Teaching to the Cognitive Domain

Teaching to the Cognitive Domain

It seems only natural to consider cognitive development more critical to education than other aspects of development. The teacher’s chief purpose is to challenge and gauge the cognitive capabilities of his students. This is the reason kids are sent to schools. Further, evidence throughout the literature suggests that while adolescents struggle with socio-emotional development, it is the immaturity of the cognitive domain which impedes a resolution of this struggle. For this reason, strengthening students’ cognitive capacities and challenging students to think more abstractly may also aid in the resolution of socio-emotional crises.

Piaget’s theory of cognitive development proposes four stages of intellectual growth. It is in the fourth stage, the formal operational stage, that youth begin to think abstractly and reason logically. This period begins in early adolescence and continues into adulthood (Santrock, 2008). Prior to this stage, youths are cognitively unable to engage in certain types of thinking. In contrast, Erikson identifies a socio-emotional stage occurring at approximately the same age in which adolescents engage in a perplexing search for identity (Erikson, 2000).

Although a socio-emotional theory, elements of cognition can be found within the work of Erikson when compared with more recent studies documenting the cognitive development of adolescents. A study by Harter (1999), finds that adolescents view themselves from multiple perspectives which are frequently contradictory. For example, while they may feel talkative and sociable with friends, with parents they may feel uncomfortable and introverted. Faced with conflicting self-representations, teens struggle with the question of who they really are.

A similar idea is supported by Kagan (1971). As adolescents experience and perceive more of the world around them, many beliefs that were unquestioned as children are thrown into uncertainty. A belief in a benevolent God, which may have been present since earliest memories, is juxtaposed against the more brutal aspects of humanity such as poverty, war and crime. Parents, viewed as unerring superheroes during childhood, are found to be fallible and fragile. As a possible progression of child to adolescent thought, consider the following example:

1. The government is a caring organization that protects the people.
2. There is a lot of social injustice in our country.
3. If the government is caring, they will not allow so much social injustice to occur.

The syllogism contradicts even the most basic logic. Revelations such as these could be earth-shattering for youths as the most difficult premise to grapple with (3), is the one to which the schema is most vulnerable. Reconciling these premises requires a re-thinking of all the adolescent mind knows.

However, this reconciliation will not take place immediately. A full reconciliation requires the further development of cognitive abilities. The incongruence adolescents perceive can be viewed as such: early and middle adolescents are aware of an incongruence, but lack the cognitive abilities to synthesize their perceptions in a meaningful and coherent way. The incongruence jars against their sense of logic and they develop a multiple sense of identity and a fragmented perception of the world. In later adolescence, when cognitive abilities are more developed, teens are able to synthesize their perceptions and reconcile contradictions. From this, it seems that the undeveloped cognitive faculties suggested by Piaget contribute to the identity crisis described by Erikson.

The question we face as teachers is whether to teach to the cognitive or socio-emotional development of our students. Being open, patient, caring, and empathetic with our students will go a long way to building lasting and trust-based relationships with them. These emotive strategies might even help to ease the transition for adolescent students in this difficult time. However, we must ask the question: will it ultimately help them grapple with the big questions they will face?

While I deem the approaches above to deserve merit, I believe the answer to the question is no. As the socio-emotional crises adolescents cope with stem from the cognitive domain, it is the cognitive domain which requires the most attention. This is not to say that socio-emotional development should be neglected. Rather, by teaching to the cognitive domain, we can also address socio-emotional development. Vygotsky (2000) suggests an educative curriculum based on cognitive development (as opposed to rote memorization of facts and figures). As the academic cognitive concepts posed in schools do not differ so much from the everyday socio-emotional concepts students are facing in their personal lives outside of school, they should not be considered as separate. What students learn in school will prepare them for everyday life. Teachers can lead students in discussions about ethics, morality or other “touchy subjects.” As students work through various scenarios and perspectives, they will be challenged to think more critically. This critical thought can strengthen the cognitive faculties of the students and ultimately furnish students with cognitive skills which will help them grapple with the big questions.

Thinking of the brain as a muscle is a common metaphor. And as a muscle, it needs healthy doses of exercise. Engaging the students in learning which challenges their cognitive abilities is the exercise the brain needs. This exercise, in school, will prepare them for the challenges they will face growing up. The cognitive skills acquired will aid in socio-emotional growth and enrich the learning experience.

References

Erikson, E. (2000). Eight Ages of Man. In R. Diessner & S. Simmons (Eds.), Sources: Notable Selections in Educational Psychology (pp. 127-137). Gulliford: Dushkin/McGraw Hill.

Harter, Susan. (1999). The Normative Development of Self-Representations During Adolescence (pp. 115-127).

Kagan, Jerome. (1971). A Conception of Early Adulthood (pp. 98-105).

Santrock, J.W. (2008). A Topical Approach to Life Span Development (pp.221-223). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Vygotsky, L. (2000). The Development of Academic Concepts in School Age Children. In R. Diessner & S. Simmons (Eds.), Sources: Notable Selections in Educational Psychology (pp. 228-236). Gulliford: Dushkin/McGraw Hill.