cognition vs knowledge

[vectra]

Hello everyone,

I am a little embarrassed by the feedback my question about the word 'cognition' has created.
The truth is I am hooked on using IT in the classroom. I enjoy creating educational videos based on news bulletins or interesting stories uploaded on various video sharing sites, inviting students to record themselves retelling the news or stories and upload their reports in MP3 files on our wikis.
I also encourage them to take part in talking groups I create on educational sites, again recording their ideas or thoughts on that or another issue.
This time I was trying a new program which helps you make lists of words you would like to memorize; apart from that it helps you to make lists of quotes and so on.
And right at that time I was trying to make a video based on the article 'The 4 Types of Teams All Leaders Need to Understand' by Thomas A. Stewart, April 5, 2011 BNET - The CBS Interactive Business Network. Here is the very paragraph I came across this word in:
Problem solvers. One reason to team up is to crack a tough problem, because when it comes to banging against a wall, two heads are better than one, and seven or eight are better still. Juries are problem-solvers. So are teams of analysts. These teams need a clear goal–a problem and a deadline. They want diversity of sex, background, and cognition, and not just tokenism.

As I wanted to learn more about the word 'cognition', I posted a question, and was about to enter it in a word list just to stir my students' curiosity. As black and white as that.
As for learning all these 'economics' terms, they do study them under the guidance of professors who read theoretical subjects.
I have nothing to do with them. I teach ESP and just try to keep my students on toes by exposing them to a whole range of web applications, aimed at helping them learn English better.
I take my hat off to you all for pushing me in the right direction.

Thank you a lot again and I really am sorry for posting a badly thought-out question.

[freezeframe]

And right at that time I was trying to make a video based on the article 'The 4 Types of Teams All Leaders Need to Understand' by Thomas A. Stewart, April 5, 2011 BNET - The CBS Interactive Business Network. Here is the very paragraph I came across this word in:
Problem solvers. One reason to team up is to crack a tough problem, because when it comes to banging against a wall, two heads are better than one, and seven or eight are better still. Juries are problem-solvers. So are teams of analysts. These teams need a clear goal–a problem and a deadline. They want diversity of sex, background, and cognition, and not just tokenism.

I believe this is a case of someone trying to use an impressively sounding word instead of a simple one and, in the process, misusing the said impressively sounding word.

[probus]

Of course it matters who is asking the question. An obvious example is a beginning student who has run across the subjunctive mood and asks about it. It's pretty useless to try to explain to somebody at that stage of learning.

In my opinion, cognition is a technical term. It has a technical meaning and if one wishes to insist on that meaning one should point out that one is being technical. In everyday non-technical usage I still think cognition indicates understanding as opposed to knowledge.

[5jj]

Of course it matters who is asking the question. An obvious example is a beginning student who has run across the subjunctive mood and asks about it. It's pretty useless to try to explain to somebody at that stage of learning.

Well, I don't try to judge whether or not a person who asks a question is capable of understanding my response. I leave it to them to tell me if they need clarification of anything I have written.

I also remember that other people see the answers. As I began this post, I noted that 141 people had viewed the thread. They, too, are interested in reading a correct answer.

[freezeframe]

Well, I don't try to judge whether or not a person who asks a question is capable of understanding my response. I leave it to them to tell me if they need clarification of anything I have written.

I also remember that other people see the answers. As I began this post, I noted that 141 people had viewed the thread. They, too, are interested in reading a correct answer.

Maybe it's just different approaches to teaching. I like to teach with terms as simple as possible. But I'm also aware that what I consider to be "as simple as possible" in my field is completely incomprehensible to majority of people.

[konungursvia]

For a good understanding of comprehension, I recommend Dilthey: Edification of the Historical World in the Sciences of the Mind. For a good understanding of cognition, I recommend Vygotsky: Thought and Language.

[Khosro]

For a good understanding of comprehension, I recommend Dilthey: Edification of the Historical World in the Sciences of the Mind. For a good understanding of cognition, I recommend Vygotsky: Thought and Language.

Thank you for both books. Vygotsky book is a very interesting one when it comes to language. The second one is yet too expensive to buy and the odd thing is that it is translated as "edification of the historical world in the human sciences".

[konungursvia]

Thank you for both books. Vygotsky book is a very interesting one when it comes to language. The second one is yet too expensive to buy and the odd thing is that it is translated as "edification of the historical world in the human sciences".

Yes, I was just quoting the title as I thought it may be in English, I read it in French in an ENS translation at the EHESS: Edification du monde historique dans les sciences de l'esprit.

[probus]

[QUOTE=fivejedjon;734915]It does not matter who asks the questionQUOTE]

I do not believe you for one minute. (!) Every time you or I open our mouths, we have an intended audience in mind.

[5jj]

I do not believe you for one minute. (!) Every time you or I open our mouths, we have an intended audience in mind.

Whether or not you believe me is of no interest to me. Your second sentence is, in any case irrelevant. I type with my mouth closed.