A transfer-in-pieces consideration of the perception of structure in the transfer of learning

Journal of the Learning Sciences

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 443-479

  Wagner, Joseph F ^a  

^a XAVIER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78049430039     PISSN: 10508406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2010.505138     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Anderson, J. R., & Lebiere, C. (1998). The atomic components of thought. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Beach, K. (1999). Consequential transitions: A sociocultural expedition beyond transfer in education. Review of Research in Education, 24, 101-139.
3. Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61-100.
4. Brown, A. L. (1990). Domain-specific principles affect learning and transfer in children. Cognitive Science, 14, 107-133.
5. Carraher, D., & Schliemann, A. D. (2002). The transfer dilemma. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 1-24.
6. Chalmers, D., French, R., & Hofstadter, D. (1992). High-level perception, representation, and analogy: A critique of artificial-intelligence methodology. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 4(3), 185-211.
7. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
8. 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.
9. diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 105-225.
10. diSessa, A. A. (2004). Contextuality and coordination in conceptual change. In E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the international school of physics "Enrico Fermi": Course CLVI (pp. 137-156). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: ISO Press/Italian Physical Society.
11. diSessa, A. A. (2008, June). How to observe knowledge. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
12. diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (1998). What changes in conceptual change? International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1155-1191.
13. 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.
14. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Evans, J. (1998). Problems of transfer of classroom mathematical knowledge to practical situations. In. F. Seeter, J. Voigt, & U. Waschescio (Eds.), The culture of the mathematics classroom (pp. 269-289). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
16. Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., & Law, K. (1995). MAC/FAC: A model of similarity-based retrieval. Cognitive Science, 19(2), 141-205.
17. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Finelli, R., Courey, S. J., & Hamlett, C. L. (2004). Expanding schema-based transfer instruction to help third graders solve real-life mathematical problems. American Educational Research Journal, 41, 419-445.
18. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Prentice, K., Burch, M., Hamlett, C., Owen, R.,... Jancek, D. (2003). Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on third-grade students' mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 293-305.
19. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
20. Gentner, D., & Loewenstein, J. (2002). Relational language and relational thought. In J. Byrnes & E. Amsel (Eds.), Language, literacy, and cognitive development: The development and consequences of symbolic communication (pp. 87-120). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52, 45-56.
22. Gentner, D., Rattermann, M. J., & Forbus, K. D. (1993). The roles of similarity in transfer: Separating retrievability from inferential soundness. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 524-575.
23. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306-355.
24. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15,1-38.
25. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1987). The cognitive basis of knowledge transfer. In S. M. Cormier & J. D. Hagman (Eds.), Transfer of learning: Contemporary research and applications (pp. 9-46). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
26. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
27. 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.
28. Greer, B. (1992). Multiplication and division as models of situations. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 65-97). New York, NY: Macmillan.
29. Hall, R. P. (1996). Representation as shared activity: Situated cognition and Dewey's cartography of experience. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 209-238.
30. Hershkowitz, R., Schwarz, B. B., & Dreyfus, T. (2001). Abstraction in context: Epistemic actions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 195-222.
31. Judd, C. M. (1908). The relation of special training to general intelligence. Educational Review, 36, 28-42.
32. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgement of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430-434.
33. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). On the study of statistical intuitions. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 493-508). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
34. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
35. Lobato, J. (2003). How design experiments can inform a rethinking of transfer and vice versa. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 17-20.
36. Lobato, J. (2006). Alternative perspectives on the transfer of learning: History, issues, and challenges for future research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 431-449.
37. Lobato, J. (2008a). Research methods for alternative approaches to transfer: Implications for design experiments. In A. E. Kelly, R. A. Lesh, & J. Y. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of design research methods in education: Innovations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics learning and teaching (pp. 167-194). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
38. Lobato, J. (2008b). When students don't apply the knowledge you think they have, rethink your as-sumptions about transfer. In M. Carlson & C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Making the connection: Research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics (pp. 289-304). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
39. Lobato, J., & Siebert, D. (2002). Quantitative reasoning in a reconceived view of transfer. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21(1), 87-116.
40. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. Packer, M. (2001). The problem of transfer, and the sociocultural critique of schooling. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10, 493-514.
42. Pea, R. D. (1988). Putting knowledge to use. In R. S. Nickerson & P. P. Zodhiates (Eds.), Technology in education: Looking toward 2020 (pp. 169-212). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
43. Piaget, J. (1954). The construction of reality in the child (M. Cook, Trans.). New York, NY: Basic Books. (Original work published 1937)
44. Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology (E. Duckworth, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
45. Piaget, J. (2001). Studies in reflecting abstraction (R. L. Campbell, Trans.). Hove, England: Psychology Press. (Original work published 1977)
46. Reed, S. K. (1987). A structure-mapping model for word problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 124-139.
47. 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.
48. Reeves, L. M., & Weisberg, R. W. (1994). The role of content and abstract information in analogical transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 381-400.
49. Salvucci, D. D., & Anderson, J. R. (1998). Analogy. In J. R. Anderson, C. Lebiere, D. Bothell, M. D. Byrne, M. Lovett, M. Matessa,... C. D. Schunn (Eds.), The atomic components of thought (pp. 343-383). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
50. Schoenfeld, A. H., Smith, J., & Arcavi, A. (1993). Learning: The microgenetic analysis of one student's evolving understanding of a complex subject matter domain. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 55-175). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
51. Simon, M. A., Tzur, R., Heinz, K., & Kinzel, M. (2004). Explicating a mechanism for conceptual learning: Elaborating the construct of reflective abstraction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35, 305-329.
52. Singley, M. K., & Anderson, J. R. (1989). The transfer of cognitive skill. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
53. Steffe, L. P. (1991). The constructivist teaching experiment: Illustrations and implications. In E. von Glasersfeld (Ed.), Radical constructivism in mathematics education (pp. 177-194). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
54. Steffe, L. P., & D'Ambrosio, B. S. (1995). Toward a working model of constructivist teaching: A reaction to Simon. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 146-159.
55. Steffe, L. P., & Wiegel, H. G. (1994). Cognitive play and mathematical learning in computer microworlds. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26(1), 111-134.
56. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
57. Taatgen, N. A., Huss, D., Dickison, D., & Anderson, J. R. (2008). The acquisition of robust and flexible cognitive skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 548-565.
58. Thorndike, E. L., & Woodworth, R. S. (1901a). The influence of improvement in one mental function upon the efficiency of other functions: II. The estimation of magnitudes. Psychological Review, 8, 384-395.
59. Thorndike, E. L., & Woodworth, R. S. (1901b). The influence of improvement in one mental function upon the efficiency of other functions: III. Functions involving attention, observation and discrimination. Psychological Review, 8, 553-564.
60. 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). Oxford, England: Pergamon.
61. von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London, England: Falmer.
62. von Glasersfeld, E. (2005). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 3-7). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
63. Wagner, J. F. (2006). Transfer in pieces. Cognition and Instruction, 24, 1-71.
64. Well, A. D., Pollatsek, A., & Boyce, S. J. (1990). Understanding the effects of sample size on the variability of the mean. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47, 289-312.
65. Wertheimer, M. (1945). Productive thinking. New York, NY: Harper & Row.