Cognitive structure and/or development	243

•	reflective thinking	•	goal theory	•	students benefit
•	productive thinking				from guidance on
•	building				learning to learn
	understanding
Classification by:		Values:		Practical
•	phases and areas for	•	choice enhances		illustrations for
	self-regulated learning		motivation for		teachers:
			independent learning	•	largely left for
					others to derive

Theories of executive function

Description and potential relevance for education

We can direct and manage some of our thought processes. Theories of executive function describe the nature and extent of this management. Arising from different perspectives, some of these theories use similar terms in different ways. Nevertheless, what they have to say is important for those who research and attempt to foster productive thinking.

Some theorists have a fairly general view of executive function as a control system that manages the ability to hold information in the mind and process it (Just and Carpenter, 1996). On this basis, it is an umbrella term for a set of domain-general control processes that organise and integrate thought (Denckla, 1996).They are distinguished from other brain functions in that they are a means of self-regulation for analysis, alteration, and management of thought (Barkley, 1996, p. 319; Lane and Nadel, 2000; Borkowski et al., 2004). In routine matters, these control processes may not be called into action but when some goal is to be achieved or problem solved, they enable an orderly approach (Welsh and Pennington, 1988; Morris, 1996; Borkowski and Burke, 1996; Rabbit, 1997; Roberts et al., 1998). They also come into action in managing processes associated with social interaction (Eslinger, 1996) and with emotions (Lane and Nadel, 2000). Pintrich (2000) includes the management of cognition, motivation/affect, behaviour and context in his comprehensive model of self-regulation.

244 Frameworks for Thinking

Torgensen (1996) equates executive function with metacognition. It clearly overlaps that concept but others see the overlap as incomplete (Denckla, 1996; Demetriou and Kazi, 2001; Borkowski and Nicholson, 2004). Demetriou distinguishes executive functioning (which he calls ‘working hypercognition’) from representations of mind and personality built up in ‘long-term hypercognition’. Jacob Bronowski (1967, 1977) provided an early model of executive function, drawing attention to the way other animals respond immediately and totally to events. In contrast, we are able to delay the response and, to some extent, separate emotions that the event engenders from the informational content. We can prolong the representation of the event in the mind (giving a sense of the past); formulate a response (in the present); and construct a scenario (for the future). This prescient model captures the essence of the functions of the control system (Barkley, 1996). Recent accounts tend to describe these as:

•to inhibit an immediate response

•to initiate mental activity directed at a specific end, maintaining or sustaining it and inhibiting distractions and impulses (including attention-diminishing emotions)

•to plan, organise, sequence, prioritise, select mental actions, apply and monitor their progress, and assess the accuracy of predictions

•to maintain a mental flexibility, stop a line of thought and initiate a change in it, in support of goal-directed or problem-solving behaviour.

The mental arena where information is maintained on-line and processed has been called working memory (Denckla, 1996, p. 266), a term introduced by Baddeley (e.g. 1976, 1996), and a concept possibly implied in Bronowksi’s model. Working memory is a ‘workspace where things can be compared and contrasted and mentally manipulated’ (Lane and Nadel, 2000, pp. 144–145; Ohbayashi et al., 2003). Beyond that, the term does not mean entirely the same to everyone (Dosher, 2003). For example, for Baddeley (1976, 1996), it incorporates a central executive which manages the processing of information and certain slave systems. For Cowan (1995), on the other hand, it is the

Cognitive structure and/or development	245

currently active part of the memory system together with the strategy and attention functions that maintain it. Whatever the theory, it may be better to think of working memory as a capacity rather than a tightly defined location (Dosher, 2003). This capacity, however, is limited. For our purpose the limited capacity of working memory is of particular interest, since neo-Piagetian stage theory is based on developmental changes in the number of distinct ‘schemas’ which can be ‘kept in mind’ (Fischer, 1980; Pascual-Leone, 1988).

Executive control processes are situation-dependent in that some people find some situations (lessons, lectures or subjects) inherently more interesting (and so easier to engage with, sustain attention in and plan for). There is also good evidence that executive control processes are ability-dependent (Miyake et al., 2001). The processes are also person-dependent in that some people may be better at some of these than at others. Those with marked deficits in executive functioning may exhibit difficulties in managing attention, following instructions, planning, time management, changing the approach, and in decontextualising thinking (Handley et al., 2004).

Failures to regulate thought can adversely affect learning. As a consequence, attempts are made to remedy such deficits (Spodak, 1999). For example, children may be taught explicit strategies for planning and working through the plan (Lyon and Krasnegor, 1996), and Graham and Harris (1996) found that students can develop strategy skills through instruction that includes modelling of the strategy by the teacher; memorisation of the steps; and collaborative and independent practice (see also, Pressley et al., 1990 for useful advice). This illustrates that executive actions (which could be thought of as thinking skills) may be taught. Working memory capacity, however, also varies from person to person. Deficits in this capacity are associated with learning disabilities (Swanson and Sa´ez, 2003) and weakness in the ability to reason (Handley et al., 2004). In the context of special education, pedagogical strategies intended to make thinking more productive should therefore not overburden working memory.

Executive function is significantly associated with activity in the prefrontal cortex, although that is neither the sole function of the

246 Frameworks for Thinking

pre-frontal cortex nor the only active area when the system operates. Posner and Raichle (1994) describe how the amount of cortical brain activity decreases with practice on a task, while the amount of sub-cortical (cerebellar) activity increases. This may reflect the ‘chunking’ of concepts, routines and ‘schemas’ which takes place as understanding and performance become automatic.

Evaluation

Theories of executive function have been criticised as invoking an homunculus, someone inside the head who controls what goes on. The problem is obvious: who controls the homunculus? The mind, however, does behave as though it has executive control over some kinds of thinking and these theories, metaphorical or otherwise, have the potential to suggest skills that may be practised and enhanced in the classroom.

Executive function has also been criticised on the grounds that it is simply re-introducing the concept of general intelligence (g) under another name. However, executive functioning is recognised as a hallmark of intelligence and it distinguishes general giftedness from more specific forms of giftedness and from other students (Sternberg, 1985, 87). Moreover, Colom et al. (2004) have shown in three studies that performance on a battery of working-memory tests can be predicted to a high level of accuracy by measures of general intelligence (g).

Working memory, the arena managed by the executive control processes, can also register emotion and integrate it with other information (Lane and Nadel, 2000). Theories of executive function may, therefore, help us understand some of the interaction between cognition and affect. They already have the potential to help us understand something of the progressive unfolding of a child’s thinking abilities – ‘the difference between child and adult resides in the unfolding of executive function’ (Denckla, 1996, p. 264) – and they point to specific control processes that may be developed in the classroom. Gathercole (1998) and Romine and Reynolds (2004) have similarly drawn attention to the development of memory in children and how it affects their ability to think productively. Luna et al. (2004) have shown that spatial

Cognitive structure and/or development	247

working memory continues to develop during adolescence, evening out at the age of 19. Perhaps students can be taught effective ways of using external extensions to working memory, such as pencil and paper.

On this basis, if the concept of executive function guides thought and practice in productive ways, then it has value. Some ask what is meant by terms such as problem, strategy, and plan. They feel that these are too vague to be meaningful and prefer to look at behaviours. Nevertheless, from a practical point of view, some degree of vagueness need not be an obstacle if there is enough shared meaning to make them useful. Theories of executive function are works in progress. They have the potential to guide thought and action and may give rise to strategies that help students manage their thinking better and, hence, achieve more.

Summary: Theories of executive function

				Relevance for teachers
Purpose and structure		Some key features			and learning
Main purpose(s):		Terminology:		Intended audience:
•	to provide a structure	•	the same words	•	researchers
	to understand		do not always mean		applied psychologists
	controlled thought		the same thing in
			different versions
Domains addressed:		Presentation:		Contexts:
•	cognitive	•	academic	•	psychology
•	conative			•	education
•	affective			•	work
				•	citizenship
				•	recreation
Broad categories		Theory base:		Pedagogical stance:
covered:		•	cognitive psychology	•	self-controlled learning
•	self-engagement	•	neuroscience

•reflective thinking

•productive thinking