Response to Phillips
- 1 June 1983
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Educational Psychologist
- Vol. 18 (2) , 75-80
- https://doi.org/10.1080/00461528309529264
Abstract
Phillips’ paper recognizes an important distinction between the structure of information in a discipline and the structure of knowledge of that information, or cognitive structure. However, Phillips contends that the discipline structure is sufficient for instruction, and ignores important issues that are addressed in the analysis of cognitive structure that are important for instruction. Phillips’ contention that inferences cannot be made about cognitive structure is fallacious. In contrast to the impression given by Phillips, the distinction between cognitive structure and the structure of a discipline involves difficult theoretical and philosophical questions about the nature of knowledge.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- On Describing a Student's Cognitive StructureEducational Psychologist, 1983
- Curvilinear Motion in the Absence of External Forces: Naïve Beliefs About the Motion of ObjectsScience, 1980
- Explicit Heuristic Training as a Variable in Problem-Solving PerformanceJournal for Research in Mathematics Education, 1979
- Arguments concerning representations for mental imagery.Psychological Review, 1978
- Diagnostic Models for Procedural Bugs in Basic Mathematical Skills*Cognitive Science, 1978
- Acquisition processes and resilience under varying testing conditions for structurally different problem-solving procedures.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974
- Acquiring cognitive structure by discovery and rule learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973
- Understanding natural languageCognitive Psychology, 1972