Epistemic cognition and evaluating information: Applying the AIR model of epistemic cognition.

By Clark A. Chinn, Ronald W. Rinehart, Luke A. Buckland. 2014

181 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0672a9350b6964fc75433c576268a00500df839b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

A Meta-Analytic Review of the Relationship Between Epistemic Cognition and Academic Achievement (2018, background): “Chinn et al. (2011, 2014, 2016) have argued that modern philosophical epistemology’s scope has broadened sufficiently to warrant looking beyond justification for other relevant aspects of epistemic cognition.”
Understanding and Promoting Thinking About Knowledge (2016, background): “Finally, Chinn and colleagues (Chinn et al., 2011; Chinn et al., 2014; Chinn & Rinehart, 2016) have argued that contemporary work in philosophical epistemology has a number of implications for models of epistemic cognition, including that (a) epistemic cognition is fundamentally a social phenomenon;”
On the Goals of Epistemic Education: Promoting Apt Epistemic Performance (2018, methodology): “We draw on the AIR model because this model is well aligned with reliabilist philosophical approaches (Chinn & Rinehart, 2016; Chinn et al., 2014); the AIR model places central importance on the achievement of epistemic aims through reliable epistemic processes.”
A review of educational responses to the “post-truth” condition: Four lenses on “post-truth” problems (2020, methodology): “Our analysis is informed by the AIR model of epistemic thinking (Chinn et al., 2014; Chinn & Rinehart, 2016).”
Disciplinary authenticity and personal relevance in school science (2018, background): “…what counts as “good” evidence in science (i.e., epistemological ideals; see Chinn, Rinehart, & Buckland, 2014), and a refinement of understanding through model-measurement iterations (i.e., epistemological processes; see Chinn et al., 2014), thus reflecting strong disciplinary authenticity.”
Education for a “Post-Truth” World: New Directions for Research and Practice (2020, methodology): “Drawing on current models of epistemic cognition (Barzilai & Chinn, 2018; Chinn et al., 2014), we analyze emblematic post-truth reasoning challenges, point to their underlying causes, and propose five directions for instructional design and research to address these causes.”
Moving Beyond Reflection: Reflexivity and Epistemic Cognition in Teaching and Teacher Education (2017, methodology): “Its current version, the AIR model, focuses specifically on epistemic Aims, Ideals and Reliable processes to better understand and explain the nature of knowledge and processes of knowing (Chinn et al., 2014).”
Changing Teachers' Epistemic Cognition: A New Conceptual Framework for Epistemic Reflexivity (2017, methodology): “It is important for teachers to be able to distinguish between these aims as they engage in teaching practice (Chinn et al., 2014).”