Content area
Full text
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explain student cognition during class sessions in the context of Piaget's Theory of Cognitive Development. The objective of the study was to describe comprehensively Piaget's active experience influence through six variables: four professor variables (cognitive level of professor discourse, cognitive level of professor questions, cognitive level of course objectives, and percent of lecture used during class sessions), and two student variables (student engagement and cognitive level of student questions) and, specifically, to describe their relationship to student cognition, which has not previously been operationally defined as it is defined in this study. Using a regression model, professor discourse and the percent of lecture used during class sessions explained more of the variance in student cognition. Recommendations included increasing professor and student awareness of the ability to teach and think using formal operations strategies for increased cognitive development, and to conduct further research to explain independent variables affecting student cognition.
Introduction
Critics of higher education believe that the university system is failing in the preparation of students (Tom, 1997). The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University (1998) advocated that students are not being prepared sufficiently to think beyond the lower levels of cognition. If a purpose for higher education is to meet the demand for high quality students to enter the workforce, universities and colleges must examine that which is occurring in their classrooms (Whittington, 2003), and be ready to produce evidence of that which has occurred (Brown and Lane, 2003) that contributed to critical thinking and problem solving for entry-level employment and beyond.
To meet this accountability challenge, Nordvall and Braxton (1996) recommended examining courselevel academics to identify institutional quality, and advocated Bloom's Taxonomy (Bloom et al., 1956) for assessing level of understanding related to course content. Similarly, Sanders (1966) proposed using Bloom's Taxonomy as a way of observing and identifying levels of cognition for questions that were being asked by instructors. Bloom et al. (1956) stated that the taxonomy was designed for classifying student behaviors. The authors of the taxonomy believed that student and teacher behaviors could be observed and could be classified in a variety of content areas and educational levels (Bloom et al., 1956).
Woolfolk-Hoy (2004) suggested strategies for effective...