Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The taxonomy divides learning objectives into three broad domains: cognitive (knowledge-based), affective (emotion-based), and psychomotor (action-based), each with a hierarchy of skills and abilities. These domains are used by educators to structure curricula, assessments, and teaching methods to foster different types of learning.
Cognitive functioning refers to a person's ability to process thoughts. It is defined as "the ability of an individual to perform the various mental activities most closely associated with learning and problem-solving. Examples include the verbal, spatial, psychomotor, and processing-speed ability."
Higher-order thinking, also known as higher order thinking skills (HOTS), [1] is a concept applied in relation to education reform and based on learning taxonomies (such as American psychologist Benjamin Bloom's taxonomy). The idea is that some types of learning require more cognitive processing than others, but also have more generalized benefits.
Cognitive synonymy is a type of synonymy in which synonyms are so similar in meaning that they cannot be differentiated either denotatively or connotatively, that is, not even by mental associations, connotations, emotive responses, and poetic value.
Cognitive acceleration or CA is an approach to teaching designed to develop students' thinking ability, developed by Michael Shayer and Philip Adey from 1981 at King's College London. [1] The approach builds on work by Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky and takes a constructivist approach.
In cognitive apprenticeships, teachers model their skills in real-world situations. By modelling and coaching, masters in cognitive apprenticeships also support the three stages of skill acquisition described in the expertise literature: the cognitive stage, the associative stage, and the autonomous stage.
Narrow abilities are described as abilities that do not correlate with skills outside their domain, following more along the lines of domain-specific learning theories. Despite breaking g into more specific areas, or domains of intelligence, Carroll maintained that a single general ability was essential to intelligence theories.
These approaches define social competence based on how popular one is with his peers. [7] The more well-liked one is, the more socially competent they are. [8]Peer group entry, conflict resolution, and maintaining play, are three comprehensive interpersonal goals that are relevant with regard to the assessment and intervention of peer competence.