ABSTRACT
Societal institution are comprised of scholars and practitioners who align themselves with particular disciplines such as physics, psychology, and education. This disciplinary structure is useful for accomplishing common research and instructional goals within academia, but it tends to limit the amount of communication and interchange among individuals aligned with distinct disciplines, even when these individuals have similar interests in common. A case in point is the fact that educators and cognitive developmental scientists are both keenly interested in the issue of children’s learning, but surprisingly few individuals in these two disciplines seem to appreciate the relevance of cognitive developmental research and theory for educational practice (and vice versa). This mutual stance of benign neglect of each other’s business is rather unfortunate because it could well be one of the chief reasons for the general ineffectiveness of most educational reforms. When reformers have an accurate understanding of the nature of some intellectual competency and the development mechanisms that foster the acquisition of this capacity, they have precisely the insight they need to create “mind-compatible” and, therefore, effective instructional approaches (Byrnes, 2001a). Just as physicians need to have an accurate understanding of the inner workings of bodily systems in order to propose treatment regimens that will truly improve physical health, educators need to have an accurate understanding of the inner workings of the mind to propose instructional practices that will truly enhance achievement. The field of cognitive developmental science provides precisely the kind of insight into the inner workings of the mind that educators need.
