Symbolics, Syntactics, and Semantics: Teaching a Language of Maps
Maps are attempts to communicate, but is mapping a language? Like verbal texts, maps carry several kinds of messages at the same time. Many map symbols represent facts about specific places. At the same time, their positions on the map can reveal distances, directions, patterns, feature associations, and other spatial relationships. Unfortunately, human brains seldom remember shapes and sizes accurately. A workshop “game” helps us understand why – the human visual system processes incoming images through multiple, parallel pathways, only some of which typically lead to conscious awareness. Decades of research by cartographers have given us a number of useful “rules of thumb” about symbol selection, size, visual hierarchy, color sequences, type design and placement, and so forth. More recent research by psychologists and neuroscientists (aided by new brain-scanning technology) has put some of those principles on more solid theoretical grounds. Together, these two lines of research lead to the disturbing conclusion that some popular educational approaches are unlikely to be successful. Educators should approach the teaching of the “vocabulary” and “grammar” of maps by observing what happens in effective foreign-language lessons. Students should be encouraged to practice the basic skills with well-designed maps about topics worth knowing. These activities help students acquire a stock of mental maps of causally important information, which their brains can use to help interpret the spatial patterns, feature associations, analogic positions, and other spatial relationships that they might perceive on new maps. It’s like learning how to learn!
KeywordsMap Communication model Spatial reasoning Spatial pattern Spatial association Spatial analogy
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
- Cavina-Pratasi, C., Kentridge, R. W., Heywood, C. A., & Milner, A. D. (2010). Separate channels for processing form, texture, and color: Evidence from fMRI adaptation and visual object agnosia. Cerebral Cortex, 20(10), 2819–2832.Google Scholar
- Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading in the brain. New York: Viking Penguin.Google Scholar
- Gattis, M. (Ed.). (2001). Spatial schemas and abstract thought. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
- Gersmehl, P. (1991). Language of maps. NCGE Pathways in Geography #1.Google Scholar
- Gersmehl, P. (2014). Teaching geography (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Gersmehl, P., & Gersmehl, C. (2006). Wanted: A concise list of neurologically defensible and assessable spatial-thinking skills. Research in Geographic Education, 8, 5–39.Google Scholar
- Gersmehl, P., & Gersmehl, C. (2011). Spatial thinking: Where pedagogy meets neuroscience. Problems of Education in the Twenty-First Century, 27, 47–65. (Special issue on geography education).Google Scholar
- Gregg, M. (1999). Mapping success: Reversing the Matthew effect. Research in Geographic Education, 1(2), 118–135.Google Scholar
- Harel, A., Gilaie-Dotan, S., Malach, R., & Bentin, S. (2010). Top-down engagement modulates the neural expression of visual expertise. Cerebral Cortex, 21(10), 2604–2618.Google Scholar
- Kosslyn, S. M. (1993). Elements of graph design. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.Google Scholar
- MacEachren, A. M. (1995). How maps work. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Muehrcke, P. (2005). Map use: Reading, analysis, and interpretation. Madison: JP Publications.Google Scholar
- Pinker, S. (1999). Words and rules: The ingredients of language. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Rey, G. D., & Buchwald, F. (2011). The expertise reversal effect: Cognitive load and motivational explanations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(1), 33–48.Google Scholar
- Soja, E. W. (1989). Postmodern geographies, the reassertion of space on critical social theory. London: Verso.Google Scholar
- Sokal, A., & Bricmont, J. (1998). Fashionable nonsense: Postmodern intellectuals’ abuse of science. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
- Thorndyke, P. W., & Stasz, C. (1979). Individual differences in knowledge acquisition from maps. Office of Naval Research R-2375-ONR.Google Scholar
- U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2018). Available at https://www.eia.gov/state/maps.php. Accessed 4 July 2018.