ABSTRACT
The contributions to the present volume fall into two distinct categories. One group of authors discusses the potential relevance of neo-Piagetian theories for educational practice, whereas another group presents the results of intervention studies intended to improve children’s thinking. The studies by Efklides, Demetriou, and Gustafsson and Csapó are examples of the latter category. Shayer’s comments on intervention studies are derived from his extensive experience with similar projects and with the Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education (CASE) study in particular (Adey 1988; Adey and Shayer 1990). The two groups of studies are obviously related to one another, because intervention studies may be inspired by a given theory of cognitive development (see Shayer 1987).
