Resumen de Optimal learning in schools – theoretical evidence: Part 4 Metacognition

John Crossland

• Parts 1 and 2 in this four-part series of articles (Crossland, 2016, 2017a) discussed the recent research from neuroscience linked to concepts from cognitive development that brought Piaget’s theories into the 21st century and showed the most effective provision towards more optimal learning strategies. Part 2 reviewed Demetriou’s latest thinking by exploring the relationship between the developing mind and the developing brain for population-sized statistics.

  Part 3 (Crossland, 2017b) delved into individual differences in development and the implications for schools. This final part makes a case for introducing the teaching of metacognitive skills. Following the historical fate of many theories, Part 1 in this four-part series of articles showed that Piaget’s ideas were not being thrown away but brought into the 21st century. Piaget was correct in identifying different types of thinking accumulating with age and experience. Many aspects of Piaget’s theory of learning and development were shown to be important for teachers in order to improve their classroom practice. However, his original idea about whole-brain stages of development was not fully compatible with the current evidence from cognitive psychology and neuroscience. It has been superseded by the theory of cycles of development (Demetriou, Spanoudis and Shayer, 2015). Theoretical research results may inform educational knowledge but ultimately individual teachers have a unique responsibility for managing the plethora of confounding variables involved in optimising the learning opportunities for individuals and small groups in their classes.

  No single research project can completely inform this number of confounding variables.

  Part 2 looked in more detail at the general population trends for these cycles made up of statistically significant periods of optimal performance leading to spurts in transitions to new types of thinking and performance. Demetriou’s model clearly deepens Piaget’s contribution to development and learning. He acknowledged that more theoretical work needs to be done so he continues to develop his model.

  Part 3 outlined how Demetriou’s research also showed that it was usual in any class to have normal and fast developers, with some individuals and small groups regressing in their