Advertisement

Categories of Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach

Chapter
Part of the Explorations in the Learning Sciences, Instructional Systems and Performance Technologies book series (LSIS, volume 1)

Abstract

The first step that we need to make in considering the manner in which human cognition is organised is to categorise knowledge. Different categories of knowledge may be acquired, organised and stored in different ways and require different instructional procedures. Understanding how we deal with different categories of knowledge is a requirement in determining which aspects of human cognition are important from an instructional design perspective.

Keywords

Instructional Design Goal State Constructivist Teaching Discovery Learning Instructional Procedure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bruner, J. (1961). The art of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21–32.Google Scholar
  2. Geary, D. C. (2007). Educating the evolved mind: Conceptual foundations for an evolutionary educational psychology. In J. S. Carlson & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on contemporary educational issues (pp. 1–99). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  3. Geary, D. C. (2008). An evolutionarily informed education science. Educational Psychologist, 43, 179–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science, 15, 661–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. The American Psychologist, 59, 14–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  8. Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Garden City: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  9. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Sweller, J. (2003). Evolution of human cognitive architecture. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 43, pp. 215–266). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  11. Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 9–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sweller, J. (2008). Instructional implications of David C. Geary’s evolutionary educational psychology. Educational Psychologist, 43, 214–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sweller, J. (2009a). What human cognitive architecture tells us about constructivism Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 127–143). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. A. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 59–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sweller, J., Mawer, R. F., & Ward, M. R. (1983). Development of expertise in mathematical problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 639–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sweller, J., & Sweller, S. (2006). Natural information processing systems. Evolutionary Psychology, 4, 434–458.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations