Computers as cognitive tools: Learningwith technology, notfrom technology

  • David H. JonassenEmail author


COGNITIVE TOOLS are computer-based applications that are normally used as productivity software. However, these applications may also function as knowledge representation formalisms that require learners to think critically when using them to represent content being studied or what they already know about a subject. Applications such as databases, spreadsheets, semantic networks, expert systems, multimedia/hypermedia construction, can function as computer-based cognitive tools that function as intellectual partners with learners to expand and even amplify their thinking, thereby changing the role of learners in college classrooms to knowledge constructors rather than information reproducers. Cognitive tools are examples of learningwith technologies rather thanfrom them.


computer applications learning strategies cognitive tools knowledge construction knowledge representation critical thinking 


  1. Adams, A.G. & Kroch, E. (1989). The computer in the teaching of economics.Journal of Economic Education, 20 (3), 269–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blickensderfer, R. (1990). Learning chemical kinetics with spreadsheets.Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 9(4), 35–43.Google Scholar
  3. Briscoe, C. & LeMaster, S.U. (1991). Meaningful learning in college biology through concept mapping.American Biology Teacher, 53(4), 214–219.Google Scholar
  4. Brosnan, T. (1990). Using spreadsheets in the teaching of chemistry: 2 more ideas and some limitations.SSR, 71(256), 53–59.Google Scholar
  5. Carver, S.M., Lehrer, R., Connell, T., & Ericksen, J. (1992). Learning by hypermedia design: Issues of assessment and implementation.Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 385–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cashien, P. (1990). Spreadsheet investigations in economics teaching.Economics, 26(2), 73–84.Google Scholar
  7. Crisci, G. (1992, January). Play the market!Instructor, 101(5), 68–69.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, N.T. (1990). Using concept mapping to assist prospective elementary teachers in making meaning.Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11(4) 66–69.Google Scholar
  9. Derry, S.J. (1990).Flexible cognitive tools for problem solving instruction.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA, April 16–20.Google Scholar
  10. Derry, S.J., & LaJoie, S.P. (1993). A middle camp for (un)intelligent instructional computing: An introduction. In S.P. LaJoie & S.J. Derry (Eds.),Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 1–14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  11. Duffy, T.M. & Jonassen, D.H. (1992). Constructivism: New implications for instructional technology. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.),Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 1–16). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  12. Edwards, N.T. & Bitter, B.G. (1989, October). Changing variables using spreadsheet templates.Arithmetic Teacher, 37(2), 40–4.Google Scholar
  13. Fisher, K.M. (1990). Semantic networking: New kid on the block.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 1001–1018.Google Scholar
  14. Fisher, K.M. (1992). SemNet: A tool for personal knowledge construction. In P. Kommers, D. Jonassen, & T. Mayes (Eds.),Cognitive tools for learning. (pp. 63–76). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. Fisher, K.M., Faletti, J., Patterson, H., Thornton, R., Lipson, J., & Spring, C. (1990). Computer assisted concept mapping.Journal of College Science Teaching, 19(6), 347–352.Google Scholar
  16. Goldsmith, T.E., Johnson, P.J., & Acton, W.H. (1991). Assessing structural knowledge.Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 88–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goodfellow, T. (1990). Spreadsheets: Powerful tools in science education.SSR, 71(257), 47–57.Google Scholar
  18. Grabinger, R.S., Wilson, B.G. & Jonassen, D.H. (1990).Designing expert systems for education. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  19. Hays, K.E., Weingard, P., Guzdial, M., Jackson, S., Boyle, R.A., & Soloway, E. (1993, June).Students as multimedia authors.Paper presented at the Ed Media conference, Orlando, FL.Google Scholar
  20. Jonassen, D.H. (1987). Assessing cognitive structure: Verifying a method using pattern notes.Journal of Research and Development in Education, 20(3), 1–14.Google Scholar
  21. Jonassen, D.H. (1991). Objectivism vs. constructivism: Do we nee a philosophical paradigm shift? Educational Technology: Research and Development,39(3).Google Scholar
  22. Jonassen, D.H. (1993). Changes in knowledge structures from building semantic net versus production rule representations of subject content.Journal of Computer Based Instruction, 20(4), 99–106.Google Scholar
  23. Jonassen, D.H. (in press).Mindtools for schools.New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  24. Jonassen, D.H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M.A. (1993).Structural knowledge: Techniques for representing, assessing, and acquiring structural knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  25. Jonassen, D.H. & Grabinger, R.S. (1993). Applications of hypertext: Technologies for higher education.Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 4(2), 12–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jonassen, D.H., Wilson, B.G., Wang, S., & Grabinger, R.S. (in press). Constructivistic uses of expert systems to support learning.Journal of Computer Based Instruction,20(3),86–94.Google Scholar
  27. Karake, Z.A. Enhancing the learning process with expert systems.Computers and Education,14(6),495–503.Google Scholar
  28. Kari, R. (1990). Spreadsheets in advanced physical chemistry.Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 10(1), 39–48.Google Scholar
  29. Karlin, M. (1988, February). Beyond distance=rate * time.The Computing Teacher,20–23.Google Scholar
  30. Knox-Quinn, C. (1992, April).Student construction of expert systems in the classroom.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA Google Scholar
  31. Kommers, P.A.M. (1989).Textvision. Eschede, Netherlands: University of Twente, Educational Instrumentation Department.Google Scholar
  32. Kommers, P., Jonassen, D. H. & Mayes T. (Eds.),Cognitive tools for learning.Heidelberg FRG: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  33. Kozma, R.B. (1987). The implications of cognitive psychology for computer-based learning tools.Educational Technology,(11), 20–24.Google Scholar
  34. Kozma, R.B. (1992). Constructing knowledge with learning tool. In P. Kommers, D. Jonassen, & T. Mayes (Eds.),Cognitive tools for learning (pp. 23–32). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  35. Krieger, M.E. & Stith, J.H. (1990, September). Spreadsheets in the physics laboratory.The Physics Teacher,378–384.Google Scholar
  36. Lai, K.W. (1989, March).Acquiring expertise and cognitive skills in the process of constructing an expert system: A preliminary study.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA (ERIC Document No. ED 312986) Google Scholar
  37. Lehrer, R.. (1993). Authors of knowledge: Patterns of hypermedia design. In S.P. LaJoie & S.J. Derry (Eds.),Computers as cognitive tools. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  38. Lippert, R. C. (1988). An expert system shell to teach problem solving.Tech Trends, 33(2), 22–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lippert, R. & Finley, F. (1988, April).Student’s refinement of knowledge during the development of knowledge bases for expert systems.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake of the Ozarks, MO. (ERIC Document No. ED 293872) Google Scholar
  40. Mansfield, H. & Happs, J. (1991). Concept maps.Australian Mathematics Teacher, 47(3), 30–33.Google Scholar
  41. Mikulecky, L. (1988).Development of interactive computer programs to help students transfer basic skills to college level science and behavioral sciences courses. Bloomington IN: Indiana University.Google Scholar
  42. Misovich., M. & Biasca, K. (990). The power of spreadsheets in a mass and energy balances course.Chemical Engineering Education,24,46–50.Google Scholar
  43. National Curriculum Commission (1990).Technology in the national curriculum,50–81.London,NCC.Google Scholar
  44. Parker, J. & Widmer, C.C. (1991, September). Teaching mathematics with technology.Arithmetic Teacher, 39 (1), 38–41.Google Scholar
  45. Pea, R.D. (1985). Beyond amplification: Using the computer to reorganize mental functioning.Educational Psychologist, 20 (4), 167–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Perkins, D.N. (1986).Knowledge as design. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  47. Perkins, D.N. (1993). Person-plus: A distributed view of thinking and learning. In G. Salomon (Ed.),Distributed cognitions.: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 88–110). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Pinter-Licke, C. (1992). Rootfinding with a spreadsheet in pre-calculus.Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 11, 85–93.Google Scholar
  49. Pon, K. (1984). Databasing in the elementary (and secondary) classroom.Computing Teacher, 12(3), 28–30.Google Scholar
  50. Ramondetta, J. (1992, April/May). Learning from lunchroom trash.Learning 92, 59.Google Scholar
  51. Rooze, G.E. (1988–89). Developing thinking using databases: What’s really involved?Michigan Social Studies Journal, 3(1), 25–26.Google Scholar
  52. Rudnicki, R. (1990). Using spreadsheets in population geography classes.Journal of Geography, 89(3), 118–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Saleem, N. & Azad, A.N. (1992). Expert systems as a statistics tutor on call.Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 11, 179–191.Google Scholar
  54. Salomon, G. (1993). On the nature of pedagogic computer tools. The case of the wiring partner. In S.P. LaJoie & S.J. Derry (Eds.),Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 179–196). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  55. Salomon, G., Perkins, D.N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies.Educational Researcher, 20(3), 2–9.Google Scholar
  56. Schlenker, R.M. & Yoshida, S.J. (1991, February). A clever lever endeavor; You can’t beat the spreadsheet.The Science Teacher,36–39.Google Scholar
  57. Schreiber, D.A. & Abegg, G.L. (1991, April).Scoring student-generated concept maps in introductory college chemistry.Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake Geneva, WI.Google Scholar
  58. Sgroi, R.J. (1992, March). Systematizing trial and error using spreadsheets.Arithmetic Teacher,8–12.Google Scholar
  59. Sigismondi, L.A. & Calise, C. (1990). Integrating basic computer skills into science classes: Analysis of ecological data.The American Biology Teacher, 52 (5), 296–301.Google Scholar
  60. Sounderpandian, J. (1989). Decision analysis using spreadsheets.Collegiate Microcomputer, 7(2), 157–163.Google Scholar
  61. Spoehr, K.T. (1992, April).Using hypermedia to clarify conceptual structures: Illustrations from history and literature.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  62. Spoehr, K.T. (1993, April).Profiles of hypermedia authors: How students learn by doing.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  63. Spoehr, K.T. (in press). Enhancing the acquisition of conceptual structures through hypermedia. In K. McGilly (Ed.),Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice.Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books.Google Scholar
  64. Spoehr, K.T., & Shapiro, A. (1991, April).Learning from hypermedia: Making sense of a multiply linked database.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  65. Starfield, A. M., Smith, K. A., & Bleloch, A. L. (1990).How to model it:Problem solving for the computer age. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  66. Tennyson, R.D. & Christensen, D.L. (1991). Automating instructional systems development.Proceedings of selected research presentations at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology.(ERIC Document No. ED 335018) Google Scholar
  67. Trollip, S., Lippert, R., Starfield, A., & Smith, K. A. (1992). Building knowledge bases: An environment for making cognitive connections. In P. Kommers, D.H. Jonassen, & T. Mayes (Eds.),Cognitive tools for learning. (pp. 105–124). Heidelberg FRG: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  68. Verderber, N.L. (1990). Spreadsheets and problem solving with AppleWorks in mathematics teaching.Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 9 (3), 45–51.Google Scholar
  69. Vockell, E. & van Deusen, R.M. (1989).The computer and higher-order thinking skills. Watsonville, CA: Mitchell Publishing.Google Scholar
  70. Watkins, W. & Taylor, M. (1989). A spreadsheet in the mathematics classroom.Collegiate Microcomputer, 7(3), 233–239.Google Scholar
  71. Watson, J., & Strudler, N. (1988–89). Teaching higher order thinking skills with databases.Computing Teacher, 16(4), 47–50,55.Google Scholar
  72. Whitmer, J.C. (1990, October). Modeling the Milky Way.The Science Teacher,19–21.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Adult EducationPennsylvania State UniversityUniversity Park

Personalised recommendations