Handbook of Learning from Multiple Representations and Perspectives

Peggy Van Meter, Alexandra List, Doug Lombardi, Panayiota Kendeou, Peggy Van Meter, Alexandra List, Doug Lombardi, Panayiota Kendeou

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9780429813658
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Educational Psychology

In and out of formal schooling, online and off, today's learners must consume and integrate a level of information that is exponentially larger and delivered through a wider range of formats and viewpoints than ever before. The Handbook of Learning from Multiple Representations and Perspectives provides a path for understanding the cognitive, motivational, and socioemotional processes and skills necessary for learners across educational contexts to make sense of and use information sourced from varying inputs. Uniting research and theory from education, psychology, literacy, library sciences, media and technology, and more, this forward-thinking volume explores the common concerns, shared challenges, and thematic patterns in our capacity to make meaning in an information-rich society.Chapter 16 of this book is freely available as a downloadable Open Access PDF under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license available at http://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9780429443961.

1
LOGGERS AND CONSERVATIONISTS

Navigating the Multiple Resource Forest through the Trees

Alexandra List

PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY

Peggy Van Meter

PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY

Doug Lombardi

UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK

Panayiota Kendeou

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA

DOI: 10.4324/9780429443961-1

ABSTRACT

In this introduction to the Handbook of Learning from Multiple Representations and Perspectives we use the metaphor of “seeing the forest through the trees” to conceptualize the nature of multiple resource learning. First, in comparing resources to trees, we identify these as originating from sources (i.e., roots), including specific content (i.e., trunk), and taking on various representational formats (i.e., leaves). Second, we identify the cognitive processes involved when learners conceptualize individual resources (i.e., trees) and identifying the connections among them for holistic understanding (i.e., see the forest). Finally, we suggest that learners may be viewed as loggers and conservationists seeking to take advantage of the resources available within a multi-resource forest and to understand the complex ecosystems within it.

Key words, multiple representations, multiple perspectives, multiple resource learning

At the dawn of the Internet Age, Elm and Woods (1985) described a phenomenon of getting lost, wherein a learner “does not have a clear conception of relationships within the system, does not know his present location in the system … and finds it difficult to decide where to look next within the system” (p. 927). Elm and Woods’ lost learner may be described as having trouble navigating the dense forest of information through the trees, a problem that has, if anything, become more pronounced with the growing predominance of the Internet (Amadieu, Tricot, & Mariné, 2009 ; DeStefano & LeFevre, 2007). The ubiquity of the Internet and other technological developments mean not only that learners are inundated with an ever-expanding torrent of information, but that this information is both diverse and complex. Learners now encounter information mediums beyond text, including images and videos, with new formats introduced every day (e.g., infographics, gifs, emojis). Beyond these formatting differences, the information available on the Internet today is heterogenous. Gone is the age of editorial discretion and information gatekeeping (Coiro, 2003 ; Marchi, 2012 ; Metzger & Flanagin, 2013). Instead, today’s learner encounters not only information that was created to inform and persuade but also to misdirect, mislead, and deceive (Lazer et al., 2018 ; List & Rubenstein, 2019 ; Tandoc, Lim, & Ling, 2018). Learners today need help making sense of the wealth and diversity of information on and offline. We conceived of this Handbook as an effort to do just that. We aim to help learners traverse the dense forest of information by integrating two independently unfolding lines of research – those of learning from multiple representations and from multiple perspectives. Learning from multiple representations occurs when individuals try to make sense of information presented across multiple, separable representations that differ in symbol systems, formats, or modalities (e.g., texts, diagrams, formulas), with separate representations typically providing content that is consistent and overlapping but not entirely redundant. Learning from multiple perspectives occurs when learners try to understand complex or controversial issues; such issues are often defined by there being a variety of viewpoints, requiring the juxtaposition and integration of these perspectives for learning. We believe that, although developing separately, these lines of research jointly capture the challenges inherent in learning in the 21st-century knowledge society – challenges associated with not only the volume of information available, but also its mixed modality, its potentially indeterminate or inexplicit origin and positionality, and its implicit inter-relatedness to a wealth of other multimodal, ambiguously sourced content.

We introduce the factors and mechanisms associated with learning from multiple representations (Section 1) and from multiple perspectives (Section 2) as well as the characteristics and skills that learners need to be successful at each pursuit (Section 3) and the challenges and opportunities that they may encounter (Section 4). We close this Handbook by introducing a framework, the Multiple Resource Learning Framework that, for the first time, explicitly links the learner characteristics and processes jointly involved in learning from both multiple representations and multiple perspectives, the contexts, tasks, and resources that shape such learning, and the constructions that are developed as a result. To foreground this ambitious pursuit, we use the expression of seeing the forest through the trees to conceptualize the fundamental goal that learners must accomplish when learning from information resources featuring multiple representations and multiple perspectives. Using this metaphor, we describe how (a) any multimodal and/or multi-positional information resource may be thought of as a tree, (b) how such trees may figure into a broader sylvan landscape of information, and (c) how learners may be conceptualized as loggers and conservationists trying to exploit and cultivate thorny thickets of information on their own and with various degrees of instructional support. We close this introduction with an overview of each Handbook section.

INFORMATION RESOURCES ARE LIKE A TREE

Trees have three main parts – the roots, the trunk, and the leaves. So too can information resources be described as having three main features: source, content, and representational format (List & Alexander, 2018). Source refers to accessible information about a resource’s origin or purpose for being created, including information about author and publisher (Bråten, Strømsø, & Britt, 2009). In addition to serving as a basis for determining trustworthiness, the source contributes to the perspective of a resource. In this Handbook we define perspective as the collection of attitudes, values, beliefs, knowledge propositions, and goals that guide the presentation of information, including decisions about what content to focus on and which to exclude and which representational format(s) to use in what ways. These attitudes, values, beliefs, knowledge propositions, and goals may be expected to proceed from the author of a given resource, as well as the author’s social, cultural, and epistemic (i.e., domain) communities. Nevertheless, while the bulk of prior work, particularly in the field of learning from multiple texts, has focused on understanding learners’ determinations of source benevolence and expertise (Bråten et al., 2009 ; Stadtler & Bromme, 2014 ), we chose, in this Handbook, to focus on a source’s perspective(s). Perspective, in addition to linking individual authors to broader sociocultural and epistemic communities (e.g., domains), also links author’s positionality with their decisions around what content to include and what representational formats to feature in presenting information to an audience. For instance, similarly benevolent and expert authors may choose to include quotes or narrative descriptions as evidence vis-à-vis data tables and statistical analyses, depending on their epistemic and methodical perspective(s). Similarly, whether authors support or oppose a given proposal may be more a question of perspective than of expertise.

We view the different perspective(s) that authors hold and reproduce in the resources that they create as roots of a tree. Like roots, these perspectives are mostly hidden, rather than manifest, and uncovering these roots is oftentimes an effortful and deliberate process, as demonstrated by the literature on sourcing within the context of learning from multiple texts (Brante & Strømsø, 2018 ; Britt & Aglinskas, 2002 ; Strømsø & Bråten, 2014). Nevertheless, their covert nature makes roots or author’s perspective no less foundational to the content and representational format of particular resources or trees of information.

We liken a resource’s informational content to the trunk of a tree, constituting its substantive essence or core. Leaves, then, are the representational format(s) that particular resources take on. We use the term representational format to indicate the modalities or symbol system(s) encoding information within particular resources as well as the particular formatting of these systems. While the two primary modalities examined in prior work have been the visual and the linguistic (Mayer, 2001 ; Mayer & Anderson, 1992 ), symbol systems as varied as graphic representations, algebraic expressions, and musical notation all constitute different types of representational formats (Loughlin, Grossnickle, Dinsmore, & Alexander, 2015). In this Handbook and in the literature on learning from multiple representations, more broadly, our concern is primarily with informational materials that include within them more than one representational format (i.e., multimedia). Such materials characterize the vast majority of information that learners may be expected to encounter, across a range of educational contexts, including when learning using textbooks or the Internet. We do not consider a resource’s representational format(s) to be a superficial matter of style, rather, we view these as a deliberate, perspective-driven choices on the part of authors (Schnotz & Baadte, 2015 ; Schnotz & Bannert, 2003). We further acknowledge that it is oftentimes the representational format that may suggest to learners the starkest contrasts among resources. That is, learners may much more readily perceive differences among texts, diagrams, and animations, even if these are representing the same content, than they would more subtle contrasts between authors holding different perspectives on a common issue. This is similar to how we perceive the differences among pines, oaks, and palms most starkly because of their leaves, despite these also varying in qualities of their roots and trunk.

To extend this metaphor further, source perspectives, content, and representational formats are inextricably linked as are roots, trunk, and leaves. Likewise, just as the nature of trees’ roots, trunk, and leaves represent an environmental adaptation, so too can information resources be viewed as derived from and existing within their sociocultural and epistemic contexts. As an illustration, consider that the content and representational format characteristics of journal articles within any scholarly domain are a result not only of author perspective but also of the historical legacies and conventions of academic publishing. Likewise, the content of Tweets and any hashtags assigned are both a matter of author perspective and of Twitter communities’ communicative practices.

As a final note, the term informational resource, or input, is used with intention both in this introduction and throughout this Handbook. Resources and inputs are broad terms that encapsulate the multitude of sources, texts, perspectives, and representations that learners may be expected to encounter during complex learning tasks, as reflected in the literatures on learning from multiple representations and from multiple perspectives. Moreover, resources hold a dual meaning as scaffolds provided to aid learners and as materials needed to be effortfully extracted and manufactured before they can be used. We consider these dual meanings to be particularly apt for capturing how resources are viewed in the fields of learning from multiple representations and from multiple perspectives. On the one hand, particularly in the literature on learning from multiple representations, resources are deliberately designed by teachers and researchers to aid learners in the process of learning. Indeed, color codes, in-text deictic references, labels, and other signaling devices (Lorch, Lemarié, & Grant, 2011 ; Scheiter & Eitel, 2015 ) have all been used as means of modifying multimodal instructional materials to be more accessible and effective resources for learners (Richter, Scheiter, & Eitel, 2016). On the other hand, both the literatures on learning from multiple perspectives and multiple representations recognize that learning from even the most optimally designed instructional resources is not an automatic or passive process for learners. Rather, these literatures approach learning as an active, deliberate, effortful, and strategic process. In the section that follows, we highlight some of the strategic processes that may be expected to be involved in individuals’ learning from multimodal and multi-perspective resources. We frame these processes as those required to conceptualize the information forest through the various multimodal and multi-perspective trees.

MULTIPLE, MULTIMODAL, MULTI-PERSPECTIVE RESOURCES ARE LIKE TREES IN A FOREST

In the previous section, we established that trees constitute a potent metaphor to capture the source perspective, content, and representational format(s) that define any informational resource. In this section, we move from considering informational resources or trees in isolation to viewing these as part of a dense informational forest. Indeed, making sense of trees or informational sources in relation to one another may be the fundamental task inherent in learning from multiple representations and multiple perspective, or in seeing the forest through the trees. We consider such relational sense making to be guided by three features of multi-resource learning tasks.

First, multi-resource learning tasks require that each resource included be understood individually, as itself. That is, in order to form relations across information resources, each resource must be understood both holistically and analytically. This requires both understanding a given tree as a whole and decomposing the sub- components within it and identifying the relations among these parts. We see such holistic and analytic comprehension processes manifest in both the literatures on learning from multiple representations and from multiple perspectives. In the literature on learning from multiple representations, it is common to analyze learners’ distribution of attentional resources (e.g., gaze patterns) across individual representational components within a multimedia resource (e.g., a text and a diagram) and as shifting between these (Mason, Pluchino, Tornatora, & Ari...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of contributors
• Chapter 1 Loggers and Conservationists: Navigating the Multiple Resource Forest through the Trees
• Section 1 Learning from Multiple Representations
• Section 2 Learning from Multiple Perspectives
• Section 3 Theoretical Viewpoints on the Integration of Multiple Representations and Multiple Perspectives
• Section 4 Challenges and Solutions
• Conclusion
• Index