You are on page 1of 33

Understanding and Implementing

Visual Metaphor
November 20, 2015

Research Team: Authors & Co-PI’s Design Team


Dr. Matthew Peterson Joe Carpenter
Dr. Kevin Wise Bella Reinhofer
Dr. Robb Lindgren Sander Weeks
Dr. Donna Cox Qing He
Nitasha Mathayas Meme Betadam

This white paper was supported through the Seed Funding Program of the Illinois Learning
Sciences Design Initiative (ILSDI), College of Education, University of Illinois at Urbana-­
Champaign. In accordance with the ILSDI’s call for proposals, it addresses themes 1 & 2:
“Advancing the scientific understanding of learning in ways that substantially inform the
design of transformative learning tools and environments; & Designing and evaluating
physical, digital, and/or hybrid learning tools and spaces of the future.” We would like to
thank Fouad Abd-El-Khalick and ILSDI for supporting our exploration. — Peterson, Wise,
­Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas

Introduction

Science curriculum materials, particularly textbooks, rely heavily on diagrams and other
visualizations of phenomena to convey core concepts and critical ideas. While the content
of these visualizations is generally informed and vetted by scientists, the pedagogical design
and the ways in which these visualizations have been informed by principles of visual
communication are typically not given a high degree of scrutiny. And yet multimedia learn-
ing theory (Mayer, 2009) and other theories of instructional design argue that the manner
in which these visualizations are constructed can have a significant impact on how people
learn from them. We argue in this white paper that substantial research needs to focus on the
characteristics of effective visualizations for learning, and we propose specifically to inves-
tigate and create proof-of-concept designs that employ an especially promising element of
learning media: visual metaphor. We intend to explore the application of visual metaphors
to both non-interactive (textbooks) and interactive (tablet and handheld applications) visu-
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 2

alizations, and we ultimately aspire to assemble principles of visual learning design that can
be employed to domains that go beyond science education.
We approach this white paper with the following objectives:

f Introduce visual metaphor to a community of researchers, especially at the


University of Illinois, in the hope that opportunities for connection and
collaboration, as yet unforeseen by us, might be realized.
f Connect visual metaphor to science education.
f Introduce the notion of “productive research,” where authentic instructional
media are produced for empirical study and are subsequently made available to
teachers.
f Use the design process, where investigation is guided by speculative and relatively
rapid prototyping, to demonstrate some of the potential of visual metaphor for
science curriculum materials.
f Use the design process to conduct informal “tests” of visual metaphor, exposing
issues likely to arise in subsequent funded work on authentic media.
f Produce visual material that we can utilize in future proposals.

Roots and Expressions of Metaphor

Metaphor is ubiquitous in strategic communication. While language is most heavily


constructed with or constituted of metaphor, purely visual communication (that is, imagery
and diagrams) is the site of much metaphor use. While visual metaphor is currently employed
in science education, it is most recognizable in advertising and editorial design, where
designers are most concerned with convincing readers of something.
This paper is motivated by a paucity of empirical evidence concerning visual metaphor.
Two of the PI’s (Peterson & Wise) have been developing and interrogating a typology of
visual metaphor through examples from advertising, a domain of use where goals are rela-
tively basic and images most immediate. In this context, visual metaphor is used to influ-
ence outcomes of attention, memory, and attitude change (Phillips & McQuarrie, 2004). A
third PI (Lindgren) has conducted research on how body-based metaphors (e.g., my body
as an asteroid) can be employed to change students’ perspectives and facilitate learning
of challenging science concepts (Lindgren & Moshell, 2011). He is interested in how these
embodied metaphors can be evoked through print and digital media such as textbooks and
tablet devices. A fourth PI (Cox) has extensively used what we will call “fundamental” visual
metaphor (diagrammatic elements such as arrows) in dynamic visualizations of complex
data sets.
In a general sense metaphor is a device whereby one entity or concept is understood in
terms of another. Attributes of a source entity or concept are selectively mapped onto a target
entity or concept (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003; Forceville, 2002). The source thus helps to explain
the target. For instance, to say that you find much of literary theory indigestible is to employ
a metaphor with food that can’t be digested as source and literary theory as target. This use of
metaphor is intentional, an “artful deviation” in language. A comparably simple example of
metaphor in purely visual form is exhibited in Fig. A .1, where the source lion is mapped onto
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 3

the target house cat by the visualization of both source and target present and interacting.
The intention here in relating the two is to in turn better sell cat food made with real meat
(as a lion would surely demand).
But metaphor is more than a mere artful deviation in language, as it was first under-
stood in the context of rhetoric. It is foundational to human thought (Lakoff & Johnson,
2003). During infant and child development, new knowledge is assimilated in large part by
making associations with existing knowledge that persist—these associations are inherently
and authentically metaphorical in nature (Johnson, 1987). Figurative or linguistic metaphor,
in the most traditional sense as a rhetorical trope in verbal communication, is recast as a
product of this underlying human capacity of conceptual metaphor, rather than as an invented
device (Forceville, 2002; Koller, 2005). Thus, when metaphor is intentionally employed, the
designer is making use of an existing human apparatus. In education, for instance, the use
of metaphor allows students to employ a skill or an experience they have already acquired.
Furthermore, it takes advantage of existing knowledge (source) to explain the unfamiliar
(target). In writing about metaphor in science education, Gentner & Wolff (2000) argue that
metaphors transform prior knowledge into systems of ideas that are richer and more robust.
As humans process verbal and visual information with separate and distinctive resources
in working memory, and because verbal and visual codes have unique characteristics (Badde-
ley, 1998; Sadoski & Paivio, 2001), visual metaphor begs its own code-sensitive description. To
that end, a theory of visual metaphor is being negotiated, especially in communication and
advertising literature, which has increasingly been defined on its own terms (see: Forceville,
1996; Phillips & McQuarrie, 2004; Van Mulken, Le Pair, & Forceville, 2010) as opposed to
“fit” to standing rhetorical theory on linguistic metaphor and its aligned rhetorical tropes
(for earlier attempts to derive visual metaphor from linguistic metaphor, see: Durand, 1987;
McQuarrie & Mick, 1996).
The literature has largely settled on three structural types of visual metaphor, described
by Phillips and McQuarrie (2004) as juxtaposition, fusion, and replacement. This structural vari-
ation refers to the visual relationship between source and target. Motivated by lack of empir-
ical evidence for these theorized types, PI’s Peterson and Wise have undertaken a program
of research in a media psychology laboratory that has begun to find differential and positive
effects on attention and memory (Peterson, Wise, Ren, & Wang, in press). Fig. A  .2 compares
the visual metaphor structure types under consideration. Juxtaposition images present both
source and target as separate, but often interacting, entities (a house cat is related to a lion
as they interact directly). Fusion images present both but as a manipulated single entity (milk
is related to a superhero’s cape through an impossible cape-of-milk). Replacement images
omit either source or target, implying an absent entity through context (strong fingernails
are related to a can opener by virtue of a fingernail cutting through a can’s lid). In each case,
the reader must recognize that source and target are being compared, and determine which
entity is which. This is critical because the mechanism of visual metaphor is a directional
mapping of attributes from the source entity onto the target entity. For instance, in Fig. A .2a,
in the context of that advertisement, the lion’s wildness is mapped onto the house cat (but
not its size). The demands that visual metaphorical imagery places on readers is thus not
insignificant: the “game” of metaphor must be recognized, the source and target must be
identified in their roles, and the relevant attributes only must be mapped, all made possible
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 4

by visual structure and the reader’s ability to accurately interpret contextual factors. However
daunting such a task may seem to present to young learners, it must be kept in mind that
metaphor use is a fundamental human capacity.

Visual Metaphor in Science Education

Metaphor has long been associated with problem solving and reasoning in science. Clement
(1998), for example, interviewed several scientists of different types and found that employ-
ing metaphor at various stages of scientific inquiry and discovery was quite common. The
use of visual metaphors in particular has great promise for science education. Research in
the learning sciences has begun to investigate the educational affordances of spatial repre-
sentation and imagery (Schwartz & Heiser, 2006; Lindgren & Schwartz, 2009) and the way
that perceptual processes are brought to bear forging new understandings and eliciting
insights. Research from neuroscience and psychology has shown that sensory and motor
systems are deeply entwined in how people learn (e.g., Glenberg, 2010), and that the images
that a learner sees do not merely transmit information, but evoke mental simulations of
physical actions and invite particular perspectives that can have deep impacts on reason-
ing and understanding. Metaphors generally have long been thought of as powerful tools
in science education (Christidou et al., 1997; Gentner & Wolff, 2000), but more research
is needed to understand specifically the visual components of metaphor, and to produce
visualizations of science phenomena that spark inquiry and guide students towards more
expert-like trajectories through science content.

State of the Science Textbook

The textbook dominates curriculum materials in general, and functions as the curriculum
itself in many K-12 classrooms (Miller & Krumhansl, 2009; National Education Goals Panel,
1998; Roseman, Stern, & Koppal, 2010; Woodward, 1993a). This curricular influence is perva-
sive and thus present in science classrooms (Dall’Alba et al., 1993; DiGisi & Willett, 1995; Stern
& Roseman, 2004). The science textbook has been described as a “delivered curriculum”
(Chiappetta & Koballa, 2002). The textbook has been criticised for overlooking instructional
goals in favor of an emphasis on commercial factors (Levin, 1979; Woodward, 1993b; Petters-
son, 1998). Especially relevant to the present argument, despite textbooks being heavily illus-
trated, science education journal articles are predominantly concerned with text rather than
visual features (Lee, 2010). If visual metaphor is a useful instructional tool, then it begs more
consideration in the science education literature.
Despite the highly visual nature of completed textbooks, the textbook production model
is text-driven to an extent that inhibits the development of functional imagery. The first
stage of textbook development isolates authors, editors, and marketing managers as “prin-
cipal decision makers” or content creators, and the designers, illustrators and photographers
involved in the second stage inherit fully-formed content (DiGiuseppe, 2014, p. 1064). Thus
imagery is not promoted as a form of information but is more often relegated to echoing, or
even merely coexisting with, textually-constituted information. This is unfortunate as it is
well-established that textual content is significantly aided by functional visual representa-
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 5

tions (see Levie & Lentz, 1982; Tversky, 2011; Van Genuchten, Scheiter, & Schüler, 2012; Vekiri,
2002; in the context of science curriculum materials, see: Finson & Pederson, 2011; Lee, 2010;
Mayer & Gallini, 1990).
There are two apparent ways to address the imagery-related shortfalls of science text-
books, by improving the theoretical prescription of functional image use (including visual
metaphor) in the hopes of ultimately improving the design of textbooks, or by promoting
more lithe non-textbook curriculum materials and thus bypassing the textbook produc-
tion model completely. While any deficiency in the textbook represents an opportunity for
research to produce broad impact in science education (Chambliss & Calfee, 1998), alterna-
tive methods of delivering curriculum materials to teachers holds the promise of immediacy.

Productive Research Model

This paper is intended to contribute to a proof-of-concept for productive research in science


education that focuses on the use of visual metaphor in curriculum materials across media
platforms. “Productive research” here refers to stimuli developed for empirical studies
subsequently being made available to teachers for use in the classroom, as an alternative
to textbooks. For stimuli to be able to function as curriculum materials, they must be fully-
formed and authentic media. This is not often the case for the stimuli used to investigate
psychological factors of illustrated media. It is often easiest to isolate variables of interest
by stripping away the richness of seemingly “extraneous” information. But authentic media
can successfully be utilized in empirical studies.
To bypass the monolithic science textbook, a growing web-based resource of readily avail-
able science curriculum materials would empower teachers to better engage their students.
By developing methods for producing and studying complex and authentic instructional
media, we seek to make the investment in empirical research double as direct assistance
to science teachers. To this end, to demonstrate the richness and practical utility of “fully-
formed” stimuli (science curriculum materials across media platforms) created with visual
metaphor, funding from the Illinois Learning Sciences Design Initiative was used to develop
media examples, created by design and art students at the University of Illinois under the
direction of the PI’s. For the sake of clarity all media prototypes cover the topic of heat trans-
fer for learners at the middle school level. One PI (Mathayas) is well versed in the subject from
her ongoing doctoral studies.

Case Study Subject: Heat Transfer

The topic of heat transfer was selected for three reasons. First, students naturally experi-
ence thermal phenomena through everyday problems such as conserving energy in homes
through heating and cooling, using kitchen appliances, and measuring temperatures within
different environments. Consequently, they have relatively well developed conceptions about
heat. However and secondly, researchers have found that these conceptions do not always
align with the scientific understanding of heat. Students’ practical experiences tends to
prevail over scientific explanations which often leads to faulty reasoning (Albert, 1978;
Clough & Driver, 1985; Erickson, 1979; Lewis & Linn, 1994). In fact, as the process of heat
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 6

transfer is explained using unobservable elements such as molecules or electromagnetic


waves, few students are found to connect the mechanism of conduction and convection
to the particle model of matter (Kesidou & Duit, 1993). Thirdly, the Next Generation State
Standards (NGSS) has identified Energy as a core disciplinary idea of the Physical Sciences
where the processes of heat transfer are repeatedly used to describe phenomena related to
matter, weather, and space (NGSS Lead States, 2013). For these reasons, we can benefit from
visualizing the unobservable processes of heat transfer through metaphors.
For the purposes of this project, heat transfer is considered to be the process by which
energy is exchanged between objects because of a difference in their temperatures. There
are three mechanisms by which the transfer occurs: conduction, convection, and radia-
tion. When energy is transferred through a solid material between two points at different
temperatures, the process is conduction. When cold matter is displaced by hot matter, such
as when hot air over a flame rises upward, the process is called convection. When energy is
emitted in terms of electromagnetic radiation, the process is called radiation. Both conduc-
tion and convection involve the movement of matter and can be explained using the particle
model of matter, while radiation is explained using electromagnetic wave theory.

Case Study Illustration: Degrees of Articulation in Visual Metaphor

The appendices collect images from design prototypes that explore the variation inherent
in visual metaphor. Figures use the example of heat transfer as a topic (save Appendix A and
Fig. B
 .1). These visualizations and media are envisioned as middle school–level curriculum
materials. Appendix B demonstrates a range of techniques from nominal or fundamental
visual metaphor to highly articulated or more explicit metaphor.
The following definitional aspects of visual metaphor permeate the examples to varying
degrees. (a) Metaphor utilizes the familiar to explain the unfamiliar; or, it can recast (or defa-
miliarize) something already understood or misunderstood with something else familiar.
This should not be minimized as an educational technique: the learner’s base of knowledge
is leveraged for a learning episode. (b) Metaphorical association is accomplished through
mapping, the transfer of meaning from one thing to another. (c) The components are differ-
entiated as source (usually familiar) and target, where topic-relevant attributes of the source
are mapped onto the target.
The graphic arrow, present in so many diagrams, is a fundamental example of visual
metaphor. It resembles the literal arrow but is used to indicate a motion vector. At this
level visual metaphor appears relatively uncompelling, but as Fig. B  .1 (a visualization of a
tornado) demonstrates, even this basic example can connect with some immediacy to bodily
understanding. In the same visualization, the conical forms on the ground are abstractions
of grass, or something like grass. Thus abstraction, absolutely necessary when visualizing
numerical data, relies on metaphor to some degree.
Moving into the topic of heat transfer, the “radiation” title of Fig. B  .2 is also inherently
graphic and abstracted, but is less dependent on conventions. The letterforms seem to be
expanding much like heat seems to radiate from a source, in the same graphic language of
typography as the word itself. Visual metaphor, as a strategy, is often concerned with making
the abstract concrete and thus understandable on more immediate “human” terms. As a tech-
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 7

nique used in a textbook, for instance, this title has more than a purely mnemonic function,
because the graphic treatment aligns with the meaning of the word.
Fig. B
 .3 illustrates energy exchanged between a hotter object and colder finger, through
conduction. Here excitation, a vibration, is visually transferred. The reader can feel this trans-
fer, as vibration is so familiar. While this may appear as a nearly literal representation of
heat (which is roughly the excitation of molecules), the scale at which the vibration occurs
is unnatural, exaggerated.
Fig. B
 .4 continues the trend of increasing articulation of visual metaphor. Here again
vibration is used to explain conduction, but the scale of the visualization is at the level of
scenario. Red Rover, depicted here, is a childhood game where one team of children, their
hands held in a chain, invite an opponent to charge one link and break it. If any link is
broken, the team loses a player to the opponents. If all links remain, the runner is absorbed
into the team. For children who have played this game, a full sensory experience is stored in
memory, and is leveraged to understand how heat is conducted through solids.
Finally, scenarios can be greatly extended, creating the most explicit of metaphors. The
outdoor festival scenario of Fig. B  .5 illustrates convection. Here people (source) are equated
with particles (target) in a special relationship. People go to the main ticket counter, away
from the attractions, to pay for tickets. A person with tickets has spending power. They are
thus hot. They then are drawn to the attractions (like hotter water rises in a pot), where they
slowly spend their tickets, and cool down. The “colder” they get, the more likely they are to
return to the ticket counter to get more spending power (tickets, or heat). This is a highly
articulated metaphor because there are multiple mappings: water particles are like people
(at an outdoor festival); a flame is like a ticket counter; attractions are like the surface of
water; a pot is like an outdoor festival; etc. These parallel mappings form a consistent whole.
But the more articulated a metaphor becomes, the more likely some aspect of the mapping
will be misleading. The IKEA shopping scenario in Fig. B.7 presents a subtle problem. The
directed “herding” experience of shopping at IKEA is used to represent the movement of
molecules (shoppers) in a contained liquid or gas (IKEA). However, in this metaphor the
shoppers do not cycle (they come in, shop, pay, and leave, replaced by new shoppers), though
the particles they represent would indeed cycle. Thus, irrelevant attributes may be mapped
by the learner, resulting in a misrepresentation. The earlier outdoor festival scenario appears
to be a better metaphor for convection in a container. (Though even that example is not
complete. Metaphors are, after all, abstractions. In a pot of boiling water, the rising hotter
particles displace the colder particles, sending them down to the heat source. The nature of
this displacement is not included in the mappings of the outdoor festival scenario.)
Though it has the complexity of scenario, the campfire illustration in Fig. B  .8 is perhaps
literal rather than figurative. The hands to the side of the flame illustrate radiation, while
the hands above the fire—much hotter—illustrate convection in addition to radiation. Both
pairs of hands are the same distance from the center of the fire and thus receive the same
amount of radiation. But the hands above the fire are in the flame’s gas column, and so the
convection heat is added to the radiation heat. This example may not strictly count as meta-
phor, but it utilizes the learner’s past experience in the same fashion, where past experience
is mapped onto concepts like convection and radiation.
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 8

Contrast the campfire illustration with Fig. B.9. If learners are familiar with Michelange-
lo’s “The Creation of Adam,” then the overlay of the hands with the heated metal rod is a most
explicit form of metaphorical mapping. In terms of visual structure, this is a juxtaposition
example (Phillips & McQuarrie, 2004), where the unexpected pairing results in the reader
making an association. The familiar image of the gift of life helps to explain—and render
more memorable—the otherwise abstract concept of conduction.
In all of the above examples of visual metaphor the learner is asked to recognize and
inspect a relationship, thereby constructing meaning. Design provides the raw material. The
following section utilizes media design prototyping to suggest how visual metaphor might
be leveraged in extended learning experiences.

Case Study Prototyping: Extended Use of Visual Metaphor

Appendix C presents scenarios from a speculative tablet-based learning app. Icons are
established for conduction, convection, and radiation (Fig. C.3), and are then systematically
utilized to anchor stimuli to these core concepts. The icons strive for concrete meaning—
they “look like” the processes they represent. The conduction icon presents a gradient across
connected shapes to emphasize how heat transfer occurs within solids. The convection icon
emphasizes the internal motion of liquids and gasses. The radiation icon emphasizes the
centrality of a radiating heat source.
The tablet-based learning experience takes the time to explicitly connect the icons,
to be used so heavily subsequently, to their terms and definitions (Figs. C  .4–C.12). Exem-
plary imagery, examples of heat transfer familiar to learners, is explicitly paired with the
icons, terms, and definitions (Fig. C  .9). Parallel matching items are used to review the icons’
connections to terms, and exemplar images’ connections to icons (Figs. C.13–C.15). Matching
is also used in exercises with scenario images that include all three types of heat transfer
(Figs. C .16–C.22).
These experiences are intended to amplify the transfer (and sharing) of meaning inher-
ent in visual metaphor, even though the examples tend toward the literal. This is continued
in a take-home activity of collection, where the learner seeks out examples of conduction,
convection, and radiation in the home or elsewhere, taking pictures and tagging them with
the icons (Figs. C  .24–C.27). Classmates view each others’ examples and can discuss, with a
gallery that is also available to the teacher for classroom activities.
Appendix D presents a handheld (smartphone) version of the same app. This is a more
natural device for the photograph sharing activity.
This same kind of controlled release of information can be delivered through a textbook
(Appendix E) if design—in particular the use of imagery—is part of the planning process.
Fig. E.1 features a mnemonic title, which attaches visual meaning to the term “radiation.” The
radiation icon is superimposed over an exemplar image, with another at right. Full scenario
imagery is utilized as a review (Fig. E.5), where conduction, convection, and radiation are
all illustrated in a scenario familiar to learners. Again the icons are used to label, anchoring
physical experience to science concepts.
Appendix F represents a physical activity assigned to an educational poster. A partially
completed home is provided and learners are encouraged to draw icons or otherwise repre-
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 9

sent heat transfer by drawing, building on their familiarity with heat in the home. A coating
on the poster allows teacher and student to erase earlier drawings in favor of continued
work. A learner might add a clothes basket to the laundry room, with an opportunistic cat
curled on top of warm clothes, enjoying conduction.
These media prototypes do not always strictly utilize metaphor, but they do promote
learning by transferring meaning: a familiar scenario is related to an icon, which looks like
the concept under consideration, which is named (in the mnemonic titles) in form visually
consonant with the concept. These types of strategies are less likely to be employed in a model
where content is generated as text before the potential of visual design is considered.

Case Study Summary

The work of the design team, where some of the potential of visual metaphor was explored
and discovered by virtue of a design-first (rather than text-first) process, quickly suggested
that the core utility of metaphor is better leveraged over extended learning episodes.
However, it remains useful to consider the power of visual metaphor in isolated images,
and there is much work to be done in understanding the range of visual metaphor available
to educators and designers. Phillips and McQuarrie (2004) provide what could be termed a
structuralist framework, which tracks the presence and determination of source and target
entities. The collection of illustrations in Appendix B suggests an important variable of artic-
ulation degree: low-level, foundational, or nominally articulated visual metaphors (such as
the arrow in a diagram) are more immediate; highly articulated visual metaphors (such as
the outdoor festival scenario of Fig. B.5) include multiple mappings and promise a more
substantial framework of understanding, while increasing the likelihood that some aspect
of the extended metaphor proves misleading (again see the IKEA example of Fig. B.7).
The use of visual metaphor in extended learning episodes represents an area of great
potential that poses challenges of complexity to both the researcher and designer. When the
interest in visual metaphor moves beyond an intellectual curiosity to the improvement of
science instruction, visual metaphor demands attention.

Opportunities for Future Work on Visual Metaphor for Science Education

There are a variety of ongoing funding programs relevant to visual metaphor and learning
in general, and many of the aforementioned applications in particular. For example, the
Cyber-Human Systems (CHS) program is one of three core programs within the National
Science Foundation’s (NSF) Division of Information and Intelligent Systems (IIS). Accord-
ing to the most recent program call, “CHS research applies knowledge of computing and
communications together with theoretical and practical understanding of behavioral, social
and design sciences to better develop diverse kinds of systems, such as systems that amplify
individual human capabilities through a device or environment that empowers them to improve their
performance, achieve their goals, improve well-being and enhance creative expression while
assuring that the computer is no longer a distraction or an obstacle” (italics ours). This
program is ongoing with annual solicitations for small (<$500k), medium ($500k–$1,200k),
and large (>$1,200) projects.
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 10

The Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) program, also within NSF’s Division of Information
and Intelligent Systems, describes as its goal “to develop the core system science needed to
engineer complex cyber-physical systems which people can use or interact with and depend
upon.” Furthermore, “To expedite and accelerate the realization of cyber-physical systems in
a wide range of applications, the CPS program also supports the development of methods,
tools, and hardware and software components based upon these cross-cutting principles,
along with validation of the principles via prototypes and testbeds.” This program seems rele-
vant to the continued development of an interface that utilizes visual metaphor to enhance
the learning of scientific concepts as we’ve discussed here.
The NSF Cyberlearning and Future Learning Technologies (also within IIS) program’s
goal is “to integrate opportunities offered by emerging technologies with advances in what
is known about how people learn.” There are a variety of different calls within this program
that occur annually or biannually.
The Perception, Action, and Cognition program within NSF’s Directorate of Social, Behav-
ioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE) supports research on topics including vision, haptics,
attention, and reasoning, among others. This program is ongoing with biannual solicitations
for proposals.
NSF also has a funding mechanism known as EAGER (EArly concept Grants for Explor-
atory Research) within many of its programs (including those mentioned above) that “may
be used to support exploratory work in its early stages on untested, but potentially transfor-
mative, research ideas or approaches.”
Google sponsors an annual faculty research competition in topics including human-com-
puter interaction, information retrieval, and mobile. All of these topics are potentially rele-
vant to visual metaphor scenarios.
These represent only a sample of the many different ways to leverage the work herein
towards a proposal for more substantial external funding.

Works Cited

Albert, E. (1978). Development of the concept of heat in children. Science Education,


62(3), 389–399.
Baddeley, A. (1998). Working memory. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences,
321(2–3), 167–173.
Chambliss, M. J., & Calfee, R. C. (1998). Textbooks for learning: Nurturing children’s minds.
Maiden, MA: Blackwell.

Chiappetta, E. L., & Koballa, T. R. (2002). Science instruction in the middle and secondary
schools. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Christidou, V., Kouladis, V., & Christidis, T. (1997). Children’s use of metaphors in
relation to their mental models: the case of the ozone layer and its depletion,
Research in Science Education, 27(4), 541–552.
Clement, J. (1988). Observed methods for generating analogies in scientific problem
solving. Cognitive Science, 12(4), 563–586.
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 11

Clough, E. E., & Driver, R. (1985). Secondary students’ conceptions of the conduction
of heat: Bringing together scientific and personal views. Physics Education, 20,
176–182.
Dall’Alba, G., Walsh, E., Bowden, J., Martin, E., Masters, G., Ramsden, P., & Stephanou,
A. (1993). Textbook treatments and students’ understanding of acceleration.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(7), 621–635.
DiGisi, L. L., & Willett, J. B. (1995). What high school biology teachers say about their
textbook use: A descriptive study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(2),
123–142.
DiGiuseppe, M. (2014). Representing nature of science in a science textbook:
Exploring author-editor-publisher interactions. International Journal of Science
Education, 36(7), 1061–1082.
Durand, J. (1987). Rhetorical figures in the advertising image. (pp. 295–318). In J.
Umiker-Sebeok, Marketing and semiotics: New directions in the study of signs for sale.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Erickson, G. L. (1979). Children’s conceptions of heat and temperature. Science
Education, 63(2), 221–230.
Finson, K., & Pederson, J. (2011). What are visual data and what utility do they have in
science education? Journal of Visual Literacy, 30(2), 20–39.
Forceville, C. (1996). Pictorial metaphor in advertising. London: Routledge.
Forceville, C. (2002). The identification of target and source in pictorial metaphors.
Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1–14.
Gentner, D., & Wolff, P. (2000). Metaphor and knowledge change. Cognitive dynamics:
Conceptual change in humans and machines, 295–342.
Glenberg, A. (2010). Embodiment as a unifying perspective for psychology. Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(4), 586–596.
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Kesidou, S., & Duit, R. (1993). Students’ conceptions of the second law of
thermodynamics- An interpretive study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
30(1), 85–106.
Koller, V. (2005). Designing cognition: Visual metaphor as a design feature in
business magazines. Information Design Journal, 13, 136–150.
Lakoff, G, & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Lee, V. R. (2010). Adaptations and continuities in the use and design of visual
representations in US middle school science textbooks. International Journal of
Science Education, 32(8), 1099–1126.
Levie, W. H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research.
Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30(4), 195–232.
Levin, J. R. (1979). On functions of pictures in prose. In Report from the project on studies
in language: Reading and communication. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Research and
Development Center for Individualized Schooling.
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 12

Lewis, E. L., & Linn, M. C. (1994). Heat energy and temperature concepts of
adolescents, adults, and experts: Implications for curricular improvements.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(6), 657–677.
Lindgren, R., & Moshell, J. M. (2011). Supporting children’s learning with body-based
metaphors in a mixed reality environment. Proceedings of the Interaction Design and
Children Conference (pp. 177–180).
Lindgren, R., & Schwartz, D. L. (2009). Spatial learning and computer simulations in
science. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 419–438.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E., & Gallini, J. K. (1990). When is an illustration worth ten thousand words?
Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4): 715–726.
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1996). Figures of rhetoric in advertising language.
Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 424–438.
Miller, J. S., & Krumhansl, R. (2009). Learning from innovative instructional materials
and making them your own. In J. Gess-Newsome, J., Luft, J. A., & Bell, R. (Eds.),
Reforming secondary science instruction (pp. 39–52). National Science Teachers
Association. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
National Education Goals Panel (1998). Recommendations regarding the implementation
of standards. Retrieved June 13, 2015, from govinfo.library.unt.edu/negp/page1-13-9.
htm.
NGSS Lead States (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Peterson, M., Wise, K., Ren, Y., & Wang, Z. (in press). Memorable Metaphor: How
different elements of visual rhetoric affect resource allocation and memory for
advertisements. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising.
Pettersson, R. (1998). Image functions in information design. The 30th annual
conference of the International Visual Literacy Association, University of Georgia,
Athens, Georgia.
Phillips, B., & McQuarrie, E. F. (2004). Beyond visual metaphor: A new typology of
visual rhetoric in advertising.” Marketing Theory, 4, 113–136.
Roseman, J. E., Stern, L., & Koppal, M. (2010). A method for analyzing the coherence
of high school biology textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(1), 47–70.
Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2001). Imagery and text: A dual coding theory of reading and
writing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Schwartz, D.L., & Heiser, J. (2006). Spatial representations and imagery in learning.
In R.K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 283–298). New
York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Stern, L., & Roseman, J. E. (2004). Can middle-school science textbooks help students
learn important ideas? Findings from Project 2061’s curriculum evaluation study:
Life science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(6), 538–568.
Tversky, B. (2011). Visualizing thought. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3, 499–535.
Van Genuchten, E., Scheiter, K., & Schüler, A. (2012). Examining learning from
text and pictures for different task types: Does the multimedia effect differ
Peterson, Wise, Lindgren, Cox, & Mathayas  2015 13

for conceptual, causal, and procedural tasks? Computers in Human Behavior, 28,
2209–2218.
Van Mulken, M., Le Pair, R., & Forceville, C. (2010). The impact of perceived
complexity, deviation and comprehension on the appreciation of visual metaphor
in advertising across three European countries. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 3418–
3430.
Vekiri, I. (2002). What is the value of graphical displays in learning?. Educational
Psychology Review, 14(3): 261–312.
Woodward, A. (1993a). Introduction: Learning from textbooks. In B. K. Britton, A.
Woodward, & M. Binkley (Eds.), Learning from textbooks: Theory and practice (pp.
vii–x). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher.
Woodward, A. (1993b). Do illustrations serve an instructional purpose in U. S.
textbooks? In B. K. Britton, A. Woodward, & M. Binkley (Eds.), Learning 
from
textbooks: Theory and practice (pp. 115–134). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Publisher.
A PPE N D I C E S

Illustrations and prototypes (all except Figs.


A.1, A.2, & B.1) designed by:

Joe Carpenter Qing He


Bella Reinhofer Meme Betadam
Sander Weeks

A.1 Example of visual metaphor. By virtue of interacting, the lion serves as source and the house cat as
target. The lion’s “wildness” is mapped onto the cat by the reader. The implication is that a wild animal
needs real meat, and Whiskas provides that. Downloaded from adsoftheworld.com: Abbott Mead Vickers
BBDO (ad agency), UK.
a Juxtaposition

c Replacement

b Fusion

A.2 Three visual structures of metaphor, according to Phillips & McQuarrie (2004). All downloaded from
adsoftheworld.com: (a) Abbott Mead Vickers BBDO (ad agency), UK; (b) by Lowe Campbell Ewald (ad
agency), New York, USA; (c) TBWA (ad agency), Vienna, Austria.
B.1 Rendering of a tornado, from NCSA Advanced Visualization Laboratory, University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

B.2 Mnemonic typography: the radiating lines are a concrete expression of the word’s meaning;
the visual component of the text renders the word more memorable

B.3 Convection illustrations: energy (higher heat) is represented as agitated vibration,


which transfers to a finger from a hotter solid
B.4 Conduction metaphor. In the game of Red Rover, an opponent attempts to break a team’s line. This
sends reverberations through the hands, arms, and bodies of the teammates. This vibration energy is like
conduction.

B.5 Extended convection metaphor: An outdoor festival stands in for a pot of water (Fig. B.6). The
highlighted person purchases tickets at the counter (flame), gains spending power (heat), circulates to
the attractions (water circulating in a pot), runs out of tickets (cools down), and then returns to the ticket
counter, to complete the cycle.
B.6 Convection illustration: bands of dots represent particles moving within the liquid, cycling.

B.7 Convection metaphor: A shopper (particle) in IKEA (pot of heated water) enters, cycles through, and
exits. This incomplete metaphor is flawed as it only emphasizes the motion of particles in a pot of boiling
water but implies that particles (shoppers leaving) are replaced (new shoppers entering).
B.8 Radiation & convection scenario: both are illustrated together, rooted in a common
experience. Learners will recognize that the hands above the fire will be hotter. This is
because there is convection in addition to the equal radiation experienced by both sets of
hands.

B.9 Conduction metaphor using Michelangelo’s “Creation of Adam”: overlay suggests a


parallel between the (familiar) painting and a heated rod.
B.10 Scenario: the familiar experience of the beach on a hot day illustrates all three types of heat transfer:
conduction (bare feet on hot sand), convection (a cool ocean breeze), and radiation (sunlight)

B.11 Scenario: the familiar experience of a car on a hot day illustrates all three types of heat transfer:
conduction (hands on a hot steering wheel), convection (air conditioning), and radiation (sunlight)
C.1 Home screen for a learning app on a tablet device

D.1 Corresponding (to Fig. C.1) app on handheld


C.2 Start definitions: “define”. C.3 Definition phase: the user will associate the term with the
image, symbol, sound, and various combinations thereof.

C.4 The definition of convection begins. Swipe >> C.5 Swipe >>

C.6 Swipe >> The information builds screen by screen to develop C.7 The same process is applied to each element of heat transfer.
concrete definition. This slide begins radiation.
C.8 Swipe >> C.9 The exemplary image is paired with the symbol, definition, and
vocal iteration (tap speaker icon to hear audible definition).

CONDUCTION

C.10 Swipe >> C.11 Swipe >>

CONDUCTION

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaf ssssssssssssssssssss
sssssssssssssssd d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d df ssssssssssssssss
sssssssssssssssssssd d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d

C.12 Swipe >> C.13 Will move to next screen when correct / complete >>
Begin phase two of “define” via image and symbol interaction.
C.14 Will move to next screen when correct / complete >> C.15 This begins phase two matching. Drag symbol over image or
vice versa, in the following four slides. >>

C.16 Matching: the user drags the corresponding icon to the C.17 If the user drags the incorrect icon to an example, the icon
highlighted area. moves back to its home position, and a sound indicates the error.

C.18 When the user places the icon in its correct space, the symbol C.19 Text and audio definition signifies correct responses. Will move
locks. to next screen when correct / complete.
C.20 Equivalent process to C.16–C.19. C.21 Icons are dragged onto their examples.

C.22 Expanded definitions follow selections. C.23 Tap to start. Icons again reinforce concepts. Users have the
option to take their own photos of the three processes, or view photos
other classmates have added to the image database.

C.24 Start Apply section C.25 User’s camera view


C.26 Users apply icons to photographs they have taken C.27 Gallery: users view photos from classmates and their own
personal collections for homework correction and consultation

C.28 Student using tablet C.29 Student using mobile device


D.2 Phone introduction screen D.3 Camera mode mobile device D.4 Symbol application on mobile
device

D.5 Gallery on mobile device D.6 Gallery view with expanded info D.7 Interacting with gallery, editing
classmates icon / image correlation
D.8 Introduction to quiz D.9 Reviewing definitions D.10 Quiz screen: drag to match image.
Flag image option available

D.11 Quiz screen D.12 Quiz screen D.13 Quiz score and flag image review
2 RADIATION 3

Sed es nones voluptatist, alit repuda venit venim non pa explabo r Sed es nones voluptatist, alit
repuda venit venim non pa explabo repudias delessunt epudias delessunt

Mu s no b i t excea r u mq u i ae n u l p a r i t , non e s t r
u mq u i d u t a u t r e r f e r i on s eq u am f u g i t a t i b e?
e t e t u r a u t mo lo r u p t a s p e r u p i c ae s am q u am
q uod i ta e stor u m e t l a bor e st por pos d u s i m
HEAT RADIATION IS THE TRANSFER OF ENERGY IN THE FORM
r a t i a n t i con p a r u m r e p u d a i d ea r u m non p r o q u i s i t a t em p e r ae s t r u m com n i s i t i on r em p o s s
b e r e ex p e r a t u mq u a t o p t a t u r? i n c t u r i s ve l le st, s i n t i d o lo r a s c u p t a? OF ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES
Ap i s e t u t om n i s e s p e r u m h a r c i a n t p l a b o r t i o r e i l l i t a t q u e n i e t l a b i p s am r em p o r e s q u i
a d mo l u m a ce p e r u m d o l u p t a t u r a r u m a b o r i b e? t em p o r em q u u n t o r e s e n t e t q u e d o l u p t a t i s
Mu s no b i t excea r u mq u i ae n u l p a r i t , non? e stotat e r e i u s ve l i gen t u t od i t a s s i t e s
r u m q u a t u me t e t e u m d o l u p t a t u r? Q u i s i t i o. ea p l i b u s d u c i d i a s u t a t e n t i p s ae s t ma x i?
e s t r u mq u i d u t a u t r e r f e r i on s eq u am f u g i? eq u ae s t q u ae. Nam r ec t o r e r e h e n i h i c ae e l?
Si t a u d a n d i r a d i s sen t. m i l l a b i n i s e t om n i m i , q u a t i o d e t a u t of f i?
t a t i b e r a t i a n t i con p a r u m r e p u d a i d ea r u m l e n i m a u t vo l l e n d i u t q u i com n i h i l l u p i c i m u?
As e t exe r u n t i on con e l am u s s eq u i d mo s c i a c u mq u a s ea r u m ex p e r i a s i l l a cc a t u l p a?
non p r o b e r e ex p e r a t u mq u a t o p t a t u r? s a n d i t a t em a s i mo l u p i t f u g a. I t a t e t e t l a b o r
a s s e r n a t i a d e s e n t e s t em q u ae p a r i b r i occ a t i a n d i t r e q u ae s c i t em q u i a e s s eq u i
Ap i s e t u t om n i s e s p e r u m h a r c i a n t p l a b o r r e h e n i h i c t e n t , u n t o q u i b l a c i i s d o l u p t a t em
a u t a t e vo l u t a s p i c t e n t i o r r o r r o q u i t o r e? s t i n v e l mo l u p t a d u n t i n v e n i h i l i quia
a d mo l u m a ce p e r u m d o l u p t a t u r a r u m a b o r i b e? e t e t u r a u t mo lo r u p t a s p e r u p i c ae s am q u am
r a t i u s p a r i t a t eo s a u d ame t q u i d q u u n t i b u s t u r i ae n u s u t a d e r e s s i m i l l e n t i a s i con ec?
r u m q u a t u me t e t e u m d o l u p t a t u r? Q u i s i t i o. q uod i ta e stor u m e t l a bor e st por pos d u s i m
a e s vo l u p t i o v e r i t a s p e r f e r i t u n t u r , c u s t a t em q u u n t e p r ae p t a t em v e l e s t , s a n i h i l ma
Si t a u d a n d i d o lo r a d i s s e n t . q u i s i t a t em p e r ae s t r u m com n i s i t i on r em?
e stotat e r e i u s ve l i gen t u t od i t a s s i t e s s i t e s t ma g n a t em a t a s s i t ae r e p u d i c i e n i e n t
As e t exe r u n t i on con e l am u s s eq u i d mo s p o s s i n c t u r i s v e l l e s t s i n t i d o lo r a s c u p t a?
eq u ae s t q u ae. Nam r ec t o r e r e h e n i h i c ae e l? a n t o t a t q u i d q u o e t d o l u p t i s i n c i m u s s eq u i?
a s s e r n a t i a d e s e n t e s t em q u ae p a r i b t i o r e i l l i t a t q u e n i e t l a b i p s am r em p o r e s q u i
l e n i m a u t vo l l e n d i u t q u i com n i h i l l u p i c i m u? d e l e s i u me t e u m i p s a p e l i l l u p t a t e n u s c i i s
a u t a t e vo l u t a s p i c t e n t i o r r o r r o q u i t o r e? t em p o r em q u u n t o r e s e n t e t q u e d o l u p t a t i s
s a n d i t a t em a s i mo l u p i t f u g a. I t a t e t e t l a b o r c i i s q u u n t a l i q u e s am r e p t a t .
r a t i u s p a r i t a t eo s a u d ame t q u i d q u u n t i b u s ea p l i b u s d u c i d i a s u t a t e n t i p s ae s t ma x i?
r e h e n i h i c t e n t , u n t o q u i b l a c i i s d o l u p t a t em Ut u t e co r i on r e p e l e n d a co r e r i b u s c i l e t
a e s vo l u p t i o v e r i t a s p e r f e r i t u n t u r , c u s m i l l a b i n i s e t om n i m i , q u a t i o d e t a u t of f i?

E.1 Textbook spread and chapter opener: Radiation. The textbook integrates the icons featured in the
app, for further iteration. Icons also become identifiers of chapters in folios, as well as markers of each
appearance of a term in the main text. A mnemonic title opens the chapter, representing the motion and
transfer of heat, consonant with the term.

4 RADIATION 5

r a d i at i o n

ea quas etur aut voluptatia deruptatet mi, exped eos solorat ipsam que num aut
mos doluptiate ipiendit aliqui di assinvent volutem doluptisquo
Hilluptur, quate nemque sol entem ulpa vo? cumquatur? Pedicte catque volupicia do?
lendelit digenimuste latiae pro veni luptatis unt la bor rum dolendios ut
mpo rehent omnim quis et ut laut voluptas odipsam rendusanda con natem reium fuga.

E.2 Radiation text page, featuring large imagery and a brief definition with adjacent icon to enhance
performance of the book, and integrate it with paired software.
6 CONDUCTION 7

CONDUCTION CONDUCTION

Sed es nones voluptatist, alit repuda venit ist, alit repuda venit venim non x Sed es nones voluptatist, alit repuda venit ist, alit repuda venit venim non xplabo repudint

Mu s no b i t excea r u mq u i ae n u l p a r i t , non e s t r
u mq u i d u t a u t r e r f e r i on s eq u am f u g i t a t i b e?
e t e t u r a u t mo lo r u p t a s p e r u p i c ae s am q u am
q uod i ta e stor u m e t l a bor e st por pos d u s i m
CONVECTIONTOUCH NAT. LIT LACCUS DIT, CONET QUIAE. IM
r a t i a n t i con p a r u m r e p u d a i d ea r u m non p r o q u i s i t a t em p e r ae s t r u m com n i s i t i on r em p o s s
b e r e ex p e r a t u mq u a t o p t a t u r? i n c t u r i s v e l l e s t , s i n t i d o lo r a s c u p t a t i o r e QUATUR, SIM EATUR ACIATAS INIMUS MAIOBE. OLOR ALIT
Ap i s e t u t om n i s e s p e r u m h a r c i a n t p l a b o r i l l i t a t q u e n i e t l a b i p s am r em p o r e s q u i t em?
a d mo l u m a ce p e r u m d o l u p t a t u r a r u m a b o r i b e? p o r em q u u n t o r e s e n t e t q u e d o l u p t a t i s ea SUM DOLESTIIS EARCI OFFICIPID MAGNATIAM, AOLUPTAQUAM
r u m q u a t u me t e t e u m d o l u p t a t u r? Q u i s i t i o. p l i b u s d u c i d i a s u t a t e n t i p s ae s t ma x i m i l l a b
Si t a u d a n d i d o lo r a d i s s e n t . i n i s e t om n i m i , q u a t i o d e t a u t of f i c i a c u m? GEN ITATIS ARUM VERNAME NIMILLACCUS ET ET.
As e t exe r u n t i on con e l am u s s eq u i d mo s q u a s ea r u m ex p e r i a s i l l a cc a t u l p a r i occ a?
a s s e r n a t i a d e s e n t e s t em q u ae p a r i b
a u t a t e vo l u t a s p i c t e n t i o r r o r r o q u i t o r e?
t i a n d i t r e q u ae s c i t em q u i a e s s eq u i s t i n v e l
mo l u p t a d u n t i n v e n i h i l i q u i a t u r i ae n u s u t
ERSPE PA CUSAPIT UTECAE OCCAECTUR AUT LIA QUAS?
r a t i u s p a r i t a t eo s a u d ame t q u i d q u u n t i b u s a d e r e s s i m i l l e n t i a s i con ec t a t em q u u n t e
a e s vo l u p t i o v e r i t a s p e r f e r i t u n t u r , c u s p r ae p t a t em v e l e s t , s a n i h i l ma s i t e s t ma g? SIMPED UNT MODIS ALIQUISI NONET VERIBUST VID QUIS SIN
e stotat e r e i u s ve l i gen t u t od i t a s s i t e s n a t em a t a s s i t ae r e p u d i c i e n i e n t a n t o t a t
eq u ae s t q u ae. Nam r ec t o r e r e h e n i h i c ae e l? q u i d q u o e t d o l u p t i s i n c i m u s s eq u i d e l e s i u? PARUM SAPIT UTECAE OCCAECTUR AUT LIA QUASSIMPED
l e n i m a u t vo l l e n d i u t q u i com n i h i l l u p i c i m u? me t e u m i p s a p e l i l l u p t a t e n u s c i i s c i i s q u?
s a n d i t a t em a s i mo l u p i t f u g a. I t a t e t e t l a b o r u n t a l i q u e s am r e p t a t . UNT MODISS MILLACEAQUI SINCTI DOLES CON RE, SAM IUR?
r e h e n i h i c t e n t , u n t o q u i b l a c i i s d o l u p t a t em Ut u t e co r i on r e p e l e n d a co r e r i b u s c i l e t

E.3 Conduction spread with the same features as Fig. E.1.

8 CONDUCTION 9

8 CONDUCTION 9

conduc tion

ea quas etur aut voluptatia deruptatet luptas mi,eos solorat ipsam que num aut
mos doluptiate rip ipiendit aliqui di ass? volutem doluptisquo
invent Hilluptur, quate nemque soel entem cumquatur? Pedicte catque volupicia do?
ulpa volendelit digenimuste latiae pro ven? luptatis unt la bor rum dolendios ut
impo re hent omnim quis et ut laut vo? odipsam rendusanda con natem reium fuga.

conduc tion

ea quas etur aut voluptatia deruptatet luptas mi,eos solorat ipsam que num aut
mos doluptiate rip ipiendit aliqui di ass? volutem doluptisquo
invent Hilluptur, quate nemque soel entem cumquatur? Pedicte catque volupicia do?
ulpa volendelit digenimuste latiae pro ven? luptatis unt la bor rum dolendios ut
impo re hent omnim quis et ut laut vo? odipsam rendusanda con natem reium fuga.

E.4 Conduction pages


10 REVIEW 11

E.5 Review spread: featuring a familiar scene of a car on a hot day in the sun, to help build an
understanding with personal experience. Here the examples are highlighted.

12 REVIEW 13

1 2 5

q u a s e t u r a u t vo l u p t a t i a d e r u p t a t e t mo s vo l u t em d o l u p t i s q u o c u mq u a t u r? Pe d i c t e
do l u p t i ate i p i en d i t a l i q u i d i ass i nven t c a t q u e vo l u p i c i a d o l u p t a t i s u n t l a b o r r u m
H i l l u p t u r , q u a t e n emq u e so l e n t em u l p a d o l e n d i o s u t o d i p s am r e n d u s a n d a con n a t em
vo l e n d e l i t d i g e n i m u s t e l a t i ae p r o v e n i m? r e i u m f u g a. Et a b o r u mq u i c u l p a r u n t . u s t e
p o r e h e n t om n i m q u i s e t u t l a u t vo l u p t a s l a t i ae p r o v e n i m p o r e h e n t om n i m q u i s e t u t
m i , ex p e d eo s so lo r a t i p s am q u e n u m a u t l a u t vo l u p t a s m i , ex p e d eo s so lo r a t i p s am

3 4
? F u r o p u l v i s p o t em s u s, n u ma, mo r e h e b a t u r , T i . I m i s? R i b u s. V i v em con t emq u e e n a t v i u s,
q u am con s e d em i d i s q u a noc u l i s, v i s no r u m, s u l emo r e m u s v i s s e r econ s u s, v i d e s ce r u m
ce r u n t i u s ex non c l em non v e n t . E g e r n i u s q u e t r a non s u m f a c i o s u s q u am q u a r e n t?
a u d e n t e r i b e r f i r i v i d i u m, mo l i c a p e r e s e n? e r i b em a d d u c t u s c u l i u m oma n d i i f a c i t a b u s M.
d u m om p e r f e c t o r u m s e n d emq u i d emov e, con Cu p i c i s. T u m o r e v i v e s s ce r v i l i i n s i d i i s. Si?
s u l i n a, nono s t am, q u e ce p e r e i n i r m i s t i s Ad me n a t i a v i s, p u b l i am q u i u s a d co r u r s u p i?
non s u l t i s? Gi t a c v i v a s d am e t i n am e s t u s c ae s s i s? no s.
a u ce r e, occ i b u s c ae me n e s i t . Mae coe n s e n? Et r aP. O b u s,Ca s t r a cc h u m d u m p u b l i i s s e n e?
d a c t u m oc t u s p e r e v i t , Ca t q u a s t f o r a Sp . q u em e t v i v i r ma n t i s s u l t i a a c t u m, s u l t y a u?
q u a s e t u r a u t vo l u p t a t i a d e r u p t a t e t mo s p o r e h e n t om n i m q u i s e t u t l a u t vo l u p t a s O n s u l t u m ma x i m u s, n e s e n t i m i u s ce p e r r i i g n am w ry t u bes g u t.
do l u p t i ate i p i en d i t a l i q u i d i ass i nven t m i , ex p e d eo s so lo r a t i p s am q u e n u m a u t n i c ae e r e i a c i i s, no r a nox i me n i m u s, me p r o F u r b em s e n t e n d u m Rommov e r ce p s, Ca t r e
H i l l u p t u r , q u a t e n emq u e so l e n t em u l p a vo l u t em d o l u p t i s q u o c u mq u a t u r? Pe d i c t e me n t e n a, mov e r em p r i d r e i i n t . I m u m s p e r m i s p u b l i s con u e t n e con i h i l con t am. Xi m u m oc,
vo l e n d e l i t d i g e n i m u s t e l a t i ae p r o v e n i m? c a t q u e vo l u p i c i a d o l u p t a t i s u n t l a b o r r u m i n n i u s a. u l t e c u s f u r . Re t a u t e r i , c u m t a t e r u d a c t e l l a r i o, q u i s. Nam d i con d am h i n t i u r ,
r e q u a s d am t a b e f f r e a d d u c t am f i c u p p l. Sp . p a t a v i u s t i c a u c i v i v e r u m t am o r i s s i n t e r e i

E.6 Review spread: numeric and iconic systems are used to iterate the concepts of conduction,
convection, and radiation.
F.1 A “doll house” poster, which learners use to identify examples of heat transfer

F.2 A learner has made additions to the house in an attempt to identify and label examples of
conduction, convection, and radiation
F.3 Details of interaction