Using Color-Coded Drafts to Facilitate Meta-Cognition in Undergraduate Writing Classes:
Benefits of Limitations
Jeffrey W. Murray, Ph.D., Assistant Professor
Department of Focused Inquiry
5165 Harris Hall
Virginia Commonwealth University
1015 Floyd Ave.
Richmond VA 23284
804-929-8720 jwmurray@vcu.edu
Learning Objectives:
1.
Consider some new ways of thinking about the nature of cognition and meta-cognition
2.
Understand how color-coding can be used as a self-reflective / meta-cognitive tool across a variety of (written) assignments
3.
Consider the advantages and disadvantages of different meta-cognitive strategies for different students
4.
Engage in preliminary reflection / discussion on how this strategy might be incorporated into one’s own existing classroom activities or course assignments
This interactive session will share a very simple but highly effective technique for achieving both better written products and a higher degree of meta-cognition in the undergraduate classroom: the strategic use of color-coded drafts. The interactive session will begin by modeling the pedagogical technique through active participation, followed by an overview of a theoretical framework for thinking about meta-cognition which both explains the utility of this pedagogical technique and points out its primary benefit and limitation as a learning tool. The session will conclude with participants considering how they might incorporate this technique into their own assignments.
This session explores a simple but effective technique for achieving meta-cognition: color-coded drafts. Participants will engage in a hands-on color-coding exercise, a general theoretical discussion of meta-cognition, and collaborative reflection on incorporating this technique into existing assignments.
This interactive session will consist of three parts (roughly equal in length). First, participants will engage in a brief activity that models the way in which students might be assigned to use

color-coded drafts during the writing / revision process – see fuller description of the interactive component of the proposal. Second, some foundational theory will be provided to not only explain the utility of the technique but also highlight the primary benefit and limitation of the approach. In brief, the underlying hypothesis of this research project is that meta-cognition works through the superimposition of one conceptual apparatus upon another, such as using a theory of audience to help students think more deeply about various features of an effective introduction (or an effective argument or . . .). The use of color-coding, by contrast, allows the student to superimpose an already-familiar conceptual apparatus, that of colors, upon course content (e.g. a model of an effective introduction or a model of an effective argument or . . .).
The primary benefit of this approach is that it compels the student to think and reflect upon the principal course content without introducing yet more course content (i.e. a new conceptual apparatus, such as a theory of audience). The primary limitation, by corollary, is that this technique does not ask students to reflect upon that course content in as sophisticated a manner as they might with the superimposition of a second conceptual apparatus. This theoretical discussion will be illustrated with some sample student assignments (as well as some concrete student testimony as to the usefulness and transferability of the technique). Third, participants will be asked to begin reflecting / discussing how they might incorporate this strategy into their own existing classroom activities or course assignments. Going beyond a mere Q & A period, participants should leave the session with some tentative options for using color-coded drafts to augment existing strategies for student engagement and meta-cognition.
As a way to model the use of color-coded drafts as a meta-cognitive tool, session participants will be asked to compose a short letter to a colleague or family member about their experience thus far at the conference. After about 5 minutes, we will have brief small group discussions
(followed by whole group discussion, in a think-pair-share type format) about what four things should be included in such a letter to make it a “good” letter. After identifying four elements, participants will be given a few minutes to revise their letter to ensure incorporation of all of those elements. Participants will then be provided with four high-lighters (of different colors) with which they will color-code their letters for those four elements. [All of this models what students might do when drafting / revising an introduction, source analysis, or argument, for example.] We will then engage in a discussion of how the color-coding helped them to reflect
(both conceptually and visually) on their own use of the four elements and to consider the anticipated benefits and limitations of this technique for particular courses, particular assignments, and particular students. Following a subsequent theoretical discussion of metacognition, participants will again get into small groups to reflect and discuss how they might incorporate color-coding into their own existing classroom activities or course assignments.
Burke, Kenneth. “Terministic Screens.”
Language as Symbolic Action: Essays on Life,
Literature and Method . Kenneth Burke. Berkeley: U California P, 1966. 44-62. Print.

Costa, Arthur L., ed. Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking . 3 rd
ed.
Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2001. Print.
Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow . New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2011.
Print.
Perkins, David. The Eureka Effect: The Art and Logic of Breakthrough Thinking . New York:
W.W. Norton, 2001. Print.
Shaughnessy, Michael F., Marcel V. J. Veenman, and Cynthia Kleyn-Kennedy, eds. Meta-
Cognition: A Recent Review of Research, Theory, and Perspectives . New York: Nova
Science, 2008. Print.