In this chapter I learned that there are two different types of metal imagery, spatial imagery and object imagery. I learned that they are different because spatial mental imagery relies on the top-brain system and object metal imagery relies on the bottom-brain system. I also learned that you can be good at one but not good at the other type. I like how in this chapter they went into some of the statistical analysis about how you cannot predict about one of the types by knowing about the other. What I mean by this is that if you good at spatial imagery, you are not necessarily bad at object imagery. This statement could be true but it does not have to be. You could be good at both spatial and object imagery. I think this is important because I think we tend to think a lot in either/or's. This does not always have to be the case. I also like that this chapter spent the time to explain some of the basics of statistical analysis and what it means. I think that statistics are an important thing for people to be aware of.
________________________________________________________________
I think the following quote could have an implication for classrooms.
Artists and scientists "were also shown a graph that charted the position of an object over time... The scientists tended to see it as an abstract representation of changes in position over time. By contrast, the artists understood the graph 'as a literal pictorial illustration of a situation or was the path of the actual motion and did not attempt to interpret the graph as an abstract schematic representation.' ...The artist and scientists clearly visualized differently."
I think the quote has big implication in the classroom. We often use visuals to illustrate abstract concepts in the science classroom. What I did not know until was that students have different ways in how they see visual images. They can look at the image in different ways because the process the visual with a different part of the brain. This makes me think that if teachers were more knowledgable about how the brain process information we would understand student responses more in-depth. Or understand why certain types of thinkers have trouble with certain concepts. We would be able to say, "Some of you may see the image this way... Some of you may look at it like this..." And be explain the visual concepts through different points of view.
I appreciate your comment on setting up false either/ors. While we tend to use categories to make sense of a complex world, it is a good reminder that many things cannot be reduced so simply.
ReplyDeleteYour comment on visuals is thought provoking. For me, it gives support to the idea of, in David Finkle's words, teaching with your mouth shut. . .which challenges the idea of teaching as telling. Not that teaching never involves telling but that any tell must begin with what I already know. . .or perhaps in this case, what I already see.