Piaget - cognitive development

Discussion in 'Multiple Subject Tests' started by jello, May 10, 2005.

  1. jello

    jello Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 10, 2005

    What Is Piaget's Theory?
    A. Piaget's Theory
    1.1 What is the nature of Piaget's theory of cognitive processes?
    That children pass through predictable stages and patterns of cognitive development and at each stage they form a new way to operate and adapt to the world

    1.2 What is a schema?
    Children’s knowledge is ordered into mental structures

    1.3 What roles do assimilation and accommodation play in cognitive development?
    The process of adaptation is central to Piaget’s stages of development. Children adjust to new information about their environment in order to function more effectively. This process involves two fundamental cognitive concepts as children move from stage to stage. These two concepts are accommodation and assimilation.
    Assimilation – children incorporate new information with existing schemes in order to form a new cognitive structure. ( a preschool child calls a lion a doggie because the child only knows one type of four-legged animal.)
    Accommodation – children take existing schemes and adjust them to fit the experience.
    1.4 What did Piaget mean by equilibration?
    Children go through conflicts of disequilbration to resolution (through process of accommodation and assimilation ) new ways of thinking emerge.
    1.5 What are names and defining characteristics of Piaget's four stages of cognitive development?
    Sensorimotor stage (infant -2)
    pre-operational stage (2-7)
    concrete operational (7-11)
    formal operational (12-adult)
    1.6 How does an infant learn about the world in the sensorimotor stage?
    egocentrism, infants behavior response to immediate surroundings. Perceive their world through sensory systems.
    1.7 What happens in the preoperational stage?
    development of symbolic and imagination, around 5 ask why questions, reason intuitively and representational thought has emerged. Make errors in spoken language. Love to hear stories and songs. Independent and cooperative play becomes important. By 6 pretty good conversationalists. Learn new words everyday and language increases rapidly. Transductive reasoning – mentally connect specific experiences, whether or not there is a logical relationship. Ex. Bill was mean to sister. Sister got sick. Bill thinks he made sister sick. Child believes that thoughts will cause something to happen. Also called casual reasoning.
    1.8 What are the characteristics of the concrete operational stage?
    solve simple problems in multi demon situations. Metacognition, understand world through traial and error. Understand the difference between appearance and reality. Clear sense of seriation, transivity, reversibility, and conservation. inductive reasoning (conclusions from specific examples to make a general conclusion) – all of the balls on the playground are round. Mental schema – reasons that all balls are round. Inaccurate conclusion because footballs aren’t round.

    1.9 What did Piaget mean by operations?
    every children goes through a predictable set of stages and operations to reach cognitive development
    1.10 What are the characteristics of conservation and classification?
    conservation – that an object’s appearance can change and be the same object as basic properties stay the same
    classification – put things in order according to types
    1.11 What are the indicators of the formal operational stage?
    hypothetical thought, abstract reasoning and solve complex problems, integrate what have learned from past to solve problems
    1.12 What is hypothetical-deductive reasoning?
    what might be ideas –
    1.13 What has been the significance of Piaget's theory for adolescent education?
    He provides an alternative to behavior theorists belief that children are merely passive learners. Children actively move through operational stages. He suggests that there are orderly and predictable developmental accomplishments in children. Children can be tested at each stage to verify their level of cognitive understanding. A child’s mind must seek a state of equilibrium. At each stage a child forms new ways to operate and adapt to the world. By understanding this teachers can avoid presenting material in the classroom that is beyond child’s cognitive ability.
    1.14 What were Piaget's main contributions to understanding cognitive development?
    1.15 What are the major criticisms of Piaget's theory?
    Major criticisms is that the theory doesn’t take into account cultural background and education.
    1.16 What are the distinctions between early formal operational thought and late formal operational thought?
    1.17 What principles of Piaget's theory of cognitive development can be applied to education?
    By understanding this teachers can avoid presenting material in the classroom that is beyond child’s cognitive ability.
     
  2.  
  3. jello

    jello Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 10, 2005

    does anyone have any examples of assimilation and accomodation -- didn't really get the difference between the two...
     
  4. Eki75

    Eki75 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 10, 2005

  5. jello

    jello Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 10, 2005

    awesome site - i get the idea now -

    from above assimilation - a preschool child calls a lion a doggie because the child only knows one type of four-legged animal
    if the child accomodates this information - he has learned a new word - lion..and that not all four legged animals are dogs...

    assimiliation - actively molding new info to fit existing schemes
    accomodation - changing existing schemes to fit new information..

    thanks
    did you study this material already - you feel confident about it?
     
  6. Eki75

    Eki75 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 10, 2005

    I have gathered a lot of information about this subject as well as all the subjects covered. I've been learning by gathering, but I now need to sit and scrutinize all the information until I have a good hold on all of it. So, to answer your question, I've been studying and will study a lot more; I do not feel confident about it yet, but I will before May 21 (I hope!!) How about yourself?
     
  7. jello

    jello Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 10, 2005

    i feel the same way you do - have gathered a lot of information - want to start going over it again and again.. do you have a chat id? wanna chat on messenger?
    i am starting to see and recognize information and I am getting better at getting the concepts. i have the cliffs and barrons so i am using both of them.
    i feel least prepared for PE, ARTS and Language phonics, child developmental stuff. how long have you been preparing?
     
  8. Angel_wyf

    Angel_wyf Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 10, 2005

    I passed Subtest II on my first try, which took me two months for preparation, and started with Language and history from April 20, spending 6 hours a day to study. But I am still not confident about it . looks like i need some luck in the May test too:p
     
  9. Eki75

    Eki75 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 10, 2005


    I feel the same way about subtest III--and the crappy thing is that I am technically a music major and a theater TA. lol. I have been outlining the Homework Help books and using the Cliffs book as well as supplemental online research. I only found out a month ago that I have to take this test, so I am freaking a little bit--especially since I am trying to get through finals week and graduate. ugh! Thankfully, I too have been recognizing information more readily as I go along and I grow more confident each day. I just want it finished. I'd be glad to chat if you wanna study. I will send you my AIM name through pm.
     
  10. Angel_wyf

    Angel_wyf Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 29, 2005

    I got a question in Piaget's theory.
    ---------------------------------------
    6. Analyze the child’s developmental stage based on the dialogue below between a mother and child.
    Child: “Me see.”
    Mother: “Yes, honey, I see you.”
    Child: “You drink.”
    Mother: “I’m drinking some milk.”
    -------------------------------------

    is that child in the Preoperational stage ?It means the young child is capable of mental representations, but does not have a system for organising this thinking (intuitive rather than logical thought).
     
  11. jello

    jello Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 30, 2005

    hi angel,

    this also represents how a mother should talk to her child - always repeating what the child said in the correct form...

    IMO I would also say pre-operational stage because she is conversing, but makes mistakes in spoken language
    still egocentric - me see ( i am stretching this one!)
    she is still very concrete and needs concrete physical situations - not abstract when she says - you drink -
     
  12. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,799
    Likes Received:
    1,167

    May 30, 2005

    The kid's in the two-word or telegraphic-utterance stage and Mom's elaborating on what she says - that's a stage kids are broadly done with by about age 2, which is only the beginning of Piaget's preoperational stage, so this kid is probably late sensorimotor.

    What's going on with "me see", if we follow Mom's interpretation (and in this case we don't have much choice), is that the syntactic object (me) precedes the subject, and this is also characteristic of children early on in the two-word stage. It takes a while for the usual English subject-verb order to become the norm in a kid's speech, and no amount of correcting will get a kid to say "see me" instead (or, for that matter, to say "I see Mommy" instead of "Me see Mommy" until she is darned good and ready developmentally.
     
  13. jello

    jello Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 30, 2005

    thanks angel for bringing up the question and thank you teachergroupie- that answer really helped a lot... i didn't realize there was a two -word stage - will be easy to remember since the child reaches that point at about age 2.

    angel do you have any more questions like that...
     
  14. Angel_wyf

    Angel_wyf Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 30, 2005

    Thank you jello and teachergroupie. Human development is my weak point and i am taking subtest III in July.

    Of course i have MANY more questions like this LOL
    i would greatly appreciate it if anyone can help with these questions from my CSET preparation course. they gave me some questions before my subtest I in May and i found it really helpful for that test, some of which even appeared in the test again.

    1. Analyze the following quote with reference to Kohlberg’s theory of moral development: “You shouldn’t do that because you might get caught.”

    2. Analyze the following with reference to Kohlberg: “You shouldn’t do that because it’s not fair to the person who owns it.”

    3. Provide evidence for the following thesis: “Intelligence consists of various components and is susceptible to change.”

    4.Respond to the following thesis: “Individual differences in intelligence are primarily a function of genetic variability.”

    5. Provide evidence for the following thesis: “Children with learning disabilities can be expected to be characterized by discrepancies between academic performance and ability.”

    6. Explain why board games of strategy (e.g. checkers and chess) are especially important for children between the ages of 8-10.


    7. Analyze and propose a strategy for treating a fifth- grader who constantly annoys classmates with teasing and disruptive behavior.
     
  15. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,799
    Likes Received:
    1,167

    May 30, 2005

    Kohlberg is the theorist of moral development. He proposed three stages of moral development:

    PRECONVENTIONAL MORALITY: The moral stage up to, say, first or second grade: what motivates children to behave is not whether something is right or wrong, but whether they'll get punished for doing what they shouldn't.

    CONVENTIONAL MORALITY: the stage from first or second grade into middle school: what motivates children to behave is fear of disapproval, and they try to live up to expectations. (Or, in some regrettable cases, down to expectations: doesn't this sound like something that could underlie gang behavior?)

    POSTCONVENTIONAL MORALITY: the stage at which one does what is right not out of fear of the consequences, nor out of fear of others' disapproval, but because it is right. In this stage one is also able to distinguish between what is legal and what is moral.

    So back to the questions you quoted. Which of Kohlberg's stages most closely parallels Question 1? Which most closely parallels Question 2? Can you think of stories from your own experience or from that of your children that illustrate these stages? If so, tell them: that's concrete evidence in a CSET multiple choice, and the stories can also help you remember Kohlberg's stages. You could even make up some children - Peter Preconventional, Corey Conventional, and Posey Postconventional? - and make up a little story about each that illustrates the age and stage at which that child would be.

    And now, Angel_wyf, let's see who else would like to come play with some ideas...
     
  16. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,799
    Likes Received:
    1,167

    Jun 11, 2005

    Nobody else came out to play, Angel_wyf: guess it's just you and me.

    Question 3 invokes the Multiple Intelligences theory of Howard Gardner. The early versions of the theory proposed that there are seven intelligences:

    =Verbal-linguistic intelligence: facility with words and language - this is what Stanford-Binet IQ scores primarily test.

    =Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence: knowing where your body is in space and how to move - dancers and athletes have this

    =Spatial intelligence: being good at design and arranging things - artists have this

    =Musical intelligence: ability to discriminate pitches and patterns in sound - musicians and singers have this

    =Logical-mathematical intelligence: being good at logic, numbers, and patterns

    =Interpersonal intelligence: understanding what makes other people tick and how to reach and persuade them, understanding social dynamics

    =Intrapersonal intelligence: understanding oneself, one's feelings and processes, and being comfortable in one's own skin

    Gardner's later versions add one or more additional intelligences - the one most often cited is the Naturalist intelligence.

    It's very cool that Gardner's theory has so many different ways to be intelligent. Doubly cool is that, according to Gardner, a person isn't just stuck with what she was born with: the intelligences can and will be enhanced through use and practice. Some of the intelligences have obvious connections to learning styles - for a kid high in musical intelligence, it's plausible that the auditory channel will be favored for learning. In any case, it makes sense, given Gardner's theory, to teach to as many of the intelligences as possible.

    Question 4 suggests that intelligence is primarily inherited: echoes of William Shockley, a winner of the Nobel Prize who claimed loudly and publicly in the 1960s that African Americans are genetically inferior intellectually. The claim is massively politically incorrect. Fortunately for my blood pressure, it's also massively untrue (for a fascinating discussion of this point in the context of human history and prehistory by an evolutionary biologist who's also a darned good writer, see Jared Diamond's book GUNS, GERMS AND STEEL, which is available in paperback).

    This brings up one of the Great Laws of Teacher Tests: If a possible answer is politically incorrect, it is almost certainly wrong.

    The case of Shockley reinforces Multiple Intelligence theory, I think. William Shockley's Nobel Prize was in physics, for his work on the transistor, and there obviously he was very, very bright - but clearly in matters of genetics and assessment of intelligence he was as dumb as dirt. The entry on him in Wikipedia suggests as well that his interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence might have rivaled the average preschooler's - if the preschooler were having an exceptionally bad day.

    (One hears from time to time the claim that standardized testing is racist by nature. Does anyone else suspect that this claim gives aid and comfort to the Shockleys of the world?)
     
  17. veg_guy

    veg_guy Rookie

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jun 11, 2005

    The following site gives a good summary of the "nurture vs. nature" debate as it relates to intelligence: http://allpsych.com/journal/iq.html

    Most scientists agree that there's a genetic component to intelligence; the issue is how strong of a role genetics plays vs. the environment one is raised in. The basic consensus nowadays is that genetics sets a potential range for your intelligence and that environmental factors determine where you fall in that range. This is similar to other variables: both of my parents are relatively short so genetically I'm predisposed to being short but environmental factors (such as nutrition) ultimately determine what my height is within a given range.

    The politically incorrect aspect of this (as TeacherGroupie suggests) is to say that racial differences in intelligence (i.e., IQ scores) are primarily due to genetics. Hardly anyone believes this to be true.

    (ps: TeacherGroupie: I'm not sure I follow your paranthetical comment. Don't you mean to say that claiming standardized testing is NOT racist gives aid and comfort to the Shockleys of the world???)
     
  18. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,799
    Likes Received:
    1,167

    Jun 12, 2005


    No: I meant my parenthetical remark as I typed it.

    Suppose for the sake of argument that the claim that standardized testing is racist is correct. An informal line of reasoning could then go like this:

    "It follows from the claim that standardized testing is racist that it's impossible to construct a standardized test on which an African American or Latino/a kid can perform well. There are, however, African American or Latino/a kids that DO do well on standardized tests. Does this mean that those kids are really whites (or maybe Asians) in disguise? Oo, that's not a very palatable consequence, so I guess we have to decide that these kids are just abnormal for their race - they're freaks. Well, white kids who do really well on standardized tests also get regarded as freaks (I speak from experience), so apparently society's fine with that. But what about the white kids who DON'T do well on standardized tests? Are they freaks of a different kind, or actually not white after all, or what?"

    Pretty absurd, no? But I think it's becoming clear that, whatever the achievement gap is about, it isn't primarily or solely race per se. If that's so, we need different terminology.

    In any case, claiming that standardized testing is racist in and of itself is a cop-out that plays into the hands of the racists. It allows too many highly placed people to be comfortable when our neediest kids are in the schools with the worst facilities and the oldest textbooks - these people agree privately that, after all, race is the determining factor so surroundings really aren't going to make a difference. It allows too many bigwigs to demand "teaching to the test" in schools where the scores aren't high and to roll in shiny new materials that underscore that the test is the only thing that matters (after all, everything else in the school that still works is still seedy and worn) - and then, when the scores plateau or even fall the next year, to take that as evidence that the African American and Latino/a brains just aren't good enough to do any better and that there's no point offering anything BUT teaching to the test.

    Worse, it sends to the kids in question the simultaneous messages that The Test matters tremendously AND that we as a society really don't expect these kids to do at all well on it. If every authority figure within earshot is begging the kids to do well and at the same time murmuring that testing is biased, bad, and an insurmountable obstacle, that's a horrendous double bind. What kid could hope to succeed with messages that mixed?
     
  19. veg_guy

    veg_guy Rookie

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jun 12, 2005


    I think we're about to get WAY far away from the original intent of this thread, but I can't resist responding. :) I just noticed that you switched from talking about intelligence to talking about standardized testing. At least in theory, intelligence testing is not the same thing as standardized testing. In practice, the lines are greatly blurred and the distinctions aren't that meaningful...

    Anyway, I'm going to stick to talking about intelligence testing since that's what I know. Your paragraph in quotes confuses me. It is in no way impossible to construct a test in which minorities do better than whites. In fact, it's pretty easy to do. It's been done by African-American psychologists to point out the cultural bias (a term I prefer to racist) that exists in current intelligence tests. Of course, white mainstream society would never accept a test that African-Americans or Latinos outperform whites on so such tests never go anywhere.

    Nor is it difficult to construct explanations for why certain minorities outperform certain whites that have nothing to do with race per se. It could simply be that certain minorities receive greater exposure to white mainstream culture than certain whites. In fact that's what some psychologists theorize intelligence tests measure: adaptation to white mainstream culture.

    I would also argue that claiming that the tests themselves aren't culturally biased/racist is what plays into the hands of racists. What we know is this: Whites (on average) outscore African-Americans (on average) on intelligence tests. If you say the test isn't culturally biased then it's pretty easy for a racist to rush in and say: If the tests aren't biased, then the racial differences between whites and African Americans must be due to whites' genetic superiority in intelligence". Ugh!!!

    Anyway, the whole issue of testing (whether for intelligence or personality or anything else) is incredibly complex. Psychologists have been debating these issues for decades and there are no easy answers or solutions.
     
  20. Angel_wyf

    Angel_wyf Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 7, 2005

    What are the distinctions between early formal operational thought and late formal operational thought?
     
  21. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,799
    Likes Received:
    1,167

    Jul 7, 2005

    Here's a short and helpful link:

    http://www.childrenshospital.org/cfapps/A2ZtopicDisplay.cfm?Topic=Cognitive Development

    The early adolescent's focus is primarily egocentric - concerns close to home. The later adolescent's mental span increases to embrace world concerns, with a streak of idealism that can be highly unsettling to parents whose focus is elsewhere. (I think it was Winston Churchill who announced that a young man who isn't a liberal has no heart; an older man who isn't a conservative has no brain. I have probably muffed the specifics of the quote but not the sense. In any case, I don't agree - but it's a fun line.)
     
  22. oldsoccerlady

    oldsoccerlady Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 6, 2006

    This is a very interesting thread ... I wish it had continued.

    I have some questions, more like musings...

    1.) Is there any empirical evidence that supports Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences (whatever he means by intelligence).

    2.) Is there any research that shows that teaching to 'multiple intelligences' improves elementary school children's abilities to read, write and do math.

    3.) Is there research showing how these intelligences correlate with each other, with success in elementary school, high school, college, life...?

    Gardner seems to theorize alot, in very heart-warming and idealistic ways. And I certainly don't disagree with him about the importance of music and art and dance and personality, etc. I also think presenting information in multi-modal ways is helpful to all of us. I also like the idea of school as a place where people can explore their talents and their strengths.

    BUT unless his theoriy can be shown to have some kind of validity, to relate to other aspects of the world, to be useful in making predictions, to allow for hypothesis testing or to be put into practice (I've seen where he says that our schools are not designed to accomodate to multiple intelligences) is it really clarifying our understanding of how to teach or is it merely muddying the waters. Is he presenting a theory of intelligences or just a series of platitudes about human nature?
     
  23. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,799
    Likes Received:
    1,167

    Sep 6, 2006

    Good questions, oldsoccer, and in fact I don't know to what extent his theories have been tested - or are testable. There's an interesting link at http://www.prometheussociety.org/articles/multiple.html - but the article is almost 20 years old, and I don't know what kind of progress has been made since then.
     
  24. oldsoccerlady

    oldsoccerlady Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 6, 2006

    Thanks for the link.

    I tend to agree with the author (even tho he was somewhat pretentious) ... Gardner's ideas don't constitute a theory. I am familiar with Galston, Spearman, Binet, Wechsler, factor analysis, g and the IQ controversies. I understood what Towers was talking about and I agree with him (my Ph.D is in clinical psychology).

    I think that Gardner is a muddle-headed thinker. And I am conerned that jumping on the band-wagon of multiple intelligences might be misguided (I'm being diplomatic here). My other concern is that his untenable theories might be making alot of unnecessary work for alot of people. BUT I won't mention any of that on the CSET.
     
  25. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,799
    Likes Received:
    1,167

    Sep 7, 2006

    When it comes to psychology, you have the advantage of me, then, oldsoccer, and I dare say of most of the people on the board.

    No, I certainly wouldn't hint on CSET (any CSET) that Gardner might be untenable. Not sure I'd hint it in the classroom, either, and for reasons above and beyond not wanting to confront the ire of True Believers. Though Gardner's stuff may not hold water as an empirically testable and falsifiable theory of what human intelligence is, I think it is helpful in suggesting the breadth of ways in which intelligence can be manifested. I think and hope that teachers who have Gardner in mind will be more open to alternative ways of presenting material to their students (because one way is rarely enough) and to alternative ways for their students to grasp it (because there is rarely only one path to an answer). Finally, I hope that teachers and students who are mindful of the Gardner model will be more open to their own smartnesses and more likely to expect themselves to come up with good solutions to problems rather than getting themselves stuck because "I'm just no good at ___".

    Feel free to throw cold water on this: I know I have much to learn here, and we could probably get a really interesting discussion going.

    By the way, can you suggest some other good links or sources for me to learn more?
     
  26. oldsoccerlady

    oldsoccerlady Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 8, 2006

    Sorry it took so long for me to get back to you. I had to try and remember what resources I used. I did my degree in the pre-internet era.

    The issue of intelligence and genetics is very complicated and is a political powderkeg. I haven't quite sorted all my opinions out in my head yet (and may never). But the following is a short list of influences on my thinking.

    Here is a link to the American Psychological Associations Task Force Report on intelligence and our current understanding of “g”: Intelligence: Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns -- Report from the APA Task Force Report on Intelligence (press release)
    Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns (1996) was written by APA's Task Force on Intelligence as a dispassionate and authoritative report in response to the fall 1994 publication of Herrnstein and Murray's The Bell Curve, a controversial book which sparked intense debate about the meaning of intelligence test scores and the nature of intelligence itself. http://www.apa.org/science/psychscience_sd-resources.html#intelligence
    OR
    www.psychpage.com/learning/library/intell/mainstream.html - 15k


    Paul Meehl really influenced my understanding of science, research, building theories and constructing constructs:. http://www.tc.umn.edu/~pemeehl/
    The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Gould is a good book about how societal preconceptions influence research.
    Behavior genetics is intriguing: (http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/behavior.shtml#1)
    David Lykken does twin research. (http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/bios/lykken.html)
    Matt McGue is a behavior geneticist Bill Iaconco does psychophysiology research. (http://www.psych.umn.edu/psylabs/mtfs/)
     
  27. oldsoccerlady

    oldsoccerlady Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 8, 2006

    I also wrote 3 or 4 paragraphs on my opinions re: scientific theory, construct construction and why I have difficulties with Gardner's Theory even though I agree that many people have wonderful talents and abilities that are not measured by "g" and even though I think people should appreciate their strengths, capitalize on their abilities and not engage in negative self-statements. I can post that another time if you want.
     
  28. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,799
    Likes Received:
    1,167

    Sep 8, 2006

    Whenever you're ready... though I won't get to it for a while (it's the weekend before CSET, and I've got a bunch of other stuff going on in connection with 9/11).
     
  29. oldsoccerlady

    oldsoccerlady Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0

    Sep 8, 2006

    yah ... one more week til CSET and I have managed to avoid reviewing anything all week ... take care ...
     
  30. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,799
    Likes Received:
    1,167

    Sep 8, 2006

    oldsoccer, you're going to do just fine.
     

Share This Page

Members Online Now

Total: 148 (members: 0, guests: 131, robots: 17)
test