Uses of cognitive science to science education

Abstract

The paper looks for common ground between cognitive science and science education starting from historical roots. Topics critically scrutinized are: representation of knowledge with applications of the schema and frame concept to physics education centering around the hierarchical structure of knowledge, the qualitative-quantitative distinction, the declarative-procedural distinction, and the semantic-episodic distinction; the uses of network versus production system representations, stressing the distinction between outward and inward representation which is often neglected; a short discussion of the likewise often forgotten index and reference issue.

The paper has been presented to the ATEE Symposium on ‘Implications of Cognitive Science for the Education of Science Teachers’ IPN (Kiel) 29.–30.08.1985.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Anderson, J.R.: 1980, Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications, H. Freeman, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson, J.R., Kline, P.J. & Beasley, Jr., C.M.: 1980, ‘Complex Learning Processes’, in R.E. Snow, P.A. Federico and W.E. Montague (eds.), Aptitude, Learning and Instruction, Vol.2, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 199–251.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Barnes, B.: 1983, ‘On the Conventional Character of Knowledge and Cognition’, in K.D. Knorr-Cetina and M. Mulkay (eds.), Science Observed. Perspectives on the Social Study of Science, Sage Publ., London, 19–51.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Beth, E.W. & Piaget, J.: 1966, Mathematical Epistomology and Psychology, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bromberger, S.: 1963, ‘A Theory about the Theory of Theory and about the Theory of Theories’, in B. Baumrin (ed.), Philosophy of Science: The Delaware Seminar, Vol. 2, 1962–63, Interscience Book Publ., New York, 79–105.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brown, A.L.: 1978, ‘Knowing When, Where, and How to Remember: A Problem in Metacognition’, in R. Glaser (ed.), Advances in Instructional Psychology, Vol. 1, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 77–165.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brown, A.L. & DeLoache, J.S.: 1978, ‘Skills, Plans and Self-Regulation’, in R.S. Siegler (ed.), Children's Thinking: What Develops? Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 77–165.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Buck, G.: 1969, Lernen und Erfahrung, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Buchler, J. (ed.): 1940, The Philosophy of Peirce. Selected Writings, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chi, M.I., Glaser, R., & Reese, E.: 1982, ‘Expertise in Problem Solving’, in R.J. Sternberg (ed.), Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, Vol. 1, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 7–76.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Clark, E.V.: 1973, ‘What's in a Word: On the Child's Acquisition of Semantics in His First Language’ in T.E. Moore (ed.), Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language, Academic Press, New York, 65–110.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Collins, H.M. & Pinch, T.J.: 1982, Frames of Meaning. The Social Construction of Extraordinary Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Deutsch, M.: 1981, ‘Imagery and Inference in Physical Research’, in R.D. Tweney, M.E. Doherty, and C.R. Mynatt (eds.), On Scientific Thinking, Columbia University Press, New York, 354–360.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Diesterweg, F.A.W.: 1850, Wegweiser zur Bildung für deutsche Lehrer, Bädecker, Essen.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gadamer, H.G.: 1960, Wahrheit und Methode. Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik, C.H. Mohr, Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gentner, D.: 1975, ‘Evidence for the Psychological Reality of Semantic Components’, in D.A. Norman and D.E. Rumelhart (eds.), Explorations in Cognition, Freeman, San Francisco, 211–246.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Glaser, R.: 1980, ‘General Discussion: Relationships Between Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction’, in R.E. Snow, P.A. Federico, and W.E. Montague (eds.), Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction, Vol. 2, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 309–326.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Goffman, E.: 1974, Frame Analysis, An Essay on the Organisation of Experiences, Harper and Row, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Greeno, J.G.: 1980, ‘Some Examples of Cognitive Task Analysis with Instructional Implications’, in R.E. Snow, P.A. Federico, and W.E. Montague (eds.), Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction, Vol. 2, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Greeno, J.G.: 1976, ‘Cognitive Objectives of Instruction: Theory of Knowledge for Solving Problems and Answering Questions’, in D. Klahr (ed.), Cognition and Instruction, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 123–159.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hacking, I.: 1983, Representing and Intervening. Introductory topics in the philosophy of Natural science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hartshorne, C. & Weiss, P. (eds.): 1932, The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Vol. 2, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hartshorne, C. & Weiss, P. (eds.): 1933, The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Vol. 3–4, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hays, J.R. & Simon, H.A.: 1977, ‘Psychological Differences among Problem Isomorphs’, in N.J. Castellan, D.B. Pisoni, and G.R. Potts (eds.), Cognitive Theory, Vol. 2, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 21–41.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Heisenberg, W.: 1959, Physik und Philosophie, Ullstein, Frankfurt a.M.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hesse, M.: 1974, The Structure of Scientific Inference, MacMillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hesse, M.: 1970, ‘Is There an Independent Observation Language?’, in R.G. Colodny (ed.), The Nature and Function of Scientific Theories. Essays in Contemporary Science and Philosophy, University of Pittburgh Press, Pittsburgh, 35–77.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hesse, M.: 1965, ‘The Explanatory Function of Metaphor’, in Y. Bar-Hillel (ed.), Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, North Holland Publ, Amsterdam, 249–259.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hohlwein, K.: 1980, Empirische Untersuchungen über Schülervorstellungen in der Mechanik, Wissenschaftliche Examensarbeit, Frankfurt a.M., (unveröffentlicht).

  30. Johnson-Laird, P.N.: 1981, ‘Mental Models in Cognitive Science’, in D.A. Norman (ed.), Perspectives on Cognitive Science, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, and Ablex Publ., Norwood, New Jersey, 1981, 147–191.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Johnson-Laird, P.N. & Wason, P.C. (eds.): 1977, Thinking, Readings in Cognitive Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Jung, W.: 1985a, Untersuchungen zur elementaren Optik. Schriftliche Erhebungen und Interviews, Forschungsbericht, Frankfurt a.M.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Jung, W.: 1985b, Versuche mit der Methode des ‘lauten Denkens’ bei physikalischen Problemen, Forschungsbericht, Frankfurt a.M.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Jung, W.: 1985c, ‘Elementary Electricity: an Epistemoligical Look at Some Empirical Results’, in R. Duit, W. Jung and C. v. Rhöneck (eds.), Aspects of Understanding Electricity, Schmidt and Klaunig, Kiel (IPN), 235–245.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Jung, W. & Wiesner, H.: 1985, ‘Unterricht in Quantenmechanik — Anspruch und Realität’, in Physica didactica 12, 3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Jung, W.: 1983a, Anstöße, Ein Essay über die Didaktik der Physik und ihre Probleme, Diesterweg Verlag, Frankfurt a.M.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Jung, W.: 1981, ‘Allgemeine Ergebnisse von Erhebungen über Schülervorstellungen zur Mechanik’, in W. Jung, H. Wiesner and P. Engelhardt, Vorstellungen von Schülern über Begriffe der Newtonschen Mechanik — Empirische Untersuchungen und Ansätze zu didaktisch-methodischen Folgerungen, B. Franzbecker, Bad Salzdetfurth, 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Jung, W.: 1981a, ‘Erhebungen zu Schülervorstellungen in Optik’. (Sekundarstufe I), in physica didactica 8, 137–155.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Klahr, D.: 1981, ‘Informationsverarbeitungsmodelle der Denkentwicklung’, in R.W. Kluwe and H. Spada (eds.), Studien zur Denkentwicklung, Huber, Bern, 231–289 (English edition: Developmental Models of Thinking, Academic Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kogan, N.: 1980, ‘A Cognitive-Style Approach to Metaphoric Thinking’, in R.E. Snow, P.A. Federico and W.E. Mantague (eds.), Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction, Vol. 1, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 247–281.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Krause, F. & Reiners-Logothetidou, A.: 1981, Kenntnisse und Fähigkeiten naturwissenschaftlich orientierter Studienanfänger in Physik und Mathematik, Universität Bonn.

  42. Kuhn, T.S.: 1981, ‘Metaphor in Science’, in A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 409–419.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M.: 1981, ‘The Metaphorical Structure of the Human Conceptual System’, in D.A. Norman (ed.), Perspectives in Cognitive Science, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, and Ablex Publ., Norwood (NJ), 193–206.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Larkin, J.H.: 1983, ‘The Role of Problem Representation in Physics’, in D. Gentner and A.L. Gentner (eds.), Mental Models, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 75–98.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Larkin, J.H.: 1981, ‘Enriching Formal Knowledge: A Model for Learning to Solve Textbook Physics Problems’, in J.R. Anderson (ed.), Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 311–333.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Larkin, J. H., McDermott, L., Simon, D.P. & Simon, H.A.: 1980, ‘Expert and Novice Performance in Solving Physics Problems’, in Science (June), 208, 1335–1342.

    Google Scholar 

  47. LaRosa, C., Mayer, M., Patrizi, P., & Vicentini, M.: 1984, ‘Common Sense Knowledge in Optics: Results of an Investigation into the Properties of Light’, in European Journal of Science Education 6(4), 387–398.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Maichle, U.: 1985, Wissen, Verstehen und Problemlösen im Bereich der Physik, P. Lang, Frankfurt a.M.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Miller, A.I.: 1981, ‘Visualizability as a Criterion for Scientific Acceptability’, in R.D. Tweney, M.E. Doherty, and C.R. Mynatt (eds.), On Scientific Thinking, Columbia University Press, New York, 383–395.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Minsky, M.: 1983, ‘Jokes and the Cognitive Unconscious. Topics With Instructional Requirements’, in R. Groner, M. Groner and W.F. Bischof (eds.), Methods of Heuristic, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 171–193.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Minsky, M.: 1977, ‘Frame-System Theory’, in P.N. Johnson-Laird and P.C. Wason (eds.), Thinking, Readings in Cognitive Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 355–376.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Montague, W.E.: 1980, ‘Discussion: Coordinating Research Topics With Instructional Requirements’, R.E. Snow, P.A. Federico, and W.E. Montague (eds.), Aptitude, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 2, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 303–307.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Nelson, K.: 1977, ‘Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Concepts’, in J.R. Anderson, R.J. Spiro, and W.E. Montague (eds.), Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 215–253.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Norman, D. A. (ed.): 1981, Perspectives on Cognitive Science, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, and Ablex Publ., Norwood, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Norman, D.A.: 1980, ‘What Goes on in the Mind of the Learner’ in New Directions For Teaching And Learning, No. 2, Jossey-Bass Inc., San Francisco, 37–49.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Norman, D.A.: 1980a, ‘Discussion: Teaching, Learning, and the Representation of Knowledge’, in R.E. Snow, P.A. Federico, and W.E. Montague (eds.), Aptitude, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 2, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 237–243.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Pascual-Leone, J.: 1981, ‘Probleme und Methoden des konstruktiven Denkens’ in R.H. Kluwe and H. Spada (eds.), Studien zur Denkentwicklung, Huber, Bern, 443–501.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Petrie, H.G.: 1979, ‘Metaphor and Learning’, in A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 438–461.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Putnam, H.: 1973, ‘Explanation and Reference’ in G. Pearce and P. Maynard (eds.), Conceptual Change, Reidel, Dordrecht, 199–221.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Reif, F.: 1981, ‘Teaching Problem Solving: A Scientific Approach’ in The Physics Teacher, 19(May), 310–316.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Resnick, L.B.: 1983, ‘Mathematics and Science Learning: A New Conception’, in Science 220, 477–478.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Rigney, J.W.: 1980, ‘Cognitive Learning Strategies and Dualities in Information Processing’, in R.E. Snow, P.A. Federico, W.E. Montague (eds.), Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction, Vol. 1, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hilsdale, 315–343.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Rogers, E.M.: 1966, Physics for the Inquiring Mind, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Rumelhart, D.E. & Norman, D.A.: 1981, ‘Analogical Processes in Learning’ J.R. Anderson (ed.), Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hilldale, 335–359.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Scriven, M.: 1963, ‘Limits of Physical Explanation’, in B. Baumrin (ed.), Philosophy of Science: The Delaware Seminar, Vol. 2, 1962–63, Interscience Book Publ., New York, 107–135.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Simon, D.P. & Simon, H.A.: 1978, ‘Individual Differences in Solving Physics Problems’ in R.S. Siegler (ed.), Children's Thinking: What Develops? Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 325–348.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Simon, H.A.: 1977, Models of Discovery and Other Topics in the Methods of Science, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Simon, H.A. & Hayes, J.R.: 1976, ‘The Understanding Process: Problem Isomorphs’, in Cognitive Psychology 8, 165–190.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Székely, L.: 1976, Denkverlauf, Einsamkeit und Angst. Experimentelle und psychoanalytische Untersuchungen über das kreative Denken, Huber, Bern.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Schank, R.C.: 1981, ‘Language and Memory’, in D.A. Norman (ed.), Perspectives on Cognitive Science, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 105–146.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Schank, R.C. & Abelson, R.P.: 1977, Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Strnad, J.: 1985, ‘Qualitative und quantitative Gesichtspunkte im Physikunterricht’, in Physica Didactica 13, 45–50.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Wagenschein, M.: 1962, Die pädagogische Dimension der Physik, Westermann, Braunschweig.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Wagenschein, M.: 1968, Verstehen lehren, Beltz, Weinheim.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Whitehead, A.N.: 1920, The Concept of Nature, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (Reprint 1955).

    Google Scholar 

  76. Whitehead, A.N.: 1929, Process and Reality, An Essay in Cosmology, MacMillan, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Whitehead, A.N.: 1929a, The Aims of Education and Other Essays, MacMillan, New York. Quoted from the Mentor Book edition 1949.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Whitehead, A.N.: 1933, Adventures of Ideas, MacMillan, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Whitehead, A.N.: 1948, Essays in Science and Philosophy, Philosophical Library, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Winograd, T.: 1981, ‘What Does It Mean to Understand Language?’ in D.A. Norman (ed.), Perspectives on Cognitive Science, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 231–263.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Winograd, T.: 1975, ‘Frame Representations and The Declarative-Procedural Controversy’, in D.G. Bobrow and A. Collins (eds.), Representation and Understanding, Academic Press, New York, 185–210.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Ziman, J.: 1978, Reliable Knowledge. An Exploration of the Grounds for Belief in Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Ziman, J.: 1968, Public Knowledge. An Essay Concerning the Social Dimension of Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jung, W. Uses of cognitive science to science education. Sci Educ 2, 31–56 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00486660

Download citation

Keywords

  • Production System
  • System Representation
  • Science Education
  • Hierarchical Structure
  • Science Teacher