Information Processing
Information Processing or IP is a cognitive theory that holds that computers and the human mind are "sufficiently similar that a single theory- the theory of computation- could guide both psychology and computer science." The tenets of this theory hold that learning is a series of additive rules, or If, Then statements. In this theory, one discovers through trial and error a rule to solve a problem, a set of algorithms in computational terms. These rules will be used in a working fashion until a problem is encountered that that rule cannot solve. From here, additions to this rule are put in place to solve the problem. The example is given in which weights are placed on a balance. The first rule is one in which more weight on one side = the "heavier side" goes down. All is fine and dandy until the position of the weight is altered. At this point the "student" must add a rule to deal with a new situation in which not only is the amount of weight important, but also the position. The final step of mastery if the understanding of the equation t1=w1 x d1; t2=w2 x d2 in which the side with more torque will drop.
This whole process is described as a journey from novice to expert. These terms are domain specific, that is, one may be an expert in one area, but a novice in another. Therefore, learning is a series of attempts at creating rules to guide you in domain specific knowledge. Experience is the key here. One article describes the misconceptions of an expert chess player.
Most people make the assumption that an expert chess player looks ten or eleven moves into the future; whereas, a novice looks one or two moves ahead. This may be a misconception. In truth, many expert chess players may only look two of three move in advance, but as an expert, they become use to different layouts that they are familiar with. In this way, they have seen certain pieces in certain positions before, and know that If they make this move, Then these possibilities are available. Studies have shown that this is in fact the truth. When both novices and experts are show a picture of a typical layout on a chess board, and asked to reproduce the scene, novices are only able to place a few individual pieces. Experts in contrast, see "chunks" information, groups of pieces, layouts they have seen before and are familiar with, and are able to reproduce much more accurately the scene.
One of the main problems with this theory, is the fact that it is domain specific. Some supporters try to reason that IP can become a multi-domain theory be teaching metacognitive strategies, that is rules that govern how to think and reason. Such ideas have come about in a program called reciprocal reading. In this strategy, students are taught a method to examine what they are reading. Those students are very capable linguistically, but fail to comprehend what they read. They are taught ways of recognizing what the author is trying to get across to the reader. They are taught how to find the main ideas in reading and strategies to identify important words and phrases. Again, this is still fairly domain-specific, it applies to a specific skill, reading. While it can be transferred to other areas of reading and enhance comprehension of science material, it does not mean that person is any more an expert in that science field.
The second problem in this theory occurs in place when no rule can be added to a situation to make the original rule remain correct. In many cases, students have misconceptions. Somewhere along the line, they created a rule for a specific event, when an event comes along that doesn’t fit the rule the rule must change, not just be added on to. In these cases, the program must be rewritten, not just modification by addition. Here is the major failing in this theory. Piaget directly confronts this issue with a much more constructive process (no pun intended).
Up
to Cognition
Forward
to Piaget