1 / 1

Theory & Methods

Theory & Methods. Key Insights. Penner & Klahr, Child Development, 1996 The Interaction of Domain-Specific Knowledge and Domain-General Discovery Strategies: A Study with Sinking Objects Subjects : 10, 12, 14 year-olds Procedure : 1. Why do things sink? What makes things sink fast?

cybele
Download Presentation

Theory & Methods

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Theory & Methods Key Insights Penner & Klahr, Child Development, 1996 The Interaction of Domain-Specific Knowledge and Domain-General Discovery Strategies: A Study with Sinking Objects Subjects: 10, 12, 14 year-olds Procedure: 1. Why do things sink? What makes things sink fast? 2. Experiment by dropping 1-2 objects in water - objects vary in size, shape, weight, and material; all variables co-vary; cannot infer from single exp’t 3. What causes an object to sink fast? Mean trial when 1st non-weight-based experiment conducted 10 12 14 Findings Strengths and Weaknesses • Most children initially believe that weight alone affects sink rate, but after experimentation all the children learn that other attributes affect sink rate too • Older children are more likely to generate hypotheses • Older children are less likely to design experiments that demonstrate their pre-existing beliefs; they design experiments to test non-favored hypotheses • Children who find surprising results almost never follow them up with more experiments, and these results rarely change their beliefs Strengths • Quantitative and qualitative data • Examined process data as well as outcomes • Well-designed task • In-depth analyses Weaknesses/Questions • Perhaps domain-general prior knowledge is affecting the results here? • Need to expand this idea of domain-specific prior knowledge and domain-general skills • A deficit model • Small N (10 per age group)

More Related