johnywrites.com

Author: kiranjohny007@gmail.com

  • Problem for Cognitive Load Theory

    Previously I have written a critical review post(Link: Constructivism vs Direct Instruction) on the article “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching BY Paul A. Kirschner, John Sweller & Richard E. Clark.

    I have also posted a Guy Claxton playlist in which Claxton questioned the core ideas over which the Neo-Traditionalist view(Cognitive-load, Direct instruction, Knowledge rich curriculum) is built-on. This includes fundamental assumptions about Computer analogy(+boxology), Evidence(evidence in health Vs education), False binaries, Contextually divorced ideas, etc.

    This post is about a 2020 article titled “A Problem for Cognitive Load Theory—the Distinctively Human Life-form”, by Professor Jan Derry of UCL. She used Philosopher Robert Brandom’s Inferentialism to directly question the representationalist world view presented by Cognitive load theory, and to some extent Constructivist thinking. “She challenges the presuppositions involved not only in arguments for guided instruction by those supporting cognitive load theory, but also in opposed pedagogic approaches involving discovery and inquiry learning”. According to her, Both approaches are in danger of presupposing what C.B. Macpherson criticised as ‘possessive individualism’—i.e. capacities, beliefs and desires viewed as possessions of an individual. As a result, they fail to pay attention to mediation and normativity, both of which are distinctive aspects of human action.

    In the Cognitive view, mind is distinct from world, and representations depict states of affairs; in the Inferential view, mind and world are not separated, and inferential connections, arising through human activity, constitute representations in the first place. Thus the role of representations has gone down one level. She adds, “the forging of the connection between word and object involves reversing the conceptual framework of much conventional pedagogical practice and placing the emphasis on bringing the learner into the inferential relations that constitute a concept prior to its acquisition.”

    For me, This is an amazing perspective to have. Since I am in a quest to explore the maximum of diversities of ideas in education and learning, what I really like to further explore is–How does inferentialism fit with ecological and enactive perspectives, which also may stress the need to have a purpose, intention, and meaning, etc.

    Video: Knowledge in education: Why philosophy matters

    (Jan Derry talks about the core themes mentioned in the paper)

    One key experiment noted in the paper

    One of the highlights of the article is the example of an experiment conducted by Martin Hughes and Margaret Donaldson, in order to put the original findings of Piaget and Inhelder’s mountain task experiment (Piaget and Inhelder, 1967) to the test(Donaldson, 1978).

    It demonstrated the importance of the purposes and intentions behind human action, which according to the author, very much relates to inferential thinking than just a representation of one mental item to another in the brain.

  • Impulsivity and entrepreneurial behavior

    Entrepreneurial behavior is often depicted as results of calculated rational action and seen to arise from a reasoned, judgement of a strategic high IQ genius . An alternative model i.e., an unreasoned, impulse-driven pathway remains to be empirically explored. A recent paper “Impulsivity and entrepreneurial behaviour: Exploring an unreasoned pathway” by Michael L Pietersen and Melodi Botha explores the impulsivity dimension of entrepreneurial behavior.

    Key Points

    1. A substantive ent-behaviors may also occur without ex-ante reasoning (Kautonen et al., 2015).
    2. Scholars have suggested that research positively linking impulsivity to EI and entrepreneurial behaviour indicates an unreasoned pathway (Hunt and Lerner, 2018; Wiklund, 2019)
    3. This paper adopt the view that while unreasoned entrepreneurial behaviour can arise from some impulsive purpose (e.g. attraction to a desirable opportunity stimulus) (Hofmann et al., 2009; Lerner et al., 2018b) an individual is less likely to consciously plan to act (i.e. form EI) while disregarding the consequences (Warshaw and Davis, 1985). Rather, such unreasoned behaviour tends to be more unconscious and non-volitional in the sense that the behaviour is not governed by effortful deliberation that taxes executive functions and requires the explicit endorsement of a goal and the means for achieving it (Evans, 2008; Hofmann et al., 2009).
    4. The paper uses Whiteside and Lynam’s (2001) four-factor model. This model identifies four heterogeneous aetiologies of ‘impulsive-like behaviours’, including, sensation seeking, lack of premeditation, lack of perseverance and urgency. (1) Sensation seeking is a proclivity for enjoying, being attracted to, and pursuing exciting, new and potentially risky experiences; (2) lack of premeditation entails limited deliberation and a disregard for the consequences of one’s actions; (3) lack of perseverance is an inability to ignore distracting stimuli and concentrate on uninteresting or tedious activities; and (4) urgency is a proclivity for experiencing intense negative affect (e.g. anxiety, fear) and acting to relieve that affect, despite the possible consequences (Whiteside and Lynam, 2001).
    5. While judgement-then-action models suggest the importance of gaining knowledge to overcome uncertainty and engage in entrepreneurial behaviour (McMullen and Shepherd, 2006), the results of the study suggest some merit to an unreasoned approach that disregards uncertainty, probabilities and issues of feasibility.
    6. Conclusion: The incorporation of an unreasoned perspective in theories of entrepreneurial behaviour has the potential to significantly advance the field, bringing it closer to the reality it seeks to explain. (Lerner et al. (2018b))

  • Social effects on performance: Mathew, Pygmalion, Galatea, and Relative Age effect

    Elaborating on his co-authored( with David J Hancock and Ashley L Adler) paper, “A proposed theoretical model to explain relative age effects in sport”, Jean Côté argues that social agents have the largest influence on relative age effects.

    According to the paper, primary agents like parents influence relative age effects through Matthew effects. Coaches influence relative age effects through Pygmalion effects and athletes influence relative age effects through Galatea effects.

    Integrating these three theories(Mathew, Pygmalion, Galatea), the authors propose a model that explains RAEs through these various social agents.

    Attached are two videos;

    1. From Jean Côté explaining the paper on RAE
    2. Short video in which Professor Anders Ericsson independently confirms Mathew effects showing example from Mozart.

    Video 1

    Uk coaching interview link

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtigClg8RAU&feature=emb_title

    Video 2

    Mozart’s father was a famous music teacher and had written one of the first books on violin instruction. He tested many pioneering training methods on Mozart and his sister, according to Professor Anders Ericsson. (HBR Article)

  • Role of Generative AI in Higher Education(video)

    Generative AI, like ChatGPT-3 from , has become really popular since its launch in November 2022. People have different opinions about how this will affect higher education. In this video moderated by Trine Jensen, experts from different places, like Chris Dede from Harvard, Frank Tsiwah from the University of Groningen, and Kate Thompson from Queensland University of Technology, talks about how Generative AI might change higher education.

  • Anthony Chemero talks about 4E and Radically embodied cognitive science(playlist)

    Anthony Chemero’s radically embodied cognitive science challenges traditional cognitive science approaches by emphasizing the importance of the body and its interaction with the environment in understanding cognition.

  • AI and Higher Education: Implications, Challenges, and Opportunities(Prof. Teruo Fujii, Prof. Pascal Fung, Prof. Manu Kapur)

    The topic of AI and Higher Education: Implications, Challenges, and Opportunities by Prof. Teruo Fujii, Prof. Pascal Fung, Prof. Manu Kapur

  • History of the scaffolding metaphor

    Interesting paper “The early history of the scaffolding metaphor: Bernstein, Luria, Vygotsky, and before”, covers a lot about the historical evolution of modern conception of scaffolding metaphor.

  • Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Human Learning(UCLA Video)

    In the world of AI, there’s a constant question looming: what does it mean to be human? As AI continues to evolve at an alarming rate, mimicking and surpassing human abilities in various domains, experts are left grappling with the very essence of human intelligence.

    In this video, Dr. Hong Jing Liu, and Dr. James Stigler, embark on a great exploration of this intricate relationship between humans and AI.

  • Ian Hacking(1936-2023)

    Ian Haking passed away on 10 May 2023. I don’t have a good grasp of his ideas but I liked one of his quotes very much. That is;

    "In my opinion, the right track in Dewey is the attempt to destroy the conception of knowledge and reality as a matter of thought and of representation". (Ian Hacking)

    He was agreeing with this idea of Dewey

    Source (Representing and Intervening; Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science’, by Ian hacking)

  • Understanding Impacts of AI on the Legal Profession (Harvard)

    In their talk titled “AI’s Impact on Law,” David Malan and Doug Lloyd from Harvard examines the role of AI, using mostly ChatGPT as an example.