They asked subjects to listen to two word lists and to judge whether or not each word on the second list (new words) had appeared on the first list (studied words), as shown below. This point is illustrated in an experiment by Chad Dodson and Arthur Shimamura (2000). And some concepts do not lend themselves well to pictures: How would one depict “genius” or “democracy” in a picture? On the other hand, the particular shade of green of a frozen pea would be stored visually because the information is inherently visual.īecause these different memory representations store different types of information, you usually cannot use one representation to substitute for another. Visual representations, for example, are poor for storing meaning because they are often consistent with more than one interpretation: A static image of a car driving on a snowy hill could just as well depict a car struggling up the hill or slipping backwards down the hill. Our minds have these different types of representations for a reason: Different representations are more or less effective for storing different types of information. If, in contrast, they were asked to remember visual details of the pictures and to ignore the story they tell, they would have a better memory for the visual details and the meaning-based representation would be worse. They usually don’t remember the visual representation for long, however, largely because when they see the pictures, they are thinking about what they mean in order to understand the story. When subjects view a picture story, they do have a visual representation of what the pictures look like, in addition to the meaning-based representation. The mind is capable of storing memories in a number of different formats, and laboratory research indicates that a single experience usually leads to more than one type of representation. Bush has a deeper voice, you will likely report that you would answer by generating an auditory memory of each. If I ask you whether Bill Clinton or George W. For example, if I ask you “Which is a darker green: a Christmas tree or a frozen pea?” you’ll likely report that you would answer this question by visually imagining the two objects side by side and evaluating which is a darker green. These findings do not mean that you can’t store auditory or visual information. People rapidly lose the memory of the precise images that make up a picture story (e.g., whether a character faced left or right), but they retain the meaning or gist of the story (Gernsbacher, 1985). The same phenomenon is observed with purely visual stimuli. People who listen to a story will later confidently “recognize” sentences that never appeared in the story - so long as these new sentences are consistent with the story’s meaning (Bransford and Franks, 1971). How did cognitive scientists figure this out? An important clue that memories are stored by their meaning is the types of errors people make on memory tests. The initial experience by which you learned this fact may have been visual (watching a flame go out under a glass) or auditory (hearing an explanation), but the resulting representation of that knowledge in your mind is neither visual nor auditory. For example, your knowledge that a fire requires oxygen to burn is unlikely to be stored as a visual or an auditory memory. You typically store memories in terms of meaning - not in terms of whether you saw, heard, or physically interacted with the information. An important finding from that research is that memory is usually stored independent of any modality. But is the theory correct? And, whether or not the theory is correct, might it not also be true that all of the kindergartners would learn the most about holidays by listening to stories, looking at pictures, and handling costumes?īefore we tackle the research on using modalities to enhance student learning, let’s review a few things that cognitive scientists know about modalities.Ĭognitive psychologists have used formal laboratory tasks to investigate the role of modality in memory. For example, within one kindergarten class, the auditory learner could listen to stories about different holidays around the world, while the visual learner examined pictures of holiday celebrants, and the kinesthetic learner handled costumes and artifacts associated with the holidays. The theory that students learn more when content is presented in their best modality seems to make sense, seems to be supported by classroom experiences, and offers the hope of maximizing each child’s learning by planning different lessons for each type of learner. Discussions of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learners 1 are common in educational literature, teacher-preparation programs, and professional development workshops.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |