So, basically Mishra is telling me that all the illustrations in childhood textbooks, etc...were all a lie? KIDDING. Mostly.
I find it really interesting that not many studies have been done on how illustrations affect education, whether it be on a small elementary scale or a university level. I would think that, in relation to the different ways people learn, whether it be visual, hands-on, aural, or any of the other methods, there would have been a couple of different ones. Based on the way Mishra sums up the article, it's seems like a pretty fascinating area of study, especially regarding how well we learn something when we see it in front of us in an image and not spelled out in words.
How useful are images for learning though? When two people see on one image, they come away with different constructions of it in their minds - and the point the image is trying to convey may take root in different ways in different minds. So maybe images are less of learning tool (at least at a higher education level - I think they are invaluable in kindergarten classroom) and more of a jump off point for discussions that they might inspire? A starting point for the swapping of ideas?
It actually makes me think a little bit about the responses to the McCloud pieces we read last week. They didn't really have a midway point, at least from the people I talked to; they either liked it or didn't like it, which is something I've heard a lot in discussions about the different ways we learn (i.e. the person who says, "I can't stand teachers who read off powerpoints to teach a class! I can't focus" or the person who really likes dissection labs because of the hands-on aspect). While I found the visual images of the comic really helpful when trying to understand the material, other people didn't. So how does that affect me as someone who is learning? Am I doomed in my line of study because it largely favors picture-less texts?
I think I got a little away from the main point of the article, but these were some of the things I was thinking about as I was reading it.
I think that images can have great use for learning, even at the highest academic levels. Although reality can be skewed in the images, as Wolf especially points out, at a higher level, shouldn't we be scrutinizing anything presented to us more critically, anyway? As a visual, hands-on learner, I constantly find myself frustrated by the mass amount of imageless text assigned on a daily basis. I think that images and illustrations can have their place in any text, if only to break it up a little. I was especially convinced of this after reading the McCloud text last week. It was an academic piece made up almost exclusively of images. For me, it brought me out of my black and white words on a page mindset and let my imagination roam, if only a little bit, so that I could better understand the piece. I know that many people do not have the same issues as I do when it comes to massive pieces of text, but sometimes I need something to get me out of the black and white nonsense. It helps sort out my thoughts. I understand that graphs and charts may be misleading, but as a reader, you must be able to analyze it critically in order to understand. No text stands alone and you must take anything with a grain of salt.
ReplyDeleteI agree that images can be interpreted in many different ways. People have unique perspectives formed by cultural experiences, and these perspectives will likely result in slightly different interpretations of the same piece of art. However, isn't the same thing true with traditional text? Our whole class could read the same literary work, but I doubt any of us would remember exactly the same details from it as anyone else. These differences between learners make the educational process much more difficult, but they also make learning interesting. Differences in interpretation provide the opportunity for discussion and debate which can increase the knowledge base of all those involved.
ReplyDeleteSince writing will always cause different reactions in different readers, I think images are just as viable and useful as texts for the purpose of sharing ideas and teaching. In fact, I often find them more useful. Large blocks of text get to be repetitious and dull to examine, and images provide a welcome relief and a valuable means of seeing data and other information in a new and provocative way.