Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T07:54:26.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Looking at the hands through time: A microgenetic perspective on learning and instruction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

Susan Goldin-Meadow
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Chicago
Martha Wagner Alibali
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Nira Granott
Affiliation:
University of Texas, Dallas
Jim Parziale
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts, Boston
Get access

Summary

Methods for studying learning typically involve three steps: Assess the learner's knowledge of the task. Provide instruction or some form of intervention on the task. Reassess the learner's knowledge of the task. Any improvement that the learner demonstrates between assessment 1 and assessment 2 is assumed to constitute learning. This method can provide rich information about the effect of intervention on a learner's initial state – it elegantly documents that learning has occurred. However, the method tells us very little about how the learner arrives at the final state – it tells us little about the process of learning.

Microgenetic methods (Siegler & Crowley, 1991) were developed to investigate the small steps learners take in their acquisition of knowledge, particularly steps taken just prior to apparent progress (Karmiloff-Smith, 1992; Kuhn, Garcia-Mila, Zohar, & Andersen, 1995; Siegler & Jenkins, 1989). The goal of microgenetic studies is to examine the learner, not just before and after instruction as in traditional training studies, but throughout the learning process. Such studies provide a spotlight on the period of transition itself.

The spotlight can, of course, have a wide or narrow beam. We can examine change over a period of minutes, hours, days, weeks, or years. One challenge in microgenetic studies is selecting the appropriate time period over which to view change. The appropriate units and intervals between them depend on the pace at which we expect change to occur.

Type
Chapter
Information
Microdevelopment
Transition Processes in Development and Learning
, pp. 80 - 106
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alibali, M. W. (1999). How children change their minds: Strategy change can be gradual or abrupt. Developmental Psychology, 35, 127–145CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alibali, M. W., Bassok, M., Solomon, K. O., Syc, S. E., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1999). Illuminating mental representations through speech and gesture. Psychological Science, 10, 327–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alibali, M. W., Flevares, L., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1997). Assessing knowledge conveyed in gesture: Do teachers have the upper hand?Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 183–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alibali, M. W., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1993). Transitions in learning: What the hands reveal about a child's state of mind. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 468–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, D. C., & Broadbent, D. E. (1984). On the relationship between task performance and associated verbalizable knowledge. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36, 209–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertenthal, B. (1996). Origins and early development of perception, action, and representation. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 431–459CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Church, R. B., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1986). The mismatch between gesture and speech as an index of transitional knowledge. Cognition, 23, 43–71CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clements, W., & Perner, J. (1994). Implicit understanding of belief. Cognitive Development, 9, 377–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. (Revised edn.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Garber, P., Alibali, M. W., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1998). Knowledge conveyed in gesture is not tied to the hands. Child Development, 69, 75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S. (1999). The role of gesture in communication and thinking. Trends in Cognitive Science, 3, 419–429CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldin-Meadow, S., Alibali, M. W., & Church, R. B. (1993). Transitions in concept acquisition: Using the hand to read the mind. Psychological Review, 100, 279–297CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldin-Meadow, S., Kim, S., & Singer, M. (1999). What the teachers’ hands tell the students’ minds about math. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 720–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S., Nusbaum, H., Garber, P., & Church, R. B. (1993). Transitions in learning: Evidence for simultaneously activated strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 1–16Google ScholarPubMed
Goldin-Meadow, S., & Sandhofer, C. M. (1999). Gesture conveys substantive information to ordinary listeners. Developmental Science, 2, 67–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S., & Singer, M. (in preparation). Teachers can use gesture to read children's minds in math tutorials
Goldin-Meadow, S., Wein, D., & Chang, C. (1992). Assessing knowledge through gesture: Using children's hands to read their minds. Cognition and Instruction, 9, 201–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Kelly, S. D., & Church, R. B. (1997). Can children detect conceptual information conveyed through other children's nonverbal behaviors?Cognition and Instruction, 15, 107–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, S. D., & Church, R. B. (1998). A comparison between children's and adults’ ability to detect conceptual information conveyed through representational gestures. Child Development, 69, 85–93CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuhn, D., Garcia-Mila, M., Zohar, A., & Andersen, C. (1995). Strategies of knowledge acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 60 (Serial No. 245)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNeil, N. M., Alibali, M. W., & Evans, J. L. (2000). The role of gesture in children's comprehension of spoken language: Now they need it, now they don’t. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 24, 131–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, M., Church, R. B., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1988). Transitional knowledge in the acquisition of concepts. Cognitive Development, 3, 359–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, M., & Elder, A. D. (1996). Knowledge in transition: Adults’ developing understanding of a principle of physical causality. Cognitive Development, 12, 131–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reber, A. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. New York: Oxford University Press
Siegler, R. S. (1996). Emerging minds: The process of change in children's thinking. New York: Oxford University Press
Siegler, R. S., & Crowley, K. (1991). The microgenetic method: A direct means for studying cognitive development. American Psychologist, 46, 606–620CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siegler, R. S., & Jenkins, E. (1989). How children discover new strategies. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Stanley, W., Mathews, R., Buss, R., & Kotler-Cope, S. (1989). Insight without awareness: On the interaction of verbalization, instruction and practice in a simulated process control task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 41, 553–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelen, E. (1989). Self-organization in developmental processes: Can systems approaches work? In M. Gunnar & E. Thelen (Eds.), Minnesota symposium on child psychology, Vol. 22: Systems and development (pp. 77–117). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×