View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Online Implementation of Portions of 'The Cognitive Challenges of Effective Teaching'

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Online Implementation of Portions of 'The Cognitive Challenges of Effective Teaching'
Language: English
Authors: Goffe, William L.
Source: Journal of Economic Education. 2021 52(1):82-88.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 7
Publication Date: 2021
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Descriptive
Opinion Papers
Descriptors: Metacognition, Self Management, Learning Strategies, Short Term Memory, Cognitive Processes, Difficulty Level, Units of Study, Electronic Learning, Economics Education
DOI: 10.1080/00220485.2020.1845264
ISSN: 0022-0485
Abstract: Chew and Cerbin (2021) offer a fruitful way of thinking deeply about teaching economics. In this article, the author offers several ideas on how to offload parts of three of the cognitive challenges they identify to an online module that any instructor could assign to their students. Ideally, this module would be described in an economics education publication. [For "The Cognitive Challenges of Effective Teaching," see EJ1282120.]
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2021
Accession Number: EJ1282124
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEqb561XbeQPbLTHnfuvWxPAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDBGojUQe622Yy1mroQIBEICBm9jbPEi9e5mGWhQIEeapUAUtQfoJYTGATGrV120X76qpnVPs3QqTaBJst9Zg3CEDJenOEHOMKKf6tMDjNCbi5ydV4M319m6EFpv4j8eOhrMr6W2i_5cOA8KCl_3obekBnRbg6EaPebgBDIoKs81LK9UbPCg384wjPDit3j5gihH6tATGDAOSbuds3UPZWr99jXuOOZt-A58hn6XB
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0147858900;jmd01jan.21;2021Jan02.03:28;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0147858900-1">Online implementation of portions of "the cognitive challenges of effective teaching" </title> <p>Chew and Cerbin (2021) offer a fruitful way of thinking deeply about teaching economics. In this article, the author offers several ideas on how to offload parts of three of the cognitive challenges they identify to an online module that any instructor could assign to their students. Ideally, this module would be described in an economics education publication.</p> <p>Keywords: Metacognition; self-regulated learning; working memory</p> <p>Chew and Cerbin ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref1">2</reflink>]) describe nine cognitive challenges for instructors to address for optimal learning. Addressing some of them might well require an extensive redesign of a course, but the focus here is on parts of three challenges that can be met with modest instructor effort. This effort could be further reduced to nearly zero if an enterprising individual or group put content online for all to access easily and to assign to their students. I describe a possible approach for this individual or group, with a focus on three of the Chew and Cerbin challenges (in their words):</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Metacognition and Self-regulation: Metacognition refers to students' awareness of their level of understanding of course concepts and their ability to regulate their study behavior to achieve a desired level of mastery.</item> <p></p> <item> Ineffective Learning Strategies: Students employ various strategies to learn course concepts, but these strategies can vary widely in their effectiveness and efficiency in learning.</item> <p></p> <item> Constraints of Mental Effort and Working Memory: Mental effort refers to our ability to concentrate on a task while working memory refers to our ability to think about and address that task.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0147858900-2">Addressing metacognition, self-regulation, and ineffective learning strategies</hd> <p>Kruger and Dunning ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref2">4</reflink>]) and Persky and Robinson ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref3">9</reflink>]) find that metacognition is often lacking in novices, and Chew and Cerbin ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref4">2</reflink>]) argue that instructors should help students improve this skill, along with self-regulation and study strategies. One approach is to assign readings or videos on these topics; there are two notable sets of them. Stephen Chew himself authored five videos; the first one is at https://<ulink href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH95h36NChI,">www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH95h36NChI,</ulink> and the later ones follow automatically. To date, they have been viewed nearly four million times, which certainly attests to their popularity and usefulness. Their titles are:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> "Beliefs That Make You Fail... Or Succeed"</item> <p></p> <item> "What Students Should Know About How People Learn"</item> <p></p> <item> "Cognitive Principles for Optimizing Learning"</item> <p></p> <item> "Putting Principles for Learning into Practice"</item> <p></p> <item> "I Blew the Exam, Now What?"</item> </ulist> <p>A group of cognitive scientists, billing themselves as the "Learning Scientists," created another resource based on Weinstein, Madan, and Sumeracki ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref5">10</reflink>], 1). They review the cognitive science literature for "cognitive strategies [that aid learning] that have received robust support from decades of research." At https://www.learningscientists.org, this group offers both videos and text materials on six concepts:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Spaced practice—one retains information for longer periods if study sessions are spaced out over time as opposed to studying the same amount of time in one session</item> <p></p> <item> Interleaving—deeper learning is achieved if one mixes up problem types rather than working similar problems together</item> <p></p> <item> Retrieval practice—trying to recall facts, concepts, and procedures from memory strengthens that memory (sometimes called the "testing effect")</item> <p></p> <item> Elaboration–asking one's self about connections between ideas and how things work deepens understanding</item> <p></p> <item> Concrete examples—learning is enhanced when examples connect to ideas and concepts that students already know</item> <p></p> <item> Dual coding—different representations of a concept (mathematical, text, tabular, graphical, etc.) enhance understanding</item> </ulist> <p>All their materials are very accessible to students, and I have recommended them for years. Metacognition and self-regulation are aided by retrieval practice as students discover if they understand a topic. The others are effective study methods.</p> <p>Simply watching a video or reading some material might lead to only a few changes in behavior. After all, these materials ask students to change what are likely deeply ingrained study methods and beliefs by reading or watching videos in one of their approximately 40 college courses. How might students be persuaded to actually change? One potential approach is classroom demonstrations, where students participate so that they can see and experience for themselves the benefits of these methods. Thus, active learning is used to convince students of their value and thus potentially change their behavior.[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref6">1</reflink>]</p> <p>One classroom demonstration on "depth of processing" is described in Chew ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref7">1</reflink>]).[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref8">2</reflink>] While not a focus of Chew and Cerbin ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref9">2</reflink>]), the concept is straightforward—when one thinks more deeply about a topic, one is more likely to remember and understand it. As a start to this classroom demonstration, students are asked which of the following matters most when studying:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> The intention and desire to learn</item> <p></p> <item> Paying close attention to the material as you study</item> <p></p> <item> Learning in a way that matches your personal learning style</item> <p></p> <item> The time you spend studying</item> <p></p> <item> What you think about while studying</item> </ulist> <p>Chew reports that typically responses from classes are evenly split between the first four, and option 5 receives relatively few votes. The class is then put into four groups, and each is given a worksheet with the same 24 words[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref10">3</reflink>]:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Evening</td><td>Pretty</td><td>Cold</td><td>Rich</td></tr><tr><td>Country</td><td>Expensive</td><td>Love</td><td>Nurse</td></tr><tr><td>Salt</td><td>Poor</td><td>Bargain</td><td>Pepper</td></tr><tr><td>Easy</td><td>Doctor</td><td>War</td><td>Hard</td></tr><tr><td>Peace</td><td>City</td><td>Hate</td><td>Ugly</td></tr><tr><td>Morning</td><td>Dry</td><td>Wet</td><td>Hot</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>The four groups receive different instructions, which are summarized in table 1 with Groups A, B, C, and D. First, two of the groups are told to "process" the list by writing "yes" or "no" after words with the letter "e" or "g," while the other two are asked to mark if each word is "pleasant" or not. The former is an example of "shallow" processing, and the latter an example of "deep" processing. Second, two groups, orthogonal to those with the first processing task, are told that they will need to recall the words after the demonstration while the other two are not told this.</p> <p>Table 1. Demonstration setup.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>Not told will need to recall words later</td><td>Told will later need to recall words</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Check for "e" or "g"</td><td>A</td><td>B</td></tr><tr><td>Is the word pleasant?</td><td>C</td><td>D</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>After the groups complete the worksheet and it is put away, each group is asked how many words they remember. Invariably, those asked to process deeply recall many more, and those told that they would need to recall the words later remember no more than those who were not told. Also, the deep-processing students generally notice that the words come in pairs while the shallow-processing students do not. During the debriefing by the instructor, it becomes clear that option 5, what you think about when studying, is the correct answer.[<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref11">4</reflink>] Thus, a very large majority of students had incorrect beliefs about studying as most felt that options 1, 2, 3, or 4 were what matters the most when studying. The instructor goes on to suggest that when studying course material, they should do the following to deeply process it: (i) elaborate on the material they are studying by making connections to related material, (ii) ask themselves how a concept is distinctive and might relate to their own lives, and (iii) should put away their materials and try to recall ideas and concepts from memory. Note that these are three of the methods suggested by the Learning Scientists: elaboration, concrete examples, and retrieval practice.</p> <p>McGuire ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref12">7</reflink>], 22) offers a less involved depth of processing demonstration.[<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref13">5</reflink>] First, the instructor shows students the following list of words on a projected slide:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Dollar Bill</td><td>Six-Pack</td><td>Football Team</td></tr><tr><td>Dice</td><td>Seven-Up</td><td>Dozen Eggs</td></tr><tr><td>Tricycle</td><td>Octopus</td><td>Unlucky Friday</td></tr><tr><td>Four-leaf Clover</td><td>Cat Lives</td><td>Valentine's Day</td></tr><tr><td>Hand</td><td>Bowling Pins</td><td>Quarter Hour</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Next, students are asked to count the number of vowels in these words over a span of 45 seconds. With the words then hidden, students are asked how many words they can recall, and they are polled anonymously (such as with a clicker). In the author's experience, the median number is in the range of 4 to 6. Next, students are shown the same words again for the same amount of time, but they are asked how these words are organized so that students process them more deeply than before. They are again hidden, students are asked how many they can now recall, and the number of recalled words roughly doubles. Then the instructor makes the same points that Chew suggests regarding study methods: they should use elaboration, ask how a concept is distinctive, and see what they can recall with their books and notes put away. More broadly, both of these demonstrations illustrate to students the usefulness of effective learning strategies.</p> <p>The following classroom demonstration illustrates another important concept[<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref14">6</reflink>] for students' learning strategies.[<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref15">7</reflink>] First, students are asked to pair up. One student is given a task to complete and the other times how quickly the first student completes this task: out loud say "a, b, c, ... j, 10, 9, 8, ..., 1" as quickly as possible. Then the two students swap roles, and the time of the second student is recorded. Next, the students are given a new task: say "10, a, 9, b, 8, c, ..., j" as quickly as possible (note how the original series are now interleaved), and again task completion time is recorded for both by their partner. Finally, for each student, the ratio of the time on the second task to the first is computed. In my experience, a very large majority of participants have a ratio larger than 1.[<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref16">8</reflink>] The pairs are then brought back together, and the class is asked the open-ended question on what principle is being demonstrated. Generally, one or two students will suggest multitasking, which is indeed the case—note how the second task has the students quickly switching between two different series. The room is quiet as students are shocked into silence as many thought that they could multitask quite well. This demonstration addresses the recommendation by Chew and Cerbin ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref17">2</reflink>], 29) that instructors "help students become aware of how multitasking will make learning harder, not easier."</p> <p>As the above suggests, there is a small cognitive science literature on classroom demonstrations. A useful summary is McCabe ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref18">6</reflink>]), who also describes demonstrations on spacing (long-term retention is aided when study sessions are spread out over time), the testing effect (or retrieval practice—trying to recall content aids retention), chunking (combining pieces of information into a larger piece makes it easier to process), the generation effect (making connections between ideas aids retention), and others. Note that chunking, the testing effect, and spacing are recommendations of Chew and Cerbin. Chunking addresses limited working memory, while spacing and the testing effect improves students' learning strategies. Potential demonstrations on spacing, the testing effect, and the generation effect lend themselves to economic content, unlike the demonstrations above on depth of processing. Here are some of the possibilities:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Spacing could be demonstrated over several class meetings over two or three weeks. Students might be asked to study some economic terms during one class meeting and other terms at several different class meetings. When tested on all the terms at the end of the period, the ones studied several times should be more accurately remembered.[<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref19">9</reflink>]</item> <p></p> <item> The testing effect could be demonstrated in a similar fashion. For example, one group of students in a class could be asked to read and reread economic content while another group of students is asked to read the same content and then asked to write down all they can remember after putting the material away. When tested a week later, those who tried to recall the information should remember more than the group of students who read and reread. This is a very robust finding in the cognitive science literature that dates back more than a century.[<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref20">10</reflink>]</item> <p></p> <item> The generation effect might be demonstrated with economic content, much like what was done with the testing effect. But, instead of being asked to write down all they can remember about a topic they just read, one group of students is asked to compare concepts in a reading while another group simply reads about the concepts. Students are then tested in a later class.[<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref21">11</reflink>]</item> </ulist> <p>While the above are interesting and engaging and should demonstrate to students' metacognition, self-regulation, and effective learning strategies, they obviously take valuable classroom time as well as effort and preparation time for the instructor. Further, these demonstrations would have to be well-motivated to avoid perceptions and even complaints that class time was spent on topics that are seemingly remote from learning economics. Thus, it would be particularly valuable and indeed welcomed by many instructors in economics and other disciplines to have an online, interactive module on these topics that instructors could point their students to for use outside of class.[<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref22">12</reflink>] That is, rather than watching a video or reading some text, students could interactively experience these concepts on their own. While some of the demonstrations mentioned above are designed for groups in class, many can be restructured so that students can do them individually and thus at times of their choosing. Rather than putting these demonstrations on a Web site, a particularly attractive approach would be to write them as an "LTI" where they would appear to students as a part of their LMS, be it Canvas, Blackboard, D2L, Moodle, or Sakai.[<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref23">13</reflink>] Ideally, data on student behavior in this module would be available to interested instructors.</p> <hd id="AN0147858900-3">Addressing constraints of mental effort and working memory</hd> <p>A further cognitive challenge from Chew and Cerbin ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref24">2</reflink>]) is "Constraints of Mental Effort and Working Memory." As they describe, humans face severe constraints on how many pieces of information we can manage at one time (such information is held in one's "working memory"). This concept of limited working memory is nicely illustrated by a simple question: "What are the days of the week? Oh, in alphabetical order."[<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref25">14</reflink>] The inability of many to easily answer this question illustrates that human working memory is indeed limited.</p> <p>Further, given the "Curse of Expertise" (or "Curse of Knowledge" [Wieman [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref26">11</reflink>]]), an instructor faces fewer limitations than students as each piece of information they can process is larger, given their experience and greater understanding of the subject. Thus, instructors can easily overwhelm students' working memory in class. The first step to address this situation is to collect data from students. This might be done with a final clicker question of the day or a brief survey in the LMS after class. This question might be phrased as, "How many times during class was there too much information for you to process?," with possible answers ranging from 0 to 4.[<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref27">15</reflink>] An LMS query might even include an open-ended question on which topic or topics did students face information overload. Once data are collected, the instructor could use these findings to potentially supply supplemental materials on this topic for this semester and redesign this lesson for future classes.</p> <p>In addition, a demonstration for students about working memory could certainly be part of the online module promoted in the previous section. It would help students understand their limitations when studying and learning.</p> <hd id="AN0147858900-4">Conclusion</hd> <p>Chew and Cerbin ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref28">2</reflink>]) provide a particularly useful framework for teaching economics with a set of nine cognitive challenges to be met for optimal learning. While some of their cognitive challenges might well take considerable effort to address, I outline three that can be addressed at a fairly low cost by an individual instructor through classroom demonstrations.</p> <p>Further, there is an opportunity for an enterprising individual or group to develop a set of interactive, online modules demonstrating these concepts to students outside of class that could be used by any interested instructor. This module would free up class time for economics and not task an economics instructor with additional topics to prep for and teach that are likely well outside their training. This proposed module could be used in multiple classes around the world and ideally inside an LMS. I have outlined demonstrations for metacognition, self-regulation, and learning strategies, and the constraints of mental effort and working memory that might be placed in this module. A paper describing this project should be published in an economics education journal to explain its details, have it reviewed by peers in the profession, enable enhancement by others, and earn credit for its authors.</p> <hd id="AN0147858900-5">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>The author thanks the editors for thoughtful comments that greatly improved the article.</p> <hd id="AN0147858900-6">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>The author states that there are no conflicts of interest regarding this article.</p> <ref id="AN0147858900-7"> <title> Notes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref6" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> As will be seen, adding economic terms or concepts does not seem possible for some demonstrations.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref1" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Some economists might have seen this demonstration at the 2019 Conference on Teaching and Research in Economic Education (CTREE) in Chew's plenary address.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref10" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> These words come from Hyde and Jenkins ([3]).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref2" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> This demonstration does not touch on learning styles, which was one option students were asked about at the start of the demonstration. Cognitive science finds little evidence for this concept (Pashler et al.[8]). This finding is described to students as part of the wrap up to this demonstration.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref13" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Like the prior demonstration from Chew ([1]), it is hard to envision it using economics content.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref14" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> The concept is revealed below—the reader is invited to see if they can determine it, much as students are asked to in the demonstration.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref12" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Like many classroom activities, the etymology of this demonstration is uncertain. A Google search shows different instructors using variations of it at different times at various institutions. I actually thought I developed a variant, but later read of its earlier use at the University of Michigan (that reference was not saved). The version here, with paired students recording task times and computing their ratio, was part of Stephen Chew's plenary address at CTREE in 2019 and I have since used it.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref16" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> A ratio larger than one for a large majority of participants is consistent with the literature; see, for example, May and Elder ([5]).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref3" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> A complication is that some terms might be easier to remember than others. To address this, terms of roughly the same difficulty should be in each of the groups.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> A subtle point is that over the span of a day or two, rereading material leads to greater recall than being tested on it. But one should keep in mind that much of college content needs to be recalled over weeks or more.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> It is an open research question on whether the testing or generation effect leads to better future recall.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> To the greatest extent possible, this module should contain discipline-specific examples. Thus, economics students would see economics examples, and so on, to help "sell" the module to students and to minimize complaints.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> "LTI" is short for "Learning Tools Interoperability," a software standard written by the IMS Global Learning Consortium. Major LMS vendors Canvas, Blackboard, D2L, Moodle, and Sakai participate, as do firms like Pearson, McGraw Hill, Cengage, and Turnitin. Many faculty and students likely use LTI tools without knowing the term—they are employed when they use external tools inside the LMS without having to log into them.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stephen Chew used this example at his plenary talk at CTREE in 2019. The etymology is unknown.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clearly the upper limit is dependent upon the technology used to ask the question, but if many students answer that even one time during class there was too much information to process, the instructor should investigate why this occurred.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0147858900-8"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Chew, S. L. 2010. Improving classroom performance by challenging student misconceptions about learning. APS Observer 23 (4). https://<ulink href="http://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/improving-classroom-performance-by-challenging-student-misconceptions-about-learning">www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/improving-classroom-performance-by-challenging-student-misconceptions-about-learning</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chew, S. L., and W. J. Cerbin. 2021. The cognitive challenges of effective teaching. Journal of Economic Education 52 (1): 17–40.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hyde, T. S., and J. J. Jenkins. 1973. Recall for words as a function of semantic, graphic, and syntactic orienting tasks. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 12 (5): 471 – 80. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(73)80027-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kruger, J., and D. Dunning. 1999. Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77 (6): 1121 – 34. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> May, K. E., and A. D. Elder. 2018. Efficient, helpful, or distracting? A literature review of media multitasking in relation to academic performance. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 15 (1): Article 13. doi: 10.1186/s41239-018-0096-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McCabe, J. A. 2014. Learning and memory strategy demonstrations for the psychology classroom. Baltimore, MD : Jennifer A. McCabe.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McGuire, S. Y. 2015. Teach students how to learn: Strategies you can incorporate into any course to improve student metacognition, study skills, and motivation. Sterling, VA : Stylus Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pashler, H., M. McDaniel, D. Rohrer, and R. Bjork. 2008. Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest : A Journal of the American Psychological Society 9 (3): 105 – 19. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Persky, A. M., and J. D. Robinson. 2017. Moving from novice to expertise and its implications for instruction. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 81 (9): 6065 doi: 10.5688/ajpe6065.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weinstein, Y., C. R. Madan, and M. A. Sumeracki. 2018. Teaching the science of learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 3:Article 2. doi: 10.1186/s41235-017-0087-y.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wieman, C. E. 2007. The "curse of knowledge" or why intuition about teaching often fails. APS News–The back page. American Physical Society News 16 (10): 8. https://<ulink href="http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200711/backpage.cfm">www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200711/backpage.cfm</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By William L. Goffe</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref27"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1282124
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Online Implementation of Portions of 'The Cognitive Challenges of Effective Teaching'
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Goffe%2C+William+L%2E%22">Goffe, William L.</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Economic+Education%22"><i>Journal of Economic Education</i></searchLink>. 2021 52(1):82-88.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 7
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive<br />Opinion Papers
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Metacognition%22">Metacognition</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Management%22">Self Management</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Learning+Strategies%22">Learning Strategies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Short+Term+Memory%22">Short Term Memory</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+Processes%22">Cognitive Processes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Difficulty+Level%22">Difficulty Level</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Units+of+Study%22">Units of Study</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Electronic+Learning%22">Electronic Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Economics+Education%22">Economics Education</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/00220485.2020.1845264
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0022-0485
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Chew and Cerbin (2021) offer a fruitful way of thinking deeply about teaching economics. In this article, the author offers several ideas on how to offload parts of three of the cognitive challenges they identify to an online module that any instructor could assign to their students. Ideally, this module would be described in an economics education publication. [For "The Cognitive Challenges of Effective Teaching," see EJ1282120.]
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1282124
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1282124
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/00220485.2020.1845264
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 7
        StartPage: 82
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Metacognition
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Management
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Learning Strategies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Short Term Memory
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cognitive Processes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Difficulty Level
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Units of Study
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Electronic Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Economics Education
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Online Implementation of Portions of 'The Cognitive Challenges of Effective Teaching'
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Goffe, William L.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2021
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0022-0485
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 52
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Economic Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1