The role of poetry and stories of young children in their process of learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the contemporary society children develop special abilities to ask questions, to doubt, and to wonder, that enhances development of their symbolic thinking that in turn help them in the learning process. This article includes analysis of the link between symbolic thinking and the child's process of learning. The inquiry is guided by the themes developed by children in poetry as a way of expressing their understanding of the world. It is illustrated by the poems published in the newsletters of the Canadian prairies' elementary schools in Winnipeg. The studies are supported by a review of the research showing that development of symbolic thinking is crucial in helping children to learn. It is asserted that the questions asked by children in their poems guide us to their future and ours. In the research of Moore (1981), it is emphasized that children come to school as essentially poetic human beings. She Many years ago I became aware that poetry is a natural of young children. All children seem to be born poets (p. 30). Wituckie (1970), who also analyzed poetry in the elementary school, asserted that poetry is necessary at school. It develops a child's imagination and abilities to express feelings and beauty. Poems may stimulate our imagination and creativity. According to Wituckie(1970) poetry is a new, imaginative way of seeing, and her belief in poetry is likewise a belief in children - young people who bring so much to poetry and can take so much from it. (p.64) I can fly (by Olga 9) I can fly like birds up high Above my head. I love they wings and the colour of the sky. Here and there the birds are every where And when I fly I sing certain lullaby. In the literature we found a very strong assertion that is the prime symbolic medium. This is supported by Deri (1983), Gardner (1979), Olson (1991), and Schmidt (1973). According to Olson (1991), is used for representing the world; it makes it possible to reflect on and to become aware of the world (p.265). Piaget (1962) stressed that at about the age of 2 the child discovers the symbolic nature of when he/she figures out that everything has a name. Yet, there are different approaches to acquisition and the thinking process. Chomsky's (1980) theory (innatism) is opposed to that of Piaget (generative) or social psychologists such as Henle (1965) and Vygotsky (1962). For example, Chomsky believed that linguistic structures are hereditary and the role of culture and is not a basic one. As Chomsky (1986) stated, The problem, then, is to determine the innate endowment that serves to bridge the gap between experience and attained-or cognitive systems attained.[.....] We are thus in a good position to ascertain the nature of the biological endowment that constitutes the human language faculty, the innate component of mind/brain that yields of when presented with linguistic experience and that converts experience to a system of knowledge (p. XXVI). For Piaget, is a product of progressive of thoughts that reach deeper than the linguistic verbal reality. As is only a particular form of the symbolic function and as the individual symbol is certainly simpler than the collective sign, it is permissible to conclude that thought precedes and that confines itself to profoundly transforming thought by helping it to attain its forms of equilibrium by means of a more advanced schematization and a more mobile abstraction (p.92)..[....] ... As Piaget (1968) emphasized. There are no innate structures: every structure presupposes a construction (p. 150). Henle (1965) stressed the social character of as an historical phenomenon. He reasoned that to learn a a person must form the concepts expressed by it or in it. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".