Cognitive Scientists Prefer Theories and Testable Principles With Teeth

Abstract

Alexander, Schallert, and Reynolds (2009/this issue) proposed a definition and landscape of learning that included 9 principles and 4 dimensions (what, who, where, when). This commentary reflects on the utility of this definition and 4-dimensional landscape from the standpoint of educational psychologists who have a cognitive science perspective. Their analysis has practical value in positioning different research programs in the landscape, planning research road maps, and identifying the scope of research efforts. However, it is argued that the learning definition is underspecified and that the learning landscape is both cumbersome and insufficiently constrained. Cognitive scientists are more likely to be inspired by theories and testable principles that have more teeth.