PRACTITIONER PERSPECTIVE

Metacognitive
Instruction
Using Web 2.0
Technologies in
an Adult ESL
Speaking Course

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore how a metacognitive
instructional design using Web 2.0 technologies can improve adult
students’ metacognition and speaking skills in a university-based English
as a second language (ESL) speaking course. We applied metacognitive
instructions in four steps—speech recording, transcribing, peer
evaluation, and reflection writing—in a classroom with 30 international
students for a semester. We found that our design, which allows students
to reflect on English knowledge both individually and collaboratively,
helped them to improve their metacognition and speaking skills. In
particular, recording their English speaking and interactive reflections
on transcriptions using VoiceThread and Google Docs played an
important role in enhancing students’ speaking skills by providing
By
them with metacognitive experiences. We argue that ESL teachers
need to consider actively incorporating metacognitive and interactively
Taewoong Kim
reflective aspects in their instructions for speaking English using web-
Junghwan Kim
University of Oklahoma based tools outside of a classroom setting.

50 Journal of Research and Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary, and Basic Education • Volume 6, Number 3, Winter 2017
 Metacognitive Instruction Using Web 2.0

M
etacognition, or “thinking about teachers must meet students in person, (2) it creates
thinking” (Dawson, 2008, p. 3), plays difficulties in sharing data, and (3) it creates difficulties
a significant role in adult English as in analyzing voice samples (Brown & Abeywickrama,
a second language (ESL) students’ learning as a 2010). To solve the given constraints in ESL speaking
meaning-making process (Hong-Nam & Leavell, classrooms, some scholars have suggested the use of
2006). The concept of metacognition involves (1) Web 2.0 applications as alternatives (Brunvand &
monitoring one’s knowledge, (2) reflecting on one’s Byrd, 2011; Rueckert & Kim, 2014; Wood, Stover,
experiences, and (3) establishing one’s study strategies & Kissel, 2013).
(Flavell, 1979; Lai, 2011). Several scholars have Therefore, using the theoretical framework of
pointed out the effectiveness of instructions that metacognition (Flavell, 1979; Lai, 2011), we examine
apply metacognitive approaches to second language in this study the effectiveness of a metacognitive
teaching to enhance students’ meaningful learning instructional design using Web 2.0 technologies
(Vandergrift, 2002), listening skills (Vandergrift, in a university-based adult ESL speaking course.
2005), reading skills (Jiuhuan & Newbern, 2012; The research question is as follows: How does
Zhang, 2010), and writing skills (Lam, 2015). In metacognitive instructions, which include speech
particular, Jiuhuan and Newbern (2012) claimed that recording, transcribing, peer evaluation, and
metacognitive instruction may effectively improve reflection writing, improve students’ metacognition
adult students’ reading comprehension in an adult and speaking skills? Before describing the study’s
literacy class. These studies’ findings seem to be findings, we will suggest a lesson plan for our
consistent with Anderson’s (2005) argument that metacognitive instructions that includes practical
metacognitive strategies may play a more significant ways for ESL teachers to implement the instructions
role in foreign language learning because they involve in their classes.
students’ overseeing and regulating skills.
Despite its significance, metacognitive instruction Methods
in a speaking course has not received adequate We developed metacognitive instructions using
attention. One reason for this might be that it is Web 2.0 technologies for this study. Participants in
difficult to archive students’ speaking performances the study were 30 international students who took
(Rueckert & Kim, 2014). Additionally, speaking an ESL speaking course (level 3: intermediate) for a
proficiency seems to be regarded as less measurable semester at a 4-year research university located in
by practitioners; the prevailing notion is that speaking the Southwest area of the United States in 2015. The
proficiency is assessed by subjective methods compared students, including eight female and 22 male students,
to other language skills (Raoofi, Tan, & Chan, 2012). were from international countries such as China,
Existing practices of ESL speaking classes require Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela. We implemented our
a new approach to enhance students’ skills. In a instructions and collected students’ reflection papers
traditional ESL speaking course, teachers who want using pseudonyms to avoid identifying individual
to capture students’ voice samples often use a students. Finally, we analyzed data from 28 papers
conventional tool (e.g., a cassette tape recorder). and contacted a faculty peer reviewer for the analysis
This type of voice archiving method involves diverse process (Creswell, 2007; Rossman & Rallis, 2003).
constraints—namely, (1) it takes a lot of time because

Practitioner Perspective 51
Kim & Kim

Metacognitive Instructions voices anytime or anywhere they wanted, they needed

The metacognitive instructions included four to transcribe their speech using Google Docs. Before
activities (steps): (1) recording students’ speeches, (2) transcribing, students needed to practice transcribing
transcribing their recordings, (3) peer evaluations, a sample recording in the classroom (see Figure 2).
and (4) reflection writing using VoiceThread (VT) Transcribing was given as an individual self-reflection
and Google Docs. VT, a Web 2.0 application, has task to monitor the students’ knowledge.
useful features in that it enables teachers to (a) save Peer evaluation. Next, students shared their
time because students can record their voices 24/7 by transcripts with peers to evaluate each other (see
responding to teachers’ oral prompts archived in VT; Figure 3). Before doing this on their own, we asked
(b) easily share voice samples using cloud servers (by them to conduct the peer evaluation three times
sharing a web link); and (c) efficiently analyze data under our supervision. This step was critical in
by navigating voice samples simply by clicking on ensuring that students properly evaluated each other.
their links (Darbyshire & Darbyshire, 2010; Rueckert Reflection writing. Finally, each student
& Kim, 2014; Wood et al., 2013). By utilizing VT, individually reflected on the peer-reviewed transcripts
teachers and students can share, archive, and reflect by writing a reflection paper. The reflection paper
on their speaking performances with ease. was designed as a study strategy to help students
Google Docs, another Web 2.0 tool, allows reflect on their speaking skills both individually and
users to keep their writings in the cloud. Using collaboratively. We gave the four steps as homework
Google Docs, teachers and students can collaborate assignments.
regarding their second language learning outcomes An example of sample lesson plans for 4-day
by sharing one document, which they can comment classes are exhibited in Table 1. This is an instructional
on, edit, and make meanings both synchronously approach that teachers can use with the activities that
and asynchronously. they want students to collaboratively learn inside and
We used VT for archiving, monitoring, and outside the classroom.
sharing students’ speaking samples. To obtain
students’ metacognitive reflections on their speaking Findings
samples in VT, we used Google Docs. Google Docs Of the 30 students who were given the metacognitive
was used to transcribe students’ recordings, share instructions in the ESL speaking course, 28 students
their transcripts among peers, and complete self- completed their reflection papers. The papers included
reflection writing throughout the following four several positive responses from the students regarding
activities. These activities are lesson plans we used the instructions. Specifically, students reported that
to help students achieve metacognitive reflection in recording and transcribing their speech using Web
second language speaking skills. 2.0 technologies was beneficial from a metacognitive
Speech recording. First, teachers prompted perspective because it allowed them to reflect
students to orally answer semi-open-ended questions on their skills/knowledge. Tyler mentioned that “this
using VT (see Figure 1). In this first step, teachers activity [VT recording] made me feel easier about
must play their role in leading the activity efficiently speaking English. I enjoyed speaking to VoiceThread,
(Beach et al., 2014). rerecording my voices, and sharing comments with
Transcribing. After students recorded their others. This helps my speaking.” Another student,

52 Journal of Research and Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary, and Basic Education • Volume 6, Number 3, Winter 2017
 Metacognitive Instruction Using Web 2.0

Alexander, also stated “this activity [transcribing] feedback regarding “I come from.”1 Furthermore,
was very meaningful because I have never done this although Michael acknowledged that he now likes
type of thing before. I check my mistakes by myself to work with classmates for homework assignments
and work with classmates very well.” because of his experiences with the peer evaluation
Additionally, most of the students reported activity, we did not find any other students who
that the peer evaluation and reflection paper were wanted to use specific study strategies based on, or
effective for developing their metacognition and inspired by, our instructions.
improving their speaking skills. Michael stated,
“I was not able to check my own mistakes when I Conclusions
transcribed. But my friend found five mistakes. It was This study’s findings show that instructions
very interesting. Now I know my mistakes, and [I] will using Web 2.0 technologies contribute to students’
fix the mistakes.” Figure 4 demonstrates one student’s comprehensive metacognitive development by
reflective thoughts about her speaking mistakes (see helping the students monitor their second language
the second paragraph of Figure 4). In this reflection knowledge, discern gaps in this knowledge, and
paper, Mary determined, by reflecting on her speech set some learning strategies within instructional
transcript, that she should have used “would” for an settings. Few classrooms have incorporated web-
answer to an unreal conditional question instead of based instructions for improving students’ speaking
“will.” skills in the manner we have proposed in this study.
Moreover, students seemed to establish study Therefore, our findings, including our lesson plans
strategies for working with their classmates through and practical suggestions, have significant academic
the four activities. Michael, for example, acknowledged and practical implications.
that he now likes to work with classmates for homework Our conclusions in this study are threefold. First,
assignments because of his experiences with these we argue that web-based metacognitive instructions,
activities. This comment shows that our instructional including both individual and collaborative reflection,
design has the potential to provide students with could enhance students’ learning and speaking skills.
strategies to more successfully learn how to speak In this study, metacognitive reflections contributed
English. to the improvement of students’ meaning-making
In addition to the positive reactions mentioned process of their second language features by allowing
above, there were a few negative responses from them to reflect on their second language mistakes.
students. Although most of the students pointed In Mary’s case, for example, she seemed to notice a
out that the four activities improved their speaking knowledge gap in her use of the unreal conditional
skill and developed their metacognitive abilities, one clause. This type of metacognitive reflection, carried
student, Thomson, pointed out the limitations of the out through the proposed four activities, can promote
activities by mentioning the following: “I can’t find any students’ learning motivation.
mistakes from my classmate[s] at all.” Additionally, Second, we realized that students were likely
we found that peer evaluation may lead to incorrect to process second language knowledge while
feedback, as illustrated in Figure 3, which shows simultaneously reflecting on their output through

1
The student who gave the feedback pointed out that “I come from” is better than “I am from,” however, the phrase,
“I am from” is still acceptable.

Practitioner Perspective 53
Kim & Kim

either oral speech or writing. Although transcribing intervention(s) when necessary for incorrect peer
by listening to speeches might be regarded by ESL evaluations. To achieve more representative results, it
teachers as a difficult task for intermediate-level will be necessary in the future to not only conduct an
students, the students in this study reported that empirical study that involves in-depth interviews with
transcribing was helpful. The reason for this might students but also apply the design of metacognitive
be that they could conduct metacognitive reflections instructions to more diverse cases and settings.
on their performance objectively through both
individual and collaborative work that involved peer
evaluations of their speeches and feedback to each Taewoong Kim is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department
other. of Instructional Leadership and Academic
Finally, we conclude that Web 2.0 technology Curriculum at the University of Oklahoma. After
tools could better address metacognitive instructions receiving his M.A. in TESOL from Oklahoma City
for enhancing students’ speaking skills. By using VT University, Mr. Kim has taught academic and adult
and Google Docs, adult ESL teachers can implement literacy ESL classes for 5 years. His research interests
metacognitive instructions for speaking skills, which include second language acquisition, computer-
will enhance not only students’ language learning but assisted language learning, and learner identity.
also their study motivation and learning strategies.
Junghwan Kim is an Assistant Professor of Adult and
Tyler’s comment in his reflection paper seemed
Higher Education and a Faculty Affiliate in the Center
to support this idea because he believed that the
for Social Justice at the University of Oklahoma.
activities let him enjoy speaking in English. These
Dr. Kim earned his Ph.D. in Adult Education at the
activities could help improve Tyler’s speech, given
Pennsylvania State University, University Park. He
our observation that Tyler no longer seemed hesitant
has expertise and research interests across three
in oral discussions in face-to-face classes. We thus
fields, including adult/community education and
suggest that adult ESL teachers actively consider
lifelong learning, human resource development, and
incorporating metacognitive activities for speaking
continuing higher education.
skills in their classrooms, which may contribute to
enhancing adult ESL students’ speaking skills, as well
as their second language learning itself, and perhaps
eventually increase their learning desire.
Although we received some study strategies
from students in their reflection papers, their efforts
were limited to thoroughly reviewing their goal
and strategies for English speaking based on our
instructions. In addition, some students provided
negative feedback for the peer evaluation activity.
Therefore, teachers may need to assist struggling
students in redoing the peer evaluation process
in order to have a more meaningful experience.
Teachers may also be required to provide appropriate

54 Journal of Research and Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary, and Basic Education • Volume 6, Number 3, Winter 2017
 Metacognitive Instruction Using Web 2.0

References
Anderson, N. (2005). L2 learning strategies, In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Lai, E. R. (2011). Metacognition: A literature review. Pearson’s
Handbook of research in second language teaching and Research Report. Retrieved from http://www.
learning (pp. 757-771). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum pearsonassessments.com
Associates. Lam, R. (2015). Understanding EFL students' development
Beach, R., Anson, C. M., Breuch, L. K., & Reynolds, T. (2014). of self-regulated learning in a process-oriented writing
Understanding and Creating Digital Texts: An Activity- course. TESOL Journal, 6(3), 527-553.
Based Approach. Lanhem, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. Raoofi, S., Tan, B. H., & Chan, S. H. (2012). Self-efficacy in
Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2010). Language assessment: second/foreign language learning contexts. English
Principles and classroom practices. White Plains, NY: Language Teaching, 5(11), 60-73.
Pearson Education. Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2003). Learning in the field: An
Brunvand, S., & Byrd, S. (2011). Using VoiceThread to promote introduction to qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand
learning engagement and success for all students. Oaks, CA: Sage.
TEACHING Exceptional Children,43(4), 28–37. Rueckert, D., & Kim, T. (2014). VoiceThread: Practical oral
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: language assessment in the cloud. Journal for Computing
Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Teachers, 12, 18-27.
Oaks, CA: Sage. Vandergrift, L. (2002). It was nice to see that our predictions
Darbyshire, P., & Darbyshire, A. (2010). Getting StartED with were right: Developing metacognition in L2 listening
Google Apps. Dordrecht: Springer. comprehension. The Canadian Modern Language Review,
Dawson, T. L. (2008). Metacognition and learning in adulthood. 58(4), 555-575.
Northhampton, MA: Developmental Testing Service, Vandergrift, L. (2005). Relationships among motivation
LLC. orientations, metacognitive awareness and proficiency
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A in L2 listening. Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 70-89.
new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Wood, K. D., Stover, K., & Kissel, B. (2013). Using digital
Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. VoiceThreads to promote 21st century learning. Middle
Hong-Nam, K., & Leavell, A. G. (2006). Language learning School Journal, 44(4), 58-64.
strategy use of ESL students in an intensive English Zhang, L. J. (2010). A dynamic metacognitive systems account
learning context. System, 34(3), 399-415. of Chinese university students' knowledge about EFL
Jiuhuan, H., & Newbern, C. (2012). The effects of metacognitive reading. TESOL Quarterly, 44(2), 320-353.
reading strategy instruction on reading performance
of adult ESL learners with limited English and literacy
skills. Journal of Research and Practice for Adult Literacy,
Secondary, and Basic Education, 1(2), 66-77.

Practitioner Perspective 55
Kim & Kim

Table 1—A Sample of Lesson Plans

Objectives (T: Teacher, Ss: Students)

Ss will be able to:
a) answer semi-open-ended questions with an appropriate sentence structure, contents, and
pronunciation by recording speech using VoiceThread.
b) reflect on their own speaking skills by transcribing their recordings using Google Docs.
c) analyze and evaluate their own and peers’ mistakes by evaluating classmates’ transcripts.
d) metacognitively reflect on speaking skills by writing a reflection paper.
e) simultaneously improve speaking skills by participating in the four activities (e.g., recognizing
and correcting speaking mistakes through peer evaluation or self-reflection writing).

Theme
My Story

Level
Intermediate

Materials
a) VoiceThread
b) Google Docs
c) Personal Computers

Procedure

Day 1
a) T models how to record speaking using VoiceThread (VT).
b) Ss sign up for VT and locate the questions T prepared.
c) Ss will record their speaking at VT as homework (see Figure 1).
Day 2
a) T and Ss discuss how the speaking homework turned out and address any problems as necessary.
b) T models how to use Google Docs for transcribing.
c) T shares a Google Doc link by using Ss’ email addresses.
d) Ss transcribe a model speaking by using Google Docs (see Figure 2).
e) Ss will transcribe their own speaking recorded on Day 1 at home and share it with a peer
evaluation partner through Google Docs (see figure 3 for a sample peer evaluation).
Day 3
a) T and Ss discuss peer evaluation process.
b) Ss consult with T as necessary.
c) As homework, Ss will write a reflection paper for the whole process.
Day 4
a) T and Ss have a conference regarding their final peer-evaluated papers.
b) Ss present their group’s findings through the project.
c) T gives comments as necessary.

56 Journal of Research and Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary, and Basic Education • Volume 6, Number 3, Winter 2017
 Metacognitive Instruction Using Web 2.0

Figure 1—A VoiceThread Example of Semi-Open-Ended Questions

Figure 2—Transcribing Practice in Class with a Sample Recording using Google Docs

Practitioner Perspective 57
Kim & Kim

Figure 3—A Peer Evaluation Sample using Google Docs

Figure 4—One Student's Reflection Paper with Transcript

58 Journal of Research and Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary, and Basic Education • Volume 6, Number 3, Winter 2017
Copyright of Journal of Research & Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary & Basic
Education is the property of Commission on Adult Basic Education and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.