Author(s):
Most STEM instructors will probably agree that one major goal of our instruction is cultivating the ability to use formal knowledge to construct logically sound arguments. When students struggle to build such arguments, it can be easy to assume that they do not possess the necessary content knowledge to reason productively. While this interpretation may be helpful, dual-process theories of reasoning from cognitive psychology suggest that other factors, such as intuition and cognitive reflection tendencies, also play a critical role in cognition. In fact, intuition is often powerful enough to significantly enhance or hinder explicit reasoning (even by those who hold correct formal knowledge). In this talk, we will discuss how insights from cognitive psychology can help STEM education researchers and instructors gain a deeper understanding of interactions between various factors that impact reasoning. We will describe common reasoning pathways suggested by the dual-process theories of reasoning and discuss reasoning hazards present along the way. We will also highlight promising research methodologies that we developed to disentangle various factors impacting student reasoning, such as the presence of formal knowledge, intuition, and cognitive reflection. Finally, we will discuss how research on student reasoning through the lens of dual-process theories informs curriculum development and instruction.
Coauthors
MacKenzie R Stetzer <mackenzie.stetzer@maine.edu>; Beth Lindsey <bal23@psu.edu>, Paula Heron <pheron@uw.edu>; Andrew Boudreaux <boudrea@wwu.edu>
