Harry Daniels and Anne Edwards. (Eds.). (2004). the RoutledgeFalmer Reader in Psychology of Education
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Harry Daniels and Anne Edwards. (Eds.). (2004). The RoutledgeFalmer Reader in Psychology of Education. New York: RoutledgeFalmer. 348 pages. ISBN: 0-415-32768-7 (hardback); 0-415-32769-5 (paperback) This book is one of a series that includes eight RoutledgeFalmer Readers in education. The editors of compilation both professors at School of Education, University of Birmingham. This particular reader is a collection of previously published articles and book chapters. Of 16 chapters in book, 12 were previously published by Taylor & Francis Group (those on which editors were invited by publishers to draw largely). The dates of original publications range from 1988 to 2002. The book is organized into nine areas: assessment, language, motivation, cognition and development, intelligence, memory, cooperative learning, activity theory, and behaviour management. The first seven parts each consist of two chapters while last two parts each consist of one chapter. In introduction, editors explore complex and delicate two-way relationship (p. 1) between psychology and education. Through contributions they selected, they are trying to show how psychology and education shaping, and being shaped by, each other (p. 2). They assert, As social change demands educational change so educational change raises new questions for psychology. These questions may, and perhaps should, act to change conceptions and assumptions of psychology as it seeks to accommodate these new challenges, thus emphasizing that the of psychological knowledge is socially situated (p. 1), which is what chapters selected for book demonstrate. Further, editors state, We see psychology as a cultural artefact that may be used in analysis of educational problems and development (p. 2). For purposes of this review, I will focus on three chapters. The first is by Usha Goswami, Cognitive development: No stages please--we're British (pp. 184-202). Originally published in 2001, it begins with a discussion of Piaget's theory and moves into a description of how Researchers in UK have made a significant contribution to displacement of Piagetian perspective (p. 188) by a more broadly knowledge-based view of cognitive development. This is followed by exploration of three trends in late twentieth century: debate between domain-general versus domain-specific or modular theories of cognitive development; roles of nature versus nurture in cognitive development; and contributions of qualitative versus quantitative change to describing cognitive development. The author calls for an increasingly interdisciplinary and precisely specified approach to study of cognitive development (p. 195). Socializing intelligence by Lauren Resnick and Sharon Nelson-Le Gall (pp. 221-232), first published in 1997, explores a conception of intelligence based on cultural and developmental theories of Vygotsky, Piaget's constructivist theory, and theories of social and social competence. They argue that interpreting intelligence as a social practice requires a critical expansion of definition of construct to include skills and knowledge classically considered intelligence as well as a cluster of social performances such as asking questions, striving to master new problems and seeking help in problem solving (p. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».