This really didn't answer your questions, but it is fodder for more
discussion--whether or not people agree with me.

Dawn

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Kathyterr@aol.com
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 11:07:20 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] [PERIODIC mosaic DIGEST POSTING]

Hello,

I am interested in the postings that took place re: informing parents/ parent
workshops about comprehension strategy studies. I believe there were
postings a few months ago and would like to find them!
Also if anyone has input on parent information/letters/workshops on
comprehension strategy instruction, I would appreciate postings. One school
in our district would like to start more formal comprehension strategy
instruction and would like help with the parent education component.

Thank you!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: RKCTEC5@aol.com
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 15:31:07 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

Well Dawn,
I always see pictures. But what made me wonder about this was that one
college professor of reading education, and one elementary principal, both of
whom I have the highest regard for, say they don't see pictures. Yet their
comprehension is top notch. So I felt there had to be others out there that
could explain. Thanks for your info.
Ruby

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: "Thorud, Carol" <thorudc@mail.davenport.k12.ia.us>
Subject: RE: [mosaic] mind pictures
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:44:15 -0600

I would like to hear more about how they process the reading without seeing
pictures... that is fascinating.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 15:45:45 -0600
From: "Dawn Marmo" <dmarmo@kaneland.org>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

Ruby,
This is so interesting. I am curious about the strategies they use to
aid in their comprehension. I am not surprised that they are proficient
readers and have no difficulty with comprehension, I didn't seem to have
trouble either, I just don't remember how it was before I trained
myself to focus on imaging. I just know that I didn't read unless I had
to unless it was for pleasure. As a matter of fact, Mosaics was the
first text I'd every actually read because I was chosen to write a
review of the book and that was during my Master's classes. That is
when I worked on training myself to create pictures in my head. I
always survived on the oral discussions and lectures even all the way
through college and did very well, so I know that it is possible. I
also read constantly for pleasure, I just don't remember what it was
like.

I am very interested in hearing about how people read and comprehend
without making mental images. It would be interesting to use that
information to help students.
Dawn

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: GailHFo@aol.com
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 21:26:13 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

I don't see pictures either, but I make all the "mosaic" connections---what I
know, what I've read, etc. I'm more likely to recreate emotions that I've
felt in these other activities. So if I'm reading about a dog, I feel the
emotions and remember the activities I do with my dog. I don't want to sound
uppity but I've always had a very high level of comprehension--when I pay
attention---probably because I can make connections very quickly. I don't
have to stop and think about my connections because they just are there.
Gail

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 20:05:24 -0700
From: ~~~Katharine~~~ <katha@syix.com>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

I'm wondering if you made a mental picture when you read this paragraph.

>I am very interested in hearing about how people read and comprehend
>without making mental images. It would be interesting to use that
>information to help students.
>

Did you have to picture people reading, comprehending, etc? Or did
it just make sense?

Same thing, I think.

Katharine -- who doesn't have pictures running through her mind while reading.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: ETA46dave@aol.com
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 23:29:57 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

I lurk here regularly, but seldom weigh in. I decided to offer a couple
of cents worth on this topic. When I read fiction or poetry I usually see
pictures. I always assumed that others did as well. Generally, when I read
non-fiction, particularly involving abstract ideas or concepts, I do not see
pictures. For example, the mutiplier effect in economics or federalism in
political science live in some abstract realm of words and thoughts, but not
pictures for me. Graphs or charts may be created to help clarify or
demonstrate relationships between elements or ideas, but they are secondary
inventions. Sometimes, if I struggle with concepts, I may consciously create
diagrams, charts or even outlines in my mind to help sort things out in a
type of mental mapping exercise. When I do this, however, I usually have
stopped processing the symbols on the page and have initiated a secondary set
of thought processes.
Metacognition is interesting, but if I were to get too involved in it, I
think it would inhibit my ability to comprehend. If images are inherent in
the words, I see them as a natural part of the process without reflection or
any real awareness of my imaging. The whole thing is a transparent. If, on
the other hand, the words create patterns of thoughts, ideas and concepts,
any attempt to force pictures would cause me to become self-conscious and
serve to distract me from the substance of the message. For me, it seems that
if my attention is focused on my own reading process, I am less receptive to
the messages sent by the writer and recorded on the written page. It is as if
I am so busy talking to myself about reading that I am not able to engage in
receiving the writer's message. Reading fluency for me is having the capacity
to take in writing in an automatic and magical process that is pretty
effortless and natural.
I am going to end this message and go do some reading. I hope what I
just written does not hinder my ability to read. Hey, I just thought of
something. Do some people have to see pictures in order to write? I did not
see pictures as I wrote this message. If someone out there would see pictures
as a necessary part of the writing process on a topic such as this, I would
like to hear about how that works.
Thanks for listening, seeing, thinking, smelling feeling, or whatever
else these words may caused you to experience.

Dave

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 07:49:25 -0500
From: "Pam Reifsneider" <preifsneider@newtownfriends.org>
Subject: [mosaic] Information for parents

I recently read in Reading Today, the newspaper
put out by the Reading Teacher, that airing
sometime this fall on PBS is a 5 part series on
how children learn to read. It is
titled, "Reading Rockets: Launching Young
Readers." There is also a website for teachers
and parents: ReadingRockets.org

The series is based on research findings and
explores the stages of reading every child goes
through from before school entry. Check out the
website for more details. You can also get info
through the PBS website. You can download a
viewers' guide and a teachers' guide from the
website. The teachers guide is full of useful
information about the stages of reading.

Pam Reifsneider
Developmental Studies
Newtown Friends School

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Marsha Cuttill <cuttillm@mfhs1.mfsd.k12.il.us>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures
Reply-To: mosaic@u46teachers.org

Seeing images as you read is only one strategy readers use. There are many
others that can connect the reader to the text; prior knowledge and text
connections being the two most important. I seldom see pictures when I
read non fiction, but do make connections either with my life or what I
have read before or to something else altogether. Chris Tovani's book I
Read It, But I Don't Get It, addresses these questions in an easy read
format.
Marsha C.

"Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one-"
Marsha Cuttill
Maroa Grade School
120 S. Locust
Maroa, Il 62756
cuttillm@mfhs1.mfsd.k12.il.us

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: RKCTEC5@aol.com
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 08:46:53 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

Katharine,
The only mental picture I made while reading your message is that of a woman
typing on
the computer.

The response I got from my friend that does not make pictures was:
<< No, to be honest, I cannot describe what happens when I am engrossed in a
book. I just know what is happening. I don't see it or hear it. I may have
vague or fuzzy notions of the scene, but I don't hang onto them. I could
probably tell you what was in a scene or happening if you stopped me, so I do
process that information. I just don't make it into an image. >>

What Gail wrote about not having to stop and think about connections is
similiar to what I do when I make mind pictures. It's automatic, like a
moving picture. But it's also like becoming lost in the book, unaware of
anything else around me but what is going on in the text. Almost like an
alternate reality, or a spell. And that is broken when my mind has to come
back to the here and now, or when I stop to metacognate, as Dave noted.
Ruby

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: "Thorud, Carol" <thorudc@mail.davenport.k12.ia.us>
Subject: RE: [mosaic] mind pictures
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 09:48:07 -0600

That is extremely interesting. It is true when I am reading a book for fun
that I get lost in the characters and story also. Whereas, when I am
reading
a textbook I have to work to be a part of the text and sometimes don't
really process the information in pictures at all.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 09:50:56 -0600
From: "hope seider" <hseider@clinton.k12.mo.us>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

Metacognition is interesting, but if I were to get too involved in it,
I
think it would inhibit my ability to comprehend. If images are inherent
in
the words, I see them as a natural part of the process without
reflection or
any real awareness of my imaging. The whole thing is a transparent. If,
on
the other hand, the words create patterns of thoughts, ideas and
concepts,
any attempt to force pictures would cause me to become self-conscious
and
serve to distract me from the substance of the message.
---------------------------------------
I just got back from the Mosaic Fall Study in Denver, and I wondered
about this, too. I think we need to teach kids about metacognition so
that they can use it when meaning breaks down -- how can one deal with
that difficult text? One starts using the connections, mental imagery,
etc. in order to construct meaning.

Also, you may not NEED it to understand the text, but recognizing and
using metacognition strategies can enrich your understanding.

For example, we read novels while we were in the Fall Study and then
discussed them, searching for use of specific strategies. I am a very
proficient reader -- I scored in the top 1% on reading tests for both
speed and comprehension in college -- but LOOKING for synthesis and then
discussing the findings with a colleague led to depths of understanding
that I'd missed competely, and my colleague said the same was true for
her.

Hope

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:29:56 -0600
From: "Dawn Marmo" <dmarmo@kaneland.org>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

this is fascinating!! In reading all of this I am revisiting all my
thoughts and strategies of reading comprehension, as I did when I first
read Mosaics. I am finding that what Dave and many others have said to
be quite true. I think some of the areas I wrote about previously were
too specific to what I am working on in the classroom with students and
focused to another discussion group I am in about Mosaics. In reading
and writing all of these emails, nonfiction, etc. I do not visualize
unless I am taking time to stop and clarify some statistical type
information. I have always been a proficient reader and writer too. I
can echo what I've been reading here--it has always been easy for me to
read, comprehend, learn, etc. I just find all of this some stimulating!
It is wonderful to really dive into a subject and pick it apart! Thank
you for all of the input. It has helped me to go back and really
evaluate what I do as a reader--no, no pictures unless I am really lost
in a good story--then it is like a spell, like I have become part of the
book. That has always been present for me. I just started training
myself since reading Mosaics to visualize things more vivdly when I am
reading fiction. I think that this rambling has encompassed all that
came to me while I was reading this listserve about metacognition, etc.
Dawn

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 15:03:31 -0700
From: ~~~Katharine~~~ <katha@syix.com>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

>Katharine,
>The only mental picture I made while reading your message is that of a woman
>typing on
>the computer.

Are you serious or joking? I would think that to have a picture
inside my brain of every thing I was reading would drive me insane..

Katharine

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: RKCTEC5@aol.com
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 17:28:22 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

That's what I'm saying. I realize I don't have a picture for "everything."
It is more what Dave was saying about being engrossed in text. It is not
reading with a conscious awareness of pictures -- images are just there, as
in a movie. They don't take away from engagement.
Ruby

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 15:36:02 -0700
From: ~~~Katharine~~~ <katha@syix.com>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

I've been thinking about this discussion as I've been reading today
(home sick).

I was struck by this paragraph:

"We turned into a dirt driveway that led to a small white-painted
house with a railed front porch. A high hemlock hedge enclosed both
the front and back yards, and a huge oak tree shaded most of the
house. Right in front of us was a closed two-car garage with a short
breezeway connecting it to a side door of the house ....."

I know what I was thinking as I read it. First of all, I wonder if
'mind picturers' create a picture of the house etc to match the
description. Like I said in an earlier post, I feel like that would
make each book weeks longer to read. But because of the first
sentence, I knew the people in the car had found the house they were
looking for. I knew we were getting closer to what looked to be a
tense part of the plot.

I didn't think much about the house being white (except for a
flashback to John Grishim's novel), but the fact that it was 'small'
and had a 'dirt driveway' (like my aunt's) told me that the people
living there were not wealthy; might in fact be poor, which was
intregal to the plot.

The part about the hedge and oak tree seemed to me to be an author's
device to slow the reader down before the tension and emotions
started. (did any of you flash on Socrates at the word 'hemlock'? I
also thought about that being a pretty big hedge which must be a lot
of work)

I wondered why the driveway didn't lead up to the doors of the garage.

Am I making sense? How making pictures to match the words is not
something I automatically do, but there are still a ton of
connections.

Now... continue on in the book ...a couple paragraphs later there is
a reference to -- here, I'll write it:

"My heart hurt as I thought of the many times my husband had
pulled into this drive and into that garage and
then slipped, unobserved, into the the house...."

At that moment I thought, "Oh, that's why there was 'a short
breezeway connecting' the garage with the house.

I guess I should say that it's not that there are NO pictures. Of
course there are, but they are fleeting and hardly important. I did
wonder for a second about the rail fence, which made me think of Abe
Lincoln and I suspect I saw his bearded face for a nano-second with
the tall hat before skimming off to some other thought.

Katharine -- who to this very day wonders what people are talking
about when they say music is full of images. All I ever see are the
dancing elephants from Fantasia. :o)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 17:36:41 -0600
From: motthebug <maps@resourceroom.net>
Subject: [mosaic] No pictures here

I think in words. There's generally a radio station playing in my mind
all the time -- no, I don't hear voices :-) but my thoughts spider out
verbally and make associations with related abstractions, not visual
images. (I sometimes think I skipped "object permanence" and went right
to "formal operations" since when my keys are out of site they no longer
exist.) I process what I see verbally. If there's a continuum, I'm
pretty far out on one side of it.

HOwever, it does help my comprehension (which has always been very good
-- but I don't think by accident; there was good teaching involved) to
imagine how I'd dramatize what I read, whether it's non-fiction that I'm
"explaining" tos omeone or a story that I'm turning into a movie. When
I'm working with students they say it helps to do that -- though I
generally don't have the time to really explore how they're doing it and
what they're learning from it (I tutor students in pre-101 reading at a
community college). HOwever, I think adding details that you're not sure
of is questionable except as a creative exercise (which has its value).
I don't need to know what color hair characters in a story have -- I
really do *not* need to have a literal "picture" of them in my mind to
understand what's happening. I may have to understand details about the
physical setting or specific physical characteristics, but there can be
many blanks in that picture.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: RKCTEC5@aol.com
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 17:28:22 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

That's what I'm saying. I realize I don't have a picture for "everything."
It is more what Dave was saying about being engrossed in text. It is not
reading with a conscious awareness of pictures -- images are just there, as
in a movie. They don't take away from engagement.
Ruby

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: "Kendra" <kendra9@mindspring.com>
Subject: [mosaic] visualizing
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 21:49:32 -0800

Dear Mosaic Of Thought Listserv,
Kendra, here.
I have been following the conversation about visualizing with awe and
wonder.
Since I am writing an entire chapter of a book for struggling readers on
this topic, I am soaking this up. What surprises me is how many of you
are convinced you do not see pictures. I think we may think of pictures
differently, but we all employ this strategy. Some of us see a sort of
movie screen, and others "feel" ourselves in the event, incorporating
all our five senses (which are part of visualizing, according to some
researchers), and some of us do a combination of both, depending on the
text. The kinesthetic part is important to portray to our kids - to FEEL
in our bodies the image, and encourage them to jump inside of it. Some
of us carry the images away with us from the page, with an engrossing
novel, entertaining further strategies after putting the book
down,inside our head such as predicting and connecting and synthesizing.
I agree with some of you that non-fiction can be harder, if you are not
as exposed to that genre as much over your lifetime, but people who read
non-fiction for a living, well, they are entirely filled with images,
like doctors read pathology reports, as boring as that seems to me. I
have asked microbiologists and brain researchers what they see when
reading dense articles in their discipline, and you would be amazed at
the movies they see.

Poetry - metaphor - comedy - all rely on imagery for the joy of each.
So I am theorize that we all conjure pictures, from the written or
spoken word, to some extent. Those of you who think you do not, I think
you are just so good at reading that you cannot extract this skill and
speak about it metacognitively. Which is not a big deal, except that it
is our responsibility to unpack our brains for our students, and display
the underpinnings of our comprehension processes. We owe it to them, to
hone our ability to be metacognitive. I am always surprised at how
many kids don't think they see pictures, and they really do, OR the kids
who really do not ( and are invariably way below grade level in reading)
and truly need to be taught step by step (sorry those micro steps are
reserved for my book!). That said, proficient readers must employ that
part of their brain, whether they feel myself or not. Before written
language tribes and groups had their oral language, where spiritual
teachings and folktales and such were passed down. If you did not, you
would not understand much of the humor in the world. Over half of the
jokes in the world have a word play that involves your mind switching
gears at the last minute and seeing something differently than you
originally set out to when first listening to the joke. The rest of
the joke depends greatly on world knowledge, cultural knowledge. A lot
of jokes rely on homonyms also. Last year some scientists in Britain set
out to find the world's funniest joke, and the results were published in
many of the major newspapers, which some of you may have read. The first
place winner certainly relies on one's visualizing abilities.

Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson are going camping. They pitch their tent
under the stars and go to sleep. In the middle of the night Holmes wakes
Watson up: "Watson, look up at the stars, and tell me what you deduce."
Watson: "I see millions of stars and even if a few of those have
planets, it's quite likely there are some planets like Earth, and if
there are a few planets like Earth out there, there might also be life."

Holmes: "Watson, you idiot, somebody's stolen our tent!"

One more thought, about those who wrote about not wanting to pause,
while teaching strategies, and who questioned the effectiveness of
teaching metacognition. I have recently read a lot of research on what
makes an expert an expert, like Olympic athletes, and woodworkers, and
award-winning artists, and speech-writers, and airline engine repairmen,
computer programmers, etc. What separates the people who are simply
proficient from those who are experts is that ability to break down, or
unpack the process, and talk about it. This means they can pause and
reflect on their process, and use "fix-ups" strategies. Ok I will stop
here, before I ramble on too long.

All for now.

Kendra.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 07:40:49 -0800
From: Lori Jackson <ljackson@gwtc.net>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] visualizing

I am new to the list and I have been sitting on the sidelines for this
discussion. I wondered about the blanket statements made by some that
they do not visualize reading non-fiction. I can't speak to every genre
of non-fiction, but I am taking an advanced cognitive psychology
graduate class and find myself visulaizing constantly. What I am often
picturing are visual images of the connections I am making to the text,
as though somehow I need illustrations. I find myself doing the same
thing as I read many professional books.

Lori

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: ETA46dave@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 14:58:03 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] visualizing

Okay, so if I am good reader, I visualize because people who know a whole
bunch about brains tell us that visualization is a required part of the
reading process. My problem is just that I don't know that I visualize. It is
hard for me, however, to accept that visualization can occur outside of my
consciousness. Don't images by definition exist in our awareness and
consciousness? If all of this takes place in the subconscious functioning of
my brain, then perhaps some other metaphor exists to better describe the
process one of visualization or mind pictures. I am perfectly willing to
accept that all kinds of things go on in my head about which I am totally
unaware. I am just not willing to accept that anyone else can be more aware
than I am of my own awareness.

Dave

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: "Thorud, Carol" <thorudc@mail.davenport.k12.ia.us>
Subject: RE: [mosaic] visualizing
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 14:15:17 -0600

whew! That says it all!! I am not sure that we know how our visualizations
actually occur ... I think it is a different experience for all of us.
I think I visualize ideas instead of pictures. The crux of the problem is
how do we convey that understanding to children (especially when we aren't
sure ourselves how it works!!) I think this discussion has brought out
some excellent points of view. We all process information in different
ways.
If the child is processing and comprehending the reading, the probably have
a system worked out. If the child is unable to process then we need to step
back and verbalize how we think or process or visualize and see if we can
help them develop a way that works for them.....just rambling through my
thoughts....

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 14:32:26 -0600
From: Patricia Watson <pwatson@sfasu.edu>
Subject: RE: [mosaic] visualizing

The good reader research didn't say visualization is "required." The
strategies in MOT were identified through comparing the reading behaviors of
good readers and less able readers. Visualization is one of the biggest
differences. MOST capable readers visualize, many less capable readers don't
even realize they're supposed to.

Can it be taught? I think it can be modeled, demonstrated, and encouraged.
Sometimes it's just that kids get so caught up in the business of figuring
out the words that they miss out on true comprehension. It's like trying to
ride a bicycle that's too big for you...it never becomes comfortable and
automatic.

Lucy Calkins talks about how she spends the entire fall of most school years
having her students read books that are easy and enjoyable for them. She
says they need to be reading with "fluency and stamina" before tackling the
complex mental demands of comprehending challenging text. Janet Allen talks
about the benefits of shared reading in same way.

pat

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: JLabar1026@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 17:38:18 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] A Questions

In a message dated 10/9/02 7:13:45 AM Eastern Standard Time,
hartsteinm@ramnet.k12.ny.us writes:

> Sensory Images is better.
> Marian (I just joined this group.)
>
>

I am running far behind, but I like the title of sensory images (instead of
visualizing), also. I entertained this discussion last year and was convinced
that visualizing was a gender thing. . . I am aware that men and women read
differently and have different tastes in books . . . sometimes. At that time,
I was convinced that women were more apt to visualize, as compared to men.
However, when I discussed this observation with several other guys . . . they
said no-they visualize as they read. So-maybe all of us don't use the same
process to make mental pictures as we read.

I do a certain amount of daydreaming. During that process I believe I make
mental pictures. However, when I read I don't necessarily make mental
pictures. This is an interesting thread. As I read my mail from October 10 to
present I'' ll see what you all have said.

BG

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: JLabar1026@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 17:41:38 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] visualizing

In a message dated 10/9/02 10:46:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, GailHFo@aol.com
writes:

> If I work at it, I can get a fuzzy outline of a standard black poodle, but
> when the heroine describes her dog, I feel the joy of my own dog much more
> readily.

Very interesting. I guess that would be right. . . we connect to books on an
emotional level. Sometimes we cry or laugh.

BG

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: JLabar1026@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 19:15:15 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] visualizing

In a message dated 10/30/02 3:42:39 PM Eastern Standard Time,
pwatson@sfasu.edu writes:

> >Okay, so if I am good reader, I visualize because people who know a whole
> >bunch about brains tell us that visualization is a required part of the
> >reading process. My problem is just that I don't know that I
> >visualize.
>
> Dave-
>
I have found a soul mate! I seriously would like to be able to study the
brain as it functions during the reading process and compare those who
visualize with those who do not. I suspect that there is more here than
meets the eye. (tee hee)

Let's suggest that some readers do not visualize- you and me. WE would have
to compare to then compare our understanding of text with two readers who
visualize.

Right? Well, maybe we do something else when we read. . . God knows what?
Maybe-all good readers do not need to visualize. Or . . . maybe you and I
are not good readers. I have wondered about this. Scary statement for a
reading specialist.>
BG

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: JLabar1026@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 19:17:37 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] visualizing

In a message dated 10/30/02 4:06:24 PM Eastern Standard Time,
thorudc@mail.davenport.k12.ia.us writes:

> I am not sure that we know how our visualizations
> actually occur ... I think it is a different experience for all of us.
> I think I visualize ideas instead of pictures.

So- what is the brain doing when it processes reading?

BG

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: JLabar1026@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 19:20:56 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] A Questions

In a message dated 10/9/02 5:48:56 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Jean247727@cs.com writes:

> , "Can you visualize what is happening?" Even 2nd graders understand shat
> you are trying to get them to do.
>
>

Right. But are all of them visualizing? Or must a good reader visualize? Or
do good readers who do not visualize do other things. If they do, then what
is it that they do?

BG

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: JLabar1026@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 20:39:10 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

In a message dated 10/29/02 5:41:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, katha@syix.com
writes:

> "My heart hurt as I thought of the many times my husband had
> pulled into this drive and into that garage and
> then slipped, unobserved, into the the house...."
>

I flashed upon infidelity or some sort of furtive act. Prediction.

BG

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: JLabar1026@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 20:45:55 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

In a message dated 10/29/02 4:16:57 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dmarmo@kaneland.org writes:

> . I just started training
> myself since reading Mosaics to visualize things more vivdly when I am
> reading fiction.

> kaneland.org -YeaH. . . I can visualize if I am actually thinking about the skill.
> However, if not. . . well then. . . I don't really know what I do.
>
> BG- Can we just simply read. What does that mean?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: JLabar1026@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 20:49:37 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

In a message dated 10/29/02 10:57:57 AM Eastern Standard Time,
hseider@clinton.k12.mo.us writes:

> how can one deal with
> that difficult text?
>
> I think you can take difficult text and convert it to hyper text. Then
> enlarge it and tear it apart on the computer screen. Also, you can have
> someone read difficult text to you. Finally, you can read difficult text
> with another person and then share your impressions.
>
> BG
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 20:47:30 -0600
From: motthebug <maps@resourceroom.net>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] [PERIODIC mosaic DIGEST POSTING]

Kendra, you wrote:
"What surprises me is how many of you =
are convinced you do not see pictures. I think we may think of pictures =
differently, but we all employ this strategy."

I think this is a rather dangerous approach to teaching. "You *say*
this isn't happening in your head, but it doesn't fit my model of what's
happening -- so you must be wrong. It is so happening in your head. "
Now, I have come to realize that there's a lot of processing that goes
on that we're *not* aware of -- but I lean towards Dave's reaction.

Now, some of the issues here are semantic - what exactly is an "image?"
Does it have to be visual? Honestly and truly the visual sense is a
near-nonexistent part of my verbal comprehension and I'm afraid it's
rather excellent. I do imagine what's happening -- but frankly, probably
much as a blind person would.

JOkes that involve word play often don't need any imagery at all,
usually -- not in the visual "mental picture" sense that I interpret
"visualization" and "seeing pictures" to mean. -- however, I will admit
that one of the reasons they are amusing is because they do often cause
a sort of spontaneous visual imagery (the HOlmes anecdote did) -- but
it's especially entertaining because it's unusual.

I do most fervently agree that being able to "unpack" our knowledge and
see how it's built brings us to a higher level of expertise; so does
understanding (by unpacking a whole bunch of times) that there are
different ways to build it.

I also realize that many readers who really struggle with comprehension
have no idea that they can consciously visualize what they're reading
and thereby make it a whole lot more meaningful. ENcouraging them to do
this is a good idea -- BUT I do it in generic terms unless/until I know
how a person "imagines" what's happening. There are few things more
frustrating than someone giving you "that extra, special help" you need
-- and you can't do that, either!

And just considering the sample size of this group -- there are an awful
lot of us here who read very well without visualizing.

Sue
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: ETA46dave@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 23:08:11 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

Oh my, I had a similar reaction to the passage, but decided not to go there.
I did, however, enjoy JLabar's willingness to do so. Perhaps a "visualizer"
can help us out. Were the husband's clothes in disarray as he slipped into
the house?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 23:31:48 -0500
From: Dave & Deb Smith <d-smith@cybersol.com>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] visualizing

Kendra, thanks for your insight. I am struggling GREATLY with how to
teach visualization / sensory imaging to my students when I totally
identify with all the people who've stated they don't visualize. I
dislike books that go on and on with details, I never like any book that
is recommended to teach visualization. What suggestions do you (OR any
others on this list) have to teach visualization?
deb
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: "Donna Baker" <baker@sprint.ca>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] visualizing
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 05:14:08 -0500

One book that I think is perfect for visualizing is Water Dance by Thomas
Locker. It poetically describes the Water Cycle. I am going to start by
giving my students the passage as a Reader's Theatre, with each pair of
students reading about one part of the cycle. I am then going to ask each
pair to draw what they see (as a visual arts activity) when they read their
part. Since it is all about geography and weather, their prior knowledge
should kick in and help them SEE the images.

Donna (who cannot visualize)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: "Tammie Lewis" <tlewis@ejourney.com>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] visualizing
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 06:29:59 -0500
I love this book, too. We also learn about the water cycle, so it fits in
nicely. Would you share your RT? Thanks.
Tammie
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: ETA46dave@aol.com
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 09:29:52 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] visualizing

I am still struggling with all of this. I can certainly understand that
visualization may be a very useful strategy for many people. I can certainly
understand that visualization may a very useful strategy to use with some
students some of the time. What I cannot understand is what seems to be a
fixation on this "imaging thing" by some devotees of MOT. They tell us that
an adult who is quite literate but does not visiualize all of the time when
they read simply does not understand the reading process and brain function.
That is okay. We can disagree. As long as I can read, I really don't care
who is right. My concern, however, is that this fixation on the imaging/visualization
aspect of teaching reading might be creating aditional frustration for some
students. As I read some of the plans and ideas described here, I began to
"visualize." What I saw became a bit scary. I saw an enthusiastic teacher
with a new plan of attack for conquering the blindness of non-visualizers in
the class. She was very perky. I see some students who identify with the
activity and get right into the action. Clearly, they are good visualizers
and like to do it. I see others who roll their eyes as if to say, "Here we
go again." They have learned, however, it is better to play the game, so they
will "visualize" making up something if necessary. Still others seem to be
very exasperated and wonder when they will just be able to read. They appear
completely bored with talking "about" reading as they glance longingly at a
shelf full of books wating to be explored. To them all of this mind picture
stuff is just so much non-sense and the activities the teacher has worked so
hard to plan are a waste of time. I could describe the reactions of others
in the class, but my point is, why must visualization be the central part of
reading and learning to read for everyone. I have a 16 year old son who is an outstanding student and an avid
reader. Last evening he came up to kick me off of the computer as I was
reading a message in this strand. I decided to discuss this topic with him.
We read some of this conversation together. One of his first observations
was that he would absolutely hate being in a class in which elaborate plans were
frequently implemented in order to cause him to visualize. He remembered
episodes from his recent school experiences that were similar in his mind.
After a while, I asked, "Well, Nick, do you visualize when you read?" His
answer was, "Sure sometimes, I don't think about it much it." What a
surprise!

Dave
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: tracker482@aol.com
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 20:23:28 EST
Subject: [mosaic] visualizing

I've been reading the thread about visualizing and the difficulties people
have. Not a problem for me, I see movies in my head. However, since
visualizing involves pictures, why not have children draw in conjunction
with
the reading? Maybe you could read a passage several times asking them to
pay
attention to what it might look like, then have them draw a sketch, and see
what details they pick up on. Have them share, to see what others "saw".
Then do another passage and look for improved attention to detail?

Joan/Gr. 1
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 21:07:23 -0800
From: ~~~Katharine~~~ <katha@syix.com>
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

Okay, I'll add this. Sometimes -- especially if I'm ill or really
tired -- I'll grab a novel (I like mysteries) and read it, just for
the calming comfortable pleasure of running my eyes over the pages.

I can read pages in this way -- and I can't say a word about my
visualizing because after a while I realize that I don't have a clue
what was happening in the story. That I didn't pay any attention to
characters, plot or setting. But physically, I enjoyed that
'reading'.

ALSO -- I read in my dreams. What I read makes no sense, and
possibly there are no real words, but again I look at pages and my
eyes go back and forth over the pages and I like the feeling of
reading.

I don't know what any of this means..... but I love to share.

Katharine
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: JLabar1026@aol.com
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 06:45:57 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

In a message dated 11/1/02 12:11:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, katha@syix.com
writes:

> >> >>> BG- Can we just simply read. What does that mean?
>>
> Katha-

Good question. I suppose in this instance-since all of us appreciate
the complexity of the reading task . . . this concept is made very clear
when
we work with students 15 years of age -- reading on an age level of 7. . .
that reading like old Mr. Gough said is word attacks and comprehension. (I
believe the process is much more than that-so I guess that is my point-how
much more?)

I thought of all you Visualizer's last night as I watched CSI on TV-
9-10pm.
The dialogue of the show was spoken by the characters-normal. The new ground
visited on this show was to have a narrator describe the movement on the
screen.
For example-if a character picked up a piece of paper-the narrator would
state-So & so picks up a piece of paper. So, you heard the description and
watched (visualized) as the event unfolded. Kind of timely. Have never seen
this tried before.

CSI is a cool show.

BG
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: ETA46dave@aol.com
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 09:07:26 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

Just simply read?

Choose to engage written language. Look at the symbols with the intent
to derive meaning. Commit the visual act of scanning the symbols converting
them into ideas, thought, even images. (I won't even open up the topic or
whether sounds have enter ones awareness as this process occcurs.) Take this
information and make it one's own by integrating it with all that you
already
know and have experienced in life. For good readers I think it really is
that
simple. Some of you good readers also enjoy all of the analysis of the
process... and you like to metacognate about it. That is fine. I still don't
understand why you insist that I am not really reading if I don't share the
same desire to do so.
I enjoy driving. I do a pretty good job of getting from A to B. I don't
have a particular love of cars and certainly am not too interested in how
they operate. I am not sure at all that spending lots of time in those two
areas would improve my driving very much. If I get from A to B, by operating
an automobile, in my view, I have driven. I fear that some would say,
however, that if I did not reflect upon my every action and technique as I
operated that vehicle, I did not really drive but only concluded that I had
because I found myself at point B getting out of my car.
Likewise, I am a proficient user of technology. I use many wonderful
pieces of software everyday. I cannot write code. How computers really work
is still a pretty much a mystery to me for the most part, but I learn as
much
as I need to know so that I can benefit from them to enhance life.
Learning more about cars or computers would not make me a better driver
or consumer of technology. What if as I was acquiring the skills to drive or
use technology, some assigned to assist me had insisted that I must learn
about cars and the technical side of computers in order to drive of to use
software. What if they sent the message that if I didn't, I would never be a
driver or user of computers. Even though I want to drive, and I want to
compute, if it means I have to do these other things, I may conclude the
price is too high or un achievable.
I realize that "just reading" is more easily said than done for many
people and certainly for children who are just becoming readers that is
true.
I have no doubt that attention to one's own reading process to include
visiualization is very helpful at certain stages of reading development. I
am
equally as sure that it does not have the same usefulness for everyone. We
need multiple strategies. To insist that a whole class of kids read and
reread a short passage and draw pictures forcing them to visualize is likely
to miss the mark for many of them. As an art lesson, a writing stimulus or
enrichment activity, it may have merit for all, but to assume it will
enhance
everyone's reading skills, I don't buy.
We used to think that diagraming sentences and formal study of grammar
improved writing. Perhaps, some of us still do, but I think most of us
became
convinced by the research over the years that we need to make a distinction
between learning about language and learning to use language. The connection
between the two was far less solid than we had assumed. We also learned that
people do not necessarily become better writers by just writing more. While
I
do think reading more improves reading, I certainly am not arguing that we
all we should do is to encourage kids to read and give them opportunities to
do so. Let's just use a full range of strategies to help them develop basic
literacy and to become fluent with langauge. Once they are literate and
fluent, let's move on to all of the wonderful ways their facility with
language can be used to enhance and enrich their lives. Let's not halt the
whole process just because they are not "visualizing."
Sorry, I really did intend a short and simple response to "just
reading." Oh well, perhaps I am becoming convinced that this more
complicated
than I ever dreamed, but I doubt it.
Dave
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: "Patricia Watson" <pwatson@sfasu.edu>
Subject: RE: [mosaic] mind pictures
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 08:58:21 -0600

I think for many of us learning to read WAS so simple it was amazing.not
complicated at all. However, reading is a very complex process..there's
more to it than most people ever imagine..rocket science if you
would..and there's just as much that we DON"T know yet.

Mem Fox's book Reading Magic is a great look at how learning to read can
be such a simple and natural process for most kids. However, it's not
that way for all. Having worked with struggling readers for about 20
years, I know from listening to them that most have never experienced
"just simply reading." It's like asking me to just simply run..it would
be a struggle by the time I got to the end of the driveway. I could do
it..I could manage it for quite a distance.but I'd never call it "simply
running."

So part of the whole MOT idea is that we try to get kids to see what
it's like to "simply read" by thinking aloud about the process, sharing
our thoughts. The other side of it, for proficient readers, is that we
want kids to be thinkers, not just absorbers as many other media
experiences have encouraged them to be. And getting to examine their
thought processes is part of this.

I don't see that it's much like the dissection of grammar and
diagramming...it's more like readers sharing what they thought and then
examining how they got there.

I'm curious.where did you get the idea that the whole process would stop
if kids don't visualize?

I tend to think visualizing gets discussed more among strategy teachers
because it can be so much FUN to teach. I know I love to read everyone
else's creative ideas..and in talking about visual (or other sensory
images) with our students it's really easy to show our love and
enthusiasm for great words and great images. I, for one, certainly don't
think it's the be-all end-all to comprehension. And it's certainly a
move in the right direction from how comprehension was "taught"
pre-Durkin..SRA kits, etc., assessment in lieu of teaching.

If you get a chance take a look at the video tapes from Harvey and
Goudvis..there's one that shows a group of 5th graders who have been in
classrooms that focused on strategies throughout elementary..they use
all the strategies fluidly and their discussions are amazing..deep and
full of thoughtful comments.

My thoughts.

pat
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: JLabar1026@aol.com
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 16:09:25 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures

In a message dated 11/1/02 9:13:57 AM Eastern Standard Time,
ETA46dave@aol.com writes:

> Just simply read?
>
> Dave,

I am adding your thoughts to my already-way too large collection of musings.

How about this one?

If I am visually impaired ( Oh no- I just had another thought)- hang on
there-

First- For example-I am sight impaired- I read a novel using braille. Am I
reading?
Secondly- I listen to a novel on audio- am I reading.

What is the sensory role in reading?

Smell- Scratch and sniff

Taste- I am at a loss.

You knew that I would go back to visualization- Example- blind from birth-
reading with braille-
Visualization?

I really don't think I am getting way out there. Just trying to expand our
horizons.

BG
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Alicia Vilas <avilas@srivernj.org>
Subject: RE: [mosaic] mind pictures/connections
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 16:24:17 -0500

Pat, I do agree with you. I subscribed to this list a few weeks ago. I
teach reading to six 5th grade classes. At this moment I am focusing on
making connections. Today I started telling my students about text-to-text
connections. I read many posts on mind pictures, and I found this to be a
quite interesting topic. Let me tell you what happened. Usually I do not
see the mind pictures unless I force myself to see the image in my head.
Today I read-aloud "Where's my kiss, then?" from Chicken Soup for the Kid's
Soul. I wanted to show my students how I made connections with this story
and About Loving by Jean Little. Both stories are about parents who love
their child, but do not tell the child that they love them. I read the full
story today, and I told my students to write down the connections they made
with the story. I then had them discuss the connections with their reading
partner. I went around listening to their talks, and one boy helped me
understand what goes on in my head while I read. I think I do see pictures,
but it is usually automatic. I do not even think about it. I just do it.
Today I felt like I had a dream, but I could not remember the dream, until
someone said something that made me remember. I did not make myself think
about the images I was having while reading "Where's my kiss, then?" One
student said that the story reminded him of the Brady Bunch or one
particular episode. Guess what? All of a sudden I remembered that I also
had an image and that it was very similar to the Brady Bunch show. Bam, it
just hit me! I was making connections/pictures, but I was not given it any
thoughts. I loved hearing his connection/image. Isn't this what we want
from our students? To discuss the different thinking that goes on and how
some people have similar thoughts and others are very different. I am a
good reader. I use strategies automatically most of the time, unless the
text is challenging. When I encounter difficult text, I then decide what I
can do to understand the text. This makes me more aware of the strategies
that I am using. I consciously think about what strategies might help me
get back on track. This is what I am trying to teach my students. No, I do
not always want them to think about their thinking, but there are times when
you need to do this. I want to teach all students, especially my struggling
students that there are a number of strategies that they can use to help
them comprehend or better comprehend a text. I can't assume that my
students comprehend what they are reading. I have too many students who
fail to comprehend what they are reading. I have to teach them direct
strategies they can use to comprehend better. I know that good readers
automatically use a variety of reading strategies, but the fact is that I
have many poor readers. Many of these poor readers can identify and
pronounce words. To get my students to use strategies automatically, they
need to use them in a more controlled, metacognitive way (just like the book
MOT explains). I do not think my good readers will get bored in my class
because I teach this way. They can also learn by hearing others. I am a
good reader and loved hearing my student compare the story to the Brady
Bunch. Someone mentioned that his or her kid at home would not like to be
taught this way. We have great conversations about literature even though
our focus is on a particular strategy. (And that does not mean I forget
about all other strategies). I feel all readers can become better readers.
As educators we need to read difficult text and think about what we can do
to comprehend the text. We need to feel what many of our students feel when
they encounter difficult text.

I tell my good readers that thinking about a particular strategy while
reading can help them get a deeper understanding of the text. Those avid
readers will encounter difficult text in school and life, and we need to
provide them with a tool to help them monitor their comprehension of a text
while they are reading. The sharing part is the best though. Hearing the
thinking of others can help us understand the story better and can help us
see what other good readers think while reading. This is my opinion. A few
days ago I read an article online that helped me understand the importance
of metacognitive strategies. Also I teach them other things besides reading
strategies. I teach them based on their needs. Today the principal sat and
observed the lesson and he thought it was one of the best lessons he saw in
a long time. I do not think the good readers go crazy when discussing a
particular metacognitive strategy. Most of the time they are quite
challenged.

Alicia
South River Middle School, NJ
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: "Leonard, Wanda L." <leonardw@mail.davenport.k12.ia.us>
Subject: RE: [mosaic] mind pictures/connections
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 15:44:26 -0600

O.K. I usually just lurk but here is my two cents worth. According to Chris
Tovani's book, I Read it , But I Don't Get It , Reading is about thinking
and constructing meaning. Decoding is not comprehending. Good readers
construct meaning through a variety of strategies, including visualization.
I just am wondering, those that say they do not visualize, what was going
on in the mind before you learned to read?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 18:14:47 -0500
From: Andy and Shelly Kennedy <pristine@aclass.com>
Subject: [mosaic] Visualizing
Reply-To: mosaic@u46teachers.org
I haven't taught sensory imagery yet, but I think Hatchet would be a
great book.
Shelly
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: ETA46dave@aol.com
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 18:30:45 EST
Subject: Re: [mosaic] mind pictures/connections

I did not say that I don't visualize. I just don't always do it when
reading.
Are you telling when I don't, I am not reading? I can't know if I don't
see? I feel like we are completing full circles now. I see "lazy circles in
the sky." I think I just made a connection as well.
Dave
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++