EDUC 55 EDUCATION 55 APPLYING COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY TO EDUCATION FALL 2016 General Information Professor: Sean Kang, Ph.D. Class Meeting Times: (2) MWF 2:10–3:15pm [email protected] X‐hour: Thu 1:20–2:10pm Class Meeting Location: Kemeny 108 Tel: (603) 646‐9051 Office Hours: Mon & Wed 3:30–5:00pm www.dartmouth.edu/~cogedlab Office: Raven 210 Course Description This course will explore the cognitive processes that underlie learning in educational contexts. We will examine: (i) how the mind encodes, stores, and retrieves knowledge, (ii) how learners monitor and regulate their learning, and (iii) how expertise is acquired. We will also delve into the scientific literature to evaluate the effectiveness of various study/instructional strategies, and compare the research findings against our own intuitions (i.e., how we learn best may not correspond to how we think we learn best). We will consider the implications of cognitive science research for enhancing educational practice. Course Goals The goals of the course for each student are to (i) understand human learning and memory from an information processing perspective; (ii) recognise that how we think we learn best may not match how we actually learn best; (iii) develop skills for reading and analysing scientific journal articles; (iv) integrate the research findings and identify existing gaps in the literature; and (v) appreciate the practical implications of cognitive research for optimising instruction and learning. Required Readings All the readings for this course are articles from scientific journals, and the PDFs have been posted on Canvas via electronic reserves. Class Format Class meetings will include discussions, lectures, and student presentations. You are expected to be present, and you will be responsible for all class material. X‐periods will sometimes be used during this course, so please ensure you are available during those times. Your performance will be evaluated by 2 exams (midterm and final), a term paper (+ in‐class presentation), and your participation in class. Methods of Assessment 1. Participation (13%) There is ample evidence that active participation during the learning process leads to better retention than passive, receptive learning. To promote active learning and an enjoyable, interactive classroom environment, class participation is encouraged and the quality of your comments, questions, and responses will count towards your participation grade in the course. To help you prepare to participate in class, you will be expected to (i) Page 1 of 8 EDUC 55 complete the readings before each day of class, and (ii) post at least 1 comment on Canvas about each reading/paper by 12 noon the day of class (for days when there is just 1 assigned paper, post 2 comments about the reading). Comments can include questions, critiques of the methodology or logic of the authors, suggestions about follow‐up research, and how the findings relate to your own experience as a student/learner. 2. Student Interest Paper (20% Written; 5% Class Presentation) It is impossible to cover all topics related to cognition and learning/education in ~9 weeks, and hence it is likely that there are some topics that are missing from the class schedule that you wish could be tackled in class. The term paper gives you the opportunity to pursue one of those topics in depth. You are to choose a topic relevant to cognition and learning/education that is not listed in the schedule (or you may choose a topic that is listed, as long as you delve into an aspect that is not directly covered by the assigned readings) and write a position paper. You should cite at least 6 references from peer‐reviewed journals (excluding assigned readings), and your paper should be 6 to 8 pages in length. You may discuss/brainstorm potential topics with your classmates. However, the research (i.e., finding relevant journal articles) and writing has to be individual work. If you are unsure whether your topic of choice is appropriate, please check with me. The paper is due on November 4 (Friday) at the start of class. You will also give a brief presentation (~10 min) on the topic of your paper on November 7 or 9. For your paper, please use 12‐point Times New Roman font, double‐spacing, and print margins that are 1‐inch on all sides (this is not the default in Microsoft Word, so make sure to change the settings). Also, please number all your pages and staple them together before turning the paper in. For citations in your papers, you must adhere to APA style (refer to the APA Publication Manual or online guides, e.g., http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/). Papers will be graded on content and style, so please proofread carefully. 3. Leading Class Discussion (10%) Research has shown that the expectancy of having to teach or explain the material to someone else can improve learning ‐‐ a topic that we will cover in Week 8! To aid in your learning of the material, as well as foster good public presentation skills, you will get to lead the discussion of the readings on 2 different days of class (a sign‐up sheet will be circulated in Week 1). As the discussion leader, it is recommended that you prepare (i) a summary of each reading/study, and (ii) a list of questions/comments to spur discussion. You may use PowerPoint slides to facilitate your presentation/discussion. 4. Midterm and Final Exams (25% each) The exams will consist of short essay questions. The midterm exam will be on October 7 (Friday) in class, and the final exam will be on November 14 (Friday) in class. Please mark your calendars now to ensure that you are able to take the exams as scheduled. 5. Research participation (2%) The goal of this assignment is to provide you with a firsthand perspective of participating in a research study. Volunteer to participate in one or more research studies conducted by any research lab in the Education Department, totalling two hours of participation (e.g., one 2‐hour study or two 1‐hour studies). Specific instructions on how to sign up for a research study are posted on Canvas. To get credit, you must hand in a signed Page 2 of 8 EDUC 55 EDUC55 Participant Confirmation Form (one signed copy for each study in which you participate) to me in class on or before the last day of class (November 14). A copy of the form is posted on Canvas. If you are unable to participate or uninterested in participating in a research study, you may write two 1‐page critiques of the methods employed in two published research articles. First, locate two empirical articles that were not assigned for this course. Then, for each study, you will write approximately half a page (double‐spaced, 12pt font) describing aspects of the study procedure that you think the researchers could improve upon without sacrificing the scientific integrity of the study. Be sure to explain why this change is relevant to the authors’ conclusions and/or to how the authors expect the results will generalise to other individuals or other situations that were not directly tested. Lastly, on the remainder of the page, briefly describe a research question that builds on the current study but that is not fully addressed by the current study. In other words, given the results of the current study, what is the next question you would like the researchers to address? Briefly outline the new methods that the researchers could use to address this question. Hand in your critique to me in class on or before the last day of class (November 14). Attach a copy of the first page of the empirical article (including the abstract). You are welcome to combine these two options (i.e., participate in one 1‐hr study and write a critique of one published study). Late Policy Papers that are submitted after the deadline (start of class on the due date) will have 1 point deducted from the score for each day that it is late (e.g., if the paper earns 17 points, you will end up with 16 points if you submit it on the due date but after the start of class). Special Accommodations 1. Students with disabilities Students with disabilities enrolled in this course and who may need disability‐related accommodations are encouraged to see me privately as early as possible in the term. Students requiring disability‐related accommodations must register with the Student Accessibility Services (SAS) office. Once SAS has authorized accommodations, students must show the originally signed SAS Services and Consent Form and/or a letter on SAS letterhead to me. As a first step, if students have questions about whether they qualify to receive accommodations, they should contact the SAS office. All inquiries and discussions about accommodations will remain confidential. 2. Religious observances Some students may wish to take part in religious observances that occur during this academic term. Should you have a religious observance that conflicts with your participation in the course, please meet with me before the end of the second week of the term to discuss appropriate accommodations. Academic Honour Principle You are expected to familiarise yourself with and uphold all aspects of the Academic Honour Principle. See http://www.dartmouth.edu/judicialaffairs/honor/students.html for the official statement. You may not receive or provide assistance on any quiz or exam. Anything turned in with your name on it must be solely your own work, and submitted only for this class. Plagiarism is the submission or presentation of work, in any form, that is not your own, Page 3 of 8 EDUC 55 without acknowledgment of the source. You must cite all sources according to the formal APA guidelines. I take the Academic Honour Principle seriously and expect you to do the same. Final Note on How to Excel in this Course I want you to do well in this class. Therefore, there are multiple chances for assessment. Please use these opportunities as an incentive to keep up with the class material. Once you have completed reading this syllabus carefully, please email me a picture of your favourite animal. You are encouraged to engage in active reading of the assigned articles. The purpose of the lectures is to explain, demonstrate, and amplify the core content. There will be some overlap between the readings and the lectures, but there will be a substantial amount of material that is unique to each. Your understanding of each lecture will be best if you have done the assigned readings before each class. Also, come to class ready to discuss the readings, so that your classmates and I can gain from your insights. If youS find yourself not understanding the assigned readings and lectures, please set up an appointment with me or drop by during my office hours. Page 4 of 8 EDUC 55 COURSE SCHEDULE Note: Readings are to be completed by the indicated class date. The schedule is subject to change. All articles are available through Canvas. WEEK 1 DATE Sep 12 TOPIC Introduction & Course Syllabus Sep 14 Short‐term / Working Memory Sep 15 X‐period Sep 16 Attention 2 Sep 19 Long‐term Memory Sep 21 Elaborative Encoding Sep 22 Sep 23 X‐period Mnemonics READING / ASSIGNMENT
1. Mayer, R. E. (1992). Cognition and instruction: Their historic meeting within educational psychology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 405–412. 2. Roediger, H. L. (2013). Applying cognitive psychology to education: Translational educational science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14, 1–3. 1. Gathercole, S. E., Pickering, S. J., Knight, C., & Stegmann, Z. (2004). Working memory skills and educational attainment: Evidence from National Curriculum assessments at 7 and 14 years of age. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 40, 1–16. 2. Ganley, C. M., Vasilyeva, M., & Dulaney, A. (2014). Spatial ability mediates the gender difference in middle school students' science performance. Child Development, 85, 1419–1432. Primer on research methods & how to read a scientific journal article 1. Pashler, H., Kang, S. H. K., & Ip, R. (2013). Does multitasking impair studying? Depends on timing. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 593–599. 2. Perham, N., & Currie, H. (2014). Does listening to preferred music improve reading comprehension performance? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 279–284. 3. Kirschner, P. A., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2008). Cognitive load theory. In E. M. Anderman & L. H. Anderman (Eds.), Psychology of classroom learning: An encyclopedia (pp. 205–208). Macmillan Reference USA. 1. Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684. 2. Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519–533. 1. DeWinstanley, P. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2004). Processing strategies and the generation effect: Implications for making a better reader. Memory & Cognition, 32, 945–955. 2. Pressley, M., Symons, S., McDaniel, M. A., Snyder, B. L., & Turnure, J. E. (1988). Elaborative interrogation facilitates acquisition of confusing facts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 268–278. ‐‐
1. Putnam, A. L. (2015). Mnemonics in education: Current research and applications. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 1, 130–139. 2. Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2003). Promoting higher‐order learning benefits by building lower‐order mnemonic connections. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 563‐575. Page 5 of 8 EDUC 55 3 Sep 26 Prior Knowledge Sep 28 Expertise Sep 29 Sep 30 X‐period Transfer 4 Oct 3 Retention / Forgetting Oct 5 Desirable Difficulty During Training Oct 6 Oct 7 5 Oct 10 X‐period Midterm Exam Retrieval Practice Oct 12 Oct 13 Oct 14 1. Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1567–1577. 2. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 23‐31. 1. Ericsson, K. A., & Towne, T. J. (2010). Expertise. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1, 404–416. 2. Macnamara, B. N., Hambrick, D. Z., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). Deliberate practice and performance in music, games, sports, education, and professions a meta‐analysis. Psychological Science, 25(8), 1608‐1618. ‐‐
1. Day, S. B., & Goldstone, R. L. (2012). The import of knowledge export: Connecting findings and theories of transfer of learning. Educational Psychologist, 47, 153–176. 1. Conway, M. A., Cohen, G., & Stanhope, N. (1991). On the very long‐term retention of knowledge acquired through formal education: Twelve years of cognitive psychology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 395–409. 2. Bahrick, H. P., & Hall, L. K. (1991). Lifetime maintenance of high school mathematics content. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 20–33. 1. Hall, K. G., Domingues, D. A., & Cavazos, R. (1994). Contextual interference effects with skilled baseball players. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 78, 835–841. 2. Bjork, R. A. (1994a). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe and A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp.185–205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ‐‐ 1. Larsen, D. P., Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2009). Repeated testing improves long‐term retention relative to repeated study: A randomized controlled trial. Medical Education, 43, 1174–
1181. 2. Kang, S. H. K., & Pashler, H. (2014). Is the benefit of retrieval practice modulated by motivation? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3, 183–188. Feedback 1. Pashler, H., Cepeda, N. J., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2005). When does feedback facilitate learning of words? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 3–8. 2. Finn, B., & Metcalfe, J. (2010). Scaffolding feedback to maximize long‐term error correction. Memory & Cognition, 38, 951–961. X‐period Lunch with Pooja Agarwal, Ph.D. (tomorrow’s guest speaker) Guest Speaker Pooja Agarwal, Ph.D., an education consultant and former K‐12 teacher, will speak about her research on how cognitive science principles can benefit learning in the classroom. http://www.poojaagarwal.com/ Page 6 of 8 EDUC 55 6 Oct 17 Oct 19 Oct 20 Oct 21 7 Oct 24 Oct 26 8 Oct 27 Oct 28 Oct 31 Nov 2 Test‐
Potentiated Learning 1. Richland, L. E., Kornell, N., & Kao, L. S. (2009). The pretesting effect: Do unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15, 243–257. 2. Wissman, K. T., Rawson, K. A., & Pyc, M. A. (2011). The interim test effect: Testing prior material can facilitate the learning of new material. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 1140–1147. Distributed 1. Cepeda, N. J., Vul, E., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., & Pashler, H. Practice (2008). Spacing effects in learning a temporal ridgeline of optimal retention. Psychological Science, 19, 1095–1102. 2. Gluckman, M., Vlach, H. A., & Sandhofer, C. M. (2014). Spacing simultaneously promotes multiple forms of learning in children's science curriculum. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 266–273. X‐period ‐‐
Interleaving 1. Kang, S. H. K., & Pashler, H. (2012). Learning painting styles: Spacing is advantageous when it promotes discriminative contrast. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 97–103. 2. Rohrer, D., Dedrick, R. F., & Burgess, K. (2014). The benefit of interleaved mathematics practice is not limited to superficially similar kinds of problems. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1323–1330. Metacognition 1. Kornell, N., Rhodes, M. G., Castel, A. D., & Tauber, S. K. (2011). The ease‐of‐processing heuristic and the stability bias: Dissociating memory, memory beliefs, and memory judgments. Psychological Science, 22, 787–794. 2. Carpenter, S. K., Mickes, L., Rahman, S., & Fernandez, C. (2016). The Effect of Instructor Fluency on Students’ Perceptions of Instructors, Confidence in Learning, and Actual Learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22, 161–172. Self‐Regulated 1. Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy Learning of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66–73. 2. McCabe, J. (2011). Metacognitive awareness of learning strategies in undergraduates. Memory & Cognition, 39, 462–476. 3. Hartwig, M. K., & Dunlosky, J. (2012). Study strategies of college students: Are self‐testing and scheduling related to achievement? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 126–134. X‐period ‐‐ NO CLASS Work on completing your term paper! Learning for 1. Nestojko, J. F., Bui, D. C., Kornell, N., & Bjork, E. L. (2014). Teaching Expecting to teach enhances learning and organization of knowledge in free recall of text passages. Memory & Cognition, 42, 1038–1048. 2. Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2014). Role of expectations and explanations in learning by teaching. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39, 75–85. 1. Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013). Laptop Issues in the multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and Classroom nearby peers. Computers and Education, 62, 24–31. 2. Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The pen is (Note taking and use of mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop computers) note taking. Psychological Science, 25, 1159–1168. 3. Sep Page 7 of 8 EDUC 55 9 X‐period NO CLASS Student Presentations Nov 9 Student Presentations Nov 10 X‐period Nov 11 Wrap‐Up Day 10 Nov 14 Exam Nov 3 Nov 4 Nov 7 ‐‐
Term paper due today at 2:10pm (class start time) Each student will give a brief presentation on the topic of his/her term paper Each student will give a brief presentation on the topic of his/her term paper ‐‐ To cap off the course, we will discuss the following brief commentaries on applying cognitive psychology to education: 1. Mayer, R. E. (2012). Advances in applying the science of learning to education: An historical perspective. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 249–250. 2. Daniel, D. B. (2012). Promising principles: Translating the science of learning to educational practice. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 251–253. 3. Dunlosky, J., & Rawson, K. A. (2012). Despite their promise, there's still a lot to learn about techniques that support durable learning. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 254–256. 4. Kornell, N., Rabelo, V. C., & Klein, P. J. (2012). Tests enhance learning—Compared to what? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 257–259. 5. Pellegrino, J. W. (2012). From cognitive principles to instructional practices: The devil is often in the details. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 260–262. 6. Daniel, D. B., & Poole, D. A. (2009). Learning for life: An ecological approach to pedagogical research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 91–96. [Do you agree with any of the views expressed in the above commentaries? Be ready to discuss in class.] (in class) Page 8 of 8