scholarly journals Scalable Science Education via Online Cooperative Questioning

2022 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Courtney B. Hilton ◽  
Micah B. Goldwater ◽  
Dale Hancock ◽  
Matthew Clemson ◽  
Alice Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Science Education ◽  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Conceptual Understanding ◽  
Question Answering ◽  
Peer Learning ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Learning Design ◽  
Online Technologies ◽  
How People Learn

How can the scalable powers of peer learning and online technologies be most effectively used to support conceptual understanding in science education? This paper reviews cognitive science research on how people learn via question answering and authoring and evaluates a promising novel learning design that applies these principles.

UNDERSTANDING RESEARCH PARADIGMS: TRENDS IN SCIENCE EDUCATION RESEARCH

2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 110-118
Author(s):  
Sebastian Szyjka
Keyword(s):  
Science Education ◽  
Education Research ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Science Education Research ◽  
Collective Interest ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
The Masses

This essay offers several insights regarding the principles of qualitative and quantitative methods, defining how they shape the empirical process as well as knowledge acquisition in social science research. A comprehensive discussion includes comparing the assumptions and techniques of each paradigm, as well as a description of their respective strengths and weaknesses in research. These paradigms are examined in terms of past trends in science education research, indicating that over the last several decades a shift in approach from the quantitative to qualitative has occurred. The central thesis of the essay contends that methodological decisions should be based in pragmatism, rather than a pre-existent set of philosophies or beliefs irrespective of context. Implications for research are discussed in terms of the findings of several science education content analysis studies, conveying that research methods often coincide with the collective interest of the masses, policy, educational reform or program developments. Key words: paradigm decisions, qualitative research, quantitative research, science education, trends.

Conceptualizing change in organizational cognition

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rasmus Gahrn-Andersen
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Distributed Cognition ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Organizational Cognition ◽  
Organizational Settings ◽  
Macro Domain ◽  
Task Specification ◽  
Domain Dynamics

PurposeSecchi and Cowley (2016, 2018) propose a Radical approach to Organizational Cognition (ROC) as a way of studying cognitive processes in organizations. What distinguishes ROC from the established research on Organizational Cognition is that it remains faithful to radical, anti-representationalist principles of contemporary cognitive science. However, it is imperative for proponents of ROC to legitimize their approach by considering how it differs from the established research approach of Distributed Cognition (DCog). DCog is a potential contender to ROC in that it not only counters classical approaches to cognition but also provides valuable insights into cognition in organizational settings.Design/methodology/approachThe paper adopts a conceptual/theoretical approach that expands Secchi and Cowley's introduction of ROC.FindingsThe paper shows that DCog research presupposes a task-specification requirement, which entails that cognitive tasks are well-defined. Consequently, DCog research neglects cases of organizational becoming where tasks cannot be clearly demarcated for the or are well-known to the organization. This is the case with the introduction of novel tasks or technical devices. Moreover, the paper elaborates on ROC's 3M model by linking it with insights from the literature on organizational change. Thus, it explores how organizing can be explored as an emergent phenomenon that involves micro, meso and macro domain dynamics, which are shaped by synoptic and performative changes.Originality/valueThe present paper explores new grounds for ROC by not only expanding on its core model but also showing its potential for informing organizational theory and radical cognitive science research.

scholarly journals Research Productivity and Citation Impact of Indian institutes of Science Education and Research

2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 455-462
Author(s):  
Jyotshna Sahoo ◽  
Sudam Charan Sahu ◽  
Basudev Mohanty
Keyword(s):  
Science Education ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Basic Science ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Publication Patterns ◽  
Research Outcomes ◽  
Basic Science Research ◽  
Research Publications

The paper’s main objective is to investigate the trends of basic science research in India using a combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches. It examines the publication patterns and impact of research productivity of five basic science institutions, i.e., “Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research” (IISER), namely IISER Kolkata, IISER Pune, IISER Mohali, IISER Bhopal, and IISER Thiruvananthapuram. The research output indexed in the SCOPUS bibliographic database of these five established IISERs was obtained from 2015 to 2019. A total number of 7329 research publications were analysed using various scientometric dimensions. This paper makes a concerted effort to present a comprehensive picture of the assessment of research outcomes at the five older IISERs, which are ostensibly India’s most active and prominent basic science research institutions. The findings reveal that these institutions are accountable for important research outcomes, such as a high number of citations, preferences towards open access (OA) publications, a rise in research publication year over year, a strong author network, a high degree of collaboration, and a high impact in terms of other scientometrics indicators. This paper discusses the findings of the research publications on the position of IISERs in basic sciences research and draws some conclusions about their effects.

scholarly journals A call to arms: time to do cognitive science in Latin America

2008 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernando Marmolejo-Ramos
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Cognitive Psychology ◽  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
World Region ◽  
The World ◽  
Social Organizational ◽  
Research Domains

Previous theoretical reviews about the development of Psychology in Latin America suggest that Latin American psychology has a promising future. This paper empirically checks whether that status remains justified. In so doing, the frequency of programs/research domains in three salient psychological areas is assessed in Latin America and in two other regions of the world. A chi-square statistic is used to analyse the collected data. Programs/research domains and regions of the world are the independent variables and frequency of programs/research domains per world region is the dependent variable. Results suggest that whereas in Latin America the work on Social/Organizational Psychology is moving within expected parameters, there is a rather strong focus on Clinical/Psychoanalytical Psychology. Results also show that Experimental/Cognitive Psychology is much underestimated. In Asia, however, the focus on all areas of psychology seems to be distributed within expected parameters, whereas Europe outperforms regarding Experimental/Cognitive Psychology research. Potential reasons that contribute to Latin Americas situation are discussed and specific solutions are proposed. It is concluded that the scope of Experimental/Cognitive Psychology in Latin America should be broadened into a Cognitive Science research program.

scholarly journals Exploring Students’ Descriptions of Mutation from a Cognitive Perspective Suggests How to Modify Instructional Approaches

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. ar45
Author(s):  
FangFang Zhao ◽  
Anita Schuchardt
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Conceptual Understanding ◽  
Bacterial Population ◽  
Instructional Approaches ◽  
Cognitive Perspective ◽  
Relevant Concept ◽  
Scientific Phenomena ◽  
Written Explanations

Prior studies have shown that students have difficulty understanding the role of mutation in evolution and genetics. However, little is known about unifying themes underlying students’ difficulty with mutation. In this study, we examined students’ written explanations about mutation from a cognitive science perspective. According to one cognitive perspective, scientific phenomena can be perceived as entities or processes, and the miscategorization of processes as entities can lead to noncanonical ideas about scientific phenomena that are difficult to change. Students’ incorrect categorization of processes as entities is well documented in physics but has not been studied in biology. Unlike other scientific phenomena that have been studied, the word “mutation” refers to both the process causing a change in the DNA and the entity, the altered DNA, making mutation a relevant concept for exploration and extension of this theory. In this study, we show that, even after instruction on mutation, the majority of students provided entity-focused descriptions of mutation in response to a question that prompted for a process-focused description in a lizard or a bacterial population. Students’ noncanonical ideas about mutation occurred in both entity- and process-focused descriptions. Implications for conceptual understanding and instruction are discussed.

Resituating cognitive mechanisms within heterarchical networks controlling physiology and behavior

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 620-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Bechtel
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Neural Control ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Cognitive Mechanisms ◽  
Physiological Processes ◽  
High Level ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
Production Mechanisms

Cognitive science has traditionally focused on mechanisms involved in high-level reasoning and problem-solving processes. Such mechanisms are often treated as autonomous from but controlling underlying physiological processes. I offer a different perspective on cognition which starts with the basic production mechanisms through which organisms construct and repair themselves and navigate their environments and then I develop a framework for conceptualizing how cognitive control mechanisms form a heterarchical network that regulates production mechanisms. Many of these control mechanisms perform cognitive tasks such as evaluating circumstances and making decisions. Cognitive control mechanisms are present in individual cells, but in metazoans, intracellular control is supplemented by a nervous system in which a multitude of neural control mechanisms are organized heterarchically. On this perspective, high-level cognitive mechanisms are not autonomous, but are elements in larger heterarchical networks. This has implications for future directions in cognitive science research.

Nature's subtlety undermines the empirical relevance of both dynamical and computational hypotheses

1998 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 646-647
Author(s):  
Gregory R. Mulhauser
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Science Research ◽  
The Way

Technical hitches mar van Gelder's proposed map of the conceptual landscape, particularly with respect to descriptive levels and the trio of instantiation, realisation, and implementation. However, for all the formal quibbles, van Gelder is onto something important; the tension he notes between computationalism and a dynamical alternative threatens to transform the way we conduct cognitive science research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document