1
11
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage
________________________________________
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage (CEA) is a comprehensive
approach, developed by Katherine Greenberg, to assist
students to become independent thinkers. This approach
includes a common language about critical thinking skills.
CEA gives teachers and students a way to ‘think about their
thinking’ – or engage in ‘metacognition’.
Constructing your own learning:
Think about how your students learn.
How does it affect your students when they have explicit
vocabulary for concepts that they are learning?
What happens when they do not have this vocabulary?
What helps students be prepared to learn?
When does learning new concepts really ‘stick’ with your
students?
When are students most likely to apply what they have
learned?
Check back to your answers once you have worked
through this module.
Module 1 Activities:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Read Cognitive Enrichment Advantage Description.
Read about CEA Best Practices.
Check out the CEA Reading List.
Try out the practice task.
Check, are you ready to go onto Module Two?
a) What are the three CEA components?
b) How long does Katherine Greenberg
recommend that students be involved with
the CEA approach?
c) What are three examples of best practices
inherent in CEA?
Tip:
Module 2 leads you through
the key to CEA- Mediated
Learning Experience.
Tip:
Module 3, pg 6 –
Getting Started…
-4-
What is Cognitive Enrichment Advantage?
________________________________________________________________________
1.
Explicit, Common Language About Thinking





2.
CEA is a comprehensive Cognitive Education model, developed by
Katherine Greenberg (2000).
Children are explicitly assisted to discover 12 cognitive concepts
and 8 affective- motivational concepts.
Children use these 20 metacognitive concepts to develop their own
learning strategies at home, school and in their community.
The cognitive concepts are called Building Blocks of Learning and
the affective and motivational concepts are called Tools of Learning.
This common language about metacognition is integrated into all
activities of the child’s day via mediated learning techniques.
Mediated Learning Experience:




Children are assisted to discover the common language about
thinking through the assistance of a more skilled learner. This is
called a mediated learning experience (MLE).
The essence of MLE is that the child is assisted to discover and
develop their own understanding and is not explicitly given
information.
The most frequently used mediational technique is ‘deep level
questioning’.
The intent of MLE is to assist learners to become both independent
and interdependent or collaborative learners.
3. Family-School-Community Partnership






CEA encourages a partnership between home, school and
community agencies.
All significant people in a child’s life develop a common purpose in
using a shared language about thinking.
There is recognition that families need broad-based support and
need to be integral team members.
It is expected that a child will learn how to learn when they are
always encouraged to actively be involved in what they are learning.
Understanding of the CEA ‘language about thinking’ takes time and
effort.
It is recommended by Katherine Greenberg that students be
engaged in the CEA approach for at least two years for optimal
benefits.
Reference: Greenberg, K. (2000) Cognitive Enrichment Advantage: Teacher Handbook.
-5-
‘Learning to Think and Thinking to Learn’
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage Uses Evidence-Based Practices to
Develop Students’ Thinking and Learning Skills
_____________________________________________
The goal for successful school systems in a complex, global system goes
beyond achieving high literacy and numeracy levels: “It is about
learning to learn…It is about the joy of learning and the pleasure and
productivity of using one’s learning in all facets of work and life
pursuits.” (Fullan, Hill, & Crevola, 2006, p.3).
What is Cognitive Enrichment Advantage (CEA)?
CEA, developed by Katherine Greenberg (2000b), is based on the theory of Lev
Vygotsky, the work of Reuven Feuerstein, and others from the fields of cognitive
education and collaborative/ cooperative learning.
Goals
The goal of CEA is to teach learners how to learn. CEA assists students, teachers, and
families to learn and use a common language about cognitive, motivational, and
affective processes. Greenberg (2000a) describes this language as being
‘metastrategic’ because children use this language to develop their own personal
learning strategies in a variety of situations. Children are not given or directly taught
specific strategies. Through ‘mediated learning experiences’ children are assisted to
discover and apply a ‘language about thinking’.
Greenberg’s interest in assisting children to ‘learn how to learn’ is echoed throughout
the theories and investigations into ‘metacognition’, general thinking skills and the
effect on children’s learning (Georghiades, 2004). Many authors have underlined the
importance of helping children to develop effective thinking practices (Flavell, 1987,
Georghiades, 2004, Nutbrown, 1994,). There is promising evidence that learners
learn best when they are aware of their own strengths and weaknesses
and can access their own best ways to learn (Georghiades, 2004).
Within the CEA approach teachers and families are assisted to adopt a ‘mediational’
teaching style, as well as learn about the common metastrategic language (MalloyMiller, Currie & Tucker, 2002). Mediated learning occurs when a more expert person
assists a learner to discover needed information or strategies (Feuerstein, 1980).
Greenberg (2000b) believes that it is essential for teachers and families to use
mediational questioning for children to be able to truly understand the CEA concepts
and construct their own strategies. Greenberg’s studies indicate that a child benefits
most after two years of exposure to CEA methods (Greenberg, 2000a).
What is the Evidence Basis for CEA?
Greenberg (2000a) completed a series of four studies from 1988-1994. CEA was
implemented in 4 school sites in rural and urban Tennessee with 3 matched
comparison schools, which did not implement CEA. The children involved in the
-6-
studies were in Grades Kindergarten to Grade 4 and had been involved with CEA
over a two-year period. Data was collected using standardized norm-referenced tests
(Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program and Standford Achievement Test)
concerning potential gains in reading, language, and math. Fidelity of treatment was
ensured by provision of weeklong workshops to teachers involved and periodic in
school support and consultation.
The effect size for reading ranged from +0.20 to + 0.55; for language, from +0.90 to
+1.0; and for math from +1.0 to +1.5, in favour of the CEA school sites 1.
Greenberg (1994) also studied the effect of CEA on the teaching style of teachers.
Teachers from both the CEA school sites and comparison schools were videotaped.
The interactions between the teacher and the students were analysed for examples of
mediational teaching by an observational system (Greenberg 1990), a rating scale
(Lidz, 1993, cited in Greenberg, 2000a), and a teacher-child interaction rating
(Brophy & Good, 1969, cited in Greenberg, 2000a). Teachers in the CEA sites
displayed greater use of mediational teaching methods (effect size of +0.9).
Greenberg (2000a) also collected data from a smaller group of students from both
CEA schools and comparisons schools, using dynamic assessment measures
concerning intrinsic motivation and attention. Students from CEA schools revealed
significantly increased intrinsic motivation and attention relative to students in
comparison schools. Greenberg’s work meets all of the evidenced-based practice
quality indicators described by Montague and Dietz (2009).
CEA Uses Evidence-Based, Best Teaching Practices to Enhance
Student Learning:
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage (CEA) reflects current evidenced-based practices
supporting children’s learning. Recently there has been an effort to detail best
practices for teaching and learning based on current research literature (Facione,
2006; McCombs, 2001; Murphy & Alexander, 2007; & Pashler, Bain, Bottege,
Graesser, Koedinger, McDaniel & Metcalfe, 2007). CEA principles encompass many
of these best practices.
Best Practices in Teaching—Use Learning Principles to Guide
Teaching Practice:
Murphy and Alexander (2007) summarized the 14 optimal learning principles,
generated by the American Psychological Association Board of Educational Affairs in
1995, into five crucial themes:
1. A learner’s current knowledge serves as a basis for association with
new knowledge, a filter for new experiences, and a guide for
organizing and representing future learning.
2. Motivational and affective factors play a significant role in the
learning process.
3. The ability to reflect upon and regulate thoughts and actions is critical
to learning.
An effect size of .20 is considered small, .30 is considered educationally important, .50 as medium
and .80 or higher as a large effect size.
1
-7-
4. Learning progresses through common developmental stages and is
influenced by heredity and environment. This is expressed in a unique
way for all learners.
5. Learning is significantly shaped by social context or situation.
Vygotsky’s concept of a Zone of Proximal development, where a more
knowledgeable learner guides the learning of less skilled learner, is
recognized as a frequent and effective source of learning.
These learning principles are reflected in the design and delivery of the CEA
Program.
Best Practices in Teaching—Incorporate Children’s Background
Knowledge and Experience into Learning Experiences:
Greenberg (2000b) emphasized the importance of recognizing the background
knowledge and experience of children in order to actively engage them in the
learning process. The foundation for CEA is the theory of mediated learning
experience, initially described by Feuerstein (1980). One of the key factors for
mediated learning is the need for ‘reciprocity’ between the child and the mediator
(Feuerstein, 1980, Greenberg, 2000b). Reciprocity underlines the importance of
building a responsive connection and understanding between the child and the
mediator. In CEA it is assumed that for learning to occur the mediator must
understand the background experience and values of the learner and the learner
must also understand the values and beliefs of the mediator.
Best Practices in Teaching—Recognize the Importance of Affective
and Motivational Practices in Learning:
CEA is a holistic cognitive education method. The common CEA metastrategic
language that children use to develop their own strategies encompasses motivational
and affective concepts as well as cognitive concepts (Greenberg, 2000a). Greenberg
believes that as children become aware of motivational and affective concepts that
they will be more likely to realize how these factors can support or interfere with
their learning (Greenberg, 2000a).
The CEA concepts most frequently used by teachers include Self Regulation
(motivational concept) and Feeling of Competence (affective concept) (Malloy-Miller
et al., 2002). CEA teachers also learn to provide frequent, specific positive feedback
to assist children to build a positive self picture (Greenberg, 2000b, Malloy-Miller &
Shuttleworth, 2009). Picture (Greenberg, 2000b, Malloy-Miller & Shuttleworth,
2009).
Most Frequently Used CEA Concepts
Self-Regulation
Exploration
Making Comparisons
Problem Identification
Planning
Goal Orientation
Connecting Events
Feeling of Competence
Best Practices in Teaching—Teach and Promote the Use of SelfRegulation:
One of the central CEA motivational concepts that children learn is Self Regulation.
Children from Kindergarten to Grade 8 have discovered, discussed, and applied the
-8-
concept of Self Regulation. They understand this concept relative to the tasks and
expectations of their grade level Malloy-Miller, et al., 2002). Students’ knowledge of
Self Regulation builds over time (Ylvisaker & Feeney, 2008). Parents and teachers
find that after extended exposure to CEA concepts, their children/students became
more independent at home and at school and often used the term Self Regulation
(Malloy-Miller et al., 2002).
Best Practices in Teaching—Attend to the Developmental Stages of
Learning While Still Recognizing that Learning is Shaped by Social
Context:
Greenberg (2000b) recognizes the developmental nature of learning and as with
Feuerstein’s theory of mediated learning experience, the emphasis of CEA is on the
social construction of knowledge. Vygotsky’s theory of the ‘zone of proximal
development is central in Feuerstein’s (1980) theory of mediated learning experience
and Greenberg’s development (2000b) of CEA:
“With the use of mediated learning experiences in an atmosphere that facilitates the
social construction of knowledge, CEA maximizes learning potential and nurtures
the human spirit in all learners by helping them to believe in themselves and their
ability to become effective learners.” (Greenberg, 2000b, pg. 25)
Classroom teachers select CEA concepts that match the developmental level and
needs of their students. Teachers help students to connect the concepts to their daily
academic and social activities (Malloy-Miller, et al., 2002).
Best Practices in Teaching—Employ Effective Instructional
Methods:
Pashler et al. (2007) generated a practice guide for organizing instruction and
improving student learning. Based on their combined expertise in the field of
teaching and learning and a current review of best practice literature, they detailed a
list of recommendations which are complementary to those described by Murphy
and Alexander (2007). Pashler et al. rated the level of evidence for each
recommendation:
 Space learning over time (moderate evidence).
 Interweave worked examples with problem-solving exercises
(Moderate evidence).
 Combine graphics with verbal descriptions (moderate evidence).
 Connect and integrate abstract and concrete representations of
concepts (moderate evidence).
 Ask deep explanatory questions (strong evidence).
CEA incorporates many of these best instructional practices. For example:
Space Learning Over Time:
Greenberg (2000b) acknowledged that CEA is not a quick fix and
recommended that students be exposed to the
CEA method for at least two years. The CEA metastrategic language is
interspersed throughout the school day to assist with understanding and
completion of regular classroom activities. CEA is not intended to be a
separate activity or instruction time. The learning of CEA concepts is
therefore naturally spaced over time with frequent, embedded examples in
children’s activities at home and at school.
-9-
Provide Examples and Encourage Students to Apply to Their
Problems; Connect Abstract and Concrete Examples;
Combine Graphic and Verbal Descriptions:
As children in CEA classrooms are guided through a discovery discussion
about a new CEA concept, the teacher-mediator offers examples of how
she/he might use that concept and then the children add their examples.
Examples are generated throughout the school day and the children begin to
use the concepts to develop their own learning strategies. During the
introduction discussions, teachers pose a series of questions prompting the
students to think more deeply about the CEA concept. The responses of the
children are recorded in mind maps, concept maps or other graphic
organizers. Teachers often keep these records as anchor charts to refer back
to or add onto with their students. During the introductory discussion, the
students summarize their ideas about the CEA concept into a general
statement or principle about the main idea of that concept (e.g., “If I use
‘Exploration’ then I will get the information that I need and be ready to
learn”). This takes the concrete examples of the students and helps them to
build a more abstract rule that they can apply in a variety of situations
(Greenberg, 2000b, Malloy-Miller et al., 2002).
Use Deep Level Questioning:
Deep level questioning is strongly supported as a teaching strategy that
prompts greater comprehension, learning and memory. Craig, Sullins,
Witherspoon and Gholson (2006) studied the effect of deep-level reasoning
questions on the vicarious, computer-based learning of college students. The
questions were drawn from a question frame (i.e., comparison, interpretation,
causal antecendent/consequent, instrumental/procedural and enablement).
They found that learners who received prompts for deep-level questioning out
preformed students who participated in an interactive dialogue, observed an
interactive dialogue, or observed a monologue of the same content. Craig et al.
hypothesized that deep level questioning may have led the learner to selfexplain, detect incomplete mental models and find discrepancies between their
model and the presented model.
A similar effect for deep level questioning has also been demonstrated with
grade eight students (Chi, De Leeuw, Chiu & Lavancher, 1994) and with grade
four students (King, 1994).
Inherent in mediated learning techniques used in CEA is the belief that
mediators guide the child with questions and statements that assist the child
to develop their own understanding and strategies (Greenberg, 1994,
Greenberg, 2000b). CEA teachers use questions or statements to prompt
students to reflect on their current actions and strategies and evaluate the
success of these strategies (Malloy-Miller & Shuttleworth, 2009). Teachers
are encouraged to guide students to develop their own plans and strategies.
Best Practices in Teaching—Actively Engage the Learner:
VanLehn, Graesser, Jackson, Jordan, Olney, and Rose (2007) examined the
difference between reading and dialogue. In their review of the literature, they found
that learning gains are dependent on how actively engaged the learner is. If the
learner actively works with the information in some way then the learning effect is
the same for reading, listening, and dialogue. In their study they found a ‘content’
- 10 -
factor and couched their explanation relative to Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal
Development (VanLehn et al, 2007). If the content is familiar to students then
dialogue is not more helpful than reading and listening. However, if the content is in
the upper zone of the learners’ ZPD, then dialogue facilitates learning. They posit
that dialogue may add content and keep the learner engaged in complex tasks
(VanLehn, et. al. 2007).
CEA teachers develop the mediational style of not giving students more assistance
than is needed. They are encouraged to engage students in ‘exploration thinking’
when they are learning new academic concepts to benefit from what students already
know (Malloy-Miller & Shuttleworth, 2009). The Mediator constantly attends to the
balance between challenge and level of difficulty (Greenberg, 2000b). Greenberg
(1994) observed that CEA teachers are more likely to ask higher-level questions than
teachers who have not had CEA training.
Best Practices in Teaching—Encourage Students’ Creation of SelfExplanations:
Chi, De Leeuw, Chiu, and Lavancher (1994) investigated the role of self-explanations
with eighth grade students. They found that students, regardless of ability level, who
engaged in more detailed and inferential self-explanations tended to understand the
content at a deeper level and made less errors. King (1994) investigated the effect of
training Grade 4 and 5 students to ask each other experience-based questions versus
factual questions versus just explaining to each other. The results of her study
indicated that student dyads using experience-based questions with explanations
developed more complex and stable mental models and were more likely to retain
what they had learned (King 1994). King, Staffieri, and Adelgais (1998) extended this
comparison with Grade 7 students to determine the effect of training students to ask
integrative, experienced-based questions in a set sequence of increasing complexity.
They found a small treatment effect in favour of training students to ask other
students sequenced higher level questions. They felt that the students required more
time and practice to internalize the question strategy. They found again that without
explicit training, students tend to question and explain in a more factual, concrete
manner and are less likely to retain what they have learned.
CEA provides students with an explicit structure to reflect on their thinking and an
Cexplicit set of metastrategic concepts to generate their own strategies (Greenberg,
2000a). Within the CEA framework students are encouraged to ‘bridge’ their
growing knowledge of the CEA concepts to a variety of situations at home, school and
in their community (Greenberg, 2000a). Greenberg’s (2000a) original studies were
based on children having exposure to the CEA concepts over a two-year period.
Greenberg (2000b) noted that CEA is not a “quick fix”. Greenberg, based on
Feuerstein’s (1980) research, believes that improving learner effectiveness requires
time and effort.
Teachers trained to use the CEA method are helped to learn questioning skills
(describe, analyze, plan, and evaluate) that encourage children to engage in
frequent self-explanations.
Best Practices in Teaching—Develop Critical Thinking Skills:
Facione (2006) reported the consensus from an international group of experts about
the meaning of critical thinking skills. This panel of experts described critical
thinking as a pervasive and purposeful human phenomenon characterized by skills
including: interpretation, analysis, inference, explanation, evaluation and self-
- 11 -
regulation. They added that a disposition toward critical thinking would include
being analytical, systematic, inquisitive, judicious, truth seeking, confident, and
open-minded.
All of these features of critical thinking are represented in the list of cognitive,
affective, and motivational concepts that are presented to children through the CEA
method (Greenberg 2000b).
Best Practices in Teaching—Explicit Strategy Instruction:
Tracy, Reid, and Graham (2009) summarized the extensive research concerning the
direct teaching of writing strategies to enhance the skills of struggling writers. They
noted that explicit and systematic strategy instruction in planning, drafting, and
revising had a strong impact on improving the overall quality of writing. In
conjunction to explicitly being taught these writing skills, students need explicit
instruction to use self regulation procedures, such as self-instruction, goal setting,
self-monitoring and self-reinforcement (Tracy et al., 2009). CEA introduces students
to similar metastrategic concepts (Planning, Goal Orientation and Self Regulation)
and encourages children to apply these concepts to all activities at home, school, and
in their community (Greenberg 2000b). The CEA concepts fit with and extend many
of the cognitive strategies that are explicitly taught in relation to a particular
academic area. Greenberg (2000a) intentionally planned to make metastrategic
concepts or knowledge explicit for children. This gives them a basis to develop their
own strategies rather than implement expert-derived strategies. Greenberg felt that
children are more likely to generalize strategies that they have actively developed.
Best Practices in Teaching—Differentiating Instruction:
In the Ontario Ministry of Education document, Education For All (2005),
differentiated instruction is described as a best practice standard. As with CEA, the
theory base behind differentiated instruction is that of Lev Vygotsky. Teachers are
encouraged to differentiate the content, the processes, or the products to match the
needs of individual students (Ministry of Education, 2005). The Education For All
document lists “Strategy Instruction” as an evidenced-based practice for both
numeracy and literacy in terms of assisting students to ‘learn how to learn’ and
become more efficient learners. Specific strategy instruction is felt to be most
effective, especially when students learn when, where and how to use a strategy
(Ministry of Education, 2005).
CEA provides children with an explicit language about thinking that they can use for
numeracy and literacy tasks, as well as activities at home and in their community
(Greenberg, 2000a). Greenberg’s (2000a) research demonstrated that CEA does
have a positive effect on both children’s numeracy and literacy achievement. CEA
reflects accepted best practices to support children’s learning.
Conclusion:
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage incorporates educational and psychological best
practices related to children ‘learning how to learn’. Kathy Greenberg (2000a)
completed effectiveness studies to verify the best practice basis of CEA. Cognitive
Enrichment Advantage can be an effective ‘toolkit’ for teachers and parents whom
support and guide children’s learning.
- 12 -
A Little Bit of History…
_________________________________________________________________________
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage (CEA) has been used by teachers within the
Thames Valley District School Board since 2000. CEA was introduced to the Thames
Valley district through a community partnership between the primary children’s
service agencies in the London area. These included:

Thames Valley Children’s Centre

Thames Valley District School Board

London District Catholic School Board

Madame Vanier Children’s Services

Learning Disabilities Association – London Region

Middlesex-London Health Unit

Kids Count

Investing in Children

Parents for Children with Attention Deficit Disorder.
From that Steering Committee group the project, Kids On-Track (KOT), was formed
as a vehicle to demonstrate CEA and provide educational opportunities for families
and teachers. From 2000 to 2003 funding support was received from the:

National Crime Prevention Centre

The Solicitor General’s Office of Ontario

The Trillium Foundation

May Court Club of London.
All of the Community Partners made in-kind donations. From 2003 to 2010 funding
was shared between TVCC and TVDSB.
The Kids On-Track (KOT) project sent out an annual invitation to Elementary
School Principals to consider beginning with the CEA approach. Since September
2000 KOT has coached more than 250 TVDSB teachers in 24 TVDSB school sites,
and through workshops an additional 25 teachers, 6 School Support Counselors,
staff in the TVDSB Steps For Success program and staff at Madame Vanier
Children’s Services. Four schools from the London and District Catholic School
Board participated in the first two years of the KOT project and a number of
teaching staff from the LDCSB have attended CEA workshops.. KOT has had many
connections with families over the years via family meetings, newsletters and
attendance at workshops.
Through the KOT project a group of dedicated and knowledgeable educational and
health professionals was built who are readily able to foster the development of
children’s critical thinking skills.
Now in 2010, the coaching and educational support of the Kids On-Track project
has been transformed into an electronic learning tool. The vision is still the same.
The core belief is that children can be supported to develop their potential
through the development of critical thinking skills. This is especially
important for children who are at risk for learning, attention, movement and
behavioural difficulties. The intent is to foster the use of a language about
thinking as a basis for children to develop their own success strategies
for schoolwork, playground activities, leisure pursuits and community
participation.
- 13 -
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage is all about “Learning to Think and
Thinking to Learn”. This is the essence of metacognitive functioning and the
basis of metacognitive strategies. Thank you for joining in the pursuit of helping all
children be the best thinkers possible!
The Kids On-Track Steering Committee:
Terry Wilkins, Chair, Bonaventure Meadows P.S.
Theresa Malloy-Miller, KOT Coordinator, TVCC
Susan Shuttleworth, Retired Teacher
Annie Timms, Northdale P.S.
Patti Westaway, Southdale, P.S.
Lori Hargreaves, Aberdeen P.S.
Chris Murray, TVCC
Sharon Clements, Caradoc North P.S.
Lisa Ancans, Bonaventure Meadows P.S.
Cynthia Rhamey, Eastdale P.S.
- 14 -
Module 1:
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage
(CEA): Practice Activity
_________________________________________________________

Check out Katherine Greenberg’s books about CEA.
o Cognitive Enrichment Advantage: Family School Partnership
Handbook . ISBN: 1-57517- 269-0

o
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage: Minilessons
ISBN: 1-57517- 269-0

o
This book provides a more informal introduction to the
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage approach. Stories and
checklists are used to illustrate how the shared vocabulary
about thinking could be used by families.
This is a very practical manual that breaks up each thinking
skill into smaller parts. Discussion points and facilitation
questions are listed to provide examples of how to guide
students to discover their own understanding of these essential
thinking skills.
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage: Teacher Handbook
ISBN: 1-57517-194-5

This manual describes an innovative method for assisting
students to learn how to think. Cognitive Enrichment
Advantage is a cognitive education model based on the
learning and use of a shared vocabulary about thinking. The
intent is to assist children to create their own learning
strategies when this language of thinking is embedded into
their daily activities. The essential relationship between the
teacher and the student is described in detail, based on the
theory of ‘mediated learning experience’.

Detailed descriptions of the 20 cognitive, affective and
motivational concepts are included, as well as practical
teaching tips, visual aides and background theory.

Watch the video interviews with teachers who use the CEA approach in their
classrooms (Video 7).

Did you watch Video 1 for an introduction to CEA?
Tip:
Mediated Learning is the key to CEA.
Check out Module Two and Video 2.
- 15 -
Cognitive Enrichment Advantage: Reading List:
________________________________________________________________________
Ashman, A. F., & Conway, R. N. (1997). An introduction to cognitive education: Theory &
applications. London: Routledge.
Ben-Hur, M. (2000). Learning and transfer- A Tautology. In A. Costa (Ed.), Teaching for
Intelligence II: A Collection of Articles, Arlington Heights, Illinois: Skylight Professional
Development.
Chi, M. T., De Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., & Lavancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations
improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439- 477.
Craig, S. D., Sullins, J., Witherspoon, A., & Gholson, B. (2006). The deep-level reasoningquestion effect: The role of dialogue and deep-level reasoning questions during vicarious
learning. Cognition and Instruction, 24, 565-591.
Duffy, G. G. (1993) Teacher’s progress toward becoming expert strategy teachers. The
Elementary School Teacher, 94,109-120.
Expert Panel On Literacy and Numeracy Instruction For Students With Special Education
Needs, Kindergarten to Grade 6. (2005). Education for all. Toronto, ON: Ontario Ministry of
Education.
Facione, P. A. (2006). Critical thinking: What is it and why does it count? Retrieved from
www.insightassessment.com.
Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., Hoffman, M., & Miller, M. (1980). Instrumental enrichment: An
intervention program for cognitive modifiability. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Flavell, J. H. (1985). Cognitive development (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Fullan, M., Hill, P., & Crevola, C. (2006). Breakthrough. Thousands Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. Educational
Research Journal, 38, 915-945.
Georghiades, P. (2004). From the general to the specific: Three decades of metacognition.
International Journal of Science Education, 26, 365-383.
Greenberg, K. (1991). Cognitive enrichment network follow through research report:
Studies on impact on children, teachers, and parents. (Report # TAC-B-192). Washington:
U.S. Department of Education.
Greenberg, K. H. (1990). Mediated Learning in the classroom. International Journal of
Education and Mediated Learning, 1, 33- 43.
- 16 -
Greenberg, K. H. (1994). Differences in the degree of mediated learning and classroom
interaction structure for trained and untrained teachers. Journal of Classroom Interaction,
29, 1-9.
Greenberg, K.H. (2000). Attending to hidden needs: The cognitive enrichment advantage
perspective. Educational and Child Psychology, 17, 51- 69.
Greenberg, K. H. (2000). Cognitive Enrichment Advantage – Teacher Handbook.
Arlington, IL: Skylight Professional Development.
Greenberg, K. H. (2000). Cognitive Enrichment Advantage – Minilessons. Arlington, IL:
Skylight Professional Development.
Greenberg, K. H. (2000). Cognitive Enrichment Advantage – Family-School Partnership
Handbook. Arlington, IL: Skylight Professional Development.
Haywood, C. (1987). A mediational teaching style. The Thinking Teacher, 6, (1), 1-6.
King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching
children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31,
338-368.
King, A., Staffieri, A., & Adelgais, A. (1998). Mutual peer tutoring: Effects of structuring
tutorial interaction to scaffold peer learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 134152.
Malloy-Miller, T. , Currie, M., & Tucker, M. A. (2002). A qualitative analysis of parent and
teacher observations of a community–based cognitive education program: Experiences,
issues and strategies. Unpublished manuscript, London, ON: Thames Valley Children’s
Centre.
Malloy-Miller, T. & Shuttleworth, S. (2009). Cognitive enrichment advantage: Learning to
think and thinking to learn. Unpublished workshop manual, London, ON: Thames Valley
Children’s Centre.
McCombs, B. L. (2001). What do we know about learners and learning? The learnercentered framework: Bringing the educational system into balance. Educational Horizons,
Spring, 182-193.
McCombs, B. L., & Vakili, D. (2005). A learner-centered framework for e-learning. Teachers
College Record, 107, 1582-1600.
Montague, M., & Dietz, S. (2009). Evaluating the evidence base for cognitive strategy
instruction and mathematical problem solving. Exceptional Children, 75, 285-302.
Murphy, K., & Alexander, A. (2007). Contextualizing learner-centered principles for teachers
and teaching. In W. D. Hawley, & D. L. Rollie (Eds.), The keys to effective schools (pp.13-32).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
- 17 -
Nutbrown, C. (1994). Threads of thinking. London, UK: Paul Chapman.
Pashler, H., Bain, P., Bottge, B., Graesser, A., Koedinger, K., McDaniel, M., & Metcalfe, J.
(2007). Organizing instruction and study to improve student learning (NCER 20072004).Washington, DC: National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education
Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ncer.ed.gov.
Tracy, B., Reid, R., & Graham, S. (2009). Teaching young students strategies for planning
and drafting stories: The impact of self-regulated strategy development. The Journal of
Educational Research, 102, 323-331.
VanLehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rose, C. P. (2007).
When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive Science, 31, 3-62.
Ylvisaker, M., & Feeney, T. (2008). Helping children without making them helpless:
Facilitating development of executive self-regulation in children and adolescents. In V. H.
Anderson, R. Jacobs, & P. Anderson (Eds.), Executive functions and the frontal lobe: A
lifespan perspective (pp. 409- 438). London, UK: Taylor and Francis.
- 18 -