首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Translating the ICAP Theory of Cognitive Engagement Into Practice
Authors:Michelene T. H. Chi  Joshua Adams  Emily B. Bogusch  Christiana Bruchok  Seokmin Kang  Matthew Lancaster  Roy Levy  Na Li  Katherine L. McEldoon  Glenda S. Stump  Ruth Wylie  Dongchen Xu  David L. Yaghmourian
Affiliation:1. Mary Lou Fulton Teachers CollegeArizona State University;2. Phoenix Union School District;3. School of Informatics and Decision Systems EngineeringArizona State University;4. Department of PsychologyLourdes University;5. Denny Sanford School of Social and Family DynamicsArizona State University;6. Center for Human Applied Reasoning and IOTUniversity of Southern California;7. Tennessee State Board of Education;8. Strategic Initiatives Group, Office of Digital LearningMassachusetts Institute of Technology;9. Center for Science and the ImaginationArizona State University;10. World Wildlife Fund;11. Institute for the Science of Teaching & LearningArizona State University
Abstract:ICAP is a theory of active learning that differentiates students’ engagement based on their behaviors. ICAP postulates that I nteractive engagement, demonstrated by co‐generative collaborative behaviors, is superior for learning to C onstructive engagement, indicated by generative behaviors. Both kinds of engagement exceed the benefits of A ctive or P assive engagement, marked by manipulative and attentive behaviors, respectively. This paper discusses a 5‐year project that attempted to translate ICAP into a theory of instruction using five successive measures: (a) teachers’ understanding of ICAP after completing an online module, (b) their success at designing lesson plans using different ICAP modes, (c) fidelity of teachers’ classroom implementation, (d) modes of students’ enacted behaviors, and (e) students’ learning outcomes. Although teachers had minimal success in designing Constructive and Interactive activities, students nevertheless learned significantly more in the context of Constructive than Active activities. We discuss reasons for teachers’ overall difficulty in designing and eliciting Interactive engagement.
Keywords:Active learning  Cognitive engagement  Constructive learning  Co‐constructive learning  Collaborative learning
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号