Ago, ergo Cogito

Using Embodiment to Teach Reading Comprehension and

Physics

Arthur Glenberg

Mina Johnson-Glenberg

Arizona State University

Ago, ergo Cogito

Embodied Cognition

All cognitive processes

including the putatively abstract processes used in language and mathematics

are grounded in bodily and neural systems of action, perception, & emotion

Linking Embodiment and Education

To be understandable and useful,

the abstract symbols of education, words & syntax for language, numbers & operators for mathematics,

must be grounded in experiences of action, perception, & emotion.

Does embodiment help in education?

Ago, ergo Cogito

I. A clear success: Reading comprehension

II. A modest success: Teaching Physics

III. Why the difference?

Ago, ergo Cogito

An embodied account of language comprehension:

Language comprehension is not the manipulation of abstract symbols. Instead, comprehension results from grounding the content of the language in neural and bodily systems of action, perception, and emotion, and using the systems to simulate the content.

“Art used the leg of the chair to knock the rattler off the porch.”

I. A clear success: Reading comprehension

1. Index words and phrases to objects & perceptual symbols

2. Derive affordances

3. Integrate affordances to simulate as directed by syntax

Why are some children competent oral language users yet

poor readers?

B. Fluency? Working Memory?

C. Failure to ground written symbols in experience?

Learning to speak/listen: grounding is frequent

Learning to read: grounding is rare

To the extent that children do not effectively ground written words in action and perception experiences, reading becomes a

meaningless exercise in word calling.

A. Learning orthography to phonology is hard work?

Ago, ergo Cogito

I. A clear success: Reading comprehension

Moved by Reading

A two-stage reading intervention for grounding writtenwords in bodily experiences

1. Physical manipulation 2. Imagined manipulation

Ago, ergo Cogito

I. A clear success: Reading comprehension

Moved by Reading

A two-stage reading intervention for grounding writtenwords in bodily experiences

1. Physical manipulation 2. Imagined manipulation

Ago, ergo Cogito

I. A clear success: Reading comprehension

Breakfast on the farm

Ben needs to feed the animals.

He pushes the hay down the hole.

The goat eats the hay.

Ben gets eggs from the chicken.

He puts the eggs in the cart.

He gives the pumpkins to the pig.

All the animals are happy now.

Word-calling

Grounding/indexing

A miracle!

Internet-based version of Physical Manipulation

Second Stage: Imagine Manipulation

After reading a sentence, the child uses the cue (i.e., the green light) to imagine how she would manipulate the toys or images, but the toys and images are not literally manipulated (and sometimes not perceptually available).

Because of the physical manipulation experiences, the child easily understands what she needs to do in imagination.

Ago, ergo Cogito

I. A clear success: Reading comprehension

Glenberg et al. (2004)

Ago, ergo Cogito

Cohen’s d = 1.4

Glenberg et al. (2004)

Ago, ergo Cogito

Per

cen

t C

orr

ect

Cohen’s d = 1.8

Across the curriculum: Extension to reading to solve MATH story problems

The logic: If children can’t understand the story, then they are unlikely to be able to solve a story problem!

Helping children to understand the story may help to eliminate “suspension of sense-making” (Verschaffel et al, 2000).

Ago, ergo Cogito

Glenberg, Willford, Gibson, Goldberg, & Zhu (2011)

Ago, ergo Cogito

% Correct % Use Irrelevant(less is better)

Cohen’s d = .58

Glenberg, Willford, Gibson, Goldberg, & Zhu (2011)

Ago, ergo Cogito

% Correct % Use Irrelevant(less is better)

Conclusion so far:

Grounding written symbols in sensorimotor activity tremendously enhances reading comprehension.

Ago, ergo Cogito

Does embodiment hold in education more generally?Teaching Circular Motion and Centripetal Force

Challenges:The real world is complicated!Real behavior is difficult to control and reproduce!

F = mv2/r

II. A modest success: Teaching physics

SMALLab

Ago, ergo Cogito

II. A modest success: Teaching physics

Cohen’s d = .28

Ago, ergo Cogito

So, why are the effects modest?

III. Why the difference?

Is the problem with embodiment?

Is the problem with translation?

Ago, ergo Cogito

Translation is successful…

…when the sensorimotor interactions are closely congruent with the abstract content.

III. Why the difference?

Ago, ergo Cogito

Translation is…

…less successful when the sensorimotor interactions are only partially congruent with the abstract content.

F = mv2/r

III. Why the difference?

SMALLab

Ago, ergo Cogito

Translation…

…is useless, or worse, when the sensorimotor interactions are irrelevant for the abstract content.

Thank you

III. Why the difference?