What Do You See That Makes You Say That?:
The Role of Asking Young Children to Provide
Evidence for their Observations in Visual
Thinking Strategies Discussions
Sarah O’Leary
2010
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?:
TheRoleofAskingYoungChildrentoProvideEvidencefortheirObservationsinVisual
ThinkingStrategiesDiscussions
InternshipCapstonePaper
Submittedby:
SarahO’Leary
Master’sAppliedProgram
Eliot-PearsonDepartmentofChildDevelopment
TuftsUniversity
May2010
InternshipSite:TheSchoolPartnershipProgram
IsabellaStewartGardnerMuseum,Boston
SiteSupervisors:MichelleGrohe,DirectorofSchoolandTeacherPrograms
PaulaLynn,SchoolPartnershipProgramManager
FacultyInternshipAdvisor:DebbieLeeKeenan
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
TABLEOFCONTENTS
Introduction.........................................................................................................................................1
VisualThinkingStrategies....................................................................................................................2
CognitiveDevelopment........................................................................................................................5
UniversalCognitiveDevelopmentfromThreetoSix................................................................................6
DefinitionsofMetacognitiveDevelopment..............................................................................................9
FindingsinMetacognitiveDevelopmentintheEarlyChildhoodYears..................................................11
TheImpactofCognitiveDevelopmentonVisualThinkingStrategies..................................................14
ProgressionofSkills................................................................................................................................15
WhenWeAskQuestionTwo..................................................................................................................15
FacilitationoftheDiscussion..................................................................................................................17
MakingMeaninginaVisualThinkingStrategiesDiscussion...................................................................18
TheImpactofVisualThinkingStrategiesonCognitiveDevelopment..................................................19
ProgressionofSkills................................................................................................................................20
WhenWeAskQuestionTwo..................................................................................................................21
FacilitationoftheDiscussion.................................................................................................................22
RemainingQuestionsandConclusions...............................................................................................24
WorksCited.......................................................................................................................................27
AppendixA:PabloPicasso,GirlwithaDove.......................................................................................30
AppendixB:HenriRousseau,TheSleepingGypsy...............................................................................31
AppendixC:PaulManship,GroupofBears........................................................................................32
AppendixD:EdvardMunch,SpringtimeontheKarlJohannStreet.....................................................33
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?:
TheRoleofAskingYoungChildrentoProvideEvidencefortheirObservationsinVisualThinking
StrategiesDiscussions
Child:Um,thatIseethevolleyballrightontheground,thatlady,whenshe’sscaredshemightjustfeellike,she
mightbelikeoutside.Soshe’sscared‘causeshemightbeoutsideinaplacewheresomebodyforgother…Cause
birdsareoutside…
Teacher:You’realsowonderingwherethispersonis,andyouthinkthatthispersonmightbeoutside…andyour
evidence,thereasonthatyouusedwasthinkingthatifthisisrealbird,andrealbirdsareoutside,thenshemust
beoutside.Ok.
Child:Andsomebodyforgotherat,theum,whatarethecalled–thebeach
Teacher:Oh,andyou’realsothinkingthatshe’snervouscauseshe’sbeenleftatthebeach?Whatdoyouseethat
makesyousaythatshewasleftalone?
Child:Becausenobody’sthere…Causealwaysfamiliesstaytogether.
TheprecedingexcerptoccurredduringaVisualThinkingStrategies(VTS)discussionofPablo
Picasso’spainting,ChildWithaDove(AppendixA),withagroupofKindergartenstudents.Inthis
excerpt,wecanseetheinteractionbetweenthechildandtheteacherasthechildworkstomakesense
oftheimagethatisbeingdiscussed.Thechildworkedtoidentifythedifferentaspectsoftheimage,
makeconnectionstoherownbeliefsandexperiences,andtoexplainherreasoning.Throughoutthe
courseofthediscussion,thechildrenactivelymadeconnectionstooneanother’sideasandengaged
withlookingattwoseparateimagesoverthecourseofthirtyminutes.
WhatisofinteresttomeishowyoungchildreninteractwithVTSdiscussionsandmethodology,
particularlythecognitiveskillsthatareemployedduringthecourseofthediscussion.Throughthe
discussionchildrenareaskedtolabelwhattheyperceiveandexplaintheirdecisions.Theyarealso
challengedtoconsiderthepossibilityofalternateperspectives.Specifically,Iwillexaminewhatskillsare
employedinansweringQuestion2ofaVTSdiscussion,“Whatdoyouseethatmakesyousaythat?,”
andhowthoseskillsalignwithcurrentknowledgeofwherechildrenaredevelopmentallyintheearly
childhoodyears.Question2challengesindividualstoexplainhowtheyknowwhattheyknowandto
1
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
groundtheirreasoningintheimage.Thisdiscussionwillprogressthroughfivestages:(1)areviewofthe
VisualThinkingStrategiesMethodology,(2)anoverviewofperspectivesfocusingoncognitiveand
metacognitivedevelopmentforchildrenages3-6,(3)anexaminationofhowourknowledgeof
metacognitionstandstoinformhowVTSisfacilitated,(4)adiscussionconcerninghowVTSdiscussions
benefitthedevelopmentofcognitiveandmetacognitiveskills,andfinally(5)recommendationsfor
movingforwardbothinresearchandinpractice.
Throughoutthecourseofthisdiscussion,Iwillbeinterspersingthetheoreticalknowledgeand
researchwithappliedexamplesfromVTSdiscussionswithKindergartenandPreschool-agedchildren.
ThesediscussionsoccurredwithstudentswhowereengagingwithVTSfortheirfirsttimeandwhocome
fromarangeofsocial,economic,anddevelopmentalbackgrounds.Whilemyparticularinterestsfocus
onchildrenintheseearlyyearsofeducation,andtheperspectivesthatfollowwillexaminethisage
range,Ibelievethatmuchofwhatfollowshasgreaterimplicationsbothforhowweconsidertheimpact
oftheenvironmentfosteredbyVTSaswellasforhowVTSisfacilitatedtoscaffoldtheskillsoflearners.
VisualThinkingStrategies
BeforewecandelvefurtherintohowyoungchildreninteractcognitivelywiththeVTS
curriculum,itisimportanttolearnmoreaboutthemethodologyitselfanditsfoundingphilosophy.
AbigailHousenandPhilipYenawinedevelopedVTSintheearly1990sinresponsetoHousen’sresearch
regardingaestheticdevelopment(Housen,2001-2,p.99).Incodingpeople’sindividual,stream-of
consciousresponsestoworksofart,Housenidentifiedfivestagesofaestheticdevelopmentthat
characterizedtherangeofreactionsthatsheobserved.Thefivestagescanbecharacterizedinthe
followingway:
Stage1:Accountive:Concreteobservationsaremadeaboutthework,thereisoftenanelementof
narrativeorstorytelling.
2
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
Stage2:Constructive:Theviewerworksonestablishingaframeworkforlookingataworkofart,there
canbeanemphasisonwhatlooks“right.”
Stage3:Classifying:Theviewerusesintellectualandarthistoricalknowledgetoplacetheworkofart
withinaplaceortime.
Stage4:Interpretive:Theviewerusescriticalskillstofosteranemotionalencounterwiththeworkofart
andtheprocessoftheaestheticexperienceisseenasevolvingovertime.
Stage5:Re-interpretive:Theviewercreatesasenseofpersonalhistorywiththeworkofartinwhichtime
isakeycomponent.Personalhistorybecomesintegratedwiththeperceptionofthepainting(Housen,
2001a,p.8-10).
WhileHousendescribesaestheticdevelopmentalongaseriesoffivestages,thereisastressthat
theaestheticexperienceis“characterizedbyaspectrumofthoughts,withthoseofonestage
intermingledwithadjacentstages.(2007,p.12)”Housenadditionallyfoundthatthemajorityof
individuals(fromchildrenthroughtoadults)whointeractedwithworksofartwereinthefirsttwo
stagesofdevelopment,andVTSwasdesignedtomeetthedevelopmentalchallengespresentinStageI
andStageIIviewers.Infact,asopposedtootherstage-basedmodels(seetheworkofMichaelParsons
1987book,HowWeUnderstandArt:ACognitiveDevelopmentAccountofAestheticExperience,fora
counterexample),Housen’sstagesofaestheticdevelopmentarenottiedtoagesbuttotimespent
lookingatandengagingwithart.WhileVTSisdesignedforindividualsatthefirsttwostages,Housen
arguesthatVTSprovidesviewersofallstageswithacontextforentryintoadiscussionandtakinga
deeperlook(2001b).
VitalcomponentsoftheVTSdiscussionincludetheselectionofimagestodiscuss,theamountof
timeprovidedtolookattheartwork,andthesociallyconstructednatureofthediscussion.Inorderto
learnhowtolookatthingsinanewway,thechildisencouragedtobuildon“hisownexperience,rather
thantryingtoappropriatetheexperts’wayofseeing.(Housen,2001a,p.5)”Thegroupnatureofthe
discussionexposeschildrentoperspectivesandideasthattheymaynothaveconsiderediftheyhad
exploredtheworkontheirown.VTSsupportsthismodelasbeingparticularlybeneficialifbegunwith
3
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
youngerlearnersandcontinuedoveranumberofyears.LongitudinalresearchfindingsofVTSin
examiningelementaryschoolstudentsinByron,Minnesotasuggestthatthismodelofathinking
dispositionhasagreaterimpactifitisbegunwithchildreningrade2ratherthangrade4(Housen,
2001b,p.19).Throughtheextendedperiodoftimespentlookingatart,andthroughhavingthe
opportunitytoexaminemultipleworks,viewershavethetimetoshapetheirperspectivesastheytakea
secondlookandtobuildavocabularyandhistoryofvisualinformation.Housencitestheparticular
benefitsofwellselectedartworkfordiscussingwithchildreninstatingthat“awell-chosenworkofartis
aselfcontainedworld”anddoesnotrequirespecificbackgroundknowledge(2001-2,p.121).Butwhyis
backgroundknowledgeconsideredunnecessary?ThegoalofVTSfocusesonthepersonalexperience
gainedthroughhavingtheopportunitytospendanextendedamountoftimelookingatart.
DuringthecourseofaVisualThinkingStrategiesconversation,childrenareprovidedwithan
extendedperiodoftimetoengagewithaworkofartandareencouragedtosharetheirinterpretations
inanenvironmentinwhichallideasarewelcome.AccordingtotheofficialwebsitefortheVTS
curriculum,theguidingprinciplesofVTSare(1)todevelopaglobalcommunity,(2)encouragecritical
thinking,(3)supportaffectiveteachingstrategies,(4)advocatefortheuseofaninnovativecurriculum,
and(5)createmotivatedlearners(VisualThinkingStrategies,2010).Fromtheinitial“Whatisgoingonin
thisimage?,”throughthesuccessiverequestsof“Whatmorecanwefind?,”learnersareencouragedto
look,andthenlookagainastheyhearandrespondtotheobservationsoftheirpeers.Manyofthetraits
ofaVTSdiscussion(andtheguidingprinciplesofthemethodology)areinlinewiththetypeof
environment,asoutlinedbyShirleyLarkin(2010),whichisbeneficialforthedevelopmentof
metacognitivethought.Larkinexplainsthat“becomingmoremetacognitiveisaboutslowingdownand
takingtimetoenjoythethinkingprocess,eventomarvelattheabilitywehavetothinkaboutsomany
4
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
differentthingsandtoallowourselvestofollowourthoughts.(p.5)”InVTS,acriticalaspectofthe
discussion,withanyagegroup,isallowingforthisextratimetolookandfollowthetrainofthoughts.
ParticipantsinaVTSdiscussionarealsoaskedtobeself-reflectiveandevaluativelearnersas
theyrespondtoQuestion2:“Whatdoyouseethatmakesyousaythat?”Throughoutthecourseofthe
discussion,participantsareencouragedtoprovideexplanationsfor,andevaluate,theirownresponses
toaworkofart.Forexample,ifachildbelievesthatthereisatreeintheimage,howdoessheknow
thatitisatree?Similarly,ifanotherchildcontributesthatthereisaconfusedpersonintheimage,what
visualinformationdoesheusetodefineconfusion?ThefacilitatorinaVTSdiscussionservestheroleof
aneutralparty.Allresponsesarereceivedandparaphrasedwiththegoalofscaffoldingideas,
illuminatingconnections,andmaintainingawiderangeoffurtherpossibilitiesthroughtheuseof
conditionallanguage.Neutralfacilitationismaintainedsothatthelearnerbeginstoseethattherearea
widerangeofresponsestoasingleworkofartandthattherecanbeconnectionsbetweenseemingly
disparateresponses(Housen,2001a,p.18).Thefacilitatoristhetorchbearer,ensuringthatnoonegets
lostalongtheway.
Ofparticularimportancetothisinvestigationarethespecificrecommendationsforchildrenin
gradesK-2whoareengagingwiththeVTScurriculum.Accordingtotheimplementationguide,VTS
recommendsthatfacilitatorsinKindergartenand1stgradeclassroomswaituntiltheendoftheyearto
beginaskingQuestion2(Housen&Yenawine,2000).Atthetimeofthiswriting,thereisnoofficial
Preschoolcurriculum,althoughasetofimageshasbeenpilotedbytheIsabellaStewartGardner
MuseuminBoston,MA.Theimplicationisthatyoungerchildren,particularlythoseintheirfirstyearof
thecurriculum,benefitfromaperiodofwaitingbeforebeingasked“Whatdoyouseethatmakesyou
saythat?”ReturningtothegoalsoftheVTSmethodology,particularlythegoaltoenhanceanddevelop
5
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
criticalthinking,itismyhopetoexploretheskillsthatareneededtoanswer“Whatdoyouseethat
makesyousaythat?”andhowthisquestionintersectswithperspectivesinchilddevelopment.
CognitiveDevelopment
Inexaminingchildrenbetweentheagesof3-6,itisimportantfirsttodefineourscope.Inthe
book,BeyondUniversalsinCognitiveDevelopment,DavidHenryFeldman(1980)exploredhowdomains
ofknowledgeandskillsexistalongacontinuumfromuniversal,tocultural,todisciplinebased,to
idiosyncratic,tounique(p.23).“Universals”are,asthenamesuggests,skillsanddomainsthat,alonga
normativecourseofdevelopment,areacquiredbyindividuals.Exampleswouldincludetheabilityto
communicateortounderstandabstractrepresentations.Thesearedomainsofknowledgethatare
learnedinastage-likeprogressionandcanbelooselyconnectedtosetperiodsofmaturation.According
toFeldman,thenonuniversaldomains“arenotnecessarilymasteredatthehighest(oreveninitial)
levelsbyallchildreninallcultures,noraretheyachievementswhichcanbeacquiredspontaneously,
independentoftheenvironmentalconditionsprevailinginaparticularcultureataparticularmomentin
time.(1980,p.8)”Housen’sstagesofaestheticdevelopmentwouldfallintooneofthesenonuniversal
domains,asprogressionthroughherstagesdoesnotoccurindependentlyofsetconditions(Feldman,
1980;Housen,2001-2002).ReturningtothecontinuumestablishedbyFeldman,IbelievethatHousen’s
stageswouldfallbetweenaculturalanddiscipline-baseddomainofknowledge.AccordingtoFeldman,
“cultural”domainsconcernskillsachievedbyallmembersofaparticularculturewhile“disciplinebased”domainsareachievedbyagroupofpeoplewithinaculture(1980,p.31).Withinthecontextof
VTSandthispaper,itthenbecomesthegoaltoidentifywhichskillsareusedduringaVTSdiscussionand
toconsiderifthoseskillsareaccessibletochildrenintheagerangeof3-6.Ibelievethatthequestion
“Whatdoyouseethatmakesyousaythat?”isaquestionthatismetacogntiveinnatureasitasksthe
individualtoreflectontheirthinkingprocessandidentifywhatledthemtoacertainconclusion.Thus,I
6
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
willexploreboththecognitiveuniversalsandcurrentresearchthatexaminesthemetacognitiveskills
possessedbychildreninthisagerange.
UniversalCognitiveDevelopmentfromAgesThreethroughSix
Atheoristwhoexploredtheconceptofuniversalstagesofdevelopment,andwhoseworkhas
hadahugeinfluenceonthefieldsofpsychologyandeducation,istheworkofJeanPiaget.Although
Piaget’sworkhasbeenexploredinarangeofsourcesandtoagreater-depththenIwillundertakehere,
hisconsiderationofchildreninhisPreoperationalStage(ages2-7)ofdevelopmentisofparticular
interest(seeCole&Cole,2001;Feldman,1980;Henniger,2005;Larkin,2010;Piaget&Inhelder,2000;
andRogoff,1990andforin-depthreviewsofhisworkinconnectiontometacognitionand/orthe
creativearts).Tenetsofthisstageincludeanincreasingabilitytoclassifyandnameobjectswithinthe
world,aswellasanincreaseintheabilitytouselanguageasaregulatorytool.Onesuchskillwithinthis
rangeisanincreaseintheabilitytolabelobjectsintheenvironment(Flavell,1979).Herewecansee
intersectionswithHousen’sAccountiveStage,thefirststageofaestheticdevelopment,inwhich
individualsfocusonlabelingconcreteaspectsoftheimageordevelopingnarratives.
AnotheraspectofPreoperationalStageiswhatPiagetreferstoasegocentrism,orthedifficulty
childrenhavetakingtheperspectiveofothers(Piaget&Inhelder,2000).ApointraisedbyFeldman
(1980)thatisimportanttoconsideristhat,upontheageof2,childrendonotautomaticallygainallof
theskillsofastage,nordoalloftheskillsprogressinanequal,predictablefashion.Infact,Feldman
citesevidencethat“ittakeschildrenseveralyearstoachievedifferentconceptsbelongingtothesame
stageofdevelopment;aminimumoffivetosixyearsseemstoberequiredfortheacquisitionofvarious
conservationconcepts.(p.4)”Traitsthatareconsideredtenetsofastage,suchasegocentrism,arealso
constantlyintransitionanddevelopment.ThisisevidencedinthetranscriptsofVTSdiscussionswith
KindergartenandPreschool-agedchildren.IndiscussingtheanimalinHenriRousseau’sTheSleeping
7
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
Gypsy(seeAppendixB),thepreschoolchildrenofferedtheiropinionsandbuiltoffofoneanother’s
responsestodeterminethetypeofanimal.Towardsthebeginningofthediscussion,onechildoffered
thattheanimalwasatigerbecauseithadatail.Otherchildrenthenofferedthattheythoughtitcould
bealionbecauseoftheamountofthehairandthattigersdon’thavehairinfront.Towardstheendof
thediscussion,thefirstchildraisedhishandandcontributedthathehadchangedhismind,thathealso
thoughtitwasalionbecauseofthehair.Iwouldarguethattheabilitytobeopentoother
interpretations,alternatereasoning,andrevisionsofpriorconclusionspointstohowskillsmay
transitionatdifferentratesindifferentdomainsthroughoutastage.Thisisseeninhowconservationof
differentproperties(mass,length,etc)occursatdifferenttimesforchildren(Elkind,1961).In
connectionwiththis,itmaybethatskillscouldemergeinaVTSdiscussionbeforemanifestinginother
domains(orviceversa)duetothenatureofthediscussionitself.
Therefore,afinalconsideration,forthepurposesofthisexploration,shouldbetounderstand
howchildreninthisagerangearelikelytoprocessnewinformation.Inexaminingtheintersections
betweenartandcognitivedevelopment,Efland(2002)notedthattheschemataofyoungerchildrenis
moredependentontheirsensesandconcreteenvironment(p.25).BarbaraRogoff(1990)considered
children’sdevelopmenttobelargelyinfluencedbytheirinteractionswithpeersandadults,inthespirit
ofLevVygotsky’stheoriesregardingculturalinfluencesandtheZoneofProximalDevelopment(ZPD)
(Lim,2004;Vygotsky,1986).ToRogoff,the“developmentofyoungchildrenintoskilledparticipantsin
societyisaccomplishedthroughchildren’sroutine,andoftentacit,guidedparticipationinongoing
culturalactivitiesastheyobserveandparticipatewithothersinculturallyorganizedpractices.(1990,p.
16)”ThesepointsagainlinkbacktothetraitsattributedtothoseintheAccountiveStageofaesthetic
development,withafocusonconcreteobservationsandlabeling.While,asnotedearlier,Housen’s
8
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
stagesofaestheticdevelopmentarenotlinkedtobiologicalage,itcanbeassumedthatyoungchildren
whohavehadlittleexposuretoartwouldbewithinthefirststage.
DefinitionsofMetacognitiveDevelopment
AspecificaspectofcognitionthattiesintotheskillsusedduringaVTSdiscussionis
metacognition.Metacognitionconsistsofalargeumbrellaofskills,butisgenerallyunderstoodtobe
howwethinkaboutthinking(seeFlavellet.al.,1995;Harriset.al.,2010;Jacobs,2004;Larkin,2010;
Peskin&Astington,2004;Schneider,2010;Schwartz&Perfect,2002forarangeofdefinitions).Flavell
(1979)hasbeengenerallycreditedwithfirstlabelingmetacognitionand,fromthere,researchershave
workedtounderstanditsmyriadofcomponents.Theskillsthatfallundermetacognitioncoverabroad
rangeofcategories:fromknowingthesourcesofourownbeliefsandthoseofothers,toregulating
actionsandemotions,tohowweconsiderourmemories,toself-explanationandassessment(tonamea
few).Ascanbeimagined,metacognitionandcognitionexistina“reciprocalrelationship,”andwork
togethertoshapeouractionsandunderstandings(Shamiret.al.,2009,p.48).Ourabilityto
comprehend,label,andreflectuponourownthinkingisdependentuponourcapacityforthoughtata
certainmomentintime.
Metacogntionisalsobaseduponourabilitytoemployskillsthatareassociatedwiththisrealm
ofcognition:includingmemory,labeling,andproblemsolving.Returningtomyobservationsofyoung
children,themajorityoftheircommentsfallintotherealmoflabeling(ex.Iseeahouse)asopposedto
higherorderthinking(ex.ThehouseappearstobefallingdownandIamwonderingiftheartistis
commentingonthestateofthefamily)becausethisiswheretheyaredevelopmentally.Whilethereare
alsoexamplesofnarrative,asevidencedinthediscussionthatopenedthispaper,themajorityofthe
observationsincludelabelingobjects.Followingalongthislineofreasoning,childrencouldrevealtheir
abilityforself-explanationthroughthecontentoftheobservations.Inotherwords,ifIamsayingitisa
9
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
house,thenIamreadytobescaffoldedtoconsiderwhyitisahouse.BuildingoffofShamirand
colleagues(2009)understandingoftherebeingareciprocalrelationshipbetweencognitionand
metacognition,Carr(2010)highlightsthatcognitionneedstobeinplacebeforetheknowledgecanbe
reflecteduponatthemetacognitivelevel(p.180).
Metacognitionhascommonlybeendividedintothecategoriesofdeclarative,procedural,and
conditionalmetacognition(seeLarkin,2010andSchneider&Lockl,2002forparticularlyusefulreviews).
Declarativeknowledgeiscommonlyreferredtoas“knowingthat”,proceduralas“knowinghow”,and
conditionalas“knowingwho,where,andwhy.(Schneider&Lockl,2002)”Ofthesethreecategories,
declarativemetacognitionwouldholdthemostrelevancefortheskillsusedinaVTSdiscussion.Larkin
(2010)considers“knowingthat”tobe“theknowledgethatwehaveandbuildupaboutourownand
other’scognition.(p.37)”Forexample,ourknowledgeofwhatweknowandrememberisconsideredto
beapartofdeclarativeknowledge.Proceduralmetacogntionwouldincludeachild’sabilitytoreflecton
theprocessofaVTSdiscussion.Forexample,atthebeginningofthediscussionwhenchildrenareable
toprovidetheinformationthattheywillbelooking“fromtoptobottom,sidetoside,atthebigthings
andatthelittlethings”whentheyarelookingattheworkofart.
OtheraspectsofmetacognitionthatareparticularlyrelevanttoVTSincludetheabilityto
provideexplanationsforourreasoningandevaluatingresponses.ChengPui-wah(2008)describesthis
typeofmetacognitionas“meta-learning,”orourthoughtsconnectedtoourthinkingduringthelearning
process.InVisualThinkingStrategies,particularlyinQuestion2,weareaskingchildrentoprovide
explanationsfortheirperceptions.While“meta-learning”isultimatelyaformofthinkingaboutour
thinking,asdemonstratedbythewiderangeoftypesofmetacognition,itisimportanttounderstand
whataspectofmetacognitionweareexploringinordertoexamineitsemergenceanddevelopmentin
youngchildren.
10
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
FindingsinMetacognitiveDevelopmentintheEarlyChildhoodYears Therearedifferingconclusionsonwhenchildrendeveloptheabilitytothinkmetacogntively,
withsomeevidencepointingtoemergencearoundsevenoreight(Brown,2002;Dewey,1910),and
othersdocumentingevidenceinchildrenasyoungasthree(Larkin,2010;Whitebreadet.al.,2009).In
examiningthesestudies,keyfactorsthatinfluenceitsemergenceincludehowmetacognitionisdefined
andhowitismeasured.Asreviewed,metacognitioncoversawidearrayofskills,anditisimportantto
beclearinwhatisbeinglookedfor.Justasperspective-takingpresentsitselfinchildreninavarietyof
formsandinavarietyofcontexts,sotoodoaspectsofmetacognitionemerge.Sometheoristshave
raisedthepointthatmeasuringmetacognitionviaself-reportingwillnaturallyexcludeyoungerchildren
duetotheconstrictionsoflanguage(Larkin,2010;Whitebreadet.al,2009).However,incontrollingfor
languageabilityandmultiplemethodsofmeasurement,thereisstrongevidenceofthepresenceofa
rangeofmetacognitiveskillsaschildrenmovefromthreetosix.Whitebreadandhiscolleagues(2009)
developedanobservationalchecklistknownastheChildren’sIndependentLearningDevelopment
(CHILD3-5)checklisttodocumentmetacognitioninchildrenfromagesthreethroughfive.Whilethe
studyfocusedprimarilyuponemotionalcontrolandregulation,oneoftheindicesonthescalethatthey
developedrelatesdirectlytoaskillthatcanemergewithinVTSdiscussions.Themeasureexamines
whetherthechild“adoptspreviouslyheardlanguageforownpurpose,”askillthatchildrenuseinVTS
discussionsastheyincorporatethevocabularyandphrasingsoftheirteachersandfriendsintotheirown
observations(p.76).
ThefollowingexampleisfromtheKindergartenclassroomdiscussionofPaulManship’s(1939)
GroupofBears(seeAppendixC).Thechildrenhadpreviouslyadoptedtheword“background”intotheir
observationsand,duringthecourseofLesson3,afemalechildbothincorporatedthewordbackground
andworkedtoextendittodescribeanewconcept.Referencingthebackdropasevidencethatthe
11
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
imageappearedtobeaphotograph,thechildreferredtothebottomoftheimageasthe“bottomground.”Thisexampledemonstratesacapacitytosynthesizenewinformationandunderstandhowit
canbeappliedforpersonaluse.However,justasanobservationalcheck-listopensupnewbehaviorsto
beconsideredasmetacognitivethought,italsoleavesroomformisinterpretation.
Justasitisimportanttounderstandwhatisbeinglookedfor,andhowitismeasured,when
examiningmetacognition,itisalsoimportanttolinkourunderstandingofmetacognitionbacktothe
cognitiveskillsthatarealsopresentinthisagerange.Carr(2010)highlightsthat“theabilitytouse
metacognitiveskills,suchasmonitoringandplanningduringproblemsolving,isinfluencedbythe
students’stateofcurrentconceptualunderstanding.(p.180)”Therefore,itisimportanttounderstand
themetacognitiveskillsusedduringaVTSdiscussionandunderstandiftheyliewithinthepotentialof
conceptualunderstandingforchildreninthisagerange.Whileresearchhaspointedtothepresenceof
metacognitivethoughtinchildrenasyoungasthree,theredoesappeartobeacriticaltransitionin
metacognitivethoughtthatoccursfromthreethroughsixyearsofage.
Instudying3-5year-oldchildren’sabilitytoidentifyandrememberthesourceoftheirbeliefs,
GopnikandGraf(1988)didfindlimitationstothetypesofquestionschildrenwereabletoanswer,
particularlythoseattheyoungerendofthespectrum.Intheirstudy,GopnikandGraffoundthat3yearoldchildrenwereunabletoprovideananswertothequestion“Howdoyouknowthat?”whenasked
aboutthesourcesoftheirbeliefs(p.1367).WhilethisquestionissimilartoQuestion2ofVTS(“Whatdo
youseethatmakesyousaythat?”)Iwouldarguethatgroundingthequestioninconcretevisualimages
hasthepossibilityofmakingsuchreflectivequestionsmoreaccessibletoyoungerlearnersinorderto
remainintheirZoneofProximalDevelopment.ThisemergesintheresponsestoQuestion2seenin
discussionswith4year-olds.Whenaskedtoexplaintheirreasoningforidentifyingananimaloran
object,thePreschoolchildrenoftenrespondedwithacolororaparticularfeature(ex.notingthatitwas
12
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
alionbecauseithadamaneorthatitwastheskybecauseitwasblue).Suchreasoningisinlinewith
thegeneralcognitiveabilitiesofclassifyingandisanappropriateresponsethatisgroundedinwhatis
physicallypresentintheimage.Heyman(2008)alsoprovidesanin-depthreviewofliteraturefocusing
onhowchildrenasyoungasthreeemploycriticalthinkingwhenlearningfromothers.Consistent
throughoutthereviewwasthefindingthat3year-oldchildrenarecapableofdiscerningbetween
differenttypesofsources.Forexample,thatchildrenasyoungasthreecanidentifyadoctorovera
mechanicasamorereliablesourceofinformationregardinghowtocareforabrokenbone.
Movingfromthreetofouryearsofage,fouryearoldchildrenhavebeenfoundtobeableto
comprehendandusementalverbssuchas“know”and“think.(Peskin&Astington,2004,p.258)”The
emergenceofmentalverbsinyoungchildrenisalsosupportedbytheresearchofSchneider(2010)and
SchneiderandLockl(2002).Additionally,fouryearoldchildrenarecapableofemployingmetacognition
inpeer-basedscenarios,inwhichage-peersworktohelponeanotherwithproblemsolvingscenarios.
Shamirandcolleagues(2009)foundthatproceduralmetacognitionemergedtoahigherdegreeinpeerassistedlearningthaninself-reportswhenlookingatchildrenranged3-5(p.57).DeannaKhuncitesan
importantskillthatemergesbetweentheagesoffourandsix,namelytheabilitytodistinguishtheory
fromevidence(Khun,1999;Larkin,2010).Inherresearch,Khunaskedyoungchildrenwhytheyknew
thatapersonwonaracebasedonthecontentofapicture.Childrenattheyoungerendofthespectrum
weremorelikelytoprovideatheory(ex.“becausehehasfastsneakers”)asopposedtochildrenatthe
olderendoftheagerangewhowereabletoprovideevidencebasedonwhatwaspresent(ex.“he’s
holdingthetrophy”)(Khun,1999,p.20).Again,whilethissuggeststhatthereisapointatwhichchildren
aretooyoungtoprovideevidencefortheirassertions,itispossiblethatthehighlycontextualized
natureofthequestion“Whatdoyouseethatmakesyousaythat?,”maymakethequestionmore
accessibletoyoungerlearners.Finally,growthintheabilitytoprovideself-explanationshasbeen
13
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
showninchildrenatthelaterendofthisagerangewhentheyareprovidedwithapredictable
environment.Againthislinksbacktoourknowledgeofproceduralmetacognition.Oncethereiscomfort
withtheformat,thechildcanreflectonitsuseandapplythatknowledgetothesituationathand.In
workingwithfiveyearolds,SieglerandLin(2010)foundthatchildrenincreasinglyusedevidencebased
reasoningovermultipletrialstoexplainananswerprovidedbyanexperimenter(p.86).Thissuggests
thatself-explanationispossibleinyoungerlearners,butthattheymayrequireaperiodoftimeinwhich
tobecomeaccustomedtothequestionsthatareinherenttotheVTSdiscussion.
Ultimately,howweviewcognitiveandmetacognitiveabilityisattheheartofhowwe
understanditsintersectionswithVTS.InaVTSdiscussion,participantsareaskedtogivevoicetotheir
perceptions,explainthevisualinformationthatgaveformtosaidobservations,andevaluateand
connecttheirobservationstothoseoftheirpeers.Notonlyareweinterestedinlabeling,explanation,
andevaluation,butweneedtoknowiftheseskillsareaccessibletochildrenfromagesthreethrough
six.Basedonthereviewedresearch,theredoesappeartobeatransitioninskillsaschildrenmove
throughthisrangeandthatchildrenattheyoungerendofthespectrummaybeonthecuspof
necessaryskills,butnotquiteready.Thatbeingsaid,itdoesappearthatchildrenasyoungasfouryears
ofagehavetheskillstobothparticipateinVTSdiscussionsandanswerthequestion“Whatdoyousee
thatmakesyousaythat?”whenaskedinapredictableenvironment.
TheImpactofCognitiveDevelopmentonVisualThinkingStrategies
VisualThinkingStrategiesisamethodologydesignedtobesensitivetolearnersatdifferent
aestheticdevelopmentalstages,andthereisstrongevidencethatcurrentunderstandingsofcognitive
developmentcanbeusedtorefineVTStobesensitivetotheneedsandcapabilitiesofyoungerlearners.
TheareasinwhichthereisthepotentialforimpactingVTSisin(1)howweconsidertheprogressionof
14
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
skills,(2)whenweaskQuestion2withchildren,(3)howdiscussionsarefacilitated,and(4)inhow
childrenmakemeaningfromtheimagethroughthecourseofthediscussion.
ProgressionofSkills
Aknowledgeofcognitivedevelopmentcaninfluencehowweconsidertheprogressionofskills
inaVTSdiscussion.Ifweconsiderchildrentobelongtoacertainstageofdevelopment–whetheritis
Piaget’sPreoperationalStageorHousen’sAccountiveStage–itisimportanttorememberthatthere
existsawiderangeofskillswithinthestagesthemselvesthatbenefitfrominstructionandintervention.
Regardingskillsassociatedwithmeta-learning:Kindergartnershavebeenshowntobenefitfrom
instructionthatincorporatespredictablequestions,andthuscreatesopportunitiestobuildupontheir
proceduralmetacognition.Inexaminingtheuseofprobestoelicitmetacognitivetalkaboutwriting,
Jacobs(2004)foundthatchildrengrewintheirabilitytorespondtothequestionsoverthecourseofthe
academicyearandincreasinglyusedmentalverbssuchas“thinking”intheiranswers(p.20).Notonly
didJacobsfindthatKindergartenerswere“capableofmetacognitivethought,”butalsothat“thequality
ofanswersappearedtogrowovertime”duringthecourseoftheacademicyear(p.22).Therefore,
facilitatorsofVTSwithyoungerlearnersshouldanticipatethatwhiletheremaybesomeinitial
expressedinabilitytorespondtoQuestion2uponfirstbeingexposedtoit,youngchildrenhavetheskills
neededtogrowintheirresponsestothequestionoverthecourseofmonths.Whatismore,that
repetitionandpredictabilityareimportantpartsoftheprocess.
WhenWeAskQuestion2
AccordingtoBrown(2002),onceaskillbecomesautomated,theskillbecomesopento
reflectionandevaluation,andthusopentometacognitionaswellastransfer.Thishasimportant
implicationsforhowVTSisviewedasitcouldsuggestthatchildrenneedtobecomecomfortablewith
thefirstquestionofVTS(Whatdoyousee?)beforetheyareabletoprovideself-reasoningorreflection
15
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
fortheirresponses.However,itbecomesimportanttoconsiderexactlywhatskillsneedtobe
automated.Iwouldarguethatchildrenwiththeabilitytolabelandcategorizecomfortablyarewithin
rangetobechallengedbybeingaskedtoprovidereasoningfortheirobservations.Inexploringthe
applicationofcognitiveskills,PerkinsandSalomon(1989)echothatusingtheskillinawidevarietyof
situationsandbuildingupconfidenceisanecessaryelementfortransfer(p.22-3).
Carr(2010)impliesthatthereisarelationshipbetweenmetacognitionandcognition;thatour
abilitytoreflectonourthinkingisconnectedtoourcurrentcognitiveability(p.188).Thereciprocal
relationshipbetweenmetacognitionandcognitionsuggeststhatthechildrenthemselveswilltellus
whenandforwhatQuestion2shouldbeaskedfor.Thus,ifthechildsays“Iseeaboy,”thenthere
shouldbetheknowledgepresenttoexplainwhatsheseesthatmakeshersayit’saboy.Similarly,ifthe
childobserves“Iseeaboywhoissad,”hisorheradditionalinformationisindicatingthepossibilityof
evaluatingamorecomplexconcept.ThisknowledgecanthentransfertohowVTSisfacilitated.In
examiningthetypesofintellectualbehaviorusedduringreasoningactivities,BenjaminBloomand
colleagues(1956)identifiedahierarchyofsixtypesofresponsestoknowledgewithinthecognitive
domainofdevelopment.Thesetypesare(frommostbasictomostcomplex):knowledge,
comprehension,application,analysis,synthesis,andevaluation.AnimpactofBloom’staxonomyon
educationalpracticeisthatthequestionsthemselvescanbeofvaryingdifficultyinwhattheyareasking
for.Ifafacilitatorisworkingwithagroupthatheorsheisunfamiliarwith,researchwouldimplythat
eventheyoungestofschoolagechildrenarecapableofansweringQuestion2,andthatitwouldbe
possibletogetasenseforwherethegroupisasawholebyaskingprobesthatarelesscomplexatthe
onsetofthediscussionandraisingdifficulty(basedontheresponsesofthegroup)asthediscussion
progresses.
16
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
CorrespondingtoHousen’sstagesare9domains(subdividedinto63issues)thataremeantto
describetherangeofpotentialresponsestoaworkofart.Forexample,inthedomainofassociation
(whenpartsoftheimagethatremindtheviewerofotherobjects,events,orhistoricaleras),statements
canrangefromidiosyncratictoidentificationandempathywiththeworkofart(Fairchild,1991,p.270).
Idiosyncraticresponsesarethe“lookslike”responsesthatmayormaynotbeobvioustootherpeople
lookingatthesameimage,forexampleit“lookslikeadvertising”(Housen,1983,p.259).Itmaybethat
withinthesedomains,thereareissuesthatareeasierormoredifficulttoprovideself-explanationsfor.
WhilethefacilitationguidedevelopedbyHousenandYenawine(2000)recommendswaitinguntillater
intheyeartobeginaskingQuestion2withyoungerlearnerswhoarenewtoVTS,Ibelievethatcareful
andthoughtfulfacilitationisakeythatcanopenthisquestiontoyoungchildren.
FacilitationoftheDiscussion
Carefulandthoughtfulfacilitationthatisinformedbyknowledgeofcognitiveandmetacogntive
thoughtcouldalsoimpacthowchildrenengagewithQuestion2andlearnfromoneanother.Jacobs’
(2004)workwithaskingkindergartner’sevaluativequestionsregardingtheirwritingsuggeststhatthere
aredifferentlevelsofmetacognitivequestionsintermsofdifficulty.Outofthedifferentprobesasked,
childrenhadthetrickiesttimewiththequestion,“Howdoyouthinkthatideacameintoyourmind?(p.
21)”However,inlinewiththesuggestionthatpredictabilityisimportantforyoungerlearners(Shamir
et.al.,2009),theabilitytorespondtothatquestionincreasedovertime.DuringthePreschoolVTS
discussions,therewasalsoanincreaseinchildren’sabilitytorespondtoQuestion2,with“Idon’tknow”
responsesdecreasingtoanaverageofoneperdiscussion(orapproximatelyoneoutofeveryfifteen
observations)aftertwolessonsofbeingexposedtoQuestion2.Thissuggeststhatitistobeexpected
thatyoungchildrenmayhaveadifficulttimewhenfirsthearingQuestion2duetothenewnessofit,but
thatitisaquestiontheyarecapableofansweringwithtimeandexperience.EvenasanadultIcan
17
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
readilyrecallsituationswhen,evenifImighthavepossessedananswer,Iwasunabletoanswera
questionduetotheunfamiliarityofitswording.Time,experience,andlanguageskillsarenecessary
componentsoftheexperience.Itthenbecomestheresponsibilityofthefacilitatortorespondto
answersof“Idon’tknow”inamannerthatleavesthedooropenforfutureexplorationandrisk-taking.
Thiswouldthenleaveopenthepossibilitythattherearethingsthatwewonderaboutthatwemaynot
knowtheanswersto,andthatquestioningisanactivepartoftheprocess.
Inexaminingthescienceprogram,Let’sThink,Larkin(2010)highlightedtheimportantrole
playedbytheteacher.AccordingtoLarkin,theroleoftheteacheris“toclarifyideas,tochallengethe
children’sthinking,toactasamemorystoreforthediscussion,andtosummarise(sic)atanappropriate
point.(p.52)”TheLet’sThinkprogram,alongsidetheirdescriptionoftheroleoftheteacher,hasclear
correlationstoVTS.Itemphasizeshowtheteacherplaysacrucialroleinmakingtheactivityaccessible,
challenging,andanenvironmentforself-reflection.Italsodemonstrateshowthefacilitatorispartofthe
processindevelopingcriticalthinkingandmetacognitionthroughaskingforevidence,modeling
neutrality,andrespondingconditionallytoobservations.
MakingMeaninginaVisualThinkingStrategiesDiscussion
ThefindingsofKoroscik(1984)supportwhatisalreadyknowninVTS:thathavingtheabilityto
focusonsemanticmeanings,andbeingencouragedtofocusonprocess,leadstogreatermeaning(pp.
331-333;Housen,2001-2).Byaskingchildrenthroughouttheprocesstoexplaintheirreasoning,
reflectionandevaluationbecomeongoingcomponentsofthediscussion.Reflectivethoughtbecomesa
habituatedskillratherthanataskthatisrelegatedtotheendoftheprocess.Thisisseenevenwith
KindergartenandPreschool-agedchildrenwho,byJanuaryofayearworkingwithVTSmethodology,
beginincluding“because”statementsintotheirobservationsbeforebeingaskedQuestion2.Evaluation
andexplanationbecomesomethingthatisjustdone.Observationsbecomestatementsthatare
18
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
interconnectedwiththeavailableevidence.Thisinfluencesthepossibilityoftransfer,because,asnoted
previously,onceaskillbecomesautomateditisopentotransfer(Brown,2002).Beyondconnecting
perceptionandevidence,Larkin(2010)assertsthataskingevaluativequestionsthroughouttheprocess
alsoworkstoensurethatthecontentofthediscussionisnotforgotten.(p.64).Thereisalsothe
questionofwhatkindsofprobesencouragemeaningmaking.IntheLet’sThinkprogram,teachers
reportedthatchildrenrespondedmoreevaluativelyto“how”questionsasopposedto“why”questions
(Larkin,2010,p.109).Ultimately,wehaveseenthatchildrenages3-6arecapableofevaluativethought
andthat,throughconsiderationsthatkeepthemethodologyofVTSintact,facilitatorscanworktomake
artandQuestion2moreaccessibletoyoungchildren.Question2alreadyopensthedoortomore
evaluativeresponsesandthejobthenbecomestomakefacilitationbothaccessibleandchallenging.
TheImpactofVisualThinkingStrategiesonCognitiveDevelopment
JustasknowledgeofdevelopmentcaninformimplementationofVTS,VTSalsostandstoimpact
thedevelopmentofyoungchildren.Previousresearchstudieshavedocumentedhow,longitudinally,
participationintheVTSmethodologyimpactsAestheticDevelopment(Housen,2001-2)ingrades2and
older.Beyondthebenefitstoaestheticdevelopment,thereisalsostrongsupportingevidencethat
suggestspossiblebenefitstochildrenages3-6inmultipledomains.VTSpossessesspecificbenefitsfor
thedevelopmentofyoungchildrenduetotheenvironmentfosteredbythelessons.Thisenvironment
includestheartimagesthemselves,theroleofopen-endedinquirywithinthecontextofart,andthe
influenceofpeersandsociallearning.Justastheearlierhighlightedskillsofcognitiveandmetacognitive
thoughtwereshowntobeavailabletochildrenfromthreethroughsix,thissectionwillhighlight
researchofprogramssimilartoVTStoemphasizetheimportantroleplayedbythismethodologyfor
youngchildren.ThinkingbacktotheworkofFeldman(1980)andhowthenon-universaldomainsof
19
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
developmentgrowduetoexternalintervention,theevidencesuggeststhattheskillstargetedbyaVTS
discussionaddresssuchdomainsofdevelopmentandthusbecomeopentointervention.
WhydiscussArt?
ThroughVTSchildrenareexposedtomultipleworksofartforanextendedperiodoftime,and
theyarealsoprovidedwithopportunitiesforextendedreflectionandinterpretation.Efland(2002)
touchesuponwhytheartobjectsthemselvesarebeneficialtoanopen-endedenvironment,likethatof
aVTSdiscussion.Hestatesthat,“oneanswertothequestionofwhytheartsarecognitivelysignificant
isthattheyprovideencountersthatfosterthecapacitytoconstructinterpretations.(p.161)”Göncϋ
andRogoff(1998),builduponthebeneficialnatureofartinhighlightingthebenefitofcategorization
tasksthatfocusedonconcreteobjects(p.336).Forexample,itiseasiertolabelthesimilaritiesbetween
catsanddogswhenviewingthetwosidebyside.Beyondtheconcretebasisforthediscussion,the
abilitytoconstructinterpretationsofartobjectsisvaluableonavarietyoflevels.Eisner(2005)outlines
thesebenefitssuccinctly:“theartsteachstudentstoactandjudgeintheabsenceofrule,torelyonfeel,
topayattentiontonuance,toactandappraisetheconsequencesofone’schoices,andtoreviseand
thentomakeotherchoices.(p.208)”Becausetheartsareconsideredanopen-endedexperience,
childrenbecomefreetoviewaworkofartfromavarietyofperspectivesanddrawtheirown
conclusions.Ratherthansearchingfortheonecorrectanswerbeforemovingon,childrenaregiventhe
spaceandtimetoconsidermultipleviewpoints.IndiscussingEdvardMunch’sSpringtimeontheKarl
JohannStreet(AppendixD),theKindergartenstudentswonderedasagroupabouttheweather
depictedintheimage.Thepaintingdepictsapromenadeinwhichpeoplearewalkingwithumbrellas
andispaintedusingflecksofcolor.Onestudentinitiallywonderedifitwasraining,notingtheumbrellas
andtheflecksofcolor.Asecondstudentaddedthathethoughtthatitwassnowinginsteadbecausethe
flecksappearedtobewhite.Afinalstudentthencontributedthatshethoughtthatitwasn’trainingor
20
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
snowing.Shenotedthatsometimespeopleuseumbrellastoprotectthemselvesfromthesunandthat,
perhaps,thefleckswereatoolusedbytheartisttomakethepictureseemmorereal.Echoingthework
ofEisner,Housen(2001b)effectivelysummarizesthebeneficialcharacteristicsofthearts:(1)thatitis
accessible,(2)itisambiguous,(3)itiscompelling,(4)theexperienceunfoldsovertime,and(5)it
addressesenduringthemes(p.24).Artprovidesanexperiencethroughwhichchildrenareableto
constructtheirownopinionsandhavethoseopinionstestedbytheirpeers.
OpenInquiryinVisualThinkingStrategies
Asartisopentomultipleinterpretations,itnaturallyfostersaspacewherechildrenare
encouragedtoengageindebateandinquiry.Whatismore,theliteraturewouldsuggestthatthe
structureofaVTSdiscussion,combinedwiththeartimage,worktogethertomakedebateandinquiry
thatmuchmoreaccessibletolearners.Returningagaintothegoalofimprovingcriticalthinkingskills,
severalresearchershavehighlightedtheimportanceofcontextinteachingcognitiveandmetacognitive
skills(Brown,2002;Perkins&Salomon,1989;Prawat,1991).Thecumulativeevidenceisthatthe
teachingofcriticalthinkingskillsbestoccurswhenembeddedincontext.Larkin(2010)highlightsone
possiblecontextforyoungchildreninherevaluationoftheLet’sThink!program,andIarguethatVTS
providesyoungchildrenwithanotherstrongcontextforthedevelopmentofevaluationandreasoning
skills.Whilethishasalreadybeenillustratedwithchildreninoldergrades(Housen,2001-2),the
evidencesuggeststhatthereadilyaccessiblenatureoftheartworkdiscussedinaVTSdiscussion,
combinedwiththepoweroftheopen-endedsocialenvironmenttoscaffoldlearning,createanideal
environmentforthedevelopmentoftheseskills.ThinkingagaintohowthePreschoolersapproached
identifyingthelioninTheSleepingGypsy,theboy’srevisionfromlabelingthatanimalasatigerto
callingitalionhighlightshowthechildwasabletocomparetheobservationsofotherstohisown
beliefsandevaluateoneagainsttheother.
21
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
Additionally,theinterplayoftheworkofartandaninquiry-baseddiscussionmethodcreatesan
environmentinwhichchildrenarechallengedtoconsidertheopinionsofothers.GopnikandGraf
(1988)outlinetheimportanceforchildrentobeabletoidentifythesourcesoftheirbeliefsinstating,
“knowingaboutthesourceofabeliefplaysanimportantroleinevaluatingthebeliefandindeciding
howtrustworthyorjustifieditisandhoweasilyitshouldbediscarded.(p.1366)”VTSprovideschildren
withanimportantskillinthatitencouragesthemtoprovideexplanationsfortheirbeliefsinanopenendedlearningenvironmentinwhichthereisnotasetcorrectanswer.Withsuchflexibility,childrenare
empoweredtoraisedifferentopinionsandtohavetheopportunitytojustifythemwiththeir
perceptions.
TheSocialEnvironment
Thisinquirycannottakeplaceinavacuum,butrather,isdependentonthecollaborationof
peersduringaVTSdiscussion.Evidencehasfoundthattheinfluenceofpeersisparticularlybeneficialin
developingcriticalthinkingskillsinyoungchildrenasitexposesthemtoavarietyofopinionsandtothe
possibilitythatabreadthofideasexist(Heyman,2008).Acrossdomainsofdevelopment,social
interactionsprovidesanimpetusforchange.AsFeldman(1980)states,“thedesiretocommunicatewith
othersandtohaveothersacceptone’sviewsseemstoenergizethechangeprocess.(p.13)”VTScan
alsoinfluencehowyoungerlearners(andlearnersacrossageranges)approachproblemsolvingthrough
fosteringtheideathattherearemultiplewaystosolveaproblem.Amastery-orientedapproachto
learningissupportedbyanenvironmentinwhichthereare“challengingandopen-endedactivities,”and
opportunitiesforchildrento“engageinselfassessment.(Whitebreadet.al.,2009,p.68)”Thisisin
agreementwithLarkin’s(2010)findingsthatmetacognitivedevelopment“canonlybedonealongsidea
facilitationofempowermentandselforientedlearning.(p.28)”
22
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
VTSencouragesactiveparticipationandanenvironmentinwhichparticipantsshapethecourse
ofthediscussionthroughtheirobservationsregardingtheartimageandinteractionswithoneanother.
Inexaminingfiveyearoldchildren,GöncϋandRogoff(1998),foundthatchildrendemonstratedthe
highestlevelofsuccesswhenchildrenwereactivelyengagedparticipantsandwhenthegoalsofthe
activitywereclearlyarticulated.ThepredictablenatureoftheVTSdiscussion,inwhichthequestions
remainconstantalthoughthecontentwillchange,shouldthenhelptofosterengagement.Insupportof
thisidea,Larkin(2010)arguesthatitistheengagementitselfthatisnecessaryforthedevelopmentof
metacognitivethought.Shecritiquesmethodologiesthatonlyincludeareflectiveperiodattheendof
thelessonandrecommendsthatitremainembeddedthroughout(pp.6-7).AsLarkinisparticularly
focuseduponyoungerchildren,thispointstothepotentialneedforincludingQuestion2indiscussions
withKindergartnersandPreschoolers.Asdiscussedearlier,childreninthisagerangehave
demonstratedtheabilitytoreasonatametacognitivelevelandtounderstandthementalverbs
associatedwiththistypeofreasoning.Additionally,theinclusionofQuestion2encouragestheselfexplanationandtheextendedamountoftimespentlookingatartthatiscriticaltothedevelopmentof
metacognitiveskills.Finally,theinclusionofQuestion2throughoutthecourseofthediscussion
encourageschildrentoengagewithbothexperiential(participatingin)andreflective(evaluationof)
formsofintelligence.TheintegrationofthetwoformsofintelligencehasbeenfoundbyEfland(2002)to
beparticularlyimportanttothelearningprocess(p.25).Overall,VTShasparticularbenefitsforyoung
childrenduetothepredictablestructureofthelessons,theactiveandconversationalenvironment,the
basisonconcreteimagesthatareopentomultiplelevelsofinterpretation,theopportunitiesfor
childrentoprovideevidencefortheirreasoning,andtheemphasisoncriticalthought.
23
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
RemainingQuestionsandConclusions
Whatdoyouseethatmakesyousaythat?Itisaquestionthatchallengeslearnersofanyageto
takeasecondlook,reflect,andfindevidencefortheirperceptions.Itisaquestionthatisboth
challengingandpowerful,andonethatisoftenremovedfromthelearningprocess.Alltoooften,once
theright(orwrong)answerisreceived,itislabeledassuchandwemoveonwithoutpausingto
considerwhyorhowitisso.ThereisaclearpowertoQuestion2,andsomethingthatIhaveconsidered
throughoutiswhetherQuestion2isappropriatetoaskyoungchildren,howitmightbeapproachedto
makeitmoreaccessible,andwhataboutitsinclusioninaVTSdiscussionprovidesparticularbenefitsto
youngerlearners.
AninterestingidearaisedbyJacobs(2004)work,thathasalreadybeendiscussed,istheidea
thatsomeevaluative/reflectivequestionsaremoredifficultthanothers.Whilethereisonlyoneformat
forQuestion2,thefacilitatorhasthediscretiontochoosewhataspectofthestudent’scomment
Question2isaskedabout.Iraisedthepossibilitythatsomeconceptsmaybeeasierorhardertoreflect
on,andIbelievethatthisconceptisworthyofstudy.Notonlywoulditbenefitfacilitationforchildren
agesthreethroughsix,butitcouldprovideausefulframeworkforfacilitatorsworkingwithlearnersin
anyagerange.ThinkingaboutHousen’sstagesofAestheticDevelopment,graduatedfacilitationmay
alsobeaformofprovidingchallengestoviewersatanystageofdevelopment.Asmentionedpreviously,
VTSisdesignedtobebothchallengingandaccessibleforindividualsatthefirsttwostagesofAesthetic
Development.Graduatedfacilitationmaintainsthisaccessibilitywhilecontinuingtoprovidechallenges
toindividualsatstages3,4,and5.Whatisneededismorestudyofhowpeople,particularlychildren
fromages3-6,answerQuestion2basedonthetypesofpromptsthatarehypothesizedtobemoreor
lessdifficult.ForviewersintheAccountiveandConstructivestages,thesecondquestionofVTS
24
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
encouragesviewerstomovebeyondtheirinitialreactionsandtodelvefurtherintothenuancesofthe
image(Housen,2007).
AquestionraisedbyresearchintheVTSmethodologyiswhetherornottheskillstouchedupon
inaVTSdiscussiontransfertootherelementsofthechild’slife.Inexaminingtransferwithelementary
studentsinByron,Minnesota,Housen(2001-2)didfindevidenceoftransferofcriticalthinkingskills
whenchildreningrades2through5movedfromdiscussingworksofarttodiscussingnon-artor
materialobjects,butthatsuchtransfertookaminimumoftwoyearswithVTS.Inotherwords,children
firstgrewinaestheticstagewithinthecontextoflookingatartbeforetransferringtheskilltodiscussing
newcontent(materialobjects)inasimilarcontext(thestream-of-consciousinterview).Thisappearsto
supportBrown’s(2002)findingsthattransferispossiblewhenaskillbecomesautomated.Inregardsto
thisexploration,thequestionemergeswhetherornotsimilarevidenceoftransferwouldoccurwith
youngerchildren.Inconsideringtherelationshipbetweencognitiveskillsandthecontextinwhichthey
arelearned,PerkinsandSalomon(1989)foundthatcontextwasanintegralcomponenttoteaching
cognitiveskillsandthattransferwaspossiblewhentherewasthecombinationofaperceivedusefor
theskills,alargevarietyofsituationsinwhichtousetheskill,andahighlevelofmasteryintheskill
itself.
ThedomainsofknowledgeutilizedduringaVTSdiscussionareskillsandcan,assuch,be
encouragedtodevelopthroughtheinterventionofexternalsources.Asdemonstratedbyexamples
fromKindergartenersandPreschoolers,childreninthisagerangearecapableofansweringQuestion2.
Children’scomfortwithQuestion2isbenefitedbytime,experience,andapredictableenvironment
(Jacobs,2004;Shamiretal.,2009).Baseduponmyownobservationsintheclassroom,childrenare
capableofQuestion2butthequestionremainsastowhatthelongitudinalbenefitsaretobegained
throughbeginningthequestionearlierasopposedtolaterintheyear.Theresearchreviewedabove
25
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
suggeststhattheenvironmentprovidedbyVTSisbeneficialtothedevelopmentofmetacognitive
thought,aswellasprovidinganumberofotherbenefitstoyoungchildren.Returningtotheguiding
principlesofVTS,ifourgoalistodevelopcriticalthinkingskillsandweknowthatchildrenarecapableof
answeringaquestionthatwilldevelopcriticalreasoning,thenQuestion2shouldbeaskedtoyounger
children.
ThefocusofQuestion2thenistobenefitmetacognitivethoughtasopposedtomovingthechild
throughaestheticstages.Thatbeingsaid,IwouldnotsaythatQuestion2isuniversallyappropriatefor
everyone.Theliteraturesuggestsacriticalchangethatoccursaroundtheageof3or4,andIbelieve
thatweneedtoknowmoreabouthowchildrenattheyoungestendofthespectrumof3-6interact
withQuestion2.Ultimately,theroleofaskingyoungchildren“whatdoyouseethatmakesyousay
that?”istomaximizethetimespentlookingatartinanenvironmentthatencouragesreflectionand
evaluation.Itilluminatestheobservationprocess,sothateveryoneinthegroupbenefitsfromthe
observationsofeachindividual.
26
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
WORKSCITED
Bloom,B.,Englehart,M.Furst,E.,Hill,W.,&Krathwohl,D.(1956).Taxonomyofeducationalobjectives:
Theclassificationofeducationalgoals.HandbookI:Cognitivedomain.NewYork,Toronto:
Longmans,Green.
Brown,N.C.M.(2002).TheMeaningofTransferinthePracticesofArtEducation.NationalArt
EducationAssociation,43(1),83-102.
Carr,M.(2010).Theimportanceofmetacognitionforconceptualchangeandstrategyusein
mathematics.InH.S.Waters&W.Schneider(Eds.),Metacognition,StrategyUse,and
Instruction.pp.176-197.NewYork:NY,TheGuilfordPress.
Cole,M.,&Cole,S.R.(2001).TheDevelopmentofChildren(4thed.).NewYork,NY:Worth.
DeSantis,K.&Housen,A.(2009)ABriefGuidetoDevelopmentalTheoryandAesthetic
Development.NewYork,NY:VisualUnderstandinginEducation.
Dewey,J.(1910).HowWeThink.Boston,MA:D.C.Heath&Co.,Publishers.
Efland,A.D.(2002).Artandcognition:Integratingthevisualartsinthecurriculum.NewYork,NY:
TeachersCollegePress.
Eisner,E.W.(Ed.).(2005).ReimaginingSchools:theSelectedWorksofElliotW.Eisner.New
York,NY:Routledge.
Elkind,D,(1961).Children'sdiscoveryoftheconservationofmass,weight,andvolume:Piaget
replicationstudyII.JournalofGeneticPsychology,98,219-227.
Fairchild,A.W.(1991).AestheticExperience:CreatingaModel.CanadianJournalofEducation,
16(3),267-280.
Flavell,J.(1979).Metacognitionandcognitivemonitoring.AmericanPsychologist,34(10),906-911.
Flavell,J.H.,Green,F.L.,Flavell,E.R.,Harris,P.L.,&Astington,J.W.(1995).Youngchildren's
knowledgeaboutthinking.MonographsoftheSocietyforResearchinChildDevelopment,
60(1),i+iii+v-vi+1-113.
Feldman,D.H.(1980).Beyonduniversalsincognitivedevelopment.Norwood,NJ:AblexPublishing
Corporation.
Göncϋ,A.&Rogoff,B.(1998).Children’scategorizationwithvaryingadultsupport.American
EducationalResearchJournal,33(2),333.349.
Gopnik,A.,&Graf,P.(1988).Knowinghowyouknow:Youngchildren'sabilitytoidentifyand
rememberthesourcesoftheirbeliefs.ChildDevelopment,59,1366-1371.
27
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
Harris,K.R.,&Santangelo,T.,&Graham,S.(2010).Metacognitionandstrategiesinstructioninwriting.
InH.S.Waters&W.Schneider(Eds.),Metacognition,StrategyUse,andInstruction.pp.226-
256.NewYork:NY,TheGuilfordPress.
Henniger,M.L.(2005).TeachingYoungChildren:AnIntroduction.(3rded.)UpperSaddleRiver,NJ:
PearsonEducation,Inc.
Heyman,G.D.(2008).Children'scriticalthinkingwhenlearningfromothers.Currentdirectionsin
PsychologicalScience,17(5),344-347.
Housen,A.(2007).ArtViewingandAestheticDevelopment:DesigningfortheViewer.InP.
Villenueve(Ed.),FromPeripherytoCenter:ArtMuseumEducationinthe21stCentury.Reston,
VA:NationalArtEducationAssociationPress.RetrievedOctober16,2009fromVisual
UnderstandinginEducation’swebsite:http://www.vtshome.org/pages/vts-downloads.
Housen,A.C.(2001-2002)AestheticThought,CriticalThinking,andTransfer.ArtsandLearning
ResearchJournal.18,99-132.
Housen,A.C.(2001a).EyeoftheBeholder:Research,Theory,andPractice.RetrievedOctober
16,2009fromVisualUnderstandinginEducation’swebsite:
http://www.vtshome.org/pages/vts-downloads.
Housen,A.(2001b).MethodsforAssessingTransferfromArtViewingProgram.RetrievedOctober
2,2009fromERICdatabaseED457186.
Housen,A.(1983).“AestheticDevelopmentScoringManual”inTheEyeoftheBeholder:Measuring
AestheticDevelopment.Ed.D.Dissertation.HarvardUniversity,Cambridge,MA.
Housen,A.&Yenawine,P.(2000).VisualThinkingStrategies,BasicManual:GradesK-2.NewYork,NY:
VisualUnderstandinginEducation.
Khun,D.(1999).Adevelopmentalmodelofcriticalthinking.EducationalResearcher,28(2),16-46.
Koroscik,J.S.(1984).Cognitioninviewingandtalkingaboutart.TheoryintoPractice,23(4),330-
334.
Larkin,S.(2010)MetacognitioninYoungChildren.NewYork:NY,Routledge.
Lim,B.(2004).Aestheticdiscoursesinearlychildhoodsettings:Dewey,Steiner,andVygotsky.
EarlyChildDevelopmentandCare.174(5),473-486.
Parsons,M.(1987)HowWeUnderstandArt:ACognitiveDevelopmentAccountofAesthetic
Experience.NewYork,NY:CambridgeUniversityPress.
28
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
Perkins,D.N.,&Salomon,G.(1989).Arecognitiveskillscontextbound?EducationalResearcher,
18(1),16-25.
Peskin,J.,&Astington,J.W.(2004).Theeffectsofaddingmetacognitivelanguagetostorytexts.
CognitiveDevelopment,19,253-273.
Piaget,J.&Inhelder,B.(2000).ThePsychologyoftheChild.NewYork,NY:BasicBooks.
Prawat,R.S.(1991).Thevalueofideas:Theimmersionapproachtothedevelopmentofthinking.
EducationalResearcher,20(2),3-30.
Pui-wah,D.C.(2008).Meta-learningability–acrucialcomponentfortheprofessionaldevelopmentof
teachersinachangingcontent.TeacherDevelopment,12(1),85-95.
Rogoff,B.(1990).ApprenticeshipinThinking:CognitiveDevelopmentinSocialContext.NewYork,NY:
OxfordUniversityPress.
Schneider,W.&Lockl,K.(2002).Thedevelopmentofmetacognitiveknowledgeinchildrenand
adolescents.InT.J.Perfect&B.L.Schwart(Eds.),AppliedMetacognition.pp.224-257.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Siegler,R.S.&Lin,X.(2010).Self-explanationspromotechildren’slearning.InH.S.Waters&W.
Schneider(Eds.),Metacognition,StrategyUse,andInstruction.pp.85-112.NewYork:NY,The
GuilfordPress.
Shamir,A.,Mevarech,Z.R.,&Gida,C.(2009).Theassessmentofmeta-cognitionindifferent
contexts:Individualizedvs.peerassistedlearning.MetacognitiveLearning,4,47-61.
VisualThinkingStrategies,2010.GuidingPrinciples.RetrievedonApril6,2010from:
http://www.vtshome.org/pages/what-is-vts-guiding-principles.
Vygotsky,L.S.(1986)ThoughtandLanguage.Baskerville,MA:MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology.
Whitebread,D.,Coltman,P.,Pasternak,D.P.,Sangster,C.,Grau,V.,Bingham,S.,Almeqdad,Q.,&
DemetriouD.(2009).Thedevelopmentoftwoobservationaltoolsforassessingmetacognition
andself-regulatedlearninginyoungchildren.MetacognitionandLearning,4(1),63-85.
29
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
APPENDIXA
PabloPicasso(1901).ChildwithaDove[oiloncanvas].
PhotographretrievedApril6,2010from:
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/pablo-picasso-child-with-a-dove.
30
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
APPENDIXB
HenriRousseau(1987).TheSleepingGypsy[oiloncanvas].
PhotographretrievedApril6,2010from:http://michaeljosephtherapy.com/blog/2009/01/.
31
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
APPENDIXC
PaulManship(1939).GroupofBears[bronze].PhotographretrievedApril11,2009from:
http://www.mmaa.org/sites/4d7874e8-0b8f-4445-9da2-d00c8bec7902/uploads/Manship-Bears.jpg.
32
O’Leary-WhatDoYouSeeThatMakesYouSayThat?
APPENDIXD
EdvardMunch(1892).SpringtimeontheKarlJohannStreet[oiloncanvas].PhotographretrievedMay2,
2010fromhttp://www.moscow.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/munch.jpg.
33