Difference between revisions of "Visual-verbal integration"
(→Laboratory experiment support) |
|||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
==Experimental support== | ==Experimental support== | ||
===Laboratory experiment support=== | ===Laboratory experiment support=== | ||
+ | Prior research has shown that students benefit from activities that coordinate both visual and verbal sources; these activities include verbal comparison of self-generated and ideal diagrams (Van Meter, 2001; Van Meter, Aleksic, Schwartz, & Garner, 2006) as well as dragging and dropping verbal information into a diagram to create an integrated representation (Bodemer, Ploetzner, Feuerlein, & Spada, 2004). | ||
===In vivo experiment support=== | ===In vivo experiment support=== |
Revision as of 16:29, 25 March 2008
Contents
Brief statement of principle
Visual-verbal integration: The process by which learners link or combine visual and verbal information to form a coherent knowledge representation. By integrating this verbal and visual information, students form a deeper understanding of the geometry principle that is retained over time.
Description of principle
Operational definition
Visual-verbal integration is assessed by tasks in which both visual and verbal information must be considered together, in meaningful ways.
Examples
In geometry, students need to connect the conceptual definition of a geometry principle (e.g., a verbal description of "Vertical Angles") with the relevant visual diagram features and configurations (e.g., the visual instantiation of "Vertical Angles" formed by two crossing lines where the angles share a common vertex but no common sides). Visual-verbal integration can be tested by having students analyze the appropriateness of geometry rules to a particular diagram.
Experimental support
Laboratory experiment support
Prior research has shown that students benefit from activities that coordinate both visual and verbal sources; these activities include verbal comparison of self-generated and ideal diagrams (Van Meter, 2001; Van Meter, Aleksic, Schwartz, & Garner, 2006) as well as dragging and dropping verbal information into a diagram to create an integrated representation (Bodemer, Ploetzner, Feuerlein, & Spada, 2004).
In vivo experiment support
Theoretical rationale
(These entries should link to one or more learning processes.)
Conditions of application
Caveats, limitations, open issues, or dissenting views
Variations (descendants)
Generalizations (ascendants)
References
See also integration and coordination.