« Ronald E. Rice: increasing the diversity of "credibility signals" | Woolsey: Credibility Does Persist Online, but Needs New Tools »
Wednesday 22nd November 2006 9:10 am
Deanna Kuhn: What develops?
Both children and adolescents exhibit weakness in evaluating evidence and in the metacongnitive ability to assess their own knowledge.
Within my field of developmental psychology (and its educational implications), I focus in particular on the transition years from middle childhood to adolescence and the changes in cognitive competencies and dispositions associated with this period.
One consistent finding is that although improvement occurs at this age, both children and adolescents exhibit weak skills in evidence evaluation. Specifically, they have difficulty in making firm differentiations between beliefs and evidence, tending to interpret identical belief-congruent and belief-discrepant evidence differently.
They also have weak metacognitive awareness regarding the source of their knowledge claims. Young children, for example, will report they have “always known” a new piece of information just transmitted to them.
Educational experiences are needed that will foster children’s metacognitive awareness, enabling them to become better managers of their own minds. Knowing how I know, and knowing how others might know, invokes children’s developing epistemological understanding (having to do with what it means to know something and the extent to which knowledge is linked to human minds rather than standing alone out in the world).
These developmental achievements become especially critical as children become adolescents, who have considerably greater discretion as to how they will invest their time and begin to make their own judgments about what is worth knowing.
Category: Credibility
Like this post?
- Email this page using tell-a-friend, or
- Save it with one of these social bookmarking tools:
, or - View author profile for Deanna_Kuhn.
Comments
MirandaNet
http://lpcesc07.ning.com/
Posted on July 14 2007 3:38 PM
Hi Dave,
Re Q1: “To what extent is the development of the ability to metacognize linked to the structural development of the brain, as opposed to “learning"?"
Ah yes, nature vs. nurture. They both work hand-in-hand. The frontal lobe is where metacognition takes place.
Re Q2: ģOf course, this brings about a fascinating second question - is the structural development of the brain based solely upon age (e.g., takes time to mature) or rather, based upon the repeated organization of information (through learned experience)?ī
The structural development of the brain is not based solely upon age. Many factors can influence the development of the brain such as tetrogens etc. Also, due to neuroplasticity the typically developing brain is flexible in regard to environmental stimuli (e.g. learning). Thus, new neural pathways are formed when learning something new. Each time the new learning is reinforced (e.g. practiced) the myelin shealth gets thicker. Thereby, the neurons can move faster. Hence, automaticity.
However, Iķve taught some extreme preemies whose brains were never fully developed. In public schools in the US, special education teachers can work with children with such severe needs that they may have a DNR listed in their school folders from the families. Therefore, they are quite a puzzle to try and help and teach. But I try my best. Some of these children are called ģsleeping angelsī by special education teachers because they seem to be between two worlds. Brain development is tricky when related to learning. There is still so much to learn. It will be interesting to see how brain mapping evolves with supercomputing over the next decade and how that affects education. Great questions Dave.
Take care.
Mechelle
Dave H. Crusoe
Harvard Univ. '05 & '07
Posted on July 13 2007 3:57 PM
Deanna,
I agree with your finding that “although improvement occurs at this age, both children and adolescents exhibit weak skills in evidence evaluation”, although I wonder:
To what extent is the development of the ability to metacognize linked to the structural development of the brain, as opposed to “learning”?
I base my wondering upon, for instance, the research that indicates PfC (prefrontal cortex) continues to develop into the early teen years. PfC is thought, among other things, to contribute to planning and abstract through—elements that I would implicate in metacognition.
Of course, this brings about a fascinating second question - is the structural development of the brain based solely upon age (e.g., takes time to mature) or rather, based upon the repeated organization of information (through learned experience)?
If the latter, then indeed I agree that could be possible to train children to become better “managers of their brain”.
--Dave