Children’s developing understanding of what and how they learn

Sobel, David; Letourneau, Susan M.

doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2015.01.004

Cited by 39 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Children's definitions of teaching were divided into the following categories, based on those used in Sobel and Letourneau (2015): 1) No response or "I don't know," 2) Identity answers, in which children defined teaching using the word "teaching" or "to teach," without further elaboration (e.g., "teaching is when you teach"), 3) Learning answers, in which children defined teaching using the word "learning" or "to learn" without further elaboration (e.g., "teaching means learning"), 4) Content answers, in which children defined teaching based on what was taught or could be taught (e.g., "teaching kids stuff like math or reading"), and 5)…”

Section: Codingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Children’s developing knowledge of and reflection about teaching

Sobel

Letourneau

2016

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A sample of 4- to 7-year-olds (N=61) defined "teaching" and described what and how others had taught them as well as what and how they had taught others. Whereas 4- and 5-year-olds were often unable to define teaching, 6- and 7-year-olds most frequently defined teaching by describing processes that could cause knowledge change. Children who held process-based definitions were more likely to offer examples of what others had taught them, to identify who had taught them, and to describe being taught through direct instruction. They were also better able to describe how they had taught others. We consider the results in light of previous interviews in which children were asked to define learning, and we discuss the implications for children's developing understanding of the connections among knowledge, learning, and teaching.

show abstract

Section: Codingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Children’s developing knowledge of and reflection about teaching

Sobel

Letourneau

2016

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to the emergence of skills in memory binding, children's awareness of their own learning and the learning process in general improves between the age of 4 and 6 years. During this developmental period, children become increasingly aware of the mental processes involved in learning (Sobel et al, ), are more able to define learning (Sobel & Letourneau, ), and can provide more examples of their own learning (Sobel & Letourneau, ). As children become increasingly aware that they need to take an active role in their own learning (Sobel & Letourneau, ), they may be more apt to reminiscence about instances of their own learning, particularly when asked about factual information that they have learned.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Along with skills in episodic memory, preschoolers also become increasingly aware of both the learning process (Sobel & Letourneau, 2015;Sobel, Li, & Corriveau, 2007) and the source of their own learning. Children's ability to reflect on their own learning may rely in part on their emerging skills in source monitoring (Johnson, Hashtroudi, & Lindsay, 1993).…”

Section: Memories Of Learning Among Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

That was last time! The effect of a delay on children's episodic memories of learning new facts

Bemis

Leichtman

2018

Infant and Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurately remembering how and when one's own learning occurs is an important metacognitive skill that matures during the early school years. In two studies, the impact of a delay on this ability was examined. In Study 1, 30 children in two age groups (4‐year‐olds and 5‐year‐olds) participated in two‐staged learning events and were interviewed immediately after each event about the facts they had learned in the events and about how they had acquired them. Children in both age groups learned the facts, but had significant difficulty reporting on their own learning. In Study 2, 79 children in the same age range participated in one staged learning event and were given similar interviews as in Study 1, either immediately after the event or after a 2‐ to 3‐day delay. Five‐year‐olds were more accurate in their memories of learning in the delay condition than in the immediate condition, but 4‐year‐olds showed no performance differences as a function of delay. Findings are interpreted in light of developmental literature on episodic memory, source monitoring, and memory binding. Highlights How does a delay interval between impact children's ability to accurately recall episodic memories of their own learning? Children completed staged learning events. Four‐ and five‐year‐olds struggled to recall instances of learning immediately, but five‐year‐olds improved after a delay. Five‐year‐olds, but not four‐year‐olds, appear to benefit from a moderate delay when recalling learning episodes. This could be due to developments in other metacognitive skills.

show abstract

“…Such developmental differences are observed in children's articulation of learning (Sobel & Letourneau, ) and teaching (Sobel & Letourneau, ), suggesting that there might be general metacognitive development that allows children to make the kinds of complex mental state inferences needed to articulate defining features of pretending rather than more characteristic features. Of course, a concern with this argument—and with the present data—is that children's verbal abilities are also developing during this time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the present study, we expand on this work by asking children not only to define pretending, but also to reflect on what they have pretended, have seen others pretend, how they went about pretending, and how they knew they or others were pretending. We adapted an interview procedure used by Sobel and Letourneau (, ) who examined how children defined and reflected on their own learning and teaching. For example, Sobel and Letourneau () asked children to define “teaching” and to reflect on a time when they taught another person and when they were taught by someone else.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Children's Developing Descriptions and Judgments of Pretending

Sobel

Letourneau

2018

Child Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two studies investigated 4- to 7-year-olds' knowledge about pretending. In Study 1, children (N = 66) defined pretending and described examples of own and others' pretending. In Study 2, children (N = 52) defined pretending and then completed a battery of measures that examined their understanding that pretending involved mental states. In Study 1, older children articulated more defining features of pretending than younger children. When describing how they or others pretended, children focused on action or appearance, regardless of whether they had included more defining features in their definitions of pretending. In Study 2, the more defining features children articulated, the better their performance on the battery. We discuss the implications of these data for the role of pretending in children's developing theory of mind.

show abstract

Children’s developing understanding of what and how they learn

Cited by 39 publications

References 28 publications

Children’s developing knowledge of and reflection about teaching

Children’s developing knowledge of and reflection about teaching

That was last time! The effect of a delay on children's episodic memories of learning new facts

Children's Developing Descriptions and Judgments of Pretending

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About