Reframing research on learning with technology: in search of the meaning of cognitive tools

Abstract

Previous research and development with cognitive tools has been limited by an inadequate conceptualization of the complexity underlying their nature and affordances for supporting learning and performance. This paper provides a new perspective on cognitive tools through the lens of the theories of distributed cognition and expertise. The learner, tool, and activity form a joint learning system, and the expertise in the world should be reflected not only in the tool but also in the learning activity within which learners make use of the tool. This enhanced perspective is used to clarify the nature of cognitive tools and distinguish them from other types of computer tools used in learning contexts. We have classified cognitive tools considering how expertise is classified: domain-independent (general) cognitive tools, domain-generic cognitive tools, and domain-specific cognitive tools. The implications are presented in reference to research, development, and practice of cognitive tools. The capabilities of cognitive tools should be differentiated from those of the human, but regarded as part of the system of expertise. Cognitive tools should be accompanied by appropriate learning activities, and relevant learner performance should then be assessed in the context of tool use.

SRECMATs - An Intelligent Tutoring System to Deliver Online Materials for Student Revision

“…Cognitive tools, based on the definition of Kim and Reeves (2007), are technologies that support the knowledge construction of the learner. Orey (2001) summarised roles of cognitive tools into four categories (modified from those of Iiyoshi et al (2005)) which are knowledge organisation, information presentation, information seeking, and knowledge integration.…”

Using Technology in Pedagogically Responsive Ways to Support Literacy Learners

“…Powerful learning opportunities can be created by students using programs such as spreadsheets, presentation software, movie editing software, word processing, and webpage creation software to solve realistic and complex problems. However, all too often, as pointed out by Kim and Reeves (2007), the focus is placed on teachers helping students to learn about the tools themselves, such as learning to use a specific software application, rather than using these tools creatively and dynamically to build knowledge. There is considerable evidence to suggest that the use of cognitive tools in school should resemble the use of such tools in real world activities (cf.…”

“…There is considerable evidence to suggest that the use of cognitive tools in school should resemble the use of such tools in real world activities (cf. Kim & Reeves, 2007). Arguably, there is no field where this is more readily achievable than in literacy learning.…”

“…Each example actively engages students in manipulating the technology for the intended purpose of the task. The focus is not on learning the technology, rather using the technology to support their response to complex tasks (Kim & Reeves, 2007). In each example, the technology is used in ways that support the task, with clear connection to the rationale, authenticity and awareness of literacy demands encapsulated within the experience.…”

Prospective Science Teachers' Self-Assessments about the Use of Slowmation Approach in Teaching

“…Using technology that is readily accessible can sometimes be a catalyst for such engagement, especially if the tools help pre-service teachers to represent their knowledge in innovative ways (Kim & Reeves, 2007;Lee, Linn, Varma, & Liu, 2010). With the rapid advancement in personal digital technologies, it is becoming easier for students such as pre-service teachers to design media products such as animations and videos, which may be a way to support their conceptual understanding of science concepts that are typical in the primary school curriculum (Hoban & Nielsen, 2012).…”