Educational psychology

Introduction. The need to develop students’ ability to learn independently has been a widely discussed issue in the theory and practice of education over the past 50 years (in research on learning to learn, self-regulated learning, metacognitive learning, etc.). If we understand instruction as a system of activities by the student and teacher, associated primarily with the transmission of cultural experience, then studying the psychological mechanism for accepting and using the proffered knowledge as an orientation for future actions is highly relevant.

Objective. We surmised that the ability to use given knowledge in the school instruction process (which we call “orientation towards given knowledge” [OGK]) would differ between fourth-graders studying in traditional educational systems (TE) and those in Developmental Education (DE), since these systems differ significantly in the principles of the selection learning material and organization of learning activity. We also sought to clarify the correlation between OGK and such important educational outcomes as the ability to identify the most important thing in a text, logical skills, memorization skills, and academic achievement.

Design. To diagnose OGK, we gave fourth-graders (N = 115) the definition of a concept, an instruction to recognize and identify objects as either being described or not described by that concept, and 10 recognition problems in the form of short texts. We assessed the level of OGK by counting the number of problems for which the answer was justified by the given definition. In addition, we measured the ability to identify the main point in the text, logical skills, and random memorization skills.

Results. Almost a quarter of all the fourth-graders (25.7%) failed to use the given definition at all; however, the DE students demonstrated a higher level of OGK (U = 2038, p < .01) significantly more often. OGK among general sample also correlated with the ability to identify the most important thing in a text (R = 0.31, p < .001), logical skills (R = +0.35, p < .001), and memorization skills (R = +0.195, p < .05 for short-term memory and R = +0.301, p < .01 for long-term memory).

Conclusions. Possible reasons for the cognitive performance of the fourth-graders are discussed. We argue that orientation towards given knowledge can be considered an essential condition for effective learning, and therefore serious attention should be paid to its development.

Background. The search for cognitive predictors of success in language learning is associated both with basic cognitive characteristics (processing speed and spatial working memory) and with general characteristics (intelligence). However, the ratio between cognitive functioning and success in language learning can change during the period of school education and depends on the socioeconomic level of the society and the effectiveness of the national educational system.

Objective. To analyze the cognitive predictors of Russian language learning samples of Russian-speaking 11th graders from Russia, Kyrgyzstan, and Moldova, three countries with a similar organization of the educational system, but differing in the functional effectiveness of that educational system and in their socioeconomic levels.

Design. The sample comprised 545 Russian-speaking 11th graders (average age = 17.42 + 0.59; 36.1% male) studying Russian throughout their public-school education in Russia, Kyrgyzstan, and Moldova. The statistical methods of one-way analysis of variance, correlation, and multiple regression analysis were used.

Results. Among the indicators of cognitive development we analyzed, the functioning of the national educational system is the one most associated with the development of fluid intelligence of 11th graders, which is directly proportional to the quality of education in the country; to a lesser extent, it is associated with the development of working memory. In Kyrgyzstan (with an average level of socioeconomic development) and Moldova (with a high level of socioeconomical development), only fluid intelligence was associated with the score on the state exam on the Russian language. In Russia, which has a very high level of socioeconomic development, fluid intelligence and spatial working memory were updated.

Conclusion. Differences in the relationship between cognitive functioning and success in Russian-language learning are associated both with the objectives of the state exam (identification of pupils ready to attend university versus testing of what was learned in school), and, in conditions of low educational effectiveness, with a greater cognitive load during the exam.

Background. The search for cognitive predictors of success in language learning is associated both with basic cognitive characteristics (processing speed and spatial working memory) and with general characteristics (intelligence). However, the ratio between cognitive functioning and success in language learning can change during the period of school education and depends on the socioeconomic level of the society and the effectiveness of the national educational system.

Objective. To analyze the cognitive predictors of Russian language learning samples of Russian-speaking 11th graders from Russia, Kyrgyzstan, and Moldova, three countries with a similar organization of the educational system, but differing in the functional effectiveness of that educational system and in their socioeconomic levels.

Design. The sample comprised 545 Russian-speaking 11th graders (average age = 17.42 + 0.59; 36.1% male) studying Russian throughout their public-school education in Russia, Kyrgyzstan, and Moldova. The statistical methods of one-way analysis of variance, correlation, and multiple regression analysis were used.

Results. Among the indicators of cognitive development we analyzed, the functioning of the national educational system is the one most associated with the development of fluid intelligence of 11th graders, which is directly proportional to the quality of education in the country; to a lesser extent, it is associated with the development of working memory. In Kyrgyzstan (with an average level of socioeconomic development) and Moldova (with a high level of socioeconomical development), only fluid intelligence was associated with the score on the state exam on the Russian language. In Russia, which has a very high level of socioeconomic development, fluid intelligence and spatial working memory were updated.

Conclusion. Differences in the relationship between cognitive functioning and success in Russian-language learning are associated both with the objectives of the state exam (identification of pupils ready to attend university versus testing of what was learned in school), and, in conditions of low educational effectiveness, with a greater cognitive load during the exam.