Thinking Across the Curriculum

The primary national curriculum for computing states,

'A high-quality computing education equips pupils to use computational thinking and creativity to understand and change the world.'

Computational thinking is a good example of metacognition, which requires children to be aware of the thinking process behind a problem, as well as the outcome itself.

Computational thinking is usually defined as:

1) Decomposition - Breaking a problem down into solvable parts

2) Pattern recognition - Looking for repetition within a problem

3) Abstraction - filtering out important information

4) Algorithm design - creating a process for solving a task

5) Debugging - fixing and correcting errors

I would also include elements like:

• Task analysis - Being aware of the tools, information and support available

• Generalisation - thinking about approaches that have worked in similar problems

• Prioritisation - deciding on which aspects to focus first

The first five elements of computational thinking use language that is well-associated with computing, although, as we will explore, possibly also relevant to other subjects.

The second three elements are more obviously applicable to tasks across the whole curriculum.

Applying computational thinking in primary computing

Let's take a programming task and consider how computational thinking might enable students to solve it successfully.

Using Lego Spike Prime kits, we might ask students to build a robot that retrieves an object, possibly in the context of a rescue or retrieval of a hazardous material.

Lego is an ideal tool for teaching thinking, as students can rapidly try out and change their solutions. Image credit: Stilfehler, used under Creative Commons license 4.0.

The first thing I would always encourage students to consider in a task like this is the task specification, including limitations, requirements, instructions, support and materials available. Consideration of these elements is a highly transferable, metacognitive skill.

Training pupils to consider the task specifications helps them become independent, successful problem solvers. Time is an important aspect of the available materials, one that pupils often fail to budget successfully without practice and scaffolding. The task specifications should include precise, measurable requirements, which the students will continuously self-assess their work against.

I would then encourage children to consider generalisation, thinking about where they have solved similar problem before. Making these connections can give them confidence and save them time.

I believe the next step of a problem like this would be decomposition. Children should break a problem like this down into elements like: 1) making the robot drive forwards the correct amount, 2) Making a 'grabber' arm lower, 3) Making the robot reverse the correct amount.

Pattern spotting would allow students to realise that the drive forward and drive backward amounts should be the same. Likewise, the amount that the grabber lowers would be the same as the amount that it raises.

Abstraction would allow the students to ignore aspects like the robots using sensors, or needing to turn (unless they opted for these things as a solution!)

Algorithm design might include them measuring the distances carefully. before creating a block-based program to control the robot. They should not expect it to be perfect first time, which is where debugging would form a natural part of the process.

Metacognition across the primary curriculum

What do subjects other than computing require in terms of awareness of metacognition?

Interestingly, metacognitive approaches are mentioned in almost all primary subjects.

In Maths, the national curriculum requires that students 'reason mathematically' and 'apply their thinking to a variety of routine and non-routine problems with increasing sophistication'. This requires children to justify their answers, think systematically and identify patterns.

In English, the terms 'self correction', 'proofreading' and 'evaluation' are used, requiring students to reflect upon their thought processes and to justify their choices of language.

In PE, children are required to 'recognise their own success' and 'develop an understanding of how to improve in physical activities'.

For primary history, children are required, under the 'sifting evidence' requirement, to ask, 'why was this written? Am I assuming this person was telling the truth because they lived back the? What are my biases?' Children are required to step outside their own 21st century mindset and evaluate how historical figures might have thought differently.

In geography, children are required to consider field data against their hypothesis, using metacognitive evaluation to ask questions like, 'Did we measure at the wrong time of day?' and 'How should we change out data collection strategy next time?'

Primary science heavily mentions metacognition, requiring children to 'ask relevant questions and use different types of scientific enquiries to answer them', set up 'simple and practical enquiries , comparative and fair tests', and 'make systematic and careful observations'. Pupils are asked to consider whether their original hypothesis was correct, thinking about their original thinking and considering whether misconceptions affected their original ideas.

Art is also heavily dependent on metacognition at primary level. A sketchbook is a visible record of children's thinking process and children should frequently evaluate the tools they use in their preliminary work. Children should be taught to consider the process as much as the outcome, dispelling conceptions that a child is 'bad at art' and focusing instead of effective steps and techniques.

A common metacognitive approach

It is clear from these examples that effective metacognition is an important part of success across the primary curriculum.

As well as enabling academic success, metacognition helps children to move from a fixed, to a growth mindset. Children start to associate success with the quality of their planning, discussion and strategy, instead of any perceived inherent abilities, or uncontrollable factors.

A question I would like to explore is,

Is it possible, and beneficial to develop a common metacognitive approach that children could use across the primary curriculum?

Is a common metacognitive approach possible and useful at primary level?

This questions is made of two aspects:

1) Is it possible? Are there enough similarities between subjects that common metacognitive language can be used?

2) Is it beneficial? Would creating a common metacognitive framework aid be a valuable resource for teachers and students, or would it risk becoming an oversimplified, extraneous document?

As a primary computing specialist, I would begin a common, metacognitive approach from the initial perspective of computational thinking, which provides a framework with potential for scope across the curriculum.

Tasks in any subject can be introduced with a precise specification, discussed with the students. This will include a success criteria, discussion of resources available, constraints, time and measurable goals. At the specification stage, children will consider they types of thinking that will enable success in a task - whether this is careful consideration of historical evidence or being aware of misconceptions in science.

Generalisation will help students identify where they have done this, or a similar activity before, saving them time and allowing them to draw on previous success and lessons. This satisfies the requirements in Maths, that children  'reason mathematically' and 'apply their thinking to a variety of routine and non-routine problems with increasing sophistication', as children make connections between practise work and application of Maths to problems.

Decomposing a task is an important aspect of tasks in all subjects. Through breaking a task down, children learn to tackle each aspect with precision and focus. They learn which aspects to prioritise and they learn the value of practising individual disciplines within a subject.

Pattern recognition is a vital part of subjects across the curriculum. When I taught primary English, I was a huge fan of Alan Peat, who provides common sentence patterns and structures to help children with writing in different genres. In English, children can learn patterns of writing like 'speech, action, speech, action' when they are writing dialogue. In Music, children will learn that certain rhythms or chords can create moods in Music, in PE, children can learn patterns of movements or patterns of play to help them succeed in games.

Abstraction, while a computing term, is applicable to other subjects, helping children 'rule out' information that they do not need to consider. Teaching children to do this helps them stay focused on the task and reduces their cognitive load. It also helps children manage their time effectively.

'Algorithm design' is also a term heavily associated with computing, but it essentially translates to a pupil's solution, including the recognition that this solution is usually a first draft. This could be a solution to a problem in Maths, a written argument or the method for a scientific experiment.

Debugging is the term used in computing for fixing errors, but realising that a piece of work has scope for improvement is a concept that is applicable in all subjects. As mentioned, English refers to 'self correction; and 'proofreading' and an important component of Maths lessons should be children identifying and fixing their errors. Creative subjects like Art and Music should involve time for students to reflects upon and improve their work, Science should involve children considering whether their results were reliable and precise.

Conclusions

I believe the foundations of a common metacognitive approach across primary subjects are there, although the wording and terminology of a common approach would need careful consideration.

Schools that could create such a resource could raise the profile of metacognition in school and produce a document that teachers and students could refer to in lessons.

Albert Einstein famously remarked,

"If I had an hour to solve a problem, I'd spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and five minutes thinking about the solution".

Thinking is clearly a vital part of subjects across the national curriculum. Developing a metacognitive framework would recognise the importance of thinking compared to the final product. This would benefit students' mindset, learning and success.