Professional Documents
Culture Documents
STEM Education. Johns Hopkins University Institute for Education Policy Commentary,
July 2016.
http://scienceoflearning.jhu.edu/assets/documents/spatial_thinking_FINAL.pdf
This article explores studies carried out about spatial thinking that detail the benefits of spatial thinking
training on mental capabilities and performance in common school subjects such as chemistry or calculus.
It explains that early math ability is correlated to the presence of a spatial thinking ability. It details the
different factors that affected the studies and why or why not they could have affected the results in order
The author, Kristin Gagnier is qualified to discuss spatial thinking because their credentials (or
experience) include Assistant Director of Dissemination, Translation, and Education her contact
information is included in the article. Written 3 years ago, this source is current on the topic of spatial
thinking. The author thoroughly evaluated how all sides of the issue were acknowledged by the source.
For example, different studies were evaluated that included higher level classes such as Calculus in
contrast to elementary school kids. The coverage can be considered broad and deep because the studies
are described, how they were carried out, and the conclusions generated. The information contained in the
source can be verified elsewhere. For example, the author says that training spatial thinking can improve
performance, which can be corroborated by J. J Jirout, in his publication “Building Blocks for Developing
Spatial Skills Evidence From a Large, Representative US Sample, Psychological science” which states
that children who play with spatial toys correlates to spatial development and increased mental
capabilities. The purpose of this article is to inform readers about spatial thinking and the benefits of
training. The audience is teachers and parents. The article is appropriate for this purpose and audience
because of the high level studies but also detailed descriptions of the benefits of training. For example, the
article references a variety of school subjects pertaining to the effect of spatial thinking on each.
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles concepts and evidence.
https://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf
This exploratory article details the different studies carried out to evaluate whether or not learning styles
are a myth and evidence to suggest that learning style theories are not methodologically sound. It explains
that many of the studies used to support learning styles theories have been methodologically inadequate
and therefore provide insufficient or reliable results. It details the different factors in each of the studies
that cause them to be ineffective in proving learning styles in order to explain the lack of substantive
evidence.
The author, Harold Pashler, are qualified to discuss learning styles concepts because their credentials (or
experience) includes experimental psychologist and cognitive scientist and Distinguished Professor of
Psychology at University of California, San Diego and his contact information is included in the article.
Although written more than 10 years ago, this source is still relevant because it describes studies that were
methodologically sound in describing the evidence about learning styles. The author thoroughly evaluated
how all sides of the issue were acknowledged by the source. For example, the article cites a multitude of
studies that disprove a myth and why learning styles are essentially a myth. The author describes how
learning styles have spread and the reasonings of the opposing view who believe in learning styles. The
coverage can be considered broad and deep because learning styles were characterized as well as the
studies that were used to evaluate them. The information contained in the source can be verified
elsewhere. For example, the author says there is a lack of evidence for learning styles to be a concrete
factor in education, which can be corroborated by Daniel T. Willingham in his publication “Do visual,
auditory, and kinesthetic learners need visual, auditory, and kinesthetic instruction?”, which describes the
uses of learning styles and the lack of tangible benefits that would result from tailoring instruction to
learning preferences/styles. The purpose of this article is to inform on issues with the learning styles
standpoint and why it is a pervasive myth. The audience is teachers and fellow researchers. The article is
appropriate for this purpose and audience because of the high density descriptions of the studies and the
evaluations on the methodological soundness of the studies. For example, a study by Cronbach and Snow
was evaluated and found to have too brief treatment periods and issues with methodologies to create a
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1006210.pdf
This explanatory article describes many studies that detail the benefits of spatial thinking and
provides many insights to different factors that could come about when talking about spatial
thinking abilities. It explains the different benefits that are visible across different levels of
instruction or classes. It describes the consequences of spatial thinking skills such as higher
The author, Nora Newcombe , is qualified to discuss spatial thinking in the stem field because
their credentials (or experience) include(s) professor of psychology at Temple University and her
contact information is included in the article. Written 6 years ago, this source is current on the
topic of spatial thinking given its relevance with the new Society of Learning Institute at Johns
Hopkins University who support this idea. The author thoroughly evaluated how all sides of the
issue were acknowledged by the source. For example, different studies were evaluated that
suggested the same conclusions even across different levels such as age. The coverage can be
considered broad and deep because the author included information on how to improve results in
STEM fields, while also providing the results of studies that support the benefits of spatial
thinking training. The information contained in the source can be verified elsewhere. For
example, the author says spatial thinking benefits STEM field achievement, which can be
corroborated by Kristin Gagnier in her publication “Spatial Thinking: A Missing Building Block
in STEM Education”, which states the benefits of spatial thinking amount different age groups
and summarizes how overall, students with higher spatial thinking skills tended to go into STEM
field jobs. The purpose of this article is to inform readers about the benefits of spatial thinking.
The audience is parents, teachers, students. The article is appropriate for this purpose and
audience because it is relatively long, but provides sufficient evidence for the points made so that
the conclusions are taken very seriously. For example, the author also provided insight on
whether or not there are differences between sex in spatial thinking abilities, and provides
Filipczak, B. (1995, March). Different strokes: learning styles in the classroom. Training, 32(3),
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A16762521/GPS?u=glen20233&sid=GPS&xid=10388aea
This explanatory article delves into why no perceptual strength is the best while also suggesting
more effective methods to deliver information. It explains that different groups of individuals
may perform at different levels based on how the information was originally presented. The
author suggests two effective ways to learn that synthesize different methods that cater to each
perceptual strength while also explaining while only catering to one strength can lead to issues.
While different learning styles do exist, the author explains that no learning style is superior over
the others and are dependent on how the brain processes information. The article also details how
a trainer/teacher has to be mindful about their own perceptual strengths so that they don’t lean
towards one type of presentation if it works for them. The author also states that admittedly,
although some people have different perceptual strengths, it is important for them to learn how to
Bob Filipczak has expertise in the field of communications and presenting information because
distinguished author and editor that has been involved in many works related to communication
such as Communications Consultant alongside Piper Jaffray. Filipczak can be googled, in which
his LinkedIn profile can be found as well as his contact info. The author explains all sides of the
argument. For example, he explains each of the different types of perceptual strengths and where
they apply. He makes it clear that the target demographic/audience is teachers by addressing
them and the purpose is to correct how teachers go about creating lessons. This article does not
fall within the 10 year currency rule, but is still a credible source due to the author’s occupation
as well as a lack of more recent articles that pertain to the specific topic at hand. The article can
be corroborated by other works such as Thirty-Five Years of Research on Perceptual Strengths:
Essential Strategies to Promote Learning by Kenneth Dunn which provides insight into different
studies carried out that support the usefulness of a mixed learning environment. The author
includes information from studies from St. John's University Center for the Study of Learning
and Teaching Styles in Jamaica, NY, who have been studying ‘learning styles’ for over 25 years
Instruction to "Learning Styles" Help Students Learn? American Educator, 42(2), 28+. Retrieved
from
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A543900498/GPS?u=glen20233&sid=GPS&xid=b0006d92
This article discusses the theory of whether or not catering to a student’s learning method is
actually helpful. It explains that people take preference to different types of presentations, but it
may not increase task performance. Different parts of the brain are used to perceive different
types of information. The author references a study in which researchers discovered that people
with different perceptual biases re-encoded information into their style and worked with that, but
it did not enhance their performance. The author discusses interesting things to take away from
the studies such as how people can choose which type of mental processing they use, and how
there is newly-emerging evidence that suggests that learning-styles do not benefit the results, but
do make the individuals more comfortable with what they are working on. The author brings in
the question of whether catering to these different perceptual options is worth it if the end result
does not change. The author also determines that although the end result may be the same, if
students are taught to match tasks to their perceptual preference, information retention is
increased.
Daniel T. Willingham has expertise in the field as a Professor of Psychology at the University of
Virginia. He has written a multitude of related articles such as How to teach critical thinking o r
Why students remember or forget. He also provides contact information on his website,
danielwillingham.com, so he is accountable for his work. This current article also makes sure to
address both sides of the argument, taking into account evidence that argues opposing points of
view. For example, he provides evidence to suggest that there are no direct benefits of catering to
perceptual bias as well as providing countering evidence that may suggest that it may still be
helpful in certain situations. The author makes it clear that the article is targeted towards
American Educators and teachers and that the purpose is to inform teachers on what they may
need to change in their teaching methods. The information in the article can be corroborated by
articles such as Effective Teaching Methods in Higher Education: Requirements and Barriers b y
Nahid Shirani Bidabadi, which describes how to best teach students and whether perceptual
biases are important to note. Many other sources were referenced and cited in the end notes as