Johns Hopkins University School of Education Fundamentals of Cognitive Development ED.887.616.95

brewerobstructionAI and Robotics

Nov 7, 2013 (3 years and 9 months ago)

71 views

1


Johns Hopkins University

School of Education


Fundamentals of Cognitive Development

ED.887.616
.95


Online,
Spring 2011


Instructor
s
:


Luke Rinne




410
-
516
-
8225




lrinne@jhu.edu





Emma Gregory




410
-
516
-
8225




egregor1@jhu.edu


Credit Hours
:

3
0


Class Time
:

1/4/11



3/14/11


Course Description:

This introductory course surveys theoretical and empirical work
in the study of cognitive development. A variety of methodological a
pproaches are
addressed, with a focus on cognitive processes related to learning. The course proceeds
from behaviorist, cognitivist, and sociocultural perspectives of the early and mid
-

20
th

century to recent and ongoing research in the neuro
-

and cognitiv
e sciences. Topics
include the development of language, motivation, and intelligence, as well as the
acquisition of skills and concepts related to mathematics, reading, writing, and problem
-
solving. Implications for education are considered.



Course Objec
tives:


Students will
:


1)

Demonstrate the ability
to seek out and interpret research on cognitive
development that may have implications for educational practice and/or
curricul
a
.

2)

Demonstrate

knowledge and understanding of e
arly approaches to the study of
co
gnitive development, including behaviorism, Piaget’s stage theory, and
Vygotsky’s socio
-
cultural theory.

3)

Demonstrate

knowledge and understanding of
traditional
cognitive science
approaches to development, including information processing theory, schema
the
ory, and connectionism.

2


4)

Demonstrate

knowledge and understanding of more recently developed
approaches to the study of cognitive development

in

neurosci
ence and social
learning.

5)

Demonstrate u
nderstand
ing of

the ways in which theories and research findings
i
n cognitive development can inform educ
ational practices and curricula.

6)

Show how theories and research findings related to cognitive development can
be
used to inform

educational
practice
s and curricula

through the use of
pedagogical frameworks like the

Br
ain
-
Targeted Teaching Model.



Course Standards


Maryland Voluntary State Curriculum Content Standards, Maryland Arts Standards, and
Core Learning Goals apply to this course. Please review them through the MSDE
website:
ww
w.mdk12.org
.


Required Text and Other Materials

Byrnes
,
J
.

P.

(200
7
).
Cognitive development and learning in instructional contexts
(3
rd

Edition)
.

Boston: Allyn & Bacon
.


Additional required readings will be in the weekly
Readings

section of the courseboo
k

in
the ELC
.


Assignments


Five teams of students (4
-
5

students per team) will be formed; these teams will
collaborate on certain course assignments.


Assignment #1:
Cri
tical Analysis Assignment (
Due

Week 3
)

Students will select an article to analyze from

a list provided by the instructors.

Each
student should
r
ead
(and re
-
read)
the article carefully, and answer the questions below.
You

should present

enough information
for

someone

who had not read the article
to be
able to understand the article’s main i
deas
. The entire critique should be fewer than 5
double
-
spaced pages.

1.

What is the primary question addressed by the authors?

2.

What answer do they propose on the basis of their results?

3.

What are the main results the authors present in support of their conclu
sion?
For each result, what is the reasoning that links the result to the conclusion?

4.

How strongly do the results support the conclusion? In other words, how solid
are the evidence and the reasoning? Be sure to justify your evaluation.

3


Assignment #2: In
corporating Research into BTT (Team; Due Week
7
)

Student teams will focus on one relatively broad topic or area of research within the
study of cognitive development (e.g., development of reading skills), and work together
to find relevant research and inc
orporate it into the Brain
-
Targeted Teaching Model.
The goal of this assignment is to learn how to seek out research that is relevant to
educational practice and fit it into a pedagogical framework. Each team will create a
multimedia presentation that will

demonstrate how the research fits into the BTT

model
.
Students will also create a
n annotated bibliography of the research collected.
Each member of the team will receive the same grade. Equal participation is expected.


Assignment #3: Literature Review

(Due Week 10)

Individuals will w
rite an in
-
depth review of literature (
5
-
7

pages) on a relatively specific
topic of
the student’s

choice (e.g., preschoolers’ development of causal reasoning). The
paper should analyze and synthesize existing research and po
se questions for future
study related to the topic. The paper should include research from a minimum of 10
different sources.


Assignment #4: Individual Reflections

Throughout the course
the student will

reflect upon
his or her

learning about cognitive
development and connections to teaching and learning.
The student’s r
eflections will
be posted on
his or her

blog, at
his or her

discretion
. However, the student

must have
at least
two f
ormal reflections posted by the end of the course.


Assignment #5:
Course Engagement

(Throughout course)

The student is
expected to have an active presence in class discussions and activities.
The overall goal is to contribute to the learning of
the

collective community as well as to
the student’s

team discussions (outsid
e of formal team assignments).



Evaluation and Grading

Assignments

Points Possible

Assignment #1:

Critical Analysis

40

Assignment #2:
Incorporating Research into BTT (Team)

40

Assignment #3: Literature Review

50

Assignment #4:

Individual Reflecti
ons Log

20

Assignment #5
: Course Engagement (includes contributions to
team activities)

50

TOTAL

200


4


Late Assignments:

It is expected that assignments will be turned in on the due dates. Late assignments
will be subject to grade reductions. Extenuating

circumstances should be discussed with
the instructor
s
.


Resubmitted Assignments:

Students may resubmit assignments with a grade of B or lower. Resubmissions may
earn up to half the point differential between the original grade and the value of the
assig
nment, and should be turned in within one week after the graded assignment is
received by the student.


Grading Scale


A

= 9
3
% and above

A
-

=
88
-
9
2
%

B+

= 8
3
-
87
%

B

= 78
-
82
%

B
-

= 73
-
77
%

C+

= 69
-
72
%

C

= 64
-
6
8
%

C
-

= 60
-
6
3%

F

= below 6
0%


The grades of D+, D, and D
-

are not awarded at the graduate level.


Attendance Policy:
Students are expected to attend all classes punctually and
participate fully in all in
-
class group activities and assignments. Contact the instructor
about emergency situations or other attendance

related issues as soon as they arise,
before scheduled class sessions. Unexplained lateness/absence may lead to penalties in
the final course grade.

Course Outline


Week 1: Introduction to Theories of Cognitive Development; Early Theories:
Behaviorism, Pi
aget, Vygotsky

Week 2: Cognitive Science Theories: I
nformation
P
rocessing
T
heory
, Schema Theory,
Connectionism

Week 3: Language Acquisition

Week 4: Memory

Week 5: Problem Solving and Transfer

Week 6: Intelligence, Aptitude and Expertise

Week 7: Numerical C
ognition

Week 8: BTT Research Presentations; Social Learning and Motivation

5


Week 9: Neuroscientific Approaches

Week 10: Cognitive Science: Implications for Education


Religious Observance Accommodation Policy


Religious holidays are valid reasons to be exc
used from class. Students who must miss
a class or examination because of a religious holiday must inform the instructor as early
in the semester as possible in order to be excused from class and to make
arrangements to make up any work that is missed.


A
ttendance


Students are expected to attend all online synchronous sessions/classes punctually and
participate fully in all in
-
class group activities and assignments. Contact the instructor
about emergency situations or other attendance related issues as so
on as they arise,
before scheduled class sessions. Unexplained lateness/absence may lead to penalties in
the final course grade.


Examinations


A student who must miss an examination should notify the instructor. If the absence is
justifiable, the instruct
or may permit a deferred examination.

Statement of Academic Continuity


Please note that in the event of serious consequences arising from the H1N1 flu
pandemic and/or in other extraordinary circumstances, the School of Education may
change the normal acad
emic schedule and/or make appropriate changes to course
structure, format, and delivery. In the event such changes become necessary,
information will be posted on the School of Education web site.

Classroom Accommodations for Students with Disabilities

If you are a student with a documented disability who requires an academic
adjustment, auxiliary aid or other similar accommodations, please contact
Karen Salinas

in the Disability Services Office at
410
-
516
-
9823

or via email at
ksalinas@jhu.edu
.


Statement of Diversity and Inclusion


Johns Hopkins University is a community committed to sharing values of diversity and
inclusion in order to achieve and sustain excellence.


We believe excellence is best
promoted by bein
g a diverse group of students, faculty, and staff who are committed to
creating a climate of mutual respect that is supportive of one another’s success.


Through its curricula and clinical experiences, the
Department of Interdisciplinary
6


Studies/Division o
f Education

purposefully supports the University’s goal of diversity,
and, in particular, works tow
ard an ultimate outcome of best serving the needs of all
students in K
-
12 schools and/or the community.


Faculty and candidates are expected
to demonstrate a

commitment to diversity as it relates to planning, instruction,
management, and assessment.


IDEA Course Evaluation


Please remember to complete the IDEA course evaluation for this course. These
evaluations are an important tool in the School of Education
’s ongoing efforts to
improve instructional quality and strengthen its programs. The results of the IDEA
course evaluations are kept anonymous

your instructor will only receive aggregated
data and comments for the entire class. Typically, an email with a l
ink to the online
course evaluation form will be sent to your JHU email address approximately 85% of
the way through the course. Thereafter, you will be sent periodic email reminders until
you complete the evaluation. The deadline for completing the evalua
tion is normally
one week after the last meeting of class. Please remember to activate your JHU email
account and to check it regularly. (Please note that it is the School of Education’s policy
to send all faculty, staff, and student email communications t
o a JHU email address,
rather than to personal or alternative work email addresses.) If you are unsure how to
activate your JHU email account, if you’re having difficulty accessing the course
evaluations or you haven’t received an email reminder by the day

of the last class, or if
you have any questions in general about the IDEA course evaluation process, please
contact Rhodri Evans (410
-
516
-
0741;
idea@jhu.edu
)
.



Bibliography

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self
-
efficacy in
cognitive development and functioning.

Educational Psychologist, 28
(2), 117
-
148
.

Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn?: A
taxonomy for far transfer.

Psychological Bulletin, 128
(4), 612
-
637.

Byrnes, J. P. (2001).
Cognitive development and learning in instructional contexts

(2nd
ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Casey, B. J., Tottenham, N., Liston, C., & Durston, S. (2005). Imaging the developing
brain: What have we learned about cognitive development?

Trends in Cogni
tive
Sciences, 9
(3), 104
-
110.

Cole, M., Cole, S.R, and Lightfoot, C. (2005)
The development of children

(5
th

edition).
New York: Worth Publishing.

7


DeKeyser, R. & Larson
-
Hall, J (2005). What does the critical period really mean? In
J.
F.

Kroll

&
A.
M.B.

de Groot

(Ed
s
.),
Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic
Approaches
(
pp. 88
-
108)
.

Ne
w York: Oxford University Press
.

Derry, S. J. (1996). Cognitive schema theory in the constructivist debate.

Educational
Psychologist, 31
(3), 163.

Diamond, A., & Amso,

D. (April 2008). Contributions of neuroscience to our
understanding of cognitive development.

Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 17
, 136
-
141(6).

Durston, S., & Casey, B. J. (2006). What have we learned about cognitive development
from neuroimag
ing?

Neuropsychologia, 44
(11), 2149
-
2157.

Elman, J. L. (2005). Connectionist models of cognitive development: Where next?

Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9
(3), 111
-
117.

Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and
achievement
.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54
(1), 5
-
12.

Flavell, J. H. (1996). Piaget's legacy.

Psychological Science, 7
(4), 200
-
203.

Gardner, H., & Moran, S. (2006). The science of multiple intelligences theory: A
response to lynn waterhouse.

Educa
tional Psychologist, 41
(4), 227
-
232.

Gazzaniga, M. S., Ivry, R. B., & Mangun, G. R. (2009).
Cognitive neuroscience
:

The
biology of the mind

(3rd ed.). New York: Norton.

Geake, J. (2008). Neuromythologies in education.

Educational Research, 50
(2), 123
-
133.


Giedd, J. N., Blumenthal, J., Jeffries, N. O., Castellanos, F. X., Liu, H., Zijdenbos, A., et
al. (1999). Brain development during childhood and adolescence: A longitudinal
MRI study.

Nature Neuroscience, 2
(10), 861.

Gogtay, N., Giedd, J. N., Lusk, L.,
Hayashi, K. M., Greenstein, D., Vaituzis, A. C., et al.
(2004). Dynamic mapping of human cortical development during childhood through
early adulthood.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United
States of America, 101
(21), 8174
-
8179.

Go
pnik, A., & Tenenbaum, J.

B. (2007). Bayesian networks, B
ayesian learning and
cognitive development.

Developmental Science, 10
(3), 281
-
287.

Goswami, U., & Bryant, P. (2007). Children's cognitive development and learning.

8


Haier, R. J., & Jung, R. E. (2008
). Brain imaging studies of intelligence and creativity:
What is the picture for education?

Roeper Review, 30
(3), 171
-
179.

Hakuta, K., Bialystok, E., & Wiley, E. (2003). Critical evidence: A test of the critical
-

period hypothesis for second
-
language acqu
isition,
Psychological Science 14
(1), 31
-
38.

Halberda, J., Mazzocco, M. M. M., & Feigenson, L. (2008). Individual differences in non
-
verbal number acuity correlate with maths achievement.

Nature, 455
(7213), 665
-
668.

Hardiman, M. M. (2005; 2003).
Connectin
g brain research with effective teaching: The
brain
-
targeted teaching model

(1 Rowman & Littlefield Education ed.). Lanham,
Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Holyoak, K. J., Junn, E. N., & Billman, D. O. (1984). Development of analogical
problem
-
solvin
g skill.

Child Development, 55
(6), 2042
-
2055.

Immordino
-
Yang, M. H. (2008). The smoke around mirror neurons: Goals as
sociocultural and emotional organizers of perception and action in learning.

Mind,
Brain, and Education, 2
(2), 67
-
73.

Johnson, M. H. (20
05).
Developmental cognitive neuroscience :An introduction

(2nd
ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Johnson, M. H., & Munakata, Y. (2005). Processes of change in brain and cognitive
development.

Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9
(3), 152
-
158.

Newport, E.L., Baveli
er, D., & Neville, H.J. (2001). Critical thinking about critical
periods: Perspectives on a critical period for language acquisition. In E. Dupoux
(Ed.), Language, Brain and Cognitive Development: Essays in Honor of Jacques
Mehler. Cambridge, MA: MIT Pres
s
, 481
-
502
.

Richland, L. E., Morrison, R. G., & Holyoak, K. J. (2006). Children’s development of
analogical reasoning: Insights from scene analogy problems.

Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 94
(3), 249
-
273.

Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004).
The mirror
-
neuron system
.

Annual Review of
Neuroscience, 27
(1), 169
-
192.

Saffran, J. R., Aslin, R. N., & Newport, E. L. (1996). Statistical learning by 8
-
month
-
old
infants.

Science, 274
(5294), 1926
-
1928.

Saf
fran, J. R. (2003). Statistical language learni
ng: Mechanisms and constraints.

Current
Directions in Psychological Science (Wiley
-
Blackwell), 12
(4), 110
-
114
.

9


Schaler, J. A., & Gardner, H. (2006).
Howard Gardner under fire
:

The rebel psychologist
faces his critics
. Chicago: Open Court.

Schulz, L. E.,
Gopnik, A., & Glymour, C. (2007). Preschool children learn about causal
structure from conditional interventions.

Developmental Science, 10
(3), 322
-
332.

Simon, H. A. (1962). An information processing theory of intellectual development.

Monographs of the S
ociety for Research in Child Development, 27
(2
)
, Thought in
the Young Child: Report of a Conference on Intellective Development with
Particular Attention to the Work of Jean Piaget), 150
-
161.

Slater, A., & Muir, D. (1999).
The blackwell reader in developm
ental psychology
. Oxford
;Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.

Tenenbaum, J. B., Griffiths, T. L., & Kemp, C. (2006).

Theory
-
based B
ayesian models of
inductive learning and reasoning.

Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10
(7), 309
-
318.

Vlach, H. A., Sandhofer, C. M., & K
ornell, N. (2008). The spacing effect in children’s
memory and category induction.

Cognition, 109
(1), 163
-
167.

Vygotsky
, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978).
Mind in society
:

The development of higher
psychological processes

[Vygotsky
, L. S.]. Cambridge, Mass.: Harv
ard University
Press.

Waterhouse, L. (2006). Inadequate eviden
ce for multiple intelligences, M
ozart effect,
and emotional intelligence theories.

Educational Psychologist, 41
(4), 247
-
255.

Waterhouse, L. (2006
). Multiple intelligences, the M
ozart effect, a
nd emotional
intelligence: A critical review.

Educational Psychologist, 41
(4), 207
-
225.

Westermann, G., Sirois, S., Shultz, T. R., & Mareschal, D. (2006). Modeling
developmental cognitive neuroscience.

Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10
(5), 227
-
232.

Xu, F.
, & Tenenbaum,
J. B. (2007). Word learning as B
ayesian inference.

Psychological
Review, 114
(2), 245
-
272.