Inquiry Through Internal Dialogue
(The heart of learning)
Developing a deep foundation of factual knowledge
- How the brain learns
- Activating prior knowledge
- Core cognitive strategies
X Core internal dialogue – inquiry
- Expressive writing
- Writing to learn – monitoring internal dialogue
- Writing to learn – response journal
The potential of cognitive strategies is limited if taught in isolation. They
become routine and mechanical devoid of the deep learning potential they
have to take advantage of what is known about how learning occurs. Internal
dialogue (internal discussion and conversation) which is inquiry driven
(questioning) can take a routine cognitive strategy and make into a dynamic
mental process for learning and especially moving toward developing the
strategies and habits of mind that enable a learner to become competent in an
area of inquiry.
John Bransford (2007) has observed that many people mistakenly feel
students cannot be asked to master what are sometimes called “higher-level
skills” unless they first learn basic content like that tested on standardized
tests. But actually, he states, “people are built to be learners who inquire and
interrogate and get feedback as they learn to solve complex problems. So
learning-to-learn and inquiry skills, guided by the ability to ask relevant
questions due to knowledge of the ‘big ideas’ of various disciplines, are
actually the fundamental skills that we need to emphasize.”
Metacognition – Internal Dialogue: a little background
Metacognition. Metacognition is broadly defined as thinking about
thinking. When students are taught to think about their own thinking,
they gain knowledge and control of factors that affect learning—the
self, the task at hand, and strategies to be employed (Baker & Brown,
1984; Palinscar & Brown, 1981).
Metacognition is not an instinctive process; therefore deliberate
efforts must be made by teachers and students to call attention to it
when it is occurring. Doing so can be difficult because the process
often occurs as an internal dialogue, meaning there are no tangible or
verbal cues to aid in awareness (Bransford et al., 2000; Wolfe &
Brush, 2000). Second, the most successful strategies for teaching
metacognition require the complete reorganization of a student’s
thinking process, which involves much more than simply pointing out
when metacognition is occurring (Perkins & Grotzer, 1997).
Handelsman etal (2006) refers to metacognition as "the internal
dialogue about what is being learned", and state that it includes "the
process of setting challenging goals, identifying strategies to meet
them, and monitoring progress toward them". The latter two aspects,
in addition to addressing student's beliefs about learning, are also the
focus of Lovett's approaches to teaching metacognition (Lovett,
2008). (Appalachia Educational Laboratory, 2005)
Bransford et al. (2000), warned that educators often make the
misguided assumption that because metacognition takes the form of
self-imposed internal conversation that students will develop this
internal dialogue on their own. They emphatically state that this is not
true. The point is that the better understood the entire concept of
metacognition becomes, the more sophisticated the thinking process
becomes. When given metacognitive training the degree to which
transfer occurs in different settings has been shown to increase
(Bransford et al. 2000). However, significant discussion and practice
with metacognition are required before students are able to
sufficiently comprehend and accommodate the concept. In a highly
recommended book by Bain (2004) that discusses the practices of the
best college teachers, the concept of metacognition is mentioned and
strongly implied throughout. To get students thinking about their
thinking is an essential first step to their mental processes of learning
and synthesis that are critical harbingers of transfer. (Ramocki, 2007)
Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino (1999) describe metacognition as
an internal dialogue that in- dividuals develop in order to build skills
for predicting learning outcomes and monitoring comprehension.
(Gorsky, 2004)
Because metacognition often takes the form of an internal dialogue,
many students may be unaware of its importance unless the processes
are explicitly emphasized by teachers. (Bransford, 1999)
Developing Internal Dialogue – SLOW DOWN
Metacognition is about helping the reader tae control of their reading – think
about their thinking or make their thinking visible.
As we have just read, it is a mistake to think that readers will necessarily
develop internal dialogue on their own or will learn how to engage in
internal dialogue if the processes are not explicitly emphasized by
instructors. It is very important that in developing internal dialogue driven
by inquiry that the reader slows down and consciously engages in carefully
designed inquiry and has an internal conversation with themselves and the
text. This is the most difficult part of helping readers develop internal
dialogue. Telling the reader to slow down and ask questions and engage in
internal conversation with themselves and the text will not work.
Instructional Strategies
This module will focus on two instructional strategies that slow the reader
down and has them begin to drop their rush to finish reading – a common
unproductive reading habit of mind. The first instructional reading strategy
is collaborative modeling and scaffolding of a specific set of inquiry
questions while reading. The second instructional strategy will focus on a
writing to learn strategy – Writing to Learn: Monitoring Internal Dialogue
with a specific set of inquiry questions for internal dialogue. The weaker the
reader’s internal dialogue, the more valuable the Monitoring Internal
Dialogue strategy (second) becomes.
Inquiry Questions for Internal Dialogue
Here are the core Inquiry Internal Dialogue questions that is the focus for
moving surface learning to deep learning:
Internal Dialogue:
1. What do I already know?
2. Are there examples in the book and do I know any examples of the
concept being considered?
3. How is what I am reading like or different than what I already know?
4. Can I predict where this is going?
5. How has the author organized the information in this reading selection
and how does it relate to prior readings?
Instructional Strategy 1: Modeling and Scaffolding Inquiry Internal
Dialogue
Any time a cognitive strategy is used, Inquiry Internal Dialogue questions
should be used with it. For example, if the first sentence of a paragraph is
changed to a question, the following inquiry questions should be asked.
1. What do I already know?
2. Are there examples in the book and do I know any examples of the
concept being considered?
3. How is what I am reading like or different than what I already know?
4. Can I predict where this is going?
5. How has the author organized the information in this reading selection
and how does it relate to prior readings?
Instructional Strategy 2: Writing to Learn: Monitoring Internal
Dialogue (VERY POWERFUL – this is a core activity for slowing down
and developing metacognition)
In instructional strategy 2, it is important to slow the student down and
focus on the information at hand. Instructional Strategy 2 is a writing to
learn strategy
* When the reader uses a cognitive strategy such as question or recite, slow down
and take the time to answer the inquiry questions before moving on. It take time for
this activity to become automatic (build neural networks for the process)
Actively promote the development of students’ metacognitive skills
“Metacognition refers to thinking about thinking in general, and reflecting
on and regulating one’s own thinking and learning in particular. It is a kind
of internal dialogue in which the learner monitors his or her own developing
skills, understanding of concepts and mental approaches to the learning as it
occurs.” (ACT Government: 2004) (School Excellence Initiative, 2004)
Provide opportunities for students to have an internal dialogue that mental
verbalizes their thinking, which can then be shared with others.
Self-Assessment and Reflection
Encouraging reflection and self-assessment helps students develop important
metacognitive skills that help them monitor their own thinking and learning.
Students learn to think about learning as well as think about thinking. The
distinction here is that self-assessment helps students think about how they
make sense of the content. Students’ self-assessments and reflections provide
valuable feedback to the teacher to inform how students’ ideas have changed
or deepened over the course of instruction, how well students are aware of
their learning, and the need to further differentiate instruction for individual
students. (Keekey, 2008)
Metacognition is often an internal dialogue, but the teacher must model this
thinking. This is what we do when we say that we are developing
independent learners. (roos)
Studies of the learning process have found that students are more able to
learn complex skills when they can think “metacognitively,” that is, when
they think about their own thinking and performance so they can consciously
monitor and change it. In fact, studies have found that successful writers
engage in an internal dialogue in which they talk to themselves —
sometimes even muttering aloud — about audience, purpose, form, and
content. They ask and answer for themselves certain questions: Who are
they writing for? Why? What do they know and what do they need to find
out? They maintain this ongoing internal dialogue as they organize ideas,
plan, draft, edit, and revise. Successful writers guide their thinking with
metacognitive strategies that help them write purposefully. (DarlingHammond)
Because metacognition often takes the form of an internal dialogue, many
students may be unaware of its importance unless the processes are
explicitly emphasized by teachers. (Bransford, 1999)