This article describes a study which investigated individual differences in the construction of mental models of recursion in Logo programming. It was hypothesized that differences in individuals' cognitive profiles would be reflected in differences in their computer programming problem solving behavior. The learning process was investigated from the perspective of Norman's mental models theory and employed diSessa's ontology regarding distributed, functional, and surrogate mental models. Analysis of the processes underlying mental model construction and of individual differences in these processes was based on the Luria model of brain function with particular regard to the relative contribution of simultaneous and successive cognitive processing abilities to conscious mental activity. Results generally confirmed predictions regarding the involvement of these abilities in the manifestation of individual differences in the stages of conscious mental activity contributing to the progressive development of mental models of recursion.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
GibbonsP. E., Recursion: An Analysis of Individual Differences in Logo Programming, unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Sydney, 1995.
2.
LuriaA. R., The Working Brain: An Introduction to Neuropsychology, Basic Books, New York, 1973.
3.
NormanD. A., Some Observations on Mental Models, in Mental Models, GentnerD.StevensA. L. (eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 7–14, 1983.
4.
VygotskyL., Thought and Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1962.
5.
diSessaA., A Principled Design for an Integrated Computational Environment, Human-Computer Interaction, 1, pp. 1–47, 1985.
6.
LuriaA. R., Language and Cognition, Wiley, New York, 1982.
7.
CrawfordK. P., Simultaneous and Successive Processing, Executive Control and Social Experience: Individual Differences in Educational Achievement and Problem Solving in Mathematics, unpublished doctoral thesis, University of New England, 1986.
8.
NaglieriJ. A., A Cognitive Processing Theory for the Measurement of Intelligence, Educational Psychologist, 24:2, pp. 185–206, 1989.
9.
BiggsJ. B.CollisK. F., Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome), Academic Press, London, 1982.
10.
GreenK., An Examination of a Model of Individual Differences for a Study of Aptitude-Treatment Interaction, unpublished doctoral thesis, University of New England, 1977.
11.
DasJ. P., Planning: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Evidence, Psychological Research, 41, pp. 141–151, 1980.
12.
LeongC. K., Cognitive Patterns of ‘Retarded’ and Below Average Readers, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 5, pp. 101–117, 1980.
13.
RansleyW., The Development of a Psychometric Model of Information Processing in Young Children Based on Luria's Theory of Brain Functioning, unpublished doctoral thesis, University of New England, 1981.
14.
HuntD.RandhawaB., Cognitive Processes and Achievement, Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 29, pp. 206–215, 1983.
15.
NaglieriJ. A.DasJ. P., Planning-Arousal-Simultaneous-Successive (PASS): A Model for Assessment, Journal of School Psychology, 26, pp. 35–48, 1988.
16.
CrawfordK. P., Definitions of Aptitude: Cognitive Processes and ASAT Test Scores, Technical Report, School of Teaching and Curriculum Studies, Faculty of Education, The University of Sydney, 1989.
17.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M., Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods, Sage, Beverly Hills, California, 1984.
AndersonA., Mental Models of Motion?, in Models in the Mind: Theory, Perspective and Application, RogersY.RutherfordA.BibbyP. A. (eds.), Academic Press, London, pp. 57–72, 1992.
20.
ClementJ., A Conceptual Model Discussed by Galileo and Used Intuitively by Physics Students, in Mental Models, GentnerD.StevensA. L. (eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 325–340, 1983.
21.
KatzeffC., System Demands on Mental Models for a Full Text Database, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 32, pp. 483–509, 1990.
22.
BainbridgeL., Verbal Reports as Evidence of the Process Operator's Knowledge, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 11, pp. 411–436, 1979.
23.
PraetoriusN.DuncanK. D., Verbal Reports: A Problem in Research Design, in Tasks, Errors and Mental Models, GoodsteinL. P.AndersonH. B.OlsenS. E. (eds.), Taylor and Francis, London, pp. 293–314, 1988.
24.
GarrodS. C.AndersonA., Saying What You Mean in Dialogue: A Study in Conceptual and Semantic Coordination, Cognition, 27, pp. 181–218, 1987.
25.
O'MalleyC. E., Understanding Explanation, Cognitive Science Research Paper Serial No. CSRP 088, The University of Sussex, School of Cognitive Science, Arts Building, Falmer, Brighton BN1 9QN, 1987.
26.
SasseM. A., Users' Model of Computer Systems, in Models in the Mind: Theory, Perspective and Application, RogersY.RutherfordA.BibbyP. A. (eds.), Academic Press, London, pp. 225–240, 1992.
27.
RutherfordA.WilsonJ. R., Searching for the Mental Model in Human-Machine Systems, in Models in the Mind: Theory, Perspective and Application, RogersY.RutherfordA.BibbyP. A. (eds.), Academic Press, London, pp. 195–224, 1992.
28.
diSessaA., Phenomenology and the Evolution of Intuition, in Mental Models, GentnerD.StevensA. L. (eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 15–34, 1983.
29.
diSessaA., Knowledge in Pieces, in Constructivism in the Computer Age, FormanG.PufallP. B. (eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 49–70, 1988.
30.
NormanD. A., Cognitive Artefacts, in Designing Interaction: Psychological Theory at the Human-Computer Interface, CarrollJ. M. (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 17–38, 1991.
31.
BibbyP. A., Distributed Knowledge—In the Head, In the World or In the Interaction?, in Models in the Mind: Theory, Perspective and Application, RogersY.RutherfordA. R.BibbyP. A. (eds.), Academic Press, London, pp. 93–100, 1992.
32.
LoB. W.McNuttL., The Neglected Dimension in Programming Courses, in Proceedings of ACC '91 — Mosaic, Australian Computer Society, Adelaide, pp. 387–404, 1991.
33.
OliverR.MaloneJ., The Influence of Instruction and Activity on the Development of Semantic Programming Knowledge, Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25, pp. 521–533, 1993.
34.
PapertS., Computer Criticism versus Technocentric Thinking, Logo85: Theoretical Papers, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1985.
35.
RiordonT., Helping Students with Recursion: Teaching Strategies, The Computing Teacher, pp. 38–40, January 1984.
36.
McDougallA., Children, Computers, and Logo Programming, unpublished doctoral thesis, Monash University, 1988.
37.
diSessaA., An Overview of Boxer, Journal of Mathematical Behaviour, 10:1, pp. 3–15, April 1991.
38.
LeonardM., Learning the Structure of Recursive Programs in Boxer, Journal of Mathematical Behaviour, 10:1, pp. 17–53, April 1991.
