Training issues

At one level the research literature revealed few differences between PAL programmes with or without pupil training and structure (Roscoe & Chi, 2007). However, research findings were unanimous (Fuchs et al., 1997; King et al., 1998; Topping & Ehly, 2001) that training tutors in constructivist theories of learning led to more impressive gains. Chipman et al. (1985) detailed the importance of an interactive training programme, endorsed by Palinscar and Brown (1984); moreover, greater learning effects were reported on programmes that gave pupils more autonomy (Fuchs et al., 1997; Roscoe & Chi, 2007). Roscoe and Chi (2007) stressed the importance of the kind, as opposed to the duration, of training.

Fuchs et al. (1997) suggested that well designed, structured interventions could fail if participants ignored the outlined tasks. Whilst the children used their planning sheets, the pilot had shown that they did not make consistent use of the flowcharts. Likewise, in the role of speaker the children did not attempt to stimulate thought processes by asking questions, which research showed to be beneficial to learning (Roscoe & Chi, 2007). I therefore decided to include more time for specific training and developed the VCOP prompt cards (see Appendix 3) in an effort to support this aspect. Another issue was training staff in PAW procedures. In the pilot I had felt that this had been rushed

and I sought to rectify this in the main programme by planning two meetings when the techniques could be practised.

1.11 Specific training

The whole class, including the four sample pairs, was taken through the PAW process by myself and the class teacher. We demonstrated the processes using my PAW flowchart and also explained the potential of the VCOP prompt cards to promote both questioning and the use of the VCOP components. All the Primary 6/7 class was given the opportunity to practise the processes. On completion of the first story, the four sample pairs were given three more training sessions. A colleague and I initially provided further modelling of the PAW procedure. The demonstration story was then introduced and the four pairs were taken through the planning, writing and editing stages and supported to write their version of The Princess and the Pea.

1.12 Summary

I have outlined the background of the PAW intervention and placed it in the context of Scottish national educational policies, my own professional background and the school setting. The efficacy of implementing PAL interventions has also been illustrated, highlighting research into the importance of metacognition. Whilst its centrality is not in dispute, the on-going debate among researchers as to how to define this complex entity continues. There is a need for research into precisely what metacognition involves, and how to encourage it both in the classroom and the wider community. Peer Assisted Writing provides an on-line context and vehicle by which metacognition can be promoted and this study is my attempt to further understanding of an area that

currently lacks complete coherence and is also under-researched. The lack of qualitative research in PAW remains the main impetus for this study.

I detailed the pilot PAW intervention and outlined its influence on the final planning of the main PAW intervention. I shall now review appropriate literature to provide balanced evidence and support for the central tenet of this study; the importance of metacognition and its promotion within the context of PAW in a busy classroom.

CHAPTER 2

Literature Review

I believe that the skill of thinking is fundamental to all aspects of life, whether in school or enjoying a fulfilling life after school. I shall look at a range of literature to support my argument that thinking should hold a central place in any school curriculum. Flavell et al. (2002) specified that this skill is metacognition, so called because its core meaning is ‘cognition about cognition’, and they defined metacognition as:

any knowledge or cognitive activity that takes as its object, or regulates any aspect of any cognitive enterprise. (2002, p.164)

A further dimension, they stressed, is that children not only think when solving a problem but learn to think about thinking about tasks, strategies and the entire process of problem solving. Individuals are the agents of their own thinking and therefore construct their understanding of both self and the world; successful pupils are those able to take charge of their own learning. I believe this is a crucial argument that makes thinking and understanding thinking a central responsibility for education.

My view is that development and understanding of thinking, that is metacognitive awareness (Flavell, 1979), should be supported and extended as part of schools’ curriculum as it incorporates skills that affect both learning and behaviour (Fernandez- Duque et al., 2000; Flavell, 1978). It appears essential that individuals are supported to

Using this literature base, this study can be shown to focus on children’s development of writing. I shall argue that the skills needed to attain success in literacy are principally metacognitive, and that writing is applied metacognition (Hacker, Keener et al., 2009).

The literature that stresses the important role of good literacy skills and their relationship to thinking about learning is extensive (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987; Hayes & Flower, 1980). Taking first writing, I explore how writing creates an appropriate context in which to observe metacognitive development (Hacker, Keener et al., 2009). I endeavour to demonstrate the important links between metacognition

and writing; crucially, the development of metacognition has to be supported, as it does not happen independently (Flavell, 1979). Embedded in the development of both are the social aspects of collaborative learning as advanced by Vygotsky (1978) and the Piagetian notion of conflict and argument (Piaget, 1929). Moreover, formal instruction should be paced so that children receive assistance at the appropriate stage. This leads to social aspects of PAL and, in my case, PAW, being situations where metacognition can be promoted.