Relational reasoning shifts by grade level and object familiarity in students grades 1 to 12¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Younger students required more scaffolding and relied more on analogical and anomalous reasoning, while older students relied more on antithetical and antinomous reasoning. → Patricia A Alexander 2016 q2 i? Significantly more occurrences of analogical reasoning occurred when the objects analyzed were familiar rather than unfamiliar. → Patricia A Alexander 2016 (2)

Evidence¶

Patricia A Alexander 2016¶

Patricia A Alexander. (2016). Relational thinking and relational reasoning: harnessing the power of patterning. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjscilearn.2016.4

q2 · i? · review · r2

Cross-sectional think-aloud study by Jablansky et al. of first through twelfth graders reasoning about the form and function of technological tools. Developmental shifts appeared in quantity and quality of reasoning; no effect size is printed.

"younger students required more external support or scaffolding than older students. In addition, among younger students, there were more occasions of analogical and anomalous reasoning and relative fewer instances of antithetical and antinomous reasoning."

Patricia A Alexander 2016 (2)¶

Patricia A Alexander. (2016). Relational thinking and relational reasoning: harnessing the power of patterning. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjscilearn.2016.4

q2 · i? · review · r2

Same cross-sectional study's context finding: problem-solving context mattered, with analogical reasoning occurring significantly more often for familiar objects. No effect size is printed.

"there were signi ficantly more occurrences of analogical reasoning over the other four forms when the objects being analyzed for their form and function were familiar rather than unfamiliar."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Relational reasoning appears malleable and trainable, but may stabilize in adulthood without relevant experience — related
• Feedback features shift with age: scaffolds (prompts, audio, physical demonstrations) cluster in ages 3-7 while written and paper-based feedback appears only from age 8 — related
• Younger students solve letter equations less accurately than number equations, but this difference disappears by age 16–17 — related