Cognitive Factors for Modeling in Digital Environments Characterized by a Nonlinear Presentation of Information
PDF (Russian)

Keywords

cognitology
information model
intellectual development
thinking
foresight thinking
nonlinear trajectory
cognition
information
knowledge
specialties of the future

Abstract

Introduction. This paper focuses on the conditions for using digital resources characterized by a nonlinear presentation of information in the cognitive process with a view of modelling personal educational environments as the basis for the map of opportunities in getting specialties of the future. The authors offer tools for the use of cognitive technologies for the construction of individuals’ worldviews which should create additional factors for the development of their theoretical and creative thinking and influence their cognitive development.

Methods. The study used the personality-oriented and the activity-based and system approaches to analyze and interpret the findings. The Rapid Foresight technique and the observation, experiment, and analysis methods were employed in the study.

Results. The authors justify the use of new cognitive technologies that allow individuals to model the process of cognition and help them create worldviews adequate to the demands of society and the trends of specialties of the future. The example of modelling a personal trajectory of the development in digital environments characterized by a nonlinear presentation of information describes the factors of the development of thinking and information searching skills. In accordance with corresponding cognitive processes individuals construct the following three types of knowledge: (a) knowledge acquired through perceiving and processing information; (b) knowledge acquired through experiment; and (c) meta-knowledge (reflexive and orientation knowledge). This paper presents an experiment confirming the effectiveness of new cognitive technologies in modeling a non-linear trajectory of individual development and cognition.

Discussion. On the basis of the generalization of the results of cognitive activity during modelling the process of cognition in digital environments the authors described the types of knowledge and offered the types of work considered to be the most effective in terms of intellectual development. The presented types of cognitive activity help to create additional conditions for new applications of cognitive technologies when constructing worldviews. A general algorithm of the map of opportunities implies a correlation between psychological characteristics and demands of specialties of the future.

https://doi.org/10.21702/rpj.2019.2.7
PDF (Russian)

References

Akcaoglu, M., & Green, L. S. (2019). Teaching systems thinking through game design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(1), 1–19. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9596-8

Asmolov, A. G. (2015). Activity as reality in defining people and activity as a cognitive construct. Activity and the activity approach to understanding people: The historical meaning of the crisis of cultural-activity psychology. Russian Education & Society, 57(9), 731–756. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2015.1125706

Bishop, P., & Hines, A. (2006). Thinking about the future: Guidelines for strategic foresight. Washington: Social Technologies.

Crosslin, M. (2018). Exploring self-regulated learning choices in a customisable learning pathway MOOC. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 131–144. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3758

Dhukaram, A. V., Sgouropoulou, C., Feldman, G., Amini, A. (2018). Higher education provision using systems thinking approach – case studies. European Journal of Engineering Education, 43(1), 3–25. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2016.1210569

Fengfeng, Ke. (2016). Designing and integrating purposeful learning in game play: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(2), 219–244. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9418-1

Fileva, A. A. (2016). Forming a map of educational opportunities when working with various categories of children. Molodoi uchenyi (Young Scientist), 19(1), 35–38. (in Russ.).

Gal'perin, P. Ya. (2015). Lectures on psychology. Moscow: Knizhnyi dom “Universitet”. (in Russ.).

Gogoll, J., & Uhl, M. (2018). Rage against the machine: Automaton in the moral domain. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 74, 97–103. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2018.04.003

Granitskaya, A. S., Unt, I., & Shadrikov, V. D. (2005). Technologies for individualizing learning. In G. K. Selevko Encyclopedia of educational technologies: Vol. 1 (pp. 224–240). Moscow: Narodnoe obrazovanie. (in Russ.).

Isupova, N. I., & Suvorova, T. N. (2018). Creating the system of learning situations with the use of text labyrinth. Informatika i obrazovanie (Informatics and Education), 4, 37–41. (in Russ.).

Jorge, J., & Paredes, R. (2018). Passive-Aggressive online learning with nonlinear embeddings. Pattern Recognition, 79, 162–171. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2018.01.019

Karavaev, N. L., & Soboleva, E. V. (2017). Analysis of software services and platforms that have the potential for gamification of the educational process. Koncept: Scientific and Methodological e-magazine, 8, 14–25. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.24422/mcito.2017.8.6960 (in Russ.)

Kartono, Suryadi, D., & Herman, T. (2018). Non-linear learning in online tutorial to enhance students’ knowledge on normal distribution application topic. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 948. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/948/1/012003

Kholodnaya, M. A., & Emelin, A. (2015). Resource function of conceptual and metacognitive abilities in adolescents with different forms of dysontogenesis. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 8 (4), 101–113. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.11621/pir.2015.0409

Leont'ev, D. A., Lebedeva, A. A., & Kostenko, V. Yu. (2017). Trajectories of personal development: Reconstruction of L. S. Vygotsky’s views. Voprosy obrazovaniya (Educational Studies Moscow), 2, 98–112. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2017-2-98-112 (in Russ.)

Nenashev, M. I., Okulov, S. M., & Yulov, V. F. (2012). Development of secondary school students’ intellect in the process of studying informatics. Vestnik Vyatskogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarnogo universiteta (Herald of Vyatka State University of Humanities), 3(3), 64–68. (in Russ.).

Paterson, R. E. (2017). Intuitive cognition and models of human–automaton interaction. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 59(1), 101–115. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018720816659796

Plack, M. M., Goldman, E. F., Scott, A. R., Pintz, C., Herrmann, D., Kline, K., Thompson, T., & Brundage, S. B. (2018). Systems thinking and systems-based practice across the health professions: An inquiry into definitions, teaching practices, and assessment. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 30(3), 242–254. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2017.1398654

Randle, J. M., & Stroink, M. L. (2018). The development and initial validation of the paradigm of systems thinking. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 35(6), 645–657. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.2508

Reynolds, R. (2016). Defining, designing for, and measuring “social constructivist digital literacy” development in learners: A proposed framework. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(4), 735–762. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9423-4

Rubinshtein, S. L. (2012). Being and consciousness. St. Petersburg: Piter. (in Russ.).

Seaborn, K., & Fels, D. I. (2015). Gamification in theory and action: A survey. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 74, 14–31. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.006

Semenov, D. S. (2015). Psychological predictors for prediction of professional activity. Fundamental'nye issledovaniya (Fundamental Research), 2(19), 4333–4335. (in Russ.).

Sgouropoulou, C., Voyiatzis, I., Koutoumanos, A., Hamdioui, S., Pouyan, P., Comte, M., Prinetto, P., Airò Farulla, G., Ellervee, P., Delgado Kloos, C., & Crespo Garcia, R. (2017). Standards-based tools and services for building lifelong learning pathways. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 1619–1621. Athens: IEEE. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2017.7943065

Smirnova, O. O. (2016). Methodology of foresight studies of the socio-economic system of rural areas as a problem of social philosophy. Context and Reflection: Philosophy of the World and Human Being, 5(6В), 300–307.

Soboleva, E. V., Karavaev, N. L., Perevozchikova, M. S. (2017). Improving the content of teacher training for the development and use of computer games in the learning process. Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta (Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin), 7(6), 54–70. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15293/2226-3365.1706.04 (in Russ.).

Solov'ev, I. V. (2016). Picture of the world as the cognitive paradigm. Obrazovatel'nye resursy i tekhnologii (Education Resources and Technologies), 1(13), 96–102. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21777/2500-2112-2016-1-96-102 (in Russ.).

Spanoudis, G., Demetriou, A., Kazi, S., Giorgala, K., & Zenonos, V. (2015). Embedding cognizance in intellectual development. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 132, 32–50. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2014.12.003

Timchenko, V. V. (2010). Foresight philosophy: The main categories. Vestnik Universiteta, 6, 209–212. (in Russ.).

Tsvetkov, V. Yа. (2014). Dichotomic assessment of information situations and information superiority. European Researcher, 86(11-1), 1901–1909. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13187/er.2014.86.1901