Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T22:30:55.163Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Cognitive Apprenticeship

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Allan Collins
Edited by
R. Keith Sawyer
Allan Collins
Affiliation:
Northwestern University
R. Keith Sawyer
Affiliation:
Washington University, St Louis
Get access

Summary

Throughout most of history, teaching and learning have been based on apprenticeship. Children learned how to speak, grow crops, construct furniture, and make clothes. But they didn't go to school to learn these things; instead, adults in their family and in their communities showed them how, and helped them do it. Even in modern societies, we learn some important things through apprenticeship: we learn our first language from our families, employees learn critical job skills in the first months of a new job, and scientists learn how to conduct world-class research by working side-by-side with senior scientists as part of their doctoral training. But for most other kinds of knowledge, schooling has replaced apprenticeship. The number of students pursuing an education has dramatically increased in the last two centuries, and it gradually became impossible to use apprenticeship on the large scale of modern schools. Apprenticeship requires a very small teacher-to-learner ratio, and this is not realistic in the large educational systems of modern industrial economies.

Even in modern societies, when someone has the resources and a strong desire to learn, they often hire a coach or tutor to teach them by apprenticeship – demonstrating that apprenticeship continues to be more effective even in modern societies. If there were some way to tap into the power of apprenticeship, without incurring the large costs associated with hiring a teacher for every two or three students, it could be a powerful way to improve schools.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences , pp. 47 - 60
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aronson, E. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999) Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. In Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.): Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 269–292). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bransford, J. D., Franks, J. J., Vye, N. J., & Sherwood, R. D. (1989). New approaches to instruction: Because wisdom can't be told. In Vosniadou, S. & Ortony, A. (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 470–497). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A., & Campione, J. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In Schauble, L. & Glaser, R. (Eds.) Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 289–325). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burton, R., Brown, J. S., & Fischer, G. (1984). Skiing as a model of instruction. In Rogoff, B. and Lave, J. (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its developmental and social context (pp. 139–150). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-Explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobb, P., & Bauersfeld, H. (Eds.) (1995). The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1997). The Jasper Project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Collins, A., & Brown, J. S. (1988). The computer as a tool for learning through reflection. In Mandl, H. and Lesgold, A. (Eds.), Learning issues for intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 1–18). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing, and mathematics. In Resnick, L. B. (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Collins, A., Hawkins, J., & Carver, S. M. (1991). A cognitive apprenticeship for disadvantaged students. In Means, B., Chelemer, C. & Knapp, M. S. (Eds.) Teaching advanced skills to at-risk students. (pp. 216–243). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Collins, A., & Smith, E. E. (1982). Teaching the process of reading comprehension. In Detterman, D. K. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), How much and how can intelligence be increased? (pp. 173–185). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Collins, A., & Stevens, A. L. (1983). A cognitive theory of interactive teaching. In Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview (pp. 247–278). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Cuban, L. (1984). How teachers taught. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Davis, E. A., & Miyake, N. (Eds.) (2004). Special issue: Scaffolding. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 265–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, H. (1991) Assessment in context: The alternative to standardized testing. In Gifford, B. & O'Connor, C. (Eds.), Future assessments: Changing views of aptitude, achievement, and instruction (pp. 77–120). Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1991) Sharing cognition through collective comprehension activity. In: Resnick, L., Levin, J., & Teasley, S. D. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 331–348). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolodner, J. L., Crismond, D., Fasse, B. B., Gray, J. T., Holbrook, J., Ryan, M., & Puntambekar, S. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting a Learning-by-Design curriculum into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lampert, M., Rittenhouse, P., & Crumbaugh, C. (1996). Agreeing to disagree: Developing sociable mathematical discourse. In Olson, D. & Torrance, N. (Eds.), Handbook of education and human development (pp. 731–764). Oxford: Blackwell's Press.Google Scholar
Lave, J. (1988). The culture of acquisition and the practice of understanding (Report No. IRL88-0007). Palo Alto, CA: Institute for Research on Learning.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (1979). The hidden costs of reward. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Norman, D. A. (1973). Memory, knowledge, and the answering of questions. In Solso, R. L. (Ed.), Contemporary issues in cognitive psychology: The Loyola symposium (pp. 135–165). Washington, DC: Winston.Google Scholar
Nowakowski, A., Campbell, R., Monson, D.Montgomery, J., Moffett, C., Acovelli, M., Schank, R., & Collins, A. (1994). Goal-based scenarios: A new approach to professional education. Educational Technology, 34(9), 3–32.Google Scholar
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175.Google Scholar
Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., Kyza, E., Edelson, D., & Soloway, E. (2004). A scaffolding design framework fo software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 345–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Steinbach, R. (1984). Teachability of reflective processes in written composition. Cognitive Science, 8, 173–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schank, R. C., Fano, A., Bell, B., & Jona, M. (1994) The design of goal-based scenarios. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(4), 305–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Smith, F. (1988). Joining the literacy club. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental processes. (Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S., & Souberman, E., Eds.) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, B. Y. (1984). Designing computer games to help physics students understand Newton's laws of motion. Cognition and Instruction, 1(1), 69–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Cognitive Apprenticeship
  • Edited by R. Keith Sawyer, Washington University, St Louis
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences
  • Online publication: 05 June 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816833.005
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Cognitive Apprenticeship
  • Edited by R. Keith Sawyer, Washington University, St Louis
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences
  • Online publication: 05 June 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816833.005
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Cognitive Apprenticeship
  • Edited by R. Keith Sawyer, Washington University, St Louis
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences
  • Online publication: 05 June 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816833.005
Available formats
×