Understanding Literacy and Cognition: Theory, Research, and Application PDF
Preview Understanding Literacy and Cognition: Theory, Research, and Application
UND ERST ANDING LITERACY AND COGNITION Theory, Research, and Application UNDERST ANDING LITERACY AND COGNITION Theory, Research, and Application Edited by ehe Kan Leong and Bikkar S. Randhawa University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada PLENUM PRESS • NEW YORK AND LONDON Llbrary of Congress Cataloglng-ln-Publlcatlon Data Understandlng 11teracy and cogn1tlon : theory. research. and app11cat10n / ed1ted by Che Kan Leong and Blkkar S. Randhawa. p. cm. "Based on the P10ceed1ngs of the Slxt1eth Annlversary Inv1tat10nal Conference on L1teracy and Cogn1tion for a Chang1ng Soc1ety. held October 29-31. 1967. in Saskatoon. Saskatchewan. Canada"--T.p. verso. Includes bibliographical references. !SBN-13: 978-1-4684-5750-6 e-!SBN-13: 978-1-4684-5748-3 DO!: 10.1007/978-1-4684-5748-3 1. L1teracy--Congresses. 2. Cogn1tlon--Congresses. 3. Educatlonal technology--Congresses. 4. Cogn1t1ve learn1ng -Congresses. I. Leong. Che Kan. II. Randhawa. Bikkar S. III. S1xTleth Annlversary Invltatlonal Conference on L1teracy and Cogn1tlon for aChanglng Soclety (1987 : Saskatoon. Sask.l LC149.U48 1989 302.2 ' 244--dc20 89-77899 CIP Based on the proceedings of the Sixtieth Anniversary Invitational Conference on Literacy and Cognition for aChanging Society, held October 29-31, 1987, in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada © 1989 Plenum Press, New York Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1989 A Division of Plenum Publishing Corporation 233 Spring Street, New York, N.Y. 10013 All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher PREFACE What does it me an to be literate? What does it mean to be a cognizing individual? What is the nature of cognizing? These are not new questions. They have been treated as "philosophical puzzles" to be pondered systema tically in the hope of some eventual solution. They have also been viewed as sets of "language games" with their own rules to enable the individual to understand the world. These age-old and significant issues gain renewed meaning with our advances in technology and neurosciences. Psychologists and educators would need to be aware of the explicit knowledge needed to prepare their students to be literate individuals. These were some of the questions that a small number of psychologists, educators, and computer scientists attempted to answer when they gathered for the Symposium Literacy and Cognition, which was held at the University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada from 29th to 31st October, 1987. The occasion also marked the sixtieth anniversary of the College of Education of the University, which had as its beginning the Normal School for the Province of Saskatchewan. We are grateful to the presenters for their presentations and their written papers, and also to our other colleagues from the United States and Sweden for their contributions to the multi faceted theme of literacy and cognition. There are many other people whom we would like to thank. These include: Dr. Sylvia Fedoruk, Chancellor of the University and Lieutenant Governor of Saskatchewan, for her opening remarks at the Symposium; Dr. Murray Scharf, Dean of the College of Education, for his strong support and the financial assistance from the College and the University; and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for its confer ence grant. Special thanks also go to Sheryl Yuzik for her administrative work in connection with the Symposium and her help in proof-reading some of the chapters; to Mary-Ann Barr for meticulously and patiently typing (and sometimes retyping) this complete volume for camera-ready printing. We appreciate the publication of this work by Plenum Publishing, and in particular the guidance given us by its Editor, Patricia V. Vann, and the Special Assistant to the Managing Editor, Gregory Safford. Space pre cludes our mentioning the names of other colleagues who have helped us in the project. It is our sincere hope that attempts such as ours at understanding literacy and cognition will lead to the continued quest in these important endeavours. When this volume appears in print, Che Kan Leong will have assumed the Endowed Lansdowne professorship with the Department of Psycho- v logica1 Foundations in Education, the University of Victoria, Victoria, British Co1umbia, Canada, V8W 2Y2. Whi1e he will miss the Prairie scene with its variegated seasons, he will, from a slight1y different vista, continue to grapp1e with some of the issues raised in this antho1ogy and e1sewhere. May, 1989 Che Kan Leong and Bikkar S. Randhawa College of Education University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada CONTENTS INTRODUCTION TO PART I: THEORY 1 Chapter Literate Thought 3 David R. Olson 2 A Schoolman's "Doubtfulness"-Metaphors on Literacy and Cognition 17 - Che Kan Leong 3 Neural Substrate of Cognition and Literacy: Biology as Wish Fulfillment? 33 Merrill Hiscock 4 From Literacy to Cognitive Science 55 Bikkar S. Randhawa 5 Cognition and Learning 73 Dennis Hunt 6 A Framework for Developing Theories about Instructional Effectiveness 85 Philip H. Winne INTRODUCTION TO PART 11: RESEARCH 127 7 The Practical Use of Artificial Intelligence in Automated Tutoring: Current Status and Impediments to Progress 131 Gordon I. McCalla and Jim E. Greer 8 Dual-Route, ACT*, and PDP Models of the Acquisition of Word Decoding Skills 157 Fotena A. Zirps and Richard K. Wagner 9 Through a Looking Glass: Swedish Research on Reading Using the TEXTWINDOW System 173 Robert J. Jarvella and Ingvar Lundberg vii 10 Computer Speech in Reading Research, Instruction, and Remediation 189 Leonard P. Haines and ehe Kan Leong 11 Some Re-thinking of the Psycho-Educationa1 Diagnostic Process from the Perspective of Deve10ping a Computer-Guided Expert System 203 John McLeod INTRODUCTION TO PART 111: APPLICATION 215 12 Schoo1ing, Literacy and Cognitive Deve1opment: A Study in Rural India 217 J. P. Das and U. N. Dash 13 Scientific Literacy and the Twenty-First Century 245 Glen Aikenhead 14 Techno1ogica1 Literacy: Imp1ications for Instruction 255 Reg Fleming 15 Cognition, Literacy, and Curriculum 269 Trevor J. Gambell 16 Cognitive Education: A Longitudinal Examination 287 R. F. Mulcahy, D. Peat, G. Mancini, J. Andrews, and K. Marfo ON LITERACY AND COGNITION: A CRITICAL SUMMATION 315 David R. Olson EDITORS' ADDENDUM 319 INDEX 321 viii INTRODUCTION TO PART I: THEORY If a little knowl€dge is dangerous, where is the man who has so much as to be out of danger? --Thomas Henry Huxley Astate of uncertainty about' our present state of knowledge (broadly defined) is implicit in Huxley's remarkable metaphorical reminder. Cogni tive awareness of one's competence in skills necessary for effective functioning in a complex society and of the appropriateness of the current level and types for the future represents a constant challenge. Miller, Galanter, and Pribram (1960) anticipated this challenge in their bold and historie foray into cognitive psychology, in the midst of extreme popu larity and domination of behaviorism. Plans, strategies, and behaviors have to be revised constantly in light of the changes in the perceived state of the environment. Literacy in this context is no exception. Therefore, the challenges of this dynamic state of cognitive well-being are enormous and explorations into these is the focus of this section of the book. Literacy and cogn1t10n are conjoined in the title of this book. 1mplicit in this co-occurrence is the notion that literacy and cognition are correlated, and the quality of one predicts the quality of the other. Really? This debate in part is the theme of Olson's chapter. 1s the literate thought qualitatively different from the illiterate thought? How does one verify the affirmative or the negative claim? Olson presents three different hypotheses and forwards claims and counterclaims in support and denial of these. 1t seems that the text and utterance underlie the rudiments of thought through enabling capacities people acquire in a culture. Leong discusses Olson's paper from a variety of perspectives and the most interesting for our readers would be his definition of reading (lit eracy) and functions of literacy. "Reading [literacy] is the interpreta tion, application, revision and invention of symbol systems." Whereas, the functions of literacy are: " 1nforming, re-forming and forming with different symbol systems." 1t is to the expansion and integration of these ideas that Leong devotes most of his discussion. Again, Leong re emphasizes the importance of metacognitive components of literacy whereby the individual manifests his or her literate competence as a driver, not as a passenger. A competent individual is in control of his or her mental resources to be deployed in an efficient and strategie manner. Research problems in education and science are complex. However, the application of scientific results to practice requires that the evidence is solid and that the results have been replicated. Furthermore, those wishing to apply science to practice should fully understand the process of translation and transformation. The application of scientific results to education has mystified many practitioners. In fact, many fads have arisen as a result of inappropriate extrapolation of brain research. Hiscock illustrates such unfortunate attempts and emphasizes two needs: "the need for educators to gain a better understanding of the manner in which scientific knowledge is acquired and communicated, and the need for scientists to devise more adequate ways of conceptualizing brain func tions." The same message is apparent in Randhawa's and Hunt's papers. Randhawa, in particular, while tracing the history of evolution of literacy, argues that the quality of mind is as much a result of societal role and experience as formal education. Manifestations of competence takes on different forms depending upon the experiential conditions. Randhawa challenges the cognitive scientists to unravel the components of competence. Hunt, similarly, points out that there is no adequate theory of cognitive learning; moreover, Olson even goes as far as to suggest in his summation of the proceedings of the Invitational Symposium that cog nition and learning are in fact incompatible terms. Perhaps, this incom patibility paralleis the "learning paradox" suggested by Pascuel-Leone (1980). Regardless of inherent theoretical problems in cognitive learning, Hunt suggests a number of interesting implications of cognitive movement for education. Instructional implications based on theoretical framework compelled Winne, in his paper, to delimit varied differences in teacher instructional behavior to be characterized by only two categories, "telling knowledge and guiding students' cognitive engagement with that knowledge to govern how students learn." Further, what students learn from instruction is, accord ing to Winne, not a function of students' cognitive operations, but rather of the structure of knowledge and of four parameters: attention to cues; perception of the cognitive operations they signal; capability to perform those cognitive operations; and motivation to perform those cognitive operations. A novel methodological alternative to research on instruc tional effectiveness rounds out this presentation. An appreciation of the complexity of the structure of knowledge, both fallible and infallible, is essential in this context (Agnew & Brown, 1989a, 1989b). Each individual constructs his or her own reality from a given knowledge domain and this provides a formidable challenge to theorists of instructional effective ness. REFERENCES Agnew, N. M., & Brown, J. L. (1989a). Foundations for a model of knowing: I. Constructing reality. Canadian Psychology, 30, 152-167. Agnew, N. M., & Brown, J. L. (1989b). Foundations for a model of knowing: 11. Fallible but functional knowledge. Canadian Psychology, 30, 168- 183. Mi11er, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior. New York: Holt. Pascual-Leone, J. (1980). Constructive problems for constructive theories: The current relevance of Piaget's work and a critique of information processing simulation psychology. In R. H. Kluwe & H. Spada (Eds.), Developmental models of thinking (pp. 263-296). New York: Academic Press. 2 1 LITERATE THOUGHT1 David R. Olson2 Cent re for Applied Cognitive Science, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, and McLuhan Program in Culture and Technology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario Canada M5S 1V6 HISTORICAL ARGUMENTS Beliefs about the relationship between literacy and thought have a long, indeed a venerable history. Beginning in the 18th century, in the period known as the Enlightenment, there was the assumption that an equa tion could be made between literacy, civilization, and rationality. Writers such as John Stuart Mill and Thomas Jefferson claimed that the ability to read and write was not only important to personal fu1fillment but also critical to the existence of an informed citizenry and a responsible government. But what began as a reasonable assumption has, in the course of two centuries, picked up sufficient momentum to be considered, in our time, the "myth" of literacy. I refer to it as a myth because it is no longer a belief subject to reflection and argument but an assumption held unreflectively. It is the assumption that directly links illiteracy with poverty, malnutrition, and unemployment as well as other social il1s, that makes us think of illiteracy as if it were some degrading social disease, of illiterates as second class citizens, and of education as a means of eliminating the "scourge" of illiteracy (Olson, 1974). In the past two decades that assumption has come under criticism, in part because of a new understanding of, not 1iteracy, but orality, the study of the structure and social uses of oral as opposed to written lang uage. This new understanding has let us recognize the myth of literacy as a myth; a belief not defensible on intellectua1 grounds. Hence, the rela tion between literacy and thought needs to be reexamined and reconstructed. The beginnings of that reconstruction, as mentioned, are recent. Over the past twenty-five years the myth of literacy, the set of assumptions linking literacy, civilization, and rationality, has been replaced by, what we may refer to as, the literacy hypothesis. The literacy hypothesis poses 1 An earlier version of this paper was published in the Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Thinking, D. Topping (Ed.), L. Erlbaum, in press. This paper is based upon The world on paper (in preparation). 2 The author gratefully acknowledges the support of the Spencer Foundation, SSHRC and the Ontario Ministry of Education through its Block Transfer Grant to OISE. 3
The list of books you might like
