Queen Essays

Keyword Essay: Place-Based Literacies Rosanne Carlo

Community Literacy Journal, Volume 10, Issue 2, Spring 2016, pp. 59-70 (Article)

Published by Community Literacy Journal DOI:

For additional information about this article

Access provided by Iowa State University (21 Jan 2019 06:47 GMT)

https://doi.org/10.1353/clj.2016.0006

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/631452

spring 2016

59Book & New Media Reviews

Keyword Essay: Place-Based Literacies

Rosanne Carlo College of Staten Island (CUNY)

Practicing community outreach and research—alongside writing community scholarship—requires an attention to place in the present, as a literal site of practice with material conditions. It also requires an attention to place in the past and future, as an imaginary as well as historical engagement of what a place once was for people and what it has yet to become. Literacy work is, as Paulo Freire describes, a “constant unveiling of reality” (8) toward the end of creating “revolutionary futurity” (10). Explained in more concrete terms, when “people develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world and with which and in which they find themselves” then they can begin to transform their reality, both ecologically and socially (Freire 9). Community work and scholarship continually unveils reality to change and shape it, and this process is a form of place-making.

It is hard to separate the words of education and community scholars from the locations through and in which they write; location is not a backdrop for abstract theories of literacy, but it is the source of those investigations. For example, rural Nebraska and its prairie shapes Robert Brooke’s reflections on place-conscious education as a way to create responsive citizens (Rural Voices: Place-Conscious Education and the Teaching of Writing); Harlem’s crowded streets after a show at the Apollo are the rhythms behind Valerie Kinloch’s arguments for a critical stance toward gentrification and loss of black culture (Harlem on Our Minds: Place, Race, and the Literacies of Urban Youth); and the urban community college campus with an open admissions policy—its students formerly academic outsiders, now moving from their worlds of work, to home, to school—underlie Ira Shor’s calls for a critical pedagogy that works to transform social inequalities (Critical Teaching and Everyday Life). It is not hard to think of several other place-based writings and educational theories in composition and community literacy scholarship.

This discussion of community literacy work and place reminds us of how Anne Ruggles Gere drew attention to the “extracurricular”—or places beyond the university—where we find literacy at work. In her article, now over twenty years old, she writes, “They [writers] may gather in rented rooms in the Tenderloin, around kitchen tables in Lansing, Iowa, or in a myriad of other places to write their worlds. The question remains whether we will use classroom walls as instruments of separation or communication” (91). The answer, if I can be so bold as to claim one, is now here—the “extracurricular” is becoming the curricular as more educators are advocating for place-based literacies under names like service-learning, place- conscious education, ecocomposition and ecopedagogy, and urban and rural literacy studies. These subfields, of course, are not one in the same as they draw on

community literacy journal

60 Book & New Media Reviews

scholarship from different disciplines with different methods and different ways of making (and counting) knowledge, and yet, there is a central theme here—the study of place as unveiling and shaping social and ecological reality.

Place-based literacies and their attention to how location creates possibilities for world-revealing and world-making practices, particularly in the sense of community development and literate practices, are now a dominant theme in pedagogy, community work, and scholarship. David Gruenewald, in his article “The Best of Both Worlds: A Critical Pedagogy of Place,” offers a definition of the aims of place-based literacies that best describes its world-revealing and making potential when he writes that place pedagogies should “(a) identify, recover, and create material spaces and places that teach us how to live well in our total environments (reinhabitation); and (b) identify and change ways of thinking that injure and exploit other people and places (decolonization)” (9). These two aims are what he sees as the goals of place-based education (a) and critical pedagogy (b), and—as his title implies—he wishes for a convergence of these pedagogical approaches rather than to separate them. This synthesis is helpful because it accounts for how place is continually changing and how we need to be aware of and a part of this process. Just like in writing pedagogy, places also continually undergo a process of revision. As community literacy workers, we are in a position to understand and teach this process of revision to students and others so that they can (potentially) participate in acts of place-making.

Furthermore, when places are being revised, there is an impulse, like place- based educators argue, to conserve—the land, the culture, the local businesses, the local residents—and there is an impulse, like critical pedagogues argue, to transform, to make social reality better for those who have been traditionally marginalized or displaced (whether we are considering place as institution, place as neighborhood, place as city, or place as region). The dialectic of transformation and conservation is one that I want to trace through the scholarship of composition and community scholars when they write about and advocate for place-based literacies. This dialectic has a discourse, a rhetoric, one we must learn and deploy strategically, as compositionists and community literacy workers, in order to impact the lives of students and others with whom we work. In other words, sometimes we have to advocate for the conservation of a place and a current way of life, and other times we need to advocate for the transformation of a place and a new way of life. My intention, in analyzing the conservation and transformation dialectic in relation to this key phrase—place-based literacies—is to draw attention to how literacy work is a form of world-revealing and place-making.

Revision: The Conservation and Transformation of Places

Writing teachers and literacy workers are very cognizant of the revision process. As Adrienne Rich describes, writing is an act of re-vision “of looking-back, of seeing with fresh eyes” (18); revision is about perspective and we often teach our students

spring 2016

61Book & New Media Reviews

to be open to envisioning what is not yet there. Revision is an imaginative labor. This section asks readers to consider our lens of revision in writing in relation to how we understand revision of place. This transference is an act of what Kenneth Burke calls “perspective by incongruity,” a method that “gaug[es] situations by ‘verbal atom cracking.’ That is, a word belongs by custom to a certain category—and by rational planning you wrench it loose and metaphorically apply it to a different category” (308). Revision in writing studies holds complex meaning because it is associated with process pedagogies. We can think of the struggle over change that we see in our students’ compositions, one where we observe how what is being revised retains elements of its original character or transforms into something entirely different. We offer feedback on this process. How is the process of revision in composition similar to that of revision of place?

There are many examples of scholars discussing revision of neighborhoods, landscapes, and campuses in community literacy and composition scholarship. For example, Jim W. Corder reflects often on the nature of revision (of writing, of place, of ourselves) as both a good and a bad thing. In one of his place-based memoirs, Yonder: Life on the Far Side of Change, he asks readers to see revision as inevitable, whether this inevitability is one of nature (erosion) or of human intervention (construction, interaction). In one passage he describes the Croton Breaks, a canyon in West Texas, as a case study of revision. The land has changed in Corder’s lifetime because of wind, water, bulldozing, scraping, and leveling. He writes, “I recognize nothing when I go back,” observing that this revision, “has torn the Canyons outside my knowledge and raped my care” (Yonder 90). Corder bristles at this revision of place, at revision in the writing process, at revision in life, insisting that “the first draft may be all I have” and questioning, “Might we take each other, and the other out there, without revision?” (91). And yet revision, and its inevitability, cannot be ignored or wished away. As Corder notes, revision is always already happening.

The dialectic of conservation and transformation is one we confront whenever we engage in a process of revision; for example, we may be shaping our ideas and putting them into words or deciding how to change our university’s writing curricula or observing or participating in the construction of our landscapes and cityscapes. Revision is a part of engaging in the work of place-based literacies. We want to hold fast to some things, and we want to change some things; holding on and changing, of course, are sometimes out of our purview. Corder wrestles with this inevitability of revision through his remark, “Unrevised, I fail, of course, and get no credit in freshmen composition, or in life” (91). This remark could be read as fatalistic, but it could also be read as realistic. If we—as community literacy scholars and practitioners—note and participate in revision, maybe less will slip out of our purview? Maybe we can conserve what is good around us and we can transform what does not serve our communities? Place-making requires an attentiveness and a critical eye toward revision, and it requires us to be active participants in conservation and transformation.

community literacy journal

62 Book & New Media Reviews

Community literacy, as Rhonda Davis defines, is taking part in a process of “analyzing and learning from a matrix of ever-evolving relationships people and themselves, for better or worse, are embedded within” (emphasis mine, 80). This definition outlines literacy work as socially critical, ecological, and bound in processes of change. Our attention to how discourses form and shape social reality is at the heart of work in writing studies, but—as Nedra Reynolds articulates (See Geographies of Writing), scholars may be too focused on discourse. This focus may abstract the real issues and people behind the words, and also may make us less focused on the material conditions of literacy. For place is not a neutral backdrop for human action, a context for rhetorical activity and discourse; it greatly influences— and maybe even generates—communicative acts. In other words, place gives place to literacy practices. In this vein, Thomas Rickert argues in Ambient Rhetoric that the work of rhetoric (and literacy) is beyond human agents engaged in speech acts; he writes, that the study of rhetoric “must diffuse outward to include the material environment, things (including the technological), our own embodiment, and a complex understanding of ecological relationality as participating in rhetorical practices and their theorization” (3). We must continue to acknowledge the material dimension of rhetoric and literacy, to see it as an “embodied and embedded practice” (Rickert 34).

The practice of critical pedagogy and scholarship of place requires responsiveness to the dialectic of conservation and transformation. David Gruenewald argues that students “must be challenged to reflect on their own concrete situationality in a way that explores the complex interrelationships between cultural and ecological environments” (6). Being attentive to material conditions makes us aware of how places are changing. And we can respond to these changes—through our scholarship and in our literacy work—by investigating how communities develop in place, how identity development is tied to geography, how emotions circulate in place, how people become excluded through spatial organization, how the local community experiences loss through change, how physical movement (or lack of movement) is undertaken by bodies in place, and many other issues that concern us in the study of place-based literacies.

The following subsections elucidate different strands of work being done in place-based literacy: institutional and home literacies, urban and rural literacies, and eco-literacies. These divisions are made to showcase some of the different case studies and approaches scholars have taken in their recognition of place as a significant part of literacy practices. My aim is to see literacy work as a process of world-revealing and place-making, and further to see the scholarly writings reviewed here as a response to the ever-changing nature of places and the literacy practices that are created within them.

spring 2016

63Book & New Media Reviews

Institutional and Home Literacies

Boundary. This is one of many spatial metaphors to describe the place of basic writers in the academy. The scholarship of the basic writing movement in rhetoric and composition continually emphasizes the ways that students from nontraditional backgrounds are outsiders. Mike Rose’s work on basic writers continues to resonate with composition and community literacy practitioners because he calls attention to the boundary lines, reminding us of the politics of remediation and the ways institutions are set up to displace basic writers (and, de facto, composition as a discipline) from the center of knowledge-making. Rose tries to arrive at a definition of remedial, and says it can be best described as “highly dynamic and contextual” in that labeling something as remedial in the university serves a function: “to keep in place the hard fought for, if historically and conceptually problematic and highly fluid, distinction between college and secondary work” (emphasis mine, 349). There is also a boundary that exists, both psychologically and materially, between what counts as knowledge in the academy and the ways of knowing and being that students learn through their home and work life experiences.

Much scholarship in community literacy and composition critiques the way power circulates in institutions and asks us to imagine how the boundary between institutional and home literacies can be less divisive. Institution as place is one site of analysis for place-based literacies. The division is indeed one that has caused oppression, perpetuating racial and class inequalities. Ira Shor defines critical literacy as a process of “questioning received knowledge and immediate experience” (11) in institutions, and for teachers to practice a pedagogy that “constructs students as authorities, agents, and unofficial teachers” (13) in order to empower them to return to their communities and become activists. Critical literacy, then, is situated in institutional and home communities—investigating these sites (and identifying and analyzing the social problems and asset-based epistemologies that circulate therein) is at the center of the curriculum. This approach to place-based literacies is one of transformation. For a further review of works in composition and community literacy scholarship that are critical of institutional organization and power, see Nedra Reynolds’ Geographies of Writing as she traces spatial metaphors in the history of rhetoric and composition scholarship (Chapter 1); Glynda Hull and Katherine Schultz’s School’s Out!: Bridging Out-of-School Literacies with Classroom Practice as they provide a comprehensive overview of scholarship about out-of-school literacies through the frames of ethnography in education, Vygotskian and activity theory, and new literacy studies (Chapter 1); and Christopher J. Keller and Christian R. Weisser’s edited collection, The Locations of Composition, particularly the writer contributions in Part III titled “Across the Institution.”

It is important to note how the spatial metaphors to describe basic writers and teaching basic writing are not relics of a bygone time. Basic writers—and these issues in the academy—have not disappeared, even though some of our scholarly attention may have shifted away from them. A more contemporary article that

community literacy journal

64 Book & New Media Reviews

engages issues of institution as place is Johnathon Mauk’s “Location, Location, Location: The ‘Real’ (E)states of Being, Writing, and Thinking.” Here Mauk explains a “contemporary” problem in the university; students, he claims, especially those in two-year colleges, are “unsituated in academic space.” The university is not an “integral part” of who they are in the fact that they are not traditional academics (368). Furthermore, he says that many professors view their students as “as uninvolved, uninterested, and unmotivated” because they are too distracted from their studies by outside forces, like their “domestic, workplace, and recreational commitments” (370). The university or college, as place, competes with other locations in students’ lives. Mauk claims that professors should not despair about the academic performance of the “new” student population, but rather professors should help students see the work of the academy as applicable to their everyday lives. Rather than “invit[ing] students to move into academic space,” (386) professors should move academic space outward so that students can “conceive the space outside of the campus, outside of the classroom, as academic” (380). Although Mauk frames the current student population and their issues as “new,” the student population described in older writings, even as far back as Mina Shaughnessy’s Errors and Expectations, sounds eerily similar.

Mauk’s writing, rather than advocating for the conservation of the academy, calls for its transformation, in the sense that students should view academic thinking as essential to their everyday lives. Mauk suggests that professors do this through their assignment design, creating assignments that ask students to reflect on their places, such as their neighborhoods, workplaces, and community organizations. By asking students to write about their locations outside school, professors place students within assignments and hopefully this will make them more engaged and critical about their everyday lives (379). Critical pedagogy, Nedra Reynolds contends, is part of composition’s “imagined geography” (27) in that it is focused on the transformation of academic space in order to challenge boundaries present in the academy that serve to displace basic writers.

Urban and Rural Literacies

So what about us? People want to gentrify Harlem, they don’t care that this our home . . . Lots of us been here all our lives and you telling me somebody’s gonna up and take it all away from our reach? Our home, neighbors, parks, even schools! This our home, where we belong.—Philip, Harlem on Our Minds

The changes occurring in urban and rural places due to economic development is a large part of what drives scholars in community literacy studies. Urban and rural literacy education helps students and community members respond critically to changes (i.e. gentrification) in order for people to have more agency in their lives.

spring 2016

65Book & New Media Reviews

Philip, a youth who participated in Columbia professor Valerie Kinloch’s research, explains from his perspective how place—Harlem in this case—is a part of his identity and how the loss or change of place (due to gentrification) can be harmful to long-time residents. There is a strong sense in urban and rural literacy scholarship that the community should take back and reclaim public spaces. These efforts can be seen through the lens of conservation of place.

Linda Tolbert and Paul Theobald trace place-based education to Vygotskian ideas of social constructivism and Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences. They say that public schools need to create space for urban youth to “work with one another and discover something about the hardships they share living in America’s passed- over urban places,” and that this work will ultimately develop students’ interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligences (Tolbert and Theobald 274). Discussing urban class and racial struggles is a part of schooling in a democratic society, one where students may go back to their home communities to work for the rights of people who live there. Tolbert and Theobald describe place-based pedagogy as a process of “. . . enculturation into an ethic of taking pride in one’s ability to positively affect the quality of the shared space that a neighborhood represents” (273). Philip displays the pride that Tolbert and Theobald describe in his home, in where he belongs, and this sentiment translates into him taking action in Harlem; in Kinloch’s book, for example, she describes how Philip and other youth attend fair housing meetings, protest Columbia University’s expansion plans, and create new media texts that advocate for the conservation of places important to black culture. It is important to note how these efforts in neighborhood conservation constitute activism. As Tolbert and Theobald remind teachers, place-based education or service learning is not about “cleaning up a vacant lot,” but rather connecting youth with their communities. As Robert Nistler and Angela Maiers describe, schools should provide “opportunities for family and social networks to be formed through activities in schools and communities” (9).

To move from theory of urban literacy to pedagogical practice, Valerie Kinloch’s book Harlem on Their Minds: Place, Race, and Literacies of Urban Youth is a good resource (see chapter 4) and her article, “Literacy, Community, and Youth Acts of Place-Making,” wherein she discusses how students create multimodal projects (i.e. writing, interviewing, videotaping) to address community issues and reach a wider audience with their texts. Lauren Esposito’s “Where to Begin? Using Place-Based Writing to Connect Students with their Local Communities” discusses her experience teaching at the community college level in an urban location; she speaks about how she engages students to write about issues in their local communities by having them create public documents, in this case public service announcements (PSAs). Her guiding questions to student writers are particularly helpful, and she touches upon the conservation and transformation of place through them; Esposito writes: “What obligations do you have in these places and to/for whom are you responsible? What roles are you asked to perform and what roles do you choose to perform? Which aspects of these places should remain the same or change?” (72). These questions

community literacy journal

66 Book & New Media Reviews

highlight the ethical responsibilities students may feel toward their communities and the ways they can choose to respond to them (or not); Esposito asks students to enter into a process of revision of their places through documenting change over time.

Scholars who write about rural literacies possess pedagogical strategies for teaching place-based writing and community projects that are worth reading as they explicitly engage students in reflecting on and imagining places. For example, Robert Brooke and Jason L. McIntosh discuss the concept of teaching “deep mapping,” or having students identify landmarks of significance to them and then having them reflect on the communities and issues within these drawings; they argue that this “active conceptualization of space is a necessary prerequisite to writing inside, in relationship to, or for a place” (133). Furthermore, James S. Chisholm and Brandie Trent discuss digital storytelling as a way to engage students in exploring their communities; in particular, they show an example of a student’s photo essay and explain her composing process. They write that digital storytelling gave this student “the opportunity to learn deeply about narrative composition; to author her story, experiment with notions of identity, home, stability, change, and memory; and, finally, to connect these intellectual insights with the emotion that connects these concepts with place” (Chisholm and Trent 315). Both pedagogical articles emphasize the role of emotion for students in connection with their places and also encourage teachers and literacy workers to draw out these reflections in writing and visual projects.

There are also many articles written by educators that encourage place-based pedagogical strategies in teacher preparation programs, specifically for educating students from rural areas (See Ajayi, Eppley, Lester, Lesley and Matthews). Again, these pedagogical strategies are framed through the lens of conservation of rural values. Ajayi’s definition of place-based literacies in teacher preparation is instructive here, as he writes that this pedagogy “connect[s] ELA [English Language Arts] to contextual realities of rural communities” and allows student-teachers to “appreciate what is locally vibrant within the community” helping them “to sustain and preserve” cultural practices and to approach community members as resources and partners in every aspect of teaching and learning (252). Many of the above articles emphasize how teacher preparation curriculum should become more place-based so that teachers can better relate to their students’ lives and further engage their imaginations around issues of place-making. There is a real sense, too, that these students will return to their communities and become advocates for their preservation in the face of economic change.

The scholarship in both urban and rural literacies emphasizes community resources, which are found in the natural surroundings, the local culture, and in the actual members of the community. This asset-based framing for pedagogy and scholarship is one step toward arguing for the conservation of urban and rural places and communities.

spring 2016

67Book & New Media Reviews

Eco-literacies

Place-based literacies are also constructed through the use of metaphors—like network and web—that describe the relationship between people and their environments. These images of place show how it is ecological, constructed of human and non-human elements that continue to influence, or act on and with, each other. For an extensive discussion of the term ecology, it is important to reference Janine Morris’ recent keyword essay in Community Literacy Journal as she characterizes ecologies as having a “reciprocal nature” that accounts for the “distribution, influence, and movement of organisms within and between environments” (89). Rhonda Davis, author of “A Place for Ecopedagogy in Community Literacy,” adds to this definition as she works to define ecopedagogy; she writes that ecopedagogy recognizes the “reciprocal relationship that involves other people, nonhuman others, the natural environment, and constructed environments” (81). The use of reciprocal as an adjective in both these articles here is important because it emphasizes how scholars in this particular area of place-based literacies want to ensure that the environment (natural and built) is seen as a key player in the formation of literacy practices. We can see these ecological theories of composition and literacy as a posthuman response; literacy doesn’t just reside in us, but rather is created and distributed across several actors.

Eco-literacies attempt to map the relationships between people, discourse, and place. Scholars in ecocomposition emphasize how writing always comes from somewhere, that discourse is not some detached entity. Discourse is created through relationships with place that are a “deeply enmeshed, coconstitutive relationship” (Dobrin 18). Sidney Dobrin asserts, “It is difficult, if not impossible, to separate the writing from the place and the place from the writing” (18). Further, Dobrin asserts that writers are as a “part of the web” as we are influenced by context: “it reverberates within us and we reverberate in it. There is no way not to affect the environment and be affected by it” (21). Eco-literacies constantly remind us how our characters and identities are created through place; place shapes us, and we shape it. Indeed, eco- literacies ask for scholars and community literacy workers to be aware of relationships and revisions that occur in ecosystems. This is a part of the transformation of place: as human agents, we are one variable in this process of transformation.

For pedagogical application of eco-literacies, see Paul Walker’s article “(Un) earthing a Vocabulary of Values: A Discourse Analysis for Ecocomposition.” Walker offers an analytical method through which “students engage in ‘discursive ecology’ by exploring the connections among discourse, people, and the environment with the intent to ‘produce writing’ that addresses those contextual connections (Dobrin and Weisser 116–17)” (Walker 70). Through a local case study, whether or not to expand Arizona’s Snowbowl ski resort, Walker helps students analyze the discourses of various stakeholders (Native American tribes who argue the land is sacred and the owners of the resort who recommend expansion) in order to see how people understand and discuss their relationship with place. For further reference on eco-

community literacy journal

68 Book & New Media Reviews

literacies in pedagogy, please see Derek Owen’s Composition and Sustainability: Teaching for a Threatened Generation and several contributions in Dobrin and Weisser’s edited collection, Ecocomposition: Theoretical and Pedagogical Approaches.

Place-based literacies are essential to our composition curricula and community literacy work. Place-based literacies help us understand how place is central to literacy practices and our theories about those practices. Being attentive to place allows scholars, students, and community members to discuss how places matter and are essential identity. This attentiveness also reveals how places change over time. I believe Gruenewald’s idea of eco-justice should be the aim of our pedagogical and community practice; as educators and community workers, we must “develop an ethic of social and ecological justice where issues of race, class, gender, language, politics, and economics must be worked out in terms of people’s relationship to their total environments, human and non-human” (6). The revision of place is inevitable, but we are ever reminded that we can participate in this change through our advocacy for the conservation and transformation of places in order to better our social realities.

Works Cited

Ajayi, Laisi. “Investigating Effective Teaching Methods for a Place-Based Teacher Preparation in a Rural Community.” Education Research Policy and Practice. 13 (2014): 251–268.

Brooke, Robert and Jason L. McIntosh. “Deep Maps: Teaching Rhetorical Engagement Through Place-Conscious Education.” The Locations of Composition. Ed. Christopher J. Keller and Christian R. Weisser. Albany: State University of New York P, 131–149.

Burke, Kenneth. Attitudes Toward History. 3rd Ed. University of California P, 1984.

Chisholm, James S. and Brandie Trent. “Digital Storytelling in a Place-Based Composition Course.” Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy. 57.4 (Dec 2013 / Jan 2014): 307–318.

Corder, Jim W. Yonder: Life on the Far Side of Change. Athens: University of Georgia P, 1992.

Davis, Rhonda. “A Place for Ecopedagogy in Community Literacy.” Community Literacy Journal. 7.2 (Spring 2013). 77–91.

Dobrin, Sidney. “Writing Takes Place.” Ecocomposition: Theoretical and Pedagogical Approaches. Ed. Christian R. Weisser and Sidney I. Dobrin. Albany, New York: State University of New York P, 2001. 11–25.

spring 2016

69Book & New Media Reviews

Eppley, Karen. “Teaching Rural Place: Pre-Service Language and Literacy Students Consider Place-Conscious Literacy.” Pedagogies: An International Journal. 6.2 (April–June 2011): 87–103.

Esposito, Lauren. “Where to Begin? Using Place-Based Writing to Connect Students with their Local Communities.” English Journal. 101.4 (2012): 70–76.

Freire, Paolo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury, 1970.

Gere, Anne Ruggles. “Kitchen Tables and Rented Rooms: The Extracurriculum of Composition.” College Composition and Communication. 45.1 (Feb., 1994): 75–92.

Gruenewald, David. “The Best of Both Worlds: A Critical Pedagogy of Place.” Educational Researcher. 32.4 (2003): 3–12.

Keller, Christopher J. and Christian R. Weisser. The Locations of Composition. Albany:State University of New York P, 251–265.

Kinloch, Valerie. Harlem on Our Minds: Place, Race, and the Literacies of Urban Youth. New York: Teachers College P, 2010.

_____. “Literacy, Community, and Youth Acts of Place-Making.” English Education. 41.4 (July 2009): 316–336.

Lesley, Mellinee and Marian Matthews. “Place-Based Essay Writing and Content Area Literacy Instruction for Preservice Teachers.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 52.6 (2009): 523–33.

Mauk, Johnathon. “Location, Location, Location: The ‘Real’(E)states of Being, Writing,and Thinking in Composition.” College English. 65.4 (2003): 368–388.

Morris, Janine. “Ecology.” Community Literacy Journal. 9.2 (2015): 85–91.

Nistler, Robert and Angela Maiers. “Exploring Home-School Connections: A Family Literacy Perspective on Improving Urban Schools.” Education and Urban Society. 32.1 (November 1999): 3–17.

Owens, Derek. Composition and Sustainability: Teaching for a Threatened Generation. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English, 2001.

Rich, Adrienne. “When We Dead Awaken: Writing as Re-Vision.” College English. 34.1 (Oct., 1972): 18–30.

community literacy journal

70 Book & New Media Reviews

Rickert, Thomas. Ambient Rhetoric: The Attunements of Rhetorical Being. PA:University of Pittsburgh P, 2013. Print.

Reynolds, Nedra. Geographies of Writing: Inhabiting Places and Encountering Difference. Carbondale: Southern Illinois, 2004. Print.

Rose, Mike. “The Language of Exclusion: Writing Instruction at the University.” College English. 47.4 (Apr., 1985): 341–59.

_____. Lives on the Boundary: A Moving Account of the Struggles and Achievements of America’s Educationally Underprepared. Penguin, 2005.

Rural Voices: Place Conscious Education and the Teaching of Writing. Ed. Robert Brooke. New York: Teachers College P, 2003.

School’s Out!: Bridging Out-of-School Literacies and Classroom Practice. Ed. Glynda Hull and Katherine Schultz. New York: Teachers College P, 2002.

Shaughnessy, Mina. Errors and Expectations: A Guide for the Teacher of Basic Writing. London: Oxford UP, 1979.

Shor, Ira. Critical Teaching and Everyday Life. University of Chicago P, 1987.

_____. “What is Critical Literacy?” Journal of Pedagogy, Pluralism, and Practice. 1.4 (1999): n.p.

Tolbert, Linda and Paul Theobald. “Finding Their Place In the Community: Urban Education Outside the Classroom.” Childhood Education. (2006): 271–274.

Walker, Paul. “(Un)earthing a Vocabulary of Values: A Discourse Analysis for Ecocomposition.” Composition Studies. 38.1 (2010): 69–87.

Spatial thinking capability is strongly correlated with educational and professional performance in science, technology, engineering, and math- ematics (STEM) fields ( Shea, Lubinski, and Benbow 2001 ; Uttal and Cohen 2012 ; Wai, Lubinski, and Benbow 2009 ; Webb, Lubinski, and Benbow 2007 ), but the systematic and integrative instruction of spatial concepts, principles, and reasoning skills is not an explicit goal in K – 12 or college curricula. Spatiality also is ubiquitous in many humanities fields, including history and fine arts. Although educators do set standards for verbal liter- acy, numeracy, and analytical reasoning, there has been no comparable articulation of what it means to be spatially literate. That said, the 2006 National Research Council report Learning to Think Spatially did outline high-level “ components of spatial literacy ” ( NRC 2006 , pp. 16 – 20) that are a useful starting point. To paraphrase: A spatially literate person has (1) good knowledge of fundamental spatial concepts, (2) “ spatial ways of thinking and acting ” — that is, the “ habit of mind ” to think spatially and to apply spatial methodologies to solve problems, and (3) proficiency in the use of spatial tools and technologies. From this we derive a concise working definition of spatial literacy for this chapter: an understanding of fundamental spatial concepts and principles and the capability to recognize their appropriate application in answering scientific, engineering, and humanistic questions, aided by spatial technologies.

This chapter primarily addresses spatial conceptual knowledge. After summarizing our recent efforts to enumerate spatial concepts, we outline a prospective college-level course that entails applications of spatial con- cepts and related principles. Although many spatial concepts and principles are highly general, they are typically specialized distinctively in individual disciplines. Important complementary studies of such specializations are being undertaken by cognitive psychologists and education researchers working with interested professionals from several fields — most notably the

12 Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy

Karl Grossner and Donald G. Janelle

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

240 Grossner and Janelle

geosciences, geography, and chemistry ( Hegarty, Stieff, and Dixon 2013 ; Jo and Bednarz 2009 ; Manduca and Kastens 2012 ) — a practice we term discipline-diving . In this chapter, drawing on discipline-specific concepts and principles (the likely pragmatic source for defining spatial learning objectives for course modules and lesson plans), we frame an initial course outline to enhance spatial literacy across the undergraduate curriculum.

Given the reality of finite “ curricular space, ” we recognize the difficul- ties of introducing a new course at any educational level. Correspondingly, the proposed course and related discussion are intended to raise awareness of spatial literacy among educators; it is a thought experiment that pres- ents an answer to the question “ What should a spatially literate person know? ” In instances where an entirely new course or course module is not feasible, the outline may suggest the insertion of simple examples that expand on concepts and on the articulation of problems to contribute spatial perspectives that enhance parts of existing courses. (See Hegarty et al. 2013 .)

Perhaps it is the ubiquity of spatiality that prevents us from viewing spatial reasoning as a distinct practice, as we do mathematics, reading, and writing. Yet the 2006 NRC report presents the case for regarding spatial thinking as a distinct complement to the three Rs. (See Hegarty 2010 for a discussion of “ spatial intelligence. ” ) The report documents how we think in space, about space, and with space. We think in space as we navigate through buildings and cityscapes, play sports, dance, or organize storage shelves. We think about space when analyzing the structure, function, motion, and distribution of things in the world, at scales from nano to cosmic — whether seeking scientific explanations for natural phenomena or designing a tool, a building, or a dam. We think with space when we create or interpret diagrams and maps, or reason by spatial metaphor — a powerful and commonplace cognitive strategy ( Lakoff and Johnson 1980 ).

Thinking in, thinking about, and thinking with space are expressed differently depending on the conceptual foundations and methodologies associated with disciplines and professional pursuits. General spatial liter- acy does not entail the specialized spatial approaches and levels of expertise required for careers as surgeons, geologists, architects, or fighter pilots. We are not all gifted writers or mathematicians, but nearly everyone can become sufficiently proficient at reading, writing, and manipulating numbers to be an informed and fulfilled citizen. Similarly, we maintain that general spatial literacy is within reach of nearly everyone, will enhance skills for problem solving in careers and in daily life, and should be a goal of basic education.

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 241

Locating Spatial Concepts

One of the foundations of spatial literacy is the ability to reason with and to apply spatial concepts. Our efforts in nurturing such capabilities have focused on the support of spatial teaching and learning at the college level. In the sections that follow, we first describe research initiatives to identify the spatial concepts used in different fields ( Grossner 2012 ), then present a preliminary framework for organizing those concepts, and finally describe the development of a semi-automated mapping of concepts to enable the discovery of teaching resources cataloged in the National Science Digital Library.

Mining existing spatial taxonomies We examined twenty articles and books in which authors from eight dis- ciplines discuss the centrality of spatial thinking in their fields and attempt to delineate fundamental spatial concepts ( table 12.1 ). Some of these include an explicit taxonomy or schema of spatial concepts. For other authors and disciplines, important spatial concepts and concept relation- ships are extracted through content analysis of the text and section head- ings. The dominance of geography and psychology in the listing reflects disciplinary interests in, respectively, space as a primary dimension of analysis, and concepts, thinking and learning more generally. Although far less attention is paid to the role of spatial thinking in the literature of other

Table 12.1 Source documents on spatial concepts used in various disciplines.

Discipline Source documents

Architecture and urban planning

Alexander 2004; Lynch 1984

Earth science Kastens and Ishikawa 2006

Geography DiBiase et al. 2008; Gersmehl 2005; Gersmehl and Gersmehl 2007; Golledge 1995; Golledge et al. 2008; Kaufman 2004; Marsh et al. 2007; de Smith et al. 2008; Nystuen 1963; O ’ Sullivan and Unwin 2002

Mathematics Battista 2007

Linguistics Johnson 1987

Psychology Newcombe and Huttenlocher 2000; Piaget and Inhelder 1967; Tversky 2005

Science education Mathewson 2005

Social science Janelle and Goodchild 2011

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

242 Grossner and Janelle

fields, this study (described more fully at teachspatial.org) seeks to make explicit their reliance on spatial principles and methodologies.

Although 185 concept terms were harvested from the sources listed in table 12.1, subsequent analysis pared the listing to 129 terms through removal of near-synonyms and redundancies. In turn, we grouped the terms into ten general categories ( table 12.2 ). The 129 terms differ signifi- cantly with respect to complexity or level of abstraction and many have multiple definitions that often reflect disciplinary traditions. Furthermore, the positioning of terms within more general categories (although gener- ally intuitively apparent) faces the inevitable ambiguity of terms that fit within multiple categories, leading to philosophical questions about the very nature of concepts. Two survey volumes on the topic ( Margolis and

Table 12.2 Categorized spatial concepts in TeachSpatial lexicon.

Category Spatial concepts

Spatial structures object, field, surface, network, region, area, place, neighborhood, landscape, zone, landmark, atom, cell, molecule, nucleus, conduit, coil

Spatial properties composition, structure, size, shape, texture, mass, boundary, part, feature, center, layer, stratum

Space-time Context

space, space-time, location, environment, setting, site, situation, global, local, reference frame

Position position, distance, direction, orientation

Spatial dynamics motion, movement, dispersion, diffusion, transfer, transport, migration, explore, formation, destruction, grow, expand, diminish, merge, split, trajectory, wave, route, cycle, force, attract, repel, gravity, radiation, convection, absorb, release, erosion, eruption, flow, navigation, deformation

Spatial relations adjacency, proximity, centrality, distribution, density, container, external, internal, spatial hierarchy, level, order, spatial organization, pattern, proportion, straight, symmetry, chirality, alignment, gradient

Spatial interaction connection, link, bond, interaction, system, coordination, ecosystem

Spatial transformations

scale, rotation, projection, spatial integration, spatial interpolation

Representation map, diagram, graph, cognitive map, representation, overlay, path, grid, coordinates, point, line, polygon, polyhedron, route perspective, survey perspective

Spatial principles spatial autocorrelation, spatial heterogeneity, spatial association, distance decay, access, availability, isotropy, congruence

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 243

Laurence 1999 ; Murphy 2002 ) show that research has been almost univer- sally limited to fairly simple exemplars — concepts as classes of things in the world, like birds and chairs — not especially helpful for more complex relationships associated with spatial concepts such as neighborhood , connec- tion , and structure .

Measuring spatiality We have adopted an extensional notion of what a concept is — mental constructs representing material and non-material entities, properties, and processes in the world, about which we communicate with language. Thus, concepts are comprised in part by the words and gestures used to communicate their intended meaning. For two perspectives on spatial gestures see the chapters by Malaia and Waller and the one by Atit, Shipley, and Tikoff.

In an experimental study, Grossner and Montello (2010 ) undertook to confirm whether the presence of spatial terms in scientific texts corre- sponded with human judgments of spatiality. First, they built a lexicon of 120 spatial terms from three sources: a distillation of the 185-term list mentioned above, salient terms in the topical headings of two spatial analysis textbooks, and a glossary of topological terms. They then assem- bled a corpus of 195,000 titles and abstracts of the National Science Foun- dation grant awards made by all NSF directorates and divisions between 1989 and 2009. A measure of “ spatial-term density ” for each award was generated using a computer program written to count occurrences of each term in each abstract document and, then, divide the sum of those counts by the number of words in the abstract. Per-document spatial-term-density values ranged from 0.00 to 0.61. For comparison with “ ‘ standard English, ’ ” the same lexicon was used to rate the spatiality of other corpora, including 2,615 Wikipedia “ featured ” articles, the Academic subset of the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), and course descriptions from seven schools within a major university (UNIV). The results are summa- rized in figure 12.1 .

To help ground the spatial-term-density measure, Grossner and Mon- tello conducted a survey that asked participants to rate the spatiality of twenty NSF abstracts, chosen to be representative of divisions across all eight directorates. The seventy respondents represented a sampling frame of (a) a university geography department ’ s graduate students, faculty, and research staff, (b) individuals registered on the teachspatial.org website, and (c) members of the Spatial Intelligence and Learning Center ’ s spatial network. This group is considered expert relative to the general population.

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

244 Grossner and Janelle

There was a rank correlation of 0.73 between the term-density measure and human judgments about the spatiality of the twenty abstracts. These results confirmed the value of using this method to search for spatiality in other texts, such as K – 12 teaching standards and university course descriptions.

Locating spatial concepts in K – 12 science standards The next step in this investigation was to examine K – 12 science teaching content standards to learn what spatial conceptual knowledge the average new college freshman might be expected to have. We convened a panel of eight “ spatial experts ” from the fields of science education, cognitive psy- chology, geography, and mathematics, and asked them to identify spatial concept terms present in each of the 150 National Science Education Stan- dards for the subject areas of Physical, Life, and Earth and Space Sciences ( NRC 1996 ), then subjectively rate each standard for its spatiality. We then rated the agreement among the eight spatial experts.

Each of the 150 NSES content standards was examined by four to six of the panel ’ s experts and given a “ spatiality rating ” between 0 and 100. Aver- aged values indicated that Life Science was the least spatial of the three domains; that, although physics was seen as the most spatial, agreement

Figure 12.1 Spatial-term density in various corpora.

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 245

among the experts varied more than for life and earth sciences; and that agreement among experts was greatest for standards judged as “ very spatial ” and “ not very spatial. ”

In reading the NSES content standards, panelists highlighted all terms in the text that they judged to be spatial. Almost all of the spatial concept terms from table 12.2 were tagged when encountered, but many other terms were also deemed markers for spatial conceptual content in the standards — examples include ‘ earth ’ , ‘ absorption ’ , ‘ proportion ’ , ‘ erosion ’ , and ‘ coordination ’ . After rating and tagging standards, the group was asked what factors led to considering a standard as highly spatial. The following responses indicate the range of considerations. A standard can be consid- ered highly spatial if

• spatial reasoning methods are essential to understanding it, • it concerns relationships among objects either directly involving or bring- ing to mind distance, hierarchies, networks, structure (e.g., containment, or parts), or patterns, • it concerns observable components for which we can develop either mental or physical (graphic) spatial imagery, • entities involved have measurable extension (i.e., size, shape, or geomet- ric characteristics), • it involves changes of distance, or clumping vs. separation along a gradient, • it concerns movement or motion (e.g., coming together, going/growing apart), • it concerns attraction and force,

and

• it may be readily represented in terms of points, lines, areas, and trajectories.

The expert participants in this exercise noticed that certain highly spatial terms, such as ‘ region ’ and ‘ network ’ , were missing. This prompted a similar search of the Geography for Life: National Geography Standards ( Geography Education Standards Project 1994 ), in which region and network did appear, along with many other distinctive terms. All terms occurring in three or more standards were cross-referenced in a discipline interaction matrix (figure 12.2). Spatial terms (lexical concepts) unique to a single domain of science appear along the diagonal; terms found in mul- tiple subject areas appear in the remaining upper cells, with counts in parentheses. The matrix should be instructive as we seek to find conceptual

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

246 Grossner and Janelle B

– P

h ys

ic al

B – Physical

C –

L if

e

C – Life

D –

E ar

th a

n d

s p

ac e

D – Earth and space

G eo

g ra

p h

y

o b

je ct

( 10

), a

to m

( 7)

, b o

n d

( 7)

, w

av e

(7 ),

n u

cl eu

s (6

), e

m is

si o

n

(5 ),

d ir

ec ti

o n

( 4)

, m as

s (4

), p

at h

(4

),

lin e

(3 ),

m ea

su re

m en

t (3

),

o rd

er (

3) , p

ro p

o rt

io n

( 3)

, st

ra ig

h t

(3 ),

w av

el en

g th

( 3)

m o

ti o

n (1

7, 3

), in

te ra

ct io

n (8

, 7 ),

co

m p

o si

ti o

n (7

, 5 ),

s iz

e (7

, 5 ),

sc

al e

(6 , 4

), m

o ve

m en

t (5

, 4 ),

m

o le

cu le

( 4,

7 ),

s tr

u ct

u re

(3 , 8

) ab

so rp

ti o

n (

3, 3

)

m o

ti o

n (1

7, 1

3) , i

n te

ra ct

io n

(8 , 3

),

co m

p o

si ti

o n

(7 , 6

), f

o rc

e (1

1, 5

),

tr an

sf er

( 6,

3 ),

m o

ve m

en t

(5 , 1

2) ,

p o

si ti

o n

( 5,

3 ),

g ra

vi ty

( 3,

3 )

in te

ra ct

io n

(8 , 7

), d

is ta

n ce

( 7,

5 ),

si

ze (7

, 4 ),

s tr

u ct

u re

(3 , 9

)

b eh

av io

r (5

), c

el l (

5) , e

xt er

n al

( 4)

, st

o ra

g e

(4 ),

a va

ila b

ili ty

( 3)

, co

o rd

in at

io n

( 3)

, h ie

ra rc

h y

(3 ),

le

ve l (

3) , o

rg an

iz at

io n

( 3)

, r el

ea se

(3

), s

yn th

es is

( 3)

, u n

it (

3)

co n

ta in

m en

t (7

, 3 ),

in te

ra ct

io n

(7 ,

3) , i

n te

rn al

( 7,

3 ),

g ro

w th

( 6,

3 ),

fo

rm at

io n

( 3,

8 ),

m o

ti o

n (

3, 1

3)

en vi

ro n

m en

t (1

9, 1

5) , s

tr u

ct u

re (

8,

9) , i

n te

ra ct

io n

(7 , 7

), e

co sy

st em

( 7,

5)

, c o

n ta

in m

en t

(7 , 4

), t

ra n

sp o

rt (

3,

8)

su rf

ac e

(8 ),

c yc

le (

6) , p

la te

( 5)

, b

u ild

in g

( 3)

, c h

an g

e (3

), c

o n

ve ct

io n

(3

), e

ar th

( 3)

, e ru

p ti

o n

( 3)

, l ay

er (

3) ,

m at

te r

(3 ),

s o

lid (

3) , s

ys te

m (

3) ,

vo lc

an o

( 3)

, w ea

th er

in g

( 3)

lo ca

ti o

n (

5, 1

4) , c

o n

ta in

m en

t (3

, 4 ),

er

o si

o n

( 3,

4 ),

in te

ra ct

io n

(3 , 7

)

Geography

re g

io n

( 29

), a

re a

(2 0)

, p at

te rn

( 13

),

p la

ce (

12 ),

m ap

( 11

), m

ig ra

ti o

n (

10 ),

d

is tr

ib u

ti o

n (

9) , s

et tl

em en

t (9

),

sp at

ia l o

rg an

iz at

io n

( 8)

, c en

te r

(7 ),

ac

ce ss

( 6)

, c o

n n

ec ti

o n

( 6)

, d en

si ty

(6

), f

ea tu

re (

6) , e

xp lo

ra ti

o n

( 5)

, n

ei g

h b

o rh

o o

d (

5) , n

et w

o rk

( 5)

, ro

u te

( 5)

, s it

e (5

), b

o u

n d

ar y

(4 ),

ex

p an

si o

n (

4) , g

lo b

al (

4) , l

an d

sc ap

e (4

), lo

ca l (

4) , p

ro xi

m it

y (4

), s

h ap

e (4

), s

p ac

e (4

),

zo n

e (4

)

Fi g

ur e

12 .2

Sp

at ia

l te

rm s

in s

ci en

ce d

om ai

n s.

T er

m s

al on

g th

e d

ia go

n al

w er

e ta

gg ed

o n

ly i

n s

ta n

d ar

d s

fo r

th at

t op

ic a

re a.

T er

m s

in b

ol d

w er

e ta

gg ed

i n

st an

d ar

d s

fo r

th re

e of

t h

e fo

u r

to p

ic a

re as

, w it

h t

h e

ex ce

p ti

on o

f ‘ in

te ra

ct io

n ’ (

th e

on ly

t er

m t

ag ge

d in

a ll

f ou

r) . N

u m

be rs

in p

ar en

th es

es o

n

ax es

a re

c ou

n ts

o f

st an

d ar

d s

h av

in g

th e

ta gg

ed t

er m

. O n

ly t

er m

s ap

p ea

ri n

g in

t h

re e

or m

or e

st an

d ar

d s

ar e

d is

p la

ye d

.

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 247

threads between disciplines, but it also highlights the specialization of concepts distinct to specific subject areas.

Mapping concepts to teaching resources A lexicon of spatial terms derived from the three studies referenced above aided the development of teaching resource collections for the National Science Digital Library, available within the NSDL master catalog at http:// nsdl.org and published at the TeachSpatial website, http://teachspatial.org. For the annotations collection, a computer script ran 69 queries (sets of spatial terms from the 69 NSES grade 9 – 12 content standards) eight times each, once for each of the NSDL “ pathway ” subject domains (Chemistry, Geoscience, Life Science, Physics, Mathematics, Engineering, Social Sci- ences, and Space Science). The 3,000 distinct records returned were then culled to produce a new NSDL TeachSpatial collection of 2,476 teaching resources that align with one or more of the science content standards. We added 80 additional spatial learning resources from the Center for Spatial Studies at the University of California at Santa Barbara.

In the Resource Browser section of the TeachSpatial website, users can select any of the 129 terms in table 12.2 and get a list of links to free teach- ing resources relevant to that concept, in most cases from multiple science domains or disciplines. For example, a query for the term ‘ surface ’ returns four records with differing perspectives: those of earth science (ocean surface currents), mathematics (Archimedes ’ Law of Floating Bodies), biology (microbe behavior on surfaces), and physics (double curvature minimal surfaces in tensile structures). TeachSpatial provides a resource for instructors to add spatial content to existing courses in specific disciplines or, if so emboldened, to tap resources from several disciplines to highlight possible interdisciplinary transfer of spatial concepts in a more general course on spatial thinking.

Concept-Based Principles for a Course in Spatiality

All the work described thus far was originally motivated by the question “ If there were a general course in spatial thinking at the undergraduate level, what would it cover? ” To help answer this question, we identified the spatial concepts considered fundamental in a number of fields and found that most are meaningful in other, often disparate, fields. We then sought to learn which of the spatial concepts, principles, and skills appear- ing in K – 12 curricula one could reasonably expect incoming college fresh- men to be conversant with. However, while one can suggest that scale is a

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

248 Grossner and Janelle

fundamental spatial concept for many fields, and should be well under- stood — what is there about scale that spatially literate people should know? Are there basic axioms or principles that concern scale? What scale-related tasks should they be able to perform? In addressing such questions, one can simultaneously invoke multiple concepts, joined through general spatial principles that span multiple fields. Thus, general concepts are building blocks for general principles and, in most cases, both principles and their component concepts have discipline-specific variation in meaning or perspective.

We find it most useful at this stage to organize fundamental spatial concepts and principles into several categories in a speculative course outline. We asked ourselves what conceptual content would lead to spa- tially literate students. This is a very different goal than achieving sufficient mastery in specialized spatial reasoning and computational methods to (for example) analyze landforms for their geological history, differentiate similar molecules from diagrams, or perform surgery. This high-level course would be foundational and motivational, diverse, even fun.

Such a course might best be co-taught — or at least co-designed — by a physicist, an astronomer, a biologist, a geologist, a geographer, a historian, a professor of literature, a cognitive psychologist, and an artist (or a similar combination). In lieu of such a committee, we will speculate on the con- tents of a course outline that such a group might produce. To do this, we will leap back and forth between spatial concepts such as those listed earlier and spatial principles — defined here as precepts, axioms, laws, or law-like statements underlying the practice of many diverse professions. As geogra- phers, we admit to having only surface knowledge in most of these fields, along with a potential bias toward the geographic scales of phenomena. Nonetheless, we are intent on having the breadth of this imagined course span all fields for which “ spatial is special ” in some way.

A Course Outline: “ Spatial Reasoning Across Disciplines ”

Week 1: Space, time, and place There are multiple ways to conceive, represent, and analyze space and spatiality.

Space and space-time According to the online Oxford English Dictionary, the term ‘ space ’ implies “ continuous, unbounded, or unlimited extent in every direction, without reference to any matter that may be present … an attribute of the universe,

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 249

describable mathematically. ” This corresponds to the naive conception of three-dimensional space as the void containing objects in the universe, or some portion thereof. The concept of space-time , an important theoretical construct in physics, is more difficult: time and space fused in a four- dimensional continuum within which all worldly phenomena exist, in a sense, as events.

Space and place Space and place are sometimes used interchangeably, but more often dif- ferentiated, with space as an abstract construct described geometrically and place as “ experienced space ” — a subjective mental construction, possibly shared, and exemplified by “ sense of place, ” a common phrase of uncertain origin. (See Tuan 1977 .) The distinction becomes clear if you ask residents of a city to describe it verbally or to draw a map of it. Representations will differ, often radically. The area bounding the physical city and the position of things within it are spatial — that is, they have spatial extension and can be described geometrically. Alternatively, the distinctive memories of human experience in such spaces constitute places, such as Hemingway ’ s Havana or the neighborhood of one ’ s youth.

Location and position Location is absolute, but descriptions of location are necessarily relative. We cannot say where something is (its position) without referring either to some other thing or to an arbitrary reference grid of some kind. Earth locations are normally described with coordinate points related to an esti- mated earth center. We also use qualitative terms of connectedness and distance to describe location in relation to other things. Topological terms such as ‘ adjacent ’ , ‘ contains ’ , ‘ overlaps ’ , ‘ above ’ , and ‘ north of ’ are ame- nable to formal definition; terms for qualitative metrics, such as ‘ near ’ and ‘ far ’ , are highly contextual and less so.

Week 2: The nature of spatial thinking Humans think in space, about space, and with space. Cognitive scientists have studied spatial thinking from at least three perspectives, each relevant for one or more of those contexts: spatial ability, acquired spatial reasoning skills, and use of spatial metaphor. We think in space as we maneuver through the world of everyday tasks and wayfinding, and about space as we reason about and analyze spatial configurations of natural phenomena. In both cases we draw upon spatial abilities such as mental imagery and spatial memory for making mental representations and for reasoning about

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

250 Grossner and Janelle

alternative perspectives, cross-sections through objects, and transforma- tions of material and objects over time — often aided by external representa- tions, like maps, diagrams, and animations. There are individual and gender differences in such abilities ( Hegarty and Waller 2006 ), but research is showing that performance at any level can be improved through instruc- tion and practice ( Uttal and Cohen 2012 ).

Spatial metaphor has been shown to be an essential reasoning strategy for non-spatial phenomena ( Lakoff and Johnson 1980 ), i.e., thinking with space. Two commonplace examples of such spatialization are the “ distance- similarity metaphor ” ( Montello, Fabrikant, Ruocco, and Middleton 2003 ) and “ magnitude as size, ” as seen in concept maps, other network or graph representations, and statistical charts.

Cognitive maps and mental models The term ‘ cognitive map ’ has been used in several senses. As introduced by Tolman (1948 ), it refers to the mental representations of the environ- ment that humans and other animals will create and maintain, and which are consulted routinely in navigating around the house (or a maze), or through the town (or cage) they live in. The concept has been extended considerably in spatial and non-spatial ways — e.g., by environmental geog- raphers studying the role of various cognitive processes in humans ’ mental models of space and place ( Downs and Stea 1977 ) and as spatialized mental models of relations between diverse concepts.

Week 3: Spatial is special There are several interwoven spatial principles that are fundamental and far-reaching across many scientific, engineering, and design fields. Their generality lies at the heart of why “ spatial is special. ” A spatially literate person is familiar with the conceptual content of the principles and the fact of their generality.

Pattern and process; form and function Kim Kastens, one of the experts who rated the spatiality of NSES content standards in the study by Grossner and Montello (2010 ), identified what she referred to as “ spatial principle zero ” :

A spatially literate person understands that the form, locations, and relative position

of things in the universe contain meaning about the causes and consequences of

their structure or arrangement, and should be able to provide examples from more

than one field.

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 251

The spatial form of natural objects (their size, shape, structure, orienta- tion, texture), at every scale, is strongly related to underlying processes of their creation and, particularly in the case of biological objects, to function. The form of earth features such as mountains, glaciers, and watersheds follow from processes we understand in large part by studying the spatial configuration and structure of their products. The composition and struc- ture of organic and inorganic molecules are also functional, in that chemi- cal processes both depend upon and produce them. The configuration of the solar system is the product of ongoing processes, but it seems a stretch to say they are functional. In a rather different sense, we say that cells, tree roots, thumbs, wings, and brains have any number of functions. Issues of purpose in these cases are often controversial, particularly outside sci- entific circles.

Human purpose plays an enormous role in the design of artifacts at all scales, from nano-scale robots to massive earthworks. With respect to chemical compounds, tools, vehicles, clothing, buildings, and cities, form largely follows function. Nevertheless, we like things that both work well and are pleasing to look at, so aesthetics of form can play an important role. Function is far less relevant to works of artistic expression, but aspects of spatiality are critical elements in the design of all artifacts, whether functional, purely artistic, or somewhere in between. Many associated concept terms hold meaning in other fields. For example, although sym- metry , perspective , and reference frames are central to urban design, architec- ture, and most fine arts, symmetry and its close cousin chirality are also important for understanding molecular structure. Perspective and reference frames are central aspects of spatial cognition studied by cognitive psychologists.

Spatial context matters — at all scales, in all disciplines. Natural phenomena — things and happenings — are significantly affected by their surroundings (i.e., their environment or setting). This includes neighboring things and any networks or ecosystems they are part of.

What you can know depends upon where you or your sensors are and what you can perceive. Observations and analyses of phenomena occur within a reference frame. In very general terms this refers to situational and observational context: the spatial, temporal, and thematic bounds for what is being considered, along with associated measurement or classifica- tion systems. Reference frames can be global or local in absolute or relative terms, and resolution of representations can vary from fine to coarse (i.e., more or less generalized). As such, they are closely tied to concepts of scale and granularity . In physics, the motion of objects of interest and observers

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

252 Grossner and Janelle

are essential determinants. In spatial analyses of social and natural phe- nomena at geographic scales, the bounds of a study area and areal divisions within it are critical factors influencing results and interpretations. Related concepts from the visual arts include field of view and perspective .

Near things tend to be more similar than distant things. Attributes of things that are near each other tend to be more similar than attributes of things that are far apart; such similarity leads to the identification of clusters , regions , and neighborhoods . This is a generalization of Tobler ’ s First Law of Geography, which asserts this for scales associated with geographical space. Gravity models derived from Newton ’ s Law have been applied in many fields (particularly in social science). Thus, the level of interaction between entities at two locations is a function of their mass (defined physi- cally or otherwise) and declines in inverse proportion to some function of the distance between them.

The fallacy of independent observations A spatially literate person will be aware that assumptions of independence for observational data in statistical studies are in many cases a fallacy. Whereas proximity is often an explanatory factor, many scientific models do not make location an explicit parameter. Hence, in cases where spatial association and dependence are factors but have not been modeled, statisti- cal analyses may be flawed.

Spatial indexing aids knowledge discovery. To the extent that we geore- ference objects of interest in library and archive catalogs and in Web- accessible documents, adding spatial metadata, particularly for geographic locations, enables the discovery of spatial and spatial-temporal patterns that may be critical to understanding natural and social processes.

Week 4: Representation, part I — Size, scale, and error Although every material thing has an absolute size in space, representations of its extent are relative to an ordered reference standard such as the metric scale of length. When something is seen as large or small, it is in relation to another thing or to a particular scale. A small elephant dwarfs the largest dog. On the scale of star size, our sun is small.

Graphic representations of things and designs are often made “ to scale ” — proportional to their actual size, faithfully rendering the relative sizes of their components. Representation scales are naturally related to the size of human beings. Representations can be at a smaller scale to visualize the entirety of something too large to see all at once, such as a house, a mountain, or a galaxy. Many realms of phenomena cannot be perceived

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 253

directly without the use of tools and technology, such as microscopes, telescopes, and radiometers. In this case large-scale representations enable us to visualize things like the parts of a watch or a molecule with greater detail than is possible at their actual size.

Scientific and engineering disciplines are divided to some extent by scale. Although it is an oversimplification, we say the atomic and sub- atomic scales are the domain of physics; molecular scales the domain of chemistry, cosmic scales that of astronomy, and so on. The work of archi- tects, planners, and environmental and social scientists involves scales associated with environmental and geographic space (Montello 1993).

Scale is an important consideration in art and in all design professions, and is linked to the concept of balance. Elements that are relatively large in one ’ s field of view are said to have more weight, figuratively speaking, than smaller elements. Achieving a balance of graphical weight is often desirable, although deliberately unbalanced arrangements can be used to purposeful artistic effect too.

Many natural phenomena have a fractal nature ( Mandelbrot 1983 ). That is, their structure is self-similar at any scale of observation. We see this when viewing higher and higher magnifications of crystals, for example. Clouds, river networks, and coastlines are said to have fractal qualities, though apparently this is only approximately true.

All representations are necessarily abstractions and tend to generalize away detail, making them the source not only of insight, but also error and uncertainty. This is true of internal representations (mental imagery, cogni- tive maps, and so forth) as well as graphical representations.

For graphical representations, greater resolution can mitigate that effect. The more pixels, points, or lines rendered per square centimeter of media (for screens, print, and film respectively), the higher the resolution and the greater the potential accuracy. For satellite imagery, a single point of data can represent an area of earth surface corresponding to anywhere between a few square centimeters and 1,000 square meters.

Week 5: Representation, part II — Objects and fields Objects can be viewed as discretizations of material phenomena (e.g., storms, ancient figurines). Depending on the scales of observation, repre- sentation, and analysis, natural phenomena can be viewed variously as continuous fields, as discrete objects, or both. Fields represent values of some attribute for every point in a region of space-time, and are most useful for studying essentially continuous phenomena. For example, the atmosphere has (potentially) a different temperature at every point in

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

254 Grossner and Janelle

space (or space-time). Representation choices are pragmatic, in part a function of desired resolution or granularity. For example, thunderstorms can be represented as continuous fields or as discrete objects having tra- jectories. But, at some scale, the boundary between storm and non-storm is difficult to discern. Viewed at larger scales, many continuous phenom- ena are composed of discrete objects (the water droplets and oxygen molecules of a storm), and we often discretize regions of continuous phenomena and material substances having similar attribute values as objects of study (thunderstorms). Some archeological finds are clumps of material whose identity as intentionally fabricated objects may be contestable.

Week 6: Spatial structure, part I — Clusters and regions One goal of scientific analysis is the discovery of spatial structure — instances of identifiable patterns that can be classified as objects in their own right and compared. One such structure is the cluster , the identification of which can depend upon many factors: the original hypothesis, the scale of analy- sis and reference frame, theory-driven categorical attributes and threshold values for them, and the type and quality of measurement instruments, to name a few. We discover and study clusters of things of every conceivable scale, including nanoparticles, cell, diseases, people, and stars.

Another highly general spatial structure is the region . Like clusters, regions exist in nature, but their identification likewise depends upon subjective definitional criteria in many cases. Regions can be purely spatial (anterior, northern, central) or be defined as areas having similar values for one or more attributes (common activity, geology, belief, demographics, etc.). That is, they are human-created objects of analysis. The concept of region is primarily associated with geography and astrophysics, but a recent scan of the Corpus of Contemporary American English for terms complet- ing the phrase “ region of the _____ ” yielded ‘ gene ’ , ‘ cell ’ , ‘ sky ’ , ‘ ship ’ , ‘ neck ’ , ‘ bat ’ , ‘ brain ’ , ‘ rotor ’ , and ‘ amygdala ’ in addition to the expected ‘ country ’ and ‘ world ’ . This suggest that the term ‘ region ’ is often applied to approximate locations on or within something, with no precise bound- ary implied.

Week 7: Spatial structure, part II — Networks, connection, and interaction Networks exist throughout nature (e.g., watersheds, circulatory systems, proteins, lightning, neurons), they are the essential structure of many human artifacts (e.g., transport, utilities infrastructure), and they are an invaluable method of representing connectivity and interaction of all

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 255

kinds. Network science is an increasingly important interdisciplinary field, with a formal mathematical foundation in graph theory. A spatially literate person will be familiar with the basic principles of networks and graphs, and will recognize network structures in science, engineering, and social behavior, and in the global spatial interactions of the highly connected twenty-first-century world. Networks are composed of nodes and the links between them. Nodes can be any material or non-material thing — a city, a person, a concept. They can be hierarchically ordered in multiple ways, according to a magnitude derived either from intrinsic properties or from network measures like connectedness (degree) or centrality. Links can be any material or non-material connection or association between nodes. They can be directed, undirected, or mixed, and have a magnitude (weight)

Figure 12.3 The globular star cluster Messier 69. Credit: NASA/STScI/WikiSky.

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

256 Grossner and Janelle

derived from potential or actual flows or interaction on them. Graphs are the mathematical expressions of network structure, and many descriptive terms and measures are used interchangeably for both graphs and net- works. Graphs can be represented as matrices of numbers and as node-link diagrams.

Week 8: Spatial dynamics The processes that produce spatial patterns are dynamic; they occur over time whether or not analyses focus on or reflect that fact. A significant proportion of the phenomena we observe, measure, and analyze in seeking explanation concerns spatial change: change of position, form, orientation, and spatial identity (e.g., composition in parts, splitting, and merging). The same holds true for many forms of humanistic inquiry and expression, in history and the fine arts for example.

Concepts in spatial dynamics are relevant in many fields and at most scales. Most have precise meanings in physics and chemistry, and alternate but similar or metaphorical meanings in other fields. For example, in physics ‘ diffusion ’ refers to a random walk of particles in a heat exchange process where a high concentration of a finite number of particles spread throughout a solution. In other fields, diffusion can refer to the spread of a concept or practice from one or more locations to many more. Meanings of ‘ migration ’ are largely consistent between disciplines. In the sciences, ‘ flow ’ refers to the continuous movement of matter (normally fluids) in a stream-like fashion; it is also used metaphorically — and effectively — to refer to non-material things (such as ideas), and to non-fluids (such as currency in trade activity).

Week 9: Spatialization Spatialization is the use of spatial concepts and their linguistic and graphi- cal representations to reason and communicate about non-spatial concepts. Lakoff and Johnson (1980 , p. 17) have demonstrated the pervasiveness of spatial metaphors in the English language, and assert that “ most of our fundamental concepts are organized in terms of one or more spatialization metaphors. ” A few important examples include similarity as distance; time as distance; associations of any kind in topological terms (adjacent, over- lapping, containment, connection); and magnitude of any type or by any measure, as size. A spatially literate person will recognize the practice of spatialization in information visualizations, including Venn diagrams, flow charts, concept maps, scatter plots, line and bar graphs, and network diagrams.

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 257

Week 10: Critical spatial thinking and analysis with representations A spatially literate person is proficient at critically interpreting the most common forms of graphical representation of spatial data at all scales: maps, plans, and diagrams. They are also able to read and critically evaluate graphical spatializations of non-spatial information, from the scatter plots, line graphs, and bar charts used for visualizing statistical data, to the network diagrams describing the relationships between people or concepts, or the flow charts depicting dynamic procedures and processes. Critical interpretation is informed in both cases by many of the principles and concepts discussed earlier — particularly in Week 4 — concerning scale, gen- eralization, and accuracy. Interpretation must also be informed by an awareness of the subjective nature of data selection, the limitations of spatial tools, and the underlying assumptions of descriptive and predictive models.

A spatially literate person will also be able to understand and use spatial language for conveying relationships of proximity, connectivity, and containment.

Discussion and Conclusions

We have described a multi-year, multi-phase research effort motivated by a belief in the value of making both the importance and breadth of spatial concepts, reasoning, and skills more explicit at the lower-division college level. We identified spatial concepts and principles found in teaching stan- dards, course content, and research investigations across a variety of fields within the physical and social sciences, design disciplines, and, to a lesser extent, the arts and humanities. Among the results of that work are the TeachSpatial Web portal for spatial teaching and learning resources (http:// teachspatial.org) and the establishment of a minor in Spatial Studies at the University of California at Santa Barbara.

In this chapter, we identified sets of spatial concepts and principles that are both fundamental and trans-disciplinary. Recognizing that most spatial concepts and principles have discipline-specific applications and perspec- tives, we organized them within an outline for a prospective “ course for spatial literacy. ” The course is aimed at college freshmen, although we anticipate that this work may also be useful for developers of K – 12 curri- cula. By beginning the enumeration of a set of spatial concepts, principles, and skills that we should expect college freshmen to have some proficiency in, we hope to encourage incremental steps toward making a “ spatial thread ” within existing K – 12 content standards more explicit, thereby

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

258 Grossner and Janelle

reducing the need for spatial remediation at the college level. Spatial lit- eracy offers a pathway to informed problem solving in a broad range of human endeavors; it is within reach of nearly everyone, and it should be a goal of basic education.

Acknowledgments

We thank Sarah Battersby, Bill Jacob, Kim Kastens, Nora Newcombe, Diana Sinton, and Lisa Weckbacher, who, along with us, participated as panelists in locating spatial concepts in K – 12 science standards; Daniel Montello, who contributed with Karl Grossner to the measurement of spatiality in NSF award abstracts; Karen Doehner, Guylene Gadal, and Michael Goodchild, who supported the TeachSpatial project through the Center for Spatial Studies at UCSB; and the National Science Foundation (NSF DUE 1043777) for funding the NSDL Pathways small grant for “ TeachSpatial: A Portal to Instructional Resources on Spatial Concepts for STEM Education. ”

References

Alexander , C. 2004 . The Nature of Order , book 1: The Phenomenon of Life .

Routledge .

Battista , M. T. 2007 . The development of geometric and spatial thinking . In Second

Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning , ed. F. K. Lester Jr. Infor-

mation Age .

de Smith , M. J. , Goodchild , M. F. , and Longley , P. A. 2008 . Geospatial Analysis: A

Comprehensive Guide to Principles, Techniques, and Software Tools , second edition .

Troubador .

DiBiase , D. , DeMers , M. , Johnson , A. , Kemp , K. , Luck , A. T. , Plewe , B. , et al. , eds.

2008 . Geographic Information Science and Technology Body of Knowledge . Association of

American Geographers .

Downs , R. M. , and Stea , D. 1977 . Maps in Minds: Reflections on Cognitive Mapping .

Harper and Row .

Geography Education Standards Project . 1994 . Geography for Life: National Geography

Standards 1994 . National Geographic Research and Exploration .

Gersmehl , P. J. 2005 . Teaching Geography . Guilford .

Gersmehl , P. J. , and Gersmehl , C. A. 2007 . Spatial thinking by young children:

Neurologic evidence for early development and “ educability. ” Journal of Geography

106 : 181 – 191 .

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 259

Golledge , R. G. 1995 . Primitives of spatial knowledge . In Cognitive Aspects of Human-

Computer Interaction for Geographic Information Systems , ed. T. L. Nyerges , D. M. Mark ,

R. Laurini , and M. J. Egenhofer . Kluwer .

Golledge , R. G. , Marsh , M. , and Battersby , S. E. 2008 . Matching geographical con-

cepts with geographic educational needs. Geographical Research 46 : 85 – 98 .

Grossner , K. 2012 . Finding the spatial in order to teach it . In Earth and Mind II: A

Synthesis of Research on Thinking and Learning in the Geosciences , ed. K. A. Kastens and

C. A. Manduca . Volume 486, Geological Society of America Special Papers.

Grossner , K. , and Montello , D. R. 2010 . Locating and measuring spatial thinking in

text corpora. Downloaded from http://kgeographer.com .

Hegarty , M. 2010 . Components of spatial intelligence . In The Psychology of Learning

And Motivation , volume 52 , ed. B. H. Ross . Academic Press .

Hegarty , M. , Newcombe , N. S. , Goodchild , M. F. , Janelle , D. G. , Shipley , T. F. , and

Sinton , D. 2013 . Spatial Thinking Across the College Curriculum: Specialist Meeting

Final Report . Downloaded from http://www.spatial.ucsb.edu.

Hegarty , M. , Stieff , M. , and Dixon , B. L. 2013 . Cognitive change in mental models

with experience in the domain of organic chemistry. Journal of Cognitive Psychology

25 : 220 – 228 .

Hegarty , M. , and Waller , D. 2006 . Individual differences in spatial abilities . In Hand-

book of Visuospatial Thinking , ed. P. Shah and A. Miyake . Cambridge University Press .

Janelle , D. G. , and Goodchild , M. F. 2011 . Concepts, principles, tools, and challenges

in spatially integrated social science . In The SAGE Handbook of GIS and Society , ed.

T. L. Nyerges , R. McMaster , and H. Couclelis . SAGE .

Jo , I. , and Bednarz , S. W. 2009 . Evaluating geography textbook questions from a

spatial perspective: Using concepts of space, tools of representation, and cognitive

processes to evaluate spatiality. Journal of Geography 108 : 4 – 13 .

Johnson , M. 1987 . The Body in the Mind . University of Chicago Press .

Kastens , K. A. , and Ishikawa , T. 2006 . Spatial thinking in the geosciences and cogni-

tive sciences: A cross-disciplinary look at the intersection of the two fields . In Earth

and Mind: How Geologists Think and Learn about the Earth , ed. C. A. Manduca and D.

W. Mogk . Volume 413, Geological Society of America Special Papers.

Kaufman , M. M. 2004 . Using spatial-temporal primitives to improve geographic skills

for preservice teachers. Journal of Geography 103 : 171 – 181 .

Lakoff , G. , and Johnson , M. 1980 . Metaphors We Live By . University of Chicago Press .

Lynch , K. 1984 . Good City Form . MIT Press .

Mandelbrot , B. 1983 . The Fractal Geometry of Nature . Freeman .

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

260 Grossner and Janelle

Manduca , C. , and Kastens , K. 2012 . Mapping the domain of spatial thinking in the

geosciences . In Earth and Mind II: A Synthesis of Research on Thinking and Learning in

the Geosciences , ed. K. A. Kastens and C. A. Manduca . Volume 486, Geological Society

of America Special Papers.

Margolis , E. , and Laurence , S. , eds. 1999 . Concepts: Core Readings . MIT Press .

Marsh , M. , Golledge , R. G. , and Battersby , S. E. 2007 . Geospatial concept understand-

ing and recognition in G6 – college students: A preliminary argument for minimal

GIS. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 97 : 696 – 712 .

Mathewson , J. H. 2005 . The visual core of science: Definition and applications to

education. International Journal of Science Education 27 : 529 – 548 .

Montello , D. R. 1993 . Scale and multiple psychologies of space. In Spatial Information

Theory: A Theoretical Basis for GIS , ed. A. U. Frank and I. Campari. Springer.

Montello , D. R. , Fabrikant , S. I. , Ruocco , M. , and Middleton , R. S. 2003 . Testing the

first law of cognitive geography on point-display spatializations . In Spatial Informa-

tion Theory: Foundations of Geographic Information Science , ed. W. Kuhn , M. F. Worboys ,

and S. Timpf . Springer .

Murphy , G. L. 2002 . The Big Book of Concepts . MIT Press .

Newcombe , N. S. , and Huttenlocher , J. 2000 . Making Space . MIT Press .

NRC . 1996 . National Science Education Standards . National Academies Press .

NRC . 2006 . Learning to Think Spatially — GIS as a Support System in the K – 12 Curriculum .

National Academies Press .

Nystuen , J. D. 1963 . Identification of some fundamental spatial concepts . Michigan

Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 48 : 373 – 384 .

O ’ Sullivan , D. , and Unwin , D. J. 2002 . Geographic Information Analysis . Wiley .

Piaget , J. , and Inhelder , B. [ 1948 ] 1967 . The Child ’ s Conception of Space . Norton .

Shea , D. L. , Lubinski , D. , and Benbow , C. P. 2001 . Importance of assessing spatial

ability in intellectually talented young adolescents: A 20-year longitudinal study.

Journal of Educational Psychology 93 : 604 – 614 .

Tolman , E. C. 1948 . Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review 55 :

189 – 208 .

Tuan , Y. F. 1977 . Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience . University of Minne-

sota Press .

Tversky , B. 2005 . Functional significance of visuospatial representations . In Cam-

bridge Handbook of Visuospatial Thinking , ed. P. Shah and A. Miyake . Cambridge

University Press .

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Concepts and Principles for Spatial Literacy 261

Uttal , D. H. , and Cohen , C. A. 2012 . Spatial thinking and STEM education: When,

why and how. Psychology of Learning and Motivation 57 : 147 – 181 .

Wai , J. , Lubinski , D. , and Benbow , C. P. 2009 . Spatial ability for STEM domains:

Aligning over fifty years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its impor-

tance. Journal of Educational Psychology 101 : 817 – 835 .

Webb , R. M. , Lubinski , D. , and Benbow , C. P. 2007 . Spatial ability: A neglected

dimension in talent searches for intellectually precocious youth. Journal of Educa-

tional Psychology 99 : 397 – 420 .

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Space in mind : Concepts for spatial learning and education. (2014). MIT Press. Created from cm on 2024-09-16 11:16:49.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

4. M

IT P

re ss

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .