Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T01:40:22.900Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Applications of Cognitive Developmental Theory and Data to Educational Psychology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2015

Graeme S. Halford
Graeme S. Halford*
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
*
Department of Psychology, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, 4067.
Get access

Extract

Recent developments in Cognitive Psychology and in the new discipline of Cognitive Science (an integration of Cognitive Psychology, Computer Science, Linguistics, Philosophy of Mind, and Cognitive Neuroscience) have made it appropriate to consider new ways in which Cognitive Development and Educational Psychology can benefit each other. Cognitive Development can contribute to Educational Psychology by specifying cognitive processes entailed in educationally relevant tasks, by analysing processing loads, and by indicating more efficient ways of using available capacity. Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Science have now produced some penetrating theories of the cognitive processes that underlie a wide variety of intellectual activities. Although there is still much work remaining to be done, these developments can be used to analyse the strategies children and adults use in solving problems in areas such as mathematics and science. This can result in benefits in both learning and remediation. Educational Psychology can benefit Cognitive Development by offering alternativeconcepts, by providing realistic problems for analysis, and by providing a testing ground for its theories. I will illustrate these ideas in the area of mathematics.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Educational and Developmental Psychologist , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , May 1991 , pp. 7 - 8
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Psychological Society 1991

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

REFERENCES

Collis, K.F. (1978). Implications of the Piagetian model for mathematics teaching. In Keats, J.A., Collis, K.F., & Halford, G.S. (Eds.), Cognitive development: Research based on a Neo-Piagetian approach. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155–170.Google Scholar
Halford, G.S. (in preparation). Children’s understanding: The development of mental models. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halford, G.S. and Boulton-Lewis, G.M. (1991). Value and limitations of analogs in teaching mathematics. In Demetriou, A., Efkliades, A., & Shayer, M. (Eds.), Modern theories of cognitive development go to school. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar