Table Of ContentUND ERST ANDING LITERACY
AND COGNITION
Theory, Research, and Application
UNDERST ANDING LITERACY
AND COGNITION
Theory, Research, and Application
Edited by
ehe Kan Leong and Bikkar S. Randhawa
University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
PLENUM PRESS • NEW YORK AND LONDON
Llbrary of Congress Cataloglng-ln-Publlcatlon Data
Understandlng 11teracy and cogn1tlon : theory. research. and
app11cat10n / ed1ted by Che Kan Leong and Blkkar S. Randhawa.
p. cm.
"Based on the P10ceed1ngs of the Slxt1eth Annlversary Inv1tat10nal
Conference on L1teracy and Cogn1tion for a Chang1ng Soc1ety. held
October 29-31. 1967. in Saskatoon. Saskatchewan. Canada"--T.p.
verso.
Includes bibliographical references.
!SBN-13: 978-1-4684-5750-6 e-!SBN-13: 978-1-4684-5748-3
DO!: 10.1007/978-1-4684-5748-3
1. L1teracy--Congresses. 2. Cogn1tlon--Congresses.
3. Educatlonal technology--Congresses. 4. Cogn1t1ve learn1ng
-Congresses. I. Leong. Che Kan. II. Randhawa. Bikkar S.
III. S1xTleth Annlversary Invltatlonal Conference on L1teracy and
Cogn1tlon for aChanglng Soclety (1987 : Saskatoon. Sask.l
LC149.U48 1989
302.2 ' 244--dc20 89-77899
CIP
Based on the proceedings of the Sixtieth Anniversary Invitational Conference
on Literacy and Cognition for aChanging Society, held October 29-31, 1987,
in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
© 1989 Plenum Press, New York
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1989
A Division of Plenum Publishing Corporation
233 Spring Street, New York, N.Y. 10013
All rights reserved
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming,
recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher
PREFACE
What does it me an to be literate? What does it mean to be a cognizing
individual? What is the nature of cognizing? These are not new questions.
They have been treated as "philosophical puzzles" to be pondered systema
tically in the hope of some eventual solution. They have also been viewed
as sets of "language games" with their own rules to enable the individual
to understand the world. These age-old and significant issues gain renewed
meaning with our advances in technology and neurosciences. Psychologists
and educators would need to be aware of the explicit knowledge needed to
prepare their students to be literate individuals.
These were some of the questions that a small number of psychologists,
educators, and computer scientists attempted to answer when they gathered
for the Symposium Literacy and Cognition, which was held at the University
of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada from 29th to 31st October, 1987. The
occasion also marked the sixtieth anniversary of the College of Education
of the University, which had as its beginning the Normal School for the
Province of Saskatchewan. We are grateful to the presenters for their
presentations and their written papers, and also to our other colleagues
from the United States and Sweden for their contributions to the multi
faceted theme of literacy and cognition.
There are many other people whom we would like to thank. These
include: Dr. Sylvia Fedoruk, Chancellor of the University and Lieutenant
Governor of Saskatchewan, for her opening remarks at the Symposium; Dr.
Murray Scharf, Dean of the College of Education, for his strong support
and the financial assistance from the College and the University; and the
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for its confer
ence grant. Special thanks also go to Sheryl Yuzik for her administrative
work in connection with the Symposium and her help in proof-reading some
of the chapters; to Mary-Ann Barr for meticulously and patiently typing
(and sometimes retyping) this complete volume for camera-ready printing.
We appreciate the publication of this work by Plenum Publishing, and in
particular the guidance given us by its Editor, Patricia V. Vann, and the
Special Assistant to the Managing Editor, Gregory Safford. Space pre
cludes our mentioning the names of other colleagues who have helped us in
the project.
It is our sincere hope that attempts such as ours at understanding
literacy and cognition will lead to the continued quest in these important
endeavours. When this volume appears in print, Che Kan Leong will have
assumed the Endowed Lansdowne professorship with the Department of Psycho-
v
logica1 Foundations in Education, the University of Victoria, Victoria,
British Co1umbia, Canada, V8W 2Y2. Whi1e he will miss the Prairie scene
with its variegated seasons, he will, from a slight1y different vista,
continue to grapp1e with some of the issues raised in this antho1ogy and
e1sewhere.
May, 1989 Che Kan Leong and Bikkar S. Randhawa
College of Education
University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION TO PART I: THEORY 1
Chapter
Literate Thought 3
David R. Olson
2 A Schoolman's "Doubtfulness"-Metaphors on Literacy
and Cognition 17
- Che Kan Leong
3 Neural Substrate of Cognition and Literacy:
Biology as Wish Fulfillment? 33
Merrill Hiscock
4 From Literacy to Cognitive Science 55
Bikkar S. Randhawa
5 Cognition and Learning 73
Dennis Hunt
6 A Framework for Developing Theories about
Instructional Effectiveness 85
Philip H. Winne
INTRODUCTION TO PART 11: RESEARCH 127
7 The Practical Use of Artificial Intelligence in
Automated Tutoring: Current Status and
Impediments to Progress 131
Gordon I. McCalla and Jim E. Greer
8 Dual-Route, ACT*, and PDP Models of the
Acquisition of Word Decoding Skills 157
Fotena A. Zirps and Richard K. Wagner
9 Through a Looking Glass: Swedish Research on
Reading Using the TEXTWINDOW System 173
Robert J. Jarvella and Ingvar Lundberg
vii
10 Computer Speech in Reading Research, Instruction,
and Remediation 189
Leonard P. Haines and ehe Kan Leong
11 Some Re-thinking of the Psycho-Educationa1
Diagnostic Process from the Perspective of
Deve10ping a Computer-Guided Expert System 203
John McLeod
INTRODUCTION TO PART 111: APPLICATION 215
12 Schoo1ing, Literacy and Cognitive Deve1opment:
A Study in Rural India 217
J. P. Das and U. N. Dash
13 Scientific Literacy and the Twenty-First
Century 245
Glen Aikenhead
14 Techno1ogica1 Literacy: Imp1ications for
Instruction 255
Reg Fleming
15 Cognition, Literacy, and Curriculum 269
Trevor J. Gambell
16 Cognitive Education: A Longitudinal Examination 287
R. F. Mulcahy, D. Peat, G. Mancini,
J. Andrews, and K. Marfo
ON LITERACY AND COGNITION: A CRITICAL SUMMATION 315
David R. Olson
EDITORS' ADDENDUM 319
INDEX 321
viii
INTRODUCTION TO PART I: THEORY
If a little knowl€dge is dangerous, where is the man
who has so much as to be out of danger?
--Thomas Henry Huxley
Astate of uncertainty about' our present state of knowledge (broadly
defined) is implicit in Huxley's remarkable metaphorical reminder. Cogni
tive awareness of one's competence in skills necessary for effective
functioning in a complex society and of the appropriateness of the current
level and types for the future represents a constant challenge. Miller,
Galanter, and Pribram (1960) anticipated this challenge in their bold and
historie foray into cognitive psychology, in the midst of extreme popu
larity and domination of behaviorism. Plans, strategies, and behaviors
have to be revised constantly in light of the changes in the perceived
state of the environment. Literacy in this context is no exception.
Therefore, the challenges of this dynamic state of cognitive well-being
are enormous and explorations into these is the focus of this section of
the book.
Literacy and cogn1t10n are conjoined in the title of this book.
1mplicit in this co-occurrence is the notion that literacy and cognition
are correlated, and the quality of one predicts the quality of the other.
Really? This debate in part is the theme of Olson's chapter. 1s the
literate thought qualitatively different from the illiterate thought? How
does one verify the affirmative or the negative claim? Olson presents
three different hypotheses and forwards claims and counterclaims in support
and denial of these. 1t seems that the text and utterance underlie the
rudiments of thought through enabling capacities people acquire in a
culture.
Leong discusses Olson's paper from a variety of perspectives and the
most interesting for our readers would be his definition of reading (lit
eracy) and functions of literacy. "Reading [literacy] is the interpreta
tion, application, revision and invention of symbol systems." Whereas,
the functions of literacy are: " 1nforming, re-forming and forming with
different symbol systems." 1t is to the expansion and integration of
these ideas that Leong devotes most of his discussion. Again, Leong re
emphasizes the importance of metacognitive components of literacy whereby
the individual manifests his or her literate competence as a driver, not
as a passenger. A competent individual is in control of his or her mental
resources to be deployed in an efficient and strategie manner.
Research problems in education and science are complex. However, the
application of scientific results to practice requires that the evidence
is solid and that the results have been replicated. Furthermore, those
wishing to apply science to practice should fully understand the process
of translation and transformation. The application of scientific results
to education has mystified many practitioners. In fact, many fads have
arisen as a result of inappropriate extrapolation of brain research.
Hiscock illustrates such unfortunate attempts and emphasizes two needs:
"the need for educators to gain a better understanding of the manner in
which scientific knowledge is acquired and communicated, and the need for
scientists to devise more adequate ways of conceptualizing brain func
tions." The same message is apparent in Randhawa's and Hunt's papers.
Randhawa, in particular, while tracing the history of evolution of
literacy, argues that the quality of mind is as much a result of societal
role and experience as formal education. Manifestations of competence
takes on different forms depending upon the experiential conditions.
Randhawa challenges the cognitive scientists to unravel the components of
competence. Hunt, similarly, points out that there is no adequate theory
of cognitive learning; moreover, Olson even goes as far as to suggest in
his summation of the proceedings of the Invitational Symposium that cog
nition and learning are in fact incompatible terms. Perhaps, this incom
patibility paralleis the "learning paradox" suggested by Pascuel-Leone
(1980). Regardless of inherent theoretical problems in cognitive learning,
Hunt suggests a number of interesting implications of cognitive movement
for education.
Instructional implications based on theoretical framework compelled
Winne, in his paper, to delimit varied differences in teacher instructional
behavior to be characterized by only two categories, "telling knowledge and
guiding students' cognitive engagement with that knowledge to govern how
students learn." Further, what students learn from instruction is, accord
ing to Winne, not a function of students' cognitive operations, but rather
of the structure of knowledge and of four parameters: attention to cues;
perception of the cognitive operations they signal; capability to perform
those cognitive operations; and motivation to perform those cognitive
operations. A novel methodological alternative to research on instruc
tional effectiveness rounds out this presentation. An appreciation of the
complexity of the structure of knowledge, both fallible and infallible, is
essential in this context (Agnew & Brown, 1989a, 1989b). Each individual
constructs his or her own reality from a given knowledge domain and this
provides a formidable challenge to theorists of instructional effective
ness.
REFERENCES
Agnew, N. M., & Brown, J. L. (1989a). Foundations for a model of knowing:
I. Constructing reality. Canadian Psychology, 30, 152-167.
Agnew, N. M., & Brown, J. L. (1989b). Foundations for a model of knowing:
11. Fallible but functional knowledge. Canadian Psychology, 30, 168-
183.
Mi11er, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the
structure of behavior. New York: Holt.
Pascual-Leone, J. (1980). Constructive problems for constructive theories:
The current relevance of Piaget's work and a critique of information
processing simulation psychology. In R. H. Kluwe & H. Spada (Eds.),
Developmental models of thinking (pp. 263-296). New York: Academic
Press.
2
1
LITERATE THOUGHT1
David R. Olson2
Cent re for Applied Cognitive Science, Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education, and McLuhan Program in Culture and
Technology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario
Canada M5S 1V6
HISTORICAL ARGUMENTS
Beliefs about the relationship between literacy and thought have a
long, indeed a venerable history. Beginning in the 18th century, in the
period known as the Enlightenment, there was the assumption that an equa
tion could be made between literacy, civilization, and rationality. Writers
such as John Stuart Mill and Thomas Jefferson claimed that the ability to
read and write was not only important to personal fu1fillment but also
critical to the existence of an informed citizenry and a responsible
government. But what began as a reasonable assumption has, in the course
of two centuries, picked up sufficient momentum to be considered, in our
time, the "myth" of literacy. I refer to it as a myth because it is no
longer a belief subject to reflection and argument but an assumption held
unreflectively. It is the assumption that directly links illiteracy with
poverty, malnutrition, and unemployment as well as other social il1s, that
makes us think of illiteracy as if it were some degrading social disease,
of illiterates as second class citizens, and of education as a means of
eliminating the "scourge" of illiteracy (Olson, 1974).
In the past two decades that assumption has come under criticism, in
part because of a new understanding of, not 1iteracy, but orality, the
study of the structure and social uses of oral as opposed to written lang
uage. This new understanding has let us recognize the myth of literacy as
a myth; a belief not defensible on intellectua1 grounds. Hence, the rela
tion between literacy and thought needs to be reexamined and reconstructed.
The beginnings of that reconstruction, as mentioned, are recent. Over
the past twenty-five years the myth of literacy, the set of assumptions
linking literacy, civilization, and rationality, has been replaced by, what
we may refer to as, the literacy hypothesis. The literacy hypothesis poses
1 An earlier version of this paper was published in the Proceedings of the
Third International Conference on Thinking, D. Topping (Ed.), L. Erlbaum,
in press. This paper is based upon The world on paper (in preparation).
2 The author gratefully acknowledges the support of the Spencer Foundation,
SSHRC and the Ontario Ministry of Education through its Block Transfer
Grant to OISE.
3
