Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T01:29:52.228Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neuropsychology and Teaching: The Problem of Translation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2015

Michael J. Lawson
Michael J. Lawson*
Affiliation:
School of Education, Flinders University
*
School of Education, Flinders University of South Australia, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide SA 5001
Get access

Abstract

While there is the likelihood that student, teacher, and psychologist will benefit from neuropsychological work carried out in classrooms, experience suggests that there is often a problem of communication of information between neuropsychologist and teacher. The nature of this problem is discussed here and a means of resolution is suggested. An infomation-processing model of cognition is presented which has been used with parents and teachers in order to provide a means of translation between the brain/processing schema of the neuropsychologist and the teaching schema of the teacher. A checklist of questions that focuses the attention of both teacher and psychologist on potential problem areas in each of the phases of the model is also presented.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Educational and Developmental Psychologist , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , May 1992 , pp. 9 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Psychological Society 1992

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

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. R. (1990). Cognitive psychology and its implications (3rd ed.). New York: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Bransford, J., Sherwood, R.,Vye, N., & Reiser, J. (1986). Teaching thinking and problem solving. American Psychologist, 41, 1078–1086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gagne, R. M. (1975). Essentials of learning for instruction. Hillsdale, Illinois: Dryden Press.Google Scholar
Lawson, M. J. (1984). Being executive about metacognition. In Kirby, J. (Ed.), Cognitve strategies and educational performance. (pp.89–110).Orlando, Florida: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lawson, M.J. (1991). Testing of transfer following strategy training. In Evans, G. (Ed.), Learning and teaching cognitive skills (pp. 208–228). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
Lawson, M.J., & Rice, D. (1987). Thinking aloud: Analysing students’ mathematics performance. School Psychology International, 20,233–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawson, M.J., & Rice, D. (1989). Effects of training in use of executive strategies on a verbal-memory problem resulting from closed-head injury. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 11, 842–854.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meier, M., Benton, A., & Diller, L. (1987). Neuropsychological rehabilitation. New York: Churchill Livingstone.Google Scholar
Novak, J., & Gowin, D. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkin, A. (1987). Memory and amnesia. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Salamon, G., & Perkins, D. (1989). Rocky roads to transfer. Educational Psychologist, 24, 113–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solhberg, M., & Mateer, C. (1989). Introduction to cognitive rehabilitation.New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Telzrow, C. (1987). Management of academic and educational problems in head injury. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20,536–545.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weinstein, C., & Mayer, R. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In Wittrock, M. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. (3rd ed.) (pp.50–91). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar