The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 50 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning
Open accessAbstract
Many teaching practices implicitly assume that conceptual knowledge can be abstracted from the situations in which it is learned and used. This article argues that this assumption inevitably limits the effectiveness of such practices. Drawing on recent research into cognition as it is manifest in everyday activity, the authors argue that knowledge is situated, being in part a product of the activity, context, and culture in which it is developed and used. They discuss how this view of knowledge affects our understanding of learning, and they note that conventional schooling too often ignores the influence of school culture on what is learned in school. As an alternative to conventional practices, they propose cognitive apprenticeship (Collins, Brown, & Newman, in press), which honors the situated nature of knowledge. They examine two examples of mathematics instruction that exhibit certain key features of this approach to teaching.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The paper argues that knowledge is fundamentally situated—partly a product of activity, context, and culture—so teaching methods that treat concepts as abstract, self-contained, and transferable are often misleading and ineffective. As an alternative, it proposes “cognitive apprenticeship,” illustrated through two mathematics teaching examples.
Key findings
- Knowledge is not independent of situations; it is a co-production of mind and world, and abstraction/explication provides an “inherently impoverished and often misleading” view of knowledge.
- Vocabulary taught from dictionary definitions is slow and unsuccessful: the average 17-year-old learns vocabulary at 5,000 words per year (13 per day) over 16 years through listening, talking, and reading, whereas classroom definition-based teaching can cover only 100 to 200 words per year and produces errors such as “I was meticulous about falling off the cliff.”
- Learning is a process of enculturation into authentic activity and culture; school activity is often “ersatz” and self-confirming, so success in school may have little bearing on performance elsewhere.
- Cognitive apprenticeship—using modeling, coaching, fading, social interaction, and collaboration—can enculturate students into authentic practices; the paper examines Schoenfeld’s magic-square problem-solving class and Lampert’s fourth-grade multiplication teaching through coin problems and student-generated stories.
Methods
- Conceptual and theoretical paper, not an empirical study; it synthesizes research on everyday cognition, apprenticeship, situated learning, indexicality, and enculturation.
- Uses illustrative cases and examples, including Miller and Gildea’s vocabulary teaching, Lave’s Weight Watchers cottage-cheese problem, Schoenfeld’s mathematics teaching, and Lampert’s multiplication teaching.
- Main analysis is argumentative: it contrasts JPF, student, and practitioner activity (Table 1) and proposes cognitive apprenticeship as an alternative to conventional didactic schooling.
Limitations
- Stated: the authors describe the exploration as “consciously speculative” and “admittedly tentative”; they say the paper does not attempt a historical survey or critical analysis, and that “major theoretical work” on situated cognition remains to be done.
- Stated: future work must frame the relationship between explicit knowledge and implicit understanding.
- Evident: the paper presents no controlled outcome data or systematic evaluation; its claims about transfer, school culture, and cognitive apprenticeship rest on conceptual argument and illustrative examples.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
118 Own interpretation · 41 Sources not found · 4 No full text of the sources · 2 No basis given · 1 Partly supported · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“We know from an extensive literature on the subject (diSessa, 1982, 1983, 1986; McCloskey, Caramazza, & Green, 1980; White, 1983) that students have many misconceptions about qualitative phenomena in physics.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites diSessa, 1982, 1983, 1986
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites McCloskey, Caramazza, & Green, 1980 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
McCloskey, Caramazza, and Green (1980) is cited as one work in a broader literature supporting the sentence, not as evidence for every misconception in physics. A Semantic Scholar snippet from “Overcoming University Students’ Alternative Conceptions in Newtonian Mechanics” (score 0.493) explicitly attributes undergraduate students’ mistaken predictions about curvilinear motion to McCloskey et al. (1980). The cited paper therefore supports the claim through a concrete example, although paper-scoped searches returned no full-text snippets. (LLM, conf=0.79)
- Could not verifycites White, 1983 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The supplied source, D. W. R. White’s 1983 paper “Plant Regeneration from Mesophyll Protoplasts of White Clover,” concerns plant regeneration, not physics education. Two searches within that paper returned no snippets, but the absence of accessible text prevents a definitive finding about its contents. An unscoped search found only lower-scoring discussions of physics misconceptions in other papers, not a sufficiently strong match to identify the intended White (1983) source. The citation appears mismatched, but the evidence does not meet the threshold for a misattribution verdict. (LLM, conf=0.75)
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The occasions and conditions for use arise directly out of the context of activities of each community or culture that uses the tool, framed by the way members of that culture see the world.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Miller and Gildea's (1987) work on vocabulary teaching shows how the assumption that knowing and doing can be separated leads to a teaching method that ignores the way situations structure cognition.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Miller and Gildea (1987) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Miller and Gildea note that by listening, talking, and reading the average 17-year-old has learned vocabulary at a rate of 5,000 words per year (13 per day) for over 16 years.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Miller and Gildea
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Language use would involve an unremitting confrontation with ambiguity, polysemy, nuance, metaphor, etc., were it not for the extralinguistic help that the context of an utterance provides (Nunberg, 1978).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Nunberg, 1978
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, it is common for students to acquire algorithms, routines, and decontextualized definitions that they cannot use and that therefore lie inert.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To develop this comparison between tools and knowledge, between manual tools and conceptual tools, a little further, it can be noted that learning how to use a tool involves far more than can be accounted for in any set of explicit rules.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“They are bound by intricate, socially constructed webs of belief, which make it possible to see them as cultures (Geertz, 1983), and which are essential to interpreting what they do.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Geertz, 1983
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because new situations, negotiations, and activities inevitably recast them in a new, more densely textured form, concepts continually evolve with each new occasion of use.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The authors examine one such method and argue that its lack of success is a direct result of this assumption.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 54
- It may state two separate claims as one. 36
In the paper
“There is barely enough classroom time, Miller and Gildea suggest, to teach more than 100 to 200 words per year.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Miller and Gildea
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many teaching methods implicitly assume that conceptual knowledge is independent of the situations in which it is learned and used.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“By contrast, learning words from definitions and sentences abstracted from the context of normal communication, the way vocabulary has often been taught, is slow and unsuccessful.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Miller and Gildea
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Knowledge, we claim, is partially embedded in the social and physical world.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is impossible to capture the densely interwoven nature of conceptual knowledge completely in explicit, abstract accounts.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Learning is the process of constructing robust understanding out of this sort of embedded activity.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Teaching methods, however, often try to impart abstracted conceptual tools as fixed, well-defined, independent entities that can be explored in prototypical examples and textbook exercises.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“And these embedding circumstances allow people to share the burden of solving problems efficiently.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Knowledge is fundamentally a co-production of the mind and the world, which like woof and warp need each other to produce texture and to complete an otherwise incoherent pattern.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Teaching, however, often overlooks the central, but restrictive, contribution made by the activities, context, and culture of schools to what is learned there.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“And the general strategies for intuitive reasoning, resolving issues, and negotiating meaning that people develop through everyday activity are superseded by the precise, well-defined problems, formal definitions, and symbol manipulation that characterize much school activity.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such ploys indicate how thoroughly learners really are situated, and how they always lean on the embedding context for help.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“So even though students are expected to behave differently, they inevitably do behave like the JPFs they are and solve most of their problems in their own situated way.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To learn to use tools as practitioners use them, students, like apprentices, must be enabled to enter that community and its culture.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unfortunately, students are too often presented with only a part of this complex.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The issues and problems that they face arise out of, are defined by, and are resolved within the constraints of their belief system and the activity they are pursuing.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though these are often anathema to traditional schooling, they are an essential component of social interaction and thus of learning.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Within a culture, ideas are exchanged and modified and belief systems developed and appropriated in part through conversation and narratives”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Learning is instead a continual process needing above all authentic activity to support its development.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From here, students can, as we have suggested, use their fledgling conceptual knowledge to see their activity in a new light, which in turn leads to the further development of the conceptual knowledge, and so on.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When descriptions replace indexical terms (which is analogous, we hold, to classroom descriptions of activity replacing activity), the nature of discourse changes and understanding becomes much more problematic.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The social network within the culture helps them develop its language and the belief systems and promotes the process of enculturation.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They need to observe how qualified practitioners behave and talk to get a sense of how expertise is manifest in conversation and other activities.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Collaboration also leads to the articulation or manifestation of strategies, which can then be discussed and reflected on.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If, as we propose, learning is a process of enculturating that is supported in part through social interaction and the circulation of narrative”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As the students gain more self-confidence and control, they move into a more autonomous phase of collaborative learning, where they begin to participate consciously in the culture.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The group, however, permits different roles to be displayed and engenders reflective narratives and discussions about the aptness of those roles.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this sequence, apprenticeship and coaching begin by providing modeling in situ and scaffolding for students to get started in an authentic activity.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The belief system is instilled in the only way it can be, through practice in which the students actively take part.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In language learning, for example, the original frail understanding of a word is developed and extended through subsequent use and social negotiation, though each use is no less situated.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Successful execution of most individual tasks requires students to understand the many different roles needed for carrying out that task.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This further suggests that a new epistemology might hold the key to a dramatic improvement in learning and completely new insights into education.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In educational terms alone, however, the unheralded importance of activity and enculturation to learning suggests that much common practice is the product of an inadequate epistemology.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All knowledge is, we believe, like language. Its constituent parts index the world and so are inextricably a product of the activity and situations in which they are produced and used.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus all concepts--even apparently well-defined, abstract technical concepts--are always under construction. They are never wholly definable, and they defy the sort of categorical descriptions that are conventionally used in teaching: part of their meaning is always inherited from the contexts in which they are used.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The adequacy of the solution they reach becomes apparent in relation to the role it must play in allowing activity to continue.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Conceptual tools similarly reflect the cumulative wisdom of the culture in which they are used and the insights and experience of individuals. Their meaning is not invariant but a product of negotiation within a culture and of practice in authentic activity.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They are not merely context sensitive; they are completely context dependent. They can only be understood in relation to specific situations, from which indexicals are, for the purposes of interpretation, inseparable.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“But words and sentences are not islands, entire unto themselves. They rely on the context in which they are used--and not just the linguistic context--to be understood.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Nunberg, 1978
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“He filled a measuring cup two-thirds full of cottage cheese, dumped it out on the cutting board, patted it into a circle, marked a cross on it, scooped away one quadrant, and served the rest.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lave (1988b)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Instead, it may be more useful to consider conceptual knowledge as in some ways similar to a set of tools.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Learning and acting are, as a result, interestingly indistinct, learning being a continuous, life-long process resulting from acting in situations.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Tools share several significant features with knowledge; in particular, both can be fully understood in use, and both, if fully understood, change the way their users look at the world.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Activity, concept, and culture are interdependent. No one can be totally understood without the other two. Learning must therefore involve all three.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“His class' goal, by contrast, is to understand the mathematical nature of magic squares, and it is in part by doing this that the belief system is exemplified.”
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“So knowledge, which comes coded by and connected to the activity and environment in which it is developed, is spread across its component parts--some of which are in the mind and some in the world--as the final picture on a jigsaw is spread across its component pieces.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Conversely, though schooling seeks to encourage problem solving, it disregards most of the inventive heuristics that students bring to the classroom.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“by pointing to different decompositions, it stresses that heuristics are not absolute, but assessed with respect to a particular task--and that even algorithms can be assessed in this way.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“by allowing students to generate their own solution paths, it helps make them conscious, creative members of the culture of problem-solving mathematicians.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Lampert (1986) also involves her students in mathematical exploration, which she tries to make continuous with their everyday knowledge.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lampert (1986) source
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“And, in enculturating through this activity, they acquire some of the culture's tools--a shared vocabulary and the means to discuss, reflect upon, evaluate, and validate community procedures in a collaborative process.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The students start with an extended procedure that parallels the story problem above. Eventually they find ways to shorten the process, and they usually arrive at the standard algorithm, justifying their findings with the stories they had created earlier.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lampert
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the ensuing situations, the appropriateness of the word is tested and, as with all conceptual knowledge, each application has the potential to change an individual's understanding of both the word and the world --the two are interdependent.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“She tries to inculcate an inseparable understanding of all of these kinds of knowledge and the connections between them, and thus to bridge the huge gap that emerges from much conventional teaching between conceptual knowledge and problem-solving activity--between, as we characterized them at the beginning, knowing and doing.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lampert
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Thus, Lampert presents the algorithm as one more useful strategy to help them resolve community problems.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lampert
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“by beginning with a task embedded in a familiar activity, it shows the students the legitimacy of their implicit knowledge and its availability as scaffolding in apparently unfamiliar tasks.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indexical terms are virtually transparent. They, like a signpost, draw little or no attention to themselves.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Eagleton (1983) describes reading as just such an enriching process, through which people continually change how they read and this, in turn, changes what they are reading.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Eagleton (1983)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“By deliberately engaging students in authentic mathematical practice, he reaches well beyond the inculcation of problem-solving skills. His method, much more importantly, provides students with the opportunity to enter the culture of mathematical practice, which enables them to use those skills as practitioners.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schoenfeld
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The class worked collectively through a number of strategies, in which, on reflection, they recognized more general and more powerful mathematical ideas.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schoenfeld
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“prevalent school practices still broadly assume that knowledge is individual and self-structured, that schools are neutral with respect to what is learned in them, that concepts are abstract and immutable and independent of the activity in which they are acquired and used, and that JPF behavior is something to be discouraged.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Schoenfeld is careful to emphasize that all these strategies are illustrated in action, developed by the class, not declared by the teacher.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schoenfeld
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Lave (1988c) describes how some students feel it necessary to disguise effective strategies so that teachers believe the problems have been solved in the school-approved way.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lave (1988c)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the terms of cognitive apprenticeship, we can represent the progress of the students from embedded activity to general principles of the culture as presented in Figure 3.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The class went on to explore other possible magic squares and thereby discovered general principles (e.g., an algebraic form for describing them).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schoenfeld
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As an indication that he is working in the culture of mathematics, not in the culture of schooling, he does not stop at what, in culture of school practice, marks the end: an answer.”
hedgedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Schoenfeld's teaching of problem solving (1985, in press) attempts to show college students how to think mathematically about the world, how to see the world through mathematicians' eyes, and thus how to use the mathematician's tools.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schoenfeld (1985, in press) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recurring features of the environment seem to afford recurrent sequences of actions.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This sort of dialectical process is common to all activity, and it similarly undermines any assumption that once conceptual knowledge has been described and applied in exercises, the task of teaching or learning has been finished.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Schoenfeld's approach, on the other hand, points in particular to the way in which students can be exposed to the authentic ways of thinking of a culture and its conceptual viewpoint, as much as to its subject matter.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A proposition, as we pointed out above, can only be correctly interpreted in the context of the situation in which it is used.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“And apprenticeship also suggests the paradigm of situated modeling, coaching, and fading (Collins, Brown, & Newman, 1989), whereby teachers or coaches promote learning first by modeling their strategies for students in authentic activity. Then teachers and colleagues support a student's attempts at doing the task. And finally they empower the student to coatinue independent of the teacher.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Collins, Brown, & Newman, 1989
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An epistemology that begins with activity and perception, which are first and foremost embedded in the world, may simply bypass the classical problem of reference--of mediating conceptual representations.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is at this stage, in short, that students no longer behave as archetypal students but participate in the activity of practitioners and develop their conceptual understanding through social interaction and collaboration in the culture of the domain, not of the school.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Lave (1988a) and Lave and Wenger (in preparation) point out the importance for apprentices of learning their craft in the appropriate community of practice, towards the center of which they continuously progress through gradual enculturation.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lave (1988a)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Lave and Wenger (in preparation)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This in turn fosters generalizing, grounded in the students' situated understanding.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These then occupy a place in our ontology and become something more to learn about rather than simply something useful in learning.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“groups of practitioners are particularly important, for it is only within groups that social interaction and conversation can take place.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, indexical representations seem to gain their efficiency by leaving a great deal of the context underrepresented or implicit.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper relies on this without support.
Most school activity exists in a culture of its own.
“The idea that most school activity exists in a culture of its own helps explain many of the difficulties of cultivating robust domain learning in school.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Schools demand a qualitative change in behavior.
“Schools do seem to demand a qualitative change in behavior, however.”
The paper relies on this without support.
What a student is expected to do and what a JPF does are significantly different.
“What the student is expected to do and what a JPF does are significantly different.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The school situation is extremely specialized.
“But the school situation is extremely specialized.”
The paper relies on this without support.
An unacknowledged dependency on school-based cues makes learning extremely fragile when viewed from outside school.
“Viewed from outside, where problems do not come in text books, an unacknowledged dependency on such school-based cues makes the learning extremely fragile.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Many professions with generally acknowledged cognitive content (e.g., law, medicine, architecture, business) have traditionally been learned through apprenticeship.
“Certainly many professions with generally acknowledged cognitive content--for example, law, medicine, architecture, business, etc.--have nonetheless traditionally been learned through apprenticeship.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Advanced graduate students in humanities, social sciences, and physical sciences acquire extremely refined research skills through apprenticeship with senior researchers.
“Moreover, advanced graduate students in the humanities, the social sciences, and the physical sciences, acquire their extremely refined research skills through the apprenticeship they serve with senior researchers.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Advanced graduate students, like all apprentices, must recognize and resolve ill-defined problems that issue out of authentic activity, in contrast to well-defined exercises typically given in textbooks and exams throughout earlier schooling.
“Then they, like all apprentices, must recognize and resolve the ill-defined problems that issue out of authentic activity, in contrast to the welldefined exercises that are typically given to them in text books and on exams throughout their earlier schooling.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Students who are taught individually rather than collaboratively can fail to develop skills needed for collaborative work.
“Students who are taught individually rather than collaboratively can fail to develop skills needed for collaborative work.”
The paper relies on this without support.
For centuries epistemologists have concentrated primarily on conceptual representation and its problematic relation to objects in the world, assuming that representation is cognitively prior to all else.
“For centuries epistemologists have concentrated primarily on conceptual representation and its problematic relation to objects in the world, assuming that representation is cognitively prior to all else.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Teachers rarely have the opportunity to hear enough of what students think to recognize when the information offered back by students is only a surface retelling for school purposes that may mask deep misconceptions about the physical world and problem-solving strategies.
“Teachers rarely have the opportunity to hear enough of what students think to recognize when the information that is offered back by students is only a surface retelling for school purposes (the handing back of an uncomprehended tool, as we described it at the beginning) that may mask deep misconceptions about the physical world and problem-solving strategies.”
The paper relies on this without support.
A common strategy in trying to overcome difficult pedagogic problems is to make as much as possible explicit.
“A common strategy in trying to overcome difficult pedagogic problems is to make as much as possible explicit.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Constructivist, situated, and sociocultural perspectives define learning as active meaning-making, participation in communities of practice, and identity development [24,25,56].”
From A Systematic Review of Generative AI in K–12: Mapping Goals, Activities, Roles, and Outcomes via the 3P Model (2025) · cites this paper as [56]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These presentations led to discussions helping teachers create authentic contexts for learning STEM content and practices (Brown et al., 1989; Bruner, 1996; Lave & Wenger, 1991).”
From Increasing high school teachers self-efficacy for integrated STEM instruction through a collaborative community of practice (2020) · cites this paper as Brown et al., 1989
Citations
Cites
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
Bloch, M. E. F., Lave, J., & Wenger, É. (1994) · Man · doi:10.2307/2804509 · Cited by 39,362
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983) · Cited by 5,190
Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities
Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1 · Cited by 5,186
Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life
Lave, J. (1988) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609268 · Cited by 5,148
Sæverot, H. (2021) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781003193463-8 · Cited by 3,090
Martino, P. D., & Signorini, G. (2019) · ICME-13 monographs · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-10472-6 · Cited by 2,698
Barwise, J., & Perry, J. R. (1981) · The Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.2307/2026578 · Cited by 2,361
Suchman, L. A. (1987) · Cited by 2,279
Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension
(2017) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315107493 · Cited by 2,245
The Problem of the Essential Indexical
Perry, J. (1979) · Noûs · doi:10.2307/2214792 · Cited by 2,195
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Geertz C, 1983, Local knowledge
- Hutchins E, Situated Learning
- Lave I, 1977, The Quarterly Newsletter of the institute for Comparative Human Development, 1, 1
- Lave J, 1988, Paper presented at AERA annual conference
- Pea RD, 1988, Paper presented at the meeting of the Cognitive Science Society
- Resnick L, 1988, Educational Researcher, 16, 13
- Rogoff B, 1984, Everyday cognition: Its development in social context
- Scribner S, 1984, Everyday cognition: Its development in social context, 9
- Shanker A, 1988, New York Times, 7
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 901–1,000 of 13,065
Yoshioka, T., Herman, G., Yates, J., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2001) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/502795.502798 · Cited by 130
A Context for Learning: Collaborative Groups in the Problem-Based Learning Environment
Cockrell, K. S., Caplow, J. A. H., & Donaldson, J. F. (2000) · Review of higher education/The review of higher education · doi:10.1353/rhe.2000.0008 · Cited by 139
“A number of instructional strategies have been recommended for facilitating this link including cognitive apprenticeships (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989), the reflective practicum (Schon, 1987), and problem-based learning (Barrows, 1986).”
BackgroundSim, C. (2005) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2005.07.006 · Cited by 133
Creativity in technology education: providing children with glimpses of their inventive potential
Lewis, T. G. (2008) · International Journal of Technology and Design Education · doi:10.1007/s10798-008-9051-y · Cited by 142
“We may draw here upon situated cognition theory which suggests deliberate contextualizing of academic subjects against the backdrop of the more active subjects such as technology education (e.g., Brown et al. 1989; Lave and Wenger 1991; Sticht and Hickey 1991).”
BackgroundEvaluating multiple aspects of a digital educational problem-solving-based adventure game
Hou, H., & Li, M.-C. (2013) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.052 · Cited by 141
Roth, W., & Jornet, A. (2013) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Cognitive Science · doi:10.1002/wcs.1242 · Cited by 174
“74 On the basis of Wittgenstein’s idea of language as a game,12 some designers of situated robotics work on the problem of (1) not only allowing communication between and with situated robots in their environment and grounding communication (language) in the material world (2) but also developing suitable language gam…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialOn the effects of 3D virtual worlds in language learning – a meta-analysis
Wang, C.-P., Lan, Y., Tseng, W., Lin, Y.-T. R., & Gupta, K. C.-L. (2019) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2019.1598444 · Cited by 150
Theoretical and Practical Considerations for Combating Mental Illness Stigma in Health Care
Ungar, T., Knaak, S. J., & Szeto, A. C. H. (2015) · Community Mental Health Journal · doi:10.1007/s10597-015-9910-4 · Cited by 150
“Additionally, the same tool, model, wording or approach may carry different meanings in different contexts, settings and/or among different target groups (Brown et al. 1989; Lave and Wenger 1991).”
BackgroundMethodPrinciples of Self-Organization: Learning as Participation in Autocatakinetic Systems
Barab, S. A., Cherkes-Julkowski, M., Swenson, R., Garrett, S., Shaw, R. E., & Young, M. (1999) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/10508406.1999.9672074 · Cited by 145
“It is their contention that learning involves more than acquiring information but actually involves building an "increasingly rich implicit understanding of the world in which they [learners] use the tools and of the tools themselves" (Brown et al., 1989, p. 33).”
BackgroundUsing Mobile Computing to Enhance Field Study
Gay, G., Rieger, R., & Bennington, T. (2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410601544-25 · Cited by 133
Guest Editors' Introduction: Rethinking Methodology in the Learning Sciences
Barab, S. A., & Kirshner, D. H. (2001) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls10-1-2_2 · Cited by 139
Argument in High School Genetics.
Jiménez‐Aleixandre, M. P., & Bugallo-Rodríguez, Á. (1997) · Cited by 133
Educative mentoring: Promoting reform‐based science teaching through mentoring relationships
Bradbury, L. U. (2010) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20393 · Cited by 148
An adaptive navigation support system for conducting context-aware ubiquitous learning in museums
Chiou, C.-K., Tseng, J. C. R., Hwang, G., & Heller, S. (2010) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.015 · Cited by 132
Professional Skills and Capabilities of Accounting Graduates: The New Zealand Expectation Gap?
Wells, P. K., Gerbic, P., Kranenburg, I., et al. (2009) · Accounting Education · doi:10.1080/09639280902719390 · Cited by 132
“Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989) suggest that ‘situated learning’ emphasises the development of capabilities within their community of practice.”
BackgroundThe Relationship Between “Textisms” and Formal and Informal Writing Among Young Adults
Rosen, L. D., Chang, J., Erwin, L. M., et al. (2010) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650210362465 · Cited by 132
“Furthermore, Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989) suggested that “situated learning” or learning by doing leads to unintentional transfer of skills.”
BackgroundPaz, S. D. L., Monte-Sano, C., Felton, M., Croninger, R. G., Jackson, C., & Piantedosi, K. W. (2017) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1002/rrq.147 · Cited by 129
Järvelä, S. (1995) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/0959-4752(95)00007-p · Cited by 132
Why educate “little scientists?” Examining the potential of practice‐based scientific literacy
O’Neill, D. K., & Polman, J. L. (2004) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20001 · Cited by 135
Dam, G. T. M. T., & Blom, S. V. (2006) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.03.003 · Cited by 139
Embedded Video and Computer Based Instruction to Improve Social Skills for Students with Autism
Simpson, A., Langone, J., & Ayres, K. M. (2004) · Education and training in developmental disabilities · doi:10.1177/215416470403900306 · Cited by 133
Revision Cognitive and Instructional Processes
Allal, L. K., Chanquoy, L., & Largy, P. (2004) · Studies in writing · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-1048-1 · Cited by 142
Hoadley, C. P., & Linn, M. C. (2000) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/095006900412301 · Cited by 132
“In SpeakEasy discussions students can be seen as participating in a cognitive apprenticeship as described by Brown et al. (1989).”
BackgroundThe Value of Ideas: Problems Versus Possibilities in Learning
Prawat, R. S. (1993) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x022006005 · Cited by 134
“An idea, according to Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989), continually evolves as it is used "because new situations, negotiations, and activities inevitably recast it in a new, more densely textured form" (p. 33).”
BackgroundHull, D. M., & Saxon, T. F. (2008) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.005 · Cited by 131
Routines we live by: from ritual to exploration
Lavie, I., Steiner, A., & Sfard, A. (2018) · Educational Studies in Mathematics · doi:10.1007/s10649-018-9817-4 · Cited by 181
“Reconceptualizing situativity of learning Situativity is the name given by researchers at the end of the previous millennium to people’s widely observed inability to help themselves with routines learned in school while solving real-life problems (Brown et al., 1989; Greeno, 1997; Lave, 1988).”
BackgroundBarab, S. A. (2005) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511816833.011 · Cited by 130
Reading comprehension: what works.
Fielding, L. G., & Pearson, P. D. (1994) · Cited by 131
Hay, K. E., & Barab, S. A. (2001) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1003_3 · Cited by 131
“These groups are formed to take advantage of the learning potential afforded by collaborative interactions that Brown et al. (1989) identified as central to situated learning.”
BackgroundInfluentialWright, J. V. (1992) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/0959-4752(92)90005-7 · Cited by 129
Some implications of cognitive theory for instructional design
Winn, W. D. (1990) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00377985 · Cited by 129
Bronack, S. C., Riedl, R., & Tashner, J. (2006) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820600909157 · Cited by 134
“What we know is ‘‘situated’’ (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989) within the interactions and shared understandings among the peers that helped us craft it.”
BackgroundCharacteristics of Problems for Problem-Based Learning: The Students’ Perspective
Sockalingam, N., & Schmidt, H. G. (2011) · Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning · doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1135 · Cited by 131
Spotlight on authentic learning: Student developed digital video projects
Kearney, M., & Schuck, S. (2006) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.1298 · Cited by 130
Learning Teaching,and Testing for Complex Conceptual Understanding
Feltovich, P. J., Spiro, R. J., & Coulson, R. L. (2012) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203052358-11 · Cited by 130
Great Expectations: Emergent Professional Development Schools
Winitzky, N., Stoddart, T., & O'Keefe, P. (1992) · Journal of Teacher Education · doi:10.1177/002248719204300102 · Cited by 130
Proving and Doing Proofs in High School Geometry Classes: What Is It That Is Going On for Students?
Herbst, P., & Brach, C. (2006) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2401_2 · Cited by 134
Dialogic framing of scientific content for conceptual and epistemic understanding
Ford, M. J., & Wargo, B. M. (2011) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20482 · Cited by 134
Teaching Practices and Pedagogical Innovations
Vieluf, S., Kaplan, D., Klieme, E., & Bayer, S. (2012) · Teaching and learning international survey · doi:10.1787/9789264123540-en · Cited by 168
Teaching and learning in the web 2.0 era: Empowering students through learner-generated content
Lee, M. J. W., & McLoughlin, C. (2007) · Charles Sturt University Research Output (CRO) · Cited by 129
The Evolution of Mathematical Practices: A Case Study
Bowers, J. S., Cobb, P., & McClain, K. (1999) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1701_2 · Cited by 129
Haas, C. (1994) · Written Communication · doi:10.1177/0741088394011001004 · Cited by 133
Wever, B. D., Keer, H. V., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2007) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.04.001 · Cited by 129
“In a previous article (De Wever et al., 2006), 15 different content analysis schemes were discussed in detail. In the present study, the interaction analysis model of Gunawardena et al. (1997) was applied.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialRolf, W.-M. (1996) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1402_2 · Cited by 128
Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. A. (2007) · Theory & Research in Social Education · doi:10.1080/00933104.2007.10473333 · Cited by 130
“Advocates of cognitive apprenticeship assume that over time, scaffolding and questioning will develop sufficient expertise so that learners can operate independently of support and that such independence is critical to genuine learning (Brown et al., 1989; Pea, 2004).”
BackgroundStoszkowski, J., & Collins, D. J. (2012) · Sport Education and Society · doi:10.1080/13573322.2012.692671 · Cited by 141
“Alongside this perspective, theories of situated cognition have also brought the social construction of knowledge fully into focus (e.g. Brown et al., 1989; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998) and these theories demonstrate that learning happens best ‘in context’ as people attend to challenges and…”
BackgroundMean What You Say: Defining and Integrating Personalized, Blended and Competency Education.
Patrick, S. K., Kennedy, K., & Powell, A. (2013) · Cited by 128
Philosophical Antecedents of Situated Cognition
Gallagher, S. (2001) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511816826.003 · Cited by 131
Nelson, B. C., Ketelhut, D. J., Clarke‐Midura, J., et al. (2005) · Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) · Cited by 128
Linchevski, L., & Kutscher, B. (1998) · Journal for Research in Mathematics Education · doi:10.2307/749732 · Cited by 138
“In the study we also compared the results with those reported in the ability-grouping study of Cahan and Linchevski (1996). This comparison was possible because identical research designs were used in the two studies.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialContradictions in theorizing and implementing communities in education
Roth, W., & Lee, Y. (2006) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2006.01.002 · Cited by 133
Beyond educational psychology: Steps toward an educational semiotic
Cunningham, D. J. (1992) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/bf01322343 · Cited by 128
New Directions in Learning and Motivation
Svinicki, M. D. (1999) · New Directions for Teaching and Learning · doi:10.1002/tl.8001 · Cited by 130
“These are the concepts of social constructivism (Bruner, 1990) and situated cognition (Brown, Collins, and Duguid, 1989), respectively.”
BackgroundConstructivist Pedagogy and How We Learn: Educational Psychology Meets International Studies
Brown, S. W., & King, F. B. (2000) · International Studies Perspectives · doi:10.1111/1528-3577.00025 · Cited by 126
An introduction to the Evaluation of Learning Technology
Oliver, M. (2000) · UCL Discovery (University College London) · Cited by 128
Educational Psychology and Technology: A Matter of Reciprocal Relations
Salomon, G., & Almog, T. (1998) · Teachers College Record The Voice of Scholarship in Education · doi:10.1177/016146819810000201 · Cited by 130
“…a particular field (e.g., knowledge of soccer rules), the latter comes out the It is better to know something than to be ignorant but equipped a general, decontextualized (Glaser, 1990; Weinert & Helmke, for other researchers, giving more credit to the long tradition psychometric research into the…”
BackgroundGenre and Cognitive Development : Beyond Writing to Learn
Bazerman, C. (2009) · Pratiques · doi:10.4000/pratiques.1419 · Cited by 128
Students assessing their own collaborative knowledge building
Lee, E. Y. C., Chan, C. K. K., & van Aalst, J. (2006) · International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/s11412-006-6844-4 · Cited by 137
The synergy of embodied cognition and cognitive load theory for optimized learning
Zou, L., Zhang, Z., Mavilidi, M., Chen, Y., Herold, F., Ouwehand, K., & Paas, F. (2025) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-025-02152-2 · Cited by 131
“On the basis of the theoretical framework of situated cognition, Brown and colleagues argue that knowledge is inherently tied to the context in which it is learned and applied 59 .”
A social network perspective on peer supported learning in MOOCs for educators
Kellogg, S., Booth, S., & Oliver, K. M. (2014) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v15i5.1852 · Cited by 146
A Taxonomy for Categorizing Generalizations: Generalizing Actions and Reflection Generalizations
Ellis, A. B. (2007) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/10508400701193705 · Cited by 127
“This suggests one of two possibilities: either concept understanding does not typically transcend the context in which it is developed ( Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989 ; Perkins & Salomon, 1989 ), or existing constructs fail to account for all of the ways in which students might be generalizing their knowledge.”
BackgroundFernández, C. (2014) · Problems of Education in the 21st Century · doi:10.33225/pec/14.60.79 · Cited by 138
The Effect of Mobile Learning on Students' Achievement and Conversational Skills
Elfeky, A. I. M., & Masadeh, T. S. Y. (2016) · International Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v5n3p20 · Cited by 127
“Situated Learning Theory hypothesises that learning is not merely a process of knowledge acquisition but primarily a social participation that seeks a solution for a problem, (Brown, et. al.”
BackgroundWu, P., Hwang, G., Yang, M.-L., & Chen, C. (2017) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2017.1294608 · Cited by 127
“Situated cognition learning has illustrated that real activities can stimulate engagement and students ’ active learning while probing explanations of knowledge or solving problems (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Herrington, Reeves, Oliver, & Woo, 2004; Woolf & Quinn, 2009).”
BackgroundEmbodying science: A feminist perspective on learning
Brickhouse, N. W. (2001) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:3 · Cited by 359
Web‐based collaborative inquiry learning
Chang, K. ‐., Sung, Y., & Lee, C. (2003) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00006.x · Cited by 128
“This finding supported the postulation of situated learning (Brown et al. 1989; Wenger, 1997) that authentic tasks are more appropriate for inquiry learning.”
ResultBillett, S. R. (2014) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2014.01.002 · Cited by 144
Interconnecting networks of practice for professional learning
Mackey, J., & Evans, T. (2011) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v12i3.873 · Cited by 126
Epistemologies of Mathematics and of Mathematics Education
Sierpinska, A., & Lerman, S. (1996) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-1465-0_26 · Cited by 125
Psychological Foundations for Networked Learning
Goodyear, P. (2002) · Computer supported cooperative work · doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-0181-9_4 · Cited by 128
Motivating self-regulated learning in technology education
Barak, M. (2009) · International Journal of Technology and Design Education · doi:10.1007/s10798-009-9092-x · Cited by 141
“Other related theories are the theory of distributed cognition (Salomon 1993; Hutchins 1995), situated cognition (Brown et al. 1989) and the socio-cognitive theory (Bandura 1997), which shows that knowledge exists within communities, and meaningful learning is the result of active social and cultural interaction.”
BackgroundOpportunity to Learn: A language-based perspective on assessment
Gee, J. P. (2003) · Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice · doi:10.1080/09695940301696 · Cited by 126
Learning from text: Reflections on the past and suggestions for the future
Goldman, S. R. (1997) · Discourse Processes · doi:10.1080/01638539709544997 · Cited by 126
Sfard, A., & Lavie, I. (2005) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2302_3 · Cited by 133
“The issue is well worth a deeper thought, as it relates this discussion to the classical debate on the transfer of learning, and to the current controversy around the inherent situatedness of cognition (Anderson, Reder, & Simon, 1996; Brown et al., 1989; Greeno, 1997; Lave, 1988; Sfard, 1998).”
BackgroundMaking a Difference in Teacher Education Through Self-Study
Kosnik, C. (2005) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/1-4020-3528-4 · Cited by 225
KM Quest: A Collaborative Internet-Based Simulation Game
Leemkuil, H., de Jong, T., de Hoog, R., & Christoph, N. (2003) · Simulation & Gaming · doi:10.1177/1046878102250605 · Cited by 125
“For instance, situated cognition (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989) stresses the importance of learning in context, because the context becomes an important part of the knowledge associated with that learning.”
BackgroundLearning to Troubleshoot: A New Theory-Based Design Architecture
Jonassen, D. H., & Hung, W. (2006) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9001-8 · Cited by 126
“Rather than learning about troubleshooting, the learner is engaged in a cognitive apprenticeship (Brown et al., 1989) with a normal troubleshooter.”
BackgroundThe Invention Studio: A University Maker Space and Culture.
Forest, C. R., Moore, R. A., Jariwala, A., Fasse, B., Linsey, J., Newstetter, W., Ngo, P., & Quintero, C. (2014) · AEE Journal · Cited by 126
Fan, M., Antle, A. N., & Warren, J. L. (2020) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/0735633120927489 · Cited by 160
“Situated cognition argues that knowledge cannot be abstracted from the situation from which it was learned (Brown et al., 1989).”
BackgroundSocial Presence and Online Learning: A Review of Research
Öztok, M., & Brett, C. (2011) · TSpace (University of Toronto) · Cited by 125
The firm as an epistemic community: the knowledge-based view revisited
Håkanson, L. (2010) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtq052 · Cited by 129
Bottge, B. A. (1999) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/002246699903300202 · Cited by 124
The Value of Ideas: The Immersion Approach to the Development of Thinking
Prawat, R. S. (1991) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x020002003 · Cited by 126
Raffo, C., Lovatt, A., Banks, M., & O’Connor, J. (2000) · Education + Training · doi:10.1108/00400910010353653 · Cited by 122
The Relationship Between Theory and Practice in Teacher Education
Korthagen, F. A. J. (2010) · International Encyclopedia of Education · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-044894-7.00638-2 · Cited by 127
Self-directed learning in a socioconstructivist learning environment
Sze-yeng, F., & Hussain, R. M. R. (2010) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.423 · Cited by 124
Picture Books as an Impetus for Kindergartners' Mathematical Thinking
van den Heuvel‐Panhuizen, M., & van den Boogaard, S. (2008) · Mathematical Thinking and Learning · doi:10.1080/10986060802425539 · Cited by 140
“The position of contextualized learning encompasses the theory of situated cognition launched by Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989) and the situated learning theory as introduced by Lave and Wenger (1991).”
BackgroundDawson, M., & Lignugaris/Kraft, B. (2017) · Teacher Education and Special Education The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/0888406416664184 · Cited by 91
“Also, their generalization to the classroom largely depended on the type and frequency of errors and misbehaviors they encountered, and the extent to which these aligned with the practice opportunities they had in TLE (see J. S. Brown et al., 1989).”
BackgroundTeaching and Researching Genre Knowledge: Toward an Enhanced Theoretical Framework
Tardy, C. M., Sommer-Farias, B., & Gevers, J. (2020) · Written Communication · doi:10.1177/0741088320916554 · Cited by 147
“Because genres are social practices and rhetorical categories, genre knowledge has been described as a kind of situated cognition (Berkenkotter & Huckin, 1993), a knowledge that includes a rich understanding of a tool (in this case, a genre) and the world in which it is used (Brown et al., 1989).”
BackgroundOuyang, F., Xu, W., & Cukurova, M. (2023) · International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/s11412-023-09387-z · Cited by 124
“Thus, instructors should pay attention to groups’ inactive moments in verbal communication or online behaviour to foster synergistic meaning co-construction (Barron, 2000; Brown et al., 1989; O’Donnell & Hmelo-Silver, 2013).”
BackgroundRoth, W., McGinn, M. K., & Bowen, G. M. (1998) · Journal of Science Teacher Education · doi:10.1023/a:1009465505918 · Cited by 124
An observational study of how objects support engineering design thinking and communication
Brereton, M. F., & McGarry, B. (2000) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/332040.332434 · Cited by 125
Alternative Perspectives on Knowing Mathematics in Elementary Schools
Putnam, R. T., Lampert, M., & Peterson, P. L. (1990) · Review of Research in Education · doi:10.2307/1167351 · Cited by 140
“, 1989; Collins, Brown, & Newman, in press), this need to acquire cognitive tools through richly embedded practice suggests that apprenticeship is an appropriate metaphor for instruction, because of its emphasis on learning in the context of authentic activity (Brown et al., 1989).”
BackgroundChalmers, C., Carter, M., Cooper, T. J., & Nason, R. (2017) · International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education · doi:10.1007/s10763-017-9799-1 · Cited by 148
Assessing Google Cardboard virtual reality as a content delivery system in business classrooms
Lee, S. H., Sergueeva, K., Catangui, M., & Kandaurova, M. (2017) · Journal of Education for Business · doi:10.1080/08832323.2017.1308308 · Cited by 122
“Given the immersive nature of VR, students can learn through situational involvement; this form of involvement has been shown to be more successful than traditional instructional methods (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989).”
MethodHirumi, A. “. C. (2002) · The Journal of Technology and Teacher Education · Cited by 123
Teaching Causal Reasoning Through Cognitive Apprenticeship: What Are Results From Situated Learning?
Hendricks, C. C. (2001) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220670109598766 · Cited by 127
“The intellectual goal of situated cognition is acquiring cognitive skills and strategies; this occurs through sustained participation within a community (Brown et al., 1989; Collins, Brown, & Newman, 1989; Lave, 1988, 1990; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Prawat & Floden, 1994).”
BackgroundInfluentialNurturing the seeds of transfer: a domain-specific perspective
Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (1999) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/s0883-0355(99)00024-5 · Cited by 121
Teachers' Progress toward Becoming Expert Strategy Teachers
Duffy, G. G. (1993) · The Elementary School Journal · doi:10.1086/461754 · Cited by 122
Metadata
- Authors
- Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P.
- Affiliations
- Institute for Research on Learning, 2550 Hanover Street, Palo Alto, California 94304.
- BBN Inc, 10 Moulton Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02238
- Venue
- Educational Researcher
- Published
- 1989-01
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 32-42
- ISSN
- 0013-189X (ISSN-L)
- 1935-102X
- OpenAlex
- W2164599981
- Cited by
- 13,645
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 324 · 2025: 322 · 2024: 255 · 2023: 271 · 2022: 384 · 2021: 446 · 2020: 520 · 2019: 472 · 2018: 467 · 2017: 513 · 2016: 525 · 2015: 585 · 2014: 628 · 2013: 637 · 2012: 651
- FWCI
- 128.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- Educational Researcher (publishedVersion)
- Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Education and Learning Practices
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Educational Theory and Curriculum Studies
- Keywords
- situated cognition, learning culture, cognitive apprenticeship, situated knowledge, school culture, mathematics education, conceptual knowledge, everyday cognition, teaching practice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
