Jordan P. Lippman et al.
184
It is often a challenge to incorporate theory-based principles of learning, instruction,
and assessment into the design of higher education courses, because any such design
activity involves simultaneous consideration of sets of environmental constraints on what
is feasible. In our case, the issues and constraints are significant. The University of Illinois
at Chicago (UIC) has a diverse student population, many of whom work part- or full-time
in addition to commuting to school while pursuing a full class load. The courses we teach
typically involve 2nd to 4th-year students who have taken prerequisite courses such as
introductory psychology and research methods before taking our course in Cognition and
Memory. We are typically constrained to offering our courses in large lecture-style
classrooms, with twice weekly class meetings of 75 mins, with no separate scheduled
discussion sections and with limited teaching assistant support. We believe that even under
such circumstances it is feasible to incorporate theory-driven activities designed to enhance
student learning outcomes.
To understand aspects of what we do to enhance student learning we need to be clear
about what we consider important in our field. The primary object of study in cognitive
psychology is the mind. The mind, however, is not directly observable, and cognitive
psychologists make inferences about the properties of the mind based on indirect
observations of how people perform on carefully designed tasks. To properly evaluate
claims about mental structures and processes, and to put them in perspective, students of
cognitive psychology must understand the research methods and logic used to reach
conclusions. Much of what we expect students to learn in the courses we teach is not
“fact” in the traditional sense of the word. All theories and conclusions are provisional in
the sense that they are the best explanations of experimental observations we have to
date. However, they are not set in stone, and often there are multiple competing explana-
tions of cognitive phenomena. Theories are evaluated based not on who believes them
but how well they can explain the outcomes of various observations. Theories are also
evaluated in terms of explanatory power, usefulness for promoting research, applicability,
and evolutionary significance.
We designed the activities discussed in this chapter to promote the development of
scientific thinking skills and learning regarding important content in cognitive psychol-
ogy. All three activities are consistent with the design principles noted previously; they ask
students to consider the relationship between theory and evidence, which we consider to
be at the core of critical thinking in science. Although they differ in the type of evidence
and method of analysis, they all promote critical evaluation of this relationship. We believe
these activities also promote active engagement and interest in the material. Some ask
students to reflect on the scientific process, whereas others encourage students to integrate
class material with knowledge and experiences outside of class. We chose activities for dif-
ferent reasons and implemented them in a variety of ways depending on class size and
other factors.
In the remainder of this chapter we describe a set of different types of activities that we
have used—including some variations—to accomplish the goals described previously.
In each case, we describe the activity and how one or more of us has implemented it,
provide evidence for its effectiveness at increasing critical thinking skills, including student
evaluations and performance data when possible, and describe ways to adapt the activity
to other contexts.