UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The relation of primary representational systems and visualization training to spatial relations aptitude Forwood, Gloria Mary 1981-12-31

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
UBC_1981_A8 F67.pdf [ 4.26MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0054320.json
JSON-LD: 1.0054320+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0054320.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0054320+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0054320+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0054320+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0054320 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0054320.txt
Citation
1.0054320.ris

Full Text

THE RELATION ()F PRIMARY REPRESENTATIONAL SYSTEMS  AND  V I S U A L I Z A T I O N TRAINING TO S P A T I A L RELATIONS APTITUDE by GLORIA MARY FORWOOD B.Ed., The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , M.Ed., The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , A THESIS SUBMITTED  IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF  THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department o f C o u n s e l l i n g  We a c c e p t t h i s  1969 1977  thesis  to the r e q u i r e d  as c o n f o r m i n g standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF B R I T I S H February,  Psychology)  COLUMBIA  I 98 I  (c) G l o r i a M a r y F o r w o o d , .1981  In p r e s e n t i n g  this  thesis  in  partial  r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that fr.eely  the  fulfilment  at  the  Library  a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y .  shall I  of  this  scholarly  granted  by  the  be  D e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of this shall  thesis  n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n  Department o f C o u n s e l l i n g  Psychology  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h  Columbia  2075 Wesbrook P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T  IW5  March,  198 1  make  further  copying  may  thesis Head  financial  permission.  of i t  agree  of  I t i s understood for  the  University  that permission f o r extensive purposes  of  for my that gain  ii  Abs^r_ac_t  It  has  ability  long  t o use  research  been  their  studies  theory,  by  external  internal  which  to  bring  One  and  give  aptitude  which  ability  to m e n t a l l y  p e r s o n may system, but system purpose  of  relationship  relations  test,  visualization spatial The grade  subjects  10 s t u d e n t s  to  that  in  a  the  way  is influenced  not  also  use  their which  may  be  by  their  sensory  input  attention, respond  system  affected is  and  to  by  a  the  person's  visualization,  tests.  This  or  enough v i s u a l  study  was, the  system and,  and  first,  to  strength  to  improve  is  that  a  input  representational mentally.  The  investigate  the  of  the  visual  a  spatial  determine  whether  performance  second, would  i t  the  aptitude  It i s possible  image and m a n i p u l a t e  training  relations  suggested  but  they  systems,  relations  betw.een  representational  their  image by means o f h i s o r h e r v i s u a l  that  this  to use  It is  Thus  n o t have a s t r o n g  to hold  many  manipulate o b j e c t s .  spatial see an  and  learning,  i t meaning.  representational  by  in  Programming,  information  primary  measured  their  environment  i t .  representational  information  in  understand information  response  channels,  people d i f f e r  to t r a i n people  more e f f e c t i v e l y .  and  their  internal  senses  Neurolinguistic  people receive only  various  that  have a t t e m p t e d  weaker m o d a l i t i e s recent  realized  on  performance  on  the  test. i n the s t u d y were 67 male in  a  large,  urban,  and  71  multi-ethnic  female high  iii  school.  A l l wrote one form of the Space  of  Dif f e r e n t i a l  the  questionnaires systems.  Of  Aptitude  Tests  Relations as  well  designed to i d e n t i f y primary those  students  who  c l a s s i f i e d as v i s u a l s , 20 were  groups and the groups randomly assigned or the c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n .  most  divided to the  One week l a t e r ,  group underwent v i s u a l i z a t i o n group took p a r t i n an  be  training  unrelated  two  clearly into  two  experimental  The same procedure  to d i v i d e the n o n - v i s u a l s .  as  representational  could  randomly  subtest  was  followed  the experimental  while  activity.  the After  control another  week, a l l the students wrote an a l t e r n a t e form o f the  space  relations test. An  a n a l y s i s o f variance  p o s t t e s t scores of  the  was run u s i n g the  and the v i s u a l or non-visual  students.  There  was  no  on  either  the  pretest  or  visual the  and  classification  significant  between the a r i t h m e t i c means of the groups  pretest  and  difference non-visual  posttest  and  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the p o s t t e s t a r i t h m e t i c of the group who r e c e i v e d the c o n t r o l group. between  mean  v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g and that of  No s i g n i f i c a n t  classification  no  as  interactions  visual  or  were  found  non-visual  and  membership i n the c o n t r o l or experimental group. Contrary  to e x p e c t a t i o n s ,  the primary  system d i d not appear to be r e l a t e d to  representational  performance  s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t , and the v i s u a l i z a t i o n  on  the  training did  not appear to have improved the s t u d e n t s ' performance on the test.  The unexpected r e s u l t s may have occurred  because  of  iv  i n a c c u r a t e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the s t u d e n t s systems,  inadequate  visualization  7  representational  training,  or  the  i n a p p r o p r i a t e u s e o f group r a t h e r t h a n i n d i v i d u a l  methods  classify  also  and t r a i n t h e s t u d e n t s .  been i n f l u e n c e d by o t h e r  The r e s u l t s  f a c t o r s such  as  may  the  subjects, their  inexperience with tests,  or the r e l a t i v e  s t r e n g t h of t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l  Further research w i l l the r e s u l t s Thesis  be n.eeded t o c l a r i f y  of t h i s s t u d y .  Supervisors  their  age  Dr.  fi.  Tolsma  the  of  to  have the  intelligence, systems.  meaning  of  V  TABLE OF CONTENTS  Chapter  I  - Introduction  1  Problem L i m i t a t i o n s and Assumptions Importance of the Study Chapter  2  - L i t e r a t u r e Review  Chapter  3  4  - Method  5  12 14 18 29  P i l o t Study Experimental Study Subjects Experimental Design.... Treatment Procedure Instrumentation  29 31 31 32 32 34 35  Hypotheses  40  - Results.-  42  Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2 Hypothesis 3 Hypothesis 4 Post Hoc Analyses Chapter  1 5 / 12  N e u r o l i n g u i s t i c Programming Learning Modalities Spatial A b i l i t i e s Chapter  •  - Discussion Summary.... Analysis.. Suggestions  42 43 44 44 45  f o r F u r t h e r Research  Bibliography  50 50 51 55 57  Appendix A - S c r i p t of the V i s u a l i z a t i o n T r a i n i n g Sessions Appendix B - L e a r n i n g S t y l e S e l f Appendix C - Questionnaire  63 Inventory  7 1 74  vi  LIST OF TABLES  Table  I  - DAT  P r e t e s t Scores by V i s u a l / N o n v i s u a l  Classification Table .II  - DAT  42  P o s t t e s t Scores by V i s u a l / N o n v i s u a l  C l a s s i f i c a t i o n by T r a i n i n g Table  III - DAT  Scores and  Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Responses..  43 48  vi i  Ackn^Mdgemexii I would thesis  supervisor,  members, D r . advice  t o e x p r e s s my s i n c e r e  like  H.  and h e l p  I would encouragement printing  Dr.  R.  R a t z l a f f and D r . during  also  like  and L.  to  t o thank my  thesis.  my  to  my  committee  Greenberg, f o r t h e i r  the c o m p l e t i o n of t h i s  and s u p p o r t  of this  Tolsma,  appreciation  husband,  study.  Garry,  and f o r h i s i n v a l u a b l e  for his  help  i n the  CHAPTER I lQtxQd.UC.ti The  realization  their  research for  various studies  visual,  learning,  t o use  results  successes  through also  preferred  modalities  such  a new  one.  Many  preferences  tactile  modes  at  learning  material  different  senses.  methods  attempted  modalities  research  to  or  teaching and  ability  people's  these  matched  t h e i r weaker of  only  kinesthetic,  their  have  in their  i n l e a r n i n g i s not  have measured n o t  them  Investigators  students  senses  also  to  students'  that people d i f f e r  auditory,  but  presented  The  n  Problem The  use  o  to  more  have  of  to teach  effectively.  been  somewhat  inconsistent. With Bandler  their  and  concept  Grinder  (1975,  comprehensive  theory  and  represent  information  two  influences  on  setting,  brought  channel,  and  in and  an  to  organization  one's  taken  and  to  The  systems and  even  which people environment.  processings  attention  system.  behavior  by  their  i n t e r n a l response  auditory,  Information  process  about  Programming,  have o u t l i n e d an  information  gustation, of  Neurolinguistic  1976)  the  representational  kinesthesis,  visual,  of  this  a representational the  of  by  a  the  sensory are  i s accomplished  it  input  vision,  olfaction,  sensory  They  external input meaning channels  although  mainly  input  see  audition,  through  kinesthetic representational  i n t h r o u g h one  receive  sensory  i t , giving  more  the the  systems.  system  may  2  well  be s t o r e d  occurs,  in  f o r example,  (visual  input)  representation) her  on t h a t  to r e l y  addition, they  (kinesthetic  image, and makes h i s o r  l e a r n to v a l u e  their  the as  environments. of sensory  one s e n s o r y  develop  information  an  effective  Gradually,  information  i t  system  more  more t h a n  they  in  completely  the  and  most  experiences.  Thus t h a t s y s t e m  system" —  becomes  In  others,  have  a v a i l a b l e i n t h a t system with which  representational  more  to organize  the  "primary  t h e one w h i c h t h e p e r s o n  values  most.  Another  body  of  research  has  abilities,  which i n v o l v e the e x t e n t  perceive  and  compare  pattern  may  manipulate Attempts  be  pattern's  presented  objects have  in  been  experiments  designed  perception  and  successful,  the  had more f a i l u r e  a  spatial  person  to  to  help  teach  concerned  remain  from which a  spatial  success.  have  and  (visualization).  spatial  subjects  with  can  (perception),  imagination  made  than  with  (perspective-taking),  perspective-taking  but those  dealt  to which  u n c o n f u s e d by t h e v a r y i n g p e r s p e c t i v e s  have  expression  feeling.  on one type  by u s i n g  distinctions  uses  feeling  This  even when a n o t h e r would be more a p p r o p r i a t e .  will  their  system.  a facial  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system  f o r dealing with come  a  than a v i s u a l  c h i l d r e n grow, t h e y  situations,  and  experiences  rather  from a p a r t i c u l a r tool  representational  when a p e r s o n s e e s  but  d e c i s i o n based As  may  another  abilities:  improve been  visualization  their fairly training  3  The  effectiveness  visualization the  is s t i l l  inconsistent  which w i l l degree  of  be  results  reviewed  involve  suggested  are  by  in.  the  training  spatial  and  requires or  instruction  not  facet if  of  spatial  B a n d l e r and  sensory  input  ability  Grinder channels  be  in  system  long  manipulation The  preferred  Secondly,  or  this  having  study  to the  visualization  and  skills  on  this  division  systems, visual  of  visual input  representational  enough  for  and  on  will the  to  auditory, as  the  mental  a  students  or  to_ system  spatial  attempt  classify  to by  grade  kinesthetic  indicated  then  representational  to  their  visual  true,  Furthermore,  t h r o u g h the  systems  success  study  is  directly  is, first,  visual,  system,  indicated  this  imagery  occur.  representational input  afford  visual  adequate.  a  clearly  images t o  as  individual's approach  of  purpose of  10 s t u d e n t s primary  retained  enough  of  representational  be  not  as  is  If  in  such  visualization  from  channel,  do  and  is  correct  occur  The  possibility  are  conceivably  not  that  concentrate not  areas,  but  Another  perception.  may  literature,  chapter.  in related  indicates  for  be'important,  abilities  perception could yet  may  spatial  reasons  the  next  a higher degree  than p e r s p e c t i v e - t a k i n g w h i c h does  in  the  in v i s u a l i z a t i o n .  r e s e a r c h which  more complex  suggested  training  in  Possible  fully  only  geometry, w h i c h draw on practice  instruction  controversial.  s p e c i f i c i t y of  some s t u d i e s  direct  of  by  their  compare  each  to  his  or  her  relations  test.  directly  teach  training  which  4  requires  them t o m e n t a l l y  which i n c o r p o r a t e s a favoured  see  Bandler  and  and  manipulate  Grinder's  objects  a p p r o a c h of  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l s y s t e m w i t h a weaker  The  specific  1.  to  o b j e c t i v e s of  identify  people  k i n e s t h e t i c primary  the  study  with  systems,  2.  who  to  group  those  representational t h e members o f  follows:  auditory,  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems,  measure o f p r e f e r r e d i n p u t  clearly  system t o g e t h e r  each  group  to  and  linking  one.  a r e as  visual,  and  using  favour  to randomly  an  and  a  one assign  experimental  or  a  control condition, 3.  t o compare t h e a p p r o a c h s u b j e c t s  t h e p r o b l e m s on identified 4.  primary  5.  solving  wi'th  their  DAT  Space  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems, obtained  by v i s u a l s and  on  the  non-visuals  (auditories  kinesthetics), to t r a i n a l l experimental  skills  by h a v i n g  subjects  them c r e a t e m e n t a l  in visualization  images and  i m a g i n e d sounds o r f.eelings w i t h v i s u a l 6.  in  Space R e l a t i o n s T e s t  t o compare t h e s c o r e s  Relations Test or  the DAT  take  t o engage the  activity takes  images,  c o n t r o l group i n a career  which i s u n r e l a t e d  t h e same amount  of  connect  exploration  to v i s u a l i z a t i o n but time  as  the  which  visualization  training, 7.  t o compare e a c h  u s i n g an Test,  subject's  a l t e r n a t e form  w i t h h i s or her  of  score  score  the on  DAT  on  a  posttest,  Space  Relations  the p r e t e s t ,  5  8.  to determine  membership  in  participation and  the  relationships,  the  visual  or  i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l  improvement  in  scores  i f any,  between  non—visual  group,  or control  from  the  condition,  pretest  to  the  pos t t e s t .  L i l l l i t a i i Q J i s . and Certain  A^s_ump_iion,s  limitations  First,  the r e s u l t s  large  urban  According  approximately  a  also  addition,  groups w h i l e groups. together  to take  another  multi-ethnic of  the  a  in  a  backgrounds.  school  wide  population,  variety  trained  these  in  other  study  had  mini—course.  a l l o f the  experimental  with  a l l the  teachers  the c l a s s e s  the  of  planning  t e a c h e r worked  the p o s s i b i l i t y  study.  I t a l i a n — s p e a k i n g homes.  part i n a career  team-teaching  this  ten students  The p a r t i c i p a n t s  both  on  E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g homes, 28% from  a r e from  one i n s t r u c t o r  Although  experiment,  survey  to grade  homes, and 15% from  backgrounds.  chosen  have  38% come from  remaining students  language  In  who  1980  Chinese-speaking The  are s p e c i f i c  school  to  have been imposed  who  control  regularly took  part  of an e x p e r i m e n t e r  work in  effect  the does  exis t. Furthermore, planning be  the study,  validly  kinesthetic their  primary  assumptions  have  i t was assumed t h a t  classified  preferred  students  certain  as  having  been  the  made.  students  visual,  In could  auditory,  or  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l s y s t e m s on the b a s i s o f  sensory  i n p u t system,  would show a c l e a r  tendency  and t h a t  enough o f the  towards  each  of  the  6  preferred  input  systems  B a n d l e r and G r i n d e r  imply  t a k e n i n t h r o u g h one representational same as t h e  to  make  the  s y s t e m and s t o r e d  s y s t e m , the p r e f e r r e d representational  t o show t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e s y s t e m and  comparing the  the  having,  used  to  and r e p o r t s I t was  of p r e f e r r e d  of  the  the  and  females.  same made  preferred system  by  student  to  spatial  relations  he o r she  sense-related  reported predicates  groups  and  to d i v i s i o n to  t h e r e w o u l d be no d i f f e r e n c e  Research  into  reaction  s t u d e n t s from d i f f e r e n t e t h n i c backgrounds  males  and  concerning  between  the  spatial  o f members o f d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s i s s u m m a r i z e d  Kagan and  Kogan  that  the c u l t u r a l  perceptual reflected as  in  Several  research  of a s o c i e t y  and p r o p r i o c e p t i v e  has  studies  performance  on  skills,  a  but  v i s u a l i z a t i o n measures  Schackman, and  spatial  have f o u n d t h a t boys  Serbin,  1978; M i l l e r  generally  affect  i n t h e i r primary representational  their  on s p a t i a l  values  This  its  by  shown  members'  this  would  systems  as  abilities  1976;  and M i l l e r ,  be well  test.  have o u t p e r f o r m e d  (Salkind,  to  between  abilities  (1970).  the  activities.  the d i f f e r e n t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l training,  of  each  a l s o assumed t h a t , w i t h r e s p e c t  visualization  is  This  representational  t o h i s o r h e r use  be  An a t t e m p t was  to the degree of v i s u a l imagery  and  system  measure  solve  may  different  system.  the r e s u l t i n g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f  method he o r she  problems,  primary  in a  input  a s s u m p t i o n has b e e n made i n t h i s s t u d y .  input  possible.  that, although information  input  primary  research  girls  Conner,  1977),  and  7  that  t h i s d i s p a r i t y has been r e d u c e d  S c h a c k m a n , and S e r b i n ;  Miller  by  and M i l l e r ;  1976).  The norms i n t h e DAT M a n u a l a l s o  obtain  slightly  subtest.  However,  significant abilities Miller  other  (Ciganko,  and M i l l e r  cultural  scores  differences  any d i f f e r e n c e s  while  higher  training  on  Eliot  the  1973;  the  Bruner,  and J F r a l l e y ,  i n d i c a t e that Space  investigators between  (Conner,  Relations  have  found  sexes 1978;  in  expectations  ability  and  by  Cohen,  sex  differences  t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s have b e e n  to  in  found  no  spatial 1976).  ( 1 9 7 7 ) p o i n t o u t t h a t many w r i t e r s  in spatial  boys  be  believe due  to  child  rearing,  many  cultures  in  ( E l i o t and F r a l l e y , 1976; M i t c h e l m o r e , 1 9 7 6 ) ,  they  seem t o e x i s t among E s k i m o s , C a n a d i a n  or Australian  Aborigines, both  sexes  Indians,  c u l t u r e s where p e r c e p t u a l (Mitchelmore,  1976).  skill Thus  is  any  do  not  valued  culturally-  p r o d u c e d d i f f e r e n c e s by s e x s h o u l d a l s o be r e f l e c t e d i n primary representational each  s y s t e m w h i c h has  in  been  adopted  the by  individual.  IfflpJ2r_t.a.oce o f the. S_tud_y_ I f B a n d l e r and G r i n d e r a r e c o r r e c t t h a t many i n d i v i d u a l s have f a i l e d their representational deleted  a  discovered  part  of  that  from  such  The a  more d i f f i c u l t  i s shown t o a f f e c t s p a t i a l  a l s o c u t him o f f  assertion  t o d e v e l o p one o r more  experience.  i n t e r p e r s o n a l communication it  their  systems, then those i n d i v i d u a l s  their  clinically  in  and  have makes  f o r a person:  relations ability,  training  have  authors  deletion  career  of  i f  t h e n i t can opportunities  8  which  require  Descriptive  an  Geometry,  Engineering,  of  however  study  must, however, be  or a  used  the  clinical  in this  rather  training  reap  the b e n e f i t s broader  identifying  vocational  and  might  the p r i m a r y difficulties their  systems.  Bandler  representational  individual  clinical  and  improved  have  in  and  Grinder systems  sessions;  by  all  society  If would  skills The  possibility  systems o f order to  identify  their  better  develop  new  clients''  t e a c h them new  a t t e m p t i n g t o do  of  students  to  h e l p them  and  for  schools.  the  in  not  of  also  school  in  systems.  possibilities.  in  have  systems  communication  representational  fully  directions  and  suggest  the  Grinder  use  taught  students  systems.  they  new  the  been  the  If will  of  avocational  difficulties and  not  the  s h o u l d be  i n terms o f  understand  primary  suggest  were e f f e c t i v e ,  o f the s t u d y  have  Bandler  Perhaps  systems  it  since  representational  also  practice.  such  who  has  measuring  representational  results  research.  might  ability.  conclusion,  a method o f o b j e c t i v e l y study  have a l l  effect  work, and  educational  fields  representational  Programming  of  Design,  confirmed,  than e x p e r i m e n t a l  This  and  more  classification  developed  other  another  tentative  theory of N e u r o l i n g u i s t i c operationalized  are  tentatively,  Drafting,  Artistic  Sewing, and  this  u n d e r d e v e l o p m e n t o f one This  visualize.  i n connection with v i s u a l i z a t i o n  hypotheses  indicate,  to  Mechanics,  Architecture,  been m e n t i o n e d the  ability  ones  this  in  with  9  a  group, t h i s  study  examines  the f e a s i b i l i t y  s u c h t r a i n i n g as a f o r m o f d e v e l o p m e n t a l In a d d i t i o n ,  this  e x p e r i m e n t might  of  the c o n t r a d i c t i o n s  of  visualization abilities.  directly  a t the  perceptual only  or perspective  this  is  manipulation  an  effective  skills,  way  of  who have p o i n t e d  "a  training  of  some  an  set  of  individual's  out  ability  (Psychological  dividing  native  capacity  clear  aptitude After  into  an e x p e r i m e n t  relations  by v a r i o u s  Relations  assessed.  to  a  one  that  this  defined  formal  not effort  yet is  as with  or s e t  language,  instructed  be  would  acquire  to  1948).  further  and  by  developed were in  they  the reasons  to  regarded  step  methods, and r e t e s t e d ,  measures had  Because no  the  limitations  i n which s u b j e c t s  aptitude,  r e s u l t s and c o n c l u d e d  Spatial  then  Corporation,  go  relations  shown  the  t o speak  (1965)  spatial  for  I t has been  Carpenter, Finley, et a l  for  suggest  ( u s u a l l y s p e c i f i e d ) knowledge, s k i l l ,  music..."  capacity.  is  characteristics  of r e s p o n s e s , s u c h as t h e a b i l i t y produce  training  at  involve  would  systems,  as  symptomatic  aimed  than  w h i c h need  relations ability  o u r common d e f i n i t i o n s o f a p t i t u d e . or  is  rather  i t s success  some  teaching  the t r a i n i n g  of  condition  on t h e  systems  representational  writers  to c l a r i f y  images.  i f spatial  to primary  support other  taking  channels,  of visual  Finally, related  input  help  s  Because  introducing  education.  in the research  representational  the s e n s o r y  that  found  of  tested spatial  found  no  f o r success  on  been made  successfully to  develop  10  Spatial  Relations  capacity  ability  most  i n a group c o u l d vary  n a t i v e c a p a c i t y but those  in  widely,  those  with  high  low d e v e l o p m e n t s h o u l d  gain  more  than  Snow  (1976,  in aptitude should  differences  in psychological  measures  should  A p t i t u d e s , he  not  be  be  understood without The  hypotheses  i n v o l v e s not  only  t r a i n i n g , but represent learned  t h e way  the w o r l d .  and  can  be  terms of C a r p e n t e r , the  this ability  to  i n w h i c h an Thus t h e  further Finley,  individual  "aptitude"  potential  of a p t i t u d e , as  The  as m e a s u r e d by  an  opposed  The  be  s t a t e d as  our  aptitude  hypotheses which t h i s  t e s t may  studies  have  implying  that  can  a  skill  with  has  learned  itself  has  training.  to view  a  R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t . Form S) o f  capacity. one,  a  person's  been  designed  test.  e x p e r i m e n t has  the  the time  static  of  to been  In  native  f o l l o w s , u s i n g the n u l l  a r i t h m e t i c mean on  be  aptitude  et a l , t h e a p t i t u d e a t any  i m p l i e s a profound d i f f e r e n c e i n  I.  by  expected  that  acquire  changed  be  other.  imply  c u r r e n t s t a t e o f development of the  This d e f i n i t i o n  can  processes  t o each  study  aptitude  predictors.  Many  learning  reference  of  the  that  interactions,  that  individual  simply  experience.  treatment  as  and  as  low o r medium suggests  understood  processes  n e i t h e r a p t i t u d e c o n s t r u c t s nor fully  also  n o t p e r m a n e n t , and  to d e v e l o p o r c h a n g e w i t h and  1977)  seen  c l a i m s , are  shown a p t i t u d e  developed  and  differences  to  the  w i t h medium o r h i g h d e v e l o p m e n t b u t o n l y  native capacity.  is  cases,  pretest students  (  form: DAT  whose  Space primary  i  1  representational be  system  appeared  significantly different  primary  from  representational  non-visual  (auditory  Statistical  or  to be that  system  visual  would  of s t u d e n t s appeared  not  whose to  be  kinesthetic). H i/K.,-U-u  Hypothesis:  0  H , : M 4 M.*. t  2.  The  arithmetic  Relations  the  s u b t e s t , Form T)  representational be  mean on  system  of  students  appeared  significantly different  primary  posttest  from  representational  to be that  system  (  DAT  whose visual  Space primary  would  of s t u d e n t s appeared  not  whose to  be  non-vis u a l . Statistical  Hypothesis:  H :/(, - ^ D  H 3.  The  arithmetic  received  receive  Statistical  4. the  There  mean on  different  participation Statistical  from  would  not  that of students  H i/i,-M 0  who be  who  did  z  no s i g n i f i c a n t  primary  interaction  representational  i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l  Hypothesis:  of students  training.  Hypothesis:  identified  M i  training  visualization  would be  :  the p o s t t e s t  visualization  significantly not  ;  H  a  : M =M {  or v  -  system  the c o n t r o l * ^4  between and  group.  12  CHAPTER 2 Literature  R e v i ew  N^yxc^ijigui^iic Programming I n The S t r u c t u r e o f M a g i c I ( 1 9 7 5 ) and The S t r u c t u r e o f M a g i c JJL ( 1 9 7 6 ) , in  Bandler  i n f o r m a t i o n by means o f t h e i r  then o r g a n i z e  that  w h i c h they authors effort their  the  have l e a r n e d  and  primary  input  give  to value  of  responses,  appropriately with their with people systems.  who  have  ' They  train  representational primary  different  highly visual  image, t o  emotional  pain  image o f  aware  of  Similarly, i s asked  Bandler  and  any  a  to t h e i r  cannot  use  to  Grinder  new  existing  respond,  husband as  body  woman  to s h i f t  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and  possible.  better  representational  these  her  your  she i s describe  looks  a t the  sensations  she i s  she  a l l her  describe  who  and  who  describe  a  more  and c o m m u n i c a t e  to  Then she i s t o t r y ,  become  experiencing.  deal  F o r e x a m p l e , a woman  you?" I f she  a s k e d t o make a m e n t a l what s h e s e e s .  can  of  with  i s a s k e d , "how do y o u f e e l as y o u s e e  husband n o t n o t i c i n g  the  t o an  that,  clients  s y s t e m s by l i n k i n g  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems.  However,  so  primary  their  systems  o f a l l the parts  they  experiences  and  personal  processes  i n p u t and r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l s y s t e m s choice  i t a  t h e most.  t o h e l p p e o p l e become c o n s c i o u s  take  systems  representational  go b e y o n d an e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e s e  greater  visual  e x p l a i n how p e o p l e  sensory  information  m e a n i n g by means o f  is  and G r i n d e r  is  undergoing  feeling  i t as this  into  a  clearly  as  process  in  1  Pa.iier.ns,  of  the  H. E r i c k s o n . M.D.  3  Hy_p_Qotic.  (19 75,  Iec.hDiau.es  of  Milton  p.190)*  By using the client's most highly valued r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l s y s t e m as a l e a d system, the c l i e n t can be h e l p e d to gain access t o new s t a t e s of awareness. F o r example: i n one o f o u r t r a i n i n g s e s s i o n s , a m i d d l e - a g e d p s y c h o l o g i s t c o m p l a i n e d t h a t he was u n a b l e t o make v i s u a l i m a g e r y , i n s p i t e o f t h e f a c t t h a t he had h i s c l i e n t s u s e t h i s technique. We had t h i s man p l a c e h i s body i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f p l a y i n g h i s piano ( h i s f a v o r i t e hobby). He was t h e n i n s t r u c t e d t o move h i s f i n g e r s i n t h e p a t t e r n of a f a m i l i a r tune, w i t h h i s e y e s c l o s e d , he was i n s t r u c t e d t o hear the t u n e i n t e r n a l l y a s w e l l as t o move h i s f i n g e r s . He was t h e n a s k e d t o l o o k down a t t h e k e y b o a r d . He e x c l a i m e d , " I c a n s.ee t h e keys and my f i n g e r s on t h e k e y b o a r d ! " He was t h e n i n s t r u c t e d t o l o o k up a t t h e r e s t of the l i v i n g room, a n d t h e n a t t h e p e o p l e i n t h e room. This technique of u s i n g highly valued representational s y s t e m s t o r e c o v e r and i m p r o v e i m p o v e r i s h e d o n e s is a common t e c h n i q u e i n o u r w o r k . The m a i n p r i n c i p a l i s simply to f i n d a s i t u a t i o n i n which the impoverished system o v e r l a p s the developed system.... The  authors  representational  suggest  systems  s e n s e - r e l a t e d words,  that  people's  c a n be i d e n t i f i e d by  o r " p r e d i c a t e s " , they  t h e i r o c c u p a t i o n s , i n t e r e s t s , and t a l e n t s .  in  Eattexos  Erickson.  have n o t i c e d  most  the often  In a d d i t i o n , M i l tan  UM.  (1975, p . 7 6 ) , they mention a d i f f e r e n c e  they  pjf i h g .  MJICLV  studying  use  and  primary  tiy^QO_tic_  between c l i e n t s  XechQiaues.  with  non-visual primary representational  visual  of  and  those  with  systems:  Many t i m e s , i n t h e c o u r s e o f t e a c h i n g a c l i e n t who has a most h i g h l y v a l u e d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l s y s t e m o t h e r t h a n v i s u a l , we have n o t i c e d t h e c l i e n t m a k i n g a d i s t i n c t i o n betw.een " i m a g i n g a p i c t u r e " and " s e e i n g a p i c t u r e " . In the f i r s t case, the c l i e n t , t y p i c a l l y , reports vague, r e l a t i v e l y u n f o c u s e d , s c h e m a t i z e d and u n s t a b l e visual images, w h i l e i n t h e second c a s e , t h e images have t h e focused, stable, f u l l , r i c h , v i v i d properties of direct v i s u a l input. In every case to date, the e x p e r i e n c e of " i m a g i n g a p i c t u r e " has a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t a verbal, i n t e r n a l d i a l o g u e , w h i l e t h e v i v i d v i s u a l i z a t i o n has no internal verbal dialogue associated with i t .  14  A p p a r e n t l y , t h e f i r s t c a s e i s one i n w h i c h the c l i e n t i s c o n s t r u c t i n g a p i c t u r e u s i n g h i s language system as the l e a d s y s t e m , w h i l e t h e s e c o n d i s a d i r e c t a c c e s s i n g of p i c t u r e s r e s i d i n g i n t h e non-dominant hemisphere. T h u s , one way w h i c h we have d e v e l o p e d t o a s s i s t the c l i e n t i n coming t o have the a b i l i t y to visualize v i v i d l y i s to teach him t o s h u t down h i s i n t e r n a l verbal dialogue.  LeaxQing  of  Mojlalliies  Bandler  and G r i n d e r ' s  learning  modalities.  longitudinal suggested abilities each  study  that  learning visual,  Morency  which, l i k e  children  the  develop  (1967) research in  Marcus  about v a r i o u s and  found  (1977)  gave  she  their  a  studies  reported  kinesthetic, or tactile  equally  in  questionnaire  to  preferences learning,  a  reviewed,  f a c t o r s w h i c h were i m p o r t a n t definite  on  perceptual  b e t w e e n g r a d e s one and t h r e e , b u t n o t  modality.  students  work was p r e c e d e d by many  to t h e i r  for as  auditory,  well  as f o r  d i f f e r i n g d e g r e e s of s t r u c t u r e , q u i e t , and s o on.  Teachers  given  t h e same q u e s t i o n n a i r e  some  these  f a c t o r s , b u t n o t o t h e r s , among thern  or k i n e s t h e t i c p r e f e r e n c e s . (1978) r e p o r t e d students  a study  responding  a preference  accurately  Similarly,  perceived  Austin  to p l a c e  tactile,  and  to a l e a r n i n g s t y l e  f o r l e a r n i n g by t a c t i l e  inventory  or  kinesthetic  objective observers  perception.  Visuals  were  who u s e t h e i r e y e s a s t h e  of i n f o r m a t i o n a c q u i s i t i o n and t r a n s f o r m  means,  input. of  p e o p l e on a c o n t i n u u m b e t w e e n t h e " v i s u a l " of  the  indicated  1945, V i k t o r L o w e n f e l d d e v e l o p e d a s e r i e s  " h a p t i c " modes  Donovan  by Dunn and P r i c e where some o f  s u p p l e m e n t e d , b u t n o t r e p l a c e d , by v i s u a l In  visual,  of  and  the  defined  as  main  tactile  tests  channel  sensations  15  to v i s u a l  images.  H a p t i c s , on  of t h e i r  i n f o r m a t i o n through  and  no need t o t r a n s f o r m  feel  images.  They  difficult  view  the  t o g e t an  become l o s t  of  on  the  world  i n the d e t a i l s . 28% as  the continuum.  Lowenfeld's  tactile  overview  s u b j e c t s as v i s u a l s , middle  the o t h e r hand, a c q u i r e  sensations  of  the  haptics,  and  or  factors.  The  a n a l y s i s was  validity  of  n i n e , t e n , and visual-haptic  tests did  not  percentages  in  each  47% of h i s as  in  the  of  given  procedures,  results  that  chance  was  some  accurate  category  for  only  also  the study w i t h grade  found  give  they  were i n c l u d e d , and  replicated  i t  (1975) q u e s t i o n e d  details  s t u d e n t s d i d a p p e a r t o be d i s t r i b u t e d on the  25%  done t o a c c o u n t  e l e v e n s t u d e n t s and  find  i n f o r m a t i o n was  Lowenfeld's  q u e s t i o n e d by S c h l e n k e r , who  visual  because  classified  conclusions, since l i t t l e  statistical  and  scene  However, D o r e t h y  means  into  Lowenfeld  controls for threats to v a l i d i t y  minimal  kinesthetic  subjectively  test c o n s t r u c t i o n techniques  few  or  most  a  were  of  the  results.  The  continuum,  but  different  from  Lowenfeld's. M o s t of t h e r e s e a r c h c i t e d attempt  be  made  to  teach  above  suggested  students  in  their  learning modality.  I n a d d i t i o n , P f l e g e r and  directly  theory of  linked  the r e s e a r c h J.E.  Hill  the  on  learning  ( 1 9 7 6 ) , who  or a c o m b i n a t i o n f o r l e a r n i n g , and  and  some  preferred  Pulvino  Neurolinguistic  modalities,  that  (1977)  Programming, the  ideas  stated that individuals establish  of input channels t h a t they develop  as b e i n g t h e most ways  of  of one  useful  responding  in  16  keeping  with  suggested indicate  these.  B u i l d i n g on t h e s e  examining student  essays  ideas,  for  words  the p r e f e r r e d l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t y  by t h e a p p r o p r i a t e Attempts  the  and  which  teaching  match  teaching  means.  have  indeed  been  made  to  results  inconsistent.  and  On the one hand, Donovan  that kindergarten  their  learning  pupils i n  modality  scored  r e a d i n g m e a s u r e s , and b o t h other  that  taught  high  (1973?  retarded  found  they  s t u d i e s w h i c h have had  Kelleher  cited  Patridge  similar  males aged n i n e  learning  task  better,  d i f f e r e n c e between  on a v i s u a l  task.  tactile  and S e g a l  kinesthetic children. improvement visual-  Gaddies  Burcham  better  when  al  (1977)  who  paired  there  a  were  was  no  learners successful  boy  to  write  (1976) t h e s u c c e s s f u l use o f t a c t i l e and  techniques Taschow  and found  and v i s u a l  a brain-damaged  cited  auditory  described  on  1975)  thirteen an  for  Lilly  et  although  auditory  (1975)  approach to teaching  spell  (1976)  results.  to  (1978)  higher  i n Newcomer and Goodman,  significant  the  and  been  placement  significantly  i n auditory d i s c r i m i n a t i o n learned  associate  and  congruent  p r e f e r r e d mode, and  that retarded  have  Austin  c h i l d r e n performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y  i n their  would  then  methods t o l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t i e s , b u t t h e  found  authors  in  teaching  learning  (1970) and C a u k i n s (1971)  students  achieved  in spelling  auditory-kinesthetic-tactile  needs o f s t u d e n t s  with  discussed  when t a u g h t  technique,  any p r e f e r r e d  disabled  which  modality.  the by  a  meets  1 7  On t h e o t h e r significant Janssen  advantage  with  preferences;  did  investigators  f o r students  (1973) and S e r a p i g l i a  working  other  hand, many  young  (1974)  children  A u s t i n and  included well,  (1978)  that v i s u a l  or  One s t u d y  cited  kinesthetic  auditory several  or a u d i t o r y l e a r n e r s  and s t i l l  i n A u s t i n and  and combined  found  matching  t h a t a u d i t o r y l e a r n e r s seem  learners,  presentation, students. tended  abilities  both  better,  students  modalities  modalities,  Students better  Janssen,  although  whether  approach)  in  or  they whole  h i g h i n one m o d a l i t y  is  Goodman  do  the  students  there  low  Robinson  both  words  than  in  and low i n t h e  auditory found  and  by  (visual  a l l  learners  those  taught  of  for  (1972)  auditory  were  better  mode  the v i s u a l  higher reading scores  i n congruent  Why  own s t u d y ,  higher  obtained  (auditory  of  and to  as  A f t e r an  and t h a t a u d i t o r y methods a r e b e t t e r  had t h e most d i f f i c u l t y .  that  Newcomer  regardless  However, i n t h e i r  t o do  article  t o be no a d v a n t a g e .  (1975) c o n c l u d e d visual  their  preferences  o f the  than  to  Donovan's  modality  literature,  result  mentioned  e x t e n s i v e review  all  this  visual  no  placement.  no b e t t e r when t h e t e a c h i n g method was matched  modality.  only  found  congruent obtained  with  Donovan  r e s e a r c h e r s who f o u n d  in  have  visual low  in  phonics approach).  other  did  no  placement. this  inconsistency  in  the  research?  Waugh, Newcomer and Goodman, and A u s t i n and Donovan  suspected  classifying  that the d i f f i c u l t y  students  by p r e f e r r e d  might  l i e i n t h e method o f  learning  modality.  The  18  construct  validity  questionable.  of  Newcomer  assumption  of  equal  students  on  a  instructional in  reality,  invalidate it  does  the  and  Goodman  used  also  visual-auditory  techniques  theory  was  This  often  criticized when  continuum  which e m p h a s i z e d  i n c l u d e d others-. the  tests  d i f f e r e n c e s between s c o r e s  one  the  placing  and  some  modality  inconsistency  but,  does  not  of p r e f e r r e d l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t i e s ,  but  i n d i c a t e a need  effects  perceptual  for further research  of m a t c h i n g t e a c h i n g methods  to c l a r i f y  to modality  the  preference.  2p.a£ial AJ2Jj,i_tie_s_ "Spatial (1951; c i t e d  Abilities" in Eliot  i s a r a t h e r broad  and  Fralley,  1976)  term w h i c h  divided  French  into  three  factors: Perceptual accurately  patterns the may  Visuali zation — the a b i l i t y to use v i s u a l m a n i p u l a t e o b j e c t s i n the i m a g i n a t i o n .  and  into  (1954) t h o u g h t  play  difficult,  but  di-fference  lies  the  the ability to perceive to compare them to e a c h o t h e r ?  Orientation — the a b i l i t y t o r e m a i n u n c o n f u s e d by v a r y i n g p e r s p e c t i v e s from w h i c h a s p a t i a l pattern be presented?  Zimmerman comes  — and  examined  the  interrelated.  i n the of  Taylor  type  the  each as  task.  Other  Frederickson  (1970),  their  shapes a c c o r d i n g  of task  these  factors  becomes  thought  more  that  the  of o r g a n i z a t i o n r e q u i r e d , not  that  in  a  (1967)  possibility  subjects di-ffered dimensional  sequentially,  S m i t h and  difficulty  that  imagery  the  three  factors  f o r example,  perception to  investigators  their  of  two  found and  "perceptual  in  have are that three  style"!  19  those  who  were g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d by  orientation their  (field  judgements  (field  Preston was  d e p e n d e n t ) showed  than d i d  independent),  consistency  than  and  imagery a f t e r matrices  constructed  subjects  approximated  the  year  that in  supposed  associated  with  external  the  internal  but  that  the  Similarly,  Fi gures T e s t ,  Both compared blind, and  later  sighted  task  but  best, blind.  patterns  groups.  was  and  stimulus of  spatial is  visual  recall his  actually  for adult  seen  for  and  six,  Peterson and  of  greater  task  with  of  that perception  (1978) f o u n d  (1976)  spatial blind,  the  by seen  i s more  closely  visual  imagery  characteristics,  there,  nonetheless.  p e r f o r m a n c e on  and  Marrnor  visualization  to  the be  and  sighted.  by  and  Embedded  related  Millar on  a mental r o t a t i o n t a s k , the  degree of  late  blind,  r o t a t i o n of  Zaback  abilities  children did equally well  followed  more  to  ability.  t h a t , on  The  experiment  imaginations  representation  Millar the  an  w h i c h measures p e r c e p t i o n ,  visual-spatial  both  children,  the  interrelationship  Bruner  with  by  in  influenced  between p e r c e p t i o n  recall  Peterson  with  so  judged  f o r matrices  matrices.  the  old  the  those  s u b j e c t s , although  stimulus  variation  were not  orientation  overlap  finding  greater  was  imagery a f t e r  an  and  that a Piagetian perspectives  fifteen  (1975) h y p o t h e s i z e d  who  shape  rotational  (1977) c o n c l u d e d  eleven,  those  yet  r e l a t e d to v i s u a l  nine,  observer  found a haptic the  followed the  of  objects  (1976)  the  early  that  blind  perception  sighted by  the  did early  significantly  20  affected  the s c o r e s  sighted.  of  Marraor and Zaback  subjects —  adults  errors  comparing  when  presented organize an  this  spatial  but  also  found  time —  The  took  i n the angle  subjects  of  well  and  of  visual  for  the  blind more  rotations, able  to  i m a g e r y , and  between the  the  made  however,  discrepancy  of  their  different  without  as  those  that  were,  the d i f f i c u l t y  as  not  longer  at  blind  representations  d i d increase  sighted  blind  two o b j e c t s  tactually.  increase  objects  the  the  task  two  f o r the  blind  in  this  Zimmerman's  idea  that  .experiment. Two s t u d i e s French's  three  lend  support  factors  represent  abilities.  Schroth  (1967)  manipulation  of v i s u a l  forms  and  Arts  majors, presumably  a representative  obtain  significantly  subtest there  Since  in He  of  the  belief  spatial  in  o n t h e DAT and research  scores  Aptitude  correlation  on  the  that  visual  Tests.  Furthermore,  between t h e A r t m a j o r s '  Meier  Ar_t Judgement Paper  concluded  does  tentatively  the  MPFB.  twenty-three  In  spatial  an  of  experiment  tests  were  spatial by  given  a  Board  ability t h a t the  ability  Barrett to  Test.  Form  and  t a p a more complex a s p e c t  college  Relations  relations  DAT may  is  majors d i d not  on t h e Space  u s i n g t h e Mi nnes o t a  the author  that  perception,  Test, f o u n d a r e l a t i o n s h i p between s p a t i a l a r t judgement,  spatial  relationships  discovered  trained  different  of the D i f f e r e n t j a l  previous  hierarchy  sample o f n o n - F i n e A r t s  was no s i g n i f i c a n t  scores  a  tested  common t o a l l a r t p r o d u c t i o n . Fine  to  than  (1953), group  of  21  undergraduate identify  students  groupings  were f o u n d —  third —  defined.  Subjects part  significantly no  advantage  also but  of  variables.  shape who  in  rated  on t h o s e  t o have some only  requires  well-defined  images, but of  the  of  as  the  and  problems  tests  that  shape  order,  an did  but  had  Imagery  recognition,  because o f the poor  concluded of  a  partially playing  i n shape  be t e n t a t i v e Barrett  lower  t h e above  commonality  children  of  Lindgren  between r e s u l t s  research  that  control  sufficient  spatial  of  recognition  other  spatial  was m a i n l y  to  clear, requires  directly  operations  vision  and t o u c h ?  easier  to r e l e a r n  visual  imagery form  with  have  examined  across  sensory  (1978) f o u n d a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n  aged s i x t o t h i r t e e n . and s t a t e d  form d i s c r i m i n a t i o n  concerned  investigators  on t a c t i l e - s p a t i a l  review o f research  tactual  solution  a high degree  spatial abilities,  modalities.  by  a  —  was  imagery  to  groupings  reasoning •—  run  shapes.  Although visual  distinct  mental  importance  o f the f a c t o r .  imagery  was  measuring s p a t i a l r e a s o n i n g .  manipulation  compare  Two  on s p a t i a l m a n i p u l a t i o n  this f i n d i n g could  only  analysis  recognition  their  better  appeared  definition  factor  s p a t i a l m a n i p u l a t i o n and  possible  important  and a  that  and v i s u a l - s p a t i a l Lolla  (1973) summarized a  transfer  of  training  had been c l e a r l y shown t o o c c u r learning  forms  in  shapes  i n one m o d a l i t y  another.  He  has been shown t o p l a y perception  and  in  also  giving  of  in  between made  noted  an i m p o r t a n t  the  tests  it that  role  in  verbal  22  information  about  demonstrated  a  that  design.  grade  Williams  two,  grade  undergraduate students processed representations Imaging  of  the  itself  Leibovitz,Cooper, people that  use  77%  and  not  Hart  those  i n one  who or  more o f  a  i s equal  connection  to  representational  the  to be  the  followed  by  imagery  (14%).  imagery Looking  v i e w , H a r t s o u g h and  Laffal  (1970)  i n v e s t i g a t o r s who  classified verbal  as  Roe  Biologists imagists.  the  (195i  Theoretical  writings  33%  to  1961),  Experimental  they  from  that  primary  the  found  subjects, imagery  olfactory-gustatory another  continued  point  of  work  of  could  be  the  people  in pictures —  t h e m s e l v e s as  to be  were  suggest  kinesthetic  and  that  were  indeed  of  of many s c i e n t i s t s  P h y s i c i s t s tended and  by  think  t a l k to  and  i m a g e r y was  v i s u a l irnagists — w h o who  modality  Grinder's  that  —  had  and  which i n d i c a t e d  found  imagists  They s t u d i e d had  imagery  visual.  These f i n d i n g s  (19%),  at  visual  f o r imaging,  modalities,  (16%),  and  that d i f f e r e n t  i n one  and  imagery  university  exclusively  others.  Visual  (1977)  same manner.  most o f t e n  Bandler  auditory  tactile  as  be  most common f o r m , f a v o u r e d  (18%),  several  i n the  research,  across  systems.  >and  auditory  showed dominance  i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n to previous imagery a b i l i t y  Aiken  (1972) d e t e r m i n e d  d i f f e r e n t modalities  of  deficient  need  six,  both  same p a t t e r n  and  Social verbal  P h y s i c i s t s were  and  they  or think.  found,  Scientists imagists usually  as and  while visual  23  In a s t u d y  of s p a t i a l  Space R e l a t i o n s mental  subtest  visualization  spatial  factor.  m e a s u r i n g the  of  DAT  ability  space,  been d e s i g n e d  be  scores  on  the  intensity  DAT  when s u b j e c t s  who  felt  strong  visualization, a greater  visual  performance  on  spatial  including  McKim  Dorethy theory because  not he  perceptual with  be  (1975) only  manipulate  objects  in  that  the  figures that  difficult.  In  addition,  relationship  test  and  the  which of  tasks  visualization  measured  that  observed  taught.  tests  more  (1972), Arnheim disagreed because  believed abilities.  i t s emphasis on  of that  belief  (1973)  (1969),  and  Lowenfeld's  the  experimental  individuals  Smith  that  closely drawing  a  could  use  spatial several, (1967).  Visual-Haptic  Indeed, N e u r o l i n g u i s t i c to  that  listed  with  h e l p i n g people  did  stimulus.  their  Lolla  clear,  determined  t e s t s was  to  subjects of  visualization (1973)  and  designed  easy m a n i p u l a t i o n  Ciganko  the  between  time  were  (1953) f o u n d  have s t a t e d  have  so  spatial  t h a n an  Many r e s e a r c h e r s can  relevant  dependent v a r i a b l e s a s s o c i a t e d with  stimulus  abilities  most  unambiguous  series  Barrett  b e t t e r , and  on  the  Te,st.s.,  as  rhythms  need f o r t h e  images  t o the  visualized  a  A p t i tude  the  subtest  positive  Alpha  by  that  comments and  a  were g i v e n  significantly  related  and  Space R e l a t i o n s  of s u s t a i n e d  stimulate  t o be  o f d i f f e r e n c e s i s not  (1974) d i s c o v e r e d  measured  Differential  mentally  clear  Glover  as  Manual d e s c r i b e s  to  three-dimensional  perception  the  would a p p e a r  The  to  abilities  methods  but  learn  new  Programming,  input  channels  24  and  representational  implies  that  this  Attempts to success. the  Those  s o r t of teach  found  their  perception  tests  increased?  Egeland  success  reading  on  the  not.  graders  trained  d r a w i n g s showed an but  b a c k g r o u n d s showed  less  g r a d e one  instruction  students  Me t r o p o l i t a n  had  engaged  Schackman  who  had  Weiderholt  completed  that  girls  over  Program  found  that  i n the  development disadvantaged (1969)  visual  greater  trained  Test  increasingly  Cowles  and  200  in  from  received  in listening a c t i v i t i e s ,  that  handicapped  (1968)  students  in and  found  noted  perception  improvement  R e a d i n e s s Tes t s t h a n a c o n t r o l  (1977) f o u n d  improved  Developmental  Resnick  showed a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  the  (1968)  perceptually  improvement.  and  Deblinger  Perception  acceleration  that  and  tests  in i d e n t i f y i n g objects  ability,  that  who  Frostig's  Similarly,  (1967)  aptitude  hand,  Visual  that  produced  Rawls  c h i l d r e n , who  other  but  mixed  have  training.  Frostig-Horne  with  discrimination  and  handicapped students  them,  perception  learning  Elkind  the  have met  visual  visual  to  learned.  abilities.  on  (1967) and  Perception,  students did  this  on  also  be  perception  children in  t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e on  of V.isua.1  of  and  (1971),  worksheets of  detailed  on  in subjects'  scores  unavailable  abilities  after perceptual  non-perceptually  improved  can  with l e a r n i n g d i s a b l e d  skills  Hammi.ll  first  spatial  a group of d e a f that  ability  concentrating  most improvement  trained  had  systems which are  group,  Connor, S e r b i n , in  perceiving  on who and  25  embedded in  the  figures  study  Two taking  improved  did  other  ability.  Cox  describe  and  themselves.  trained  described  ( 1978)  had  relationships  scored  Verbal  training  a small  and  on  Priddle  (1977)  tests  feedback  relations  by  either  cards, or  by  body  group were b e t t e r groups i m p r o v e d  the  boys  was than  able  to  Those  their controls months  children  The  so on  a  later.  left-right  and  visual  cue  kinesthetically-taught  i d e n t i f y these p o s i t i o n s ,  somewhat  year  observer,  given.  instructions  movements.  five  the  seven  preschool  verbal  perspective  group o f  s e v e n weeks and  taught  in  between o b j e c t s ,  s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher  posttest  although  not.  studies  olds  in this a b i l i t y ,  i n more g e n e r a l  spatial  but  both  perspective  skills . Experiments inconsistent Fralley, having  in visualization  results.  1976)  Brinkman  described  taken geometry  (1966?  a study  lessons  training  have  had  in  Eliot  cited  i n which grade 8  including  pattern  m a n i p u l a t i o n , showed a s i g n i f i c a n t improvement Space  Relations  posttest  C o n n e r , Schackman,  and  c h i l d r e n with a set  of  the of  not  Serbin  the  DAT  the  Space  embedded  figures  F o l d i ng  true  for  Relations pretest  Blocks  the  the  figures,  subtest.  Test  for  experimental  the  DAT  the  Likewise,  an  the  of  control  group.  on  grade  then t e s t e d  While  were p r e d i c t i v e  students, and  trained  Blocks Test,  scores  group,  them  one on  adaptation  posttest  Darrow  and  folding  pretest.  (1978)  S t e r n g l a n z - L i f s c h i t z F o l d i ng  embedded on  over  more  on  an  scores  this  (1973) a l s o  was had  26  success  when  closures  on  changes  he  trained  ambiguous  in objects  s c o r e s on  t h e DAT  and  using  tasks  relations  tests,  since  the  gain  same  the b a s i s  did  They  Loll a  the  as  tactile  of p r e t e s t  t h e low  s c o r e s on  scored  visual  by  visual  significantly experimental actually  group.  two  with  high  drawing similar  from  studies  ninth line  imagery,  Minnesota  on  Paper  t h e DAT  than  o f whether  they  condition,  group's  directly who  d i d there  ability than  a group  students  his  He  and  scores visual  that  the  the were  imagery training  with these s t u d e n t s ' a b i l i t y .  rather  (1973) compared  in  either.  h i g h e r on  appear  showed  pictorial  group, r e g a r d l e s s  would  spatial  succeed  i n visual  the Revised  of  measuring  had  t h o s e o f the h i g h  It  visualization  visualization  not  and  them  control  h i g h e r than  interfered  In o n l y train  imagery  their  study  training,  stimuli  as  on  his  did  i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l o r t h e c o n t r o l  high  improved  presumably  significantly  imagery  articulate  those  in  (1973)  matching  form  generalizabi1ity  parallel  visualization  them  posttest.  subjects  Students c l a s s i f i e d  Board T e s t ,  were  the  subjects practise  drawings.  Ears  which  abilities.  wooden b l o c k s  grade  parts.  Relations  having  visually  a f t e r w a r d s on o t h e r t e s t s  improving s p a t i a l used  object  by  and  (1970) d o u b t e d  training  little  stimuli  Space  However, Wolfe  subjects  s.eern to be  by  the  perceptual  o f grade n i n e observed practised  an a t t e m p t  direct  use  exercises. students  stimuli drawing  with from  a  to of  Ciganko  trained  by  group  of  visualized  27  stimuli.  Both  groups  visualization  improved  scores.  observed s t i m u l i  The  tended  significantly  students  trained  spatial  by  drawing  t o i n c l u d e more s p a t i a l  i n t h e i r drawings of v i s u a l i z e d  stimuli,  spatial  f o u n d t o be  visualization  in  t e s t s was  information  but performance more r e l a t e d  the v a r i a b l e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h drawing a v i s u a l i z e d t h a n an o b s e r v e d o n e . cited  in  Lolla,  visualizing angles,  exercises,  and  areas  t i c k - t a c k - t o e , and  trained  such  or found  as  college  engaging  in  linear  thr.ee  tons. T_es_t  dimensional  Lolla  the  results  visualization  (1973)  cited  related  four such  t e s t s c o r e s f o r c o l l e g e men  who  had  E n g i n e e r i n g c o u r s e s ; Myers (195 1, in spatial  course i n m i l i t a r y  relations  1953)  test  t o p o g r a p h i e s and  (1958)  h i g h s c h o o l had  found  that mechanical  very l i t t l e  scores of m i l i t a r y  drawing  e f f e c t on t h e s p a t i a l  c a d e t s , and  Sedgewick  year a  (196 1)  of  similar  after  On  and  relations  one  g r a p h i c s and  e n g i n e e r i n g d r a w i n g and d e s c r i p t i v e g e o m e t r y .  For  Blade  reported  scores  work  studies.  reports:  completed  of  instruction  Watson ( 1 9 5 5 ) n o t e d a s i g n i f i c a n t g a i n i n s p a t i a l  h a n d , Myers  section  i n v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g , a n o t h e r body of  o c c u r i n g i n the course o f presumably  increase  showed  f o r EriinaLy. Me,n_tai. A b i H i i . e s .  examined the e f f e c t s o f i n c i d e n t a l  example,  extent,  figures  In a d d i t i o n t o the r e s e a r c h r e p o r t i n g experiments  with  t h a t h i s e x p e r i m e n t a l group  a s i g n i f i c a n t i m p r o v e m e n t on t h e c a r d s a n d of t h e T o u r s  (1941,  students  estimating  to  stimulus  Some y e a r s b e f o r e , Van V o o r h i s  1973)  on  both  a  a course i n the  other  taken  in  relations discovered  28  no  significant  differences  Space  Relations  p o s t t e s t he gave t o matched p a i r s o f E n g i n e e r i n g ,  Industrial  E d u c a t i o n , and I n d u s t r i a l not  they It  the  Supervision students,  i s t h e r e f o r e u n c e r t a i n whether s p a t i a l taught.  Several  the i n c o n s i s t e n t r e s u l t s  literature.  a l s o noted  did  Lo.lla  (1973),  have  for  been  training.  not prove s u c c e s s f u l i n instructional  S c r o t h , and  Barratt  suggest  instruction  w h i c h does  f a c e t of s p a t i a l a b i l i t y  occur  and G r i n d e r ' s  through  internally  a visual  in  a  spite  that  chapter  direct  representational on a s p a t i a l  the  idea  his  and of  use  the  of  he  brief study brief,  The w r i t i n g s o f Zimmerman, visualization  is  more  perspective  taking,  and  that  not  concentrate  directly  on  this  may  not  be  enough  to  adequate.  implies that  input channel  was d e s i g n e d  training  that  i s important,  of  that  m a n i p u l a t i o n o f images t o o c c u r . the next  thought  i n the  or  theory  clear  explanations  N e v e r t h e l e s s , h i s own  sessions.  complex than p e r c e p t i o n  Bandler  or  visualization  mentioned  example,  t h a t the r e s e a r c h supported  than prolonged  specific  whether  possible  degree o f s p e c i f i c i t y of the t r a i n i n g  rather  DAT  had t a k e n d e s c r i p t i v e g e o m e t r y s i n c e t h e p r e t e s t .  c a n be e f f e c t i v e l y for  on  to  perception  y e t n o t be  manner  for  The e x p e r i m e n t explore  develop  a  Fina.lly,  the  could  represented the  mental  outlined i n possibility  person's  visual  system c o u l d improve h i s or her performance  relations  test.  29  CHAPTER 3  P_iiQ.i Study. In an a.ttempt possible  to  see  to c l a s s i f y students  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems would bear any r e l a t i o n r e l a t i o n s problem, with  whether  fourteen  or  not  according  and  whether  to  their  this  and  fifteen  boys,  They  were  would be t a k i n g part i n a study r e l a t e d  nine  students,  was  asked  told  that  they  ways  that  to  the  people d e a l with i n f o r m a t i o n , and that they would to w r i t e a s h o r t essay t h a t day i n c l a s s and to  ten  minute  teacher the next week.  private  The students wrote  with no e f f o r t , which ones would you what would you do with them?"  During  were asked t o s o l v e one problem  their  had  whether they had f e l t and f o l d  i t together.  some o f the a c t i v i t i e s  t o be working  their  essay  on and and  interview,  they  as they  they  minds,  solved  the  had  been  whether  they  problem,  and  a s t r o n g d e s i r e to p i c k up the drawing They were a l s o asked  to  talk  they  in  their  enjoyed  doing  time, and to d e s c r i b e an i d e a l s e t t i n g i n which like  with  come  learn  whether  move i n t h e i r  t a l k e d t o themselves  the  to  asked  to  immediately  choose  to  from the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s  the i n t e r v i e w e r  able to s.ee the drawing  be  then  interview  the t o p i c " I f you could l e a r n any language  t e s t and then t e l l  primary  to t h e i r method of s o l v i n g a s p a t i a l  p a r t i c i p a t e i n a p i l o t study.  for a five  be  classification  an i n t a c t c l a s s of grade  girls  i t would  i n a few y e a r s .  they  about free would  30  Several pilot  conclusions  study.  The  e s s a y t o p i c was  f o c u s on  language  auditory  predicates.  not  include  use  interviewer  wanted o r a s k detail.  brought  The  a  a poor c h o i c e , about  a  to a s s e s s the  D u r i n g the could  own.  the  type  i n t e r v i e w s , on  c o n c e r n was,  was  decided  technique during  compose  series  questions the  and  the  the  of  essays  did  predicates other  hand,  of  was  their descriptions with  not the  to  use  carefully  have an  worded  more  "leading"  the  given  essay  experiment, but  on  as  rather  a to  multiple  choice  i n c o m p l e t e s e n t e n c e s t o a s c e r t a i n the  approach  s t u d e n t s u s e d i n s o l v i n g the  a s p e c t s of  since  of  of c o u r s e , t o a v o i d  classifying a  the  e x p l a i n t o c o n f u s e d s t u d e n t s what  them t o c o n t i n u e  It  of  preponderance  s t u d e n t s i n t o g i v i n g answers t h e y would not their  result  In a d d i t i o n , many of  enough d e t a i l  used most o f t e n . the  were r e a c h e d as  spatial  problems  and  the  t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t s w h i c h were most m e a n i n g f u l  to  them. During individuals the  the  a p p r o a c h e d the  system.  much have l i k e d  task  fingers while  she  w a n t e d t o work i n a  good".  For  to p i c k  her  the  it  became  evident  i n d i f f e r e n t ways.  t w e n t y - e i g h t s t u d e n t s showed a c l e a r p r e f e r e n c e  representational very  interviews,  up  attempting  A n o t h e r , who  was  drawn p a t t e r n a t a l l ,  e x a m p l e , one the  "comfortable" unable was  work e n v i r o n m e n t w o u l d l o o k  the  Nine  of  for  one  s t u d e n t who  d r a w i n g , and  to f i n d  that  would  who  moved  answer, s t a t e d office  that  that  "feels  t o v i s u a l i z e t h e movement of  not  even a b l e  l i k e ; he  to say  what  r e s p o n d e d t h a t he  his would  31  be  physically  active  and  have b r e a k s  Similarly,  a girl  would  "quiet".  Other  were a b l e  to see  that in  look they  settings  "posters", look  solved was  that  representational  all  correctly.  t h a t the  where  in sports. she  the  and  worked  interviewer  p a t t e r n move, wanted  "open"  not  part  told  "bright",  to  work  and  had that  blah",  and  "carpets  students  who  seemed  c o r r e c t answer, none  the p r o b l e m  decided  the  take  place  students  that aren't  Although  chose the  t h a t the  were  "colours  nice".  visuals  replied  to  of  Because of  classification  systems s h o u l d  the  to  be  non-visuals  these  results,  of students  by  it  primary  be p o s s i b l e .  S_tudx  Fjlpe.rime.Dial  Subjects Subjects female, as  who  were  had  a p a r t of  138  grade  chosen  their  ten s t u d e n t s ,  t o take  guidance  67  male  a car.eer p l a n n i n g  program.  A l l were  and  mini-course students  Vancouver T e c h n i c a l S c h o o l ,  a large urban high s c h o o l  multi-ethnic  population.  According  approximately  38%  homes,  28%  of  the  from  Italian-speaking  students  to  were from  Chinese-speaking  homes, and  the  a  rest  71  at  with a  1980  survey,  English-speaking  homes,  J5%  from  f r o m a wide v a r i e t y  of  f  other the of a  language backgrounds.  experiment measure  classified  as  were d i s t r i b u t e d of  preferred  visuals,  classified  as  students  input  From  visuals,  who  took  among s i x c l a s s e s .  auditories,  or c o m b i n e d / u n c l a s s i f i e d . certainly  The  system, tactiles  those 20  who  were  part  in  By  means  students  were  (kinesthetics), could randomly  be  most  divided  into the  two g r o u p s . experimental  those students non-visuals selected those or  Then e a c h g r o u p was or the c o n t r o l  who  could  (auditories  be  divided  A  assigned  from  classified  2 0 were two  t o the  to  as  randomly  groups,  and  experimental  condition.  Design  2x2  represented  into  assigned  Similarly,  certainly  and k i n e s t h e t i c s ) ,  two g r o u p s were r a n d o m l y  Experimental  condition.  most  and t h e n r a n d o m l y  the c o n t r o l  randomly  factorial as  design  was  used,  which  can  be  follows! R  0,  R  0_ Z  Y, 0  R  0, X  Y  R  0  +  X  0. fc  t  Z  0, 0,  Where? R Ui ,  = Random a s s i g n m e n t t o g r o u p s 0 , L  0 , 0« =  Pretest  3  X  = Visualization  Z  = A c t i v i t y not r e l a t e d  Y,  = Visual  to v i s u a l i z a t i o n  group  Y_ = N o n - v i s u a l  group  0, , 0 , ( ) , 0, = t  training  Posttest  1  Treatment Visualization regular  class  counsellors  Jxairiifia  time and was  who  regularly  1  The t r a i n i n g conducted  teach  the  by  occurred one  guidance  of  during the  classes.  two It  33  comprised review  one f i f t y  session  minute  one week  purpose  of the t r a i n i n g  objects  in their  their  eyes  school,  later. was  and t r y  to  noting familiar  steps  and t o u c h i n g t h i n g s ,  asked  concentrate  to h e a r  on how  imagine front  of t h e i r  s e e the  verbally  house  objects  and examine  from  and t h e n or  them f r o m  other  and l o o k a t them from  group  met a g a i n f o r  minutes  to p r a c t i s e  training  feeling  specific  a l l sides. minutes.  exercise  home  from  They  were taking  on  the heard  they  way  They  and  these  told to  around  describing  the p o s t t e s t . c a n be f o u n d  i t  visual  standing  up  various  a n g l e s and t o relation  place  to  each  One week l a t e r , did  to  stand  t o walk  to pick  to  sounds.  were  themselves  They  and t h e n  how  sensations.  c o n c e n t r a t i n g on t h e  different a  close  themselves  angles,  v i s u a l i z i n g on t h e i r  wrote  session  in  twenty  visualization  to  They were a s k e d  different  o b j e c t s on a t a b l e  the  home.  way, t h e y were t o l d  similar  asked  and l o o k a t i t , then  other  they  as  the  and , move  concentrate  along  was used  u s i n g words  In a s i m i l a r  time,  to  minute  that  see  walking  these  the sounds  house  there.  this  were  to feel  and t h e n  arriving  to themselves  image w i t h o u t  them  t h i n g s l o o k e d as they  themselves  twenty  were t o l d  themselves  b o d i e s moving,  same s e n s o r y m a t c h i n g  and  They  l o o k e d as t h e y were f e e l i n g  were a l s o  in  their  help  a  l a n d m a r k s as t h e y went.  to f e e l  The  to  see  and  Students  imagination.  asked  things  session  a  the  brief,  were  given  own.  A t t h e end o f  The c o m p l e t e  i n A p p e n d i x A.  a  script  few  of  34  Control fifty took  CoQdi.ti.ons  The c o n t r o l  group a l s o met f o r one  minute s e s s i o n d u r i n g t h e i r r e g u l a r c l a s s part i n discussion  job  application  f o r m s and i n t e r v i e w t e c h n i q u e s , an a c t i v i t y  not  related  the guidance  The o t h e r c o u n s e l l o r  c l a s s e s conducted  g r o u p a l s o met a g a i n before  practice  They  of  visualization.  and  time.  this  f o r twenty  j o i n i n g the experimental  who  regularly  session. minutes  taught  The  one  to  control  week  later  group t o w r i t e the p o s t t e s t .  Procedure All  students  i n the careers mini-course  Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t as a p a r t o f t h e i r activities.  Just before  they  took  i t , they  took  the  DAT  self-exploratory were  told  the  following* The n e x t a c t i v i t y i n t h i s m i n i - c o u r s e will allow y o u t o e x p l o r e one o f y o u r a b i l i t i e s t h a t y o u may n o t know much a b o u t — spatial relations. This is important i n a l o t of job areas like drafting, e n g i n e e r i n g , a r t i s t i c d e s i g n , s e w i n g , and s o o n . You have some i d e a a b o u t y o u r a b i l i t y t o u s e l a n g u a g e and y o u r a b i l i t y w i t h numbers f r o m y o u r s c h o o l c o u r s e s , b u t you may n o t have had much t o do w i t h s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s . ne a r e a l s o g o i n g t o a s k y o u t o t a k e part i n an experiment w h i l e you a r e d o i n g t h i s . This is for a M a s t e r ' s D e g r e e t h e s i s a t U.B.C. and t h e r e s u l t s will be b r o u g h t t o g e t h e r and w r i t t e n up. We c a n ' t t e l l you v e r y much a b o u t t h e e x p e r i m e n t u n t i l i t ' s o v e r , b u t i t i s d e s i g n e d t o s e e how d o i n g d i f f e r e n t a c t i v i t i e s will a f f e c t your a b i l i t y t o s o l v e t h e problems on t h i s t e s t . This i s not a " t e s t " i n the sense of a grading d e v i c e , b u t j u s t a way t o l e a r n a b o u t y o u r s e l v e s . You c a n ' t f a i l i t . A l s o , we a r e n o t l o o k i n g f o r any deep p s y c h o l o g i c a l t h i n g s about you — just your spatial relations ability. The t e s t i t s e l f t a k e s 25 m i n u t e s . Then w e ' l l ask you t o f i l l i n two o t h e r q u e s t i o n n a i r e s r e l a t e d t o t h e experiment.  35  The  two c o u n s e l l o r s  the  s i x classes.  Space R e l a t i o n s Inventory,  turns  information  test,  and about  as w e l l  predicates  they  a  and  ideas  s y s t e m , b a s e d on t h e i r Inventory,  solved  were t h e n  on  grouped  the  as  Twenty members o f e a c h o f t h e s e and  assigned  week a f t e r  took  the t e s t ,  their  fifty  minute  experimental twenty  sessions.  or  in  One  for  one  input  Style  S_e.lf  non-visuals.  and  different w.eek  again  chosen  control for  that,  the  separately  for  and t h e n a l l w r o t e t h e a l t e r n a t e form o f  DAT Space R e l a t i o n s  The  rooms,  after  met  the  systems.)  for  the e x p e r i m e n t a l  and c o n t r o l g r o u p s  minutes  interests  or c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n .  groups met a t t h e same t i m e , b u t  in  provide  groups were r a n d o m l y  t o the e x p e r i m e n t a l  they  on  (to  Learning  visuals  Self  requesting  topics  their  to DAT.  Style  problems  preference  on  the  t o take  representational  clear  scores  prefer  the  on v a r i o u s  primary a  the L e a r n i n g  questionnaire  information  T h o s e who showed  introduction finished  the ways t h e y  short  of t h e i r  had  completed  t h e way they  as t h e i r  classification  giving this  When t h e s t u d e n t s  which asks about  information,  test  took  the  test.  Instrumentat ion Learning assumption  that  Style  Self.  no two s t u d e n t s  way, D r . J o s e p h E . H i l l Inventory style,  Inventory: seek  developed  Working  information  the  Learning  from  i n t h e same Style  to d e t e r m i n e an i n d i v i d u a l ' s e d u c a t i o n a l  o r t h e manner i n w h i c h he o r s h e t a k e s  total-surroundings  and  becomes  informed.  note The  the  S_el_f  cognitive of  the  instrument  36  identifies this of  students'  cognitive strenghts  i n f o r m a t i o n can  instruction  be  for  used  them,  Community C o l l e g e  (Hill,  by  and  Berry,  style  Sutton,  m a t c h i n g t o be The  Motivation  has  done  the  Learning  It  extensive  have  provided  instrument. ranged  from  .70  this  associated Pulvino primary  to  with  (1977)  on  style  Qualitative t h r o u g h the  with  the  and  Milwaukee,  Wisconsin  .61  study,  to the  sensory  were d e f i n e d  and  .95,  the  .68  to  were  Hill's  Hill  ranges  other  categories  —  Gustatory—  are  ability  of  the  used.  to  but  the  .73  three  to  to  and  identify  elements  of  beings  perceive  meaning  meaning  perceive  by  meaning  Olfactory not  .92.  inventory Pfleger  sensory  Qualitative recognized  f o r the  and  to  for  coefficients  .93,  (1976) as  Auditory — ability sense of h e a r i n g . . .  studies  coefficients  inventory The  used  students.  data  validity  sections  by  ten  has  separate  validity  stimuli used  grade  and  reliability  f o r each t r a i t ,  —  inventory.  mentioned cognitive  that three  Predictive  Qualitative Visual through s i g h t .  Qualitative  Oakland  shown  Q u a l i t a t i v e Tac t i l e — a b i l i t y to p e r c e i v e the s e n s e o f t o u c h , t e m p e r a t u r e , and p a i n ;  Two  and  programs  at  studies,  cognitive style  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems.  cognitive  done  have  Centre,  Centre  .96.  also  been  (1975),  Inventory  the  =  personalized  Several  Kuder-Richardson  were r^.b.  For  research  reliability  were d e t e r m i n e d studies  1976).  to L e a r n  from  has  weaknesses,  advantage.  Style Self  i s reported  as  McBeth an  to b u i l d  and  included  and in  37  S t u d e n t s answer speaker's use  my  voice  questions  adds meaning t o  hands when l e a r n i n g  (5 p o i n t s ) , "Sometimes" A score  of  such  30 o r  as  their  about  of  tone  words" and  something  (3 p o i n t s ) , o r  more o u t  "The  "I like  by  41  40  indicates  a major o r i e n t a t i o n i n t h a t  element?  orientation,  a negligible orientation.  section  of  and  the  reproduced  17 or  inventory  i n Appendix  Questionnaire» i n Appendix asking  C,  had  students  problems,  less,  two  w h i c h was  This  questionnaire,  four parts* they  multiple  choice  holiday  a question  the  q u a l i t y of  living  rooms, and  t h e y were to c o m p l e t e The series and  sentence  w h i c h was  given  twelve students  raters  scored  analyzed. stimulate elicited  a  which o f t e n  The is  from  were  one  chosen  group o f  relations about  section  the  the  enjoy,  could  stems  from  make which  72  and  a  longer  grade  eleven  course.  the  frequently  failed  which  w h i c h the of  predicates  the  Two  r e s u l t s were to  consistently  representational  r e s p o n s e s on  of  basis  question  wished.  response,  was  the  they  which  This  on  asking  image t h e y  questionnaire,  a g r e e were e l i m i n a t e d . scored  way  stems  stimulated  spatial  e l e c t i v e psychology  classifiable  predicates  visual  to a p i l o t  that p i l o t  choice  a s e r i e s of sentence  used  i n an  Sentence  minor  study  s e t t i n g t h e y would most  i n any  steins  the  questions  the  their  this  a  which i s reproduced  a multiple  solved  work s e t t i n g and  of  in  27,  B.  how  about  used  to  to  (I point).  points  18  a  "Usually"  "Rarely"  a possible  of  system,  or  raters did  not  questionnaire  used  (visually,  38  auditorially, activities  the  auditory,  rating  to  be  this  sections  thirty  shown  largely  the  on  approach problems. on  the  these  the  no  clear  to provide  an  only  the  Because  incomplete s e c t i o n s and  rating  two  of  same b o t h  times  system used  of  the  judged  These  analyses.  percent their  higher of  approach  were r a t e d t h e same and  the  on  seventy—six  made  by  to  comparing  establish the  some  primary  to  be  present  with  in solving  the  spatial  relations  l a c k o f c o n s i s t e n c y i n the  sentences the  the  imagery.  was  instrument  the  where  the  on  work s e t t i n g s , mental  on  somewhat  Seventy  of  times,  percent.  ratings.  percent  Only  both  test,  i n any  a  preferences  variation  the  to  compared.  fifty-three  attempt  student  were  wide  of  the  t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e had  clarity  representational  a  were n o t u s e d  the  the  time  sections  h o l i d a y and  their  for  visual,  weeks l a t e r  and  same o v e r a l l  t:est. s i x t y - t h r e e  In a d d i t i o n , validity  the  were r a t e d the  choice of  percent  the  independently  or  averaged  students  each  was  test  a g r e e m e n t s between  the DAT  and  indicating  g i v e n two  because of  s e c t i o n s of  respondents  raters  preferences  of the  had  in ratings  other  their  responses  were t h e n  at  sentences  of  Two  words)  f o r the q u e s t i o n n a i r e .  percent  was  agreement  to  of  same q u e s t i o n n a i r e was  incomplete  The  student.  Their scores  fifty-seven but  the  kinesthetic  random sample o f judged  by  number  and  preference.  The  kinesthetically-oriented  enjoyed  determined  overall  or  total  s e c t i o n s of rating  the  were not  the  answers  questionnaire, included.  When  39  each s t u d e n t ' s clarity  approach  of mental  to  imagery  a n s w e r s were c o n s i s t e n t . of  holiday  responses least  and  It  considered  reason, the this  a valid  systems  Style Self  Tests  objects  to c h o o s e  E d i t i o n Manual reliability  o f .94 (Grade  Form T.  corrected  at  basis i t  of  this  could  not  Inventory  was used  to define  information  i n post-hoc  thr-ee  an  (Bennett,  o f the  individual  dimensional  to  space.  o f a p a t t e r n and  which and  figures. could  10 b o y s ) and .89 (Grade  made  together.  and  f o r t h e Space  Wesman, Relations  10 g i r l s )  10 b o y s ) and .93 (Grade reliability  l e n g t h by t h e Spearman-Brown  a  The  be  folded  Seashore,  coefficients  from  analyses.  subtest  dimensional  the f i g u r e  These a r e s p l i t - h a l f  forfull  the  by  For this  i f i t were c u t o u t  Form S, and o f .92 (Grade for  on  purpose.  has a l a r g e , c l e a r d r a w i n g  that pattern  subtest  the  for this  in  i s asked  lists  on  requires  person  1974)  of  be c l a s s i f i e d  The Space R e l a t i o n s  Aptitude  manipulate  Fifth  could  was examined o n l y  of four drawings of three  The  the  to h i s choice  matched  g r o u p s , and t h e  series  from  of  percent  i n d i c a t e d that  instrument  Pre t e s t - p o s t.test s  Each q u e s t i o n  percent  percent  that students  but the r e s u l t s  questionnaire  mentally  fifty  to h i s  of setting.  and n o n - v i s u a l  Di f f e r e n t i a l  compared  fifteen  e x a c t l y and f i f t y  the L e a r n i n g  visual  rating,  was  When i t was compared  representational  questionnaire,  DAT  setting,  had been hoped  primary  be  work  matched  one c h o i c e  the  10  for  girls)  coefficients formula.  40  The manual and  T  and  reports  also  Unfortunately,  extensive  f o r the  v a l i d i t y data  previous  f o r Forms  forms,  the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f  L  the  and  not  validity  o f t h e Space R e l a t i o n s  M.  Di f f e r e n t i a l  A p t i t u d e Tes t s i s b a s e d on c o m b i n a t i o n s o f s u b t e s t s , predictive  S  subtest  and t h e  alone  is  provided. The c o e - f f i c i e n t s o f  Relations  subtest  Grade 9 s t u d e n t s . girls,  correlation  between  the  Spatial  on Form S and t h a t on Form T a r e g i v e n f o r These were  when Form S was g i v e n  .79 before  f o r boys  and  .71 f o r  Form T.  Hy:p^ih.es_es_ The h y p o t h e s e s , s t a t e d 1.  i n null  The a r i t h m e t i c mean o n  Relations  subtest,  representational  f o r m , were*  the  Form S) o f  pretest  students  (  DAT  whose  representational  non-visual  system  Hypothesis:  to  n  ,i M, TtM^  The a r i t h m e t i c mean o n t h e subtest,  representational  Form T) o f  posttest students  (  DAT  whose  representational  non-visual.  Space primary  s y s t e m a p p e a r e d t o be v i s u a l w o u l d n o t  be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t o f s t u d e n t s primary  be  H iM,-M_  H  Relations  appeared  whose  ( a u d i t o r y or k i n e s t h e t i c ) .  Statistical  2.  primary  s y s t e m a p p e a r e d t o be v i s u a l w o u l d n o t  be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t o f s t u d e n t s primary  Space  system  appeared  whose to  be  41  Statistical  H tM^^-  Hypothesis!  D  H t M, -PM-L (  3.  The a r i t h m e t i c  received  mean on the p o s t t e s t  visualization  significantly  different  training from  not r e c e i v e  visualization  Statistical  Hypothesis!  that  o f s t u d e n t s who  would  not  o f students  be  who d i d  training. H  0  M , ^ i  H, i A, 4. the  There  would be no s i g n i f i c a n t  identified  participation Statistical  primary  representational  i n the experimental  Hypothesis!  interaction  H1 0  system  o r the c o n t r o l  M,-M._*=A  +  between and  group.  42  CHAPTER 4 Results An a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e posttest scores of t h e s t u d e n t s . Hy_P^thes_is_ It  was r u n u s i n g  and t h e v i s u a l  the  pretest  or non-visual  and  classification  The r e s u l t s were a s f o l l o w s :  i  was s t a t e d i n t h e f i r s t  arithmetic  mean  on  the  pretest  s u b t e s t , Form S) o f s t u d e n t s s y s t e m a p p e a r e d t o be different  from  (  hypothesis  that  DAT.  Relations  Space  whose p r i m a r y  visual  not  representational be  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l s y s t e m a p p e a r e d t o be n o n - v i s u a l  (auditory  variance  results  a r e shown i n T a b l e  Table  students  significantly primary  The  of  would  the  whose  or k i n e s t h e t i c ) .  that  null  of  the  first  analysis  of  I below.  I - D.AI P r e t e s t S c o r e s b y V i s u a l / N o n v i s u a l Class i f i c a t i o n  Source o f V a r i a t i o n Main E f f e c t s (Vis/Nonvis)  Sum o f S q u a r e s  DF  Mean S a u a r e  57.600  1  57.600  Residual  4486.785  38  J 18.073  Total  45 44.387  39  1 16.523  These r e s u l t s  i n d i c a t e t h a t the n u l l  be r e j e c t e d (F =0.49, p >.05).  hypothesis  The s t u d e n t s  should  classified  h 0.49  not as  43  visuals on the  and t h o s e  Form S o f t h e DAT expectations,  been i d e n t i f i e d the  classified  students  as n o n - v i s u a l s  Space R e l a t i o n s  subtest.  having a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l  as v i s u a l  i n doing  d i d equally  s.eemed t o be o f  well  Contrary  system no  to  w h i c h had  advantage  to  the t e s t .  HxaQ.ities.is 2 In  this  arithmetic subtest,  null  mean  hypothesis  on  the  different  t o be that  representational  system  II  of  (  would  DAT  not  students  appeared  of the A n a l y s i s  was  whose p r i m a r y  visual  from  results  posttest  Form T) o f s t u d e n t s  system appeared  i t  of Variance  to  be  stated  that  Space  the  Relations  representational be  significantly  whose  primary  non-visual.  a r e summarized  in  The Table  below.  Table  I I - UKL P o s t t e s t S c o r e s by V i s u a l / N o n v i s u a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n by T r a i n i n g  Source of V a r i a t i o n  Sum  o f Squares  Mean S o u a r e  F  Main E f f e c t s Visual/Nonvisual Training  139.250 46.225 93.025  2 1 1  69.625 46.225 93.025  0.52 0.35 0.70  2-Way I n t e r a c t i o n s ( V i s / N o n v i s by T r a i n )  164.025  1  164.025  1 .23  Residual  4819.473  36  133.874  To ta 1  5 122. 750  39  1 31 .353  44  As a group, the v i s u a l students d i d no b e t t e r Form T of the D M non-visuals. hypothesis  Space  This  should  Relations  would  subtest  indicate  not be  that  or  worse  than  did  the  on the  second  null  rejected.  Hypothesis 3 The  third  hypothesis,  the a r i t h m e t i c mean on visualization  again,  The  the  p >.05).  who  hypothesis  visualization  improved the s t u d e n t s ' test.  did  not  receive  T h i s was  was  not  different  visualization  II  above.  rejected  t r a i n i n g d i d not  performance on  the  Once  (F =0.695,  seem  to  Space  true f o r both the v i s u a l and  that  received  be s i g n i f i c a n t l y  r e s u l t s are shown i n Table  null The  the p o s t t e s t of students who  t r a i n i n g would not  „-from t h a t of- students training.  s t a t e d i n the n u l l form, was  have  Relations  the  non-visual  groups. ily.po.tJies.is _ It was  s t a t e d i n the f o u r t h n u l l hypothesis  would be no s i g n i f i c a n t  i n t e r a c t i o n betw.een  primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system experimental or the tested  in  summarized  the in  control  analysis Table  of  Jl  and  (F =1.225,  n u l l hypothesis  rejected.  the  non-visual  was  not  group  who  This  variance  i n t e r a c t i o n s were found  No  The  received  training,  nor  was  the  identified in  results  significant  therefore  training visual  the was are  two-way  arithmetic  arithmetic  there  hypothesis  whose  p >.05),  s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that of the received  the  participation  group.  above.  that  mean  the of  was  not  group  who  mean  of  the  i  45  non-visual different  group who d i d not r e c e i v e from that of the v i s u a l  training.  Similarly,  training  significantly  group who d i d not  receive  the a r i t h m e t i c mean of the  non-visual  group who r e c e i v e d  t r a i n i n g was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y  different  from that of  non-visual  the  group  who  d i d not  t r a i n i n g , and the a r i t h m e t i c mean of the received  visual  t r a i n i n g was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t  of the v i s u a l Contrary  group who d i d not r e c e i v e to e x p e c t a t i o n s ,  a l l of  receive  group  who  from  that  training. the  null  hypotheses  were accepted on the b a s i s of the  results.  The  students'  primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l  i f they  were  correctly  identified,  d i d not  appear  performance on the DAT visualization students'  systems,  Space  training  scores  to  was  be  related  Relations not  on the t e s t .  to lend support to a p o s i t i v e  subtest,  successful  Since  to  their  and the  in  improving  the l i t e r a t u r e appeared  relationship  between  visual  primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems, v i s u a l i z a t i o n a b i l i t y , and performance on Space R e l a t i o n s analyses  t e s t s , a number o f  were performed to s e a r c h  the negative  f o r possible  post  hoc  reasons  for  results.  EQS£ HQC. Ana.iy.se.s_ The  Learning  Style  Appendix B, was used t o visual  or n o n - v i s u a l  Self classify  Inventory  reproduced  t  the  students  primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l  assumption was made that the p r e f e r r e d input i s measured by t h i s instrument, would be primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l  system.  the  as  in having  systems. system, same  The LSSI scores  An which  as the f o r each  46  category  of input system were  Relations  scores  Correlation.  by  means  .29,  of  respectively;  p >.05). negative  V i s u a l s c o r e s and the DAT scores  to  three  to  the  Pearson  scores and the  there was a s i g n i f i c a n t  The  a  There was no s i g n i f i c a n t  the Auditory or T a c t i l e and  compared  the  sections  attempted to i d e n t i f y primary Appendix C ) .  Space  Product-Moment  correlation  between  DAT  (r = .22  scores  However,  surprisingly,  correlation  between  the  ( r = -.43, p <.05).  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of input systems was of  DAT  on  the  also  compared  questionnaire  which  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems  (See  When the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s were compared to the  approaches used i n s o l v i n g the Space R e l a t i o n s problems  ("I  could q u i t e e a s i l y  the  c o r r e c t shapes";  see "I  the  talked  patterns to  move  myself";  and "I  form  had  trouble  imagining how the p a t t e r n would move and would have l i k e d to pick i t up"), 35% of the 40 cases  matched.  inconsistent,  people  including  tactile  48% who  were  not  talked  to  themselves about the p a t t e r n s s i n c e they were unable to p i c k them up.  In comparison with c l a r i t y  of mental imagery ("The  p i c t u r e was c l e a r and i n f o c u s " ; "I t a l k e d to myself me get the p i c t u r e r i g h t " ; "The p i c t u r e was had  t r o u b l e keeping  i tclearly in  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s matched.  one,  to  the  (concentrations  choice  of  38%  of  In a d d i t i o n , some students the  so that 55% of the cases were not  compared  unclear  mind"),  major s t r e n g t h s on the LLSI and used  of  visual,  holiday  to help  most  and the  auditory,  appropriate  work or  40  had two  inconsistent. and  I  When  setting  kinesthetic  47  d e s c r i p t o r s ) , 40% of the 40 c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s matched  exactly  while 52% matched on a t l e a s t one choice of s e t t i n g . In  a  performance  further to  attempt  to  visualization  relate  Space  ability  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems, the DAT scores the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s e c t i o n s on  clarity  Relations  and were  of  primary  compared  mental  imagery,  approach to the Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t , and choice o f and work s e t t i n g .  The mean scores on the DAT  for  holiday students  s e l e c t i n g the v a r i o u s choices are summarized below i n III.  Table  The maximum score on the DAT i s 60. Table  C l a r i t y , of  III - DAT Scores and Questionnaire Responses  Meoigl Imao.er_y.  _M  - c l e a r image - t a l k e d to s e l f - c l e a r image and t a l k e d to s e l f - u n c l e a r image and d i d not t a l k to s e l f Approach to the t e s t -vis. -aud. -kin. Choice -2 -2 -2 -1 -1 -i  to  (saw the p a t t e r n move) ( t a l k e d to s e l f ) (wanted to p i c k i t up)  o i Mllday. and. wo_r_k  setting  v i s . preferences aud. p r e f e r e n c e s k i n . preferences v i s . , I aud. preference v i s . , i k i n . preference aud., 1 k i n . preference  27 8 3  33. 1 26.6 43.0  2  26.0  _ii  Score  10 2J 9  32.8 33.4 28.7  _M  Score  6 3 1 1 9 5 6  N = Number o f students who s e l e c t e d that p o s s i b i l i t y Score = Mean score on the DAT v i s . = v i s u a l primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system aud. = a u d i t o r y primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system k i n . = k i n e s t h e t i c primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system  28.6 37.6 28.9 36.8 27.6 35.8  48  Finally,  accuracy  attempted) on visual  and  possiblity  scores  the  non-visual  that v i s u a l  at many of the  accuracy  70.0%  since  had  there  solved  and  thus For  worked  the  on the p r e t e s t and group, i t was  79.6%  on  more  guessed quickly,  group,  i n d i c a t e any analyses  on the p o s t t e s t . the  pretest  part,  reasons  the  for  of v a r i a n c e .  The  post  and  did  not  of  the  answers on the q u e s t i o n n a i r e  did  the  hoc  analyses  unexpected  results  not r e l a t e c l o s e l y to the scores on e i t h e r the LSSI There d i d , however, appear to be a  that having by  the  on the p o s t t e s t . For the most  DAT.  a  problems  had  visual 72.3%  was  the  n o n - v i s u a l students  questions.  For the non-visual 82.1%  group,  students  questions  more was  correct/number  the Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t were computed f o r the  slowly but a c c u r a t e l y while  finishing  (number  the  slight  a v i s u a l p r e f e r r e d input system,  LULL,  was  r e l a t i o n s problems.  a  disadvantage Scores  on  when  the  spatial  part on  of  the  the  DAT  the  students  classified  v i s u a l s even appeared to have been  slightly  less  accurate  was  obtained  than t h e i r n o n - v i s u a l The  and  identified  solving  visual  the  indication  as  i n v e n t o r y were n e g a t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d with scores Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t ,  or  counterparts.  h i g h e s t mean score on the D&I  by the group which s a i d t h e i r minds and  of not one  (43.0)  that they could v i s u a l i z e c l e a r l y i n  that they a l s o t a l k e d  the mental image they  as  were forming.  to It may  themselves  about  be that the  but a combination of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems  use is  49  the  most  problems.  effective  strategy  for  solving  spatial  relations  50  CHAPTER 5 Di_s_cu£siaQ Bandler and people  have  Grinder's one  or  writings more  indicated  that  underdeveloped  some  primary  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system and that they thus d e l e t e a p a r t t h e i r experience.  of  Although t h e i r work c o n s i d e r e d the e f f e c t  of such d e l e t i o n s on i n t e r p e r s o n a l communications,  i t seemed  reasonable to assume that other a p t i t u d e s , i n such areas s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s , might a l s o be  affected  primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems.  of  impoverished  I f t h i s were found to  t r u e , then t r a i n i n g i n an underdeveloped important form  by  as  developmental  system would be  education,  be an  permitting  a  person to more f u l l y develop h i s or her p o t e n t i a l . The purpose of t h i s study was, classify  grade  representational rather  10  students  systems,  according  working  than with i n d i v i d u a l s .  compared to performance  on  the  study  system —  the v i s u a l —  a g a i n , w i t h an e n t i r e s p a t i a l relations test determine  to  to  with  a  spatial  attempt  their  an  to  primary  entire  relations  primary  an a s s e t when s o l v i n g such attempted  to  group  The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s were then  determine whether a s t r o n g v i s u a l system was  first,  develop  test  to  representational  problems. one  Secondly,  representational  by v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g done, once group. was  A  second  given  form  after  the  whether the students had improved  to m e n t a l l y manipulate o b j e c t s .  The  group  of  the  training  in their  same to  ability  classification  and t r a i n i n g techniques were used to t e s t the f e a s i b l i t y  of  51  designing primary  developmental  education  representational  However, a l t h o u g h expectation  that  betw.een a v i s u a l scores the  on s p a t i a l  results  that  there  arithmetic either on  was  the p r e t e s t  Self  which  used  representational negative and  performance  analysis  system,  correlation on  that  the  control  there as  or n o n - v i s u a l  experimental  from  obvious reasons mentioned.  on  the  produced  test.  for In  interaction  and membership  in  primary  visual  input  addition, mean o f  'training  between  system  significant  arithmetic  visualization  Learning  by a  on  scores  input  students  the  and t h a t  the the of  and t h a t  classification the  control  or  group.  What f a c t o r s different  scores  by  found  A comparison of  fact  spatial  higher  groups  group were n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t ,  was no s i g n i f i c a n t  visual  and  the  between  and t h e n o n - v i s u a l  classify in  and  variance  difference  the p o s t t e s t  g r o u p w h i c h had r e c e i v e d  of  relationship  system  of  between a p r e f e r e n c e the  indicated  test  supported  t h e measure o f p r e f e r r e d to  area  was n o t i n d i c a t e d  An a n a l y s i s  or the p o s t t e s t .  relations  the  positive  this  significant  Inventory,  was  a  tests,  means o f t h e v i s u a l  the s p a t i a l  Stvle  study.  no  be  had  representational  relations  of t h i s  literature  would  primary  in  systems. the  there  classes  could  those stand  have which  caused were  results expected?  so  radically  Although  no  o u t , a number o f p o s s i b i l i t i e s c a n  be  52  It  may  be  postulated do  by  that  B a n d l e r and  n o t have any  Even  used  representational indeed many o f the  not produce  students  preferred  input  Style  Sei f  the  and  examination be  visual  telling  object the  the L g S I  reveals  me  concerns  of  scores  about  mental  and  This  imagery.  one  information  s t a t e m e n t s might  be  others from  and  the  Learning  the the  in  to  primary the  study  to  train  the  by  visual  test.  considered  An to  "When somebody i s i t i n my  refer it.  used  i s suggested  are  to  activities  relations  o f them —  answered  attempted  attempted  I can p i c t u r e  The  in  were the c a s e ,  possibility  was  cited  be  reflect  in  in  system,  statements which  something,  gaining  which  validly  but  lie  results  students'  the s p a t i a l  that only  the  primary  were  betw.een membership on  may by  s t u d e n t s on  not  systems  systems.  higher  on  by  If t h i s  input  negative c o r r e l a t i o n  group  may  system.  representational  which  representational  I nventojy  ability.  strengthen  inconsistent  could  indicated  least  classification  questionnaire  which  by  have m e a s u r e d  of  information  system  representational would  The  results  classify  to  students  modality studies  and  relations  Inaccurate  a cause  review.  predicates  or a t  as  training.  classify  systems.  learning  literature  elicit did  the  not e x i s t  impossible by  systems,  the s o u r c e o f d i f f i c u l t y  to  s u s p e c t e d t o be  do  spatial  system  the o t h e r hand,  method  to  be  representational  On the  i t may  representational  Grinder,  connection  i f t h e y do,  visual  primary  mind"  to l o o k i n g  Furthermore,  positively  more  —  at  an  two  of  often  by  53  people who story  do not v i s u a l i z e wells  they may  state  that  "a  i s e a s i e r to understand in a movie than i n a book" and  that they  "like  to read books that have p i c t u r e s or drawings  i n them" p r e c i s e l y because they images of what they imply  read.  that people with  system pay their  ca.nnot r e a d i l y  Although  a  visual  Bandler  primary  there may  i n t e r n a l l y i n v i s u a l terms.  T h i s would make  systems.  for  and  identifying  but only  by  i n d i v i d u a l ' s speech p a t t e r n s and of an i n t e r v i e w .  gain  representing a  measure  the  of  identified  observation  non-verbal  T h i s i s what  it  representational  Perhaps the l a t t e r cannot be a c c u r a t e l y  by group instruments,  course  and  be a s u b t l e d i f f e r e n c e  visually  invalid  Grinder  representational  betw.een g a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n  systems  mental  and  more a t t e n t i o n to things that they see  i n f o r m a t i o n t h i s way,  input  form  of  behaviors  Bandler  and  an  i n the Grinder  have done i n t h e i r work. It i s a l s o p o s s i b l e would have been more adolescents. sentences  that  effective  Much of the  section  the  of  original  with  difficulty  the  a  group  with  questionnaire  preponderance of k i n e s t h e t i c p r e d i c a t e s the responses. group of grade The  grade  10's,  f o r one  other  the arose  and  1 I and at  12 the  students age  of  did 15,  from  to  and with t h e i r  input or representa'tional system.  in  pilot  questionnaire.  seemed  a  the  activities  the  not yet have developed  than  incomplete  This imbalance d i d not appear when the  concerned with p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t i e s Indeed, they may  questionnaire  true  be  very  emotions. preference  54  A second p o s s i b l e cause o f the n e g a t i v e be  the  design  literature likely  be  approximately overlapping  again,  the  indicated  to  technique  of  that b r i e f ,  effective,  sessions. specific  the  two  recommended  by  have u s e d  It  designed  specifically  person's  Although  training  sessions,  of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems  they  could the  was  most  comprising  80 m i n u t e s , may n o t have b e e n s u f f i c i e n t .  groups.  that  training  results  is  Bandler  i t with  possible  and  w h i c h was used Grinder,  individuals  that  the  f o r one p e r s o n  once  not  with  instructions  feedback d u r i n g the t r a i n i n g  in  is a  but,  and  and must be  The  must  be  guided  by  order  to  be  effective. Thirdly,  the scores  have been i n f l u e n c e d by ability.  The s t u d e n t s  performance  might about  confidence  and s u c c e s s  the s t u d e n t s  the  pretest.  factors  other  the  been  test.  influenced A  trend  was o b s e r v e d ,  had h i g h e r  scores  In a d d i t i o n , more  on t h e  reasoning,  less  t o imagine  logical scores  aptitude the  tests,  of  but  on r e a s o n i n g . a  general  a student's  reasoning  s c o r e , r e g a r d l e s s of h i s or her  or  improvement  in  virtually a l l than  students by  might  still  Since  intelligence  anxiety  skills  students  t h e p a t t e r n moving  c h o i c e based form p a r t  intelligent  may  and t h e i r  posttest  intelligent  f o r poor v i s u a l i z a t i o n  able  by  to  test  visualization  i n that  have c o m p e n s a t e d while  than  were n o t t e s t - s o p h i s t i c a t e d  have  confusion  of  on t h e DAT Space R e l a t i o n s  logical  not  score  likely  might  have  space  been  make  a  relations on  would  visualization  on  many affect  ability.  An attempt was s c o r e s , but  made  to  compare  i n s u f f i c i e n t data was  s i n c e the group who  for  DAT  scores  available.  d i d the best on  combination of v i s u a l and the use  the  the  test  was  using  may  not be  the best  strategy  s o l v i n g s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s problems.  not have  truly  impoverished  representational  of t h e i r systems may and  i n this  have been s t r o n g e r  Bandler  difficulties  i n t h e i r l i v e s because they had d e l e t e d a  of t h e i r experience, seeking  Grinder's  less-developed  part  a  group have  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems which were  still  functional.  A l l but one  of the  have a "major" r a t i n g f o r v i s u a l  input  LSSJL had  a "minor" r a t h e r than  visual  input.  People  a  "negligible"  with  a  very  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system might have shown similar visualization The  experiencing  not p a r t of  difficulties —  than  might  s t r o n g enough to be d i d not  c l i e n t s were  these students —  c o u n s e l l i n g because of  study  systems  the o t h e r s .  who  a  a u d i t o r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems,  of v i s u a l i z a t i o n alone  even though one  had  IQ  Furthermore,  F i n a l l y , i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t the students did  with  students on  the  rating  for  weak  visual  improvement  after  training.  p o s s i b i l i t i e s o u t l i n e d above could w e l l be examined  in further research.  A r e p e t i t i o n of the experiment with  c o n t r o l f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e could produce as could a s i m i l a r  experiment  with  subjects  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems were i d e n t i f i e d t r u l y underdeveloped.  The  study  useful  information, whose  clinically  could a l s o be  a  visual as  being  replicated  56  with  an a d u l t  group, perhaps a f t e r e x e r c i s e s  to reduce  test  anxiety. In a d d i t i o n , clarify  whether  connection  two  the n e g a t i v e  between  aptitudes,  contrasting  inadequate  training.  individual  subjects  visualization interviews It clarify learning to  not  had been hoped some o f t h e modalities new  and  group  this  would  Programming  theory  a combination Hopefully,  systems  our  primary the  individual  would  to  the, l i t e r a t u r e  on  well  as  application  of techniques research  relations  of  What i t has which will  outcomes  understanding  and s p a t i a l  with  help  the  f o r the unexpected  to  or  for  use  i n schools.  future  spatial  and t r a i n i n g .  in  for  of  of  sessions  research  contradictions  the reasons  representational  but  that  lack  interviews  identification  possibilities  add  use  other  to  techniques,  the  the  help  and  and v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g , as  been e f f e c t i v e .  to c l a r i f y  would  a  systems  the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  i s to i d e n t i f y  study  for  training;  Neurolinguistic done  One  could  indicate  classification  systems  f o r both  indicate  results  representational  inadequate  representational  studies  of  have begin  of  this  primary  aptitudes.  57  A u s t i n , Mary C , and Donovan, Margaret A. Do es Moda l i ty Preference Make a, Di ff erence? Jhe Results of a. 'IhLee_±ee_ Siyjdy ~z Literatuxe, Review. May, 1978. (ERIC Document ED 157 026) Bandler,  Richard,  and  Grinder,  John.  Patterns  of  the  tono.t__.c_ T_£cjar_iau_e_i of M i l t o n ti__ Er_icj_.sc_£u /_.__£___,» v o l . I. C u p e r t i n o , C a l i f o r n i a * Meta P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1975. Bennett, George K.? Seashore, Harold G.5 and Wesman, Alexander G. Manual f o r the Di f f e r e n t i a l Apti tude Tests F i f t h , Edi t i o n . Forms, S and. I . New York* The Psychological Corporation, 1973. T  Boffoly, Richard Lee. "A Factor Analysis of Visual, Kinesthetic and Cognitive Modes of Information Handling." D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 35; 3-A (September 1974)s 1489-90. Bruner, P a t r i c i a Boyle. "The E f f e c t s of Perceived Parental Nurturance, Sex of Subject and P r a c t i c e on Embedded Figures Test Performance." Dissertation Abs t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 38; 8--B (February 1978)* 3867-68. Burcham, Temmie et a l . " E f f e c t s of A u d i t o r y Reception on A u d i t o r y and Visual Learning Tasks." Education and IraiQina ol i b a Maniaiijt Re tarred 9; 2 ( A p r i l 19.77)* 56-61. Butzow, John W. and Schlenker, Richard M. A R o s s i b i e R^latiQQ§J_io. £e_kv_j__er_ Lo.we.Qf_e M i s Theory and Piaget's Developmental Theory. (ERIC Document ED 152 705)  Study of a y_i.sual-Hap_t.____ March, 19/8.  Carpenter, F i n l e y et a l . E d u c a b i l i tv of Stqd i e s Vjsua.li z a t i o n of Ob j e c t s i n Space. 1965. Document ED 003 271) Caukins, Sivan Eugene J r . Muscle SpjLQdJ_e_s Document ED 056 831)  l e a c h i n g Reading — 2JLmr±9_ejotorsl.  in  the (ERIC  y_is___on vs. the 19/1. (Eric  Ciganko, Richard A l l a n . "The E f f e c t of S p a t i a l Information Training and Drawing Practice upon Spatial V i s u a l i z a t i o n A b i l i t y and R e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l Drawings of 9th Grade Students." Di s s e r t a t ion Abstracts iaier.riatloQal 34*6-A (December 1973)* 3131-32.  58  Cohen, Donna. "Usefulness o f the Group-Comparison Method to Demonstrate Sex D i f f e r e n c e s i n S p a t i a l O r i e n t a t i o n and Spatial Visualization i n Older Men and Women." P e r c e p t u a l and Motor. S k i l l s . 43? 2 (October 1976)* 388-90. Conner, Jane Marantz; Schackman, Maxine? and S e r b i n , L i s a A. "Sex-Related D i f f e r e n c e s i n Response to P r a c t i c e on a V i s u a l - S p a t i a l Test and G e n e r a l i z a t i o n to a Related T e s t . " C h i l d Development 49? I (I978)s 24-29. Conner, Jane Marantz? Serbin, Lisa A.? and Schackman, Maxine. "Sex D i f f e r e n c e s i n Children's Response to Training on a V i s u a l — S p a t i a l Test." Developmental Psychology 13? 3 ( 1977)s 293-94. Cowles, James D.  A n Experimental Study of Visua1 Perceptual I r a . i n i n a and. Readiness Scores w i t h Qexiaio 1 s t Gxacie ChlidmQ. February 1969. (ERIC Document ED 032 92 1)  Cox, M.V. " P e r s p e c t i v e Ability* a Training Programme." J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research 71? 3 (January-February 1978)* 127-33. Darrow, James F. "Instruction Method Effects on V i s u a l i z a t i o n Test and V i s u a l i z a t i o n Task Performance by Non-Art Elementary Majors." D i s s e r t a t i o n Abs t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l .33? A (1973)* 6725. Donovan, Margaret A., and A u s t i n , Mary C. Does Moda1ity Pr^ie.Ee.Qc.e Make. a. D i f f erence? The R e s u l t s of A Three-Year Study — E m p i r i c a l Data. May 1978. (ERIC Document ED 157 027) Dorethy, Rex E. A r t Education and C r i t i ca1 Analysis. November ED 147 .266)  Perceptual Theory* a 1975. (ERIC Document  Eastman, P h i l l i p M., and Salhab, Mohammed. "The I n t e r a c t i o n of Spatial Visualization and General Reasoning Abilities with Instructional Treatment on Absolute Value Equations." J o u r n a l f o r Reseaych i n Mathematics Education 9? 2 (March 1978)* 152-54. Egeland, Byron e t a l . V i s u a l inf.gxaation ELQjC.e.ss.iQcri E v a l u a t i o n of a I r a i o i o g Erjascaia f o x CJiHgxen feSLiih Learning D j s a b i l i t i es. 19/6. (ERIC Document ED 132 161) E l i o t , John, and Fra.lley, J a c q u e l i n e S. "Sex D i f f e r e n c e s i n S p a t i a l A b i l i t i e s . " Young C h i i d r e n 31? 6 (September 1976)* 487-98.  E l k i n d , David, and D e b l i n g e r , Jo Ann. i n DLsacly.aQj_ao;e_c[ Children as Non—Verbal P e r c e p t u a l T r a i n i n g . ED 021 7o4)  Read i n g Achi evement a Con^ejau_=ac_e of 1968. (ERIC Document  F r e d e r i c k s o n , Edward W. Shape P e r c e p t i o n Judgements as a F u n c t i o n of. Stimulus O r i e n t a t i o n , Stimulus Background, and P e r c e p t u a l S t y l e . December 1970. (ERIC Document ED 049 496) G l o v e r , Henry. "A Study of the R e l a t i o n s h i p Between Scores on a V i s u a l i z a t i o n Test and Neural Impulse on a V i s u a l Task." Di_s_sexiatiojQ Ab_s_tnacj;s latexQ^iiQQal 35? 3-A (September 1974): 1497. Grinder, John; D e l o z i e r , J u d i t h ; and Bandler, Richard. RaJ.ier_QS. of the Hy_c_aot.i_c Iecjinj.au.es of M l It on fcL E r i c k s o n . M.D., v o l . I I . Cupertino, C a l i f o r n i a : Meta Publications, 1977. Hartsough, Ross, and L a f f a l , J u l i u s . "Content A n a l y s i s S c i e n t i f i c W r i t i n g s . " J o u r n a l of General Psychology (October 1970): 193-206.  of 83  riewick, Walter E l t o n . "A Study to Compare the E f f e c t i v e n e s s of the D i f f e r e n t i a l Aptitude Tests and the Adapted Guyanese Tests f o r I d e n t i f y i n g Aptitudes among Students i n Guyanese Secondary Schools." D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 30; A (1969): 3635. Hopkins, Kenneth D., and G l a s s , Gene V. Basic Statistics fox ihe. Bjs_ha_YJ_cj:al ^ l e o c e s . . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 19/8. Janssen, David R a i n s f o r d . " E f f e c t s of V i s u a l and Auditory Perceptual Aptitudes and Letter Descrimination Pretraining on Word Recognition." Dissertation Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l 34; 3-A (September 1973): J 130. Kagan, Jerome, and Kogan, Nathan. " I n d i v i d u a l V a r i a t i o n i n C o g n i t i v e Processes." In Carmichael's Manual Q_f Chi Id Psychology. 3rd E d i t i o n . E d i t e d by Paul Mussen. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1970. L e i b o v i t z , Perry London; Cooper, L e s l i e M.; T. "Dominance i n Mental Imagery." Psvchologi c a l Measurement 32; 3 679-703.  and Hart, Joseph Educat i o n a l and (Autumn 1972):  Lindgren, S c o t t David. "Spatial Perception in Children: Supramodal Spatial Ability and Hemispheric Specialization for Spatial Processing." Di s s e r t a t i on A b ^ i x a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 39; 1-B ( J u l y 1978): 388.  60  L o l l a , Raymond Samuel. "The E f f e c t of S e l e c t e d I n s t r u c t i o n i n T a c t u a l - V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n on Ninth Grade Male and Female's V i s u a l Imagery, Mechanical Reasoning, and Spatial Relations A b i l i t i e s . " Ph. D. Dissertation, Purdue U n i v e r s i t y , 1973. Lovgren, George K. " S u s t a i n i n g and Encouraging V i s u a l Imagery i n C h i l d r e n P r i o r to Learning to Read." Reading Improvement 14? 4s 268-74. Lowenfeld, Viktor. "Tests for Visual and Haptical A p t i t u d e s . " American J o u r n a l of Psychology 5 8 (1945): 100-112. Marcus, Lee. "How Teachers View Student NAS5P B u l l e t i n 6? 408 ( A p r i l 1977)s  Learning 112-14.  Styles."  Marmor, G l o r i a Strauss, and Zaback, .Larry A. "Mental R o t a t i o n by the B l i n d s Does Mental R o t a t i o n Depend on V i s u a l Imagery?" J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychologys Human P e r c e p t i o n and Performance 2; 4 (November 1976)s 5 15-21. Millar, Suzanna. "Spatial Representation by Sighted C h i l d r e n . " J o u r n a l of Experimental psychology 21? 3 (June 1976): 460-79.  Blind and and Chi Id  Miller, Jack W., and Miller, Haroldine G. "Toward R e s o l u t i o n of the S p a t i a l P u z z l e . " Peabody J o u r n a l of EducaliQQ 54; 3 ( A p r i l 19 77): 135-41. Mitchelmore, Michael C. "Cross—Cultural Research on Concepts of Space and Geometry." In Space agd. Geometry. Papers from a Research Workshop. E d i t e d by J. Larry M a r t i n and David A. Bradbard. August, 1976. (ERIC Document ED 132 033) Morency, Anne. May 1967.  Auditorv Mgdality — Research and (ERIC Document ED 014 383)  Practice.  Newcomer, P h y l l i s L., and Goodman, L i b b y . "Effects of M o d a l i t y of I n s t r u c t i o n on the Learning of Meaningful and Non—Meaningful M a t e r i a l by Auditory and Visual L e a r n e r s . " J o u r n a l of S p e c i a l Education 9? 3 (1975): 261-68. P a t r i d g e , Susan. ED 147 776)  Mocigs. of L e a r n i n g .  1976.  (ERIC  Peterson, M. J. "The Retention of Imagined Spatial Matrices." C o a a i t i x e EsxsJiology. 7? 1975): 18 1-93.  Document and Seen 2 (April  61  P f l e g e r , Lawrence R., and P u l v i n o , Charles J. Students Prefer to L e a r n ? 1977. (ERIC ED 148 768)  How do Document  P r i d d l e , Ruth E., and Rubin, Kenneth H. "A Comparison of Two Methods f o r the T r a i n i n g of S p a t i a l Cognition." M e r r i l l - P a l m e r Q u a r t e r l y 23; I (1977)! 57-65. Psychological Corporation. S e r v i ce Bulje t i n 36 ED 078 026)  "What (August  i s an 1948).  Aptitude?" Test (ERIC Document  Rawls, Rachel F. T r a i n i n g i n V i s u a l Perception Deaf C h i l d r e n ig_ Stimulate School Readiness. 1967. (ERIC Document ED 012 -993)  for. Young February  Resnick, Robert J . A n I n v e s t i g a t i o n of the M o d i f l a b i l i t y of yisua_l l i l t e ^ L a i i x e AM.llt.Jes i n Ch±iir_ejQ. June 1968. (ERIC Document ED 017 009) S a t t e r l y , David J . " C o g n i t i v e S t y l e s , S p a t i a l A b i l i t y , and School Achievement." J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology 68; 1 (February 1976)! 36-42. Schlenker, Richard M. Vi ktor Lowenfeld 5 Vjsual-Haptic Continuum and. Gxoup_s of Wicie Ge^axajinic. S e ^ a x a i i o n . (ERIC Document ED J33 359) 7  Schlenker, Richard M. Vi ktor Continuum i n Grades 9, 10, ED 128 413)  Lowenfeld's V i s u a l - H a p t i c and 11. (ERIC Document  Schroth, Marvin L. " S p a t i a l A p t i t u d e and to A r t Judgement." Perceptual and ( 1967)! 746.  Its Relationship Motor Ski l i s 24  S e g a l , Ruth C. "The Haptic Approach i n P r a c t i c e . " Therapy 12; 2 (Winter 1976-77)* 219-24.  Academic  Serapiglia, Theresa. " S e l f - S e l e c t e d and Teacher-Matched Word R e c o g n i t i o n Tasks Presented to Measured Perceptual M o d a l i t i e s of Primary C h i l d r e n . " D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 35; 3-A (September 1974)! 1536-37. Snow, Richard E. A n Overview of Current Research on Aptitude Processes. August 1977. (ERIC Document ED 148 977) Snow, Richard E. Research on Apti tudes % A Progress Report. S t a n f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Research P r o j e c t , T e c h n i c a l Report No. 1, September, 1976. (ERIC Document ED 141 72 1)  62  Tas chow, Horst G. Us i n g the Vjsual-Audi t o r v Kjnesthetic-Tactile lechQiaua to Solve • S]DeJL!iD_g Problems i n Elementary and Secondary School Classrooms. December 1970. (ERIC Document ED 046 668) Tuckman, Bruce W. Conducting E d u c a t i o n a l Research. New Yorks Harcourt Brace J o v a n o v i c h , 1978.  2nd  ed.  Wiederholt, J . Lee, and Hammill, Donald D. "Use of the Frostig-Horne V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n Program i n the Urban S c h o o l . " Psychology i n the. Schools 85 3 (1971): 268-74. Waugh, Ruth. Moda 1 i t y P r e f e r e n c e as_ a. F u n c t i o n o f Heading Achievement. August, 1971. (hRIC Document ED 054 921) W i l l i a m s , Tannis MacBeth, and Aiken, Leona S. '"Development of Pattern Classification: AuditoryVisual Equivalence i n the Use of P r o t o t y p e s . " Developmental psychology 135 3 (1977)s 198-204. W i t k i n , Herman A. "A C o g n i t i v e S t y l e Approach to Cross C u l t u r a l Research." I n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o_f Psychology 254(1967)J 233-50. Wickless, Barbara J e a n e t t e . "The Development of a Test of S p a t i a l P e r c e p t i o n to Assess the Spatial Ability of 8th, 9th, and 10th Grade Students.' ' Dissertation A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 34? I 2-A (June 1974)s 7475. 1  63  APPENDIX A Scrip.! Q l loe y,isuaii,^tiOQ l i a i a i Q a  SessiQQS  E i r ^ i Day. We a l l get i n f o r m a t i o n t h r o u g h our five senses. For learning, we use mostly our visual, auditory, and k i n e s t h e t i c systems. E v e r y b o d y comes t o depend a bit more on one o f the s y s t e m s , b e c a u s e we've l e a r n e d t h a t t h a t works for us. I t becomes s t r o n g e r . For example, some of you would p r o b a b l y r a t h e r get i n f o r m a t i o n by reading a book, o t h e r s by h e a r i n g someone t e l l thefn a b o u t i t . Some of you would p r o b a b l y r a t h e r f i g u r e s o m e t h i n g o u t by l o o k i n g at a diagram, others by actually picking the thing up and e x a m i n i n g how i t ' s p u t t o g e t h e r . T h i s i s q u i t e normal, j u s t as some p e o p l e p r e f e r d i f f e r e n t f o o d s and so on. We may g e t i n f o r m a t i o n t h r o u g h one system, but react i n t e r n a l l y i n another system which i s s t r o n g e r f o r us. For example, you see t h e e x p r e s s i o n on someone's f a c e and that g i v e s you a p a r t i c u l a r f e e l i n g , and t h e n you react on the b a s i s of the f e e l i n g you h a v e . Or you do some physical a c t i v i t y t h a t someone has warned you a g a i n s t , and you g e t a p a i n , and you can h e a r t h a t p e r s o n ' s voice i n your head, w a r n i n g you. You may a l s o h e a r a v o i c e and get a visual image of the p e r s o n i t b e l o n g s t o . The t e s t you d i d needs a v i s u a l a b i l i t y — you try to use your v i s u a l s y s t e m t o c r e a t e a p i c t u r e i n y o u r mind and have t h e p i c t u r e c l e a r enough t h a t you can see i t move and change p o s i t i o n . What y o u ' r e g o i n g t o do i n t h i s group is to t r y t o i m p r o v e y o u r scores on that type of test by p r a c t i s i n g s e e i n g and moving o b j e c t s in your imagination. By p r a c t i c e you c o u l d g e t b e t t e r a t d o i n g s p a t i a l relations problems. The r e s t o f t h i s p e r i o d w e ' l l be d o i n g this practice. It w i l l be l i k e e x e r c i s i n g y o u r i m a g i n a t i o n s . Some of you may f i n d i t h a r d t o s.ee m e n t a l p i c t u r e s or h e a r s o u n d s , but t h i s s h o u l d get a b i t e a s i e r as we go t h r o u g h the practice. J u s t t r y t o f o l l o w the i n s t r u c t i o n s the b e s t you can. I ' l l be a s k i n g you to see the r o u t e you t a k e as you go home, so e a c h o f you w i l l be s e e i n g d i f f e r e n t images. Some of you may be w a l k i n g , o r g e t t i n g on a bus, or r i d i n g in a c a r , and s o on. J u s t make y o u r own m e n t a l p i c t u r e s and t h e n t r y to do t h e t h i n g s I t e l l you t o do w i t h the p i c t u r e s you see. Remember, when you see t h i n g s i n y o u r mind, see them from y o u r own p o i n t o f view, as you would i f you were actually there. Don't see y o u r s e l f as a s e p a r a t e p e r s o n .  64  You w i l l probably f i n d i t e a s i e r to c l o s e your eyes you are not d i s t r a c t e d by things you see i n t h i s rbom. This should be r e l a x i n g . Start comfortable p o s i t i o n i n your c h a i r . Mow slow b r e a t h s .  by take  so  finding a five deep,  I t ' s the end of the day and you're about to go home from s c h o o l . You're a t your l o c k e r . You're p u t t i n g things in the l o c k e r — f e e l them i n your hands, feel yourself reach up to the s h e l f . Feel y o u r s e l f pick up anything you want to take with you, maybe put on a j a c k e t . Now j u s t t r y to see the i n s i d e of your l o c k e r f o r a minute. Look at what i s i n i t and where things a r e . Close the l o c k e r . Hear the sound i t makes. Feel your f i n g e r s p u t t i n g the lock i n place and s h u t t i n g i t — hear i t snap shut. One of your f r i e n d s i s there and they s t a r t to t a l k t o you. Hear t h e i r voice and what they say. Hear y o u r s e l f answer them. Look at them. L i s t e n to the other sounds i n the h a l l . Now Look around you and t r y to see e v e r y t h i n g as c l e a r l y as you can — the h a l l , the lockers, the people s t a n d i n g around or moving. F e e l y o u r s e l f walking through the h a l l s . Feel y o u r s e l f t a k i n g s t e p s , your body moving. Look around and see the things that you are passing. Go towards the e x i t you normally use to leave the s c h o o l . L i s t e n to the sounds around you. Look and see where the sounds are coming from. Go down the s t a i r s . Look around you.  Feel y o u r s e l f taking those  steps.  Now you're o u t s i d e . You can f e e l that i t ' s cooler. L i s t e n to the sounds — t r a f f i c , v o i c e s , some b i r d s . Look around and see what things are making the sounds. Turn back and look at the s c h o o l . Try to really concentrate on the p i c t u r e . Count the windows you can see, look a t the doors — are there windows i n the doors? Are there bushes near the b u i l d i n g ? Watch the doors swing open and people come out. Now t r y to d e s c r i b e what you see i n your mind, as though you were d e s c r i b i n g i t to someone e l s e . Hear y o u r s e l f s a y i n g the words i n s i d e your head. Now just f o r g e t the words you used and concentrate on s e e i n g the p i c t u r e without t a l k i n g to y o u r s e l f . Now continue along your normal route home. Feel the movement and l i s t e n to the sounds around you. Stop a minute. L i s t e n . Look around you i n a l l d i r e c t i o n s — turn to your l e f t and see what's there, then to your r i g h t , then behind you.  65  Now look a t some o b j e c t t h a t ' s near you — a pole, a bench, a c a r , a l e t t e r b o x , a t r e e , a bike. Go over and touch i t . F e e l what i t ' s l i k e — smooth or rough? Sticky? Dusty? Take a good look a t i t . Walk around and look at i t from d i f f e r e n t angles and see what i t ' s l i k e from those sides. Continue on your way. F e e l the motion, f e e l any s u r f a c e you are t o u c h i n g . I f you a r e next to something, s i t t i n g on something, standing on something, be aware of the s u r f a c e your body i s i n contact with. Look at those t h i n g s . There i s another person there and they begin to t a l k . Hear t h e i r v o i c e and your v o i c e as you answer. Look at them. Try t o form a c l e a r image of what they look like. Watch what they're d o i n g — are they moving, changing their p o s i t i o n ? As they t a l k , see t h e i r l i p s move. Now t r y again to get a c l e a r image of t h e i r f a c e , t h e i r e x p r e s s i o n . Continue on your way u n t i l you are very near to your home. T r y t o see the things you would see on that route. Look to your l e f t and see the things you're p a s s i n g . . . to the r i g h t . . . behind you.... Hear the sound of a t r u c k . Turn and look a t i t . What does i t look l i k e ? Is i t big? What c o l o u r i s i t ? Does i t have any s i g n s on i t ? Watch i t approach, pass by you, and disappear. Feel the steps you are t a k i n g . Look a t something i n the d i s t a n c e . As you f e e l y o u r s e l f move towards i t , see i t get c l o s e r t o you. I t gets bigger and you can see more d e t a i l s as you move nearer to i t . See those d e t a i l s . Walk up to the f r o n t of your house or apartment b u i l d i n g . F e e l y o u r s e l f make the turn to go towards i t . L i s t e n t o any sounds you hear — people t a l k i n g , t r a f f i c , a dog b a r k i n g , b i r d s , c h i l d r e n p l a y i n g . Look around and see what i s c a u s i n g those sounds. Now study the f r o n t of your house or b u i l d i n g . See a l l the d e t a i l s you can. How many windows are there? Are they open o r shut? Are the c u r t a i n s open? What do they look like? How many steps are there? Can you see a chimney? Is the roof s t r a i g h t or does i t have a peak? Now, i n your mind, d e s c r i b e what you see to another person. Hear y o u r s e l f s a y i n g the words. Now f o r g e t the words and j u s t t r y to see the p i c t u r e . Now t u r n l e f t and walk around to the l e f t s i d e of the building. Go around the corner and stand back a b i t . See that s i d e of i t , i n d e t a i l , and t r y to d e s c r i b e i t i n your rnind. Mow j u s t see the p i c t u r e .  66  Walk a r o u n d t o t h e b a c k . S t a n d back, and t r y t o s e e i t c l e a r l y from t h a t p o s i t i o n . D e s c r i b e i t i n your mind, then l e t t h e words d i s a p p e a r and j u s t s e e the p i c t u r e . Go a r o u n d t o t h e o t h e r s i d e . Take a l o o k a t t h a t s i d e . How would y o u d e s c r i b e i t t o someone? Now j u s t concentrate on s e e i n g t h e p i c t u r e . Imagine y o u were looking down on t h e t o p o f t h e b u i l d i n g from a h i g h e r b u i l d i n g or a h e l i c o p t e r . T r y t o see what i t would l o o k l i k e from t h e r e . Where i s the peak o f the r o o f ? The c h i m n e y ? C o n c e n t r a t e on s e e i n g t h a t p i c t u r e . R e t u r n t o the f r o n t . Now walk up t o t h e f r o n t door — f e e l y o u r s e l f g o i n g towards i t , up o r down any s t e p s . Feel t h e d o o r k n o b i n y o u r hand and turn i t . Open the door. L i s t e n t o t h e sound i t makes. Walk i n and s h u t i t . Hear i t click. Look a r o u n d y o u . Look f o r a s m a l l o b j e c t y o u c o u l d pick up. I f you d o n ' t see one, go a b i t f u r t h e r i n t o t h e room. Walk o v e r t o i t and p i c k i t up. R e e l i t — feel i t s shape, i f i t is smooth o r r o u g h , i f t h e r e a r e any bumps o r s h a r p c o r n e r s . Look a t t h e t o p , o r a t one s i d e i f t h e r e i s no real top. Turn i t over — f e e l i t t u r n i n y o u r hands — and l o o k at t h e b o t t o m o r t h e o p p o s i t e s i d e . Now t u r n i t a g a i n and look a t a d i f f e r e n t s i d e . F i n d some o t h e r angle a t which •you h a v e n ' t h e l d i t and t u r n i t to look at i t i n that position. Now t u r n i t back so t h e f i r s t s i d e i s up again. Put i t down on t h e f l o o r . P i c k up a n o t h e r o b j e c t n e a r y o u . Look a t i t f r o m t h e top. In y o u r mind, d e s c r i b e what t h e t o p l o o k s l i k e . Hear your words. Now f o r g e t t h e words and j u s t l o o k a t i t . T u r n i t o v e r and l o o k a t t h e b o t t o m . Describe i t i n your mind, and t h e n j u s t t r y t o s e e i t w i t h o u t t h i n k i n g about the description. Now l o o k a t a n o t h e r s i d e and, a g a i n , describe i t t o y o u r s e l f . L e t t h e words f a d e from y o u r mind and just see the o b j e c t t h e r e , as c l e a r l y a s y o u c a n . Put i t down o n t h e f l o o r t o the l e f t of the first o b j e c t and a b o u t a f o o t away from i t . Look a t t h e two objects. Now move the s e c o n d o b j e c t c l o s e r t o t h e f i r s t , so i t i s o n l y a b o u t s i x i n c h e s away. Look a t them. S w i t c h the two o b j e c t s so the s e c o n d one i s now on t h e r i g h t and t h e f i r s t one on t h e l e f t . Look a t them carefully — s.ee how c l o s e they a r e t o g e t h e r , w h i c h way they are facing — so t h a t i f you had to p u t them down e x a c t l y t h e same way again l a t e r , you c o u l d . P i c k up a t h i r d o b j e c t . Feel i t carefully. Are there any bumps o r g r o o v e s on the t o p s i d e ? Is i t smooth? Describe i t . Now just look at i t and forget the  67  description. T u r n i t u p s i d e down Describe i t to y o u r s e l f , then j u s t  and f e e l that surface. c o n c e n t r a t e on s e e i n g i t .  Take i t o v e r to t h e o t h e r two o b j e c t s and p u t i t on t h e f l o o r , c l o s e r t o y o u t h a n the o t h e r two a r e , b u t s o t h a t one of t h e o t h e r o b j e c t s i s t o t h e l e f t of this one and t h e o t h e r i s t o the r i g h t o f i t . Look a t t h o s e three objects and s e e how t h e y l o o k i n r e l a t i o n t o e a c h o t h e r . Now walk a r o u n d them and s e e how t h e y Look f r o m d i f f e r e n t positions. Go t o one s i d e and Look a t them. Which one i s t o t h e left now? Which i s n e a r e r t o you? Now walk a r o u n d f u r t h e r and a g a i n look a t t h e i r p o s i t i o n s . Which one i s on the left now? C l o s e r t o you? Go on to t h e o t h e r s i d e and l o o k at them a g a i n . Now walk back t o where you s t a r t e d and s e e t h e o b j e c t s from t h a t p o s i t i o n . As you l o o k down, l e t the p i c t u r e g r a d u a l l y fade your mind. Become aware o f the desk you a r e s i t t i n g i n t h e o t h e r p e o p l e a r o u n d you i n t h e c l a s s r o o m . Open eyes and s e e t h e c l a s s r o o m . Stretch a b i t , take a breath, relax. (3 eyes,  minute  from and your deep  break)  Once a g a i n , f i n d a c o m f o r t a b l e take f i v e d e e p , s l o w b r e a t h s .  position,  close  your  See a t a b l e . I t i s bare. You a r e g o i n g to p l a c e nine o b j e c t s on t h e t a b l e . Along the l e f t hand side, p u t an a p p l e n e a r t h e f a r edge, a banana i n the c e n t r e , and an o r a n g e n e a r e s t t o y o u . See them l i n e d up along the left side. Down t h e c e n t r e , p u t a cup f a r t h e s t f r o m y o u , a p l a t e i n t h e c e n t r e , and a g l a s s n e a r e s t t o y o u . A l o n g t h e r i g h t hand s i d e , p u t a pen f a r t h e s t from you, a r u l e r i n the c e n t r e , and a book n e a r e s t t o y o u . Now l o o k a t t h e t a b l e . Look a t t h e f a r edge and s e e the t h r e e o b j e c t s b e s i d e e a c h o t h e r — the apple, t h e cup, and t h e p e n . Then l o o k a c r o s s the c e n t r e and s e e t h e banana on t h e l e f t , t h e p l a t e n e x t to i t , i n t h e c e n t r e of the t a b l e , and t h e r u l e r n e x t t o i t . Look a t t h e row nearest you and s e e the o r a n g e on t h e l e f t , t h e n t h e g l a s s , then t h e book. D e s c r i b e t o y o u r s e l f the t h r e e o b j e c t s on t h e l e f t the t a b l e . . . on the r i g h t . . . i n between. Describe o b j e c t s along each d i a g o n a l — from t h e l e f t n e a r c o r n e r the r i g h t f a r c o r n e r and f r o m t h e r i g h t near c o r n e r to l e f t f a r corner. Now f o r g e t t h e d e s c r i p t i o n i n words j u s t t r y t o s e e t h e t a b l e w i t h a l l t h e o b j e c t s on i t . n o t t o have any words i n y o u r mind a t a l l .  of the to the and Try  68  Now walk around to the l e f t s i d e of the t a b l e and watch the o b j e c t s as you do s o . See them now from this new position. See which ones are on the l e f t now, which ones are i n the c e n t r e , which on the r i g h t . Which are i n the f a r t h e s t row? The nearest? When you have d e s c r i b e d i t to y o u r s e l f from t h i s p o i n t of view, j u s t t r y to see i t c l e a r l y without t h i n k i n g o f the d e s c r i p t i o n . Now walk around to your l e f t again and see the p o s i t i o n of the o b j e c t s change as you move. As you Look at the t a b l e now, which o b j e c t s are c l o s e s t to you? Farthest away? In the centre? On the l e f t ? On the r i g h t ? Take a good look at the t a b l e and see the o b j e c t s s i t t i n g t h e r e . Clear a l l the words from your mind and j u s t s.ee the t a b l e . Once again, walk around to your left, watching the o b j e c t s as you do so. See the o b j e c t s , and where each one is from t h i s p o s i t i o n . Try to get a c l e a r p i c t u r e i n your mind, without t h i n k i n g o f a d e s c r i p t i o n i n words. Now you are going to walk around the t a b l e very slowly but without s t o p p i n g . As you move, you w i l l look a t the o b j e c t s and t h e i r p o s i t i o n s from where you are at that moment. Try to do that now. Try to see how the o b j e c t s w i l l seem to be on d i f f e r e n t s i d e s of the table as you move. Let the p i c t u r e fade from your mind. Become the desk you are i n , the other people around you. eyes, s t r e t c h , take a deep breath, and r e l a x . ^<^Q_i  aware of Open your  Day  A f t e r about twenty minutes today, you w i l l be w r i t i n g another form of the S p a t i a l R e l a t i o n s t e s t you d i d two weeks ago. Before then, we are going to spend some time p r a c t i s i n g v i s u a l i z a t i o n e x e r c i s e s again, so that your minds are prepared f o r the type of problem y o u ' l l be d o i n g . Get i n t o a comfortable p o s i t i o n , and c l o s e Take f i v e deep, slow b r e a t h s , and f e e l y o u r s e l f  your eyes. relax.  See a s m a l l , square g l a s s t a b l e . The g l a s s i s clear. We are going to p l a c e some o b j e c t s on the t a b l e again. F i r s t pick up a s t a p l e r and f e e l i t i n your hand. Feel your arm reach o u t and put the s t a p l e r along the f a r edge, on the left. Hear the sound as i t touches the t a b l e . Now pick up a paper c l i p and f e e l y o u r s e l f put that i n the centre along the f a r edge of the t a b l e . Now an eraser — put t h a t i n the far r i g h t hand corner. Now you w i l l p i c k up and place some o b j e c t s along the centre row. Feel each one as you p i c k i t up 5 f e e l your arm reach out and hear the sound as you put i t down. On the l e f t , put a r i n g . Then put a watch i n the c e n t r e , and a p a i r of eyeglasses on the r i g h t . Now you w i l l p i c k up a f o l d e d kleenex and put i t on the l e f t along the  69  nearest edge of the t a b l e . Take a toothbrush and in the c e n t r e , and a comb on the r i g h t .  place  it  Now look at the l e f t hand edge of the t a b l e and see the three objects s i t t i n g there — farthest from you, the s t a p l e r , then the r i n g i n the c e n t r e , and the f o l d e d kleenex nearest to you. Look along the c e n t r e . S t a r t i n g at the f a r t h e s t edge, you see the paper c l i p , then, i n the centre, the watch, then, nearest to you, the toothbrush. Look at the r i g h t hand edge and away, the eyeglasses i n the c e n t r e , you.  see the e r a s e r f a r t h e s t and the comb nearest  Now get a c l e a r image of those o b j e c t s i n your mind. Try to see where they a l l are. Describe i t i n your mind and as you do so reach out and p o i n t to each one i n t u r n . Then f o r g e t the d e s c r i p t i o n i n words and just concentrate on s e e i n g the t a b l e w i t h the o b j e c t s on i t . Now walk around to the l e f t s i d e of the t a b l e and see the o b j e c t s from t h a t p o s i t i o n . See which ones are on the left... the r i g h t . . . nearest to you... farthest away. Describe i t to y o u r s e l f , r e a c h i n g out and touching each object i n order. Now f o r g e t the words and just see the image there i n f r o n t of your eyes. Now imagine t h a t you are under the table looking up through the g l a s s . You are s t i l l on the same s i d e of the t a b l e , but you have s l i d down underneath it. How do the o b j e c t s look from the underside? Which ones are now on your left? Your r i g h t ? Look a t each one i n t u r n , and then try to see the whole group at once. at  S t i l l under the t a b l e , move around to your l e f t . the o b j e c t s again and s.ee what p o s i t i o n each i s i n  Look now.  Come up on that s i d e of the t a b l e and look down at i t . Describe t o . y o u r s e l f the p o s i t i o n of the o b j e c t s now, and p o i n t to them as you do so. Then l e t the words disappear from your mind and j u s t see the t a b l e with the objects on it. Slowly walk around the t a b l e , l o o k i n g at the objects and watching how t h e i r p o s i t i o n s seem to change as you move. Try to keep the p i c t u r e c l e a r i n your mind. Now l e t that p i c t u r e fade again, and g r a d u a l l y become aware of where you are and what i s around you. Feel the c h a i r you are s i t t i n g i n and hear the other people i n the room. Open your eyes, s t r e t c h , take a deep b r e a t h .  70  In the few minutes before we begin the test, practise moving o b j e c t s i n your mind on your own. This i s what you could do y o u r s e l f i f you were going to w r i t e a Spatial Relations test for a job interview, or entrance to a t r a i n i n g program. I t i s a way of p r e p a r i n g y o u r s e l f f o r the test.  71  APPENDIX B  LEARNING STYLE SELF  Tnis assessment you l e a r n .  will  INVENTORY  a l l o w us to i d e n t i f y the ways i n which  In t n i s assessment are a s e r i e s o f statements. After r e a d i n g each statement, p l e a s e respond by i n d i c a t i n g one of tne three c a t e g o r i e s on the answer s h e e t . Circle  t h e : J i f you wish t o respond, USUALLY S i f you wish t o respond,  SOMETIMES  R i f you wish to respond,  RARELY  There a r e no GOOD or BAD, RIGHT or WRONG response should r e f l e c t YOUR OWN f e e l i n g s  selections. Your and i n s i g h t s .  Although you w i l l not be timed, do not ponder statement f o r a long time.  INDICATE YOUR ANSWERS ON THE SriEEf PROVIDED  over  any one  72  1.  I can t e l l i f something l i s t e n i n g to i t r u n .  is  wrong  2.  The tone of a speaker's v o i c e words .  adds  J.  I could sliding  4.  I can b u t t o n my coat i n the dark.  •J.  A story b oo k.  with  a  motor  meaning  to  by  their  f e e l the d i f f e r e n c e between wood and p l a s t i c b y my hand over i t .  i s e a s i e r t o understand  i n a rnovie  than  in a  6.  I like them.  to read books that have p i c t u r e s o r drawings  '/.  I can r e c o g n i z e who i s on the phone j u s t to the v o i c e f o r a few moments.  d.  I can remember music well enough to r e c o g n i z e a the next time I hear i t .  "tune"  9.  I rub my f i n g e r s over something or rough i t might be.  smooth  by  listening  to f i n d out how  to use my hands when l e a r n i n g about  10.  I like  11.  I choose c l o t h e s f o r the way they pic t u r e s .  12.  I f e e l I know a person b e t t e r i f I them than i f I read about them.  13.  Noises bother me when I'm t r y i n g to someone.  14.  I am a b l e to t e l l which instruments • d i f f e r e n t times d u r i n g a song.  Id.  I d e c i d e that my h a i r needs washing when I touch i t .  16.  I can c e l l a n i c k l e from a dime w i t h my f i n g e r s when r e a c h i n s i a e my pocket.  17.  when someoody i s t e l l i n g p i c t u r e i t i n my mind.  13.  r.'hen I tune a r a d i o ,  |y.  I can r e c o g n i z e people by h e a r i n g t h e i r  me  about  look  something.  on  see  a  read are  in  me  or i n  picture or  of  talk  to  playing  at  by the way i t f e e l s  something,  I  I can  I use the numbers on the d i a l . footsteps.  7J  20.  I tune dial.  21.  I l i k e to w r i t e coiiif o r t a b l e".  22.  I pick them.  23.  I can understand picture.  24.  I like rather  a radio  by s o u n d , n o t with  up and f e e l  a  by  pen  the  or  numbers  pencil  v e g e t a b l e s and f r u i t  what i s  going  on  by  i t when someone shows me how to t h a n t o r e a d o r be t o l d a b o u t i t .  "Auditory" "Tactile"  statements* statements:  ''Visual" statements:  on  the  that  "feels  before  eating  looking  do  1,2, / ,8,I 3, 14,J 9,20 3,4,9,10,15,16,21,22 5,6,11,12,17,18,23,24  at  a  something  7.4  APPENDIX C QUESTIONNAIRE Check the sentence which best describes the way you s o l v e d most of the problems on the Space R e l a t i o n s Test. Place a check by one c h o i c e . 1. In my mind, I could q u i t e e a s i l y see the p a t t e r n s move and form the c o r r e c t shapes. 2.  I t a l k e d to myself ( f o r example, I might tell myself "The door has t o go to the l e f t of the wi ndow").  3. I had t r o u b l e imagining how the p a t t e r n would move to form the o b j e c t , and I r e a l l y would have l i k e d to p i c k up the p a t t e r n and f o l d i t . That i s how I s o l v e such problems. Imagine that you are working at a job you of these three s e t t i n g s would you most l i k e (If you would l i k e more than one, t r y t o would be more important to you.) Place beside your one c h o i c e .  enjoy. Which to work i n ? decide which a check mark  1. The area i s q u i e t and r e l a x i n g . Sometimes you can hear b i r d s outside the windows. You can have your choice of music i f you want i t . You can sometimes hear the hum of other conversations, but t h i s i s not unpleasantly loud or d i s t r a c t i n g . 2. The area i s w e l l l i t and decorated in cheerful, b r i g h t c o l o u r s . The f u r n i t u r e i s a t t r a c t i v e and there are many p i c t u r e s on the w a l l s . From the window you can see the mountains. 3. The area i s one where you f e e l comfortable and at home. There are deep carpets and s o f t f u r n i t u r e . 4. You can be p h y s i c a l l y a c t i v e while working and you have a chance to take sports or e x e r c i s e d u r i n g your breaks.  you are part i n  7.5  Imagine that you are on an i d e a l h o l i d a y i n the t r o p i c s . Which of these p l a c e s would you r a t h e r be a t ? ( I f you l i k e a l l of them, t r y to decide which f e a t u r e s are more important to you.) Place a check mark beside your one c ho i c e . 1. You can l i e on the beach and f e e l yourself t o t a l l y r e l a x , as the sun beats down on you. You can f e e l the warmth s p r e a d i n g r i g h t through you, but a s o f t breeze cools you enough so that you are c o m f o r t a b l e . When you wish, you can swim i n the warm waters or l e t the waves l a p over you. 2.  L y i n g beside the ocean w i t h your eyes c l o s e d , you can hear the sound of the waves r o l l i n g i n and breaking on the shore. The leaves r u s t l e i n the breeze. Nearby, t r o p i c a l b i r d s are c a l l i n g and s i n g i n g , and the sound o f music can be heard from the v i l l a g e .  3.  From your c a b i n , you look out over a s t r e t c h of white sand t o the deep blue water beyond i t , s p a r k l i n g i n the sun. Lush green palm trees s t r e t c h from the c a b i n to the shore. In the distance, blue-green mountains seern to rise m a j e s t i c a l l y out o f the water.  t  In Walt Disney-type movies and cartoons, animals are l i k e people. If I had a chance to be an animal l i k e t h a t : 1.  I would most want to be a  2.  Most o f a l l ,  3.  Right now, I am most l i k e  because  I would hate to be a a  because because  Complete the f o l l o w i n g sentences i n any way that i s f o r you: 1. The season I l i k e best i s  because  2.  If I had one hour o f f school t o do anything I I would  3.  When I'm with my f r i e n d s ,  I r e a l l y l i k e to  4 . My g r e a t e s t s t r e n g t h i s 5.  When I enter a new group, I  6.  At n i g h t  I like  true  wanted,  76  7. My h o u s e 8. M o t o r c y c l e s F. T r y t o f o r m a m e n t a l p i c t u r e o f y o u r l i v i n g room a t home. See a l l t h e d e t a i l s a s c l e a r l y as y o u c a n . When y o u have " l o o k e d a t " t h i s p i c t u r e f o r a minute o r s o , check any s t a t e m e n t s b e l o w w h i c h were t r u e f o r you w h i T e you had t h i s mental picture. You may c h o o s e more t h a n one response. 1 . The p i c t u r e was c l e a r and i n f o c u s , a l m o s t was a c t u a l l y l o o k i n g a t t h e room. 2. The p i c t u r e was a b i t u n c l e a r , a n d I had k e e p i n g i t c l e a r l y i n rnind. 3.  like I trouble  I t a l k e d t o m y s e l f i n my h e a d , t o h e l p me g e t t h e p i c t u r e r i g h t ( f o r example, I might s a y to myself "The r e d c h a i r i s b e s i d e t h e T.V.")  4. I j u s t "saw" t h e p i c t u r e . myself about i t .  I  didn't  talk  to  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
China 26 5
United States 9 5
Germany 6 10
Japan 6 0
Russia 4 0
France 3 0
Sweden 1 0
Canada 1 0
Australia 1 0
Hong Kong 1 0
City Views Downloads
Beijing 23 1
Unknown 12 16
Ashburn 7 0
Tokyo 6 0
Shenzhen 3 4
Saint Petersburg 3 0
Seattle 1 0
Montreal 1 0
Sunnyvale 1 2
Central District 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054320/manifest

Comment

Related Items