Aaron Long
Annotated Bibliography: The Role of Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence in Teaching Composition: An 'Orangeprint' for Overhaul
Block, Cathy Collins, Sheri R. Parris, Cinnamon S. Whiteley, and Sherri R. Parris. “CPMs: A Kinesthetic Comprehension Strategy.” The Reading Teacher. 61.6 (2008): 460-470. Print.
Block’s et. al. article focuses on motions used to help primary school-aged students represent abstract learning processes, including making predictions, clarifying and following directions, inferring, drawing conclusions, and identifying main ideas (465). The theory on which the study was based holds that “kinesthetic motions are effective tools for creating mental representations for abstract concepts.” (461) One question that arises is whether, since this works for primary school-aged learners, it would work for post-secondary learners as well. Nothing in Block’s study suggests that hers and her colleagues’ work is not applicable to undergraduates.
De Mers, Kathleen Dunn. “‘The Brain within Its Groove’: Language and Struggling Students.” English Journal. 100.2 (Nov. 2010): 31-35. Print.
De Mers’ article is comprised primarily of anecdotes in an effort to raise awareness of several technological solutions to learning obstacles that confront students who struggle to learn with words. Her most important point is that the employ of certain non-traditional methods may have a norming effect on the learning environment. (32-33) By exposing students who do not struggle with learning through words to non-traditional methods, teachers who do so remove a large obstacle for learners who do not learn through words: the fear of feeling abnormal. In her terms, introduction of the unusual renders it unremarkable. (33) Thus mainstreaming non- traditional learning methods helps to establish a tradition of including non-logocentric learning styles.
Dunn, Patricia A. Talking, Sketching, Moving: Multiple Literacies in the Teaching of Writing. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc., 2001.
Dunn offers an exercise that lends itself readily to Unit 2 of the ENGL 101 syllabus at the University of Kansas. Called “Rhetorical Proof Cards,” this exercise presents groups of students with 18 pieces of evidence written on 3x5 cards which the groups then have to order to form a coherent argument for or against the death penalty (issues are, of course, exchangeable). The physical act of moving the evidence around, and doing so as part of a group, generates discussion, debate, and a sense of accomplishment after the work is finished. The exercise also prompts metacognition, as students often engage in discussion about how evidence should be treated. Can an inconvenient fact simply be left out of the argument?Dunn, Patricia A., and Kathleen Dunn De Mers. “Reversing Notions of Disability and Accommodation: Embracing Universal Design in Writing Pedagogy and Web Space.” Kairos: A Journal for Teachers of Writing in Webbed Environments. 7.1 (2002). Electronic.
Gardner, Howard. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York, NY: BasicBooks, 1993.
In the ninth chapter of this book Gardner argues convincingly for the existence and properties of a bodily-kinesthetic intelligence. Among the properties he identifies are:
“a well-honed sense of timing” “points of repose or shift” during which the body recalibrates itself after one behavior in preparation for the next “a sense of direction... and a point of no return” (208).
All of these properties are involved in both the physical and mental acts of writing. Thus the cultivation of bodily-kinesthetic intelligence provides bodily intelligent students with a richer metaphor from which to translate reflection on bodily acts into prescriptions for a writing- oriented mental process.
Hecker, Linda. “Walking, Tinkertoys, and Legos: Using Movement and Manipulatives to Help Students Write.” English Journal. 86.6 (1997): 46-52. Print.
Hecker’s article elaborates hers and her colleagues’ use of manipulatives (e.g., Legos or Tinkertoys) in helping students model their work. This is predicated on the idea that “many students we label as ‘concrete thinkers’ actually are capable of sophisticated, abstract conceptualization, but may not be able to express this in words as a first step” (51). Modeling writing with manipulatives or kinesthetic processes allows a student to gain an abstract understanding of her/his writing’s structure by representing said structure in a concrete way.
Housner, Lynn Dale, and David C. Griffey. “Wax On, Wax Off: Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Motor Skill Instruction.” Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 65.2 (1994): 63-68. Print.
Housner’s and Griffey’s article is generally focused on instructors teaching motor skills, however their work does make one extremely helpful point: associating a kinesthetic motion with a visual image and a verbal term aid in the interpretation of physical actions during competition. The visual image helps an athlete recognize an action, for example a specific type of tennis serve, translate the recognition to an interpretation of an opponent’s strategy, and then identify and execute counter-strategies. Coding the motion at multiple levels—physical, visual, and verbal— aids recall and response. If the multi-level coding of kinesthetic actions improves recognition and recall, why wouldn’t the multi-level coding of rhetorical strategies and structures yield an analogous benefit?
Klein, Karen, and Linda Hecker. “The Write Moves: Cultivating Kinesthetic and Spatial Intelligences in the Writing Process.” Presence of Mind: Writing and the Domain Beyond the Cognitive. Eds. Alice Glarden Brand and Richard L. Graves. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers, 1994. 89-98. Print.
Ochsner, Robert S. Physical Eloquence and the Biology of Writing. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1990. Ochsner’s second chapter argues that
It is important, however, to understand that education was, at least for Western culture, incipiently athletic. Body dominated mind. The physically fit were also the victorious. Into this new, agonistic arena—the classroom—young students came to find a different battle zone: mind versus mind. Yet for the Greeks (and later the Romans) the mental discipline of learning retained a fundamentally physical basis. Students copied their textbooks word for word—a necessary task since books were rare, and original copies remained at the teacher’s desk. So new editions had to be copied into bulky, rolled manuscripts... Modern students, of course, simply buy their texts, and if they do much extended writing, it is usually done in their English or other humanities classes. Compared to the ancients, students today barely practice the physical act of writing. (25)
The simple point here is that modern education has largely divorced the student’s physical presence from the curriculum, and the implication of that point is simply that we cannot engage the student’s entire person without reincorporating it into the classroom.
Stephenson, Denise, and Sarah Hochstetler. “A Diversity of Writers: Fun with Kinesthetics.” Language Arts Journal of Michigan. 18.1 (2002): 53-59. Print.
Stephenson and Hochstetler argue that the use of toys in modeling the structure of academic papers aids writing in several ways. First, they tap a wider range of intelligences, particularly visual and kinesthetic intelligences, which are not usually tapped by traditional writing exercises. Second, they cultivate confidence by offering those who might otherwise be intimidated by writing an easy, familiar entrance to the practice. Third, they make writing fun, which increases the likelihood that people will write more often if the writing process entails modeling with toys. This article raises the interesting issue of how physical intelligence could be tapped to help students structure their writing by modeling their thoughts in physical ways. Should we be adding specific sets of construction toys to the lists of texts and supplies on our syllabi?
Annotated Bibliography: The Role of Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence in Teaching Composition: An 'Orangeprint' for Overhaul
Block, Cathy Collins, Sheri R. Parris, Cinnamon S. Whiteley, and Sherri R. Parris. “CPMs: A Kinesthetic Comprehension Strategy.” The Reading Teacher. 61.6 (2008): 460-470. Print.
Block’s et. al. article focuses on motions used to help primary school-aged students represent abstract learning processes, including making predictions, clarifying and following directions, inferring, drawing conclusions, and identifying main ideas (465). The theory on which the study was based holds that “kinesthetic motions are effective tools for creating mental representations for abstract concepts.” (461) One question that arises is whether, since this works for primary school-aged learners, it would work for post-secondary learners as well. Nothing in Block’s study suggests that hers and her colleagues’ work is not applicable to undergraduates.
De Mers, Kathleen Dunn. “‘The Brain within Its Groove’: Language and Struggling Students.” English Journal. 100.2 (Nov. 2010): 31-35. Print.
De Mers’ article is comprised primarily of anecdotes in an effort to raise awareness of several technological solutions to learning obstacles that confront students who struggle to learn with words. Her most important point is that the employ of certain non-traditional methods may have a norming effect on the learning environment. (32-33) By exposing students who do not struggle with learning through words to non-traditional methods, teachers who do so remove a large obstacle for learners who do not learn through words: the fear of feeling abnormal. In her terms, introduction of the unusual renders it unremarkable. (33) Thus mainstreaming non- traditional learning methods helps to establish a tradition of including non-logocentric learning styles.
Dunn, Patricia A. Talking, Sketching, Moving: Multiple Literacies in the Teaching of Writing. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc., 2001.
Dunn offers an exercise that lends itself readily to Unit 2 of the ENGL 101 syllabus at the University of Kansas. Called “Rhetorical Proof Cards,” this exercise presents groups of students with 18 pieces of evidence written on 3x5 cards which the groups then have to order to form a coherent argument for or against the death penalty (issues are, of course, exchangeable). The physical act of moving the evidence around, and doing so as part of a group, generates discussion, debate, and a sense of accomplishment after the work is finished. The exercise also prompts metacognition, as students often engage in discussion about how evidence should be treated. Can an inconvenient fact simply be left out of the argument?Dunn, Patricia A., and Kathleen Dunn De Mers. “Reversing Notions of Disability and Accommodation: Embracing Universal Design in Writing Pedagogy and Web Space.” Kairos: A Journal for Teachers of Writing in Webbed Environments. 7.1 (2002). Electronic.
Gardner, Howard. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York, NY: BasicBooks, 1993.
In the ninth chapter of this book Gardner argues convincingly for the existence and properties of a bodily-kinesthetic intelligence. Among the properties he identifies are:
“a well-honed sense of timing” “points of repose or shift” during which the body recalibrates itself after one behavior in preparation for the next “a sense of direction... and a point of no return” (208).
All of these properties are involved in both the physical and mental acts of writing. Thus the cultivation of bodily-kinesthetic intelligence provides bodily intelligent students with a richer metaphor from which to translate reflection on bodily acts into prescriptions for a writing- oriented mental process.
Hecker, Linda. “Walking, Tinkertoys, and Legos: Using Movement and Manipulatives to Help Students Write.” English Journal. 86.6 (1997): 46-52. Print.
Hecker’s article elaborates hers and her colleagues’ use of manipulatives (e.g., Legos or Tinkertoys) in helping students model their work. This is predicated on the idea that “many students we label as ‘concrete thinkers’ actually are capable of sophisticated, abstract conceptualization, but may not be able to express this in words as a first step” (51). Modeling writing with manipulatives or kinesthetic processes allows a student to gain an abstract understanding of her/his writing’s structure by representing said structure in a concrete way.
Housner, Lynn Dale, and David C. Griffey. “Wax On, Wax Off: Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Motor Skill Instruction.” Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 65.2 (1994): 63-68. Print.
Housner’s and Griffey’s article is generally focused on instructors teaching motor skills, however their work does make one extremely helpful point: associating a kinesthetic motion with a visual image and a verbal term aid in the interpretation of physical actions during competition. The visual image helps an athlete recognize an action, for example a specific type of tennis serve, translate the recognition to an interpretation of an opponent’s strategy, and then identify and execute counter-strategies. Coding the motion at multiple levels—physical, visual, and verbal— aids recall and response. If the multi-level coding of kinesthetic actions improves recognition and recall, why wouldn’t the multi-level coding of rhetorical strategies and structures yield an analogous benefit?
Klein, Karen, and Linda Hecker. “The Write Moves: Cultivating Kinesthetic and Spatial Intelligences in the Writing Process.” Presence of Mind: Writing and the Domain Beyond the Cognitive. Eds. Alice Glarden Brand and Richard L. Graves. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers, 1994. 89-98. Print.
Ochsner, Robert S. Physical Eloquence and the Biology of Writing. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1990. Ochsner’s second chapter argues that
It is important, however, to understand that education was, at least for Western culture, incipiently athletic. Body dominated mind. The physically fit were also the victorious. Into this new, agonistic arena—the classroom—young students came to find a different battle zone: mind versus mind. Yet for the Greeks (and later the Romans) the mental discipline of learning retained a fundamentally physical basis. Students copied their textbooks word for word—a necessary task since books were rare, and original copies remained at the teacher’s desk. So new editions had to be copied into bulky, rolled manuscripts... Modern students, of course, simply buy their texts, and if they do much extended writing, it is usually done in their English or other humanities classes. Compared to the ancients, students today barely practice the physical act of writing. (25)
The simple point here is that modern education has largely divorced the student’s physical presence from the curriculum, and the implication of that point is simply that we cannot engage the student’s entire person without reincorporating it into the classroom.
Stephenson, Denise, and Sarah Hochstetler. “A Diversity of Writers: Fun with Kinesthetics.” Language Arts Journal of Michigan. 18.1 (2002): 53-59. Print.
Stephenson and Hochstetler argue that the use of toys in modeling the structure of academic papers aids writing in several ways. First, they tap a wider range of intelligences, particularly visual and kinesthetic intelligences, which are not usually tapped by traditional writing exercises. Second, they cultivate confidence by offering those who might otherwise be intimidated by writing an easy, familiar entrance to the practice. Third, they make writing fun, which increases the likelihood that people will write more often if the writing process entails modeling with toys. This article raises the interesting issue of how physical intelligence could be tapped to help students structure their writing by modeling their thoughts in physical ways. Should we be adding specific sets of construction toys to the lists of texts and supplies on our syllabi?