TY - JOUR
T1 - From Exploratory Talk to Abstract Reasoning
T2 - a Case for Far Transfer?
AU - Webb, Paul
AU - Whitlow, J. W.
AU - Venter, Danie
N1 - Funding Information:
This project was kindly funded in part by incentive funding (UID 85590) from the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016, Springer Science+Business Media New York.
PY - 2017/9/1
Y1 - 2017/9/1
N2 - Research has shown improvements in science, mathematics, and language scores when classroom discussion is employed in school-level science and mathematics classes. Studies have also shown statistically and practically significant gains in children’s reasoning abilities as measured by the Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices test when employing the practice of “exploratory talk”. While these studies suggest that transfer of learning had taken place, a number of dialog-intensive designs have failed to find positive results, only reported delayed transfer, or have been criticized in terms of methodological rigor, small sample sizes, or because they have only shown small effect sizes. In this study, the claim is made that a particular set of studies which focused on exploratory talk and reasoning abilities, and which used designs that are better positioned to meet the standards mentioned above when presenting data in support of far transfer, provides robust evidence of far transfer within the framework of Barnett and Ceci’s taxonomy of transfer. Possible relationships between exploratory talk, argumentation, and key domains in the science of learning are considered in an attempt to explain the apparent far transfer effects when children engage in exploratory talk.
AB - Research has shown improvements in science, mathematics, and language scores when classroom discussion is employed in school-level science and mathematics classes. Studies have also shown statistically and practically significant gains in children’s reasoning abilities as measured by the Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices test when employing the practice of “exploratory talk”. While these studies suggest that transfer of learning had taken place, a number of dialog-intensive designs have failed to find positive results, only reported delayed transfer, or have been criticized in terms of methodological rigor, small sample sizes, or because they have only shown small effect sizes. In this study, the claim is made that a particular set of studies which focused on exploratory talk and reasoning abilities, and which used designs that are better positioned to meet the standards mentioned above when presenting data in support of far transfer, provides robust evidence of far transfer within the framework of Barnett and Ceci’s taxonomy of transfer. Possible relationships between exploratory talk, argumentation, and key domains in the science of learning are considered in an attempt to explain the apparent far transfer effects when children engage in exploratory talk.
KW - Argumentation
KW - Exploratory talk
KW - Far transfer
KW - Raven’s standard progressive matrices
KW - Reasoning
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85026823091
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85026823091#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1007/s10648-016-9369-z
DO - 10.1007/s10648-016-9369-z
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85026823091
SN - 1040-726X
VL - 29
SP - 565
EP - 581
JO - Educational Psychology Review
JF - Educational Psychology Review
IS - 3
ER -