Student Metacognition and Reflection meets Creativity (Chapter 6)

    Chapter 6 of Karin Hess’s book Rigor by Design, Not Chance Deeper Thinking Through Actionable Instruction and Assessment describes the fifth essential, evidence-based teacher move for rich student learning in the classroom: engage students in metacognition and reflection throughout the learning process. She distinguishes metacognitive skills which happens during learning and supports monitoring one’s own focus and progress from self-reflection which is the act of looking back on learning and evaluating achievement versus set goals. “(Developing metacognitive and self-reflection skills) is integral to becoming a self-directed learner who can propel and personalize learning in and out of school” (p.128). Hess clarifies that engagement goes beyond students asking “Is this what you want?” (p.128). Rather, teachers should educate their students about the continuum of engagement so that they can more effectively engage in metacognition, recognizing their own level of achievement, and linking their engagement to their learning. Hess stresses that a goal for student learning is far transfer of skills and concepts, and teachers should evaluate both the products and processes of student learning. “Whenever possible, give students the opportunity to choose a personally meaningful way to reflect on their learning” (p.136). For example, student self-reflections could take myriad forms such as a written essay, visual/multimedia display, or recorded oral presentation, but each way would provide insight into their thinking and be an artifact summarizing their learning process.

    A key component of a rigorous classroom, or any classroom that holds deep learning as its goal, is engagement. Hess introduced the continuum of engagement as defined by Amy Berry and visually summarized by Frey and Fisher (Hess, p.129) as a tool to introduce with students so that they can begin to identify their current level of engagement and self-monitor choices to be active and engaged learners. Throughout the chapter, Hess refers to rubrics from BEST that can be adapted for specific classroom use as students have collaborative work. These introductions piqued my curiosity about BEST and so I followed the “related resources” links to find out more about the entity.

    According to their website, BEST (Building Essential Skills Today) is “an effort to elevate the teaching and assessment of essential skills in our schools” based out of New Hampshire. The organization outlines four key ingredients needed to shift classroom learning toward ones where students demonstrate the essential skills of communication, collaboration, creativity, and self-direction:

• Teacher instruction of Work-Study Practices (essential skills) to their classrooms
• Professional development of teachers within an improvement cycle framework
• Statewide performance assessment system for competency-based education
• Research to practice to research encouraging a dialogue between researchers and practitioners

    BEST, like Hess, is future-focused, doing work to improve student learning in order to promote a future where students can connect their classroom learning to real-world living with the end-goal of students being able to direct their own learning both in terms of college readiness and beyond. Unlike Hess’s book which is a roadmap for individual teachers, BEST promotes large-scale adoption of defined practices and is being piloted in 4 large districts across New Hampshire. One stand-out resource is Applying Creative Thinking and Developing Creative Products 1.0, designed for students and teachers to use to monitor and assess creative thinking, development of creative products or solutions, and reflecting on and developing their confidence as problem solvers and creative thinkers. What I love about these rubrics is that they include clear “I can…” statements in kid-friendly language at the emerging level, but continue with “I can also…” statements at the developing, applying, and extending levels, scaffolding a student’s ability to see their work on this continuum.

    Ultimately, both Karin Hess’s chapter outlining student metacognition and reflection as well as the work and initiatives promoted by BEST underscore the importance of rigor in the classroom. That is, the goal of rigor is for students to engage in deep learning, of which engagement and creative thinking are integral aspects. Each provides practical, ready-made tools that teachers can implement in classrooms tomorrow. As someone dedicated to lifelong learning and to better supporting students, I was grateful to interact with both sources which provide roadmaps for encouraging student scholarship.


BEST for the Future (2021). Applying creative thinking and developing creative product rubrics. https://www.best-future.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/NH-Rubric-BEST-Creativity-Intro_v3.pdf

Hess, K. (2023). Rigor by design, not chance: Deeper thinking through actionable instruction and assessment. ASCD.

Designing Complex Tasks to Promote Learning (Chapter 5)

    Design complex tasks is the mandate described in chapter 5 of Karin Hess’s book Rigor by Design not Chance: Deeper Thinking Through Actionable Instruction and Assessment. Recall from earlier chapters that the goal of deeper learning is to prepare students students for high achievement and is evidenced by “a classroom culture where thinking is the norm.” (p.8). It stands to reason that assessments should be authentic and support student engagement, learning, and academic growth; cue high quality performance based assessments, PBA’s. Hess cautions that not all PBA’s are high quality and that they have evolved over time.

    The tasks of PBA’s may be simple and relate to near transfer of learning or may be more complex and with opportunities for creative or critical thinking and support far transfer of learning. Hess argues that, high quality performance-based assessments could be designed solely by teachers, they would be more meaningful if students were given the opportunity “to take an active role in designing and assessing their own learning” (p.94). Hess notes seven common characteristics of high-quality PBA’s that further stretch student thinking: they have open-ended contexts, productively challenge students, uncover thinking, promote authentic doing and sharing, stretch student thinking by integrating academic knowledge with personal skills and student input, require far transfer, and spark reflective and metacognitive thinking. Further, Hess provides many examples of deep complex tasks that could be implemented in the classroom.

    Reading this chapter had me reflecting on my mathematics methods class when the professor showed the class how to include performance-based assessment using fraction tiles rather than a typical pencil and paper assessment using a standard algorithm. I sought out an academic article related to performance-based assessments in mathematics that moved beyond what Hess’s description “asking students to solve a mathematics problem using one strategy and then to use another approach to prove that the solution is correct” (p.95) or the problem-based performance task to find buried treasure (p.119). This brought me to an academic paper written in 2008 by Allison Heyl, Fostering Engagement for Students from Low-Socioeconomic Status Backgrounds using Project-Based Mathematics.

    The big idea of Heyl’s work echoes Hess’s chapter that project based learning results in increased engagement among students from a low socioeconomic background. Unlike Hess’s chapter which guides teachers to create tasks, Heyl focused on a specific Interactive Mathematics Program curriculum that scaffolds students in cooperative learning groups to develop their own formulas and mathematical understanding. Unlike Heyl, Hess stressed the importance of tasks including student choice and voice whereas the projects researched by Heyl were still largely structured by the curriculum alone.

    Both authors note the importance of authentic tasks that are engaging to students. Heyl directly comments, though, that the focus on student performance on state assessments has a limiting effect on the use of PBA in the classroom. Rather, math curriculum is often “presented separate from real world context” (Heyl, p.26) and learning standard algorithms and producing work similar to what is on standardized tests is the norm. She further stresses, that more research is needed in the specific area of mathematics learning with PBA’s.

    Ultimately, both underscore the need to connect learning to real world applications, underscoring the notion that rigorous learning involves student decision-making and thinking about how to apply their classroom learning to novel situations.



Hess, K. (2023). Rigor by design, not chance: Deeper thinking through actionable instruction and assessment. ASCD.


Heyl, A. (2008). Fostering Engagement for Students from Low-Socioeconomic Status Backgrounds Using Project-Based Mathematics. In Online Submission. Online Submission. Available: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED501239

Strategic Scaffolding in the Classroom (Chapter 4)

    In chapter four of her 2023 book, Karin Hess makes the case for the use of strategic scaffolding to support rigor in the classroom.“Keeping the focus of learning on deeper understanding for all students means that teachers must be willing to shift their role as the person who delivers direct instruction to being more of a strategic learning coach” (p.74). Strategically, Hess describes four areas where scaffolding activities could occur: with teachers and peers, content, task, and materials. Given that the goal of scaffolding is to reduce the stress put on a student’s working memory, Hess guides instructors to consider a key question when planning: “How can scaffolding help students show what they know by making content more accessible or by supporting the processing of content?” (p.72). One way to scaffold materials is to embed visual cues, like color-coding, hyperlinks, exemplars with notes, or visual icons. Teachers who want more support in utilizing color-coding with their materials should start by reading Allyson Caudill’s article, Color-Coding: The Differentiation Strategy You Never Knew You Needed.
    Though Hess was careful to distinguish scaffolding from differentiation, Allyson’s Caudill’s article supports Hess’s notion of the use of scaffolds in the classroom. Like Hess, Caudill writes that color-coding can lesson the cognitive load placed on students by drawing their attention to critical information with the strategic use of color. Where Hess had mentioned visual cues, Caudill details specific ways that teachers could embed color in the classroom, with examples of how to:

• Distinguish between new ideas and concepts
• Selective highlighting
• Color-coded graphic organizers
• Supporting student discourse

    Further, in her article about color-coding, Allyson Caudill cautions that the goal is for color-coding to be effective, not confusing or over-complicated. Teachers should be mindful that they are consistent with their color coding (for example, once a color is assigned for a topic - like highlighting in yellow for comparison - that you should stick to that color for the rest of the year, rather than having students reassign or re-learn a different color).

    In both sources, the authors work to explain how, by strategically choosing scaffolding strategies, teachers can help guide their students to being able to engage more deeply with material.


Caudill, Allyson (2018). Color-coding: The differentiation strategy you never knew you needed. https://www.weareteachers.com/color-coding-classroom/

Hess, K. (2023). Rigor by design, not chance: Deeper thinking through actionable instruction and assessment. ASCD.

Schemas, Learning, and Neuroscience - Oh My! (Chapter 3)

    Supporting the thesis that instructional rigor must be intentionally planned, Karin Hess laments, that teachers often leave schema building out of their instructional planning. In chapter 3 of her book, Rigor by Design not Chance: Deeper Thinking Through Actionable Instruction and Assessment, she reminds readers that “Schemas become frameworks for learning new content and dramatically expanding a learner’s knowledge base” (p. 55) and are “crucial to students’ long-term memory retrieval and their ability to transfer learning to novel situations” (p.56). She goes on to summarize the research related to schemas and problem solving including its ties to neuroscience. Her writing also serves as a practical guide, giving examples of how instructors may build on the existing schemas students have, or build schema in each of five stages of the Actionable Assessment Cycle.
    One example described is a structural schema that could support student understanding and analysis of narrative text, an SWBS Chart: Somebody, Wanted, But, So. Using a graphic organizer or chart with a class, helping to identify these aspects of a story, helps them to apply this organization to future stories they read, and even allowing them to understand the necessary components of stories that they can then produce. I have seen the SWBS Chart previously, but it was called a Plot Relationships Chart (Uthink.edu). This version goes on to scaffold students to use the SWBS in order to write a summary paragraph about the narrative text. Interested in this resource, I was interested in finding out more about its origin.
    This strategy is attributed to James M. Macon, Diane Bewell, and Mary Ellen Vogt. It appeared in their 1990 book, Responses to Literature: K-8. I think it noteworthy that they designed strategies for students to respond to literature, providing 10 “classroom activities that encourage students to think more as they read and to focus on the literary elements of a story” (International Reading Association). As Karin Hess stresses, the goal of instructional rigor is to engage students in deeper thinking and transfer of what they learn to novel situations. The work of Macon, Bewell, and Vogt to design activities that support student thinking is the foundation of meaning-making and supporting schema building as we know it today.

Hess, K. (2023). Rigor by design, not chance: Deeper thinking through actionable instruction and assessment. ASCD.

International Reading Association (1999). Adolescent literacy: A position statement for the Commission on the adolescent literacy of the international reading association. .https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED437640.pdf

Uthinkedu.com (n.d.) Plot Relationships Chart. https://uthinkedu.com/files/resources/comprehension/Plot%20Relationship%20Chart.pdf