Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Perspective Chapter: Developing Academic Writers – Examples of Scaffolding Learning and Metacognitive Teaching Strategies to Foster Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving

Written By

Fatima Slemming

Submitted: 17 March 2025 Reviewed: 18 March 2025 Published: 28 May 2025

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1010171

Chapter metrics overview

1,135 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Many university courses require students to display knowledge and proficiency in academic writing genres and styles. Course credits are accrued by completing academic writing assignments and essays written during tests and examinations. However, most students encounter academic writing as ‘different’ and ‘foreign’ as they begin their years of study at university with inadequate prior knowledge of academic writing conventions and norms. This chapter discusses the necessity of student academic support and scaffolding student writers’ learning about academic writing. Examples based on experiences from practice are used to describe how to employ metacognitive teaching strategies in supporting students to gradually develop their critical thinking skills and academic reading and writing abilities. Practice-based examples of challenges students encounter with academic reading and writing are presented in the form of different vignettes illustrating an academic communication ‘problem.’ Examples are based on experiences in writing centres and academic literacy development courses in higher education. Each example is analysed, followed by suggestions about how to support students in developing their critical thinking skills and academic reading and writing proficiency.

Keywords

  • academic writing
  • scaffolded learning
  • metacognitive strategies
  • critical thinking
  • problem-solving

1. Introduction

Critical thinking is an important cognitive ability that students are expected to develop during their years of study at a university. Studies into and practices in the sphere of higher education teaching and learning encourage the inclusion of critical thinking development as part of the planning for university courses and student learning support activities. University mission statements in South Africa explicitly articulate that the development of critical thinking is a key objective of university studies and that it forms part of what constitutes student graduateness.

In this paper, this concept of critical thinking will be explored in the context of undergraduate student learning; firstly, in terms of a discussion of how the term ‘critical thinking’ can be understood and, secondly, in relation to how critical thinking can be developed in the teaching and learning process. The paper is interspersed with vignettes, which depict notable challenges with academic writing that students seek support with. All the vignettes are based on actual experiences of writing tutoring that have occurred in academic literacy courses and writing centres, which have been recorded by the author as practice or session notes. Each vignette is followed by an analysis of a specific writing challenge and how the tutor or consultant set out to support the student’s critical thinking through the use of thinking or writing strategies that can assist a student with decision-making and problem-solving in ways that can develop his/her academic writing proficiency over time. The process of following this manner of engaging with the development of critical thinking in education practice situations is considered to encourage the development of students’ self-efficacy and autonomous learning capabilities and, gradually, to help shape their identities as university scholars.

Advertisement

2. Conceptions of ‘critical thinking’ and its development in the teaching and learning process

Critical thinking as a skill or competence is not an end in itself but serves a higher purpose in the life of a university student. It is an ability that higher education institutions value as an indication of students’ graduateness, readiness, and capability to conduct themselves as critical citizens who are able to contribute to the intellectual projects necessary to solve the real-world problems that can develop nations. Critical thinking proficiency contributes to students’ developing identities as academic scholars and professionals. It plays a role in developing their abilities to become autonomous, self-directed learners, and it can encourage their development of self-efficacy.

It cannot be assumed, however, that students can attain the goals of autonomy and scholarly identity without purposeful guidance through their teaching and learning journeys at university. Hence, what is meant by critical thinking and how it can be developed are important considerations in planned approaches to developing students’ critical thinking abilities. “The new skills focus for university teaching grants a central role to critical thinking in new study plans; however, using these skills well requires a certain degree of conscientiousness and its regulation” [1].

According to Rivas et al. [1], there is no firm consensus of the meaning of the concept ‘critical thinking’ due to the complex nature of how critical thinking can be demonstrated and characterised. There is, however, a possibility for a working definition of the concept based on what authors wish to emphasise in their deliberations about this concept, and Saiz and Rivas [2] define critical thinking as “a knowledge-seeking process via reasoning skills to solve problems and make decisions which allows us to more effectively achieve our desired results.” They also make the point that, currently, the basis for the present field of critical thinking is in argumentation, although critical thinking includes not only reasoning skills but also the ability to make inferences and judgements. Critical thinking also enables decision-making and the ability to solve problems.

Another meaning of the concept is that it is integrally part of a worldview, which Jason describes as tools for surviving and living well. His broad definition of critical thinking encapsulates the following:

The heart of critical thinking is the ability to ask fruitful questions and to infer or reason well. Your worldview … changes continually, with beliefs being added or deleted in the face of experience. You change your worldview by questioning it, other people, and the world around you, and by inferring [and] drawing conclusions from the information gathered. Moreover, your worldview is not a passive thing – you use it continually, as a tool to help make decisions and take action [3].

Seel [4], however, offers one of the most succinct definitions of the concept by identifying that the “cognitive skills of analysis, interpretation, inference, explanation, evaluation, and of monitoring and correcting one’s own reasoning are at the heart of critical thinking.”

Another useful and elaborated definition is offered by the UNESCO International Bureau of Education, in its Glossary of Curriculum Terminology, in which it is stated that critical thinking is:

A process that involves asking appropriate questions, gathering and creatively sorting through relevant information, relating new information to existing knowledge, re-examining beliefs and assumptions, reasoning logically, and drawing reliable and trustworthy conclusions. Critical thinking calls for a persistent effort to apply theoretical constructs to understanding the problem, consider evidence, and evaluate methods or techniques for forming a judgement. Attributes such as curiosity, flexibility, and a questioning attitude are closely related to critical thinking. Increasingly referred to as a key competence/competency and twenty-first century skill [5].

It is evident from the above definitions that there is considerable overlap in describing what constitutes critical thinking and what the process of developing critical thinking can include. Newman et al. [6] framed critical thinking as a process with the following five stages:

  1. problem identification (skill: elementary clarification);

  2. problem definition (skill: in-depth clarification);

  3. problem exploration (skill: inference);

  4. problem evaluation/applicability (skill: judgement); and

  5. problem integration (skill: strategy formation).

Based on these stages, according to Teng and Yue [7], critical thinking skills encompass the following five factors: making correct inferences, recognising assumptions, deducing information, drawing conclusions, and interpreting and evaluating arguments.

However, to what end is critical thinking important as a key competence or critical skill in the life of a university student? To answer this question, it becomes necessary to connect the development of this critical skill by means of the teaching and learning process and how the application of critical thinking could be carried out in a conscientious manner.

Advertisement

3. The importance of critical thinking development according to South African universities

Critical thinking as an essential skill to be developed during university studies is emphasised by a number of higher education institutions in South Africa. Their views find expression in the mission and value statements these institutions make known to the public. As an example, Table 1 below contains articulations, by a few higher education institutions in South Africa, of the important role of critical thinking development in the education of university students in preparing them to become critical scholars and citizens in society. Similar expressions by other higher education institutions of the necessity to develop students as critical thinkers and citizens through their learning programmes and their co- and extra-curricular programmes can be found in their mission and value statements, teaching and learning strategic plans, and similar official and vision-linked documents that are periodically prepared by higher education institutions for systemic and institutional planning and reporting purposes. University departments, by inference, carry the collective responsibility that this critical skill receives attention in the planning and execution of learning programmes and student support initiatives.

UniversityStatement
According to the University of the Western Cape Charter of Graduate Attributes for the Twenty First Century, which is part of the Mission of the University and is described in detail in the UWC Student Guide [8], the first enabling attribute characterising the twenty-first century graduate is ‘Scholarship’ and, by extension, ‘a critical attitude towards knowledge’.“UWC graduates should have the ability to actively engage in the generation of innovative and relevant knowledge and understanding through inquiry, critique, and synthesis. They should be able to apply their knowledge to solve diverse problems and communicate their knowledge confidently and effectively”.
The University of the Witwatersrand (commonly known as Wits) has articulated its stance in relation to developing students’ critical thinking abilities in the Wits Learning and Teaching Strategic Plan 2025–2029 [9].“[at] Wits we stimulate debate and cultivate open-mindedness, critical thinking, creativity, ethics and a strong sense of social responsibility through a variety of learning experiences designed to promote meaningful student learning”.
Also, the Wits Graduate should possess the knowledge, skills and values to display the “ability to engage critically with a multiplicity of diverse perspectives and sources of information and the capacity for real-world problem solving”.
The University of South Africa (UNISA) is the largest online and distance-learning higher education institution in the country. Critical thinking development is a crucial aspect of ‘Student Support and Co-curricular activities’ in the UNISA Mission Statement, with the institutional responsibility to give effect to this mandate residing in the Student Development Division (SDD).
The Student Development Division provides social support, governance, and leadership development services to students to enhance graduateness and citizenship, and the work done by the SDD has been singled out as one of UNISA’s ten catalytic niche areas for improving institutional quality and effectiveness [10].
“Equipping students with life skills beyond academics is crucial”.
“We are guided by the principles of life-long learning, student-centeredness, innovation and creativity. Through our efforts, we contribute to the knowledge and information society, advance development, nurture a critical citizenry and ensure global sustainability”.

Table 1.

Three South African universities’ articulations about students’ critical thinking development as a graduate attribute.

Advertisement

4. Student academic support, scaffolding learning and teaching towards metacognition

It is widely accepted among educational developers in the field of higher education teaching and learning (such as writing centre consultants, faculty academic advisors, and academic literacies lecturers and tutors) that students are not embodied in a decontextualised teaching and learning environment. Instead, students enter the university environment with their own sets of unique experiences and skills. These skills and experiences have been shaped by their social and educational histories and the daily realities that they have to negotiate, while university students may or may not be closely connected to what they have to do to succeed at their studies in university. Many students in South Africa hail from less than favourable home learning environments, where overcrowded living conditions, a lack of constructive social relations, and the dismissal of a culture of reading and learning are the norms of home life. Students’ struggles to navigate the home milieu while living their lives as university students often lead to students becoming academically ‘at risk’ of failing their study programmes.

To ensure that students have access to student support services that can help them to adapt to the rigours of university life, universities have student support programmes in place where students can seek support with various aspects of student life that they find challenging to manage on their own. Student support services cover student support with financial, psycho-social, and academic difficulties. In formal university courses, student academic support occurs in the form of academic tutoring that is scheduled as additional classes tied to a particular learning module or subject taken in a course. In undergraduate degree programmes, students have to complete academic literacy learning modules in their first year of a three-year degree programme or a more intensive suite of academic literacy modules in the first year of a four-year, extended studies degree programme. All universities in South Africa also have, at least, one multi-disciplinary writing centre that offers student academic support in any area that can help them to develop their academic literacies in any of the communicative competencies, namely, (1) academic reading; (2) academic writing; (3) oral presentations; (4) digital literacy; and (5) information literacy. Academic support programmes take the view that academic literacies are developed over time as part of a learning process that unfolds parallel to completing tasks tied to the disciplinary subject content students are exposed to in their respective courses in a three- or four-year undergraduate degree programme.

Both in the context of academic literacy courses and writing centres, the process of developing critical thinking is considered of greater importance than merely knowing what critical thinking is and how to identify students’ critical thinking abilities. Moreover, the importance of initiating the developmental learning process for students based on what they present as their present skill level is a norm in practice. Offering guidance to students on the basis of what they reveal about their current knowledge and then systematically scaffolding their learning about critical thinking by using a metacognitive approach to learning is the method underpinning many of these interactions taking place in individualised instruction sessions and small group consultations typical of writing centre and academic literacy course teaching.

Nevertheless, it is difficult to specify how one teaches metacognition, but there is evidence that it is possible to teach towards metacognition and that such an approach to teaching is beneficial for students. Rivas et al. [11] are of the opinion that metacognition “plays a crucial role in developing critical thinking and consists of a person being aware of their own thinking processes in order to improve them for better knowledge acquisition.” As a research area, metacognition has contributed generously to new conceptions of teaching and learning in the way it draws attention to student awareness or consciousness and the regulation which they exercise over their own learning [12].

Advertisement

5. Theory of metacognition as a teaching and learning approach

Initially developed by John Flavell in the 1970s, Metacognition is concerned with knowledge about knowledge itself, or, even more accurately, in relation to the formation of the word, thinking about thinking. It presupposes that a higher or more complex layer of thinking is needed to interrogate and make sense of thinking patterns and can be described as the cultivation of a method of thinking that can enable an individual to more skilfully direct, monitor, regulate, organise, and plan task activities in a helpful way. Metacognition helps form autonomous students, increasing consciousness about their own cognitive processes and their self-regulation so that they can regulate their own learning and transfer it to any area of their lives. In other words, it refers to a conscious process involving high-level thinking that allows us to look into and reflect upon how we learn and to control our own strategies and learning processes [13, 14].

On the one hand, thus, metacognition clarifies “the knowledge which one has about his own cognitive processes, products and any other matter related with them” [15]. On the other hand, it also refers “to the active supervision and consequent regulation and organisation of these processes in relation with the objects or the cognitive data upon which they act” [16]. By focusing on helping students ‘learn how to learn’ and think about how they think, we must use adequate cognitive learning strategies that are orientated towards self-learning, developing metacognitive strategies, and critical thinking. The theory makes provision for a knowledge, skills, and experiences dimension that can be of a declarative, procedural, or conditional nature, as well as an executive regulation component that includes monitoring and control strategies (for example, see Ref. [17]).

Brief descriptions of the components that can be individually activated in developing students’ critical thinking development, using metacognition as a theoretical construct, follow below (for more in-depth discussion, see Ref. [18]):

  • Declarative knowledge includes information about prior learning experiences and the current knowledge and skills students think they have.

  • Procedural knowledge is concerned with eliciting information about how students approach a task and whether their knowledge of the procedure is adequate for the task at hand.

  • Conditional (or strategic) knowledge is focused on what a student needs to learn about or information that needs to be searched for and acquired in order to satisfy the requirements of the task and that can enable a student to have sufficient information or data to make sense of in response to an assigned task. A student is required to be able to determine when, where, and why certain strategies are selected and resources employed to execute a task.

  • Metacognitive strategies can be deliberately used by students to control cognition and process activities. These strategies include ways of becoming orientated to a task; planning the execution of a task; cognitive processing of task-related content; monitoring attainment of knowledge, process, and progress related to a task; and evaluation of progress and quality that are, more often than not, initially only task-related. They enable students to monitor time and effort on task on an ongoing basis and to evaluate progress until a task has been completed.

  • Such strategies also require that students develop metacognitive awareness of how to work within set timeframes, locate and analyse data, and increasingly exert control over their own learning and progress. Over time, the ability to exercise control on a task-by-task basis can start to represent a ‘way of doing’ that can become scholarly practice for students that is goal-directed, purposeful and applicable to all tasks and not only the immediate task at hand.

Advertisement

6. Methodological considerations

Careful observations of student behaviour in a place of pedagogical practice where students seek academic advice about writing challenges commonly experienced by student writers enabled the educational developer cum researcher to identify trends and patterns as they emerge in practice through recurring experiences of tutoring writing around a repetitive theme or writing challenge experienced by student writers. For this reason, the ethnographic style of research that involves observing research participants in a naturalised setting and includes participant-observer behaviours, carefully recorded field or practice notes and associated fieldwork documentation, and/or research interview data were used to provide the methodological focus for the collection, selection, and analysis of data for this study [19, 20].

The data used to inform the insights obtained in this chapter were collected over a period of more than ten years, based on reports about writing tutoring sessions and session-specific field notes recorded on an ongoing basis as part of session reflections. Student names used to refer to research participants are pseudonyms, and, as has been mentioned earlier, the student writers mentioned by name in this paper are representational of a type of student and student writing problem that has been composited from the ethnographic research data. No human participants were thus harmed or identified by name during the course of conducting the research. Participants’ rights to confidentiality were respected in the treatment of the data, as only trends in student academic writing challenges are reported on in the paper [21, 22].

Advertisement

7. Teaching towards metacognition through scaffolding learning in consultation with student writers

This section of the paper sets out to describe, analyse, and provide insight into how teaching and learning support for different types of academic writing challenges experienced by students can be provided by writing developers. The writing challenges identified and described are based on commonly occurring reasons for students seeking tutoring that can help them deal with their academic writing tasks and specific tasks for which groups of students were either a group of students in an Academic Literacies course or were referred to a writing centre for writing tutoring. Examples based on pervasive writing difficulties encountered by undergraduate students are presented in the form of vignettes or mini-narratives. Each example highlights a specific writing challenge for which a student has sought tutoring assistance.

Each example discussed below highlights a type of writing challenge many undergraduate students have to overcome. Details for each vignette are drawn from the author’s practice notes of working in writing centres and academic literacy courses in South African higher education institutions. However, in each example or vignette, the story that is related is narrowed down to the experience of an individual student or student group, for the purpose of analysis and commentary about scaffolding learning and applying a metacognitive approach to teaching and learning when assisting a student writer in practice.

There is a tendency in higher education teaching and learning practice for lecturers to impart an oversimplified understanding of what type of support or tutoring assistance students should request in order to successfully learn and improve their academic writing proficiency. Students are often referred to writing centres with the simple instruction from the referring lecturer that the student should get his/her language use and grammar checked in order for an essay or report that they are writing to make sense and be ‘more academic.’ Similarly, it has not been uncommon to encounter students with the unrealistic expectation that one visit to a writing centre will help them be better writers able to produce the much-needed improved draft of writing that will be rewarded with an excellent grade.

One of the most important roles of a writing consultant or educational developer, thus, is to support the development of the student’s cognitive framework, emotional rationality, metalanguage, and metacognitive abilities. The support provided by these professionals aims to help students learn how they may become more adept at academic writing. By imparting knowledge about academic writing genres, as well as writing and rhetorical strategies, writing consultants endeavour to help students develop scholarly writing knowledge and habits that can instil the necessary motivation, self-efficacy, and confidence to become self-directed learners with the desired scholarly attributes to verbalise what they find challenging. Over time, and with the training to realise that better writers and better writing result from practice, genre awareness, and better writing habits, students are led to exhibit behaviours that signal they have a clearer understanding of what is needed to improve their academic communication skills and, by extension, to succeed in their studies at university in the long term.

As explained by Harris et al. [23], metacognition is the most influential theoretical framework because it emphasises the idea that “writing is a recursive, strategic, and multidimensional process central to (1) planning what to say and how to say it, (2) translating ideas into written text, and (3) revising what has been written.” For example, by means of eliciting declarative knowledge from students, a writing consultant can ascertain whether students are aware of their strengths and weaknesses with regard to a task, as well as other affective dimensions such as self-efficacy and motivation to undertake higher-order thinking on a task. Thus, it is important for writing consultants to consider whether students understand their levels of proficiency with respect to various forms of writing as well as various compositional processes (such as planning or revising their writing), their attitudes towards writing, as well as their self-efficacy beliefs and motivation with regard to academic writing.

Another useful aspect of metacognition is to work with students’ procedural knowledge, which, according to Raphael [24], “includes information about how to successfully apply the various actions or strategies comprising declarative knowledge, that is, the repertoire of behaviour available from which the learner selects the ones best able to help reach a particular goal.” Examples of procedural knowledge within the context of writing include an understanding of general strategies for planning, text production, and revision. This could include advanced planning activities such as creating an outline of a report or essay or using specific strategies to build authorial knowledge of particular writing genres, such as gathering information about ‘argumentative essay writing’, in order to learn how to develop an argument in academic essay writing. It could also include learning that lower-order writing skills such as spelling, grammatically correct language use, sentence construction, and correct punctuation play an important role in writing development and performance, but that these aspects are better attended to as part of a later stage of writing, where revision and proofreading of a completed draft paper containing the student writer’s fully developed ideas on a topic is possible.

The vignettes that follow set out to expound on how teaching towards metacognition in the context of academic writing development can be used as a teaching and learning approach when working with student writers. Each student’s ‘writing problem’ is analysed in relation to a writing task, as well as the tutoring approach used to scaffold the student writer’s learning and to teach towards metacognition. The support provided by the writing consultant is considered to offer the student the ability to gradually develop transferable composition skills that can lead a student to become a better writer cognisant of the demands of different academic writing genres and tasks.

7.1 Vignette 1: Lerato

Lerato is a Humanities and Social Sciences student in her second-year level of study. She has to complete a writing assignment for a second-year module in Human Development Psychology. She visited the university writing centre for assistance in making sense of the task instructions and to find out whether the partial draft essay she has written satisfies the requirements of the task. Lerato brought along the task instruction sheet she received from her course instructor as well as some ideas that she has draughted as notes, as well as a partial draft of her essay that contains a few paragraphs on the topic.

7.1.1 The following task instruction was provided by the course instructor

Critically analyse literature on the topic of aggression, paying particular attention to composing a working definition of the concept, the main causes or reasons giving rise to aggressive outbreaks, and annual, or periodical, statistical information pertaining to cases of aggression that you have located among reporting of at least one governmental agency. Use the information you have collected to write an essay not exceeding 2000 words (excluding cover page and reference list).

Guidelines to follow:

  • Include a cover page containing the following headings: your full name, student number, lecturer’s name, subject, topic, task number, and assignment due date.

  • Use conventional essay structure formatting and type your assignment in MS Word using double-spacing, Times New Roman font type in font size 12.

  • Include correctly formatted APA-style in-text references as well as a corresponding reference list containing at least 4 references.

  • Although optional, each figure and table used must be clearly labelled and should not exceed A6 dimensions of 10.5 cm x 14.8 cm on a page.

7.1.2 Lerato’s writing problem

Lerato admitted to not feeling confident about which details or aspects of the topic she should include in the essay. She is also confused about the meaning of the instruction to ‘Critically Analyse’. This has made it difficult for her to write an initial draft of her essay that contains sufficient relevant and connected information on the topic. She admitted to experiencing false starts each time she sat down to work on developing her essay. Her confusion about whether she has understood the task correctly motivated her to seek writing tutoring support, especially since she was experiencing frustration at not being able to produce a fully written essay draft due to not being certain that she is responding suitably to the requirements of the task.

7.1.3 The writing consultant’s approach

To help Lerato understand how to approach the writing task, the writing consultant adopts the pedagogical thinking synonymous with a scaffolded learning/metacognitive teaching approach, a flipped teaching approach considered useful in writing tutoring sessions where writing consultants (also referred to as writing tutors) are not necessarily subject matter experts. When adopting such an approach, the writing consultant starts out by eliciting ‘declarative knowledge’ information from the student. This constitutes the important role of tutor-student talk to make sense of the writing process and activities appropriate to the stage in the writing process where the student finds himself or herself at the time of seeking help with their academic writing.

To elicit declarative knowledge from the student, the consultant asked Socratic questions such as those listed below:

  1. What do you think you are being asked to write about in this essay?

  2. Do you think you have suitable information about the topic to be able to answer the different questions posed in this assignment?

  3. Are there particular aspects of the topic to which you should pay specific attention?

Based on the student’s responses to the above questions, the consultant is able to discover that the student has misunderstood what it means to render a critical account of a topic and is also uncertain about how to present information in an analytical essay. In other words, making sense of the task instruction and the planning of their writing becomes the logical place to start with offering writing development support to the student.

The consultant also reads the two pages of notes that the student has brought along as a ‘partial essay’. The incomplete essay contains paragraphs that explain the concept of aggression and some ideas about what can cause displays of aggressive behaviour. The consultant notices that the student has provided three sources of information offering definitions of the key concept in the task as well as two sources of information in which reasons for aggression are identified. No information is provided about government-produced statistics about cases relating to acts of aggression.

The next step is to help the student understand that ‘conditional knowledge’ must be acquired. The consultant asks questions about what other information on the topic she needs to collect in order to fully answer all the questions posed in the task instruction sheet. This is the consultant’s technique to help the student make her tacit understanding of the task explicit. In other words, the student is encouraged to find words in the task instruction that can help her focus on the detailed information she is expected to include in her essay. To help Lerato to ‘decode’ the task instruction, the consultant models a task analysis technique that Lerato can use to make sense of writing assignment task instructions. Together, the consultant and student proceed to work through the task instruction sheet, using the task analysis technique.

Without going into too much detail here, the consultant explains that each writing task instruction can be understood to contain words that indicate the subject or topic of the writing task, instructional words that specify how the topic should be written about, and focus words that limit or contain the breadth or depth of content on the topic that can be included in the essay or report written on the topic. The focus words can be any words or phrases that help to limit the number of perspectives or that provide guidance about the specific aspects of a topic and about how to present information in terms of the genre of writing and formatting requirements of the writing task. This could also include instructions about only using information situated in specific time frames or historical periods, or only certain geographical or demographic data, such as age-related information, or similar.

The task analysis technique also requires student writers to identify an intended audience/readership and purpose for their writing in order that they may imagine writing to a ‘person of interest’ whom they can visualise addressing in their papers. This technique helps to raise awareness (1) of the discursive nature of academic writing; (2) of the student writer’s role as a participant in an academic discipline and academic discourse and as a contributor to a disciplinary body of knowledge; (3) that helps to build the foundations of a scholarly identity; and (4) that supports the development of authorial confidence and self-efficacy.

After helping Lerato to make sense of the task instructions and to identify what other information she still needs to collect and write about (conditional knowledge), the consultant moves on to focusing on discussing or developing Lerato’s procedural knowledge of what she still needs to do after the writing consultation in order to further develop her paper. The consultant leads Lerato to identify that she has to collect information containing statistics by the government that relate to the topic. They spend some time discussing which government agencies could provide this information, where Lerato could attempt to locate such information, what she thinks she needs to do with the additional information she will collect, as well as how she could incorporate the new information into her essay.

Towards the end of the consulting session, the consultant and Lerato also discuss arranging her information more coherently and how to present her ideas in essay format. They agree that she needs to cluster information according to a numbered mind map that can be expanded as a number of interconnected paragraphs, which will be presented as an outline of the essay along with a fully written essay in a follow-up writing consultation session if she finds the outline helpful as a form of pre-writing. In this way, there is a clear plan that Lerato can follow to monitor the progress she is making in relation to the task, and, together with the writing consultant, she would be able to evaluate time-on-task progress by the next consultation session if she is able to compile a better understood, more coherently organised draft essay.

The preparatory work needed for the follow-up writing consultation session is an example of how the consultant models metacognitive monitoring and evaluation strategies that can assist Lerato to learn how to establish control over her writing and time-on-task progress as well as be set on the path of becoming a self-regulated learner through her new experience of scaffolded learning. The follow-up writing consultation session in which her expanded task information and attempt at ‘essaying’ will be evaluated is a deliberate strategy of scaffolded learning in a process-orientated writing support approach.

7.2 Vignette 2: Linguistics I group

Four first-year Arts and Humanities students booked a group writing consultation session. They needed assistance with a Linguistics I assignment. It is important to mention that all of the students in this group are ESL speakers, whose mother tongues include Afrikaans, Sesotho, and isiXhosa. For this session, however, we did not concentrate much on the issues of language interference that were evident in their writing but rather on the more important prior step of getting them to compose a logical essay outline on the topic in order to produce a coherent essay.

7.2.1 The following task instruction was provided by the course instructor

Considering Baker’s (1996) four types of language death and the power of English, which some people regard as the dominant language in South Africa, identify reasons for the power of the English language and what conditions will have to be met in order for other languages to be maintained or to spread. Your essay must adhere to the academic essay format (see LCS course reader, page 35), and the length of your essay is expected to be four pages, including in-text references and the reference list.

7.2.2 Linguistics I group’s writing problem

The group found themselves in a typical ‘stuck’ place in the writing process, where student writers tend to include information on a topic without having established and signalled the purpose of the topic and what they want to achieve with their writing on the topic to the reader. It was also noticeable from the introductory section of this essay that the group had not clarified how their discussion of the concepts and the role of English versus non-dominant languages were related to language maintenance and language spread conditions. In other words, the group did not connect the order in which they would discuss different aspects of the topic and what they would foreground or emphasise as a rhetorical position in their group essay.

7.2.3 The writing consultant’s approach

As is usual in a writing consultation session, the consultant begins the session by encouraging the students to verbalise why their group is seeking support and tries to identify what the students consider to be the priority discussion points about their writing and the task they have to complete. Knowing that students tend to be fixated on a particular writing task and not their writing skills and their knowledge about academic writing, this type of opening segment in a consultation can enable the consultant to determine students’ declarative knowledge and/or conditional knowledge.

By asking questions to find out whether the students understand the purpose and approach needed to write an essay on the given topic, the consultant can compare the students’ responses to the writing they have produced on the topic. It became apparent while discussing the task that the students understood the distinctions between different concepts in Baker’s postulation, which they could explain and discuss in relation to non-dominant indigenous languages that have become official South African languages. The consultant provided positive verbal feedback to the group about having interpreted this partial answer to the task instruction correctly to affirm the declarative knowledge they have shared with the consultant.

However, the fact that the students did not clarify connections between related concepts concerning the survival of non-dominant languages necessitated some discussion about the purpose of an essay introduction and the different ways to introduce a topic and establish coherence in an essay from the beginning. It also came to light that the absence of a clear instruction about the type of essay the group was expected to write caused confusion about what they needed to do with the information they compiled about the central concepts and the conditions for language maintenance and spread. The consultant pointed out the need to decide whether they wanted to ‘Discuss’ the different aspects, ‘Argue’ in favour of or against the dominant position of English, or ‘Compare’ the powers of different languages in relation to one another. The group was then given definitions of each instructional word and asked to consider their meanings in order to decide on the type of essay they wanted to write. The students were also encouraged to seek clarity from the course instructor about the ‘vague’ instruction if possible.

In the last part of the session, the next steps were discussed so that metacognitive monitoring and evaluation of the group’s progress on the task could be activated in the days leading up to a follow-up consultation when they agreed to present a fully written draft essay on the topic to the writing consultant. By the next session, the consultant already planned to look for completeness in the students’ treatment of the topical contents in the essay, to determine whether the essay is coherent, to check how information has been clustered and organised, as well as to ensure that there is adherence to the essay format according to the course reader guidelines. Surface-level corrections to language use and referencing information would also be discussed in a follow-up session or two once the consultant and student writers agree that the topical information has been presented in a recognisable essay format. This gradual scaffolding of student learning of writing genre and writing process using a metacognitive approach, through modelling of scholarly writing techniques and by using metacognitive monitoring and evaluation strategies, is intended to encourage student writers to develop critical thinking skills that can help them better their academic writing abilities and become more successful university students. Being able to identify and verbalise helpful or confusing task instructions is another indication of students’ developing critical thinking skills.

7.3 Vignette 3: Samira

Samira is a final-year Commerce student who has to complete a term research paper of twenty pages. This is her first experience of a lengthy research writing assignment, as her previous academic writing tasks have been much shorter in length, and only a handful of essay writing assignments are prescribed per semester or year. This is not the reason for Samira’s request for writing development tutoring, however.

7.3.1 Samira’s writing problem

The reason for Samira’s visit to her first-year Academic Literacies tutor is to receive advice about how to reference sources of information correctly according to the faculty style guide. Her current course convenor referred Samira for tutoring assistance. Because different referencing styles have been used for the few writing tasks given in different subjects in previous levels of study, Samira is not too certain whether she is citing her sources correctly in this writing assignment. She is concerned about how to integrate in-text references and how to compile a correctly formatted reference list.

7.3.2 The writing consultant’s approach

Samira was certain that referencing sources was what she needed help with to learn doing correctly in her academic writing. The writing consultant used a full consultation hour in discussion with Samira about different styles of referencing, why referencing is important, and finding out whether Samira knew about plagiarism and how to avoid plagiarising in her writing. Once again, the consultant’s method of using declarative knowledge to determine conditional knowledge and procedural knowledge was used to begin supporting Samira with her academic writing problem. In this situation where students request assistance with learning how to work with references in their writing, it is not uncommon for writing consultants not to question the reason for their visit to the writing centre nor to try to convince the student to focus on other aspects of the writing task first, as part of the consulting process.

It is a common occurrence among university students that they find referencing and plagiarism challenging. However, it is often also true that, while students accurately identify their need to be taught how to reference appropriately according to a specific referencing style, referencing in their academic writing is not the only aspect of their writing task that requires attention and tutoring. Tutoring about referencing, as a compulsory feature of academic writing, is not necessarily text-dependent. Hence, the writing consultant could elicit Samira’s awareness of the different metacognitive knowledge dimensions in order to model a particular referencing style without having a fully written draft essay.

In preparation for one or more follow-up consultations that can provide further tutoring about referencing, perhaps after having practised referencing on a fully written draft essay that can be presented to the writing consultant, the consultant can identify other aspects of the student’s research paper that can be improved upon, such as (1) planning the research report, (2) what types of information to include in a research report, or (3) how to compile information according to formatting guidelines of a research report genre of writing. This could then be used as stepping stones for scaffolding Samira’s learning about research report writing, developing her knowledge and skills about this genre of writing, and teaching her the metacognitive strategies she could use to monitor and control her awareness of genre and time-on-task progress of the writing process and writing support process she has undertaken in consultation with an academic writing consultant.

Advertisement

8. Conclusion

In summary, theoretical and empirical research conducted during the past three decades has provided many important insights regarding the metacognitive aspects of writing, as well as the metacognitive differences between more and less skilled writers. As a writing consultant and academic literacy practitioner, this author has observed that skilled writers understand and are familiar with diverse genre conventions. They are also able to draw upon a wide range of topical knowledge gained either through experience or research. Throughout the writing process, skilled writers are more inclined to begin with a plan of what they want to write about and are able to be reflective in their writing on any topic. They also tend to demonstrate a sensitivity to the needs and perspectives of their audience, the overarching goals and purposes of their writing, and the thematic cohesion and organisation of their ideas that they need to create in their writing. When student writers find it difficult to display what skilled writers are able to demonstrate through their writing, writing consultants can use those as cues for scaffolding student writers’ developing knowledge about academic writing by using a metacognitive approach to teaching writing.

Scaffolding students’ learning and student writers’ burgeoning skills in academic writing by applying a metacognitive approach to support students’ developing student identities and cognitive framing for conducting scholarly activities is an effective means whereby student writers can be taught to think about how they think of and for academic communication purposes. Critical thinking is regarded as a key skill university graduates should be able to demonstrate in public and professional discourse, as discussed in an earlier section of this paper. Insights into how students’ academic writing and general learning difficulties can be overcome through guided learning methods that prize scaffolded learning and teaching towards metacognition are necessary. They can enable a process of envisioning how a metacognitive approach to supporting university student writers to develop their communicative competence can be used as a suitable theoretical perspective to provide a logical structure for tutor-student talk in writing consultations and academic writing tutoring sessions. Using scaffolding learning of academic writing and a metacognitive approach for developing student writing abilities in a supportive process of planned writing consultation sessions is an effective method for helping students develop their critical thinking skills. It is also beneficial for developing their self-confidence and self-efficacy with regard to academic writing, making it possible, over time, for students to practice the knowledge dimensions and control strategies of metacognition to develop the metacognitive awareness necessary for high-level thinking and problem-solving expected from university graduates.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

The author appreciates the contributions by student writers of the University of the Western Cape, University of Cape Town, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, and Rhodes University in South Africa for sharing their difficulties with academic writing in the interest of academic support and research.

Advertisement

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1. Rivas SF, Saiz C, Ossa C. Metacognitive strategies and development of critical thinking in higher education. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022;13:913219, 1-5. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.913219
  2. 2. Saiz C, Rivas SF. Evaluación en pensamiento crítico: una propuesta para diferenciar formasde pensar. Ergo. Nueva Época. 2008;22-23:25-66
  3. 3. Jason GJ. The Critical Thinking Book. Ontario: Broadview Press; 2022
  4. 4. Seel NM. Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. London: Springer; 2012
  5. 5. UNESCO International Bureau of Education. IBE Glossary of Curriculum Terminology. Geneva: IBE; 2013. p. 15
  6. 6. Newman DR, Webb B, Cochrane CA. A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer supported group learning. Interpersonal Computing and Technology. 1995;3(2):56-77
  7. 7. Teng MF, Yue M. Metacognitive writing strategies, critical thinking skills, and academic writing performance: A structural equation modeling approach. Metacognition and Learning. 2022;18:8. DOI: 10.1007s11409-022-09328-5
  8. 8. Middleton W, Parker N, editors. UWC Student Guide. Bellville: University of the Western Cape; 2018. p. 4. Available from: https://www.uwc.ac.za/ [Accessed: 11 January 2025]
  9. 9. University of the Witwatersrand. Wits Learning and Teaching Strategic Plan 2025-2029. Johannesburg: Wits University; 2024. Available from: https://www.wits.ac.za/teaching-and-learning/ [Accessed: 12 January 2025]
  10. 10. University of South Africa. Mission statement. Available from: https://www.unisa.ac.za/sites/corporate/default/About [Accessed: 11 January 2025]
  11. 11. Rivas SF, Saiz C, Ossa C. Metacognitive strategies and development of critical thinking in higher education. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022;13: 913219:1. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.913219
  12. 12. Rivas SF, Saiz C, Ossa C. Metacognitive strategies and development of critical thinking in higher education. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022;13: 913219:2. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.913219
  13. 13. Flavell JH. Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In: Resnik LB, editor. The Nature of Intelligence. Hillsdale: Erlbaum; 1976. pp. 231-235
  14. 14. Flavell JH. Theory of mind development: Retrospect and prospect. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. 2004;50:274-290. DOI: 10.1353/mpq.2004.0018
  15. 15. Flavell JH. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new era of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist. 1979;34:906-911
  16. 16. Schraw GA. Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science. 1998;26:113-125
  17. 17. Teng MF, Yue M. Metacognitive writing strategies, critical thinking skills, and academic writing performance: A structural equation modeling approach. Metacognition and Learning. 2022;18:4. DOI: 10.1007s11409-022-09328-5
  18. 18. Teng MF, Yue M. Metacognitive writing strategies, critical thinking skills, and academic writing performance: A structural equation modeling approach. Metacognition and Learning. 2022;18:1-24. DOI: 10.1007s11409-022-09328-5
  19. 19. Blommaert J, Dong J. Ethnographic Fieldwork: A Beginner’s Guide. Bristol: Multilingual Matters; 2010
  20. 20. Kramer MW, Adams TE. Ethnography. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods. 2017;4:458-461. DOI: 10.4135/9781483381411.n169
  21. 21. Gregory I. Ethics in Research. London: Continuum; 2003
  22. 22. Bos J. Research Ethics for Students in the Social Sciences. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature; 2020
  23. 23. Harris KR, Santangelo T, Graham S. Metacognition and strategies instruction in writing. In: Waters HS, Schneider W, editors. Metacognition, Strategy Use, and Instruction. New York: Guilford Press; 2010. pp. 226-256
  24. 24. Raphael TE, Englert CS, Kirschner BW. Students’ metacognitive knowledge about writing. Research in the Teaching of English. 1989;23:343-379. DOI: 10.58680/rte198915507

Written By

Fatima Slemming

Submitted: 17 March 2025 Reviewed: 18 March 2025 Published: 28 May 2025