Running head: 1

EDCI 531
Case Study 2
Kristina Miller
Purdue University




COGNITIVE INFORMATION PROCESSING 2
EDCI 531 1
Case Study Assignment #2 2
3
Case Study: Cognitive Information Processing 4
5
Case Study 2 6
7
Description 8
9
Taylor is assigned a narrative writing prompt in Language Arts class. She must first focus on 10
her basic understanding of narrative writing and her test scores on Acuity, a formative and 11
benchmark assessment tool (the input). To process its content and mechanics, she is required to 12
recognize the purpose of her writing (similar to reading a story or watching an episode of her 13
favorite television show) and relating it to what she already knows about telling stories, as well 14
as how to structure her writing. For example, Taylor understands her writing must follow a plot 15
line, which lays a story line out, tells her what is needed for a complete narrative, and the 16
elements within each piece of the plot. She also understands the writing process (brainstorm, 17
pre-write, draft, proofread, edit, publish). This information retrieval helps her to organize her 18
ideas into a response, which is a complete narrative essay as it relates to the prompt given by the 19
instructor. 20
21
Multiple opportunities to write using collaboration present themselves with anticipatory sets 22
consisting of quick-writes that explore key concepts that require collaboration when planning 23
using the Team Mind Map strategy to map out possibilities for the plot of her narrative. Taylor 24
retains more content and gains valuable information processing skills, learns to organize her 25
writing and chunk information, and distinguishes, main ideas and supporting details. Taylor 26
learns how to take turns while mind mapping with her group, reaches a consensus, and learns to 27
how to respect others ideas and input. 28
Each day there is a new strategy used that requires for planning, revising, and editing are 29
involved in the lesson design. But specific goals are set for her writing, which makes it 30
attainable. Taylor frequently reviews sentence combining to construct more complex sentences, 31
and engages in tutorials that increase her proficiency of related standards that she is deficient. 32
33
She and her face and shoulder partners then create a Team Mind Map of the events for the 34
narrative essay based on each persons theme. Taylor retains more content and gains valuable 35
information processing skills, learns to organize her writing and chunk information, and 36
distinguishes, main ideas and supporting details. Taylor learns how to take turns while mind 37
mapping with her group, reaches a consensus, and learns to how to respect others ideas and 38
input. 39
40
The instructor utilizes strategies that will help Taylor encode information through the use of 41
graphic organizers, chunking, actively reading others writing and circling mistakes, as well as 42
evaluating her peers writings (at least three pieces) and writing her feedback based on the 43
objectives of the assignment, using a rubric to help guide her. After she has completed this task, 44
Taylor rereads her own writing and evaluates it in the same manner she did the others- circling 45
COGNITIVE INFORMATION PROCESSING 3
mistakes, taking notes on what she did well, and using the rubric to guide her, she makes a list 46
of deficiencies she should focus on for her editing, and then she uses her base knowledge and 47
based on the deficiency list created by her peers, she rewrites and repeats the procedure the next 48
day and publishes two days later. 49
50
Reflective Questions 51
52
1. Which epistemological tradition is the case study supporting? How is this proven? 53
54
2. How has the instructor enhanced the learners encoding and memory? 55
56
3. How is the instruction organized? Does it provide variable practice for metacognition? 57
58
59
4. What type of learning outcomes are present in the case, and what is the role of the 60
instructor utilizing the CIP theory? 61
62
5. How is the strategy of chunking utilized as a process of learning? 63
64
65
Potential Solutions 66
67
Taylor has been provided with organized instruction, given extensive and variable practice, 68
enhanced her encoding and memory using various strategies that require her to rely on her 69
sensory memory, short term memory, and long term memory to produce a proficient piece of 70
writing. By designing a lesson that drew her attention to specific features of the writing 71
process, she was able to retrieve prior knowledge and enhance her encoding by completing 72
various tutorials that honed in on her deficiencies with the structures of writing as well. The 73
instructor also provided Taylor with a breakdown of information in the context of a rubric, and 74
made correcting her own paper more manageable by providing examples and allowing her to 75
make it meaningful for her (chunking). She was constantly reading and taking notes in her own 76
words and practicing being an editor within the classroom. All of these activities have 77
enhanced Taylor's encoding skills. These strategies allowed for Taylor to commit the rules of 78
writing a narrative to her long-term memory. The social interaction will assist her in creating 79
self-regulatory skills in learning (Driscoll, 2005, p. 107). 80
81
Driscoll mentioned that the dictum practice makes perfect has some truth to it. I too believe 82
that by providing Taylor with the opportunity to find the deficiencies in her peers writing, as 83
well as the proficiencies a minimum of four times, that she achieved the objective set forth in 84
her own writing, which was proficiency in regards to content and mechanics. 85
86
87
88
89
90
91
COGNITIVE INFORMATION PROCESSING 4
References 92
93
Driscoll, Marcy (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3
rd
edition). Needham Height 94
MA: Allyn & Bacon. 95
96