Learning to Think: Cognitive Mechanisms of Knowledge Transfer

Learning to think is about transfer. The scope of transfer is essentially a knowledge representation question. Experiences during learning can lead to alternative latent representations of the acquired knowledge, not all of which are equally useful. Productive learning facilitates a general representation that yields accurate behavior in a large variety of new situations, thus enabling transfer. This chapter explores two hypotheses. First, learning to think happens in pieces and these pieces, or knowledge components, are the basis of a mechanistic explanation of transfer. This hypothesis yields an instructional engineering prescription: that scientific methods of cognitive task analysis can be used to discover these knowledge components, and the resulting cognitive models can be used to redesign instruction so as to foster better transfer. The second hypothesis is that symbolic languages act as agents of transfer by focusing learning on abstract knowledge components that can enhance thinking across a wide variety of situations. The language of algebra is a prime example and we use it to illustrate (1) that cognitive task analysis can reveal knowledge components hidden to educators; (2) that such components may be acquired, like first language grammar rules, implicitly through practice; (3) that these components may be “big ideas” not in their complexity but in terms of their usefulness as they produce transfer across contexts; and (4) that domain-specific knowledge analysis is critical to effective application of domain-general instructional strategies.

[1]  Sharon M. Carver,et al.  Cognitive objectives in a LOGO debugging curriculum: Instruction, learning, and transfer , 1988, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Please Scroll down for Article Journal of the Learning Sciences Promoting Transfer by Grounding Complex Systems Principles , 2022 .

[3]  Mitchell J. Nathan,et al.  The Real Story Behind Story Problems: Effects of Representations on Quantitative Reasoning , 2004 .

[4]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning , 2002 .

[5]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  Learning Factors Analysis - A General Method for Cognitive Model Evaluation and Improvement , 2006, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[6]  John R. Anderson The Architecture of Cognition , 1983 .

[7]  J. Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and Complex Learning: Recent Developments and Future Directions , 2005 .

[8]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987 .

[9]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  Helping students know'further'-increasing the flexibility of students' knowledge using symbolic invention tasks , 2009 .

[10]  James G. Greeno,et al.  Learning Chemistry: What, When, and How? , 2010 .

[11]  Avrim Blum,et al.  The Bottleneck , 2021, Monopsony Capitalism.

[12]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  Seeing language learning inside the math: Cognitive analysis yields transfer , 2010 .

[13]  Kurt VanLehn,et al.  Learning one Subprocedure per Lesson , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[14]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  Why Tutored Problem Solving May be Better Than Example Study: Theoretical Implications from a Simulated-Student Study , 2008, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[15]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[16]  R. Siegler Microgenetic Studies of Self-Explanation , 2002 .

[17]  Albert T. Corbett,et al.  A Cognitive Tutor for Genetics Problem Solving: Learning Gains and Student Modeling , 2010 .

[18]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  Advancing Development of Intercultural Competence through Supporting Predictions in Narrative Video , 2009, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[19]  Allen Newell,et al.  Computer science as empirical inquiry: symbols and search , 1976, CACM.

[20]  A. diSessa Toward an Epistemology of Physics , 1993 .

[21]  K. Holyoak,et al.  A symbolic-connectionist theory of relational inference and generalization. , 2003, Psychological review.

[22]  J. Sweller,et al.  The Use of Worked Examples as a Substitute for Problem Solving in Learning Algebra , 1985 .

[23]  S. Michaels,et al.  Deliberative Discourse Idealized and Realized: Accountable Talk in the Classroom and in Civic Life , 2008 .

[24]  Seymour Papert,et al.  What's the big idea? Toward a pedagogy of idea power , 2000, IBM Syst. J..

[25]  Daniel L. Schwartz,et al.  Inventing to Prepare for Future Learning: The Hidden Efficiency of Encouraging Original Student Production in Statistics Instruction , 2004 .

[26]  Alan H. Schoenfeld,et al.  Problem solving in the United States, 1970–2008: research and theory, practice and politics , 2007 .

[27]  Allen Newell,et al.  Deduction as verbal reasoning. , 1995 .

[28]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  Why we’re so smart , 2003 .

[29]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Abstract Planning and Perceptual Chunks: Elements of Expertise in Geometry , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[30]  M. Tomasello The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition , 2000 .

[31]  Susan M. Barnett,et al.  When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. , 2002, Psychological bulletin.

[32]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  Categorization and Representation of Physics Problems by Experts and Novices , 1981, Cogn. Sci..

[33]  C. Lebiere,et al.  The Atomic Components of Thought , 1998 .

[34]  M. Chi,et al.  Eliciting Self‐Explanations Improves Understanding , 1994 .

[35]  Mathieu Koppen,et al.  Introduction to knowledge spaces: How to build, test, and search them , 1990 .

[36]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Schema induction and analogical transfer , 1983, Cognitive Psychology.

[37]  Matthew W. Lewis,et al.  Self-Explonations: How Students Study and Use Examples in Learning to Solve Problems , 1989, Cogn. Sci..

[38]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  An effective metacognitive strategy: learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based Cognitive Tutor , 2002, Cogn. Sci..

[39]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  Reviving Inert Knowledge: Analogical Abstraction Supports Relational Retrieval of Past Events , 2009, Cogn. Sci..

[40]  J. Stigler “Mental abacus”: The effect of abacus training on Chinese children's mental calculation , 1984, Cognitive Psychology.

[41]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  Outcomes and Mechanisms of Transfer in Invention Activities , 2011, CogSci.

[42]  Keith J Holyoak,et al.  Pragmatic reasoning schemas , 1985, Cognitive Psychology.

[43]  J. Dewey Democracy and education : an introduction to philosophy of education / John Dewey , 1916 .

[44]  Daniel L. Schwartz,et al.  How Mathematics Propels the Development of Physical Knowledge , 2005 .

[45]  Nils J. Nilsson,et al.  The Physical Symbol System Hypothesis: Status and Prospects , 2006, 50 Years of Artificial Intelligence.

[46]  Albert T. Corbett,et al.  Cognitive Tutor: Applied research in mathematics education , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[47]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Modeling children's early grammatical knowledge , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[48]  David F. Feldon,et al.  Cognitive task analysis , 2009 .

[49]  I. Biederman,et al.  Sexing day-old chicks: A case study and expert systems analysis of a difficult perceptual-learning task. , 1987 .

[50]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  A Computational Model of How Learner Errors Arise from Weak Prior Knowledge , 2009 .

[51]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  The Education of Perception , 2010, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[52]  Alan H. Schoenfeld,et al.  Mathematical Problem Solving , 1985 .

[53]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  Solving inductive reasoning problems in mathematics: not-so-trivial pursuit , 2000, Cogn. Sci..

[54]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data , 1984 .

[55]  Jeffrey D. Karpicke,et al.  The Power of Testing Memory Basic Research and Implications for Educational Practice , 2006 .

[56]  H. Simon,et al.  Learning Mathematics From Examples and by Doing , 1987 .

[57]  John H. Holland,et al.  Induction: Processes of Inference, Learning, and Discovery , 1987, IEEE Expert.

[58]  Kurt VanLehn,et al.  Rule-Learning Events in the Acquisition of a Complex Skill: An Evaluation of Cascade , 1999 .

[59]  Fernand Gobet,et al.  Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/acp.1110 Chunking Models of Expertise: Implications for Education FERNAND GOBET* , 2022 .

[60]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  An Investigation of Teachers' Beliefs of Students' Algebra Development , 2000, Cognition and Instruction.

[61]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Transfer of Cognitive Skill , 1989 .

[62]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  The Difficulty Factors Approach to the Design of Lessons in Intelligent Tutor Curricula , 2007, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[63]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Cognitive Tutors: Lessons Learned , 1995 .

[64]  L. R. Novick Representational Transfer in Problem Solving , 1990 .

[65]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  A Computational Model of Accelerated Future Learning through Feature Recognition , 2010, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[66]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Rules of the Mind , 1993 .

[67]  W. Kintsch,et al.  The role of understanding in solving word problems , 1988, Cognitive Psychology.

[68]  Eva L. Baker,et al.  Standards, Assessments, and Accountability. Education Policy White Paper. , 2009 .