4.3 Article

On the Goals of Epistemic Education: Promoting Apt Epistemic Performance

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE LEARNING SCIENCES
卷 27, 期 3, 页码 353-389

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2017.1392968

关键词

-

资金

  1. Israeli Centers of Research Excellence (I-CORE) Program of the Israel Council of Higher Education
  2. Israel Science Foundation [1716/12]
  3. National Science Foundation [1008634]
  4. Division Of Research On Learning
  5. Direct For Education and Human Resources [1008634] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent years have seen a surge in educational efforts to foster the development of learners' epistemologies. Our 1(st) aim is to problematize some current assumptions about the goals of epistemic education and to argue that existing models of lay or expert epistemologies cannot directly translate into educational goals. Our 2(nd) aim is to present a fresh integrative analysis of the goals of epistemic education based on both philosophical arguments and empirical research. Synthesizing these sources, we propose that the overarching purpose of epistemic education is to promote learners' apt epistemic performance, defined as performance that achieves valuable epistemic aims through competence. We identify 5 key aspects of epistemic performance that are important to achieving this goal: engaging in reliable cognitive processes that lead to the achievement of epistemic aims, adapting epistemic performance to diverse situations, metacognitively regulating and understanding epistemic performance, caring about and enjoying epistemic performance, and participating in epistemic performance together with others. Each of these aspects involves competent engagement with epistemic aims and value, epistemic ideals, and reliable epistemic processes. Our analysis can help educators plan and evaluate epistemic education and suggests ways in which current curricula might be better designed to promote epistemic growth.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据