Empirical evidence is provided to show that potential for learning can predict and explain academic performance. Postulating potential for learning as an antecedent variable in Pascual-Leone's Theory of Constructive Operators, facilitates the integration of developmental and learning factors in cognitive theories.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrainerdC. J. (1978) The stage question in cognitive developmental theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2, 173–213.
2.
MillerR.Pascual-LeoneJ.CampbellC.JuckesT. (1989) Cross-cultural similarities and differences on two neo-Piagetian tasks. International Journal of Psychology, 24, 293–313.
3.
NiazM. (1990) Does Newton's falling apple require an explanation? Antecedent variables in cognitive development: Controversy and resolution. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 70, 755–758.
4.
NiazM. (1994) Pascual-Leone's theory of constructive operators as an explanatory construct in cognitive development and science achievement. Educational Psychology, 14, 23–43.
5.
NlazM.CaraucanE. (in press) ‘Learning-to-learn’ ability: A neo-Piagetian interpretation of the potential for learning. Perceptual and Motor Skills.
6.
NovakJ. D.GowinD. B. (1984) Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge Univer. Press.
7.
Pascual-LeoneJ. (1987) Organismic processes for neo-Piagetian theories: A dialectical causal account of cognitive development. International Journal of Psychology, 22, 531–570.
8.
Pascual-LeoneJ.BurtisP. J. (1974) FIT: Figural Intersection Test, a group measure of M-capacity. (Unpublished manuscript, York Univer., North York, Ontario).
9.
Rojas De AstudilloL.NiazM. (1996) Understanding alternative conceptions in chemistry: A neo-Piagetian explanatory model. Paper presented at the 69th Annual Conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), St. Louis, MO, April.
