Rethinking what is "developmentally appropriate" from a learning progression perspective: The power and the challenge

Article · January 2009with44 Reads
Source: DOAJ
Learning progressions have recently become increasingly visible in studies of learning and instruction in science. In this essay, I explore the power and considerable challenges in rethinking what may be developmentally appropriate for young children's learning science from the perspective of learning progressions. In particular, I examine the issues of: a) the design of promising learning progressions within the vast design space of potential progressions; b) identification of cognitive resources relevant to a progression; c) analysis of effort / payoff for particular competencies at different points in the progression; d) attribution of cognitive limitations and achievements; e) coordination and collaboration needed to support the design, utilization, and refinement of the learning progression; and f) absence of straightforward correspondence between a learning progression and trajectories of different children's knowledge-development.
January 2011
    本研究では, 幼児の帰納推論における知識の影響を検討するために, 2つの実験を行った。実験1では, 3・4・5歳児群を対象にして未知属性の一般化を行う際に, カテゴリー判断に基づいて帰納推論を行うかどうかを調べた。標準刺激に対して新奇な属性を提示し, 下位カテゴリー, 基礎カテゴリー, 上位カテゴリー, 無関連カテゴリーの各テスト刺激に対して属性があてはまるかどうかを尋ねた。また, 標準刺激と仲間であるものをテスト刺激から選択させた。その結果, 仲間だと判断していても, 外見が違うと未知属性をあてはめにくくなることが示された。実験2では, 4・5歳児群を対象にして, 未知属性と既知属性の帰納推論を直接比較した。その結果, 未知属性にくらべて既知属性においては, 分類学的カテゴリーに基づく推論が多かった。また, 実験1・2を通して,... [Show full abstract]
    December 2008 · Perspectives in Education
      This article is a report on research conducted to support the development of a multilingual literacy learning software programme for adult learners in rural Limpopo Province, South Africa. The topic of inquiry for the research was literacy learning in a multilingual environment, with special attention paid to attitudinal and metacognitive aspects. Preliminary results of the study suggest that... [Show full abstract]
      April 2009 · Silicon · Impact Factor: 1.07
        March 1991 · American Educational Research Journal · Impact Factor: 2.39
          This experiment explored how expert credit administrators and trained, but not yet expert, credit administrators (i.e., trained nonexperts, TNEs) differ in their ability to generate and verify inferences. Subjects read a case study describing a bank that appeared to be growing rapidly but, because of quality control problems, was heading for major difficulty. Subsequently, they performed a... [Show full abstract]
          Discover more