In the last decade, reading research has seen a paradigmatic shift. A new wave of computational m... more In the last decade, reading research has seen a paradigmatic shift. A new wave of computational models of orthographic processing that offer various forms of noisy position or context-sensitive coding have revolutionized the field of visual word recognition. The influx of such models stems mainly from consistent findings, coming mostly from European languages, regarding an apparent insensitivity of skilled readers to letter order. Underlying the current revolution is the theoretical assumption that the insensitivity of readers to letter order reflects the special way in which the human brain encodes the position of letters in printed words. The present article discusses the theoretical shortcomings and misconceptions of this approach to visual word recognition. A systematic review of data obtained from a variety of languages demonstrates that letter-order insensitivity is neither a general property of the cognitive system nor a property of the brain in encoding letters. Rather, it is a variant and idiosyncratic characteristic of some languages, mostly European, reflecting a strategy of optimizing encoding resources, given the specific structure of words. Since the main goal of reading research is to develop theories that describe the fundamental and invariant phenomena of reading across orthographies, an alternative approach to model visual word recognition is offered. The dimensions of a possible universal model of reading, which outlines the common cognitive operations involved in orthographic processing in all writing systems, are discussed. The important role of registering letter position during the process of visual word recognition and reading seems almost self-evident. Printed letters are visual objects, and the fast saccades that characterize text reading necessarily involve some level of uncertainty regarding their exact identity and location. Indeed, general concerns regarding letter-position coding have already been acknowledged in the seminal discussion of the Interactive Activation Model , and some proposals for alternative coding schemes have been subsequently RAM FROST is a full professor in the Department of Psychology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and a member of Haskins Laboratories in New Haven, Connecticut. He received his Ph.D. in Cognitive Psychology from the Hebrew University. His research focuses on the cognitive processes involved in visual word recognition, investigating what is universal in the reading process across diverse languages, and what aspects of reading are unique to each language's orthographic and morphological system. Among his theoretical contributions to reading research are the Orthographic Depth Hypothesis and the Strong Phonological Theory of Visual Word recognition.
In this article we argue that to study or apply games as learning environments, multiple perspect... more In this article we argue that to study or apply games as learning environments, multiple perspectives have to be taken into account. We first define game-based learning and gamification, and then discuss theoretical models that describe learning with games, arguing that playfulness is orthogonal to learning theory. We then review design elements of games that facilitate learning by fostering learners’ cognitive, behavioral, affective, and sociocultural engagement with the subject matter. Finally, we discuss the basis of these design elements in cognitive, motivational, affective, and sociocultural foundations by reviewing key theories from education and psychology that are the most pertinent to game- based learning and by describing empirical research on learning with games that has been or should be conducted. We conclude that a combination of cognitive, motivational, affective, and sociocultural perspectives is necessary for both game design and game research to fully capture what games have to offer for learning.
In this article we argue that to study or apply games as learning environments, multiple perspect... more In this article we argue that to study or apply games as learning environments, multiple perspectives have to be taken into account. We first define game-based learning and gamification, and then discuss theoretical models that describe learning with games, arguing that playfulness is orthogonal to learning theory. We then review design elements of games that facilitate learning by fostering learners’ cognitive, behavioral, affective, and sociocultural engagement with the subject matter. Finally, we discuss the basis of these design elements in cognitive, motivational, affective, and sociocultural foundations by reviewing key theories from education and psychology that are the most pertinent to game- based learning and by describing empirical research on learning with games that has been or should be conducted. We conclude that a combination of cognitive, motivational, affective, and sociocultural perspectives is necessary for both game design and game research to fully capture what games have to offer for learning.
Choosing effective multimedia simulations for chemistry learning: What Molecules & Minds research shows Steven D. Yavner, NYU, s. yavner@ nyu. edu Catherine Milne, NYU Jan L. Plass, NYU
Seeing Objects as Symbols and Symbols as Objects: Language and the
ABSTRACT This chapter explores children's development of symbolic understanding. First, a... more ABSTRACT This chapter explores children's development of symbolic understanding. First, an overview of the nature of symbolic representation is presented. It is then argued that there are regularities in the development of symbolic competencies in different domains, including language. Discussion then turns to the problems that children have with dual representation of both symbolic artifacts, which can be very salient as objects but are difficult for children to perceive as representations, and for language, which is extremely salient as symbol, but is difficult for children to contemplate as an object. We argue that for symbolic artifacts, language provides the "cognitive distance" that allows objects to be seen as symbols, whereas for language, writing provides the cognitive distance that allows linguistic forms to become "objects of thought" (Olson, 1994). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Literacy and children's conceptions of language
Literacy and metalinguistic awareness in Chinese-English bilingual children
Literacy and Metalinguistic Development
The Cambridge Handbook of Literacy, 2009
Commentary: Exploring Symbolic Spaces: Writing, Narrative, and Art
Uploads
Papers by Bruce Homer