Page 1 of 6 - Cover Page Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
Submission
My Files
My Files
University
Document Details
Submission ID
trn:oi[Link]9502 4 Pages
Submission Date 368 Words
Mar 18, 2025, 1:49 AM GMT+5:30
2,048 Characters
Download Date
Mar 18, 2025, 1:50 AM GMT+5:30
File Name
Cognitive [Link]
File Size
14.4 KB
Page 1 of 6 - Cover Page Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
Page 2 of 6 - AI Writing Overview Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
0% detected as AI Caution: Review required.
The percentage indicates the combined amount of likely AI-generated text as It is essential to understand the limitations of AI detection before making decisions
well as likely AI-generated text that was also likely AI-paraphrased. about a student’s work. We encourage you to learn more about Turnitin’s AI detection
capabilities before using the tool.
Detection Groups
1 AI-generated only 0%
Likely AI-generated text from a large-language model.
2 AI-generated text that was AI-paraphrased 0%
Likely AI-generated text that was likely revised using an AI-paraphrase tool
or word spinner.
Disclaimer
Our AI writing assessment is designed to help educators identify text that might be prepared by a generative AI tool. Our AI writing assessment may not always be accurate (it may misidentify
writing that is likely AI generated as AI generated and AI paraphrased or likely AI generated and AI paraphrased writing as only AI generated) so it should not be used as the sole basis for
adverse actions against a student. It takes further scrutiny and human judgment in conjunction with an organization's application of its specific academic policies to determine whether any
academic misconduct has occurred.
Frequently Asked Questions
How should I interpret Turnitin's AI writing percentage and false positives?
The percentage shown in the AI writing report is the amount of qualifying text within the submission that Turnitin’s AI writing
detection model determines was either likely AI-generated text from a large-language model or likely AI-generated text that was
likely revised using an AI-paraphrase tool or word spinner.
False positives (incorrectly flagging human-written text as AI-generated) are a possibility in AI models.
AI detection scores under 20%, which we do not surface in new reports, have a higher likelihood of false positives. To reduce the
likelihood of misinterpretation, no score or highlights are attributed and are indicated with an asterisk in the report (*%).
The AI writing percentage should not be the sole basis to determine whether misconduct has occurred. The reviewer/instructor
should use the percentage as a means to start a formative conversation with their student and/or use it to examine the submitted
assignment in accordance with their school's policies.
What does 'qualifying text' mean?
Our model only processes qualifying text in the form of long-form writing. Long-form writing means individual sentences contained in paragraphs that make up a
longer piece of written work, such as an essay, a dissertation, or an article, etc. Qualifying text that has been determined to be likely AI-generated will be
highlighted in cyan in the submission, and likely AI-generated and then likely AI-paraphrased will be highlighted purple.
Non-qualifying text, such as bullet points, annotated bibliographies, etc., will not be processed and can create disparity between the submission highlights and the
percentage shown.
Page 2 of 6 - AI Writing Overview Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
Page 3 of 6 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
Cognitive Development
Your Name
Name of your Institution
Name of the Course
Name of the Professor
March 15, 2025
Page 3 of 6 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
Page 4 of 6 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
Cognitive Development
Suzanne's schema of the balance beam is based on the incorrect assumption that having
the same number of tiles on both sides of the fulcrum will always make it balanced. This schema
is an initial intuitive concept of equilibrium that does not include the factor of the distance from
the fulcrum. The cognitive process that leads to her error is centration, defined by Piaget in
which the child is focused on one element of the problem (number of tiles) at the expense of the
other (distance from the fulcrum). As Suzanne is not thinking of the distance at the start, she
assumes that equalizing the two sides of the tiles will make the beam balanced.
An example of assimilation in Suzanne's thinking is when she applies her existing
schema to a new balance beam problem. Even after hearing her peers describe it, she continues
to apply the same incorrect method, attempting to balance the beam by equating the number of
tiles but not their location. This is assimilation because she is applying new information to her
existing mental structure rather than modifying it.
A good example of accommodation comes later in the lesson when Suzanne begins to
rethink her approach. The second she sees tiles more distant from the fulcrum will result in the
most significant effect on balance; she is making her schema adapt to this new information. This
is an example of accommodation because she is altering what she already knows based on new
information.
By applying Vygotsky’s theory, social interaction, and scaffolding were two impacts on
cognitive development within this lesson. To begin with, interaction between the peers helped
Suzanne learn. Molly and Gretzel rectified her misapprehension by clarifying that weight and
length are balancing factors. Secondly, the instructor offered to provide leading questions and
Page 4 of 6 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
Page 5 of 6 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
break down the problem into steps as a means of scaffolding. These provided Suzanne with a
progressive approach toward understanding the balancing factor concept, which demonstrates
Vygotsky’s assertion that learning is achieved through social interaction and guidance.
Page 5 of 6 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
Page 6 of 6 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
Reference
Pearson Education, Inc. (2025). Cognitive Development in Fourth Grade. [Link].
[Link]
ders_iPad
Page 6 of 6 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oi[Link]9502
