically investigate their effectiveness have yet to be performed. Nonetheless, evidence suggests that such interventions can be successful. Researchers found that metacognitive prompts fostered the use of metacognitive strategies (offline meta-control) and that the combination of cognitive and metacognitive prompts improved learning outcomes 97 . Another experiment showed that students who received metacognitive prompts performed more metacognitive activities inside the learning environment and displayed better transfer performance immediately after the intervention 98 . A similar study using self-directed prompts showed enhanced transfer performance that was still observable 3 weeks after the intervention 99 .

Several studies suggest that learning journals can positively enhance metacognition. Subjects who kept a learning journal displayed stronger high meta-control and meta-knowledge on learning tasks and tended to reach higher academic outcomes 100 , 101 , 102 . However, how the learning journal is used seems to be critical; good instructions are crucial 97 , 103 , and subjects who simply summarise their learning activity benefit less from the intervention than subjects who reflect about their knowledge, learning and learning goals 104 . An overview of studies using learning journals and metacognitive prompts to train metacognition can be found in Supplementary Table 3 .

In recent years, educational neuroscience researchers have tried to determine whether training and improvements in EF can lead to learning facilitation and higher academic achievement. Training may consist of having students continually perform behavioural tasks either in the lab, at home, or at school. Current evidence in favour of training EF is mixed, with only anecdotal evidence for positive effects 105 . A meta-analysis did not show evidence for a causal relationship between EF and academic achievement 19 , but suggested that the relationship is bidirectional, meaning that the two are “mutually supportive” 106 .

A recent review article has identified several gaps and shortcoming in the literature on metacognitive training 96 . Overall, research in metacognitive training has been mainly invested in developing learners’ meta-control rather than meta-knowledge. Furthermore, most of the interventions were done in the context of science learning. Critically, there appears to be a lack of studies that employed randomised control designs, such that the effects of metacognitive training intervention are often difficult to evaluate. In addition, research overwhelmingly investigated metacognitive prompts and learning journals in adults 96 , while interventions on EF mainly focused on young children 22 . Lastly, meta-analyses evaluating the effectiveness of metacognitive training have so far focused on metacognitive instruction on children. There is thus a clear disbalance between the meta-analyses performed and the scope of the literature available.

An important caveat of educational sciences research is that metacognition is not typically framed in terms of online and offline metacognition. Therefore, it can be unclear whether protocols operationalise online or offline processes and whether interventions tend to benefit more online or offline metacognition. There is also confusion in terms of what processes qualify as EF and definitions of it vary substantially 86 . For instance, Clements and colleagues mention work on SRL to illustrate research in EF in relation to academic achievement but the two spawn from different lines of research, one rooted in metacognition and socio-cognitive theory 31 and the other in the cognitive (neuro)science of decision-making. In addition, the MSLQ, as discussed above, assesses offline metacognition along with other components relevant to SRL, whereas EF can be mainly understood as online metacognition (see Table 1 ), which on the neural level may rely on different circuitry.

Investigating offline metacognition tends to be carried out in school settings whereas evaluating EF (e.g., Stroop task, and BRIEF) is performed in the lab. Common to all protocols for offline metacognition is that they consist of a form of self-report from the learner, either during the learning activity (thinking-aloud protocols) or after the learning activity (questionnaires, interviews and learning journals). Questionnaires are popular protocols due to how easy they are to administer but have been criticised to provide biased evaluations of metacognitive abilities. In contrast, learning journals evaluate the degree to which learners engage in reflective thinking and may therefore be less prone to bias. Lastly, it is unclear to what extent thinking-aloud protocols are sensitive to online metacognitive processes, such as on-the-fly error correction and effort regulation. The strength of the relationship between metacognitive abilities and academic achievement varies depending on how metacognition is operationalised. Self-report questionnaires and interviews are weakly related to achievement whereas thinking-aloud protocols and EF are strongly related to it.

Based on the well-documented relationship between metacognition and academic achievement, educational scientists hypothesised that fostering metacognition may improve learning and academic achievement, and thus performed metacognitive training interventions. The most prevalent training protocols are direct metacognitive instruction, learning journals, and metacognitive prompts, which aim to induce and foster offline metacognitive processes such as self-reflection, planning and selecting learning strategies. In addition, researchers have investigated whether training EF, either through tasks or embedded in the curriculum, results in higher academic proficiency and achievement. While a large body of evidence suggests that metacognitive instruction, learning journals and metacognitive prompts can successfully improve academic achievement, interventions designed around EF training show mixed results. Future research investigating EF training in different age categories may clarify this situation. These various degrees of success of interventions may indicate that offline metacognition is more easily trainable than online metacognition and plays a more important role in educational settings. Investigating the effects of different methods, offline and online, on the neural level, may provide researchers with insights into the trainability of different metacognitive processes.

In this article, we reviewed the literature on metacognition in educational sciences and cognitive neuroscience with the aim to investigate gaps in current research and propose ways to address them through the exchange of insights between the two disciplines and interdisciplinary approaches. The main aspects analysed were operational definitions of metacognition and metacognitive training, through the lens of metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive control. Our review also highlighted an additional construct in the form of the distinction between online metacognition (on the fly and largely automatic) and offline metacognition (slower, reflective and requiring meta-representations). In cognitive neuroscience, research has focused on metacognitive judgements (mainly offline) and EF (mainly online). Metacognition is operationalised with tasks carried out in the lab and are mapped onto brain functions. In contrast, research in educational sciences typically measures metacognition in the context of learning activities, mostly in schools and universities. More recently, EF has been studied in educational settings to investigate its role in academic achievement and whether training it may benefit learning. Evidence on the latter is however mixed. Regarding metacognitive training in general, evidence from both disciplines suggests that interventions fostering learners’ self-reflection and knowledge of their learning behaviour (i.e., offline meta-knowledge) may best benefit them and increase academic achievement.

We focused on four aspects of research that could benefit from an interdisciplinary approach between the two areas: (i) validity and reliability of research protocols, (ii) under-researched dimensions of metacognition, (iii) metacognitive training, and (iv) domain-specificity vs. domain generality of metacognitive abilities. To tackle these issue, we propose four avenues for integrated research: (i) investigate the degree to which different protocols relate to similar or different metacognitive constructs, (ii) implement designs and perform experiments to identify neural substrates necessary for offline meta-control by for example borrowing protocols used in educational sciences, (iii) study the effects of (offline) meta-knowledge training on the brain, and (iv) perform developmental research in the metacognitive brain and compare it with the existing developmental literature in educational sciences regarding the domain-generality of metacognitive processes and metacognitive abilities.

First, neurocognitive research on metacognitive judgements has developed robust operationalisations of offline meta-knowledge. However, these operationalisations often consist of specific tasks (e.g., 2-AFC) carried out in the lab. These tasks are often very narrow and do not resemble the challenges and complexities of behaviours associated with learning in schools and universities. Thus, one may question to what extent they reflect real-life metacognition, and to what extent protocols developed in educational sciences and cognitive neuroscience actually operationalise the same components of metacognition. We propose that comparing different protocols from both disciplines that are, a priori, operationalising the same types of metacognitive processes can help evaluate the ecological validity of protocols used in cognitive neuroscience, and allow for more holistic assessments of metacognition, provided that it is clear which protocol assesses which construct. Degrees of correlation between different protocols, within and between disciplines, may allow researchers to assess to what extent they reflect the same metacognitive constructs and also identify what protocols are most appropriate to study a specific construct. For example, a relation between meta- d ′ metacognitive sensitivity in a 2-AFC task and the meta-knowledge subscale of the MAI, would provide external validity to the former. Moreover, educational scientists would be provided with bias-free tools to assess metacognition. These tools may enable researchers to further investigate to what extent metacognitive bias, sensitivity and efficiency each play a role in education settings. In contrast, a low correlation may highlight a difference in domain between the two measures of metacognition. For instance, metacognitive judgements in brain research are made in isolated behaviour, and meta-d’ can thus be viewed to reflect “local” metacognitive sensitivity. It is also unclear to what extent processes involved in these decision-making tasks cover those taking place in a learning environment. When answering self-reported questionnaires, however, subjects make metacognitive judgements on a large set of (learning) activities, and the measures may thus resemble more “global” or domain-general metacognitive sensitivity. In addition, learners in educational settings tend to receive feedback — immediate or delayed — on their learning activities and performance, which is generally not the case for cognitive neuroscience protocols. Therefore, investigating metacognitive judgements in the presence of performance or social feedback may allow researchers to better understand the metacognitive processes at play in educational settings. Devising a global measure of metacognition in the lab by aggregating subjects’ metacognitive abilities in different domains or investigating to what extent local metacognition may affect global metacognition could improve ecological validity significantly. By investigating the neural correlates of educational measures of metacognition, researchers may be able to better understand to what extent the constructs studied in the two disciplines are related. It is indeed possible that, though weakly correlated, the meta-knowledge scale of the MAI and meta-d’ share a common neural basis.

Second, our review highlights gaps in the literature of both disciplines regarding the research of certain types of metacognitive processes. There is a lack of research in offline meta-control (or strategic regulation of cognition) in neuroscience, whereas this construct is widely studied in educational sciences. More specifically, while there exists research on EF related to planning (e.g. 107 ), common experimental designs make it hard to disentangle online from offline metacognitive processes. A few studies have implemented subject reports (e.g., awareness of error or desire for reminders) to pin-point the neural substrates specifically involved in offline meta-control and the current evidence points at a role of the lPFC. More research implementing similar designs may clarify this construct. Alternatively, researchers may exploit educational sciences protocols, such as self-report questionnaires, learning journals, metacognitive prompts and feedback to investigate offline meta-control processes in the brain and their relation to academic proficiency and achievement.

Third, there is only one study known to us on the training of meta-knowledge in the lab 78 . In contrast, meta-knowledge training in educational sciences have been widely studied, in particular with metacognitive prompts and learning journals, although a systematic review would be needed to identify the benefits for learning. Relative to cognitive neuroscience, studies suggest that offline meta-knowledge trained in and outside the lab (i.e., metacognitive judgements and meditation, respectively) transfer to meta-knowledge in other lab tasks. The case of meditation is particularly interesting since meditation has been demonstrated to beneficiate varied aspects of everyday life 108 . Given its importance for efficient regulation of cognition, training (offline) meta-knowledge may present the largest benefits to academic achievement. Hence, it is important to investigate development in the brain relative to meta-knowledge training. Evidence on metacognitive training in educational sciences tends to suggest that offline metacognition is more “plastic” and may therefore benefit learning more than online metacognition. Furthermore, it is important to have a good understanding of the developmental trajectory of metacognitive abilities — not only on a behavioural level but also on a neural level — to identify critical periods for successful training. Doing so would also allow researchers to investigate the potential differences in terms of plasticity that we mention above. Currently, the developmental trajectory of metacognition is under-studied in cognitive neuroscience with only one study that found an overlap between the neural correlates of metacognition in adults and children 109 . On a side note, future research could explore the potential role of genetic factors in metacognitive abilities to better understand to what extent and under what constraints they can be trained.

Fourth, domain-specific and domain-general aspects of metacognitive processes should be further investigated. Educational scientists have studied the development of metacognition in learners and have concluded that metacognitive abilities are domain-specific at the beginning (meaning that their quality depends on the type of learning activity, like mathematics vs. writing) and progressively evolve towards domain-general abilities as knowledge and expertise increase. Similarly, neurocognitive evidence points towards a common network for (offline) metacognitive knowledge which engages the different regions at varying degrees depending on the domain of the activity (i.e., perception, memory, etc.). Investigating this network from a developmental perspective and comparing findings with the existing behavioural literature may improve our understanding of the metacognitive brain and link the two bodies of evidence. It may also enable researchers to identify stages of life more suitable for certain types of metacognitive intervention.

Dunlosky, J. & Metcalfe, J. Metacognition (SAGE Publications, 2008).

Pintrich, P. R. The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory Into Pract. 41 , 219–225 (2002).

Article   Google Scholar  

Zimmerman, B. J. Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview. Educ. Psychol. 25 , 3–17 (1990).

Zimmerman, B. J. & Schunk, D. H. Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives (Routledge, 2001).

Baker, L. & Brown, A. L. Metacognitive Skills and Reading. In Handbook of Reading Research Vol. 1 (ed. Pearson, P. D.) 353–395 (Longman, 1984).

Mckeown, M. G. & Beck, I. L. The role of metacognition in understanding and supporting reading comprehension. In Handbook of Metacognition in Education (eds Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J. & Graesser, A. C.) 19–37 (Routledge, 2009).

Desoete, A., Roeyers, H. & Buysse, A. Metacognition and mathematical problem solving in grade 3. J. Learn. Disabil. 34 , 435–447 (2001).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Veenman, M., Kok, R. & Blöte, A. W. The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills in early adolescence. Instructional Sci. 33 , 193–211 (2005).

Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Brindle, M. & Sandmel, K. Metacognition and children’s writing. In Handbook of metacognition in education 131–153 (Routledge, 2009).

Fleming, S. M. & Dolan, R. J. The neural basis of metacognitive ability. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 367 , 1338–1349 (2012).

Vaccaro, A. G. & Fleming, S. M. Thinking about thinking: a coordinate-based meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies of metacognitive judgements. Brain Neurosci. Adv. 2 , 10.1177%2F2398212818810591 (2018).

Ferrari, M. What can neuroscience bring to education? Educ. Philos. Theory 43 , 31–36 (2011).

Zadina, J. N. The emerging role of educational neuroscience in education reform. Psicol. Educ. 21 , 71–77 (2015).

Meulen, A., van der, Krabbendam, L. & Ruyter, Dde Educational neuroscience: its position, aims and expectations. Br. J. Educ. Stud. 63 , 229–243 (2015).

Varma, S., McCandliss, B. D. & Schwartz, D. L. Scientific and pragmatic challenges for bridging education and neuroscience. Educ. Res. 37 , 140–152 (2008).

van Atteveldt, N., van Kesteren, M. T. R., Braams, B. & Krabbendam, L. Neuroimaging of learning and development: improving ecological validity. Frontline Learn. Res. 6 , 186–203 (2018).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hruby, G. G. Three requirements for justifying an educational neuroscience. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 82 , 1–23 (2012).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Dignath, C., Buettner, G. & Langfeldt, H.-P. How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively?: A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programmes. Educ. Res. Rev. 3 , 101–129 (2008).

Jacob, R. & Parkinson, J. The potential for school-based interventions that target executive function to improve academic achievement: a review. Rev. Educ. Res. 85 , 512–552 (2015).

Kassai, R., Futo, J., Demetrovics, Z. & Takacs, Z. K. A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence on the near- and far-transfer effects among children’s executive function skills. Psychol. Bull. 145 , 165–188 (2019).

Roebers, C. M. Executive function and metacognition: towards a unifying framework of cognitive self-regulation. Dev. Rev. 45 , 31–51 (2017).

Clements, D. H., Sarama, J. & Germeroth, C. Learning executive function and early mathematics: directions of causal relations. Early Child. Res. Q. 36 , 79–90 (2016).

Nelson, T. O. & Narens, L. Metamemory. In Perspectives on the development of memory and cognition (ed. R. V. Kail & J. W. Hag) 3–33 (Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1977).

Baird, J. R. Improving learning through enhanced metacognition: a classroom study. Eur. J. Sci. Educ. 8 , 263–282 (1986).

Flavell, J. H. & Wellman, H. M. Metamemory (1975).

Flavell, J. H. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. Am. Psychol. 34 , 906 (1979).

Livingston, J. A. Metacognition: An Overview. (2003).

Nelson, T. O. Metamemory: a theoretical framework and new findings. In Psychology of Learning and Motivation Vol. 26 (ed. Bower, G. H.) 125–173 (Academic Press, 1990).

Nelson, T. O. & Narens, L. Why investigate metacognition. In Metacognition: Knowing About Knowing (eds Metcalfe, J. & Shimamura, A. P.) 1–25 (MIT Press, 1994).

Shimamura, A. P. A Neurocognitive approach to metacognitive monitoring and control. In Handbook of Metamemory and Memory (eds Dunlosky, J. & Bjork, R. A.) (Routledge, 2014).

Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P. A. & Loughlin, S. M. Focusing the conceptual lens on metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 20 , 391–409 (2008).

Borkowski, J. G., Chan, L. K. & Muthukrishna, N. A process-oriented model of metacognition: links between motivation and executive functioning. In (Gregory Schraw & James C. Impara) Issues in the Measurement of Metacognition 1–42 (Buros Institute of Mental Measurements, 2000).

Risko, E. F. & Gilbert, S. J. Cognitive offloading. Trends Cogn. Sci. 20 , 676–688 (2016).

Gilbert, S. J. et al. Optimal use of reminders: metacognition, effort, and cognitive offloading. J. Exp. Psychol. 149 , 501 (2020).

Boldt, A. & Gilbert, S. Distinct and overlapping neural correlates of metacognitive monitoring and metacognitive control. Preprint at bioRxiv https://psyarxiv.com/3dz9b/ (2020).

Fernandez-Duque, D., Baird, J. A. & Posner, M. I. Executive attention and metacognitive regulation. Conscious Cogn. 9 , 288–307 (2000).

Baker, L., Zeliger-Kandasamy, A. & DeWyngaert, L. U. Neuroimaging evidence of comprehension monitoring. Psihol. teme 23 , 167–187 (2014).

Google Scholar  

Schwartz, B. L. Sources of information in metamemory: Judgments of learning and feelings of knowing. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 1 , 357–375 (1994).

Nelson, T. O. Metamemory, psychology of. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (eds Smelser, N. J. & Baltes, P. B.) 9733–9738 (Pergamon, 2001).

Hart, J. T. Memory and the feeling-of-knowing experience. J. Educ. Psychol. 56 , 208 (1965).

Arbuckle, T. Y. & Cuddy, L. L. Discrimination of item strength at time of presentation. J. Exp. Psychol. 81 , 126 (1969).

Fechner, G. T. Elemente der Psychophysik (Breitkopf & Härtel, 1860).

Rouault, M., Seow, T., Gillan, C. M. & Fleming, S. M. Psychiatric symptom dimensions are associated with dissociable shifts in metacognition but not task performance. Biol. Psychiatry 84 , 443–451 (2018).

Fleming, S. M., Weil, R. S., Nagy, Z., Dolan, R. J. & Rees, G. Relating introspective accuracy to individual differences in brain structure. Science 329 , 1541–1543 (2010).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

McCurdy, L. Y. et al. Anatomical coupling between distinct metacognitive systems for memory and visual perception. J. Neurosci. 33 , 1897–1906 (2013).

Fleming, S. M. & Lau, H. C. How to measure metacognition. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8 https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00443 (2014).

Galvin, S. J., Podd, J. V., Drga, V. & Whitmore, J. Type 2 tasks in the theory of signal detectability: discrimination between correct and incorrect decisions. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 10 , 843–876 (2003).

Metcalfe, J. & Schwartz, B. L. The ghost in the machine: self-reflective consciousness and the neuroscience of metacognition. In (eds Dunlosky, J. & Tauber, S. K.) Oxford Handbook of Metamemory 407–424 (Oxford University Press, 2016).

Maniscalco, B. & Lau, H. A signal detection theoretic approach for estimating metacognitive sensitivity from confidence ratings. Conscious Cognition 21 , 422–430 (2012).

Rouault, M., McWilliams, A., Allen, M. G. & Fleming, S. M. Human metacognition across domains: insights from individual differences and neuroimaging. Personal. Neurosci. 1 https://doi.org/10.1017/pen.2018.16 (2018).

Rounis, E., Maniscalco, B., Rothwell, J. C., Passingham, R. E. & Lau, H. Theta-burst transcranial magnetic stimulation to the prefrontal cortex impairs metacognitive visual awareness. Cogn. Neurosci. 1 , 165–175 (2010).

Ye, Q., Zou, F., Lau, H., Hu, Y. & Kwok, S. C. Causal evidence for mnemonic metacognition in human precuneus. J. Neurosci. 38 , 6379–6387 (2018).

Fleming, S. M., Huijgen, J. & Dolan, R. J. Prefrontal contributions to metacognition in perceptual decision making. J. Neurosci. 32 , 6117–6125 (2012).

Morales, J., Lau, H. & Fleming, S. M. Domain-general and domain-specific patterns of activity supporting metacognition in human prefrontal cortex. J. Neurosci. 38 , 3534–3546 (2018).

Baird, B., Smallwood, J., Gorgolewski, K. J. & Margulies, D. S. Medial and lateral networks in anterior prefrontal cortex support metacognitive ability for memory and perception. J. Neurosci. 33 , 16657–16665 (2013).

Fleming, S. M., Ryu, J., Golfinos, J. G. & Blackmon, K. E. Domain-specific impairment in metacognitive accuracy following anterior prefrontal lesions. Brain 137 , 2811–2822 (2014).

Baldo, J. V., Shimamura, A. P., Delis, D. C., Kramer, J. & Kaplan, E. Verbal and design fluency in patients with frontal lobe lesions. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 7 , 586–596 (2001).

Froböse, M. I. et al. Catecholaminergic modulation of the avoidance of cognitive control. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 147 , 1763 (2018).

Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S. & Cohen, J. D. Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychol. Rev. 108 , 624 (2001).

Kerns, J. G. et al. Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control. Science 303 , 1023–1026 (2004).

Yeung, N. Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. In The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Neuroscience: The Cutting Edges Vol. 2 (eds Ochsner, K. N. & Kosslyn, S.) 275–299 (Oxford University Press, 2014).

Botvinick, M. M. Conflict monitoring and decision making: reconciling two perspectives on anterior cingulate function. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 7 , 356–366 (2007).

Fleming, S. M., van der Putten, E. J. & Daw, N. D. Neural mediators of changes of mind about perceptual decisions. Nat. Neurosci. 21 , 617–624 (2018).

Ridderinkhof, K. R., Ullsperger, M., Crone, E. A. & Nieuwenhuis, S. The role of the medial frontal cortex in cognitive control. Science 306 , 443–447 (2004).

Koriat, A. The feeling of knowing: some metatheoretical implications for consciousness and control. Conscious Cogn. 9 , 149–171 (2000).

Thompson, V. A., Evans, J. & Frankish, K. Dual process theories: a metacognitive perspective. Ariel 137 , 51–43 (2009).

Arango-Muñoz, S. Two levels of metacognition. Philosophia 39 , 71–82 (2011).

Shea, N. et al. Supra-personal cognitive control and metacognition. Trends Cogn. Sci. 18 , 186–193 (2014).

Nieuwenhuis, S., Ridderinkhof, K. R., Blom, J., Band, G. P. & Kok, A. Error-related brain potentials are differentially related to awareness of response errors: evidence from an antisaccade task. Psychophysiology 38 , 752–760 (2001).

Overbeek, T. J., Nieuwenhuis, S. & Ridderinkhof, K. R. Dissociable components of error processing: on the functional significance of the Pe vis-à-vis the ERN/Ne. J. Psychophysiol. 19 , 319–329 (2005).

McGuire, J. T. & Botvinick, M. M. Prefrontal cortex, cognitive control, and the registration of decision costs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107 , 7922–7926 (2010).

Hester, R., Foxe, J. J., Molholm, S., Shpaner, M. & Garavan, H. Neural mechanisms involved in error processing: a comparison of errors made with and without awareness. Neuroimage 27 , 602–608 (2005).

Melby-Lervåg, M. & Hulme, C. Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review. Dev. Psychol. 49 , 270 (2013).

Soveri, A., Antfolk, J., Karlsson, L., Salo, B. & Laine, M. Working memory training revisited: a multi-level meta-analysis of n-back training studies. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 24 , 1077–1096 (2017).

Schwaighofer, M., Fischer, F. & Bühner, M. Does working memory training transfer? A meta-analysis including training conditions as moderators. Educ. Psychol. 50 , 138–166 (2015).

Karbach, J. & Verhaeghen, P. Making working memory work: a meta-analysis of executive-control and working memory training in older adults. Psychol. Sci. 25 , 2027–2037 (2014).

Patel, R., Spreng, R. N. & Turner, G. R. Functional brain changes following cognitive and motor skills training: a quantitative meta-analysis. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 27 , 187–199 (2013).

Carpenter, J. et al. Domain-general enhancements of metacognitive ability through adaptive training. J. Exp. Psychol. 148 , 51–64 (2019).

Baird, B., Mrazek, M. D., Phillips, D. T. & Schooler, J. W. Domain-specific enhancement of metacognitive ability following meditation training. J. Exp. Psychol. 143 , 1972 (2014).

Winne, P. H. & Perry, N. E. Measuring self-regulated learning. In Handbook of Self-Regulation (eds Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R. & Zeidner, M.) Ch. 16, 531–566 (Academic Press, 2000).

Zimmerman, B. J. & Martinez-Pons, M. Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. Am. Educ. Res. J. 23 , 614–628 (1986).

Park, C. Engaging students in the learning process: the learning journal. J. Geogr. High. Educ. 27 , 183–199 (2003).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Harrison, G. M. & Vallin, L. M. Evaluating the metacognitive awareness inventory using empirical factor-structure evidence. Metacogn. Learn. 13 , 15–38 (2018).

Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T. & Mckeachie, W. J. Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educ. Psychol. Meas. 53 , 801–813 (1993).

Prevatt, F., Petscher, Y., Proctor, B. E., Hurst, A. & Adams, K. The revised Learning and Study Strategies Inventory: an evaluation of competing models. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 66 , 448–458 (2006).

Baggetta, P. & Alexander, P. A. Conceptualization and operationalization of executive function. Mind Brain Educ. 10 , 10–33 (2016).

Gioia, G. A., Isquith, P. K., Guy, S. C. & Kenworthy, L. Test review behavior rating inventory of executive function. Child Neuropsychol. 6 , 235–238 (2000).

Ohtani, K. & Hisasaka, T. Beyond intelligence: a meta-analytic review of the relationship among metacognition, intelligence, and academic performance. Metacogn. Learn. 13 , 179–212 (2018).

Dianovsky, M. T. & Wink, D. J. Student learning through journal writing in a general education chemistry course for pre-elementary education majors. Sci. Educ. 96 , 543–565 (2012).

Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. & Afflerbach, P. Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacogn Learn. 1 , 3–14 (2006).

Weil, L. G. et al. The development of metacognitive ability in adolescence. Conscious Cogn. 22 , 264–271 (2013).

Veenman, M. & Spaans, M. A. Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learn. Individ. Differ. 15 , 159–176 (2005).

Verbert, K. et al. Learning dashboards: an overview and future research opportunities. Personal. Ubiquitous Comput. 18 , 1499–1514 (2014).

Dignath, C. & Büttner, G. Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students. A meta-analysis on intervention studies at primary and secondary school level. Metacogn. Learn. 3 , 231–264 (2008).

Hattie, J., Biggs, J. & Purdie, N. Effects of learning skills interventions on student learning: a meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 66 , 99–136 (1996).

Zohar, A. & Barzilai, S. A review of research on metacognition in science education: current and future directions. Stud. Sci. Educ. 49 , 121–169 (2013).

Berthold, K., Nückles, M. & Renkl, A. Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learn. Instr. 17 , 564–577 (2007).

Bannert, M. & Mengelkamp, C. Scaffolding hypermedia learning through metacognitive prompts. In International Handbook of Metacognition and Learning Technologies Vol. 28 (eds Azevedo, R. & Aleven, V.) 171–186 (Springer New York, 2013).

Bannert, M., Sonnenberg, C., Mengelkamp, C. & Pieger, E. Short- and long-term effects of students’ self-directed metacognitive prompts on navigation behavior and learning performance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 52 , 293–306 (2015).

McCrindle, A. R. & Christensen, C. A. The impact of learning journals on metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning performance. Learn. Instr. 5 , 167–185 (1995).

Connor-Greene, P. A. Making connections: evaluating the effectiveness of journal writing in enhancing student learning. Teach. Psychol. 27 , 44–46 (2000).

Wong, B. Y. L., Kuperis, S., Jamieson, D., Keller, L. & Cull-Hewitt, R. Effects of guided journal writing on students’ story understanding. J. Educ. Res. 95 , 179–191 (2002).

Nückles, M., Schwonke, R., Berthold, K. & Renkl, A. The use of public learning diaries in blended learning. J. Educ. Media 29 , 49–66 (2004).

Cantrell, R. J., Fusaro, J. A. & Dougherty, E. A. Exploring the effectiveness of journal writing on learning social studies: a comparative study. Read. Psychol. 21 , 1–11 (2000).

Blair, C. Executive function and early childhood education. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 10 , 102–107 (2016).

Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., Unlu, F. & Layzer, C. The Efficacy of an Intervention Synthesizing Scaffolding Designed to Promote Self-Regulation with an Early Mathematics Curriculum: Effects on Executive Function (Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2012).

Newman, S. D., Carpenter, P. A., Varma, S. & Just, M. A. Frontal and parietal participation in problem solving in the Tower of London: fMRI and computational modeling of planning and high-level perception. Neuropsychologia 41 , 1668–1682 (2003).

Sedlmeier, P. et al. The psychological effects of meditation: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 138 , 1139 (2012).

Bellon, E., Fias, W., Ansari, D. & Smedt, B. D. The neural basis of metacognitive monitoring during arithmetic in the developing brain. Hum. Brain Mapp. 41 , 4562–4573 (2020).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the University of Amsterdam for supporting this research through the Interdisciplinary Doctorate Agreement grant. W.v.d.B. is further supported by the Jacobs Foundation, European Research Council (grant no. ERC-2018-StG-803338), the European Union Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant no. DiGYMATEX-870578), and the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (grant no. NWO-VIDI 016.Vidi.185.068).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Informatics Institute, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Damien S. Fleur & Bert Bredeweg

Departement of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Damien S. Fleur & Wouter van den Bos

Faculty of Education, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Bert Bredeweg

Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany

Wouter van den Bos

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

D.S.F., B.B. and W.v.d.B. conceived the main conceptual idea of this review article. D.S.F. wrote the manuscript with inputs from and under the supervision of B.B. and W.v.d.B.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Damien S. Fleur .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary materials, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Fleur, D.S., Bredeweg, B. & van den Bos, W. Metacognition: ideas and insights from neuro- and educational sciences. npj Sci. Learn. 6 , 13 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00089-5

Download citation

Received : 06 October 2020

Accepted : 09 April 2021

Published : 08 June 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00089-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Relation of life sciences students’ metacognitive monitoring to neural activity during biology error detection.

• Mei Grace Behrendt
• Carrie Clark
• Joseph Dauer

npj Science of Learning (2024)

Exploring the relationship between dysfunctional personality traits with metacognition and confidence

• María Agostina Gerbaudo
• Guillermo Solovey

Current Psychology (2024)

Inferential theories of retrospective confidence

• Bennett L. Schwartz

Metacognition and Learning (2024)

Ambient smart environments: affordances, allostasis, and wellbeing

• Mark Miller

Synthese (2024)

Clinical and Cognitive Metacognition in Gaming and Gambling Disorder: A Narrative Review

• Ruth J. van Holst
• Katja Cornelissen
• Marcantonio M. Spada

Current Addiction Reports (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

TASK Education Abbreviation

What does TASK stand for in Education ? 12 meanings of TASK abbreviation related to Education :

Related Acronyms and Abbreviations

Explore abbreviations related to TASK, organized by common usage and topics:

What's Next? Explore Further…

Discover Education Abbreviations: Dive deeper into a comprehensive list of top-voted Education Acronyms and Abbreviations .

Explore TASK Definitions: Discover the complete range of meanings for TASK , beyond just its connections to Education.

Contribute an Abbreviation: Have an abbreviation we haven't listed? Add your knowledge to our database and help expand our community's resource.

Follow Us on Social Media: Join our social circles on X , Facebook , and Instagram for the latest updates, fun facts, and community interactions. Connect with us to be part of our ever-growing network!

Share Your Discoveries: Help spread the word by sharing the "TASK Education Abbreviation" page with friends and colleagues!