A critique is offered of three papers on the student's role in learning. The first, by Robert Sternberg and Richard Wagner, makes connections between cognitive processing of information and the metacognitive processing of one's own approach to a situation and the information contained therein. The second, by Deborah Stipek, implies that metacognitive processing depends upon intrinsic motivation and may be stunted by structured extrinsic reinforcement. The third, by Walter Doyle, holds that evaluation and control pressures in classrooms are detrimental to intelligence and motivation to learn. Each paper is synthesized and a set of recommendations is offered for the redefinition of the student role in learning. Four approaches are discussed: (1) build on the foundations of direct instruction; (2) distinguish short-term and long-term values of learning; (3) develop student capacity for self-management of work; and (4) ground higher-order learning on ideals and exemplars. A discussion is presented of the work conditions required for teachers to implement the sort of curricular ideas suggested in the papers, focusing on management of teachers' agendas, resources, and incentives. Implications for school administrators and policy makers are considered. (JD)