A Review of the Literature for:
Richard A. Parkany
rparkany@borg.com
315.733.2016
An Historic Context Concerning Research in Symbolic Systems and Semiotic Meaning |
This page: 1 of 19
|
Overview: Spawning Our Inquiry |
This page: 1 of 19
|
Researching Ontological Frameworks: Collecting and Sorting the Studies |
This page: 3 of 19
|
|
This page: 4 of 19
|
|
|
This page: 5 of 19
|
|
|
This page: 8 of 19
|
|
|
This page: 10 of 19
|
|
Unifying Our Technical (Structural/Formal) Frames: The Ontology of Our Study |
This page: 12 of 19
|
|
This page: 13 of 19
|
|
|
This page: 13 of 19
|
|
|
This page: 15 of 19
|
|
|
This page: 16 of 19
|
|
Relevance to Instructional Technology |
This page: 17 of 19
|
|
This page: 17 of 19
|
|
|
This page: 17 of 19
|
|
|
This page: 18 of 19
|
|
|
This page: 19 of 19
|
|
References |
|
Notes |
Overview: Spawning Our Inquiry
Go Back to Table of Contents
This inquiry is a historical survey of the critical literature with respect to research investigating symbolic systems and semiotic meaning and their relevancy to instructional design. It grew out of questions and considerations having to do with modes of engagement in and potential facilitation of literate thinking inspired by seminar discussions in Instructional Design (after Bangert-Drowns and Pike, 1997). As such, its intent is to clarify and offer context for several of the themes developed across that discourse and to share individual insights nested in the critical literature with the cohorts of those same discussions. And since, "(t)he construction of social knowledge is, by definition, an interpersonal process that requires a community of independent researchers who contribute adjustments, contradictions, or alternative conceptualizations to research that has preceded them" (Bangert-Drowns, 1997b), this historical review is offered as an attempt to "illustrate evolution, (and) to document political and cultural context" in the critical literature by tracing the developments of the theory and constructs of symbol systems and semiotic meaning over time. Particularizing the setting for this inquiry is our intent for this review to additionally serve as an inquiry preparatory for further research initiatives with respect to socio-cultural features, effects, and entities evident in and their importance to educative settings.
Nesting our originating concerns within the context of learner-engagement as taxonomically described by Bangert-Drowns and Pike (1997), we proceed with Schuell (1990) and find it useful to frame the instructional process as marked by phases. We find Schuell's analysis cogent when he summarizes, "...(M)eaningful learning in any field is a much more complex process than often realized; different types of learning are involved, and...various phases or stages occur during which the nature of the learning process changes in systematic ways." (p. 532) Though, we agree with both Schuell (1990) and Champagne, et al. (1982) when they identify essentially distict phases of learning (beginning, intermediate, and terminal; after Schuell), we depart from the particular interpretation as offered by both studies in the "novice/expert" metaphor motivating each. Though we feel this metaphor not entirely unuseful, we feel that the choice of metaphor could just have easily been "mentor/understudy" or "master/apprentice" as Collins, et al. (1991) chose. Rather, at this level of our inquiry, we find the broadest consensus in the literature for considering instructional processes as occurring in phases with differential treatment indicated for the several discrete phases in the overall process of learning--eventually culminating in engagements of what Bangert-Drowns defines as "literate thinking".
Literate thinking, after Bangert-Drowns, is described as possessing four essential elements: (1) sensitivity to the structure of the literature and an ability to evaluate and interpret the significance of its forms; (2) a sophisticated view of and skill with the possibilities of interpretation (hermeneutics); (3) the ability to employ meaningful symbols, metaphors, and analogies hermeneutically; and (4) an awareness of the personal, intellectual, perceptual, and emotional associations evoked by transactions with literature and an ability to hermeneutically engage with the literature (after Bangert-Drowns, 1997a). Incidentally, we ask the reader to notice the structural symmetries evidenced in this description of literate thinking and that of the cognitive educational tools, "symbol systems", which facilitate these aspects of learning after Salomon (1988) as cited by Bagert-Drowns (1993, p. 70). It is within this definition of literate thinking and learning that we were ushered to our present inquiry by the observations of John-Steiner and Mahn as they attempted to frame the developmental learning processes against the "crisis" in psychology as represented by anomalies contrasted by the "cognitive" and "behavioral" strands of psychological inquiry. (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 192). With Vygotsky and his constructivist socio-cultural framework of inquiry presently interfacing in the contemporary critical literature with that of the classical positivist objective studies, we see the historical stage dynamically set for our present study.
It was agreed by our cohorts in seminar on our first day of discourse,
as articulated later in our reading of John-Steiner and Mahn (1996) that,
"Human development starts with dependence on caregivers. The developing
individual relies on the vast pool of transmitted experiences of others."
(p. 192) Just as certainly, it is through the "mediation" of language and
other complex symbol systems that knowledge and meaning are conveyed from
the "knower" to the "learner" in the instructional setting. It is within
these two axioms of instructional process, as it were, that we situate
our current inquiry. Specifically, it will be illustrated that the study
of symbol systems and the semiotic meanings conveyed thereby is set and
framed historically by anthropologic inquiry and maps a distinction made,
therein, since Pike (1954) between the "etic" and "emic" points-of-view,
a distinction based upon a similar bifurcation of studies between phonetic
and phonemic aspects (hence, the "-etic" and "-emic" nomenclature) found
in philologic and linguistic studies. The development of the theoretical
and practical separation of the research into these two aspects, or strands,
will be investigated and considered in light of our present concerns with
respect to literate engagement. Several implications of this historic distinction
in the literature concerning symbol systems and semiotic meaning will be
illustrated by considering a third frame of inquiry historically represented
in our review of the literature by phenomenological inquiry.
Our research was initiated by keyword searches [(modeling AND software);
(symbol systems); and (semiotic)] of the critical literature within two
on-line data bases: (a) ERIC, consisting of Research in Education and
Current Index to Journals in Education; and (b) EBSCO. Similar key
word searches were made within the catalogue listings of stack holdings.
Internet searches utilizing two search engines, Yahoo and Alta-Vista
were conducted, as well, in a secondary refinement conducted after the
traditional searches. Here, keyword searches [(cognitive science); (semiotic);
and (Merleau-Ponty AND Dreyfus) were used to fill in gaps detected in the
more traditional listings of the critical literature. Analysis of abstracts
and citation summaries were conducted based on these searches. All articles
and citations indicating either a theoretical or an instructional/educational
framework were reserved for full-text analysis. No attempt was made to
be thorough or complete in our selection, except that an overall balance
and thematic completeness of treatments and perspectives was desired.
A thematic analysis was then conducted in order to sort the studies with respect to their theoretical or practical frameworks. In the most general reading of these resources, a pattern emerged which grouped the studies into three major structural areas of inquiry. These classifications consisted of studies whose orientation was with respect to: (a) symbol or sign systems as such; (b) mental (psychological) or experiential (social) processes involving symbols; or (c) analysis of signs as fundamentally dynamic referential entities, in and of themselves, inexorably united with intentional behavioral acts of the learner. This external, objective analysis which preceded full-text analysis was born out in the exegesis and internal analysis which was the intent of this study. The thematic exegesis based on full-text analysis follows in the next three sections.
A Fundamental Distinction Revealed in Our Review: Etic/Emic Aspects of Inquiry Go Back to Table of Contents
It might be helpful for our readers at this point to digress momentarily and to consider that this "bifurcation of studies" just mentioned occurs in all three aspects of educational theory and practice as articulated within our own department in which this seminar is nested; that is, in the curricular, instructional, and learning perspectives of education. In poor pedagogic form, I explicitly announce these to our readers as advance organizers for situating our historical study. In curricular model theory, exemplary extremes are represented by, respectively, Tyler and Miller-Seller; in curricular evaluation studies, by Bloom, Thorndike and Kaufman on the one hand, and Guba, Lincoln and Schwandt on the other; in instructional design by Bloom and Gagne, the former, and the latter by Dewey and Piaget; finally, the extreme frames in learning theory are seen in first Bloom, Carroll, and Cronbach, and then Piaget, Ausubel and Cohen. Explicitly reducing all of these cases to essentials, we find a commonality in all refractions and splits of inquiry aforementioned. This difference is a structural (ontological, paradigmatic, or perspectival) difference and has to do with the focus and point-of-departure, as it were, of each antipodal (extreme) approach to educational inquiry; that is, the objective (positivist) or experiential (constructivist) paradigms. As Nelson (1996) puts it, "The objective scientist sets up the experiment and views the data that emerge as a puzzle demanding an explanation in terms of the scientist's prior theory...The experiential approach takes...history (sic situations) into account in formulating a theory of what the child (sic learner) brings to the experiment..." We transcribe Nelson's point by seeing, for the purposes of our present review, the distinction as one between inquiry concerning product and the techniques for producing products and that concerning process and the historically situated context in which learning, literally, takes place.
This bifurcation of inquiry is a distinction that is as old as Western Civilization, itself. Heidegger (1962) finds this distinction as based in Aristotle and his discussions concerning two types of knowledge: techne and praxis, technique and practice, and, therefore between technical and practical knowledge. We have found this distinction useful for classifying the broad scope of our study, as well. In a truly Aristotelian effort, we wish to view the two aspects of inquiry--positive and constructive--not as contradictory or antithetical to, but rather, as complementary and cooperative toward a full and complete framework of educational inquiry. In fact, we can clearly indicate the relevance of this long-standing distinction between technique and practice by directly considering, next, our constructs of symbol systems and semiotic meaning, respectively; how they are related; and how it is that they lend themselves, respectively, to the positive and constructive paradigms of inquiry.
The Anthropological Connections between Tools, Symbols and Semiotic Meaning: Tracing the Historic Articulation of the Etic and Emic Aspects of Cultural Analysis Go Back to Table of Contents
We follow Olson's (1974) observations as articulated in his Media and Symbols when he reflects on the anthropological evidence for the origination of symbol systems. "It was the sharing and improving of both the practical and communication tools and the skill in their use which, when transmitted to the young, made culture possible--culture became 'man's adaptive dimension' in Ashley Montagu's phrase." (p. 11) Citing Mayr (1963), he considers:
Continuing in this restricted and provisionally reduced mode
of inquiry, Gross refines Olson's definitions by indicating:
"A code or symbol system may be defined as an organized subset of the total range of elements, operations, and ordering principles correlated with a field of reference that are possible in a given mode or family of symbol systems... We invariably encounter symbolic modes in terms of a particular 'native' code which will shape our perceptions, memories, and cognitive processes in that mode. Most human beings...need never be aware that the code they know is not coextensive with the symbolic mode. Phenomenologically, then, the code--not the mode--is the primary level of analysis." (Olson, 1974, p. 59, emphasis added)
This provisional stand kept the inquiry of the Society squarely
within the objective paradigm of inquiry concerning symbol systems. Research
in semiotic meaning would be deferred until further "schemes" could be
refined which would permit such study--concerning the syntax inherent in
the mediating forms (pictures, movies, hyper-links), themselves--hence,
a purely etic study. The constructivism of Vygotsky as well as the
phenomenology of intentional acts will radically depart from this approach,
as will be seen.
Here, in Olson's research initiative, we come up against the anthropological basis for the bifurcation of inquiry, perhaps explicitly unknown to Olson and his progeny. This analytic of the code, the preoccupation with learning theory and the structure of language is evidence of what in anthropology is called the etic aspect of cultural anthropology (Pike, 1954). After Pike, social science inquiry in the field of cultural anthropology came to view inquiry as composed of both "etic (theoretical), as well as emic (experientialist) units of analysis" (Nelson, 1996, p. 10) in its critical literature. According to Pike, this distinction seeks to capture a similar refinement in analysis which had been occurring in linguistic and philologic studies for more than a century since A. J. Ellis seminal studies in linguistics and the philologic exegesis of moral theory performed by Neitzsche were laid out. This linguistic study included both a phonetic (ideal, visually symbolic) as well as a phonemic (real, aurally experienced) aspect of analysis. Pike (1954) sought to extend this distinctive frame of inquiry into that of cultural anthropology.
Paraphrasing Pike's views, it was assumed there was an underlying cultural logic of distinctions and conflations implied by any cultural activity (including, especially, language, hence the extention...), and used by actors but not (necessarily) consciously available to them under most conditions (this sounds very familiar to Gross' frame as cited previously). The job of the analyst was to identify that logic through his emic analysis. This emic analysis would be distinct from any externally framed functional, etic, formal analysis conducted accounting for no internal cultural logic (i. e. semiotic cultural meaning). Replicating the theoretical function of phonetics in linguistic studies whose units of analysis are the international phonetic alphabet, Pike emphasized the etic frame for studying the cultural symbolic forms and the emic frame for studying cultural content (semiotic meaning). This linguistic theoretical (ontological) distinction can be traced according to another of its significant threads, that of propositional (sentential) calculus--the formal analysis of language, logic, and its critique, meta-logic.
Formal Studies (Phonetic Studies: Propositional Calculus, Meta-logic, Structural Analyses) Go Back to Table of Contents
It is not the intent of this study to thoroughly trace the history of sentential calculus from its roots in Aristotle's Logic to its articulation in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) research. Rather, we merely wish to sketch the traces of its development and implications. We pick up and identify the etic thread of inquiry in Aristotle's Logic and the introduction of the sentential form in symbolic representation of subject and predicate and consequent analysis. Not much movement was made in this phonetic study of propositional forms until Leibnitz began to stylize the symbolic representations (phonetics) in "better fitting code" in the seventeenth century (Parkinson, 1966). Formal, etic logic progressed at phenomenal rates, thereafter, especially after Frege, through Peano, and past Godel's meta-logical investigations into the propositional (etic) forms of language (logic) (van Heijenoort, 1967). This vein of inquiry continues past the foundational crises encountered in Godel's work within David Hilbert's project seeking formal foundations for positive inquiry half a century ago.
Dawson (1987) citing, Godel's unpublished Gibbs lecture of 1951, indicates that Godel interpreted his work on the (In)completeness and (In)consistency (Dis)proofs within the Hilbert project as evidence that the mind could not be reduced to the working of the brain. According to Godel, with respect to the traditional standards of AI research, Turing erred in supposing "that a finite mind is capable of only a finite number of distinguishable states...disregard[ing] completely the fact that mind, in its use, is not static, but constantly developing." (p. 19) This critique, though not astounding if spoken from the field of constructive, emic studies is uniquely interesting--especially since it comes from the core of the positive, etic paradigm rebounding from its inability to secure within its paradigm its own formal (etic) foundations. Though Godel is not without his detractors within etic studies, this diversion is incisive since it indicates a dynamic within the core of the paradigm, apart from its constructive critique.
Returning ever so obliquely to our original point of departure which was the investigation of the etic aspect of language and other cultural forms, we are back to current considerations in linguistic studies. The frame of discussion in the extreme etic frame is exemplified in contemporary linguistic studies by "Chomsky and Fodor against the constructivist position of Piaget (Piatelli-Palmarini, 1980), with the strong claims that language, indeed all concepts, must be innate, that is, not developed or learned." (Nelson, p. 27) This, of course, is simply a restatement of the rationalist paradigm as articulated by Kant in his Critique of Pure Reason. It has been shown by us elsewhere (Parkany, 1997) that this extreme, a-historical theory of concept development necessarily reduces to a dualist paradigm and the concomitant anomalies and theoretical impasses associated with a correspondence theory of truth, therefore, hereby obtain.
The most obvious anomaly of this extreme form (after Chomsky) of etic inquiry is framed in the discussions which have to do with verification and reliability constructs. Though it is not the intent of this study to establish particular paradigms of inquiry, but merely to classify theories and practices within the historical frame of theoretical development, it will be pointed out that both extremes of the inquiry with respect to symbolic forms (etic, formal studies) and semiotic meaning (emic, experiential studies) point toward irreconcilable anomalies when pursued either theoretically or experientially. It is here, that we introduce the next thread of inquiry investigating language and culture. The third historical thread, that of phenomenology is next considered. Appropriately so now, as it was with respect to the impasses presented by the extremities in the etic and emic aspects of cultural analysis that this paradigm established its inquiry.
Interpretive Studies: Phenomenological Inquiry Investigating Intentional Acts Go Back to Table of Contents
Limitations implicit within the etic and emic aspects of social science inquiry, either taken separately as in Chomsky or Vygotsky, or together as is attempted in cultural anthropology (as treated by Pike, 1954 and Harris, 1978) occasion yet a third frame of inquiry concerning symbol systems and semiotics. This third way seeks to investigate semiotics from the standpoint of what are known as intentional acts via a methodology Husserl called phenomenological reduction (epoche) and which Benjamin Pierce called reciprocal semiosis. As Dreyfus (1982) explains, "the phenomenological reduction is Husserl's way of describing the turning away from both objects in the world and psychological activity to the mental contents which make possible the reference of each type of mental state to each type of object...Husserl has finally begun to be recognized as the precursor of current interest in intentionality--the first to have a general theory of the role of mental representations at the center of his philosophy of language and mind. As the first thinker to put directedness of mental representations at the center of his philosophy, he is also beginning to emerge as the father of current research in cognitive psychology and artificial intelligence." (Dreyfus, 1982, p. 2)
This turn away from both objects in the world (etic studies) and psychological activity (emic studies) focuses upon mental representations given in the immediacy of intuition, themselves, as its point-of-departure. These intentional acts are, in and of themselves semiotic entities already referential in the very moment of perception. From this inquiry, we seek not atoms of elemental non-referential entities upon which a calculus of combinatorics is performed (etic studies) in order to generate meaning; nor do we come to investigate processes of mental or social activities (emic studies) in which meaning is produced. Rather, mental states as they are given in the immediacy of perception are analyzed in order to reveal meanings which are latent within the very constitutive mental acts of the knower, itself. According to Husserl, responding to the rationalist (etic) inquiry, "It is not true that only an extensional calculus of classes is possible. A calculus of conceptual contents, or intensions, is also possible." (Husserl, 1973 as cited in Dreyfus, 1982, p. 46). As it is not the intention of this current study to explicate or critique, but rather, to collect and thematically sort our studies, further analysis of this third frame will await further research. Suffice it to say, here that Dreyfus (1982, 1996) does the best job we've seen in summarizing the various contemporary issues with respect to semiotics and that study's implications for literate engagement. We will continue by tracing the threads in phenomenological studies which are most relevant to literate engagement.
Wrathall and Kelly (1996) in their on-line article, Existential Phenomenology and Cognitive Science, pick up the historical threads of phenomenology and trace in a concise fashion the significant influences this inquiry has effected in the field of cognitive science and AI research "exploring how the continental tradition in philosophy and cognitive science can 'inform' each other." (paragraph 6) "Both Heidegger (1889-1976) and Merleau-Ponty (1908-1961) did the bulk of their work before the AI project got off the ground, indeed before there were machines recognizable as modern day computers at all. Nevertheless, both philosophers were working against well established, representationalist views about the nature of language and perception--views which are assimilable to representational assumptions underlying much of the contemporary work in AI and cognitive science." (paragraph 13) Summarizing Merleau-Ponty's ontological standpoint Wrathall and Kelly (1996) state:
"Phenomenologically, when I perceive a thing I experience a series of pre-determinate kinaesthetic attitudes (the body) which tend towards a maximum unity (the thing). The phenomena of body and thing are not reducible to intellectual processes but require a different kind of analysis altogether: 'The constancy of forms and sizes in perception is therefore not an intellectual function, but an existential one, which means that it has to be related to the pre-logical act by which the subject takes up his place in the world.' (Merleau-Ponty, 1962, p. 303)" (paragraph 26)
Merleau-Ponty and the phenomenological tradition since his work takes as the fundamental given of their analysis not the mind and its stock of memories, nor its traditional correlate, the object of representations of these memories, but, rather the body as it immediately perceives its content situated in-the-world. For this line of inquiry, then, the mind is the body as it perceives its world.
According to Lechte (1994), Merleau-Ponty sought existential foundations
for the inspirations he found in the work of Saussure's and Levi-Srauss'
structuralist synchronic theories of language and semiotics, a search which
saw his work diverge from the etic frame of inquiry toward one which "seems
to emphasize the subject's lived relation to the world." Summarizing this
frame concisely, Lechte continues:
"To view language synchronically, Merleau-Ponty argues, is to view it as enacted, and not as an abstract, universal entity, subject to gradual evolution over time. Language here is fundamentally the 'living present' in speech. To speak, to communicate--to use language--is in part equivalent to becoming aware that there are only successive living presents. Indeed, any discourse on language must come to grasp itself as an enactment of language. A linguistics worthy of the name, therefore, comes to recognize that language can only be understood from the inside. In other words, language can no more be reduced to a history of linguistics than history can be reduced to historical discourse." (Lechte, 1994)
Again, whether or not this frame of inquiry is cogent or adequate
in the light of critical review is not the point of our study. Rather,
we have sought to indicate, by its inclusion in the frame of our study
a more complete thematic treatment of the various modes of semiotic inquiry.
This concludes the third of the three general modes of inquiry present
in the critical literature concerning symbol systems and semiotics. The
remainder of our work will be to briefly discuss the studies which entered
our three modes of semiotic inquiry and their relevance to engagement in
literate thinking.
Let us, for now, investigate how, after reading Champaign, et al. (1982), a practitioner will make use of all three aspects of semiotic inquiry as discovered in this study. The physics teacher, in this inquiry, is concerned with ensuring that engagements with the learners produce a schema which is in ideal correspondence with a known, extant corpus of knowledge. Such an instructor is obviously going to benefit from a positive and objective orientation in this situation as defined by Champaign, in which the instructor is to transmit facts and heuristic methods found within Newtonian mechanics. However, this, alone does not motivate the classroom situation to action. That is, in our terms, to engage. What device Champaign uses to motivate or engage the learners is one found within the scope of constructive pedagogy: the Socratic dialogue in its five step process, as described by Champaign (1982, p. 41, citing Anderson, 1977 ). Here the practitioner is squarely within the Vygotskian socio-psychological aspects of the constructive paradigm. It is in the careful preparation of materials to be presented to the learners in the educational setting that the practitioner (and curricular extensions) best make use of the phenomenological aspect of the situation. Here, we see the phenomenological frame with its interest in the cognitive-psychological aspects of literate engagement informing the process with appropriately designed materials and dialogic input pertinent to the given classroom conditions meeting that practitioner in that building on a particular day of the week with just those individuals present for instruction.
Our point for the reader is this: it will not be through the theoretical aspects of semiotic research that a unity of research will be achieved, they, as such, are inimically antithetical. It is rather through the implementation of results brought to the individual practitioners engaged in learning situations in professional discourse that such unity of effort will be achieved. It is, therefore, from within a constructivist frame of engagement, as Champaign alluded, that the "best fit" will obtain--even in an otherwise quite positive, rationalist frame of concern. So it is that we proceed with this study. How can the practitioner be best informed?
Theoretic Studies: Objective, Cognitive, Process Go Back to Table of Contents
Objective (Objective/Etic Studies)
As Olson (1974) indicated more than two decades ago, the objective research into semiotics (etic, syntactical theory of meaning), would have to await developments in theory. By our survey, this theoretical research has not, as yet, trickled down to educational settings. Aside from the very fine work by Olson (1974) and the continuances of the meta-logical vein of inquiry since Godel previously cited, we found only two studies (Lemke, 1992 and Karamuftuoglu, 1997) which concern themselves with theoretical educational issues. Lenke (1992) is a special issue of Linguistics and Education and considers many of the themes we found in AI and other expert heuristic systems. The topic of intertextuality is studied from many perspectives, including the etic as presaged by Olson--the intertextuality of a text being all the other texts we use to make sense of it, including thematic, orientational, and organizational aspects. It is this type of structural analysis of the text/context setting that Olson saw as necessary to precipitate useful research in educational use of symbolic meanings. Karamuftuoglu (1997) presents an intriguing study in which language games are incorporated into search heuristics in an information and document retrieval system (IR) known as Okapi. Here the metaphor of a game is used in order to engage the inquirer (sic learner) within the search interface. It is this type of etic research into what Lenke studies as intertext which we find representative of contemporary theoretical research into educational studies of semiotics.
Studies such as Basil (1994) continue with research in syntactical meaning by considering effects on learning in the context of multiple channels of information processing. The question of benefits and limitations of multiple syntactic meanings simultaneously processed is a major theme in educational adaptations of multi-media educational designs. Basil concludes from current psychological theories of information processing that "there appears to be evidence of modality-specific attentional resources that select one modality of information at the expense of the other modality. These attentional mechanisms appear to support multiple resource theory." (paragraph 62) Wolfe (1992) argues from the positive, etic frame when he argues that "the contention that texts have no meaning in and of themselves is problematic, no matter how intensely that position is advanced..." (p. 261) Citing media sociologists and psychologists such as Tuchman, Epstein, Georgoudi and Rosnow, Wolfe argues, "interpretation is a culturally determined practice rooted in codes shared by message-makers and -consumers belonging to the same culture...The meaning of a media text is enabled and constrained by the culture of its origination and completed, even if not created, by its audience." (pp. 272-273) Though Wolfe's study has to do explicitly with mass media and not, explicitly, with education, we consider it here due to the implications of curriculum driven by national or regional standards and other content directive effects of public education.
An electronic archive of the Semiotic Review of Books, a refereed journal monitoring "those domains in the Humanities, the Social and the Natural Sciences which bear upon symbolic and communicative behavior, cognitive systems and processes, cultural transmission and innovations, and the study of information, meaning and signification in all forms" is offered as an appendix. This as well as the CyberSemioticInstitute are centered at Victoria College, University of Toronto and should be considered invaluable resources for a more thorough examination of semiotics. In fact, as is indicated by the mission statement downloaded from their WEB page, and as can be seen by the archives in the appendix, every theoretical aspect of this current study has been considered and critically discussed in detail. Recommended particularly due to the relevance to educational curriculum is Debatin's (1993) review of Andersen (1990) where it is argued that "computer semiotics can support the paradigm of computer development that focuses on designing a user oriented interface emphasizing Andersen's construct of communicative consistency which states that "a computer system should not communicate a perspective on work that is (at) cross purposes with that of its users." (paragraph 6) Andersen works entirely within a structuralist (etic) framework and relies upon Glossematics--a formal method of text analysis which cuts text into smaller and smaller pieces in order to find invariant elements and the smallest meaningful units--as his main semiotic tool.
Cognitive (Psychological/Emic ) Go Back to Table of Contents
Eisner's (1997) introductory article to the January, 1997 Phi Betta Kappan, a special issue dedicated to the study of how symbol systems function in our mental lives is considered to be an example of a phenomenological theoretical study in that it considers educational use of symbol systems from the standpoint of the perceptions of a perceiving learner, situated and engaged in learning. That it highlights moral and ethical issues is an indication that it is not from the positive frame. Eisner argues here that the educational uses and manipulation of symbol systems bear implications pertaining to "matters of process, content, equity, and culture." (paragraph 25) Allan (1992) examines motion media and demonstrates his Iconic Phenomena Communication Model (IPC) in his phenomenological inquiry, a model which "all the varied forms of media and communication, in part or in whole, contribute to the building of communication repertoires and the personal repertoires of the viewer-participant."
Process (Sociological/Emic) Go Back to Table of Contents
By far, the greatest numbers of theoretical educational studies, appropriately
enough are found in the process inquiry into semiotics. Most of these works
are based upon the recently translated and politically emancipated writings
of Vygotsky and his followers. Nelson (1996), previously cited is a work
on child linguistic development. After Donald's (1991) theory of philogenetic
evolution of human cognition, she infuses the concept of Vygotsky's
zone of proximal development with semiotic theory in this neo-Vygotskian
frame resulting in a construct she calls mimesis. "Mimesis, according
to Donald, incorporates mimicry and imitations to a higher end, that of
re-enacting and re-presenting an event or relationship. That is,
mimesis is fundamentally representational; it is representation through
action." We observe that this sounds very much like a phenomenological
study and might also be considered as such, specifically due to the use
of this construct. The studies found to best articulate the Vygotskian
theme of semiotic meaning, in addition to the Nelson (1996) study were
Wertsch, semiotic mediation and propositional and discourse referentiality
(1985, 1991); Cole, critical thinking (1978); Ratner, symbolic interactionism
(1991); Rogoff and Wertsche, semiotic mediation in the zone of proximal
development (1984); and Lemke, ecosocial dynamics and semogenesis (1995),
all from the indicated perspectives explicate the theory of semiotics as
presented by Vygotskian theory. Together, these theoretical readings offer
a thorough grounding in the constructive theory of semiotics.
In these concluding sections, we present studies concerning semiotics
which have direct, technical, or practical educational implications for
education and pedagogy. There were found to be studies which focused on
general curricular issues, domain specific research, and finally non-instructional
educative settings (marketing)
Curricular: General Issues Go Back to Table of Contents
These studies, again, were all in the Vygotskian frame and all focused upon the sociocultural aspects of semiotics as understood by Vygotsky. Jaramillo (1996) discussed socially negotiated meaning making in curriculum design. Daniels (1995), on the other hand investigates the regulating function of speech and school organization and its effect on domain specific effectual speech by attempting a fusion between Vygotskian semiotics and Bernstein's sociology of cultural transmission. Saint-Amand (1990) focuses on how to design curriculum which will be facilitated by dialogic mediation (semiotics) as a necessary activity in the negotiated construction of meaning. In all of these studies, there is a marked emphasis on enhancing and facilitating settings in which semiotic meaning is constructed in ways that enhance critical thinking, engagement in literate thinking. Snow, adaptive classroom teaching (1997); Carellichio and Field, strategies encouraging neural branching and creativity by overcoming the brains's natural tendency to limit information (1997); and Clark, semogenesis from code to process (1992) each approaches curricular design from the standpoint of manipulating semiotic meaning socioculturally present in symbol systems .
Pedagogical: Domain Specific Research Go Back to Table of Contents
The studies which located their semiotic research within established domains of knowledge, again, were, to a one, all Vygotskian. One study, Li and Gardner (1993) considers how traditional curricular domains, themselves, constrain creative semiotic development. The remainder of the studies are simply listed in order to illustrate the widely disseminated influence the Vygotskian frame has had in educational practice over the past decade. All of these studies exemplify the attention needed and the manner in which semiotics are utilized in the practical design of constructive lesson plans. A study investigating semiotics and abnormal psychology was Grotstein (1995) who investigated psychotic and other primitive mental disorders. Wimsatt (1996), Beniger (1991), Hicks (1993), and Greene (1997) all offer applications in aesthetics and creativity in the arts. Writing and textual composition incorporating semiotic theory were the themes of Medway (1996), Witte (1992), and Westmoreland (1995). Mathematical semiosis was investigated by Bussi, perspective drawing (projective geometry) (1996); Roth and McGinn, graphing (1996); and Becker and Vaelas, early mathematical cognition (1993). Finally, with respect to computer aided instruction (CAI), four studies were found which utilized semiotics in their expositions: Woolsey and Bellamy, science education and CAI (1997); De Bruijn, adult education (1995); Ariel, children's play and social development (1992); and Labbo, semiotic analysis of children's symbol making in CAI (1996). This extensive listing of thematic treatments is testament to the interest and richness of research in the contemporary literature.
Non-instructional Educative Settings (marketing) Go Back to Table of Contents
Concluding this section reviewing the relevance of semiotics to education, we make a somewhat startling observation. By far and away, the largest single topic concerned with semiotics was that of advertising or marketing. Whether or not they were essentially etic or emic studies was not noticed, as most of these studies were rejected since they did not have to do with instruction, but, obliquely with education. Three such studies were reserved just to indicate the variety of interest in semiotics the market place has. Indeed, it may very well be that a closer study of this area of applicability needs to be conducted in order that salient features of such studies might transfer to instructional design. The inordinate attention commercial television has for engagement is, perhaps a clue that this area of research may have much to share with educators and curriculum specialists. Hughes (1995) investigated semiotic and cultural considerations in the process of government communication coming up with conclusions similar to those of Wolfe (1992), previously cited, when he states, "Future communication policy-makers need to acknowledge that they are not dealing with a single, unitary audience or readership, but with a diverse collection of niches; and to recognize and plan for the possibility of contest and competition between those niches over the discourse within which government policies and actions are represented." Baker (1992) investigates semiotics and the sociology of knowledge of clerical workers, in her study, Bored and Busy. And finally, perhaps most revealing of all is Morris (1991) who studies the accommodation in Canadian national politics in his cultural analysis through semiotics with an eye toward "Len Norris' cartoons on official bilingualism." This study is a fascinating example of the diverse applicability found in the Vygotskian notions and theory concerning semiotics and symbolic form.
This review has sought to examine the educational implications for
research in the theory of semiotics and symbol systems. It sought to make
sense of the vast and diverse material present in the critical literature
with respect to such research. It did so by using a historical frame of
theory development and articulation. This historic study did discover
themes internal to the corpus of literature considered which found thematic
settings in the critical frames investigating semiotics.
One thing is apparent after considering this review and that is that
there is quite a bit of interest and research currently in the field with
respect to semiotics and literate thinking. Further areas of research might
focus on more closely investigating the reciprocity between etic (formal)
and emic (process) research results. Can each of these theoretically disparate
frames effectually inform each other, perhaps within an overarching paradigm
as yet to be articulated? On the face of it, it would not seem that such
fecund areas of investigation would be operating in a practical vacuum
apart form each other. Additionally, insights obtained within the emic
studies--the phenomenological (cognitive psychology) and constructivist
(social psychology) seem, ontologically, to be corrolated aspects of one
educative process. It is, perhaps here, in the collateral investigations
of the psycho-social holist educational process that the most cooperation
and acceleration of research might obtain.
Ariel, S. (1992). Semiotic analysis of children's play: A method
for investigating social development. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly.
38(1). 119-138.
Baker, P. (1992, Fall). Bored and busy: Sociology of knowledge of clerical workers. (45 paragraphs). Sociological Perspectives. 35(3). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Bangert-Drowns, R.L. (1993). The word processor as an instructional tool: A meta-analysis of word processing in writing instruction. Review of Educational Research. 63. 69-93.
Bangert-Drowns, R.L. (1997, March). Literate thinking with electronic literature: Suggestions from theory, research, and practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Bangert-Drowns, R.L. and Pyke, C. (1997, March). A taxonomy of modes of student engagement with electronic literature. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Bartolini Bussi, M.G. (1996). Mathematical discussion and perspective drawing in primary school. Educational Studies in Mathematics. 31.11-41.
Basil, M. (1994, April). Multiple resource theory I: Application to television viewing. (61 paragraphs). Communication Research. 21(2). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Becker, J. and Varelas, M. (1993). Semiotic aspects of cognitive development: Illustrations from early mathematical cognition. Psychological Review. 100(3). 420-431.
Beniger, J.R. (1991, Dec). Far afield. (1 paragraph). Communication Research. 18(6). Available E-mail oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Bruijn, H.F.M. (1995). Cognitive apprenticeship in a CAL-environment for functionally illiterate adults. Instructional Science. 23. 221-241.
Cardellichio, T. and Field, W. (1997, March). Seven strategies that encourage neural branching. (78 paragraphs). Educational Leadership. 54(6). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Champagne, A.B. and Klopfer, L.E. (1982). Cognitive research and the design of science instruction. Educational Psychologist. 17. 31-53.
Clark, A. (1992). The presence of a symbol. (55 paragraphs). Connection Science. 4(3-4). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Collins, A., Brown, J.S. and Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American Educator. 15. 6-11, 38-46.
Daniels, H. (1995, Dec). Pedagogic practices, tacit knowledge and discursive discrimination: Bernstein and post-Vygotskian research. (68 paragraphs). British Journal of Sociology of Education. 16(4). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Debatin, B. (1993). Computers at work: The semiotics of interface design. The Semiotic Review of Books. 4(2).
Dreyfus, H.L. (1982). Husserl intentionality and cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dreyfus, H.L. (1996, Spring). The current relevance of Merleau-Ponty's phenomenology of embodiment. The Electronic Journal of Analytic Philosophy. 4.
Eisner, E.W. (1997, Jan). Cognition and representation: a way to pursue the American dream? (30 paragraphs). Phi Delta Kappan. 78(5). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Greene, M. (1997, Jan). Metaphors and multiples. (59 paragraphs). Phi Delta Kappan. 78(5). Available E-mail oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Grotstein, J. (1995, Summer). Orphans of the 'real': I. Some modern and postmodern perspectives on the neurobiological and psychosocial dimensions of psychosis and other primitive mental disorders. (62 paragraphs). Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic. 59(3). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Harris, M. (1974). Cows, pigs, wars and witches: The riddles of culture. New York, NY:Random House.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. New York and Evanston:Harper and Row.
Hughes, P. (1995, Jun). The process of government communication: Some semiotic and cultural considerations. (25 paragraphs). Australian Journal of Public Administration. 54(2). Available E-mail oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Jaramillo, J. (1996, Fall). Vygotsky's sociocultural theory and contributions to the development of constructivist curricula. (28 paragraphs). Education. 117(1). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
John-Steiner, V. and Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian Framework. Educational Psychologist. 31(3/4). 191-206.
Karamuftuoglu, M. (1997). Designing language games in okapi. Journal of Documentation. 53(1). 69-73.
Labbo, L.D. (1996). A semiotic analysis of young children's symbol making in a classroom computer center. Reading Research Quarterly. 31(4). 356-385.
Lechte, J. (1994). Fifty key contemporary thinkers: From structuralism to postmodernity. New York: Routledge.
Lemke, J.L. (1992). Intertextuality and educational research. Linguistics and Education. 4. 257-267.
Li, J. and Gardner, H. (1993, Sep-Oct). How domains constrain creativity. (26 paragraphs). American Behavioral Scientist. 37. Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Lipman, M. (1991, Oct). Squaring Soviet pedagogical theory with American practice. (16 paragraphs). Education Digest. 57. Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Lipman, M. (1996). Natasha: Vygotskian Dialogues. New York:Teachers College Press.
Marshall, R.M. and Hynd, G.W. (1997, Nov-Dec). Academic underachievement in ADHD subtypes. (41 paragraphs). Journal of Learning Disabilities. 30(6). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Medway, P. (1996). Virtual and material buildings. Written Communication. 13(4). 473-514.
Morris, R. (1991, May). Cultural analysis through semiotics: Len Morris' cartoons on official bilingualism. (88 paragraphs). Canadian Sociology and Anthropology. 28(2). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Nelson, K. (1996). Language in cognitive development. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Olson, D.R. ed. (1974). Media and symbols: The forms of expression, communication, and education. Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
Parkany, R. A. (1997). Philosophical foundations and practical applications of a reconcilliation and raproachement between the constructive and positive discourse in evaluation. Paper presented at the 1998 Kelly Conference, Ottawa, CA. Kelley Conference Archives.
Parkinson, G.H.R. (1966). Leibniz logical papers: A selection translated and edited. London: Oxford University Press.
Pike, K. L. (1954). Emic and etic standpoints for the description of behavior. Glendale:S. I. L..
Roth, W-M. and McGinn, M.K. (1997). Graphing: cognitive ability or practice? Science Education. 81. 91-106.
Saint-Amand, P. (1990). Repositioning the writer within the social context. Journal of Education. 172(1). 7-13.
Shuell, T.J. (1990). Phases of meaningful learning. Review of Educational Research. 60. 531-547.
Skordev, D.G. (1987). Mathematical logic and its applications. New York: Plenum Press.
Snow, R.E. (1997, January). Aptitudes and symbol systems in adaptive classroom teaching. (44 paragraphs). Phi Delta Kappan. 78(5). Available E-mail:oclc-fs@oclc.org.
van Heijenoort, J. (1967). From Frege to Godel. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Westmoreland, K. (1995). A semiotic perspective on the technical and professional writing assignment. Technical Communication Quarterly. 4. 125-143.
Wimsatt, J.I. (1996, Summer). Rhyme, the icons of sound, and the middle english pearl. (55 paragraphs). Style. 30(2). Available E-mail oclc-fs@oclc.org.
Witte. S.P. (1992). Context, text, intertext: Toward a constructivist semiotic of writing. Written Communication. 9(2). 237-308.
Wolfe, A.S. (1992). Who's gotta have it?: The ownership of meaning and mass media texts. Critical Studies in Mass Communication. 9. 261-276.
Woolsey, K. and Bellamy, R. (1997). Science education and technology:
Opportunities to enhance student learning. The Elementary School Journal.
97(4). 385-399.
Overview
History and Foundations (Phonemic/Phonetic Bifurcation of Inquiry)
Formal Studies (Phonetic Studies: Propositional Calculus, Meta-logic, Structural Analyses)
Interpretive Studies (Phonemic Studies: Anthropology, Philology and Linguistics)
Ontological Considerations: Several Formal Frames of Consideration
Theoretical (Structural/Formal) Frames
Pragmatic (Practical/) Dimensions
Cognitive (Psychological)
Perceptive (Sociological)
Relevance to Instructional Technology
Pedagogical: Domain Specific Research
Technological: Researching Aids to Instruction
Pan-cultural Examples of Use and Other Applications