Alternative perspectives on the transfer of learning: History, issues, and challenges for future research

Journal of the Learning Sciences

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 431-449

  Lobato, Joanne ^a  

^a SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33751502795     PISSN: 10508406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15327809jls1504_1     Document Type: Review

References (88)

1. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 167-207.
2. Anderson, J. R., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (1996). Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 5-11.
3. Barnett, S., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 612-637.
4. Beach, K., Hundersmarck, S., & Vassallo, S. (2003, April). Consequential transitions: A sociocultural approach to the generalization of knowledge and identity. In K. Beach (Chair), Sociocultural, semiotic, situative, and activity theoretic alternatives to the transfer metaphor: New understandings of how knowledge generalizes. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
5. Beach, K. D. (1995). Activity as a mediator of sociocultural change and individual development: The case of school-work transition in Nepal. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 2(4), 285-302.
6. Beach, K. D. (1999). Consequential transitions: A sociocultural expedition beyond transfer in education. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 101-140). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
7. Beach, K. D. (2003). Consequential transitions: A developmental view of knowledge propagation through social organizations. In T. Tuomi-Gröhn & Y. Engeström, (Eds.), Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary-crossing (pp. 39-62). Oxford, United Kingdom: Elsevier Science.
8. Bereiter, C. (1995). A dispositional view of transfer. In A. McKeough, J. Lupart, & A. Marini (Eds.), Teaching for transfer: Fostering generalization in learning (pp. 21-34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). Learning and transfer. In How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (pp. 31-78). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
10. Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 61-100). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
11. Brown, J. S., Collins. A., & Duguid. P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher. 18, 32-42.
12. Butterfield, E. C., & Nelson. G. D. (1991). Promoting positive transfer of different types. Cognition and Instruction. 8(1), 69-102.
13. Campione, J. C., Shapiro, A. M., & Brown, A. L. (1995). Forms of transfer in a community of learners: Flexible learning and understanding. In A. McKeough, J. Lupart, & A. Marini (Eds.). Teaching for transfer: Fostering generalization in learning (pp. 35-69). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
14. Carraher, D., & Schliemann, A. D. (2002). The transfer dilemma. The Journal of the Learning Sciences. II, 1-24.
15. Cassirer, E. (1953). Substance and function and Einstein's theory of relativity (W. C. Swabey & M. C. Swabey, Trans.). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1923)
16. Chen, Z., & Daehler, M. W. (2000). External and internal instantiation of abstract information facilitates transfer in insight problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25. 423-449.
17. Cobb, P. (2003, April). Discussant comments for the symposium. In K. Beach (Chair), Sociocultural, semiotic, situative, and activity theoretic alternatives to the transfer metaphor: New understandings of how knowledge generalizes. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
18. Cobb, P. (2004, April). Exploring the construct of collective abstraction. In J. Lobato (Chair). Rethinking abstraction and decontextualization in relationship to the "transfer dilemma." Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
19. Cobb, P., & Bowers, J. (1999). Cognitive and situated learning perspectives in theory and practice. Educational Researcher. 28(2). 4-15.
20. Cox, B. D. (1997). The rediscovery of the active learner in adaptive contexts: A developmental-historical analysis of transfer of training. Educational Psychologist. 32(1), 41-55.
21. De Corte, E. (1999). On the road to transfer: An introduction. International Journal of Educational Research. 31, 555-559.
22. Detterman, D. K. (1993). The case for the prosecution: Transfer as an epiphenomenon. In D. K. Detterman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 1-24). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
23. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
24. diSessa, A. A., & Wagner, J. F. (2005). What coordination has to say about transfer. In J. P. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 121-154). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
25. Ellis, A. B., & Lobato, J. (2004, April). Using the construct of "focusing phenomena" to explore links between attentional processes and "transfer" in mathematics classrooms. In J. Lobato (Chair). Attentionol processes, salience, and "transfer" of learning: Perspectives from neuroscience, cognitive science, and mathematics education. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
26. Engle, R., & Greeno, J. (2003, April). Framing interactions to foster productive learning. In K. Beach (Chair), Sociocultural, semiotic, situative, and activity theoretic alternatives to the transfer metaphor: New understandings of how knowledge generalizes. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
27. Evans, J. (1998). Problems of transfer of classroom mathematical knowledge to practical situations. In F. Seeger, J. Voigt, & U. Waschescio (Eds.), The culture of the mathematics classroom (pp. 269-289). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
28. Fortus, D., Krajcik, J., Dershimer, R. C., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2005). Design-based science and real-world problem-solving. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 855-879.
29. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Prentice, K., Burch, M., Hamlett, C. L., Owen, R., et al. (2003). Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on third-grade students' mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 293-305.
30. Gee, J. P., & Green, J. L (1998). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: A methodological study. Review of Research in Education, 23, 119-169.
31. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 393-408.
32. Greeno, J. G. (1997). Response: On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 5-17.
33. Greeno, J. G., Smith, D. R., & Moore, J. L. (1993). Transfer of situated learning. In D. K. Detterman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 99-167). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
34. Gruber, H., Law, L., Mandl, H., & Renkl, A. (1996). Situated learning and transfer. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 168-188). Oxford, United Kingdom: Pergamon.
35. Guberman, S., & Greenfield, P. M. (1991). Learning and transfer in everyday cognition. Cognitive Development, 6, 233-260.
36. Hall, R. (1996). Representation as shared activity: Situated cognition and Dewey's cartography of experience. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 209-238.
37. Hatano, G., & Greeno, J. G. (1999). Commentary: Alternative perspectives on transfer and transfer studies. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 645-654.
38. Hershkowitz, R., Schwarz, B. B., & Dreyfus, T. (2001). Abstraction in context: Epistemic actions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(2), 195-222.
39. Høffding, H. (1892). Outlines of psychology (M. Lowndes, Trans.). London: Macmillan.
40. Hoyles, C., Noss, R., & Pozzi, S. (2001). Proportional reasoning in nursing practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(1), 4-27.
41. Judd, C. H. (1908). The relation of special training to general intelligence. Educational Review, 36, 28-42.
42. Katona, G. (1940). Organizing and memorizing. New York: Columbia University Press.
43. Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition. (1983). Culture and cognitive development. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. History, theory, and methods (pp. 295-356). New York: Wiley.
44. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
45. Lobato, J. (2003). How design experiments can inform a rethinking of transfer and vice versa. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 17-20.
46. Lobato, J. (2004a, April). Abstraction, situativity, and the "actor-oriented transfer" perspective. In J. Lobato (Chair), Rethinking abstraction and decontextualization in relationship to the "transfer dilemma. "Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
47. Lobato, J. (2004b). An international working conference: Addressing the transfer dilemma. Proposal REC- 0450208 funded by the National Science Foundation.
48. Lobato, J. (2005, August). Attention-focusing and the "transfer" of learning. In J. Emanuelsson & M. F. Pang (Chairs), Contrasting different perspectives on the object of learners' attention. An invited symposium of the Special Interest Group on Phenomenography and Variation Theory conducted at the 11th Biennial Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Nicosia, Cyprus.
49. Lobato, J. (in press-a). When students don't apply the knowledge you think they have, rethink your assumptions about transfer. In C. Rasmussen & M. Carlson (Eds.), Making the connection: Re starch and teaching in undergraduate mathematics. Washington. DC: Mathematical Association of America.
50. Lobato, J. ( in press-b). Research methods for alternative approaches to transfer: Implications for design experiments. In A. E. Kelly & R. Lesh (Eds.), Design research in education. Mahwah. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Inc.
51. Lobato, J., & Ellis, A. B. (2002a). An analysis of the teacher's role in supporting students' connections between realistic situations and conventional symbol systems. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 14(2), 99-120.
52. Lobato, J., & Ellis, A. B. (2002b). The focusing effect of technology: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(2), 297-314.
53. Lobato, J., Ellis, A. B., & Muñoz, R. (2003). How "focusing phenomena" in the instructional environment afford students' generalizations. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(1), 1-36.
54. Lobato, J., & Siebert, D. (2002). Quantitative reasoning in a reconceived view of transfer. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21(1), 87-116.
55. Marini, A., & Genereux, R. (1995). The challenge of teaching for transfer. In A. McKeough, J. Lupart, & A. Marini (Eds.), Teaching for transfer: Fostering generalization in learning (pp. 1-20). Mahwah. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
56. Maxwell, J. (2004). Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific inquiry in education. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 3-11.
57. Mayer, R. E. (1999). Multimedia aids to problem-solving transfer. International Journal of Educational Research. 31, 611-623.
58. Mestre, J. (2003). Transfer of learning: Issues and research agenda: Report of a workshop held at the National Science Foundation, Retrieved September 25, 2006, from http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2003/nsf03212/nsf03212.pdf
59. Mestre, J. (Ed.). (2005). Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
60. Nemirovsky, R. (2004). "I also remember": On the centrality of perceptual activity in the re-encounter of past experiences. In J. Lobato (Chair), Rethinking abstraction and decontextualization in relationship to the "transfer dilemma. " Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
61. Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on mathematical meanings: Learning cultures and computers. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
62. Novick, L. R. (1988). Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(3), 510-520.
63. Packer, M. (2001). The problem of transfer, and the sociocultural critique of schooling. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10, 493-514.
64. Pea, R. (1989). Socializing the knowledge transfer problems (Report No. IRL89-0009). Palo Alto, CA: Institute for Research on Learning.
65. Perkins, D. N., & Salomon. G.(1988). Teaching for transfer. Educational Leadership, 46(1), 22-32.
66. Piaget, J. (1980). Adaptation and intelligence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
67. Piaget, J. (2001). Studies in reflecting abstraction (R. L. Campbell, Trans.). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis. (Original work published 1977)
68. Rebello, S., Zollman, D., Albaugh, A. R., Engelhardt, P. B., Gray, K. E., Hrepic, Z., et al. (2005). Dynamic transfer: A perspective from physics education research. J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 217-250). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
69. Reed, S. K. (1993). A schema-based theory of transfer. In D. K. Detterman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 39-67). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
70. Reed, S. K., Ernst, G. W., & Banerji, R. (1974). The role of analogy in transfer between similar problem states. Cognitive Psychologyy, 6, 436-450.
71. Reeves, L. M., & Weisberg, R. W. (1994). The role of content and abstract information in analogical transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115(3), 381-400.
72. Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 573-605.
73. Royer, J. M., Mestre, J. P., & Dufresne, R. J. (2005). Introduction: Framing the transfer problem. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. vii-xxvi). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
74. Saxe, G. (1989). Transfer of learning across cultural practices. Cognition and Instruction, 6(4), 325-330.
75. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1999). Looking toward the 21 st century: Challenges of educational theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(1), 4-14.
76. Schwartz, D. L., Bransford, J. D., & Sears, D. (2005). Efficiency and innovation in transfer. In J. P. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 1-52). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
77. Schwartz, D. L., & Martin, T. (2004). Inventing to prepare for future learning: The hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistics instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 129-184.
78. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4-13.
79. Singley, M. K., & Anderson, J. R. (1989). The transfer of cognitive skill. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
80. Sternberg, R. J., & Frensch, P. A. (1993). Mechanisms of transfer. In D. K. Detterman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 25-38). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
81. Thorndike, E. L. (1906). Principles of teaching. New York: Seiler.
82. Tuomi-Gröhn, T., & Engeström, Y., (2003). Conceptualizing transfer: From standard notions to developmental perspectives. In T. Tuomi-Gröhn & Y. Engeström, (Eds.), Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary-crossing (pp. 19-38). New York: Pergamon.
83. van Oers, B. (1998). The fallacy of decontextualization. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5(2), 135-142.
84. van Oers, B. (2004, April). The recontextualization of inscriptions: An activity-theoretical approach to the transferability of abstractions. In J. Lobato (Chair), Rethinking abstraction and decontextualization in relationship to the "transfer dilemma." Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
85. Wagner, J. F. (2006). Transfer in pieces. Cognition and Instruction, 24(1), 1-71.
86. Wertheimer, M. (1959). Productive thinking. New York: Harper & Row. (Original work published 1945)
87. Wertsch, J. V. (2000). Voices of collective remembering. New York: Cambridge University Press.
88. Whitson, J. (2003, April). Thinking, learning, knowing, doing, and becoming: Semiotic and pragmatic bases for an alternative to "transfer." In K. Beach (Chair), Sociocultural, semiotic, situative, and activity theoretic alternatives to the transfer metaphor: New understandings of how knowledge generalizes. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.