Skip to main content Accessibility help
Teaching, Learning, and Visual Literacy
  • Cited by 51
  • Export citation
  • Recommend to librarian
  • Buy the print book

Book description

Visual literacy is an increasingly critical skill in a globalizing, digital world. This book addresses the core issues concerning visual literacy in education, underscoring its importance for the instruction of students and educators. Professor Billie Eilam argues that the incorporation of visual skill development in teacher training programs will help break the cycle of visual illiteracy. Understanding the pedagogical benefits and risks of visual representation can help educators develop effective strategies to produce visually literate students. Eilam presents a broad overview of theoretical knowledge regarding visual representation, as well as a discussion of best practices for the use of visual elements in schools. In addition to theory, Eilam includes practical exercises for introducing visual literacy into teacher education, offering strategies for analyzing visualization in curricula and for increasing awareness of visual culture.

Refine List

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.


Page 1 of 2

Page 1 of 2


Ainsworth, S. E. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computer & Education, 33(2/3), 131152.
Ainsworth, S. E. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning representations. Learning and Instruction, 16, 183–198.
Ainsworth, S. E. (2008). How do animations influence learning? In D. H. Robinson, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Recent innovations in educational technology that facilitate student learning (pp. 37–67). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Ainsworth, S. E., Bibby, P. A., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Information technology and multiple representations: New opportunities, new problems. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 6(1), 93–109.
Al-Haj, M. (1995). Kinship and modernization in developing societies: The emergence of instrumentalized kinship. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 26, 311–328.
Anderson, J. R. (1991). The adaptive nature of human categorization. Psychological Review, 89, 409–429.
Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Apple, M. W. (2008). Curriculum planning. Content, form, and the politics of accountability. In F. M. Connelly (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 25–44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ausburn, L., & Ausburn, F. (1978). Visual literacy: Background, theory and practice. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 15(4), 291–297.
Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Avgerinou, M., & Ericson, J. (1997). A review of the concept of visual literacy. British Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4), 280–291.
Ayers, P. (2006). Using subjective measures to detect variations of intrinsic cognitive load within problems. Learning and Instruction, 16, 389–400.
Ayers, P., & Sweller, J. (2005). The split-attention principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 135–146). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Baca, J. C., & Braden, R. A. (1990). The Delphi study: A proposed method for resolving visual literacy uncertainties. In R. A. Braden, D. G. Beauchamp, & J. C. Baca(Eds.), Perceptions of visual literacy (pp. 99–106). Conway, AR: International Visual Literacy Association.
Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556–559.
Bakkenes, I., Vermunt, J. D., & Wubbels, T. (2010). Teacher learning in the context of educational innovation: Learning activities and learning outcomes of experienced teachers. Learning and Instruction, 20(6), 533–548.
Ball, D. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 241–247.
Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is – or might be – the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform?Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6–8, 14.
Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond, & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 3–31). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bannert, M. (2002). Managing cognitive load: Recent trends in cognitive load theory. Learning and Instruction, 12, 139–146.
Barnes, H. (1989). Structuring knowledge for beginning teaching. In M. C. Reynolds, & American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (Eds.), Knowledge base for the beginning teacher (pp. 13–22). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.
Barthes, R. (1968). Elements of semiology (A. Lavers & C. Smith, Trans.). New York: Hill and Wang.
Barthes, R. (1973). Mythologies. Frogmore, St. Albans: Granada Publishing.
Barthes, R. (1977). Image, music, text (S. Heath, Trans.). New York: Hill and Wang.
Bell, A., & Janvier, C. (1981). The interpretation of graphs representing situations. For the Learning of Mathematics, 2(1), 34–42.
Ben-Peretz, M. (1975). The concept of curriculum potential. Curriculum Theory Network, 5(2), 151–159.
Ben-Peretz, M. (1990). The teacher-curriculum encounter: Freeing teachers from the tyranny of texts. New York: State University of New York Press.
Ben-Peretz, M., & Eilam, B. (2008). Teacher education. In G. McCulloch, & D. Crook (Eds.), Routledge international encyclopedia of education (3rd ed.). London: Institute of Education, University of London.
Berry, D. C. (1997). How implicit is implicit learning?New York: Oxford University Press.
Bertin, J. (1983). Semiology of graphics: Diagrams, networks, maps (W. J. Berg, Trans.). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Bestgen, B. J. (1980). Making and interpreting graphs and tables: Results and implications from national assessment. Arithmetic Teacher, 28(4), 26–29.
Black, A. L., & Halliwell, G. (2000). Assessing practical knowledge: How? Why?Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 103–115.
Bodemer, D., Ploetzner, R., Feueelein, I., & Spada, H. (2004). The active integration of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualizations. Learning and Instruction, 14, 325–341.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.
Borko, H. (2005). Data and graph interpretation practices among pre-service science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1063–1088.
Bransford, J. D., Barron, B., Pea, R. D., Meltzoff, A., Kuhl, P. et al. (2006). Foundations and opportunities for an interdisciplinary science of learning. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 19–34). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. In A. Iran-Nejad, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (vol. 24, pp. 61–100). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Brassell, H. M., & Rowe, M. B. (1993). Graphing skills among high school physics students. School Science and Mathematics, 93(2), 63–70.
Brill, J. M., Kim, D., & Branch, R. M. (2007). Visual literacy defined – the results of a Delphi study: Can IVLA (operationally) define visual literacy?Journal of Visual Literacy, 27(1), 47–60.
Brookshire, J., Scarff, L. F. V., & Moses, L. E. (2002). The influence of illustrations on children’s book preferences and comprehension. Reading Psychology, 23(4), 323–339.
Bruner, J. (1961). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brünken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2004). Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning with dual-task methodology: Auditory load and modality effects. Instructional Science, 32, 115–132.
Brünken, R., Steinbacher, S., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2002). Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning using dual task methodology. Experimental Psychology, 49, 1–12.
Burbank, L., & Dennis, W. P. (1983). Eight dimensions of visual literacy. Instructional Innovator, 28(1), 25–27.
Butcher, K. R. (2006). Learning from text with diagrams: Promoting mental model development and inference generation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 182–197.
Carey, S., & Gelman, R. (1991). The epigenesist of mind: Essays on biology and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Carney, N. R., & Levin, R. J. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students’ learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 5–26.
Carpenter, B. S., & Taylor, P. G. (2006). Making meaningful connections: interactive computer hypertext in art education. Computers in the Schools, 23(1/2), 149–161.
Chandler, D. (2002). Semiotics (2nd ed.). London and New York: Routledge, the Taylor & Francis Group.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293–332.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 233–246.
Cohen, D. K. (1990). A revolution in one classroom: The case of Mrs. Oublier. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 311329.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.
Cole, C. (1991). Conclusion. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 398–417). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Colin, P., Chauvet, F., & Viennot, L. (2002). Reading images in optics: Students’ difficulties and teachers’ views. International Journal of Science Education, 24(3), 313–332.
Comenius, J. A. (1658). Lateinisches textbuch. Faksimile der Nurnberger. Osnabruck/Belm: Zeller.
Connelly, F. M. (1972). The function of curriculum development. Interchange, 2(3), 161–177.
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, J. (1992).An interview: The nature of reflective practice. Orbit, 23(4), 1–7.
Considine, D. M., & Haley, G. E. (1992). Visual messages: Integrating imagery into instruction. Englewood, CO: Teacher Ideas Press.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures. London and New York: Routledge.
Cox Rollins, D. (2003). Eye to 1: Visual literacy meets information literacy. Retrieved February 16, 2008 from
Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teacher learning that supports student learning. Educational Leadership, February6–11.
Darling-Hammond, L., Banks, J., Zumwalt, K., Gomez, L., Gamoran Sherin, M., Griesdorn, K., & Finn, L. E. (2005). Educational goals and purposes: Developing a curricular vision for teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond, & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world (pp. 169–200). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds.). (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
De Bock, D., Verschaffel, L., Janssen, D., Van Dooren, W., & Claes, K. (2003). Do realistic contexts and graphical representations always have a beneficial impact on students’ performance? Negative evidence from a study on modeling non-linear geometry problems. Learning and Instruction, 13, 441–463.
de Jong, T. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: Some food for thought. Instructional Science, 38(2), 105134.
de Jong, T., Ainsworth, S., Donson, M., van der Hultst, A., Levonen, J., et al. (1998). Acquiring knowledge in science and mathematics: The use of multiple representations in technology-based learning environments. In M. W. van Someren, P. Reiman, H. P. A. Boshuizen, & T. de Jong (Eds.), Learning with multiple representations (pp. 9–40). Oxford: Elsevier Science.
de Vries, E., Demetriadis, S., & Ainsworth, S. (2009). External representations for learning. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, S. Barnes, & L. Mondandon (Eds.), Technology enhanced learning: Principles and products (pp. 137–154). Dordrecht: Springer.
Debes, J., & Williams, C. M. (1978). Visual literacy, languaging and learning. Washington, DC: Center for Visual Literacy, Gallaudet College.
DeLoache, J. S. (2002). Early development of the understanding and use of symbolic artifacts. In U. Goswami (Ed.), Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (pp. 206–226). Oxford: Blackwell.
diSessa, A. A. (2004). Meta representation: Native competence and targets for instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22(3), 293–331.
diSessa, A. A., Hammer, D., Sherin, B., & Kolpakowski, T. (1991). Inventing graphing: Meta representational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10, 117–160.
diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (2000). Meta-representation: An introduction. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 385–398.
Dutke, S., & Rinck, M. (2006). Multimedia learning: Working memory and the learning of word and picture diagrams. Learning and Instruction, 16, 526–537.
Duval, R. (2002). The cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in the learning of mathematics. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics, 1(2), 1–16.
Eco, U. (1976). A theory of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press/London: Macmillan.
Edelson, D. C., & Reiser, B. J. (2006). Making authentic practices accessible to learners: Design challenges and strategies. In Sowyer, R. K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 335–354). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Egan, E. D., & Greeno, G. J. (1974). Theory of rule induction: Knowledge acquired in concept learning, serial pattern learning, and problem solving. In L. W. Gregs (Ed.), Knowledge and cognition (pp. 43–103). Potomac, MD: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Eilam, B. (2002). “Passing through” a western-democratic teacher education: The case of Israeli Arabs. Teachers College Record, 104(8), 1656–1701.
Eilam, B. (2003). Jewish and Arab teacher trainees’ orientations toward teaching-learning processes. Teaching Education, 14(2), 169–186.
Eilam, B. (2007). Junior and high school students’ ideas regarding the uses of VRs in learning. Unpublished manuscript.
Eilam, B. (2008). Textbook analysis schema: What can we learn about textbooks’ overt and covert orientation by analyzing their visual representation characteristics?Unpublished manuscript.
Eilam, B. (2012). Students’ cultural beliefs in transition to modernity: The case of Druze children/adolescents. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Eilam, B., & Ben-Peretz, M. (2010). Revisiting curriculum inquiry: The role of visual representations. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(6), 751–774.
Eilam, B., & Gurtler, O. (2010). Interactive hypermedia-based learning environment: Models of making sense of dynamic visualization. In S. Mukerji, & P. Tripathi (Eds.), Cases on technological adaptability and transnational learning: Issues and challenges (pp. 244–263). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Eilam, B., & Ofer, S. (2012).The emergence of a semiotic system: Girls generating visual representations of directions and time in movement. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Eilam, B., & Poyas, Y. (2006). Promoting awareness of the characteristics of classrooms’ complexity: A course curriculum in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(3), 337–351.
Eilam, B., & Poyas, Y. (2008). Learning with multiple representations: Extending multimedia learning beyond the lab. Learning and Instruction, 18(4), 368–378.
Eilam, B., & Poyas, Y. (2009). Learning to teach: Enhancing pre-service teachers’ awareness of the complexity of teaching-learning processes. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(1), 87–107.
Eilam, B., & Poyas, Y. (2010). External visual representations in science learning: The case of relations among system components. International Journal of Science Teaching, 32(17), 2335–2366.
Eilam, B., & Poyas, Y. (2012). Teachers’ interpretations of text-image juxtapositions in textbooks: From the concrete to the abstract. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(2), 265–297.
Eisner, E. W. (1970). Media, expression, and the arts. In G. Salomon, & R. E. Snow (Eds.), Commentaries on research in instructional media (pp. 103–118). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Eisner, E. W. (1985). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs. New York: Macmillan.
Elia, I., Gagatsis, A., & Demetriou, A. (2007). The effects of different modes of representation on the solution of one-step additive problems. Learning and Instruction, 17, 658–672.
Elia, I., & Philippou, G. (2004). The functions of pictures in problem solving. Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 2, pp. 327–334.
Emmison, M., & Smith, P. (2000). Researching the visual. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Erstad, O. (1998). Media literacy among young people. Integrating culture, communication and cognition. In H. Hoijer, & A. Werner (Eds.), Cultural cognition: New perspectives in audience theory (pp. 85–101). Gotebo, Sweden: Nordicom.
Esdale, B., & Robinson, R. (1982). Viewing in secondary language arts. Edmonton, Canada: Alberta Education.
Eshach, H., & Schwartz, J. L. (2002). Understanding children’s comprehension of visual displays of complex information. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11(4), 333–346.
Ethell, R. G., & McMeniman, M. M. (2000). Unlocking the knowledge in action of an expert practitioner. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(2), 87–102.
Fagin, D. (2008). Second thoughts about fluoride. Scientific American, January, 58–65.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Norman, P. J. (2000). Teacher education: From initial preparation to continuing professional development. In B. Moon, M. Ben-Peretz, & S. Brown (Eds.), Routledge international companion to education (pp. 732–755). London: Institute of Education, University of London.
Fein, Z. (1999). World revealing maps. Tel Aviv: Center for Educational Technology.
Fischer, F., Bruhn, J., Grasel, C., & Mandl, H. (2002). Fostering collaborative knowledge construction with visualization tools. Learning and Instruction, 12, 213–232.
Fischman, G. E. (2001). Reflection about images, visual culture, and educational research. Educational Researcher, 30(8), 28–33.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive development inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.
Flinders, D., Noddings, N., & Thornston, S. (1986). The null curriculum: Its theoretical basis and practical implications. Curriculum Inquiry, 16(1), 33–42.
Fransecky, R. B., & Debes, J. (1972). Visual literacy: A way to learn – A way to teach. Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.
Freedman, K. (2003). Teaching visual culture: Curriculum, aesthetics, and the social life of art. New York and Reston, VA: Teachers College Press and the National Art Education Association.
Friel, S. N., Curcio, F. R., & Bright, G. W. (2001). Making sense of graphs: Critical factors influencing comprehension and instructional implications. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 32(2), 124158.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (1996). What’s worth fighting for in your school?New York: Teachers College Press.
Garner, R., Brown, R., Sanders, S., & Menke, D. J. (1992). “Seductive details” and learning from text. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 239–254). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Gilbert, J. K. (2007a). Visualization: A metacognitive skill in science and science education. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization in science education (pp. 9–27). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Gilbert, J. K. (Ed.). (2007b). Visualization in science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Gilbert, J. K., Reiner, M., & Nakhleh, M. (Eds.) (2008). Visualization in science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Ginns, P. (2005). Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction, 15, 313–331.
Ginns, P. (2006). Integrating information: A meta-analysis of the spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity effects. Learning and Instruction, 16, 511–525.
Goldman, S. R. (2003). Commentary. Learning in complex domains: When and why do multiple representations help?Learning and Instruction, 13, 239–244.
Goldstein, B. E. (2002). Sensation and perception (6th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Wadsworth, Thomson Learning.
Goodlad, J. I. (1990a). Places where teachers are taught. San Francisco: Josey Bass.
Goodlad, J. I. (1990b). Teachers for our nation’s schools. San Francisco: Josey Bass.
Goodlad, J. I., Klein, M. F., & Tye, K. A. (1979). The domains of curriculum and their study. In J. I. Goodlad (Ed.), Curriculum inquiry: The study of curriculum practice (pp. 43–76). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Goodman, N. (1969). The language of art: An approach to a theory of symbols. London: Oxford University Press.
Goodman, N. (1988). Languages of art: An approach to theory of symbols (2nd ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett Press.
Gopnik, A., Glymour, C., Sobel, D. M., Schulz, L. E., Kushnir, T., & Sanks, D. (2004). A theory of causal learning in children: Causal maps and bayes nets. Psychological Review, 111(1), 3–32.
Gordon, M. (2007). Introduction. In M. Gordon, & T. V. O’Brien (Eds.), Bridging theory and practice in teacher education (pp. xi–xvi). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Gould, S. J. (1995). Dinosaur in a haystack: Reflections and natural history (pp. 248–259). New York: Random House.
Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2000). Behavior in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Greeno, J. G., & Hall, R. P. (1997). Practicing representation. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 361–367.
Gregor, S. D., & Cuskelly, E. F. (1994). Computer mediated communication in distance education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 10(3), 168–181.
Grosse, C., & Renkl, A. (2007). Finding and fixing errors in worked examples: Can this foster learners’ outcomes?Learning and Instruction, 17, 612–634.
Grossman, P., Valencia, S. W., Evans, K., Thompson, C., Martin, S., & Place, N. (2000). Transitions into teaching: Learning to teach writing in teacher education and beyond. Journal of Literacy Research, 32(4), 631–662.
Guri-Rozenblit, S. (1989). Effects of tree diagrams on students’ comprehension of main ideas in a multi-thematic expository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 236–247.
Hacker, D. J. (1998). Definitions and empirical foundations. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 1–23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hall, S. (1973). The determination of news photographs. In S. Cohen, & J. Young (Eds.), The manufacture of news: Deviance, social problems and the mass media. London: Constable.
Hall, S. , (Ed.). (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices (pp. 1–64). London, CA, and New Delhi, India: Sage Publications.
Hallet, K., & Cummings, J. (1997). The virtual classroom as authentic experience: Collaborative, problem-based learning in a WWW environment. In Proceedings of the annual conference on distance teaching and learning: Competition-connection-collaboration (pp. 103–107). Madison: University of Wisconsin.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotics. London: Edward.
Halliday, M. A. K., (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Baltimore: Edward Arnold.
Hanson, J. R., Silver, H. F., & Strong, R. W. (1988). Learning styles and visual literacy: Connections and actions. In R. A. Bradon, D. G. Beauchamp, & L. Miller (Eds.), Visual literacy in life and learning (pp. 178–183). Blacksburg: Virginia Tech University.
Harper, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 414–434.
Harskamp, E. G., Mayer, R. E., & Suhre, C. (2007). Does the modality principle for multimedia learning apply to science classrooms?Learning and Instruction, 17, 465–477.
Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In H. Stevenson, H. Azuma, & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Child development and education in Japan (pp. 262–272). New York: Freeman.
Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1991). Sharing cognition through collective comprehension activity. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, S. Stephanie, & D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 331–348). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hatib, S., Addawi, S., & Musa, H. (1992). Rainbow B (Lessons 17 & 21, pp. 90, 109). Haifa: Hawaadi. (Hebrew).
Headd, P. W. (1957). Preparing pre-service teachers for audio-visual education. Journal of Teacher Education, 8, 417–419.
Heath, E. F. (1998). Two cheers and a pint of worry: An on-line course in political and social philosophy. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2(1), 15–33.
Hegarty, M., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1996). Diagrams in the comprehension of scientific texts. In R. Barr, M. L., Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. II, pp. 641–668). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hegarty, M., & Just, M.A. (1989). Understanding machines from text and diagrams. In H. Mandl, & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures (pp. 171–194). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
Hegarty, M., Narayanan, N. H., & Freitas, P. (2002). Understanding machines from multimedia and hypermedia presentations. In J. Otero, A. C. Greaser, & J. Leon (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 357–384). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Heie, N. (2007, August). Understanding text and picture content as a unity. Paper presented at the EARLI conference, Budapest.
Heinich, R., Molenda, M., & Russell, J. D. (1982). Instructional media and the new technologies of instruction. New York: Macmillan.
Hibbing, A. N., & Rankin-Erickson, J. (2003). A picture is worth a thousand words: Using visual images to improve comprehension for middle school struggling readers. The Reading Teacher, 56(8), 758–771.
Hirshfeld, N., Raz, R., Shirav, P., Nethanel, N., & Hochberg, M. (1998). The literature curriculum for the junior-high school: Evaluation. A final report. Jerusalem: Ministry of Education. (Hebrew).
Hlebowitsh, P. (1990). The teacher technician: Causes and consequences. Journal of Educational Thought, 24(3), 147–160.
Hobo-Dyer Equal Area Projection (2007). A world map with the southern hemisphere on top. Maps and related teaching materials, ODT, Inc., PO Box 134, Amherst, MA 01004 USA. Web:
Höffler, T. N., & Leutner, D. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17, 722–738.
Iding, M. K. (1997). Can questions facilitate learning from illustrated science text?Reading Psychology, 18, 1–29.
Janus. (2010). Wikipedia. Retrieved September 25, 2010 from
Janus. (2012). EncyclopediaMythica. Retrieved January 16, 2012, from encyclopedia Mythica Online
Jones, M. G., Thomas, T., Taylor, A., & Oppewal, T. (2008). Experienced and novice teachers’ concepts of spatial scale. International Journal of Science Education, 30(3), 407–427.
Kalyuga, S. (2005). Prior knowledge principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 325–337). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kalyuga, S. (2007). Expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 509–539.
Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 23–31.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Levels of expertise and instruction design. Human Factors, 40, 1–17.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351–372.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2000). Incorporating learner experience into the design of multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 126–136.
Kapa, E. (2007). Transfer from structured to open-ended problem solving in a computerized metacognitive environment. Learning and Instruction, 17, 688–707.
Kashtan, Y., & Ben-Horin-Abramsky, H. (2000). With a hand on pulse: A study unit for the 6th grade [Series on health and life quality]. Tel Aviv: Ramot Press and the Center for Science and Technology Education, Tel Aviv University.
Kelly, A. V. (1999). The curriculum: Theory and practice (4th ed.). London: Paul Chapman.
Kessels, J., & Korthagen, F. (2001). The relations between theory and practice: Back to the classics. In F. A. J. Korthagen, in cooperation with J. Kessels, B. Koster, B. Lagerwerf, & T. Wubbels, Linking practice and theory: The pedagogy of realistic teacher education (pp. 20–31). New York: Routledge.
Kirschner, P. A., Martens, R. L., & Strijbos, J. W. (2004). CSCL in higher education? A framework for designing multiple-collaborative environments. In J. W. Strijbos, P. A. Kirschner, & R. L. Martens (Eds.), What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education? (pp. 3–30). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
Kirschner, P. A., Strijbos, J. W., & Kreijns, K. (2003). Designing integrated collaborative e-learning. In W. Jochems, J. van Merrienboer, & R. Koper (Eds.), Integrated e-learning: Implications for pedagogy, technology and organization. London: Taylor & Francis Books.
Kneser, C., & Ploetzner, R. (2001). Collaboration on the basis of complementary domain knowledge: Observed dialogue structures and their relation to learning success. Learning and Instruction, 11, 53–83.
Körner, C. (2005). Concepts and misconceptions in comprehension of hierarchical graphs. Learning and Instruction, 15, 281–296.
Korthagen, F., & Brouwer, N. (2005). Can teacher education make a difference?American Educational Research Journal, 42(1), 153–224.
Korthagen, F., & Kessels, J. P. A.M. (1999). Linking theory and practice: Changing the pedagogy of teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28, 4–17.
Korthagen, F. A. J., in cooperation with Kessels, J., Koster, B., Lagerwerf, B., & Wubbels, T. (2001). Linking practice and theory: The pedagogy of realistic teacher education (reprinted 2008). New York: Routledge.
Kosnik, C., & Beck, C. (2008). We taught them about literacy but what did they learn? The impact of a pre-service teacher education program on the practice of beginning teachers. Studying Teacher Education, 4(2), 115–128.
Kosslyn, S. M. (1989). Understanding charts and graphs. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 3, 185–226.
Kosslyn, S. M. (1994). Image and brain: The resolution of the imagery debate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kosslyn, S. M. (2006). Graph design for the eye and mind. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Kozma, R. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7–19.
Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. (2000). The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 105–143.
Kozma, R., & Russell, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Experts and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 949–968.
Kress, G. (2000). Multimodality: Challenges to thinking about language. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 337–340.
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality. A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed., pp. 135–153.). New York: Routledge.
Kuhl, J., & Goschke, T. (1994). A theory of action control: Mental sub-systems, modes of control, and volitional conflict-resolution strategies. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and personality: Action versus state orientation (pp. 93–124). Seattle: Hogrefe & Huber.
Kulhavy, R. W., Schwartz, N. H., & Shaha, S. H. (1982). Interpretive framework and memory for map features. American Cartographer, 9, 141–147.
Kulhavy, R. W., Schwartz, N. H., & Shaha, S. H. (1983). Spatial representation of maps. American Journal of Psychology, 96, 337–351.
Kwon, O. N. (2002). The effect of calculator-based ranger activities on students’ graphing ability. School Science and Mathematics, 102(2), 57–67.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 465–491.
Lampert, M. (1985). Learning in context: The voyage of the Mimi. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 4(2), 157–167.
Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press.
Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth 10000 words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65–99.
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimated peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Leahy, W., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). When auditory presentations should and should not be a component of multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 401–418.
Lee, A. (2010). A proposed visual education for all Australian students. Art Education Policy Review, 111, 25–32.
Lee, H. (2007). Instructional design of web-based simulations for learners with different levels of spatial ability. Instructional Science, 35, 467–479.
Leinhardt, G., Young, K. M., & Merriman, J. (1995). Integrating professional knowledge: The theory of practice and the practice of theory. Learning and Instruction, 5, 401–408.
Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. K. (1990). Functions, graphs and graphing: Tasks, learning and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60(1), 1–64.
Lemke, J. L. (1989). Using language in the classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values (2nd ed.). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Levin, J. R. (1981). On functions of pictures in prose. In F. J. Pirozzolo, & M. C. Wittrock (Eds.), Neuropsychological and cognitive processes in reading (pp. 203–228). New York: Academic Press.
Levin, J. R., Anglin, G. J., & Carney, R. N. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In D. M. Willows, & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The psychology of illustration (Vol. 1, pp. 51–86). New York: Springer.
Levin, J. R., & Mayer, R. E. (1993). Understanding illustrations in texts. In B. K. Britton, A. Woodward, & M. Binkley (Eds.), Learning from textbooks: Theory and practice (pp. 95–113). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Levin, J. R., Shriberg, L. K., & Berry, J. K. (1983). A concrete strategy for remembering abstract prose. American Educational Research Journal, 20(2), 277–290.
Lewalter, D. (2003). Cognitive strategies for learning from static and dynamic visuals. Learning and Instruction, 13, 177–189.
Lieblich, A., Ninio, A., & Kugelmass, S. (1975). Developmental trends in directionality of drawing in Jewish and Arab Israeli children. Journal of Cross-Culture Psychology, 6, 504–510.
Lin, M., Lake, V. E., & Rice, D. (2008). Teaching anti-bias curriculum in teacher education programs: What and how. Teacher Education Quarterly, Spring, 187–200.
Ling, M. G., Wells, C., & Wells, G. (1993). Dynamics of discourse: Literacy and the construction of knowledge. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick, & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Context for learning: Socio-cultural dynamic in children development (pp. 58–90). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lowe, R. K. (2003). Animation and learning: selective processing of information in dynamic graphics. Learning and Instruction, 13, 157–176.
Lunsford, E., Melear, C. T., Roth, W. M., Perkins, M., & Hickok, L. G. (2007). Proliferation of inscriptions and transformations among preservice science teachers engaged in authentic science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 538–564.
Manouchehri, A., & Goodman, T. (1998). Mathematics curriculum reform and teachers: Understanding the connections. Journal of Educational Research, 92(1), 27–41.
Marcus, N., Cooper, M., & Sweller, J. (1996). Understanding instructions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 49–63.
Mar’i, S. K. (1974). School and society in the Arab village in Israel. Studies in Education, 4, 85104. (Hebrew).
Martin, L., & Schwartz, D. L. (2009). Prospective adaptation in the use of external representations. Cognition and Instruction, 27(4), 370–400.
Mason, R. (1991). Analyzing computer conferencing interactions. International Journal of Adult Education and Training, 2, 161–173.
Mathai, S., & Ramadas, J. (2009). Visuals and visualization of human body systems. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 439–458.
Matusov, E. (2001). Intersubjectivity as a way of informing teaching design for a community of learners classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 383–402.
Mayer, R. E. (1989). Systematic thinking fostered by illustrations in scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 240–246.
Mayer, R. E. (1993). Illustrations that Instruct. In R. Glaser, (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Volume 4, pp. 253–284). Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions?Educational Psychologist, 32, 1–19.
Mayer, R. E. (1999). Multimedia aids to problem-solving transfer. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 611–624.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125–139.
Mayer, R. E. (2005a). Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2005b). Introduction to multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 1–16). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2005c). Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: Segmenting, pretraining, and modality principles. In R. E. Mayer, (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 169–182). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2005d). Principles for reducing extraneous processing in multimedia learning: Coherence, signaling, redundancy, spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity principles. In R. E. Mayer, (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 183–200). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E., & Anderson, R. B. (1992). The instructive animation: Helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 444–452.
Mayer, R. E., Bove, W., Bryman, A., Mars, R., & Tapangco, L. (1996). When less is more: Meaningful learning from visual and verbal summaries of science textbook lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 64–73.
Mayer, R. E., Hegarty, M., Mayer, S., & Campbell, J. (2005). When static media promote active learning: Annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11(4), 256–265.
Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 187–198.
Mayer, R. E., Mautone, P., & Prothero, W. (2002). Pictorial aids for learning by doing in a multimedia geology game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 171–185.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual coding processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 312–320.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43–52.
Mayer, R. E., Moreno, R., Boire, M., & Vagge, S. (1999). Maximizing constructivist learning from multimedia communications by minimizing cognitive load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 638–643.
Mayer, R. E., & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 389–401.
Mayer, R. E., Sims, V., & Tajika, H. (1995). A comparison of how textbooks teach mathematical problem solving in Japan and the United States. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 443–460.
Mayer, R. E., Steinhoff, K., Bower, G., & Mars, R. (1995). A generative theory of textbooks design: Using annotated illustrations to foster meaningful learning of science text. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(1), 31–43.
McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., Lehman, S., & Poliquin, A. (2007). The effect of causal diagrams on text learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 367–388.
McKean, B. (2002). Artistic representations in three fifth-grade social studies textbooks. Elementary School Journal, 103(2), 187–197.
Meltzoff, A. N. (1988). Imitation, objects, tools, and the rudiments of language in human ontology. Human Evolution, 3, 45–64.
Messaris, P. (1993). Visual “literacy:” A theoretical synthesis. Communication Theory, 3(4), 277–294.
Messaris, P. (1994). Visual literacy vs. manipulation. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 11, 180–203.
Metros, S. E., & Woolsey, K. (2006). Visual literacy: An institutional imperative. Educate Review, May/June, 80–81.
Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (1997). From verbal descriptions to graphic representations: Stability and change in students’ alternative conceptions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 32, 229–263.
Meyer, J. (2000). Performance with tables and graphs: Effect of training and a visual search model. Ergonomics, 43, 1840–1865.
Meyer, J., Shinar, D., & Leiser, D. (1997). Multiple factors that determine performance with tables and graphs. Human Factors, 39, 268–286.
Michel, E., Roebers, C. M., & Schneider, W. (2007). Educational films in the classrooms: Increasing the benefit. Learning and Instruction, 17, 172–183.
Miller, H. J. (1992). Illustration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Miller, J. P., & Seller, W. (1985). Curriculum: Perspectives and practices. New York and London: Longman.
Miller, P., & Eilam, B. (2008). Age-related development in the ability of individuals to apply hierarchical containment relations to word concepts: Implications for learning. Journal of Educational Research, 101(6), 350–362.
Mirzoeff, N. (1999). An introduction to visual culture. London and New York: Routledge.
Mitchell, W. J. T. (1987). Iconology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Molinari, G., & Tapiero, I. (2007). Integration of new domain-related states and events from texts and illustrations by subjects with high and low prior knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 17, 304–321.
Molitor, S., Ballstaedt, S. P., & Mandl, H. (1989). Problem in knowledge acquisition from text and pictures. In H. Mandl, & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures (pp. 3–35). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
Moore, P. J., (1993). Metacognitive processing of diagrams, maps and graphs. Learning and Instruction, 3, 215–226.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358–368.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). A coherence effect in multimedia learning: The case of minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 117–125.
Moreno, R., & Valdez, A. (2005). Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53(3), 35–45.
Morgan, R. L., Whorton, J. E., & Gunsalus, C. (2000). A comparison of short-term and long-term retention: Lecture combined with discussion versus cooperative learning. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27, 53–58.
Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 319–334.
Mozes, S., Amiad, R., & Zirlin, M. (1991). Every individual and their family. Nazareth: Maalot (Hebrew and Arabic versions).
Musen, G., & Triesman, A. (1990). Implicit and explicit memory for visual patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 127–137.
Nathan, M. J., Eilam, B., &Kim, S. (2007). To disagree, we must also agree: How intersubjectivity structures and perpetuates discourse in a mathematics classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(4), 525–565.
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America’s future (p. 32). New York: NCTAF.
National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment, National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.
Nichols, B. (1981). Ideology and the image: Social representation in the cinema and other media. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Olson, D. R. (1977). The language of instruction: The literate bias of schooling. In R. C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, & W. E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 65–89). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: The dual coding approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Park, O. C., & Hopkins, R. (1993). Instructional conditions for using dynamic visual displays: A review. Instructional Science, 21, 427–449.
Pass, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design. Educational Psychologist, 38, 1–4.
Pass, F., & Van Merriënboer, J. (1993). The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental-effort and performance measures. Human Factors, 35, 737–743.
Pass, F., & Van Merriënboer, J. (1994). Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem solving skills: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 122–133.
Pearce, G., & Pickard, A. (1987). Being a teacher: Towards an epistemology of practical studies. In G. Smyth (Ed.), Educating teachers: Changing the nature of pedagogical knowledge. (pp. 35–44). London: Falmer Press.
Peeck, J. (1987). The role of illustrations in processing and remembering illustrated text. In D. M. Willows, & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The psychology of illustration: Vol. 1 Basic research (pp. 115–151). New York: Springer.
Peeck, J. (1993). Increasing picture effects in learning from illustrated text. Learning and Instruction, 3, 227–238.
Peirce, C. S. (1931–1958). Collected papers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pereira, P., & Roby, T. (2001). Joseph Schwab as teacher. Curriculum History, March, 67–72. Waco, TX: Society for the Study of Curriculum History.
Perkins, D. (1987). Thinking frames: An integrative perspective on teaching cognitive skills. In J. Baron, & R. Sternberg (Eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice (pp. 41–61). New York: W. H. Freeman.
Perkins, D. (1992). Smart schools: From training memories to educating minds (pp. 4–6). New York: Free Press.
Perkins, D., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound?Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16–25.
Pettersson, R. (1996). Verbo-visual communication. In T. Vekders (Ed.), Beeldenstorm in Deventer [Multimedia education in praxis: Selected readings] (pp. 11–15). Deventer, Holland: TheRijkshogeschool,IJselland, and the International Visual Literacy Association.
Pettersson, R. (2000, April). Literacies in the new millennium. Presented at III Miedzynardowa Konferencja, Media and Education, University of Adam Mickiewicz, Poznan.
Pettersson, R. (2009). Visual literacy and message design. TechTrends, 53(2), 38–40.
Phillips, L. M., Norris, S. P., & Macnab, J. S. (2010). Visualization in mathematics, reading and science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Phye, G. (1997). Handbook of academic earning: Construction of knowledge. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pinar, W. F., Reynolds, W. M., Slattery, P., & Taubman, P. M. (1995). Understanding curriculum. New York: Peter Lang.
Pinker, S. (1990). A theory of graph comprehension. In R. Freedle (Ed.), Artificial intelligence and the future of testing (pp. 73–126). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pollock, E., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction, 12, 61–86.
Poyas, Y., & Eilam, B. (2012). ‘Common interpretive spaces’ constructed through ‘intertextual loops’ – teachers interpreting multimodal learning materials. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(1), 89–100.
Prabu, D. (1992). Accuracy of visual perception of quantitative graphics: An exploratory study. Journalism Quarterly, 69(2), 273–292.
Rapp, D. N. (2007). Mental models: Theoretical issues for visualizations in science education. In J. K. Glibert (ed.), Visualization in science education (pp. 43–60). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Rapp, D. N., & Kurby, C. A. (2008). The “ins” and “outs” of learning: Internal representations and external visualizations. In J. K. Glibert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 29–52). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Reed, S. K. (2010). Thinking visually. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
Reiner, M. (2008). The nature and development of visualization: A review of what is known. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.) (2008). Visualization in science education (pp. 25–27). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Reisberg, D. (1997). Cognition. New York: Norton.
Riding, J. R., & Douglas, G. (1993). The effect of cognitive style and mode of presentation on learning performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 297–307.
Rieber, L. P., & Kini, A. S. (1991). Theoretical foundations of instructional applications of computer-generated animated visuals. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 18, 83–88.
Robbins, S. (2000). Essentials of organizational behavior (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Roehrig, G. H., & Kruse, R. A. (2005). The role of teachers’ beliefs or knowledge in the adoption of a reform-based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 105(8), 412–423.
Rogers, E. M. (2002). Diffusion of preventive innovation. Addictive Behaviors, 27, 989–993.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovation (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C. O’Malley (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 69–97). Berlin: Springer.
Rose, G. (2001). Visual methodologies. An introduction to the interpretation of visual materials. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage.
Rossano, M. J., & Morrison, T. T. (1996). Learning from maps: General processes and map-structure influences. Cognition and Instruction, 14(1), 109–137.
Roth, W. M. (2001). Gestures: Their role in teaching and learning. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 365–392.
Roth, W. M., & McGinn, M. K. (1998). Inscriptions: Toward a theory of representing as a social practice. Review of Educational Research, 68(1), 35–59.
Roth, W. M., McGinn, M. K., & Bowen, G. M. (1998). How prepared are preservice teachers to teach scientific inquiry? Levels of performance in science representation practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 76, 531–557.
Roth, W. M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1992). The social construction of scientific concepts or the concept map as a conscription devise and tool for social thinking in high school science. Science Education, 76(5), 531–557.
Russell, A. (2003). Visual literacy after 9/11. Academic Exchange Quarterly, June, 61–65.
Salomon, G. (1968, February). Cross cultural differences in map reading. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Salomon, G. (1979). Interaction of media, cognition and learning (pp. 28–60). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Salomon, G. (Ed.). (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1998). Individual and social aspects of learning. Review of Research in Education, 23, 1–24.
Saussure, F. de (1916/1983). Course in general linguistics (R. Harris, Trans.). London: Duckworth.
Sawyer, K. R. (Ed.). (2006). Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schau, C. G., & Scott, K. P. (1984). Impact of gender characteristics of instructional materials: An integration of the research literature. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 183–193.
Schiller, H. A. (1987). Visual literacy in ancient and modern man (Part 1). In R. A. Braden, D. G. Beauchamp, & I. W. Miller (Eds.), Visible & viable: The role of images in instruction and communication (pp. 263–284). Commerce, TX: East Texas State University.
Schnotz, W. (2005). An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 49–69). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 141–156.
Schnotz, W., & Kulhavy, R. W. (Eds.). (1994). Comprehension of graphics. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North Holland.
Schnotz, W., & Rasch, T. (2005). Enabling, facilitating and inhibiting effect of animations in multimedia learning: Why reducing of cognitive load can have negative results on learning. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53(3), 47–58.
Schön, D. (1992). The theory of inquiry: Dewey’s legacy to education. Curriculum Inquiry, 22(2), 119–139.
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351–371.
Schunk, D. (2004). Learning theories. An educational perspective (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, Merrill Prentice Hall.
Schwab, J. J. (1973). The practical: translation into curriculum. School Review, 81(4), 501–522.
Schwab, J. J. (1978). Science, curriculum, and liberal education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Schwab, J. J. (1983). The practical 4: Something for curriculum professors to do. Curriculum Inquiry, 13, 239–265.
Schwan, S., & Riempp, R. (2004). The cognitive benefit of interactive videos: Learning to tie nautical knots. Learning and Instruction, 14, 293–305.
Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475–522.
Selden, S. (1987). Professionalization and the null curriculum: The case of the popular eugenics movement and American educational studies. Educational Studies, 18, 221–238.
Seufert, T. (2003). Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13, 227–237.
Seufert, T., & Brünken, R. (2006). Cognitive load and the format of instructional aids for coherence information. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 321–331.
Seufert, T., Schütze, M., & Brünken, R. (2009). Memory characteristics and modality in multimedia learning: An aptitude-treatment-interaction study. Learning and Instruction, 19, 28–42.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the danger of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communication. Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sfard, A., & Kieran, C. (2001). Cognition as communication: Rethinking learning-by-talking through multi-faceted analysis of students’ mathematical interactions. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 8(1), 42–76.
Shah, P., & Carpenter, P. A. (1995). Conceptual limitations in comprehending line graphs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124(1), 43–61.
Shah, P., Freedman, E. G., & Ioanna, V. (2005). The comprehension of quantitative information in graphical displays. In P. Shah, & A. Miyake, (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking (pp. 426–476). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Shah, P., & Hoeffner, J. (2002). Review of graph comprehension research: Implication for instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 47–69.
Shah, P., Mayer, R., & Hagerty, M. (1999). Graphs as aids to knowledge construction: Signaling techniques for guiding the process of graph comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 690–702.
Shah, P., & Miyake, A. (Eds.). (2005). Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sherin, B. L. (2000). How students invent representations of motion: A genetic account. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19(4), 399–441.
Shirav, P., Rubinstein, B., & Nethanel, N. (Eds.). (1992). Migvan for grade eight. Tel-Aviv: Ministry of Education and Tel Aviv University. (Hebrew).
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14.
Shulman, L. S. (2004). The wisdom of practice: Essays on teaching, learning, and learning to teach (Vol. 1, pp. 165–188). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Siegler, R. S., & Klahr, D. (1982). When do children learn? The relationship between existing knowledge and the acquisition of new knowledge. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 121–211). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Silverman, K. (1983). The subject of semiotics. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sless, D. (1984). Visual literacy: A failed opportunity. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 32(4), 224–228.
Sloffer, S. J., Dueber, B., & Duffy, T. M. (1999). Using asynchronous conferencing to promote critical thinking: Two implementations in higher education. Proceedings of HICSS-32, New York: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
Soller, A. L. (2001). Supporting social interaction in an intelligent collaborative learning system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12(1), 40–62.
Spencer, K. (1991). The psychology of educational technology and instructional media (2nd ed.). Liverpool: Unique Writing Publications.
Spillane, J. P. (1999). External reform initiatives and teachers’ efforts to reconstruct practice: The mediating role of teachers’ zone of enactment. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31, 143–175.
Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advance knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domain. In T. M. Duffy, & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 57–75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Spiro, R. J., & Jehng, J. C. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the non-linear and multi-dimensional traversal of complex subject matter. In D. Nix, & R. J. Spiro (Eds.), Cognition, education and multi-media: Exploring ideas in high technology (pp. 163–205). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Stern, E., Aprea, C., & Ebner, H. G. (2003). Improving cross-content transfer in text processing by means of active graphical representation. Learning and Instruction, 13, 191–203.
Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Teaching intelligence: The application of cognitive psychology to the improvement of intellectual skills. In J. B. Baron, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice (pp.182–218). New York: W. H. Freeman.
Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: ACER Press.
Sweller, J. (2003). Evolution of human cognitive architecture. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 43, pp. 215–266). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32(1/2), 9–31.
Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 19–30). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition & Instruction, 12, 185–233.
Tabachneck, H. J. M., Leonardo, A. M., & Simon, H. A. (1994). How does an expert use a graph? A model of visual and verbal inferencing in economics. In A. Ram, & K. Eiselt (Eds.), 16th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 842–847). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tabers, H. K., Martens, R. L., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2004). Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: Effects of modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 71–81.
Tabibian, K. (1999). A journey into the past. Tel Aviv: Center for Educational Technology. (Hebrew).
Tagg, J. (1993). The burden of representation: Essays on photographies and histories. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Tankard, J. W. Jr. (1987). Quantitative graphics in newspapers. Journalism Quarterly, 64(2), 406–415.
Taylor, H. A. (2005). Mapping the understanding of understanding maps. In P. Shah, & A. Miyake (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking (pp. 295–333). Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Teasley, S. (1995). The role of talk in children’s peer collaboration. Developmental Psychology, 3(2), 207–220.
Teasley, S., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Constructing a joint problem space: The computer as a tool for sharing knowledge. In S. P. Lajoie, & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 229–257). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). When two sensory modes are better than one. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3(4), 257–287.
Tom, A. R., & Valli, L. (1990). Professional knowledge for teachers. In W. R. Houston, M. Haberman, & J. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 373–392). New York: Macmillan.
Tufte, E. R. (2001). The visual display of quantitative information (2nd ed.). Chesire, CT: Graphic Press.
Tuson, J. (2007). Writing: The story of a cognitive revolution. In E. Teubal, J. Dockrell, & L. Tolchinsky (Eds.), Notational knowledge. developmental and historical perspectives (pp. 65–78). Roterdam/Taipei: Sense.
Tversky, B., Morrison, J. B., & Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate?International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57, 247–262.
Tyler, R. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Tyler, R. W. (1977). Toward improved curriculum theory: The inside story. Curriculum Inquiry, 6(4), 251–256.
Upside down map of the world. (1988). Retrieved February 9, 2009 from
Uttal, D. H., & O’Doherty, K. (2008). Comprehending and learning from “visualizations:” A developmental perspective. In J. K. Glibert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 53–72). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Van der Meij, J. (2007). Support for learning with multiple representations. Designing simulation-based environment (pp. 79–96). Enschede, The Netherlands: Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research.
van der Meij, J., & de Jong, T. (2004, April). Learning with multiple representations. Paper presented at the AERA symposium, San Diego.
van Gog, T., Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G., (2008). Effects of studying sequences of process-oriented and product-oriented work examples on trouble shooting transfer efficiency. Learning and Instruction, 18(3), 211–222.
van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future discussions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147–177.
Verdi, M. P., Kulhavy, R. W., Stock, W. A., Rittschof, K. A., & Johnson, J. T. (1996). Text learning using scientific diagrams: Implication for classroom use. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 487–499.
Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45–69.
Wade, S. E. (1992). How interest affects learning from text. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 254–277). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wainer, H. (1992). Understanding graphs and tables. Educational Researcher, 21(1), 14–23.
Wax, N., Levin-Zamir, D., & Levi, D. (1993). To be healthy: A study unit for the 1st and 2nd grades [Series on health and life quality]. Tel Aviv: Ramot Press and the Center for Science and Technology Education, Tel Aviv University.
Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small group. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 21–39.
Webb, N. M. (1991). Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 366–389.
Weidenmann, B. (1989). When god pictures fail: An information-processing approach to the effect of illustrations. In H. Mandl, & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures (pp. 157–171). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Weil, S. (1983). A garden. Jerusalem: Safrai Fine Art Gallery.
Welch, A. (1999). The triumph of technocracy or the collapse of certainty? Modernity, postmodernity, and postcolonialism in comparative education. In R. Arnove, & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Comparative education: The dialectic of the global and the local (pp. 25–50). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Werner, W. (2004). “What does this picture say?” Reading the intertextuality of images. International Journal of Social Education, 19(1), 64–84.
Whatley, M. H. (1992). Images of gays and lesbians in sexuality and health textbooks. Journal of Homosexuality, 15, 197–211.
Willows, D. M. (1978). A picture is not always worth a thousand words: Pictures as distracters in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(2), 255–262.
Winn, W. (1991). Learning from maps and diagrams. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 211–247.
Winn, W., & Holliday, W. (1982). Design principles for diagrams and charts. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), The technology of text principles for structuring, designing and displaying text (pp. 277–299). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
Yerushalmy, M. (1991). Students’ perceptions of aspects of algebraic function using multiple representation software. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7, 42–57.
Zimmerman, J. (2006). Why some teachers resist change and what principles can do about it. NASSP Bulletin, 90, 238–249.