H. Carl Haywood
Vanderbilt University
Invited address, International Association for Cognitive Education
and Psychology, Boston, MA, July 13, 2011




Galton: We can learn about the nature of
human beings partly by studying how they
differ from each other in lawful ways.
Binet & Henri: The Psychology of Individual
Differences
Nomothetic science
Idiographic science

Dynamic assessment






The state of physical development
Illness, physical and/or mental
Sensory impairment
Inadequate intellectual development, lack of
understanding, low intelligence
Deficient memory: understands, does not
retain
Difficulty understanding abstractions,
generalities, but adequate intelligence





Momentary disorientation, distraction,
environmental/social life changes
Apathy, laziness, distaste for intellectual work
Instability of character
Lack of discipline, hostility toward the teacher
Failure of family to support school’s efforts

How, rather than merely how much

Post hoc analysis of error types and patterns

Differential scoring, e.g., partial vs all-or-none

Direct observation during learning

Learn about processes by changing them






Direct observation of use of systematic
cognitive strategies
Emphasis on how, not merely how much
Comparison of “help” or “intervention” modes
Use of transfer of learning as an indicator of LP
Use of a mediation paradigm
Generalization of mediational learning




Learning Set
(Harlow)
2-choice discrimination problems, e.g., A+ BMany unique problems, each one only 6 trials
Did repeated experience with the
discrimination learning problems establish a
learning set; i.e., did the animals learn to learn?
(Yes; They performed much better than did
inexperienced subjects on new problems)





2-choice discrimination problems, e.g., A+ BEach unique problem presented for 7 or 13
reinforced trials, regardless of performance
Then contingency reversed: A- B+, for 10 trials
regardless of accuracy, to test for transfer
Then training and testing continues with new pairs
of objects
Reflects individual and species differences in the
ability to be flexible, to learn rules, to transfer what
has been learned from one problem to the next.
Would this reversal experience facilitate or impair
learning on new problems?





2-choice discrimination problems, e.g., A+ BContinue training to a preset criterion of learning,
e.g., correct 67% or 84% of the time
THEN reverse the rewarded choice, e.g., A- B+, for
the next 11 trials
Assess transfer of learning effects by testing
subjects on at least 10 new problems
Negative transfer (a negative effect on
performance on subsequent problems) indicates SR associative learning, whereas positive
(facilitative) transfer indicates
relational/conceptual learning.






Introduced 40+ years ago (D. M. Rumbaugh)
Simple two-choice discrimination problems
Learn to criterion, then
Reverse “correct” choice, then
Learn reversal problem or new contingencies
Efficiency of transfer is a clue to learning
processes and potential



Learning potential across species
Prediction of success on subsequent problems;
readiness to engage in learning tasks
Developmental (ontogenetic) effects


e.g., environmental/experiential deprivation
Specific cognitive processes

e.g., Visual attention



Data do not merely reflect operant
conditioning
Transfer index permits inferences of processes
rather than merely of outcomes
Helps to mitigate or equalize variables that
influence performance



Motivation
Prior knowledge
Language deficiencies or differences





Addition of more challenges more clearly requires the
learning of relations in the face of arbitrary changes, and the
generalization of that relational learning to subsequent
problems.
Simple two-choice discrimination problems, e.g., A+ B-, on a
succession of unique problems, each continued to a criterion
of learning.
Reversal trials given (A- B+)
Test trials continue with introduction of a new second
choice : A- C+, or B- C+.
Provides even stronger evidence of relational vs associative
learning. In highly encephalized subjects (great apes, e.g.),
overtraining on the original A+ B- contingency leads to
FEWER ERRORS on reversal and novel-choice trials:
Subjects had learned a relation about learning itself.



Emphasis on learning effectiveness and/or
efficiency
Ability that is not readily apparent, that is
hidden
Possible better performance, under different
conditions





Deficiencies in language development
Language difference
Knowledge/information gaps; e.g.,
impoverished vocabulary, inadequate
information store
Inadequate development of basic cognitive
processes
Cultural differences, e.g., in attitudes toward
learning





Cultural deficiencies, i.e., failure to have
developed strong cultural identity, associated
with transculturality
Ineffective motivation systems
Negative self concept, especially as learner
Sub-optimal life experiences and/or
opportunities; e.g., limited language
elaboration at home
Poor teaching

Based on illogical assumptions



Samples of tasks are representative or exhaustive.
Conditions are optimal.
Corollary requires negative proof.




Need for and efficacy of “help” suggested by
Vygotsky
Many possible kinds of intervention/help
Selection depends on purpose
Mediation elaborated by Feuerstein







Clarification of task and instructions
Elaborated verbalization
Successive clues to solving problem (graduated
prompt)
Motivation to engage in task, succeed
Stimulus enrichment (more examples)
Accommodations for special needs
Mediation of cognitive functions





Discover obstacles to effective performance
Neutralize obstacles whenever possible
Assess effects of “obstacle removal” on
subsequent performance
Assess transfer to different learning tasks
Identify conditions under which better
performance is achievable







Regulation of behavior
Motivation to engage in task
Belief in subject’s capability
Rules of the task
Applicable modes of logical thought
Value of verification
Transfer, Generalization


Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 3
(1), 2003. [online: www.iacepcoged.org/journal]
Mediated learning, Feuerstein
Deutsch)



(by Ruth
Vygotsky (by Yuriy Karpov)
Nyborg (by Andreas Hansen)
Neo-Piagetians (by Carl Haywood)