| Summary: | In this paper, we have considered two competing methodologies, which may be used as the first two of four necessary utilities for implementing effective cognitive learning—the type of learning that is achieved by assimilating and accommodating new information with prior knowledge. The first of these methodologies has been provided through constructivism. According to the philosophies of the renowned psychologist and philosopher Jean Piaget, learning a new concept requires the mind to enter a state of disequilibrium and then progress through stages to re-establish a new equilibrium. Human intellect persists in a dynamic equilibrium state, while maintaining self-satisfaction and contentment. This equilibrium state allows reflective thought and reassurance within an individual about what he or she already knows. Moreover, according to Piaget, a student is thrown into a state of mental disequilibrium with the onset of receiving and assimilating a new concept, and it is a desire to remove the disequilibrium that results in cognitive learning. The second method for implementing cognitive learning has been advanced by the lesser-known Soviet Psychologist Lev Vygotsky, who expressed the notion that cognitive learning does not occur from removing a state of disequilibrium, but rather, it occurs from Cognitive Development instead. Cognitive Development occurs from the integration of both learning and an individual's sociocultural development, and as an outcome, manifests as an effective cognitive learning procedure. Additionally, Vygotsky has provided the philosophy that the nurturing of students is required in order to have both learning and sociocultural development to occur concurrently, instead of having only a natural assimilation and accommodation from a disequilibrium as asserted by Piaget. In this regard, we have reviewed briefly Jean Piaget's Constructivism, Lev Vygotsky's Cognitive Development Adaptation, Karl Popper's Three Worlds View Hypothesis, with its falsifiability component, and Bloom's affective and cognitive domains while considering each structure as a separate utility. Lastly, we have presented our notion of applying Individualized Symbolic Metal Structures (ISMSs), which allows through these methods the first-step effort beyond rote memorization to achieve cognitive learning.
|
|---|
