On the role of concepts in learning and instructional design

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 54, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 177-196

  Jonassen, David H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

Assessment; Concept learning; Conceptual change; Knowledge representation

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745555386     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-006-8253-9     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Andersen, R. C. & Pichert, J. W. (1978). Recall of previously unrecallable information following a shift in perspective. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 17,1-12
2. Besterfield-Sacre, M., Gerchak, J., Lyons, M. R., Shuman, L. J., & Wolfe, H. (2004). Scoring concept maps: An integrated rubric for assessing engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(2), 105-115.
3. Canelos, J, Taylor, W., & Altschuld, J. (1982). Networking vs. rote learning strategies in concept acquisition. Educational Communication and Technology - A Journal of Theory, Research, and Development, 30(3), 141-149.
4. Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Carrier, C., Davidson, G., & Williams, M. (1985). The selection of instructional options in a computer-based coordinate concept lesson. Educational Communication and Technology A Journal of Theory, Research, and Development, 33 (3), 199-212.
6. Chan, C., Burtis, J, & Bereiter, C. (1997). Knowledge building as a mediator of conceptual change. Cognition & Instruction, 15(1), 1-40.
7. Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993)). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science education. Review of Educational Research, 63,1-49.
8. Cooke, N. M., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1988). Effects of computer programming expert-ence on network representations of abstract programming concepts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 29,407-427.
9. Edmundson, K. M. (2000). Assessing science understanding through concept maps. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, J. D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 19-40). San Diego: Academic Press.
10. Evans, A. W., Hitt, J. M., & Jentsch, F. (2001, March). Mental model reliability. Paper presented at the APA Division 21 and 19 Mid-year Meeting, Crystal City, VA.
11. Gagné, R. M. (1966). The conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
12. Gagné, R. M. (1968). Learning hierarchies. Educational Psychologist 6,1-9.
13. Gagné, R. M. (1973) Learning and instructional sequence. In F. N. Kerlinger (Ed.) Review of Research in Education. Itasca, IL: Peacock.
14. Gagné, R. M., & Briggs, L. J., (1979). Principles of instructional design (2nd. ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
15. Gärdenfors, P. 2000. Conceptual spaces: the geometry of thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Gilbert, J., & Watts, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10,61-98.
17. Haller, H. (2004). Toolvergleich Retrieved June 5, 2004 from the University of T_bingen, Instit_t fur Wissenmedien website: http://heikohaller. de/toolvergleich/.
18. Harper, M. E., Jentsch, F. G., Berry, D. Lau, H. C., Bowers, C., Salas, E. (2003). TPLKATS-card sort: A tool for assessing structural knowledge. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers. 35(4), 577-584.
19. Hicken, S., Sullivan, H., & Klein, J. (1992). Learner control modes and incentive variations in computer-delivered instruction. Educational Technology: Research and Development, 40(4), 15-26.
20. Hogan, K., & Fisherkeller, J. (2000). Dialogue as data: Assessing students' scientific reasoning with interactive protocols. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, J. D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 96-129). San Diego: Academic Press.
21. Jonassen, D. H. (1978). Implications of multi-image for concept acquisition. Educational Communication and Technology-A Journal of Theory, Research, and Development, 27(4), 291-302.
22. Jonassen, D. H. (1986, November). Attribute identification versus example comparison strategies in an interactive videodisc concept lesson. Association for the Development of Computer-based Instructional Systems, Washington, DC.
23. Jonassen, D. H. (1987). Verifying a method for assessing cognitive structure using pattern notes. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 20(3), 1-14.
24. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as Mindtools for Schools: Engaging Critical Thinking. Columbus, OH: Prentice-Hall.
25. Jonassen, D. H. (2004). Learning to solve problems: An instructional design guide. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer/Jossey-Bass.
26. Jonassen, D. H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M. (1993). Structural knowledge: Techniques for assessing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27. Jonassen, D. H., Reeves, T. C., Hong, N., Dyer, D., & Peters, K. M. (1997). Concept mapping as cognitive learning and assessment tools. Journal of Interactive Learning Research., 8(3/4), 289-308.
28. Jonassen, D. H., Strobel, J., & Gottdenker, J. (2005). Model building for conceptual change. Interactive Learning Environments.
29. Kelly, G. A. (1963). A theory of personality: The psychology of personal constructs. New york: W. W. Norton.
30. Limon, M., & Mason, L. (2002). Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice. Amsterdam: Kluwer.
31. Liu, X. (in press). Using concept mapping for assessing and promoting relational conceptual change in science. Science Education.
32. Mazur, J. M. (2004). Conversation analysis for educational technologists: theoretical and methodological issues for researching the structures, processes and meaning of online talk. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Medin, D. L. (1989). Concepts and conceptual structure. American Psychologist, 44(12), 1469-1481.
34. Merrill, M. D. (1983). Component display theory. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Merrill, M. D. (1987). The new component design theory: Instructional design for courseware authoring. Instructional Science, 16,19-34.
36. Merrill, M. D., Reigeluth, C. M., & Faust, G. W. (1979). The instructional quality profile: Curriculum evaluation and design. In H. F. O'Neal (Ed.), Procedures for instructional systems development. New York: Academic Press.
37. Merrill, M. D., Richards, R. E., Schmidt, R. & Wood, N. D. (1977). The instructional strategy diagnostic profile training manual. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, David O. McKay Institute.
38. Merrill, M. D., Tennyson, R. D., & Posey, L. O. (1992). Teaching concepts: An instructional design guide, 2nd Ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
39. Montague, W. E. (1983). Instructional quality inventory. Performance and Instruction, 22(5), 11-14.
40. Murphy, G. L., & Medin, D. L. 1985. The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review, 92,289-316.
41. Newby, T.J., Ertmer, P.A., & Stepich, D. A. (1995). Instructional analogies and the learning of concepts. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(1), 5-18.
42. Norman, D. A., Centner, S. & Stevens, A. L. (1976). Comments on learning schemata and memory representation. In D.Klahr (Ed.), Cognition and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
43. Quillian, M. R. (1968). Semantic memory. In M. Minsky (Ed.), Semantic information processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
44. Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
45. Ross, B. H., & Spalding, T. L. (1994). Concepts and categories. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Thinking and problem solving (pp. 119-148). New York: Academic Press.
46. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Comparison of the reliability and validity of scores from two concept-mapping techniques. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2),260-278.
47. Schnotz, W., Vosniadou, S. & Carreler (1999). New perspectives in conceptual change. Amsterdam: Pergamon.
48. Schvaneveldt, R. W., Dearholt, D. W., & Durso, F. T.(1988). Graph theoretic foundations of Pathfinder networks. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 15,337-345.
49. Schvaneveldt, R. W., Durso, F. T., Goldsmith, T. E., Breen, T. J., Cooke, N. M., Tucker, R. G., & DeMaio, J. C. (1985). Measuring the structure of expertise. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 23,699-728.
50. 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.
51. Siegler, R. S. (1996). Emerging minds: The process of change in children's thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.
52. Sinatra, G. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of intentions in conceptual change learning. In G. M. Sinatra, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
53. Smith, J. P., di Sessa, A. A., Roschelle, J. (193). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of Learning Sciences, 3, 115-163.
54. Southerland, S. A., Smith, M. U., & Cummins, C. L. (2000). "What do you mean by that?": Using structured interviews to assess science understanding. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, J. D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 72-95). San Diego: Academic Press.
55. Strike, KA, & Posner, GJ (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In LHT West & AL Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change, (pp. 211-231). New York: Academic.
56. Tennyson, R. D. (1978). Pictorial support and specific instructions as design variables for children's concept and rule learning. Educational Communication and TechnologyA Journal of Theory, Research, and Development, 26 (4), 291-299.
57. Tennyson, R. D., & Buttrey, T (1980). Advisement and management strategies as design variables in computer-assisted instruction. Educational Communication and TechnologyA Journal of Theory, Research, and Development, 28 (3), 169-176.
58. Tennyson, R. D., & Cocchiarella, M. J. (1986). An empirically based instructional design theory for teaching concepts. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 40-71.
59. Tennyson, R. D., Youngers, J., & Suebsonthi, P. (1983). Acquisition of mathematical concepts by children using prototype and skill development presentation forms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75,280-291.
60. Tessmer, M., & Driscoll, M. P. (1986). Effects of diagrammatic display of coordinate concept definitions on concept classification performance. Educational Communication and Technology-A Journal of Theory, Research, and Development, 24(4), 195-205.
61. Tessmer, M., Wilson, B., & Driscoll, M. (1990). A new model of concept teaming and teaching. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 45-53.
62. Thagard, P. (1992). Conceptual revolutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
63. Thro, M. P. (1978). Individual differences among college students in cognitive structure and physics performance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto, Canada.
64. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4(1), 45-70.
65. Vosniadou, S. (1999). Conceptual change research: The state of the art and future directions In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou, & M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspectives on conceptual change (pp. 1-13). Amsterdam: Pergamon.
66. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535-585.
67. Whimby, A., & Lockhead, J. (1999). Problem solving and comprehension, 6th Ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
68. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations, 2nd Ed (Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe). London: Blackwell Publishers.