GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION
T. Navés tnaves@ub.edu
http://lada.fil.ub.es/angles/ELTM/Classnotes/NavesGraphicOrganizers.doc



Graphic organizers make content area information more accessible to second
language learners. They convert complex information into manageable chunks.
Teach your students to use graphic organizers such as webs, Venn diagrams, and
charts to help them better comprehend these texts. These are visual tools that help
ELLs understand and organize information. They are like mind maps which promote
active learning. Graphic Organizers can also help students develop higher level
thinking skills and promote creativity.
One of our goals in teaching our English language learners is to help them
summarize and interpret text. Graphic Organizers are excellent tools in achieving
this goal.
Source: Judie Haynes (1998-2004). Graphic Organizers for Content Instruction, from
http://www.everythingesl.net/inservices/graphic_organizers.php
I.
How do you usually / Which is your favourite …? Surveys
& From matrix diagrams to bar and pie diagrams
1. MATRIX DIAGRAMS

First whole class activity on the blackboard or on a transparency, once
students are familiar with the procedure, they may interview each other
using a similar grid (matrix diagram)

A Matrix Diagram is a tool that is used to systematically organize
information that must be compared on a variety of characteristics in order
to make a comparison, selection or choice.
How do you usually / did you come to school?
Other
1. Maria
2. Jasim
3. Anna
4. Pol
5. Joan
(…)
50. Kevin
Total
% = N x 100
/ Total











9
0
10
16
4
1
2
5
3
9x100/50
0x100/50
10x100/50
16x100/50
4x100/50
1x100/50
2x100/50
5x100/50
3x100/50
18%
0%
20%
32%
8%
2%
4%
10%
6%
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 1 of 35
2. BAR DIAGRAMS

The teacher demonstrates how to keep a record of the answers for each
column and completes the ‘total’ row cell. Using a Cartesian diagram
demonstrates how to draw a bar diagram as illustrated below.

Bar diagrams consist of vertical or horizontal bars whose lengths are
proportional to amounts or quantities. A Bar diagram is a graphical
presentation in which the values of the dependent variable are represented
by vertical or horizontal bars, drawn at coordinates on the other axis of the
corresponding values of the independent discrete variable
How do you usually come to school?
20
Car
15
16
Bus
Tube
10
5
Bike
9
0
Tram
10
0
Taxi
4
1
2
5
Means of Transportation
3
Train
Foot
Other
Figure 1. Bar diagram
3. PIE DIAGRAMS

In the example above, the percentage of students who come by car is
calculated by multiplying 9 by 100 and dividing it by 50 (the total number of
students in the survey)

Pie diagrams are good for showing percentages. In order to calculate the
percentage, simply multiply the frequency obtained in each column by 100
and then divide it by the total number of subjects.

A pie chart is a graphical way to organize data. All pie charts
compare parts of a whole. For example, a pie chart for the time you spend
at school could compare the amount of time you spend in each class and at
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 2 of 35
lunch. A pie chart uses percentages or fractions to compare the data. The
whole is equal to 100%, which is the same as 1. So if you spend 7 hours at
school and 55 minutes of that time is spent eating lunch then 13% of your
school day is spent eating lunch. This can be figured by converting 7 hours
to 420 minutes (you always must compare using the same unit of measure
or your numbers are meaningless). Then solve the proportion 55 minutes /
420 minutes = ? % / 100% which works out to be about 13%. Source:
http://www.shodor.org/interactivate/activities/piechart/what.html
How do you usually come to school?
Other
6%
Car
18%
Foot
Car
10%
Bike
Train
Bike
4%
0%
Bus
Tube
Taxi
2%
Tram
Taxi
Tram
8%
Bus
20%
Train
Foot
Other
Tube
32%
Figure 2. Pie chart
Follow up activity
M
A
R
I
A
Always
Often


Sometimes
Seldom
Never




GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 3 of 35


Variant 1
What type of music do you like best?
Other
1. Maria
2. Jasim
3. Anna
4. Pol
5. Joan
(…)
50. Kevin
Total
% = N x 100
/ Total










__%
__%

__%
__%
__%
__%
__%
__%
Variant 2
Which is your favourite subject?
Maths
1. Maria
2. Jasim
3. Anna
4. Pol
5. Joan
(…)
50. Kevin
Total
% = N x 100
/ Total
Science
P.E.
Art
History
Language
Arts
Literature
EFL
Other








__%
__%
__%
__%
__%
__%
__%
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 4 of 35



__% __%
Variant 3
Which of the followings is your favourite sport?

1. Anna
2. Fatima
3. Erik
4. Jan
5. David




Variant 4
Do you like fruit? / Which fruit do you like best?
1.
Pili
II.










Comparing. Finding similarities and differences: Likes
and Dislikes. Comparison Matrix and Venn Diagrams
4. Comparison Matrix / Compare & Contrast Diagram (subclass of matrix
diagram)

Comparing and Contrasting Use to show similarities and differences
between two things (people, places, events, ideas, etc.). Key frame
question: What things are being compared? How are they similar? How are
they different? (NCREL, 1988)
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 5 of 35

Useful for:
1. Pro’s and con’s compositions
2. Comparing your opinion with partner’s opinion
3. Finding similarities and differences
Source: http://www.writedesignonline.com/organizers/comparecontrast.html#t-chart
Source: http://www.graphic.org/commat.html
Source: http://imtcsamba.hct.ac.ae/cconline/year1/hotpot/hwbeg_u9/9likes_dislikes/table.gif
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 6 of 35
You
Sports
Food
Free time
Films
Books on
TV
Your partner


Cycling
Skiing
Salads &
fruit
Going out
Soccer
Tennis
Peas
Fish
Homework
Comedy
Horror films
Western
Love
Sports
Reality shows
Teenagers
Computers
Soap operas
Films


5. VENN DIAGRAMS to compare and contrast
John Venn
Source: http://www.graphic.org/venbas.html

Venn diagrams are used to analyze similarities and differences between two
things (people, places, events, ideas, etc.), by placing individual
characteristics in either the left or right sections, and common characteristics
within the overlapping section.

The Venn Diagram is made up of two or more overlapping circles. It is often
used in mathematics to show relationships between sets. In language arts
instruction, Venn Diagrams are useful for examining similarities and
differences in characters, stories, poems, etc.
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 7 of 35
It is frequently used as a prewriting activity to enable students to
organize thoughts or textual quotations prior to writing a
compare/contrast essay. This activity enables students to organize
similarities and differences visually .
Source: http://www.sdcoe.k12.ca.us/score/actbank/tvenn.htm
Source: The above comparison comes from Oliver Sacks's book, Seeing Voices
(New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1990). It seeks to explore why Joseph
had so much more difficulty learning sign language than did Manual from
http://www.gyrus.nu/Learning_Skills/Writing/Organizing/GraphicOrganizers/VennDiagram/venndiagrameg.
html

How to create a Venn diagram online from Welcome to Create-A-Venn
http://www.venndiagram.com/venn01.html
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 8 of 35
Classifying. Flow and dichotomy diagrams
III.
Dichotomy flow chart adapted from Halliwell (1992:137)
Where do they live?
Ann
Ruth
Martin
Erik
Angela
watch
glasses
ring
A
no ring
B
C
Mike
Joe
no watch
no glasses
ring
Susan
no ring
D
glasses
ring
E
no glasses
no ring ring
F
no ring
G
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 9 of 35
H
Can you find where they live?
1. Ann usually wears a watch but
today she is not wearing a watch.
She should wear glasses but she has
left them at home.
She loves wearing rings, bracelets
and necklaces but today she is not
wearing any. She overslept, was late
and did not have time to put them on.
5. Angela loves cats. Her cat is called
pirate because of the black spot on
one of his eyes. Angela needs glasses
and always wears them. She has two
pairs of them, one for practising her
favourite sport: cycling and another
one for everyday tasks. Today she is
wearing her sister’s watch. She is
not wearing any rings.
2. Ruth is not wearing either a watch 6. Susan does not wear glasses. She
or glasses but she is wearing a ring in is not wearing glasses today. She is
her left hand.
wearing a watch and a ring though.
3. Martin has got many watches and 7. Mike loves playing rock music. He
he is wearing two, one in each wrist
hates watches. He usually does not
although you cannot see them
wear watches. However, today he is
because of the long sleeves of his
wearing his grandfather pocket
red pullover. He doesn’t like wearing watch to be repaired. He loves
rings though. He never wears rings.
wearing lots of rings in most of his
He is not wearing a ring today.
feet fingers. He is not wearing rings
He doesn’t need glasses either and
he only wears sunglasses in summer
time. He is not wearing glasses
today.
4. Erik loves reading. He is wearing
8. Joe wears glasses all the time. He
lens instead of glasses today. He is
is wearing his reading glasses right
wearing a watch in his left arm but
now. He is not wearing a watch. He is
he is not wearing any rings today.
not wearing any rings. He hates
rings.
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 10 of 35

Susan Halliwell (1992) “Integrating Language Work and Other Subjects”
A diagram or chart enables us to handle complex information more easily
and concisely than we can through straightforward text. For example, if
railway timetable were written out in continuous sentences, they would be almost
impossible to read. A diagram can also show relationships and significance more
clearly than can the written or spoken word alone. (…)
Children encounter diagrammatic information in all subjects. In maths and science
particularly, they are themselves encouraged to learn how to express and read
ideas diagrammatically … So, clearly, the handling of information in this way is an
element common to other subjects and to language study and can clearly provide
one starting point for integrating the two types of work. (…)
Seeing as a source of understanding is central to language work. This is because we
do not just take meaning from language. We get hold of a great deal of our mother
tongue by taking meaning to language. If we understand the language, we get the
message. (…) In fact, seeing as a key source of understanding is not just an
element of language learning and acquisition. It is an element of all good
teaching. Again, science and maths work make particularly full use of
seeing in order to understand. (…)
Responding through doing: Even in our mother tongue we do not always respond to
language with language. Sometimes this is because just doing something is itself
the most appropriate response to a language message we have received. After all,
if someone asks us to open the door for them, it would be odd to say ‘I will open
the door for you’. We simply do it. However, physical response is also one of the
ways in which we handle particular understanding. By allowing the other person to
see what we do as a result of what they said, we soon discover whether we have
interpreted the message correctly. Besides, we can often understand more than we
can articulate. For this reason, good teachers make room for non-verbal
response in all subjects. In the early stages of language learning, when the
ability to articulate is a long way behind the capacity for understanding,
responding through action has a particularly significant role to play.
Source: Halliwell, S. (1992). “Chapter 6: Integrating Language Work and Other
Subjects” in Teaching English in Primary School . London & New York: Longman pp
130-142

JoAnn Crandall, (1994). “Graphic Organizers”
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS.
These provide a “means for organizing and presenting information so that it can be
understood, remembered, and applied” (Crandall, 1992). Graphs, realia, tables,
maps, flow charts, timelines, and Venn diagrams are used to help students
place information in a comprehensible context. They enable students to
organize information obtained from written or oral texts, develop reading
strategies, increase retention, activate schema as a pre-reading or prelistening activity, and organize ideas during the prewriting stage (Crandall,
1992).
Sources:
Crandall, J. (1994). Content-Centered Language Learning. Eric Digest(ED367142),
www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_DIGESTS/ed367142.html
Crandall, J. (1992). Content-Centered Learning in the United States. Annual Review
of Applied Linguistics, 13, 111-127.
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 11 of 35

JoAnn Crandall (1987) “Science and ESL”
SCIENCE AND ESL
Science is generally defined as a set of concepts and relationships developed
through the processes of observation, identification, description, experimental
investigation, and theoretical explanation of natural phenomena. Through scientific
inquiry, students develop learning processes inherent in thinking: observing,
classifying, comparing, communicating, measuring, inferring, predicting,
and finding space and time relationships. Current approaches to science and
second language education based on research and classroom practice indicate a set
of central notions for relating science and ESL. Science inquiry facilitates the
development of ESL by providing the following:










a sociocognitive conflict that spurs development of a new language system;
a source of meaningful and relevant language input, using hands-on materials and
texts with extralinguistic devices (diagrams, charts, pictures) to clarify meaning;
positive affective conditions of high motivation and low anxiety;
extensive opportunities for small group interactions in which students negotiate
meanings and receive comprehensible language input;
opportunities for heterogeneous grouping with the role of peer tutor alternating
among students, factors that contribute to input, interaction, and a positive, affective
climate;
experience with a wide range of language functions;
extensive vocabulary development needed for school success;
the integration of all modalities of language use: listening, speaking, reading, and
writing;
literacy-related tasks for development of cognitive/academic language proficiency;
and the use of prior cultural and educational experiences for developing new
concepts.
Source:
Crandall, J., Ed. (1987). ESL Through Content-Area Instruction. Mathematics,
Science, Social Studies. Language in Education: Theory and Practice. Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, Inc.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed296572.html

Lilian G. Katz (1994). “Activities included in Project Work”
ACTIVITIES INCLUDED IN PROJECT WORK
Depending on the ages and skills of the children, activities engaged in during
project work include drawing, writing, reading, recording observations, and
interviewing experts. The information gathered is summarized and
represented in the form of graphs, charts, diagrams, paintings and
drawings, murals, models and other constructions, and reports to peers
and parents. In the early years, an important component of a project is dramatic
play, in which new understanding is expressed and new vocabulary is used.
Project work in the early childhood and elementary curriculum provides children
with contexts for applying the skills they learn in the more formal parts of the
curriculum, and for group cooperation. It also supports children’s natural impulse to
investigate things around them.
Source:
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 12 of 35
Katz, L. G. (1994). The Project Approach. Eric Digest, ED368509 from
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed368509.html

Baca & Cervantes (1991), Ganschow & Sparks (1993), Lowry (1990) and
Schwarz & Burt (1995). “ESL Instruction for Learning Disabled Children and
Adults”
Educators of learning disabled children and adults (Baca & Cervantes,
1991; Ganschow & Sparks, 1993; Lowry, 1990) give the following
suggestions for providing instruction.
1. Be highly structured and predictable.
2. Include opportunities to use several senses and learning strategies.
3. Provide constant structure and multisensory review.
4. Recognize and build on learners’ strengths and prior knowledge.
5. Simplify language but not content; emphasize content words and make
concepts accessible through the use of pictures, charts, maps, timelines,
and diagrams.
6. Reinforce main ideas and concepts through rephrasing rather than through
verbatim repetition.
Sources:
Baca, L. & Cervantes, H.T. (1991). “Bilingual Special Education.” ERIC Digest.
Reston, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. (ED 333 618)
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed333618.html
Ganschow, L., & Sparks, R. (1993). Foreign language and learning disabilities:
Issues, research and teaching implications. In S.A. Vogel & P.B. Adelman (Eds.),
“Success for college students with learning disabilities” (pp. 283-322). New York:
Springer-Verlag.
Lowry, C.M. (1990). “Teaching adults with learning disabilities.” ERIC Digest.
Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education.
(ED321156) http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed321156.html
Schwarz, R., & Burt, M. (1995). ESL Instruction for Learning Disabled Adults. Eric
Digest, ED379966. from
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed379966.html

Carl B. Smith & Roger Sensenbaugh (1992). “Helping the Problem Reader”
HELPING THE PROBLEM READER
Besides reading more slowly, the person with reading difficulties can be asked to
find specific kinds of information in a story, or can be paired with a more capable
reader who will help in summarizing the essential points of the reading or in
identifying the main ideas of a story.
One of the reasons that these learners read more slowly is that they seem less able
to identify the organization of a passage of text (Wong and Wilson, 1984). Since
efficient comprehension relies on the reader’s ability to see the pattern or the
direction that the writer is taking, parents and teachers can help these readers by
spending more time on building background for the reading selection, both in the
general sense of concept building and in the specific sense of creating a mental
scheme for the text organization. Many times, drawing a simple diagram can help
these readers greatly.
Direct intervention of parent or teacher or tutor in the comprehension process
increases reading comprehension in slower readers (Bos, 1982). These readers
often need help with vocabulary and need reminders to summarize as they
proceed. They also need to ask themselves questions about what they are reading.
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 13 of 35
The parent can prompt thinking or can provide an insight into the language that
may otherwise elude the reader.
One effective strategy for slower readers is to generate visual images of
what is being read (Carnine and Kinder, 1985). For the reader to generate
images, he or she must first be able to recognize the word. Assuming the reader
knows how to recognize words, he or she needs concepts to visualize the flow of
action represented on the page. The same kind of concept building techniques
that work for average readers also work for slower readers. The slower
reader, however, gains more from concrete experiences and images than from
abstract discussions. It is not enough for the parent to simply tell the slower reader
to use visual images—the parent has to describe the images that occur in his or her
own mind as he or she reads a particular passage, thus giving the child a concrete
sense of what visual imagery means. Pictures, physical action,
demonstrations, practice using words in interviews or in an exchange of
views among peers are only a few of the ways that parents, tutors, or
teachers can make the key vocabulary take root in the reader’s mind.
Bibliography cited:
Bos, Candace S. (1982). “Getting Past Decoding: Assisted and Repeated Readings
as Remedial Methods for Learning Disabled Students,” Topics in Learning and
Learning Disabilities, 1, 51-57.
Carnine, Douglas and Diane Kinder (1985). “Teaching Low Performing Students to
Apply Generative and Schema Strategies to Narrative and Expository Materials,”
Remedial and Special Education, 6(1), 20-30. [EJ 316 930]
Wong, Bernice Y. L. and Megan Wilson (1984). “Investigating Awareness of a
Teaching Passage Organization in Learning Disabled Children,” Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 17(8), 77-82. [EJ 308 339]
Source:
Smith, C. B., & Sensenbaugh, R. (1992). Helping Children Overcome Reading
Difficulties. Eric Digest, ED344190 from
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed344190.html
William Christen & Thomas Murphy (1991). “Increasing Comprehension by
Activating Prior Knowledge.”
Research has been conducted to determine the value of providing activities or
strategies to assist in providing students with ways to activate their prior
knowledge base. Studies looked at three possibilities: (1) building readers’
background knowledge; (2) activating readers’ existing background knowledge and
attention focusing BEFORE reading; and (3) guiding readers DURING reading and
providing review AFTER reading.
It appears that when readers lack the prior knowledge necessary to read, three
major instructional interventions need to be considered: (1) teach vocabulary as a
prereading step; (2) provide experiences; and (3) introduce a conceptual
framework that will enable students to build appropriate background for
themselves.
LEVEL OF PRIOR KNOWLEDGE
To check out what prior knowledge exists about a topic, idea, or concept, you may
choose to do some of the following activities:
1. BRAINSTORM the topic. Write all the information solicited from the students on
the chalkboard, a piece of paper, or transparency.
2. ASK specific and/or general questions about the topic. See what responses are
given.
3. POST a PROBLEM or a SCENARIO. Based on this description, find out what the
students know about the idea presented.
Once the data is collected, a decision about the appropriate forms of instruction can
be made.
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 14 of 35
Teachers should remember to
(1) Present information which builds:
 Background ideas
 Concepts
 Principles
(2) Show, don’t tell through—



Demonstrations
Multi-media
Graphics
(3) Use outside resources, trips and speakers
(4) Tell about topic from your experience
(5) Use any combination of the above!
Source:
Christen, W. L., & Murphy, T. J. (1991). Increasing Comprehension by Activating
Prior Knowledge. Eric Digest, ED328885 from
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed328885.html

Gail M. Hickey & Patty Braun (1990). “What are the Special Needs of Disabled
Readers?”
WHAT ARE THE SPECIAL NEEDS OF DISABLED READERS?
Simms (1988) indicates that poor readers may have difficulty following directions
because of a short attention span and memory or vocabulary deficits. The teacher
should be concise and clear when oral version of written directions. Periodic
checkpoints can help break up lengthy assignments into more manageable tasks.
Writing in social studies texts is characterized by main idea/supporting details, fact
versus opinion, and variations in reading rate. This style of writing can pose
particular problems for disabled readers, who need specific instruction to develop
these skills.
Students must be able to determine the main idea in a reading selection and
distinguish relevant details from among those presented in order to understand
what is read. Direct instruction in comprehension strategies may be necessary
when the social studies text is the primary teaching resource.
Sequencing of events and accompanying cause-effect relationships are often
represented visually in social studies materials, as in charts, time lines, or
diagrams. Such concrete representations of key concepts can be especially helpful
to the poor reader; teachers should make a special effort to draw attention to and
explain information contained in textual graphics.
The distinguishing of fact from opinion is a critical reading skill, one closely
associated with the social studies. Although a higher form of comprehension, the
separation of fact from opinion can be taught to even the poor reader, through the
use of direct instruction.
Practice in skimming can help prevent disabled readers from becoming bogged
down by lengthy passages. Having a purpose for reading gives students an
incentive to search for relevant information.
Zipperer (1987) suggests that many reading problems may occur when learners
bring insufficient background knowledge to the reading act. The richer the
background brought to the reading act by readers, the better their ability to
integrate new information from the printed page with the information acquired
through prior experiences. Students who lack adequate background in content and
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 15 of 35
language, such as disabled readers, do not comprehend as well as readers with
more sophisticated experiential backgrounds. Idol’s study (1987), in which she
provided modeling of critical thinking strategies to disabled readers during their
reading of a social studies text, shows that disabled readers can benefit from the
modeling of effective reading skills.
These and other studies further support the need for special instruction for disabled
readers in social studies. Peer tutors, cooperative groups, or even a buddy system
can facilitate remediation of needed skills. Modeling of effective reading strategies
by teachers, providing clear directions in an oral format, and making allowances for
insufficient background experiences have also been shown to benefit disabled
readers.
WHAT STRATEGIES CAN BE USED TO TEACH SOCIAL STUDIES TO DISABLED
READERS?
Instruction in study skills can boost the poor reader’s achievement and increase
self-esteem. Tama and Martinez (1988) suggest the “TELSQA” technique as an
appropriate strategy for disabled readers. The teacher introduces the reading
assignment by reading the title (T) and asking students to hypothesize what it may
be about. Using what students already know, the teacher is able to build a
conceptual bridge from prior knowledge to new information. Students then examine
(E) the reading material; look (L) for important or difficult words and find out what
they mean; self-question (SQ) after each paragraph to check understanding; and
answer (A) comprehension questions at the end of the section.
The “T-line” approach (Stein 1987) is a form of visualized notetaking
appropriate to the needs of the disabled reader. On unlined paper, a large “T” is
written. Above the “T” three headings are written: “person” on the left, “date”
above the vertical, and “event” on the right. Notes are written in chronological
order to correspond with the structure provided.
Stein also recommends the “stick person” form of visual notetaking, especially
when social studies content is people-centered. The student draws a simple figure
on his or her paper. Information about each person studied is diagrammed in the
following fashion. (…)
Important dates are written below the stick figure’s feet at ground level, and
background information or family history at the “roots level” beneath the ground.
Because visual notetaking uses both the left and right sides of the brain,
the chances for recall are greater, and students feel a sense of
accomplishment that merely reading a selection does not provide (Stein
1987).
Generally speaking, the same reading skills good readers employ to interpret social
studies content should be taught to less able readers, but more careful attention
must be given to direct skills instruction for disabled students. Examples of these
skills are presented below:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Define unfamiliar words in context.
Recognize main ideas and supply supporting details.
Recognize cause/effect relationships.
Distinguish fact from opinion.
Compare and contrast sources.
Identify propaganda techniques.
Use tables of contents, indexes, and glossaries efficiently.
Decipher relevant information found on maps, charts, and graphs.
Remember that students have different learning style performances, and that there
are many ways to teach the same content. If the main teaching strategy used is
textbook reading, the disabled reader is sure to suffer. Use a variety of methods to
teach the same material. For the disabled reader, these methods may include taped
records of written material, interviews, class discussion, and organization of
information in charts or graphs (Curtis 1982). Other techniques include the
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 16 of 35
use of oral reports, cooperative learning teams, creation of models or other
concrete representations, and frequent modeling of effective study skills.
Ford and Ohlhausen (1989) believe that teachers can maximize participation of
disabled readers by using a whole language approach, which helps to minimize
performance differences among students in the same classroom. Class projects
such as a play or production of a newspaper that require many different
contributions help ensure that the strengths of all students will be utilized.
Works cited:
Bender, William N. “Strategies for Helping the Mainstreamed Student in Secondary
Social Studies Classes.” THE SOCIAL STUDIES 78 (November-December 1985):
269-271. EJ 330 599.
Carbo, Marie. “Deprogramming Reading Failure: Giving Unequal Learners an Equal
Chance.” PHI DELTA KAPPAN 69 (November 1987): 197-201 EJ 360 778.
Curtis, Charles K. “Teaching Disabled Students in the Regular Social Studies
Classroom.” HISTORY AND SOCIAL SCIENCE TEACHER 18 (Fall 1982): 9-16. EJ 270
331.
Ford, Michael P. and Marilyn M. Ohlhausen. “Tips from Reading Clinicians for Coping
with Disabled Readers in the Regular Classroom.” THE READING TEACHER 42
(October 1988): 18-22. EJ 377 453.
Idol, Lorna. A CRITICAL THINKING MAP TO IMPROVE CONTENT AREA
COMPREHENSION OF POOR READERS. TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 402. Illinois
University, Urbana: Center for the Study of Reading, 1987. ED 282 192.
Simms, Rochelle B. “Mildly Handicapped Students in the Social Studies Class:
Facilitating Learning.” THE SOCIAL STUDIES 75 (November-December 1984): 265267. EJ 309 173.
Smith, Sally L. “The Masks Students Wear.” INSTRUCTOR (April 1989): 27-32. EJ
number to be assigned.
Stein, Harry. “Visualized Notetaking: Left-right Brain Theory Applied in the
Classroom.” THE SOCIAL STUDIES 18 (July-August 1987): 163-168. EJ 357 442.
Tama, M. Carrol and David H. Martinez. “TELSQA and the LD Social Studies
Student.” THE SOCIAL STUDIES 79 (November-December 1988): 274-277. EJ 383
108.
Zipperer, Anita. “Using Content-Oriented Materials to Fill the Gaps in Students’
Knowledge.” WISCONSIN STATE READING ASSOCIATION JOURNAL 31 (Winter
1987): 45-48. EJ 371 795.
Source:
Hickey, M. G., & Braun, P. (1990). Social Studies and the Disabled Reader. Eric
Digest, ED322080.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed322080.html

Patricia T. Cousin (1989). “Some Approaches: Readabiliby, Clarifications,
Graphics”
SOME APPROACHES: READABILITY, CLARIFICATIONS, GRAPHICS
One recent study in this area involved the revision of an expository text by text
linguists, composition instructors, and former magazine editors. The most readable
revisions were those done by the magazine editors. The study suggested that the
most comprehensible texts were those in which attention was given to the
structure, content, and style of the text (Graves et al., 1988).
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 17 of 35
Another way of modifying the text has been to use abridgement and rewriting.
Abridgement refers to eliminating subplots and details, while rewriting focuses on
replacing words and syntactic structures with supposedly simpler versions. The
problem has been that simplification may in some cases make a text more difficult
to read because character contrasts are reduced and beliefs about the lexical
difficulty of specific words often differ. Words that one individual judges as difficult
are judged as easy by another (Campbell, 1987).
Another area of concern has been that texts tend not to address misconceptions
that students commonly have about content area subjects. Two studies (Eaton, et
al., 1983; Smith, 1983), have examined students’ misconceptions about scientific
concepts and how texts often do not consider these areas. The latter study
identified four broad categories of misconceptions and suggested that these areas
be addressed in the student text and teacher manual.
Studies of effective textbook adaptations have included recommendations to
include more graphics (Burnette, 1982). Herum (1982) found that revising texts to
include more graphics and to make the text more explicit supported college
students with learning difficulties. Bergerud, et al. (1988) compared the
effectiveness of two types of textbook adaptations—graphics and study guides—for
the purpose of self-study, with students identified as either low achievers or
learning disabled. The use of graphics, consisting of diagrams with parts of pictures
or labels missing, was found to be superior to the other approaches as measured by
a retention test.
FINDINGS OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
A project funded by the ERIC Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children
(Burnette, 1982) focused on the adaptation of several textbook-based curricula for
the purpose of making them more appropriate for main-streamed students. The
adaptations included revising texts to include text aids such as, structured
overviews, organizers, chapter summaries; the use of audiotapes; inclusion of
manipulatives and games in the curriculum; and development of computer
software. These adaptations were found to be appropriate within a regular
classroom setting and improved the learning outcomes of all the students, not just
those identified as special needs learners.
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), of the U.S. Dept. of Education,
funded a project which supported the collaboration of educators, researchers, and
publishers for the purpose of improving the usability of textbooks, particularly for
use with diverse groups of learners (Educational Development Center and RMC
Research Corporation, 1988). The project involved conducting a review of the
literature on learners and effective instruction, developing an instrument to analyze
textbooks, evaluating textbooks using this instrument, developing a set of
recommendations, and holding a conference involving the three groups to discuss
the findings.
The instructional design of 12 elementary and secondary social studies and science
textbook programs, with their ancillary materials, was reviewed. The questionnaire
used to evaluate the texts was based on current information regarding the nature
of learning and the characteristics of learners. The evaluation of the texts and
recommendations for change were organized into three major areas including: 1)
getting students ready to learn, 2) engaging students in the learning process, and
3) having students demonstrate competence and expand knowledge.
All of the programs reviewed were rated as visually appealing with good designs
and graphics. However, it was reported that many of the ancillary materials were
not well coordinated with the content of the lesson.
We already have a great deal of information about what makes a text more
understandable and supportive to the student in learning concepts. Yet research in
the area of text adaptation indicates that the process of revision is complex and
cannot be addressed with simple solutions. However, research has also indicated
that publishers do need to consider particularly the need for the inclusion of
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 18 of 35
additional graphics and attention not only to the content, but also to the
organization and style of the text.
References cited:
Armbruster, Bonnie B., and Anderson, Thomas H. Content Area Textbooks. Reading
Education Report No. 23. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Bolt, Beranek, and Newman,
Inc.; Champaign, Illinois: Center for the Study of Reading, 1981.
Armbruster, Bonnie B., and Gudbrandsen, Beth. “Reading comprehension
instruction in social studies programs,” Reading Research Quarterly, 21, (1) 1986,
pp. 36-48.
Bergerud, Donna, et al. “The effectiveness of textbook adaptations in life science
for high school students with learning disabilities,” Journal of Learning Disabilities,
21, (2) 1988, pp. 70-76.
Burnette, Jane. “Adapting instructional materials for mainstreamed students.”
Reston, Virginia: ERIC Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children; Reston,
Virginia: Council on Exceptional Children, 1987. 3 pp. [ED 297 557]
Campbell, Nancy. “Adapted literary texts and the EFL reading programme,” ELT
Journal, 41, (2) 1987, pp. 132-135.
Eaton, Janet F., et al. “Students’ misconceptions interfere with learning: Case
studies of fifth-grade students.” East Lansing, Michigan: Institute for Research on
Teaching, 1983. 32 pp. [ED 228 094]
Educational Development Center and RMC Research Corporation. Improving
textbook usability. Conference Report, 1988.
Graves, Michael F., et al. “Some characteristics of memorable expository writing:
Effects of revisions by writers with different backgrounds,” Research in the Teaching
of English, 22, (3) 1988, pp. 242-265.
Herum, John. “A college professor as a reluctant learner: Facing up to the learning
disabled. Alternative techniques for teaching English composition to learning
disabled students in the university.” Ellensburg, Washington: Instructional Media
Center, 1982, 36 pp. [ED 234 547]
Larrivee, Barbara. “Effective teaching for mainstreamed students is effective
teaching for all students,” Teacher Education and Special Education, 9, (4) 1986,
pp. 173-179.
Osborn, J., et al. “The case for improving textbooks,” Educational Leadership, 42
(7), 1985, pp. 9-16.
Singer, H. “Criteria for selecting friendly texts,” In Content Area Reading:
Improving Classroom Instruction, E. Dishner, et al. Eds.). Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall
Hunt, 1985.
Smith, Edward L. “Teaching for conceptual change: Some ways of going wrong.”
Paper presented at the International Seminar on Misconceptions in Science and
Mathematics, 1983, 26 pp. [ED 237 493]
U.S. Bureau of the Census. Projections of the population of the United States:
1982-2050. Current Population Reports Series P25 No. 922P Washington, D.C.:
1983.
U.S. Bureau of Census. Statistical abstract of the United States, 1986 (106th ed.)
Washington, D.C.: U.S. 1985.
Wang, M. C. et al. Handbook of Special Education: Research and Practice. (Vols. 13). Oxford, England; Pergamon Press, 1987-1988. ----Dr. Patricia Tefft Cousin is Assistant Professor of Graduate Programs in the School
of Education at California State University—San Bernardino.
This publication was prepared with funding from the Office of Educational Research
and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under contract no. RI88062001.
Contractors undertaking such projects under government sponsorship are
encouraged to express freely their judgment in professional and technical matters.
Points of view or opinions, however, do not necessarily represent the official view or
opinions of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
Source:
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 19 of 35
Cousin, P. T. (1989). Content Area Textbooks: Friends or Foes?” Eric Digest
(ED321249) http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed321249.html

Laura R. Novick & Sean Hurley (2001) “To Matrix, Network, or Hierarchy: That
Is the Question”
This article focuses on three types of schematic diagrams—matrices, networks
(path diagrams), and hierarchies (see fig. 1)—that we refer to as spatial
diagrams (e.g., Novick et al., 1999). Like other schematic diagrams, these three
diagrams facilitate learning and problem solving (e.g., Bartram, 1980; Broadbent,
Cooper, & Broadbent, 1978; Carroll, Thomas, & Malhotra, 1980; Day, 1988; GuriRozenblit, 1988; Holliday, 1976; McGuinness, 1986; Novick & Hmelo, 1994;
Scanlon, 1989; S. Schwartz, 1971; Vessey & Weber, 1986).
Schematic diagrams typically rely on convention to depict both the components
of the situation being represented and their organization, and the conventions must
be learned before the diagrams can be understood and used successfully (DufourJanvier et al., 1987; Hegarty et al., 1991). Although a large body of research has
shown that schematic diagrams, including the three of interest here, are powerful
tools for thinking, it is important to note that superior performance is only obtained
when the display format and the structure of the environment are consistent
(Sanfey & Hastie, 1998).
Two structural analyses of a wide variety of graphical items (scientific drawings, bar
graphs, photographs, Venn diagrams, corporate logos, etc.), depicting both
concrete and abstract concepts, have been proposed.
In Lohse, Biolsi, Walker, and Rueter’s (1994) analysis, separate categories refer to
kinds of diagrams, such as graphs, maps, icons, network charts (same as our
networks), and photorealistic pictures. In Twyman’s (1979) analysis, which
included text as well as diagrams, graphic stimuli are cross-classified according
to methods of configuration (e.g., linear interrupted, linear branching, matrix, and
nonlinear directed viewing) and modes of symbolization (e.g., verbal/numerical,
pictorial, and schematic).
Cheng (1996) also analyzed a wide variety of diagrams from many different
content domains, which led him to propose 12 functional roles for diagrams.
For example, diagrams can show spatial structure and organization
(F1; e.g., blueprints), can show how an object is physically assembled (F3;
e.g., Novick & Morse, 2000), and can depict state spaces (F7; e.g., the periodic
table and the transition state space for river crossing problems).
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 20 of 35
FIG. 1. The three spatial diagram representations. From ‘‘Evidence for abstract,
schematic knowledge of three spatial diagram representations,’’ by L. R. Novick, S.
M. Hurley, & M. Francis, 1999, Memory & Cognition, 27, p. 290. Copyright 1999 by
the Psychonomic Society, Inc.
References cited:
Bartram, D. J. (1980). Comprehending spatial information: The relative efficiency of
different
methods of presenting information about bus routes. Journal of Applied Psychology,
65,
103–110.
Broadbent, D. E., Cooper, P. J., & Broadbent, M. H. P. (1978). A comparison of
hierarchical
and matrix retrieval schemes in recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Learning and Memory, 4, 486–497.
Carroll, J. M., Thomas, J. C., & Malhotra, A. (1980). Presentation and
representation in design
problem-solving. British Journal of Psychology, 71, 143–153.
Cheng, P. C-H. (1996). Functional roles for the cognitive analysis of diagrams in
problem
solving. In G. W. Cottrell (Ed.), Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Conference of
the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 207–212). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dufour-Janvier, B., Bednarz, N., & Belanger, M. (1987). Pedagogical considerations
concerning
the problem of representation. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation in
the
teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 109–122). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Guri-Rozenblit, S. (1988). The interrelations between diagrammatic representations
and verbal explanations in learning from social science texts. Instructional Science,
17, 219–234.
Hegarty, M., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1991). Diagrams in the comprehension
of scientific texts. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.),
Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 641–668). New York: Longman.
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 21 of 35
Holliday, W. G. (1976). Teaching verbal chains using flow diagrams and texts. AV
Communication Review, 24, 63–78.
Lohse, G. L., Biolsi, K., Walker, N., & Rueter, H. H. (1994). A classification of visual
representations. Communications of the ACM, 37(12), 36–49.
McGuinness, C. (1986). Problem representation: The effects of spatial arrays.
Memory & Cognition, 14, 270–280.
Novick, L. R. (1990). Representational transfer in problem solving. Psychological
Science, 1, 128–132.
Novick, L. R. (2001). Spatial diagrams: Key instruments in the toolbox for thought.
In D. L.
Medin (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 40, pp. 279–325).
San Diego: Academic Press.
Novick, L. R., & Hmelo, C. E. (1994). Transferring symbolic representations across
nonisomorphic problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory,
and Cognition, 20, 1296–1321.
Novick, L. R., Hurley, S. M., & Francis, M. (1999). Evidence for abstract, schematic
knowledge of three spatial diagram representations. Memory & Cognition, 27, 288–
308.
Novick, L. R., & Morse, D. L. (2000). Folding a fish, making a mushroom: The role
of diagrams in executing assembly procedures. Memory & Cognition, 28,
1242–1256.
Sanfey, A., & Hastie, R. (1998). Does evidence presentation format affect
judgment? An experimental evaluation of displays of data for judgments.
Psychological Science, 9, 99– 103.
Schwartz, S. H. (1971). Modes of representation and problem solving: Well evolved
is half solved. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 91, 347–350.
Vessey, I., &Weber, R. (1986). Structured tools and conditional logic: An empirical
investigation. Communications of the ACM, 29(1), 48–57.
Twyman, M. (1979). A schema for the study of graphic language (tutorial paper).
In P. A. Kolers, M. E. Wrolstad, & H. Bouma (Eds.), Processing of visible language
(Vol. 1, pp. 117–150). New York: Plenum.
Source:
Novick, L. R., & Hurley, S. M. (2001). To Matrix, Network, or Hierarchy: That Is the
Question. Cognitive Psychology, 42(2), 158-216.
Electronic copy available online from the UB Campus from
http://estel.bib.ub.es/cgibin/awecgi?db=rex&op=complex&qy_eq_TIT=COGNITIVE+PSYCHOLOGY
Also available at
http://lada.fil.ub.es/Angles/ELTM/Ereadings/Novick2001.pdf

Patricia Daniel (1986) “But Can Your Students Read the Diagrams?” published in
SYSTEM
The article suggests that the wide use in ELT materials of visual media is at present
based on an insufficient analysis of the properties of visual formats, the skills
demanded in using them and the existing visual literacy of second language
students.
The design and implementation of the appended diagnostic Visual Information
Test are described and some of the factors contributing to visual performance
are briefly discussed.
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 22 of 35
Test results and analysis so far suggest that the inclusion of visual formats may
constitute both a cultural and subject bias and that they may also present an
additional hurdle, as opposed to providing support, in second language learning.
Source:
Daniel, P. (1986). But Can Your Students Read the Diagrams? System, 14(1),
15-27.

Andrea K. Balas (1997) “What is the Impact of Reading on Mathematical
Processand Skills?”
WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF READING ON
MATHEMATICAL PROCESSAND SKILLS?
Reading provides both context and motivation for the mathematics students.
Reading from a text book, trade book, or newspaper article can provide the
students with a shared basis for receiving and sharing information. Reading can
supply a common setting, environment, and details for application of
students’ mathematical skills. Reading provides an interesting context that
students can explore. This exploration can occur either in a group with many
students or with one student. In general, the integration of math and reading
creates a relevant context for the formal and abstract mathematical
processes.
The use of either fiction or non-fiction material can create the context for discussion
and set the stage for mathematical skills. The specific areas may include:
1. Posing questions in mathematics.
2. Sequencing events in a story.
3. Questioning and seeking additional information students would like to know about a
topic.
4. Developing recording skills.
5. Comparing and contrasting. For example, a Venn Diagram can be used to compare
and contrast different versions of the same story.
6. Constructing charts and graphs to illustrate or determine the impact of details.
7. Counting through one-to-one correspondence.
8. Predicting and hypothesizing. For example, examining stories for patterns like this
one: introduction, development of details and theme, climax, and conclusion.
9. Validating or persuading, using data or details to determine and support a particular
position.
10. Conferring with others to generate new knowledge or to confirm a position on a
topic.
Source:
Balas, A. K. (1997). The Mathematics and Reading Connection. Eric Digest,
ED432439 from
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed432439.html
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 23 of 35

Eric Plotnick (1997) “Concept Mapping: A Graphical System for Understanding the
Relationship between Concepts”
Source: http://www.iserp.lu/ch-max/cours1/konstruktiv/novak1.jpg
In the 1960s, Joseph D. Novak (1993) at Cornell University began to study
the concept mapping technique. His work was based on the theories of David
Ausubel (1968), who stressed the importance of prior knowledge in being able to
learn about new concepts. Novak concluded that “Meaningful learning involves the
assimilation of new concepts and propositions into existing cognitive structures.”
A concept map is a graphical representation where nodes (points or
vertices) represent concepts, and links (arcs or lines) represent the
relationships between concepts. The concepts, and sometimes the links,
are labeled on the concept map. The links between the concepts can be
one-way, two-way, or non-directional. The concepts and the links may be
categorized, and the concept map may show temporal or causal
relationships between concepts.
Concept mapping is a type of knowledge representation. Jonassen & Grabowski
(1993, p. 433) state that structural knowledge may be seen as a separate type of
knowledge. “Structural knowledge provides the conceptual basis for why. It
describes how prior knowledge is interconnected....Structural knowledge is most
often depicted in terms of some sort of concept map that visually describes the
relationships between ideas in a knowledge domain.” Representing knowledge in
the visual format of a concept map allows one to gain an overview of a domain of
knowledge. Because the nodes contain only a keyword or a short sentence, more
interpretation is required of the reader, but this may be positive. Concept mapping
can be used for several purposes:
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 24 of 35
PURPOSE OF CONCEPT MAPPING
 To generate ideas (brainstorming);
 To design complex structures (long texts, hypermedia, large web sites);
 To communicate complex ideas;
 To aid learning by explicitly integrating new and old knowledge; and
 To assess understanding or diagnose misunderstanding
ADVANTAGES OF CONCEPT MAPPING
Visual representation has several advantages:



Visual symbols are quickly and easily recognized;
Minimum use of text makes it easy to scan for a word, phrase, or the general
idea; and
Visual representation allows for development of a holistic understanding that
words alone cannot convey.
APPLICATIONS OF CONCEPT MAPPING
(1) Creativity Tool:
Drawing a concept map can be compared to participating in a brainstorming
session. As one puts ideas down on paper without criticism, the ideas become clearer
and the mind becomes free to receive new ideas. These new ideas may be linked to
ideas already on the paper, and they may also trigger new associations leading to new
ideas.
(2) Hypertext Design Tool:
As the World Wide Web becomes an increasingly powerful and ubiquitous medium
for disseminating information, writers must move from writing text in linear fashion
to creating hypertext documents with links to other documents. The structural
correspondence between hypertext design and concept maps makes concept mapping
a suitable tool for designing the conceptual structure of hypertext. The structure of
both a hypertext document and a concept map can be seen as a directed graph
or a knowledge graph (Conklin, 1987). A concept map placed on the Web in
hypertext may also serve as a Web navigational tool if there are clickable areas on
the concept map that take the user immediately to indicated parts of the hypertext
document.
(3) Communication Tool:
A concept map produced by one person represents one possible way to structure
information or ideas. This is something that can be shared with others. A concept
map produced by a group of people represents the ideas of the group. In either case,
concept mapping can be used as a communication tool for people to use to discuss
concepts and the relationships between the concepts. They may try to agree on a
common structure to use as a basis for further action.
(4) Learning Tool:
Novak’s original work with concept mapping dealt with learning. Constructivist
learning theory argues that new knowledge should be integrated into existing
structures in order to be remembered and receive meaning. Concept mapping
stimulates this process by making it explicit and requiring the learner to pay attention
to the relationship between concepts.
Jonassen (1996) argues that students show some of their best thinking when
they try to represent something graphically, and thinking is a necessary condition
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 25 of 35
for learning. Experiments have shown that subjects using concept mapping
outperform non-concept mappers in longer term retention tests (Novak, et al, 1983).
5) Assessment Tool:
Concept maps can also be used as assessment tools. The research team around
Joseph Novak at Cornell found that an important by-product of concept mapping is
its ability to detect or illustrate the “misconceptions” learners may have as
explanations of content matter. The conceptions students may have are often
incomplete and deficient leading to misunderstanding of instruction. Concept maps
drawn by students express their conceptions (or their misconceptions) and can help
the instructor diagnose the misconceptions that make the instruction ineffective
(Ross & Munby, 1991).
SUMMARY
Concept mapping is a technique for representing the structure of
information visually. There are several uses for concept mapping, such as
idea generation, design support, communication enhancement, learning
enhancement, and assessment. A wide range of computer software for concept
mapping is now available for most of the popular computers used in education.
References cited:
Ausubel, D. (1968). “Educational psychology: A cognitive view.” New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston. (Available at the UAB library http://ccuc.cbuc.es/cgibin/vtls.web.gateway?bib=1093-28860&conf=080000 )
Conklin, E. J. (1987). Hypertext: An introduction and survey. “Computer,” 20(9),
17-41.
Jonassen, D. H., & Grabowski, B. L. (1993). “Handbook of individual differences:
Learning & instruction.” Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. ISBN: 08058-1412-4/0-8058-1413-2.
Jonassen, D. H. (1996). “Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical
thinking.” Eaglewoods, NJ: Merill/Prentice Hall.
Novak, J. D., Gowin, D. B., and Johansen, G. T. (1983). The use of concept
mapping and knowledge vee mapping with junior high school science students.
“Science Education,” 67, 625-645.
Ross, B., & Munby, H. (1991). Concept mapping and misconceptions: A study of
high-school students’ understanding of acids and bases. “International Journal of
Science Education,” 13(1), 11-24. (EJ 442 063)
Source:
Plotnick, E. (1997). Concept Mapping: A Graphical System for Understanding the
Relationship between Concepts. Eric Digest, ED407938.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed407938.html

Martha Larkin (2002). “Using Scaffolded Instruction To Optimize Learning”
SCAFFOLDING THROUGHOUT THE LESSON
In order to incorporate scaffolding throughout the lesson, teachers may find the
framework outlined by Ellis & Larkin (1998) helpful.
(1) First, the teacher does it. In other words, the teacher models how to perform a
new or difficult task, such as how to use a graphic organizer. For example, the
teacher may have a partially completed graphic organizer on an overhead
transparency and “think aloud” as he or she describes how the graphic organizer
illustrates the relationships among the information contained on it.
(2) Second, the class does it. The teacher and students work together to perform the
task. For example, the students may suggest information to be added to the
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 26 of 35
graphic organizer. As the teacher writes the suggestions on the transparency,
students fill in their own copies of the organizer.
(3) Third, the group does it. Students work with a partner or a small cooperative group
to complete a graphic organizer (i.e., either a partially completed or a blank one).
(4) Fourth, the individual does it. This is the independent practice stage where
individual students can demonstrate their task mastery (e.g., successfully completing
a graphic organizer to demonstrate appropriate relationships among information)
and receive the necessary practice to help them to perform the task automatically
and quickly.
For additional scaffolding tips, teachers may want to view the videotape, How to
Scaffold Instruction for Student Success (ASCD, 2002). See Beed, Hawkins, &
Roller (1991) for examples of teacher-student dialogue during scaffolded
instruction. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (Producer).
(2002). How to scaffold instruction for student success. [videotape]. (available from
the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1703 North
Beauregard Street, Alexandria, VA 22311-1714).
References cited:
Beed, P. L., Hawkins, E. M., & Roller, C. M. (1991). Moving learners toward
independence: The power of scaffolded instruction. The Reading Teacher, 44, 648655.
Ellis, E. S., & Larkin, M. J. (1998). Strategic instruction for adolescents with
learning disabilities. In B. Y. L. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (2 nd
ed., pp. 585-656). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Source:
Larkin, M. (2002). Using Scaffolded Instruction To Optimize Learning. Eric Digest,
ED474301. http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed474301.html

JoAnn Crandall, J., A. Jaramillo, et al. (2002). “Building Conceptural Frameworks”
This digest describes ways to develop students’ English language and literacy skills
and to make academic content challenging, interesting, and accessible. They
include the following: 1) building conceptual frameworks for new knowledge, 2)
teaching learning strategies, 3) focusing on reading in all classes, 4) giving
students opportunities to engage in free reading, and 5) helping students move
beyond the text. (See Crandall, Jaramillo, Olsen, & Peyton, 2001, for a fuller
discussion of these and other strategies.)
BUILDING CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
Teachers can employ various methods to help students see how ideas or concepts
relate to one another and fit into a larger picture. Understanding the relationships
among concepts helps students grasp them more quickly and efficiently and
develop well-structured mental pictures about the content they are learning
(Goldman & Rakestraw, 2000). Many English language learners are unable to see
how the content presented from lesson to lesson is connected. They may be able to
retain facts about social studies or science, for example, but have difficulty
performing more demanding cognitive tasks such as relating those facts to
historical trends or relating the study of the earth’s surface to the study of the
moon and the solar system (Warren & Rosebery, 1995).
Schemas are interpretive frames that help individuals make sense of information by
relating it to previous experiences (Schank & Abelson, 1977). Providing students
with a graphic organizer—a visual aid that displays the chunks of information to be
studied—gives them an interpretive frame from which to approach the information.
A story map is one example of a graphic organizer (see Figure 1). A story map
breaks down the components of a story—characters, setting, and dialogue in a
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 27 of 35
series of events or conflicts leading to a resolution—into chunks of text that can
help students organize and comprehend the events of the story. It also illustrates
what the students are responsible for learning. Use of a story map repeatedly for
the study of various types of literature provides a schema for the study of
literature.
Graphic organizers can help teachers clarify their instructional goals. Teachers can
ask themselves what they want their students to learn and how they can display
this information graphically to help their students connect ideas. For example, after
studying various geometric shapes in a math class, the teacher might ask the
students to create a concept map showing the relationships among the different
shapes and to write the ways in which they are related, moving from the general
(e.g., they are made with straight lines) to the more specific (e.g., they have
parallel sides). Discussions might take place as students clarify the connections,
clear up misconceptions, and come to consensus on the structure of the map
(Crandall, Jaramillo, Olsen, & Peyton, 2001, p. 54).
TEACHING LEARNING STRATEGIES
Research has shown that all students can benefit from instruction in learning
strategies. Chamot and O’Malley’s (1994) work with second language learners
reinforces the notion that students who learn to consciously monitor their own
learning, and who have a storehouse of strategies to use when learning becomes
difficult, fare better than students who do not have such strategies. When teaching
a learning strategy, teachers should identify the strategy, explain why it is useful,
demonstrate its use, give students practice in applying it to a learning situation,
and show them how to evaluate its effectiveness and what to do if it does not work
(Duffy et al., 1986).
One reading strategy that can enhance students’ understanding of texts is for them
to think about “under-the-surface” questions. This type of question begins with
words such as why, how, should, and could and cannot be answered by pointing to
an obvious fact on a page. For example, students in a literature class who have
read a chapter from John Reynolds Gardiner’s novel, Stone Fox, might be asked
first to respond to questions whose answers can be found easily in the story, such
as, What kind of farm do the main characters live on? Then the teacher might move
to questions that do not have an easy answer (e.g., Why is Willie’s grandfather not
speaking? How do you think Willie could help his grandfather?). After modeling
several under-the-surface questions, the teacher can ask the students to construct
some of these questions themselves.
When teachers help students learn how to learn, students may examine how they
think about a particular problem, think about what they know about the problem
before they learn about it, think about how they are going to go about
accomplishing a task, make predictions about how a lesson studied yesterday is
connected to a lesson being studied today, and summarize what they have read
when they have finished a particular section in a text.
FOCUSING ON READING IN ALL CLASSES
Because academic and cognitive demands increase with every grade level, the need
for continual improvement in students’ reading ability becomes especially urgent for
students struggling to achieve at the same levels as their native-English-speaking
peers.
Teachers can use a variety of strategies to ensure that students are actively
engaged in reading. They can explicitly teach what good readers do and give
students opportunities to interact with both teacher-selected and self-selected
texts. For example, in reciprocal teaching (Palinscar & Brown, 1984) teachers
instruct students in four distinct reading strategies: questioning, predicting,
clarifying, and summarizing. A well-designed unit might include practice in all four
reciprocal teaching strategies. For example, students might practice predicting by
creating questions about a text based on reading the first paragraph. They can
learn how to summarize by looking at a series of statements and deciding which are
necessary for the summary and which can be omitted. The teacher can model how
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 28 of 35
to create questions about what is happening in the text, how to hypothesize what
might happen next, how to ask for clarification, and how to state the most
important ideas in what has just been read. When students gain sufficient skill,
they can work in groups on selected portions of text and take turns using the four
strategies.
Teachers can also give students opportunities to respond to reading texts using a
number of teacher-designed tasks. These may include reading logs, in which
students copy quotes from the text and then write their own response; “firstresponse writes,” in which students read and then quickly write about the ideas
that came to them as they were reading; or graphic logs, in which students write
quotes from the text and respond with a drawing or symbol that corresponds to the
quote.
GIVING STUDENTS OPPORTUNITIES FOR FREE READING
Free voluntary reading and sustained silent reading can build students’ vocabulary
and develop reading habits that extend beyond the classroom (Cho & Krashen,
1994; Coady, 1997). In a voluntary reading program, English language learners
have something they may not have at home: access to books.
Teachers who want to implement a voluntary reading program can use a variety of
methods to heighten students’ interest. They can conduct research on what their
students would like to read by asking other teachers, seeing what kinds of books
students check out on their own, or asking students themselves. The idea is to get
students to read so they will want to read more.
It is best to make reading time extended and consistent. For example, reading may
take place at the beginning of class every day for 15 minutes. Students may need
to be taught how to select an appropriate book. When teachers see students
struggling to maintain focus on their reading, they should help them select a book
more appropriate to their reading level or interest.
HELPING STUDENTS MOVE BEYOND THE TEXT
At the end of a unit, lesson, or theme, teachers can plan tasks that move students
back to the text or content to reexamine, reconnect, and rethink the major ideas or
concepts. Students have the chance to gain deeper understanding of the content by
representing the text in new and different ways. At this point, the classroom may
be filled with posters, drawings, and writings that students have created after
studying a particular piece of literature, historical era or figure, scientific concept,
or thematic unit incorporating several subject areas. A good end-of-the-study task
builds on students’ strengths by giving them the chance to express themselves in a
variety of formats.
“Beyond-the-text” tasks force students to go back to the text, reflect on its
meaning, clarify and question, and reread with a different purpose in mind. One
type of beyond-the-text task has students transform a piece of writing from one
genre to another (e.g., rewrite a short story as a poem or play). Another is an
“open-mind” activity to help students understand what a character is thinking or
feeling. In this activity, students draw or are given a picture of an empty head.
Inside the head, they can draw pictures of what the character sees, write questions
the character might be wondering about, or write key words that show the
character’s feelings or ideas.
CONCLUSION
In the recent past, the focus of education for newcomers to U.S. schools was
primarily the mastery of English. By extending this focus to include the
development of literacy and higher order skills and the belief that these students
can achieve at high levels in school, we come closer to ensuring that no child is left
behind. The strategies described in this digest are designed with this new focus in
mind.
REFERENCES
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 29 of 35
Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1994). “The CALLA handbook: Implementing the
cognitive academic language learning approach.: New York: Addision-Wesley.
Cho, K.S., & Krashen, S.D. (1994). Acquisition of vocabulary from the Sweet Valley
Kids series: Adult ESL acquisition. “Journal of Reading, 37,” 662-7.
Coady, J. (1997). L2 vocabulary acquisition through extensive reading. In J. Coady
& T. Huckin (Eds.), “Second language vocabulary acquisition” (pp. 225-37).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crandall, J., Jaramillo, A., Olsen, L. & Peyton, J.K. (2001). Diverse teaching
strategies for immigrant children. In R. W. Cole (Ed.), “More strategies for
educating everybody’s children.” Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Duffy, J.L., Roehler, M., Meloth, M., Vavrus, L., Book, C., Putnam, J., & Wesselman,
R. (1986). The relationship between explicit verbal explanation during reading skill
instruction and student awareness and achievement: A study of reading teacher
effects. “Reading Research Quarterly, 21,” 237-52.
Goldman, S.R., & Rakestraw, J.A. (2000). Structural aspects of constructing
meaning from text. In M.L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.),
“Handbook of reading research” (Vol. II, pp. 311-335). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A.L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehensionfostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. “Cognition and Instruction, 1,”
117-25.
Schank, R., & Abelson, R. (1977). “Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding.”
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Warren, B., & Rosebery, A.S. (1995). “’This question is just too, too easy!’
Perspectives from the classroom on accountability in science” (Research Rep. No.
14). Santa Cruz, CA, and Washington, DC: National Center for Research on Cultural
Diversity and Second Language Learning.

Alvarez, M. C. and V. J. Risko (1989). “Schema Activation, Construction, and
Application.” Eric Digest ED312611.
Schema theorists have advanced our understanding of reading comprehension by
describing how prior knowledge can enhance a reader’s interaction with the text.
Accordingly, comprehension occurs when a reader is able to use prior knowledge
and experience to interpret an author’s message (Bransford, 1985; Norris &
Phillips, 1987). Educators and researchers have suggested numerous instructional
strategies to help students activate and use prior knowledge to aid comprehension.
Yet, schema theory does not explain how readers modify and create new schema
when presented with novel information in texts.
SCHEMA ACTIVATION
Because texts are never completely explicit, the reader must rely on preexisting
schemata to provide plausible interpretations. Yet, there is much evidence that
good and poor readers do not always use schemata appropriately or are unaware of
whether the information they are reading is consistent with their existing
knowledge. Also, there is evidence that students who do not spontaneously use
schemata as they read will engage them if given explicit instructions prior to
reading (e.g., Bransford, 1979).
Prereading strategies have been developed to help students relate new information
appearing in written discourse to their existing knowledge. The design of many of
these preorganizers reflects Ausubel’s (1959) definition of readiness and the
purpose of their use is to create a mind set prior to reading. These preorganizers
have included advance organizers (Ausubel, 1960), structured overviews or graphic
organizers (Alvermann, 1981), previews (Graves, et al., 1983), concept maps
(Novak & Gowin, 1984), and thematic organizers (Alvarez, 1980, 1983; Alvarez &
Risko, 1989; Risko & Alvarez, 1986).
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 30 of 35
SCHEMA CONSTRUCTION AND APPLICATION
Learning novel concepts may require the reader to connect new information to a
congruent mental model. Mental models represent an individual’s construal of
existing knowledge and/or new information in the domain even though this
information may be fragmentary, inaccurate, or inconsistent (Gentner & Gentner,
1983). A person’s mental model is a representation of a particular belief based on
existing knowledge of a physical system or a semantic representation depicted in a
text. For example, a person may hold a belief that balls are round, inflatable and
are made to bounce. However, this person may encounter a football (an ellipsoid)
that is kicked or thrown, or ball bearings that are solid, or a bowling ball that is
solid and has holes drilled into it for the purpose of rolling rather than bouncing.
This new knowledge is integrated into a new, more complex, mental structure
about the shape, substance, form, and function of balls.
As Bransford (1985) points out, schema activation and schema construction are two
different problems. While it is possible to activate existing schemata with a given
topic, it does not necessarily follow that a learner can use this activated knowledge
to develop new knowledge and skills. Problem solving lessons and activities can
provide learners with situations that aid in schema construction which includes
critical thinking. Critical thinking theory enables a reader to analyze an ambiguous
text. When versed in this process, a reader can either weigh alternative
interpretations, dismiss others, make a decision to evaluate multiple possibilities, or
accept the information as being reasonable. This process helps students to modify
or extend their mental model, or existing knowledge base, for target concepts.
Several teacher-directed and self-initiated activities can be used to promote
schema construction and application of knowledge to novel situations. Four such
strategies that are designed to foster shared meaning between and among teachers
and peers are: cases, interactive videodiscs, hierarchical concept maps, and Vee
diagrams.
Cases that present learners with single and varied contexts across disciplines
provide learners with scenarios that can be discussed and analyzed from multiple
perspectives (e.g., see Christensen, 1987; Spiro, et al., 1987). These cases can
include written documents, recorded (musical as well as narrative) interludes,
paintings, artifacts, video portrayals, and other pertinent substances and materials.
Another teacher-directed strategy is the use of interactive videodiscs. Bransford
and his colleagues are developing episodes, revolving around problem-oriented
learning environments, that can be computer-accessed by learners to invite critical
thinking and schema construction (see Bransford, et al., 1989; Bransford, et al., in
press).
Hierarchical concept maps and Vee diagrams are two methods that students can
initiate on their own for schema construction and application. Hierarchical concept
maps (Novak & Gowin, 1984) are designed to help the reader clarify ambiguities of
a text while simultaneously revealing any misconceptions that result from a
reading. More importantly they provide the learner with a tool from which to initiate
ideas that can be shared by visual inspection with someone else. The Vee diagram
(Gowin, 1981/1987) is a method by which a learner can learn about the structure
of knowledge and knowledge-making within a given discipline and use this
knowledge in novel contexts.
Students can be taught to incorporate new information into their existing world
knowledge. This can be accomplished through teacher guided instruction and selfinitiated strategies that includes methods and meaningful materials that induce
critical thinking with conceptual problems. In order for schema construction to
occur, a framework needs to be provided that helps readers to elaborate upon new
facts and ideas and to clarify their significance or relevance. Students need to learn
more about themselves as learners. Notable in this learning context is the
relationship between facts and ideas learned in formal school settings and those
encountered in everyday learning environments. Perhaps within this inquiry we will
be led to discover the ways individuals choose to relate new information to existing
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 31 of 35
schemata and how this new information influences their future knowledge and
decision-making.
Additional material on schemata can be found in the ERIC database. Some recent
articles are:
Anstey, Michele. “Helping Children Learn How to Learn,” Australian Journal of
Reading, 11 (4) November 1988, p. 269-77. [EJ 383 664]
Blachowicz, Camille L. Z. and Fisher, Peter J. L. “Defining is an Unnatural Act: A
Study of Written Definitions.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
National Reading Conference, 1988. 17 p. [ED 301 854]
Bloom, Charles P. “The Roles of Schemata in Memory for Text.” Discourse
Processes, 11 (3) July-September 1988, p. 305-18. [EJ 381 725]
Mealey, Donna L. and Nist, Sherrie L. “Postsecondary, Teacher Directed
Comprehension Strategies,” Journal of Reading, 32 (6) March 1989, p. 484-93. [EJ
383 759]
Scales, Alice M. “Teaching College Reading and Study Skills Through a
Metacognitive-Schema Approach.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
International Reading Association, 1987. 39 p. [ED 298 428]
REFERENCES
Alvarez, M. (1983). Using a thematic pre-organizer and guided instruction as an aid
to concept learning. Reading Horizons, 24, 51-58.
Alvarez, M. (1980). The effect of using an associate passage with guided instruction
to evoke thematic conceptual linkage. Dissertation Abstracts International, 41,
1000A. (University Microfilms No. 8019163).
Alvarez, M. & Risko, V. (1989). Using a thematic organizer to facilitate transfer
learning with college developmental studies students. Reading Research and
Instruction, 28, 1-15.
Alvermann, D. (1981). The compensatory effect of graphic organizers in the
learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational
Research, 75, 44-48.
Ausubel, D. (1960). The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of
meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 267-272.
Ausubel, D. (1959). Viewpoints from related disciplines: Human growth and
development. Teachers College Record, 60, 245-254.
Bransford, J. (1985). Schema activation and schema acquisition. In H. Singer & R.
B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading, 3rd ed. Newark, DE:
International Reading Association, 385-397.
Bransford, J. (1979). Human cognition: Learning, understanding, and
remembering. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Bransford, J., et al., (in press). Teaching thinking and content knowledge: Toward
an integrated approach. In B. F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and
cognitive instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bransford, J., et al., (1989). New approaches to instruction: because wisdom can’t
be told (pp. 470-497). In Vosniadou, S. & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and
analogical reasoning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Christensen, C. (1987). Teaching and the case method. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School.
Gentner, D. & Gentner, D. (1983). Flowing waters or teeming crowds: Mental
models of electricity (pp. 99-129). In D. Gentner & A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental
models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gowin, D. (1981/1987). Educating. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Graves, M., et al., (1983). Effects of previewing difficult short stories on low ability
junior high school students’ comprehension, recall, and attitudes. Reading Research
Quarterly, 18, 262-276.
Norris, S. & Phillips, L. (1987). Explanations of reading comprehension: Schema
theory and critical thinking theory. Teachers College Record, 89, 2, 281-306.
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 32 of 35
Novak, J. & Gowin, D. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Risko, V. & Alvarez, M. (1986). An investigation of poor readers’ use of a thematic
strategy to comprehend text. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 298-316. [EJ 337
401]
Spiro, R., et al., (1987). Knowledge acquisition for application: Cognitive flexibility
and transfer in complex content domains (pp. 177-199). In B. K. Britton & S. M.
Glynn (Eds.), Executive control processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. ----- Marina C. Alvarez is a professor at Tennessee
State University; Victoria J. Risko is a professor College of Vanderbilt University.

Bello, T. (1997). “Improving ESL Learners’ Writing Skills.” Eric Digest
ED409746.
“Analyzing and Synthesizing Information:” Adults frequently need to interpret
information that appears in graphic form such as charts, drawings, and maps, or
interpret and synthesize information from several sources. To prepare for this kind
of writing, learners can complete grids based on information they gather from class
or community surveys. For example, at the beginning level, a simple grid can ask
for the names of the learners in the class and their native countries or languages.
Groups of learners can work together to fill in parts of the grid and then share their
information with the entire class to complete the grid. They can then use this
information to write simple sentences describing their class, such as “There are
nine Spanish speakers and four Russian speakers in our class.” At higher levels,
learners can gather more extensive data and then write a descriptive paragraph or
composition. Using maps, learners can write directions for getting from one location
to another. After reading articles on a topic such as immigration, learners can write
a letter to the editor or a summary of the information presented.

Behrmann, M. and M. K. Jerome (2002). “Assistive Technology for Students with
Mild Disabilities: Update 2002.” Eric Digest ED463595.
Lahm and Morissette (1994) identified areas of instruction in which AT can assist
students. Six of these are described here: (1) organization, (2) note taking, (3)
writing, (4) academic productivity, (5) access to reference and general educational
materials, and (6) cognitive assistance.
ORGANIZATION
Low-tech solutions include teaching students to organize their thoughts or work
using flow-charting, task analysis, webbing, and outlining. These strategies can also
be accomplished using high-tech, graphic, software-based organizers to assist
students in developing and structuring ideas. Such graphic organizers allow
students to manipulate and reconfigure brainstormed ideas and color code and
group those ideas in ways that visually represent their thoughts. Another high-tech
solution might be the outline function of word processing software, which lets
students set out major ideas or topics and then add subcategories of information.
Using the Internet, local area networks, or LCD projection systems enables
students and their teachers to collaborate, give feedback, and modify these
applications either as a group or individually at different times.
Lahm, E., & Morrissette, S. (1994, April). Zap ‘em with assistive technology. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of The Council for Exceptional Children, Denver,
CO.

Selected bibliography by T. Navés
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 33 of 35
Alvarez, M. C., & Risko, V. J. (1989). Schema Activation, Construction, and
Application. Eric Digest, ED312611.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed312611.html
Balas, A. K. (1997). The Mathematics and Reading Connection. Eric Digest,
ED432439. http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed432439.html
Behrmann, M., & Jerome, M. K. (2002). Assistive Technology for Students with Mild
Disabilities: Update 2002. Eric Digest, ED463595.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed463595.html
Bello, T. (1997). Improving ESL Learners’ Writing Skills. Eric Digest, ED409746.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed409746.html
Christen, W. L., & Murphy, T. J. (1991). Increasing Comprehension by Activating
Prior Knowledge. Eric Digest, ED328885.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed328885.html
Cousin, P. T. (1989). Content Area Textbooks: Friends or Foes? Eric Digest,
ED321249. http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed321249.html
Crandall, J. (Ed.). (1987). ESL Through Content-Area Instruction. Mathematics,
Science, Social Studies. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. ISBN: 013-284373-0. http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed296572.html
Crandall, J. (1992). Content-Centered Learning in the United States. Annual Review
of Applied Linguistics, 13, 111-127.
Crandall, J. (1994). Content-Centered Language Learning. Eric Digest(ED367142),
www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_DIGESTS/ed367142.html.
Crandall, J., Jaramillo, A., Olsen, L., & Peyton, J. K. (2002). Using Cognitive
Strategies To Develop English Language and Literacy. Eric Digest, ED469970.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed469970.html
Daniel, P. (1986). But Can Your Students Read the Diagrams? System, 14(1), 1527.
Ginther, A. (2002). Context and Content Visuals and Performance on Listening
Comprehension Stimuli. Language Testing, 19(2), 133-167.
Halliwell, S. (1992). Integrating Language Work and Other Subjects. In S. Halliwell
(Ed.), Teaching English in Primary School (pp. 130-143). London & New York:
Longman.
Hickey, M. G., & Braun, P. (1990). Social Studies and the Disabled Reader. Eric
Digest, ED322080.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed322080.html
ISK, & DSU. (2000). VISL Languages: Automatic Analysis, from
http://visl.hum.ou.dk/visl/gramanalyses.html
Katz, L. G. (1994). The Project Approach. Eric Digest, ED368509.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed368509.html
Larkin, M. (2002). Using Scaffolded Instruction To Optimize Learning. Eric Digest,
ED474301. http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed474301.html
Lowe, R. (2000). Visual Literacy and Learning in Science. Eric Digest, ED463945.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed463945.html
Moxley, R. (1983). Educational Diagrams. Instructional Science, 12(2), 147-160.
Novick, L. R., & Hurley, S. M. (2001). To Matrix, Network, or Hierarchy: That Is the
Question. Cognitive Psychology, 42(2), 158-216.
Oser, H. M. C. S. M. F. R. L. (2002). Scaffolding Cognitive and Metacognitive
Processes in Low Verbal Ability Learners: Use of Diagrams in Computer-based
Training Environments. Instructional Science, 30(6), 433-464.
Plotnick, E. (1997). Concept Mapping: A Graphical System for Understanding the
Relationship between Concepts. Eric Digest, ED407938.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed407938.html
Royce, T. (2002). Multimodality in the TESOL Classroom: Exploring Visual-Verbal
Synergy. TESOL Quarterly, 36(2), 191-205.
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 34 of 35
Schwarz, R., & Burt, M. (1995). ESL Instruction for Learning Disabled Adults. Eric
Digest, ED379966.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed379966.html
Smith, C. B., & Sensenbaugh, R. (1992). Helping Children Overcome Reading
Difficulties. Eric Digest, ED344190.
http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed344190.html
Navés selection of web sites on graphic organizers:
http://www.graphic.org/
http://www.shodor.org/interactivate/activities/
http://www.writedesignonline.com/organizers/sequence.html
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS & DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION by T. Navés 2004 tnaves@ub.edu Page 35 of 35