Recent research results having to do with explicit instruction in computer programming and cognitive skills indicate an increased emphasis upon the structure of the learning environment surrounding programming languages. A new research direction concerned with transfer effects due to environmental aspects of programming instruction is emerging. A conceptual analysis of the syntax and semantics of the IF-THEN [ELSE] conditional command is presented which suggests that mastering a procedural language itself (independent of environment) might have unintended, indirect, and potentially negative effects upon fundamental intellectual skills. Research is reported which suggests that there are unintended side-effects upon childrens' conditional reasoning ability due to learning a procedural computer programming language.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SalomonG. and PerkinsD. N., Transfer of Cognitive Skills from Programming: When and How?, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3: 2, pp. 149–170, 1987.
2.
JohansonR. P., Computers, Cognition and Curriculum: Retrospect and Prospect, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 4: 1, pp. 78–83, 1988.
3.
MayerR. E. (ed.), Teaching and Learning Computer Programming: Multiple Research Perspectives, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1988.
4.
SeidmanR. H., New Directions in Educational Computing Research, in Teaching and Learning Computer Programming: Multiple Research Perspectives, MayerR. E. (ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, Chapter 12, 1988.
5.
FayA. L. and MayerR. E., Learning LOGO: A Cognitive Analysis, in Teaching and Learning Computer Programming: Multiple Research Perspectives, MayerR. E. (ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, Chapter 3, 1988.
6.
ClementsD. H. and MerrimanS., Componential Developments in LOGO Programming Environments, in Teaching and Learning Computer Programming: Multiple Research Perspectives, MayerR. E. (ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, Chapter 2, 1988.
7.
PerkinsD. N.SchwartzS., and SimmonsR., Instructional Strategies for the Problems of Novice Programmers, in Teaching and Learning Computer Programming: Multiple Research Perspectives, MayerR. E. (ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, Chapter 7, 1988.
8.
OsborneA. R., Priorities in School Mathematics, Council of Teachers of Mathematics, ERIC ED 184891/ED 184892, 1980.
9.
EnnisR. H., A Concept of Critical Thinking: A Proposed Basis for Research in the Teaching and Evaluation of Critical Thinking Ability, Harvard Education Review, 32, pp. 81–111, 1962.
10.
EnnisR. H., Conditional Logic and Children, Critical Thinking Project, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 1969.
11.
EnnisR. H., Children's Ability to Handle Piaget's Propositional Logic: A Conceptual Critique, Review of Educational Research, 45: 1, pp. 1–41, Winter 1975.
12.
EnnisR. H., An Alternative to Piaget's Conceptualization of Logical Competence, Child Development, 47, pp. 903–919, 1976.
13.
SmithB. O., Thinking and Teaching, Educational Theory, 7: 4, October 1957.
14.
KnellerG. F., Logic and Language of Education, Wiley, New York, 1966.
15.
GreenT. F.EricsonD. P., and SeidmanR. H., Predicting the Behavior of the Educational System, Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, New York, 1980.
16.
BeckerH. and SterlingC., Equity in School Computer Use: National Data and Neglected Consequences, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3: 3, pp. 289–312, 1987.
17.
HillS., A Study of Logical Abilities in Children, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 1961.
18.
EnnisR. H. and PaulusD., Critical Thinking Readiness in Grades 1–12 (Phase I: Deductive Reasoning in Adolescence), Critical Thinking Project, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 1965.
19.
BerzonskyM. D. and OndrankoM., Cognitive Style and Logical Deductive Reasoning, Journal of Child Psychology, 43: 1, Fall 1974.
20.
McAloonM. D., An Exploratory Study in Teaching Units in Logic in Grades Three and Six, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1969.
21.
SeidmanR. H., Transductive Reasoning and the Teaching of Conditional Logic to Children, Occasional Paper Series, Research Report 86–2, New Hampshire College Graduate School, Manchester, New Hampshire, 1986.
22.
von WrightG. H., Explanation and Understanding, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1971.
23.
SosaE. (ed.), Causation and Conditionals, Oxford University Press, London, 1975.
24.
PiagetJ., Logic and Psychology, Basic Books, New York, 1957.
25.
InhelderB. and PiagetJ., The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence, Basic Books, New York, 1958.
26.
HuntJ. McV., Intelligence and Experience, Ronald, New York, 1961.
27.
DeLongD., A Profile of Mathematical Logic, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1970.
28.
QuineV., Methods of Logic (3rd Edition), Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1969.
29.
SeidmanR. H., The Effects of Learning a Computer Programming Language on the Logical Reasoning of School Children, American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, 1981 (ERIC ED 205206).
30.
KnifongJ. D., Logical Abilities of Young Children—Two Styles of Approach, Child Development, 45: 1, pp. 78–83, March 1974.
31.
PiagetJ., The Language and Thought of the Child, Harcourt Brace, New York, 1926.
32.
PiagetJ., Judgment and Reasoning in the Child, Harcourt Brace, New York, 1928.
33.
EvansJ. St. B., On the Problems of Interpreting Reasoning Data: Logical and Psychological Approaches, Cognition, 1: 4, pp. 373–384, 1972.
34.
PapertS., A Computer Laboratory for Elementary Schools, Computers and Automation, 21: 6, June 1972.
35.
PapertS., Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas, Basic Books, New York, 1980.
