Alternative Cognitive Devices and the Lack of
Development of Higher Order Thinking Skills
Western Oregon University
November 12, 2009
by Robert E. Mahoney
Developmentally
Appropriate
Technology
Acquisition
Verbal
Math
Background
• High School Students unable to
perform simple tasks
• Excessive misuse of homophones
2
120
0
2
12
There, They’re, and Their
You’re and Your
Even non-homophones such as
Then and Than
Reports from Others
• Decline in SAT scores
• Is Google Making Us Stupid ?
• Employers noting lack of skills
– United States (Cocodia, et al, 2003)
– Britain (Phillips, 2007)
• 35% of college teachers note lack of
readiness (Bauerlein, 2008)
Indicators of Decline in Achievement
Government Documents
• Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literacy
Reading in America (Bradshaw & Nichols, 2004)
• National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP)
Indicators of Decline in Achievement
Out with the Old, In with the New?
• Educational Testing Service
– Information & Communications Technology Skills test
Persuasive
Presentations
Searches
Relevant
12%
Effective,
40%
Ineffective,
60%
Irrelevant
88%
The New Standard
Question arises
• What is so different in the last 20 years?
Alternative Cognitive Devices
What is happening?
Alternative Cognitive Devices
• The user “outsources” the cognitive task
– Calculators
– Spell-Check
– Predictive Spelling
Alternative Cognitive Devices
Flynn Effect
Technology
& Cognition
Phenotypic
and
Genotypic
Intelligence
Flynn Effect
• James R. Flynn
• Rise in intelligence
test scores over time
• Requires re-norming
Flynn Effect
Gains in IQ
Ancestor Paradox
Flynn Effect
Ancestor Paradox
• Ancestor’s IQ
• Functioned in society
• Societal Change
– From Concrete to
Abstract
IQ
IQ
Flynn Effect
IQ
Gains in IQ
• 3 Percentage points per decade
(average)
• Occurred until 1990s when it stopped
or reversed in many developed
countries (Teasdale & Owen, 2005)
• Why?
Flynn Effect
Why are any Changes Significant?
50
• Education
Mentally
• Legal System
45
40
Impaired 35
– Executions Classification
(Kanaya, et al,30 2003)
25
– Walker vs. True
per 1000 20
• Social Securitystudents, 15
1947-1999 10
(Flynn)
5
0
1: 23
Post Re-norm
Flynn Effect
1: 213
Pre Re-norm
Commonly Cited Reasons for the
Flynn Effect
•
•
•
•
•
Genetics insufficient to account for change
Change in Body size/Brain size (Storfer,1999)
More liberal attitude (Brand, 1987)
Nutrition
Technological changes
Flynn Effect
Technology & Cognition
• Historically linked
– Switch from oral to written
• Negative and positive consequences
• Rewriting neural networks (Small, 2008)
Technology & Cognition
Declarative vs. Procedural
Knowledge
• What if one lacks the neural network?
• What if one lacks the declarative
knowledge?
• Procedural knowledge specifies how to
bring declarative knowledge to bear in
problem solving (Anderson, 1997)
• Over-reliance on the technology
Technology & Cognition
Declarative vs. Procedural
Knowledge
x2
+
11x
+ 28
7+4
7 · 4
(x + 7) (x + 4)
Technology & Cognition
Genotypic vs. Phenotypic
Intelligence
Genotypic Intelligence
• Phenotypic
Intelligence
– Attributable
genetic causes
That which istoexhibited
• Genetics and the overlay
of environmental factors
Intelligence – Genes & Environment
Genotypic vs. Phenotypic
Intelligence
– Based upon birth rate
differential
• Caused by a societal
imbalance
– Lack of equal access
to contraceptives and
reproductive choices
Fertility Rate
(Number of Children per Family)
• Genotypic Intelligence
Decline
Fertility Rate by IQ
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
81
111
IQ Score
Intelligence – Genes & Environment
Genotypic vs. Phenotypic
Intelligence
Flynn Effect
Genotypic Intelligence
Environmental
factors no
longer
contribute to
IQ gains
Phenotypic Intelligence caused by the
overlay of environmental factors
raises IQ
Intelligence – Genes & Environment
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
Are we at the juncture wherein
technology now interferes as an
environmental factor thereby
reducing measures of intelligence,
knowledge, and learning?
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
•
•
•
•
•
•
Denmark (Teasdale & Owen, 2005)
Norway (Sundet, et al, 2004)
Sweden (Emmanuelsson, et al, 1993)
Britain (Ginsburg & Coe, 2007; Shayer, 2008)
Australia (Cotton, 2005)
Not reversing in developing countries
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
United States
• SAT Scores
• Decline in Textbook Difficulty (Hayes, et al., 1996)
• National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP)
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
NAEP Math Scores, 17-year-olds
Note the lack of
significant
progress
since 1992
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
NAEP 1999 Math Test Data
MATH
SKILL
Allowed
Calculators
(Percent
Correct)
Not Allowed
Calculators
(Percent
Correct)
Addition
87.0
78.4
Subtraction
89.2
59.7
Multiplication
87.9
42.5
Division
77.1
48.3
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
What Conclusion?
• It is erroneous to conclude that calculators
are beneficial to understanding math
• Students only show the computational
proficiency with an assistive device
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
Reversal of the Flynn Effect
Conclusion
Alternative Cognitive Devices are likely
significant environmental factors in
the reduction of measures of
intelligence, knowledge, and learning
Additional Research
• The need for additional research in this
area exists
– Societal significance
• Likely source for additional research would
be developing countries
– Alternative Cognitive Devices not as prevalent
Discussion
Do you believe that
technology is
resulting in a
reduction of higher
order thinking skills?
Open Discussion
Developmentally
Appropriate
Technology
Acquisition
Is this concept key to
incorporating technology
into education?
Open Discussion
Open Discussion
Open Discussion
Open Discussion