EBSCOhost: Of mind and media - 0 views
-
When children are told to watch a television program not for fun but to learn something from it, their expenditure of mental effort rises dramatically, and with it, the quality of learning outcomes. [14] Quite clearly, children's differential perceptions of the media and of symbolic forms of representation ("pictures are realistic and hence require less mental effort than print") reflect the views of the social world around them. Where or when television is perceived as a serious medium (as was the case in Israel in the early days of television), processing capacities become mobilized, and much learning takes place. Not so when the medium is taken to be "just pictures." The socially held and communicated views of the media appear to affect the way children handle them, the depth with which they process their offerings, and thus what they actually learn from them.
-
Eric Calvert on 12 Aug 10This raises a question for me related to learning games. If the "learning" part is too carefully disguised (and some learning games are sold with statements like, "it makes learning easy!" or "students don't even know they're learning!") is there a risk that it's educational value will be compromised? Do you think it's better to disguise learning as a video game, or create learning games that are EXPLICITLY designed to be used to promote learning/thinking?
-
-
Significantly, I and others have found that children often tend to handle a medium more on the basis of the general image they hold of it than on the basis of its particular offering or intrinsic attributes. Symbolic forms of representation that are perceived to duplicate reality closely (e.g., pictures) are taken to require no knowledge of authorship and no skill for processing.[12] Television, as a general rule, is perceived to be fun, simple, easy to understand, and generally useless. Comprehending televised content is perceived to require no brains, while failing to comprehend it is a sign of stupidity. On the other hand, print is generally perceived to be highly demanding, and success in comprehending a story in print is regarded as a matter of ability. Failing to comprehend print is expected because it is "tough." Do these differential perceptions make a difference in learning? Indeed, they do! In line with such perceptions, children do not expend much mental effort on a televised story, even when it is quite poetic and requires effort. Thus they learn far less from it than from an equivalent story in print. The largest and most impressive difference in responses is found in the more intelligent children, who mobilize their capacities to learn from the print story but forgo doing so when it comes to TV.[13]
-
Forms of Representation As Tools of the Mind Last, and perhaps most important, we need to ask whether the different symbolic forms of representation not only offer different meanings, require different mental capacities, and are differentially perceived, but also whether they leave some differential cognitive residue. That is, do they somehow affect the way we come to perceive or represent the world to ourselves? Do they affect our cognitive apparatus in some lasting way, thus coming to serve as tools of the mind?
- ...5 more annotations...