Development of sensory functions, including visual perception of objects, is one of the main objectives of preschool education. Visual perception is expected to reach overall maturity by school age, and school programs are created based on that expectation. The elementary school curriculum places high demands on students to develop full and accurate mental representations of objects and, connected with them, verbal concepts, because those concepts, in turn, form a foundation for developing verbal logical thinking.

Despite the key role of visual perception, it is often overlooked when children's readiness for school is being assessed. Yet the data obtained through neuropsychological testing of older preschool children and first graders reveal that a significant percentage suffers from pronounced difficulties of visual recognition. This was shown in the series of research studies conducted by the staff members and the students of the Department of Psychology, Moscow University (Kozlova, Reference Kozlova1998 R; Ksenzenko, Reference Ksenzenko1998 R; Pylaeva, Reference Pylaeva, Akhutina and Khomskaya1998 R; Yablokova, Reference Yablokova1998 R; Yurtova, Reference Yurtova1995 R) and summarized in our book (Akhutina & Pylaeva, Reference Akhutina and Pylaeva2003a R).

Our research, as well as the studies conducted by L. S. Tsvetkova and her students (2001 R), O. A. Krasovskaya (Reference Krasovskaya, Leont'ev, Khomskaya and Artem'eva1980 R), and E. G. Simernitskaya (Reference Simernitskaya1985 R), show that difficulties in solving visual problems can be caused by insufficient development of the following functions:

1. the holistic (or global) “scanning” perceptual strategy

2. the analytical “classification” strategy

3. the orienting activity in visual perception acts

Language development in general and its nominative function in particular also affect the formation and differentiation of visual images.

Based on that data we identified the following objectives for development and remediation of visual perception of objects:

1. developing visual gnostic processes, including both holistic and analytical strategies of visual recognition

2. developing “visual image–word” connections and differentiation of visual images and the meaning of words

3. developing visual attention

The main strategy for meeting these goals is to promote the growth of a weak component or link by using more mature functions in the process of specially designed interactions. In the process, the adult working with the student first takes on the functions of the weak component and then gradually transfers them to the child by presenting tasks in order from the easiest to the hardest in regard to the demands they put on the weak component.

To determine the initial level of visual-verbal functioning and find the adequate level of task complexity (as well as to assess the dynamics of the learning process), we used an extended set of trials on visual gnosis and nominative language function, which included the following:

1. Recognition of crossed out, overlapping, and unfinished drawings

2. Visual memory trial including recognition

3. Verbal and nonverbal fluency tests (free drawings, drawings of plants)

4. Naming trial

5. Identification by name (of words similar in sound or meaning) trial (Tsvetkova, Akhutina, & Pylaeva, Reference Tsvetkova, Akhutina and Pylaeva1981 R)

When any of the components of the functional system of visual perception are underdeveloped, the whole system is affected. Therefore in the first stage we offered relatively simple, general tasks that children could complete by engaging their better developed functional components. Further along, the tasks became more targeted, focusing on the development of a particular perceptual strategy, image–word connections, or visual attention. Giving children tasks that were too difficult for them diminished the therapeutic effect. When faced with these tasks they stopped using perceptual characteristics of objects and instead started choosing the parts through a trial-and-error method. Therefore it was very important to find the level of task difficulty that was optimal for each child so that he or she successfully completed the task by focusing attention on the perceptual characteristics of objects.

The overall goals for developing visual perception of objects were met through the first set of methods: identification of visual images. The simplest task in this set was the identification of different, realistically colored images of familiar objects in a lotto or bingo-type game. The complexity of these tasks was increased by altering their gnostic or verbal characteristics. To increase the perceptual complexity of images, we used black-and-white, outline, stylized, and schematic copies of the color images (see Figs. 11.1 and 11.2). Comparing real objects and their more complete or generalized images helped children identify the meaningful characteristics of objects and focused their attention on scanning of contours. It also helped organize children's perceptual attention.

Narrowing the field of choice (initially the images on the cards belonged to different categories, but later were reduced to the same category) increased both the verbal and perceptual difficulties of the identification process. Changing from the most frequent prototypical representatives of a category (for example, fruit – an apple, furniture – a table) to less common, peripheral, and consequently less familiar ones also increased the tasks’ gnostic and verbal complexity.

Each image identification task became a foundation for additional exercises aimed at strengthening visual images. For this purpose, after completing the tasks, the students were asked to recall the pictures that were shown (naming or delayed recognition) or the order of their presentation, to read and choose the written names for the pictures, etc.

The second set of tasks consisted of finding differences between the pictures that could be identified in a verbal form. Here story pictures were used; initially they contained very few objects, but gradually they became more saturated. Identifying the easiest types of differences, such as the presence or absence of an element or an object or a change in color, shape, or quantity, was practiced first. While strengthening visual images of the familiar objects, these tasks allowed practicing visual attention and the full orienting process. As usual, we worked on programming and control functions by introducing the plan of actions – helping students scan the pictures and determine how many differences could be found, etc. At times we mediated the search by offering the child the opportunity to trace objects with a finger (this allowed psychologists to see the type of search that the child conducted and correct it if the child's strategy was chaotic).

Some children found it easier to compare the story pictures when they were positioned vertically one underneath the other as opposed to being placed horizontally next to one another. Because of that we periodically changed the way in which the pictures were positioned. A more complex version of this task was to identify the differences from memory. In that version we had to make the differences between the pictures more obvious from the perceptual standpoint, and the initial picture had to be presented several times.

The third set of tasks were based on perceptual modeling; in other words, re-creating a whole from its parts. This set included several tasks, starting with simple ones (putting together parts of an object using the Segen boards) and progressing to complicated puzzles. As in the first set of tasks, in this third set the gnostic or verbal complexity of tasks could be varied, a key feature or several insignificant features could be omitted, and the complexity of the context in which the choice had to take place could be increased.

The simplest task consisted of finding the second half of symmetrical objects (apples, houses, clocks, etc). The picture could be cut in two along the middle line or not, the cut could be straight or ragged, etc. Having a ragged cut increased the possibility of solving the task through manipulations; a diagonal cut increased the complexity of the tasks because typically it did not coincide with the natural segmentation (see Fig. 11.3). The task of finding the other half of an object is an effective way to practice graphic images and graphic skills. The first half could be used as a stencil for outlining, and the drawing of a second half could then be added to the stencil. Drawing by memory, naming, and finding written names for the images could be added to these tasks.

Adding missing pieces to complete an image (finding a missing piece) and putting together picture puzzles consisting of 3 or more pieces (up to 12 or 16) proved to be more challenging for the students. Each of these tasks could be performed with cards depicting parts of objects or on paper (in that case students connected the pieces by drawing lines between them or numbered the pieces and the cells in a blank table; see Fig. 11.4).

Putting together a puzzle enabled development not only of visual gnostic functions (identifying a contour and meaningful characteristics of an object or an image) but also of visual-spatial and regulatory functions. Mastery of programming and control functions was achieved with the help of several methods: creating a plan of action by giving students a frame showing how the picture was cut or pointing out the difference in color between the figures and the background frame. Another way was to identify the key figures and create the verbal plan of action. In that case it was important to design the sequence of tasks in such a way that the student could later use the method independently that was previously shown to him or her by an adult. We observed students while they were working on their tasks to identify the pattern of cutting an object into pieces that was easier for them to work with. As in the tests on finding the missing half, straight (vertical, horizontal, or diagonal) separation lines helped the students focus on orienting and searching visual gnostic activity.

Students’ motivation was very important for the successful completion of these (and all the other!) tasks. Therefore, the content of the picture and its complexity (for example, the ease of guessing what the complete image was) had to stimulate students to complete the tasks.

Construction tasks, created by N. G. Kalita (Reference Kalita and Tsvetkova1975 R; advisor, L. S. Tsvetkova), included in the third set are extremely important. Unlike the previous tasks, here the picture of an object was cut along functionally important parts. For example, adding a handle, a lid, or a spout transformed a bowl into a cup, a teapot, a sugar bowl, etc. (see Fig. 11.5). Thus, in construction tasks, meaningful characteristics of objects were identified and named, which enabled development of the analytical (“classification”) perceptual strategy and broadening of students’ vocabulary.

The following construction tasks were used:

1. Constructing the model of an object using its parts

2. Outlining the model and coloring its parts

3. Drawing a missing piece using a model as a stencil

4. Drawing independently, without a model

5. Drawing by memory (“Try to remember the figures we put together”)

6. Delayed drawing using the naming word as a help

The following tasks could be used to strengthen learning:

1. Picture classification (separating fruits and vegetables; summer and winter clothes; kitchen utensils and tableware). Here simpler images could be used along with more complicated, generalized, schematic ones that require the active use of models.

2. Finding missing pieces

3. Identifying extra pieces that do not belong with the picture

The fourth set of tasks included those with a primary focus on visual gnosis. Here we used methods of creating “visual” noise that are traditional for neuropsychology – superimposing pictures, crossing them out, inserting visual interferences, or using complex backgrounds (see Fig. 11.6). (Important: using the material of neuropsychological tests in the remedial lessons should be avoided at all times!). Students were given an algorithm of actions – tracing a contour using the visual model or verbal instruction – and were offered a way to make scanning the contour easier: students traced the contour with a finger, then named the figure, and then traced it with the colored pencil, using different colors for different shapes. Thus, if the sequence of colors was established ahead of time, the order in which the figures were identified by a particular student could be determined.

This type of tasks helped develop a holistic (global) scanning perceptual strategy and prepare students for complex trials of image recognition in which visual information is incomplete and for trials of identifying a whole based on its parts (see Fig. 11.7).

In conclusion, we would like to make a few comments on choosing materials for the tasks and to discuss the importance of motivation. In remedial-developmental work we use materials that contribute to the child's language and cognitive development based on the “better less but better” approach. We mean that it is not an effective strategy to present as many different pictures and words as possible. It is necessary to repeat the new material regularly in the following lessons to consolidate knowledge. We already discussed altering the complexity of material based on language and perceptual development. In addition, we organize the material based on its content – toys, dishes, means of transportation, etc. – or on its perceptual component: round, square, red, green, etc.

How can we keep children interested in completing remedial-developmental tasks?

One way is to place task completion in the context of fairy tales; for instance, they were given the task of furnishing Pinocchio's room or designing clothes for him and the Blue Fairy. Children also greatly enjoy completing tasks that use emotionally significant objects: for example, draw six of your most favorite fruits. In addition, tasks involving free and directed visual associations (“Draw the flowers you know”, etc.) can be used to assess the development of visual-verbal functions.

These methods form the foundation for the manual, Learning to See and Name (Pylaeva & Akhutina, 2008 R), one part of it is presented in Chapter 12. The effectiveness of the interventions included in this manual that aim to develop visual-verbal functions was verified in a research study by N. M. Skityaeva (Reference Skityaeva2010 R; T. A. served as advisor to this research; see also Skityaeva & Akhutina, Reference Skityaeva and Akhutina2011 R). The study examined children preparing to start school, divided into two experimental groups (10 right-handed subjects and 8 left-handed subjects) and a control group of 8 subjects. All the children were about the same age (average age – 6.5 yrs) and had similar delays in the development of higher mental functions (HMFs), particularly visual and verbal functions. Subjects in all three groups received help in developing HMFs to get them ready for school; children in the control group received interventions to develop language and visual functions separately, independent of each other. In both experimental groups, these interventions were conducted in close association. Assessment of language and visual perception at the beginning and the end of the course of intervention revealed significant improvement in both experimental groups (the assessment was conducted using the methods of Fotekova & Akhutina, Reference Fotekova and Akhutina2007 R, and Akhutina & Pylaeva, Reference Akhutina and Pylaeva2003b R). The data are presented in Table 11.1.

The assessment of the nominative language function revealed significant improvement in children in both experimental groups as compared to the control group (see Fig. 11.8: the difference between both the control group and both experimental groups was significant: right-handed group vs. control group, p = 0.018; left-handed group vs. control group, p = 0.048.

The lexical capabilities of children in the) experimental groups in discourse and sentence construction also increased significantly (p ≤ 0.01), whereas in the control group the increase was insignificant (p = 0.25). The differences in the dynamics of the subjects in three groups were statistically significant (see Table 11.1).

In trials on sentence composition based on the picture, pragmatic language skills were also assessed. Two types of errors were distinguished: incompleteness of content and deviation from the picture context. For example, if describing the picture “The sun comes out from behind the clouds” the student said: “The sun…” or “The sun is shining,” such errors were classified as incompleteness of content. If the picture of a man and a woman who are loading hay on the truck was described like this: “Is it a sea?…They are sweeping. A truck. Don't know” or “They carry the hay to the fair,” such errors were classified as deviation from the context. The first type of errors depends on syntactic and lexical development; the errors of the second type are closely connected with the development of visual-verbal and visual-spatial functions or more exactly the right hemisphere holistic strategy of information processing (Akhutina, Zasypkina, & Romanova, Reference Akhutina, Zasypkina and Romanova2009 R). The number of both types of content mistakes in language significantly decreased in both experimental groups (right-handed, p = 0.004; left-handed, p = 0.013), whereas in the control group it remained practically unchanged (p = 0.35).

The assessment of visual gnosis showed that, as a result of the remedial-developmental interventions, visual perception improved significantly in children in the right-handed experimental group: all the children in this group reached the average norm. All the left-handed subjects also showed improvement in visual perception. In six of the eight children in this group visual gnosis reached normal levels. Average subjects in the control group showed the least significant improvement: only three of eight children reached the normal levels of functioning. The difference in the dynamics between the two experimental groups and the control group was statistically significant (right-handed vs. control, p ≤ 0.001, left-handed vs. control, p = 0.035).

Thus, Skityaeva's study demonstrated the effectiveness of our methods of remediation of delays in the development of visual-verbal functions.

Table 11.1. Language and visual functions characteristics in two experimental and a control groups (Skityaeva, Reference Skityaeva2010 R) before the course of remediation (1) and after it (2)

Figure 11.1. Image identification tasks (an example).

Figure 11.2. Image identification tasks (an example).

Figure 11.3. Tasks of finishing incomplete images.

Figure 11.4. “Finding the missing half” paper test.

Figure 11.5. Construction task (after Kalita, Reference Kalita and Tsvetkova1975 R).

Figure 11.6. Example of a task with overlapping drawings.

Figure 11.7. Identifying a whole based on its part.

Figure 11.8. Dynamics of nominative language development in three groups.

This chapter is excerpted from Learning to See and Name, a handbook on developing visual-verbal functions (Pylaeva & Akhutina, 2008 R). It presents perceptual modeling tasks focused on the development and remediation of visual information-processing functions and vocabulary in students (for other applications of these methods, see Chapters 10 and 11).

The set of tasks presented in this chapter are one of the most important in remediation of visual-verbal function because they facilitate further development of both analytical and holistic (global) perceptual strategies. With the help of these methods students can learn to analyze an object's parts, identify the key characteristics of various shapes, and integrate these characteristics to form a complete image of an object.

Task 1: One of the simpler tasks, it consists of constructing an image of a familiar object that has been cut in half. Both halves of the images are preferably glued to a piece of a cardboard (see Figs. 12.1a and 12.1b). The child finds the two matching halves, puts them together, and, using a colored pencil, outlines the entire image on a piece of paper. After he or she finishes doing that, the paper is turned upside down, and the student is asked to name the objects and recall their positions on the paper.

Task 2: The student needs to identify the missing piece, name it, and draw it to complete the image. After that the paper with the image on it is turned upside down, and the child names the objects (see Fig. 12.2).

Task 3: The student is shown a picture and told that in it the artist mixed up parts of different pictures. Then the teacher tells the student, “To help the duckling you need to connect all the parts correctly. In order to do that you need to outline each fish with a different color pencil. Let us start with the first one. First outline it and then find its tail and outline it as well” (see Fig. 12.3).

Task 4: This task is perceptually more difficult than Tasks 2 and 3. Students need to recognize and name different objects and, using colored pencils, draw the lines from one-half of the object to the other (see Fig. 12.4).

Task 5: Pictures of vegetables that have been cut in half are used. We recommend that students themselves cut at least some of the pictures in half. After that students put the two halves together and name the vegetables. The next step is to remove half of the tomato so that the student can draw it and complete the image with or without a model. Similar operations are completed with an onion and a cucumber. If the student likes this assignment he or she can continue doing it with the remaining pictures (see Fig. 12.5). Any colored pictures of vegetables can be used in this task.

Task 6: This task is difficult from both perceptual and graphic points of view. The child is presented with pictures that show only half of the image of a symmetrical object and is asked to complete the image. The most difficult image is a picture of a butterfly. Adult can draw the second half of the image to model this process for the child (see Fig. 12.6). After the pictures are completed the teacher asks the child to find all the handles on them (three objects have handles).

Task 7: This task consists of identifying parts of different pieces of kitchenware, tableware, and cutlery. First the child is asked to name the objects in the pictures. After that he or she outlines all handles with one color, all lids with another, and all spouts with the third color (see Fig. 12.7). After the child completes this part of the task, the page is turned over, and the teacher asks the following questions:

Task 8: This task was created by N. G. Kalita (advisor, L. S. Tsvetkova). This is a prototypical task that captures the main idea behind perceptual modeling, which in essence is the process of constructing images of objects. Here “the student is shown a certain fragment of an object that is typical for all the objects in a particular group, for example a bowl. Certain elements are then added to this main fragment” (Kalita, Reference Kalita and Tsvetkova1975 R, p. 186). After each addition the child is asked, “What do you see? What parts did we add?” Then the child outlines the objects and colors those parts that constitute the key characteristics of all the objects in this group.

Thus, in this task the child identifies key features of different objects (practicing the analytical strategy), constructing and recognizing a complete image (thus practicing the holistic perceptual strategy). Naming the objects and their parts enriches child's vocabulary and makes naming more precise (see Figs. 11.5 and 12.8).

Task 9: The purpose of this task is to strengthen skills learned in all the previous tasks. The child is asked what elements need to be added to the images in the upper row to make a teapot, a sugar bowl, and a cup. Then he or she is asked to outline the elements that are necessary to make a teapot and after that to add these elements to images in the upper row by drawing them in the appropriate place. While outlining the image the child names its details, and after the drawing is complete he or she names the picture that was created as a result. Then the child moves on to the next image (see Fig. 12.9).

Task 10: This task is focused on differentiating visually similar images and training visual attention. Additional difficulty is created by turning the shadows of the objects upside down, therefore requiring that students be able to visualize turning them back to their correct position. The child is asked to outline the first image with a colored pencil, name it (a teapot without lid), find its shadow, and draw a line to it. Then he or she is asked to outline a second object using a pencil of a different color, etc. (see Fig. 12.10).

Task 11: The child gives names to geometric figures and adds elements to them to create an image of an object; for example, a spoon, teapot, fork, pot, frying pan, and cup. This task requires the ability to work independently in both perceptual and graphic formats (see Fig. 12.11).

Task 12: First the child names different items of clothing. After that the teacher suggests that the student finds and outlines or colors various parts of the clothing items: collars, sleeves, pockets, buttons, zipper, and hood (see Fig. 12.12).

The next step is to strengthen the knowledge of the names of different items of clothing or their parts using the following model:

1. A t-shirt has two short sleeves and does not have a collar.

2. A dress has two sleeves, a collar, two buttons, etc.

Task 13: Students need to figure out how to assemble different parts of clothing to make a dress, a blouse, a t-shirt, and a shirt. They outline the parts necessary for a dress and connect all of them with a line. Then they follow the same procedure with the parts necessary for a blouse using a different colored pencil, etc. While they are outlining the parts they are asked to name them, and at the end they name the item of clothing that was created by connecting these elements. If students are interested, they can then draw these and other articles of clothing (see Fig. 12.13).

Task 14: This task focuses on putting parts together to create an object. A teacher gives a student the following instructions:

Task 15: This task allows for strengthening and specifying visual images of clothing and shoes and practicing the ability to actualize a typical situation based on its details. Children with a weak holistic strategy of visual perception particularly benefit from this task.

A teacher gives the following instructions:

After the child finishes drawing these lines, the teacher starts the dialogue with the student that includes the following questions:

To differentiate between the pictures of different clothing items the following questions can be discussed with the student:

1. “Suit”: what parts does a suit consist of, what kind of fabric is typically used for suits, when do people normally wear suits

2. “Robe”: where do people typically wear robes, what material are they made from (cotton, terry), how are they different from dresses

Then the teacher has a discussion about different types of shoes with the child; for example, what types of shoes do people wear in the winter, in the summer, when the weather is good, when it is raining, and in the home versus outside. The teacher asks the student these types of questions: “What kind of shoes are you wearing now? What will you wear when you go outside? What is the difference between boots, dress shoes, and high boots? What kinds of shoes do you know about?”

The pairing of shoes and clothes also needs to be discussed. For example, jeans are an everyday casual type of clothing, so normally people wear them with sneakers or some other type of comfortable shoe. The teacher might ask, “How do you think it would look if someone would wear a fancy suit with sneakers or go to the theater in flip flops?”

Finally, the last part of this cycle is to draw on the child's personal experience and to predict a person's behavior in different situations: “What kind of clothes would you wear in summer if you are going to play soccer? What kind of shoes will you put on?” Or, “What would you wear if you were going to take a nature walk? Or if you were going to a theater?”

In this chapter we have shown the progression from very simple tasks for developing visual and verbal functions and their connections to more complicated tasks that involve the pragmatic dimension of language and general knowledge of the world. Part IV is devoted to methods of developing visual-spatial functions.

Figures 12.1a and 12.1b. Images for Task 1.

Figure 12.2. Images for Task 2.

Figure 12.3. Images for Task 3.

Figure 12.4. Images for Task 4.

Figure 12.5. Images for Task 5.

Figure 12.6. Images for Task 6.

Figure 12.7. Images for Task 7.

Figure 12.8. Images for Task 8.

Figure 12.9. Images for Task 9.

Figure 12.10. Images for Task 10.

Figure 12.11. Images for Task 11.

Figure 12.12. Images for Task 12.

Figure 12.13. Images for Task 13.

Figure 12.14. Images for Task 14.

Figure 12.15. Images for Task 15.