Advertisement

Investigating Knowledge of Chemistry Through a Study of Language

  • Roger Maskill

Abstract

The idea that what an individual already knows governs what he can be taught is self-evident.

Keywords

Adjacency Matrix Educational Psychology Instructional Material Cognitive Structure Content Structure 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dangerfield, A.S., 1977, An investigation of whether specifically written materials can influence Cognitive Structure. Unpublished M.Sc dissertation, University of East Anglia.Google Scholar
  2. Deese J., 1965, The Structure of Associations in Language and Thought. Baltimore, Johns Hopkings Press.Google Scholar
  3. Garskoff B.E. and Housten J.P. 1963, Measurement of verbal relatedness an idiographic approach. Psychological Review, 70, 277–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Harary F., Norman R.Z., and Cartwright D., 1965, Structural Models New York, John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  5. Johnson C.J., 1976, The Investigation of Cognitive Structure by Directed Graph Analysis of Essay Material. Unpublished M. Sc. dissertation, University of East Anglia.Google Scholar
  6. Johnson P.E., 1964, Associative Meaning of Concepts in Physics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 55, 84–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Johnson P.E., 1967, Word relatedness and Problem Solving in High School Physics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 58 75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kintsch W., 1974, The Representation of Meaning in Memory. Hillsdale N.J., Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Maskill R. and Pareira D. 1980, Cognitive Structure from digraph analysis of language. In “Cognitive Development in Science and Mathematics” W. F. Archenhald, R.H. Driver, A. Orton and C. Wood-Robinson (Eds.), Leeds, University of Leeds Printing Service.Google Scholar
  10. Miller G.A., 1969, A Psychological Method to investigate verbal concepts. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 6, 169–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Miller K.M. 1970. Free Association responses of English and Australian students to 100 words from the Kent-Rosanoff Word Association test. In “Norms of Word Association” L. Postman and G. Keppel (Eds.), New York.Google Scholar
  12. Neisser V. 1967, Cognitive Psychology, New York, Appleton.Google Scholar
  13. Preece P.F.W., 1976, Associative structure of Science concepts. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 174–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rapoport A., 1967, A comparison of two tree construction methods for obtaining proximity measures among words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Behaviour, 6, 884–890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Shavelson R.J., and Geeslin W.E., 1975, A Method for examining subject structure in instructional material, Journal of Structural Learning, 4, 199–218.Google Scholar
  16. Shavelson R.J., 1972, Some Aspects of the correspondence between content structure and cognitive structure in Physics Instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 225–234.Google Scholar
  17. Skinner B.F., 1953, Science and Human Behaviour, New York, Mac Millan.Google Scholar
  18. Thompson J.J. 1974, Approaches to the teaching of Integrated Science at the Secondary level, Studies in Science Education, 1, 23–27.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roger Maskill
    • 1
  1. 1.University of East AngliaNorwichUK

Personalised recommendations