Classroom-based Experiments in Productive Failure

Expanding the Space of Cognitive Science - Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2011

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 2812-2817

  Kapur, Manu ^a   Bielaczyc, Katerine ^a  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

TEACHING;

CRITICAL FEATURES; EFFECTIVE APPROACHES; NOVEL CONCEPT; QUANTITATIVE INDICES;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84969183300     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. Brown, A., & Campione, J. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229–270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Farr, M. J. (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
3. diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (2000). Meta-representation: An introduction. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19(4), 385–398.
4. Hardiman, P., Pollatsek, A., & Weil, A. (1986). Learning to understand the balance beam. Cognition and Instruction, 3, 1–30.
5. Kapur, M. (2008). Productive failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 379-424.
6. Kapur, M. (2009). Productive failure in mathematical problem solving. Instructional Science, 38(6), 523-550.
7. nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2727-2732). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
8. Kapur, M. (2010a). A further study of productive failure in mathematical problem solving: Unpacking the design components. Instructional Science. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-010-9144-3
9. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
10. Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science, 15(10), 661–667.
11. Roll, I. (2009). Structured invention activities to prepare students for future learning: Means, mechanisms, and cognitive processes. Thesis, Pittsburgh, PA.
12. Schmidt, R. A., & Bjork, R. A. (1992). New conceptualizations of practice: Common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychological Science, 3(4), 207-217.
13. Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475-522.
14. 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.
15. Strand-Cary, M., & Klahr, D. (2008). Developing elementary science skills: Instructional effectiveness and path independence. Cognitive Development, 23(4), 488-511.
16. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285.
17. Tuovinen, J. E., & Sweller, J. (1999). A comparison of cognitive load associated with discovery learning and worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 334–341.