A medium feature's affordance does not guarantee its actual cognitive effects: LOGO instruction designed to enhance conditional reasoning may not do so¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r3 · q1
Currency · newest study 1983 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on an ERIC document (a report, conference paper or thesis). It is kept because 2 design pages cite it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.

Subclaims¶

q1 i? There is no necessary one-to-one correspondence between what a feature or activity affords and the way it is actually processed or carried out. → Salomon 1983

Evidence¶

Salomon 1983¶

Salomon, Gavriel; Gardner, Howard. (1983). The Computer as Educator: Lessons from Television Research. Harvard Project Zero. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED253201

q1 · i? · theoretical · r3

The authors' theoretical argument, citing Seidman (1983), that assuming unique features have unique cognitive effects is naive. The paper reports no data of its own here; the point is an analytic critique of feature-effect assumptions.

"Thus while instruction in LOGO may be designed to enhance conditional reasoning, one cannot simply assume that this effect will be forthcoming (see Seidman, 1983)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Algebraic Thinking — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• One-session checklist (CRAAP) instruction in source evaluation did no better than the alternative methods it was compared with in two quasi-experiments — related
• Learners' beliefs about a medium and its processing demands influence the mental effort they invest in processing it — related
• Reported PLC outcomes frequently do not correspond with the stated object; complete object–outcome correspondence appeared in only three studies — a broader claim this one bears on
• A systematic review argues that concrete materials aid mathematics and science learning when they are explicitly and gradually connected to the abstract symbols they represent — related
• Students can only improve if they develop the capacity to monitor the quality of their own work during actual production — related
• Learning from visual displays often yields disappointing outcomes because displays pose substantial demands on learners — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Students' self-reports of task effortfulness do not validly indicate a task's object-level cognitive requirements — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Holding a strong goal intention alone does not guarantee goal achievement — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Writing is presented as uniquely corresponding to the features of successful learning — related
• A tool's effectiveness results from the whole configuration of events, activities, and contexts in which it is used — related
• Review reports exposure abroad alone does not guarantee gains in social-change competencies, calling the learning mechanism a black box — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Learning is assumed to be a non-symbolic inductive process enhanced by formal systems acting as tools — related
• Learning is a process of development in which the beginner's mode of working constantly changes and cannot use expert methods — related