In Part 2 (..) of this series, I talked about how using a learning-strategies approach inherently supports generalisation and independent learning. In this post, I will talk about the increasingly important role that meta abilities play in older students’ journey towards independence.
What are “meta” skills?
Metacognition, metalinguistic awareness, as well as lesser known terms such as “meta-phonology”, “metacommunication” and “meta-pragmatics” (Paul and Norbury, 2012) all fall under this umbrella. Whilst metacognition is commonly referred to as “thinking about one’s own thinking”, metalinguistic ability has been called “talking about one’s own talking”.
Put another way, meta skills involve consciously reflecting on our own thought processes and abilities and understanding what needs to be known or done to achieve a particular goal, using grammatical labels to talk about language, as well as having an awareness of how language is used across different settings and with different people.
Whilst some meta skills develop in later childhood, secondary school children and adolescents are continuing to hone these abilities (Nippold, 1998, Larson and McKinley, 2003). But for those with language disorders, this is a common area of difficulty. For example, older students with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) tend to have more trouble deciphering metaphors, using repair strategies, and they may even lack awareness of their own difficulties (Larson and McKinley, 2003, Paul and Norbury, 2012).
Why do they matter?
Meta skills become increasingly important at secondary school level as students are expected to use linguistic labels such as “adjective”, “metaphor” and “personification” and analyse complex language in their English lessons. These abilities have even been found to predict reading comprehension performance (Nelson, 1998).
They are also integral to the writing process (Nelson, 1998), as students are required to consider their purpose and audience, choose certain words to entertain, inform or persuade, before then editing their writing. “Comprehension monitoring”, and being able to seek support when messages are complex or ambiguous also becomes increasingly important as students are expected to listen for longer periods of time as well as take more responsibility for their learning.
Having an awareness of their personal strengths, weaknesses and learning style also helps students revise whilst understanding the unspoken rules of classroom interactions (the “hidden curriculum” – Nelson, 1998) helps them to stay out of trouble.
Using meta skills to support generalisation
Meta skills are important to teach not just in and of themselves, but also because they promote generalisation. In my last post, I hinted at the strong connection between metacognition and successful strategy use. Students with strong meta abilities are better able to apply the skills and strategies you teach to different contexts.
Having a few strategies in their repertoire and knowing how to use them is not enough. To apply strategies effectively, students must consciously reflect on which to use at any given time, and why. Once they have used a strategy, they then need to consider how effective it was. If it was ineffective, what were the factors that contributed to that? What could they try in future?
“Generalisation” may be even too narrow a word to describe the potential transformation in a student’s learning that may occur as a result of improved meta abilities. The term implies transfer of a particular skill that has been taught to new contexts. Students who truly improve their meta-abilities, though, become more self-reliant, flexible thinkers, capable of setting their own goals and directing their own learning.
How to support meta abilities
So how can we nurture these abilities in our students? Larson and McKinley (2003) and Paul and Norbury (2012) recommend incorporating regular metacognitive discussions into intervention sessions, even as often as every activity.
After reading a passage of text, for example, we might ask our students questions about the language used or the feelings of the different characters; we could even ask them to read some of the speech in the emotion of that character (Paul and Norbury, 2012). We might also ask our students to evaluate the activity and themselves: What was the point of it and what did they learn? (Paul and Norbury, 2012).
For Nelson, (1998, p.7) students truly become independent when they learn to ask themselves self-guided questions. If we regularly ask questions such as, “What are you supposed to do here?”, “Does it make sense?”, “How is this organised?” or alternatively, “How do you know?” and “What evidence do you have for that statement?”, then students are more likely to internalise them and ask themselves such questions in future (Paul and Norbury, 2012).
That little voice that we hear in our heads when we try to undertake a difficult task has also been referred to as “self-talk” or “thinking language” (Nelson, 1998). Nelson aims to foster this in her students by explicitly referring to a “question transplant operation” (p.7). She describes to them how she will “transplant” the questions from her brain into their brains. She notes that learning to ask good questions typically takes a lot of practice and modelling from the facilitator.
Using a “think aloud” is another way of scaffolding “thinking language”. The facilitator models appropriate thought processes aloud, such as checking and repairing their understanding, making and confirming predictions and resolving ambiguities as they undertake a particular task like a reading comprehension or solving a mathematics problem (Nelson, 1998). The student is then asked to use their own thinking language to attempt a similar task.
Nelson (1998) also refers to a meta-pragmatic program she created called the “alternative adolescent curriculum” (Anderson and Nelson, 1998 in Nelson, 1998, p.438). Students are set tasks such as identifying the top learners in their class, observing them, reflecting on the characteristics that made them such “good learners” and attempting to emulate them.
Other activities that are good for supporting meta skills might include editing work, paraphrasing and using barrier games to support comprehension monitoring. Please see Nelson (1998), Larson and McKinley (2003) and Paul and Norbury (2012) for more ideas.
What’s next?
To read more about using a mediated learning approach and bridging questions to support students’ transfer of skills and independent learning ability, please see Part 4, my last post in this series – coming soon!
Notes
Larson, V.L. and McKinley, N.L. (2003) Communication solutions for older students. Thinking Pub.
Nelson, N. W. (1998) Childhood Language Disorders in Context: Infancy Through Adolescence. 2nd edn. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Paul, R. and Norbury, C. (2012) Language Disorders from Infancy Through Adolescence: Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing, and Communicating. 4th edn. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.
Thoughts of a secondary school SLT 
Leave a comment