[EDUCATION] Should there be more comic books in the curriculum? 📖

Comic books have historically been viewed as an “enemy of literature” due to biases held by educators about the detrimental effects these visual stories would have on the development of literacy. However, recent research has led to a shift in the way we think about literacy and a breakdown of the educational prejudices surrounding what we consider to be literature. As a result, educators and researchers are now interested in the idea of implementing more comic books into the curriculum and the potential benefits this could have for readers of all ages. In this educational scoop, we’re going to consider the ways in which comic books could potentially help our literacy skills and evaluate the supporting and opposing arguments for introducing these books into our classroom learning!

💡 Things to consider

• Does reading comic books aid literacy? Currently, in the majority of schools across the country, picture books and other forms of visual literature are primarily used to support younger students with their early reading skills or as interventions for learners who are struggling to grasp reading. Think about it, can you remember the last time you read a book in school that was heavily illustrated rather than just a continuous flow of words? As many research studies have now demonstrated the value of comic books in helping children access literature and better understand complex texts, they are now beginning to be seen as useful teaching tools which more educators should seek to adopt in order to profit from their use.

• Benefits of introducing comic books into the curriculum: There are a range of suggested benefits of introducing comic books into the curriculum. One of which is centred around student motivation, with literacy experts proposing that motivating students with texts (such as comic books) that align with their personal interests and identities would improve their reading comprehension and exposure to literature and new vocabulary. Another advantage of increasing the number of comic books in the classroom is that they have been proven to be a stronger learning device than traditional textbooks. It is thought that the brain processes images 60,000 times faster than text, which suggests that comic books are beneficial in combining story and information more seamlessly than other forms of literature.

• Disadvantages of introducing comic books into the curriculum: Whilst the argument for including comic books into the curriculum seems overwhelmingly positive, there are some disadvantages to consider. For example, comic books are often regarded as only being able to provide a superficial level of analysis, unlike other forms of literature. Additionally, their use in the classroom has been questioned with regard to its appropriateness, due to the type of content and images it can contain which teachers may be wary of. Overall, it seems like there is a convincing case for the introduction of comic books into the curriculum and that, for the future of education, teachers should focus on removing the stigma and negative biases attached to the use of visual pieces of literature.

🔎 Find out more

• Harvard Graduate School of Education: Comics in the Classroom

• Teachwire - Comics SHOULD be on the curriculum

• CBR - The benefits and risks of comics in education

[PSYCHOLOGY] Unravelling the Psychology of Voting: Beyond the Ballot Box 🗳️

In a democracy, voting stands as a cornerstone of civic engagement, empowering citizens to shape the future of their country. Yet, beyond the act of marking an ‘X’ on a piece of paper, voting behaviour is deeply intertwined with psychological factors, shedding light on the intricate interplay between individual traits and political preferences.

💡 Things to consider

• Personality Dimensions and Political Preferences: Research has consistently demonstrated that personality dimensions, such as conscientiousness and openness to experience, play a significant role in shaping political leanings. Individuals high in conscientiousness (characterised by orderliness, dependability, and self-discipline) tend to gravitate towards conservative economic policies, favouring tax reductions and fiscal responsibility. Conversely, those high in openness to experience (marked by intellectual curiosity, imagination, and a willingness to embrace new ideas) often align with liberal social policies, advocating for progressive social change and immigration reform. These correlations are modest, so if you're high on 'orderliness' you aren't necessarily going to be conservative, but the chances are slightly higher that you will be. Why do you think these traits tend to align with these political stances?

• The Conundrum of Causation: The relationship between personality and political preferences raises questions about the direction of causality. Do personality traits predispose individuals to adopt certain political ideologies, or do political experiences and affiliations shape personality over time?

• The Dynamic Nature of Personality: Personality is not a static construct; it can evolve throughout an individual’s lifespan. What else changes throughout an individual’s lifespan? Might this impact someone’s political preferences. Or, do you think it impacts someone’s personality? How might this relate to our ‘conundrum of causation?

🔎 Find out more

• X … is for voting - Psychology A-Z

• The moral roots of liberals and conservatives (TED Talk)

[LINGUISTICS] An introduction to psycholinguistics: how does the brain store and process language? 🧠

Psycholinguistics, as suggested by its name, is the intersection between psychology and linguistics. It seeks to answer some fascinating questions. How do babies learn to speak? Are our brains hardwired to acquire language and all its syntactic (grammatical) and phonological (sound-related) rules? How do we spontaneously produce utterances we have never heard before? Do bilingual brains process language differently? To begin to answer any of these, we first need to think about how the brain actually stores language. Is there only one part of the brain that deals with language? In short, the answer is most likely no. In this scoop, we will be exploring how and why this question is much more complicated.

💡 Things to consider

• Localisation: We know that different areas of the brain are responsible for different processes. In linguistics, localisation is the idea that specific regions of the brain are responsible for different parts of language. Localisation implies the existence of different levels of language, such as the lexicon (words and vocabulary), syntax (grammar), phonology (sound), and morphology (word structure). Language is certainly localised to some extent. Following a stroke, many individuals develop aphasia, a language disorder resulting from a blood vessel becoming blocked or ruptured in the brain. Broca’s aphasia (brain damage near Broca’s area, found in the frontal cortex) is characterised by more jolted, effortful speech. Individuals with Broca’s aphasia may also present agrammatism, where sentences often miss core functional words. So, instead of saying “the dog barked at the child”, “dog…bark…child” may be produced instead.

  On the other hand, individuals with Wernike’s aphasia can produce perfectly grammatical and fluent sentences, yet they are often meaningless. From this, we can infer that Broca’s area must play a crucial role in sentence structure, whilst Wernike’s area must be more involved in meaning and comprehension. These specific areas of language seem to be localised to specific brain regions.

  

• But is language entirely localised? Not fully. A 2007 study explored the relationship between the proximity of a brain lesion to Wernike’s area and the severity of phonemic identification disorders. For example, patients with such disorders may struggle to distinguish between words such as “pat” and “bat”. Since Wernike’s area is associated with speech comprehension, we would assume that the nearer the lesion is to Wernike’s area, the more pronounced these disorders are. This was the case 94.7% of the time, which means there is still a significant minority of patients who do not fit this pattern. Some report the same symptoms despite having a legion much further away. However, we should not immediately discredit localisation theories: no two lesions are identical, and neither is the quality and immediacy of the treatment received, meaning that not all variables are controlled.

• Lateralisation: this is the idea that specific functions and processes are taken care of by one hemisphere of the brain. It is generally accepted that language is lateralised to the left hemisphere. There have been several studies on split-brain patients who have undergone commissurotomy (a procedure that essentially isolated the two hemispheres). When sentences such as “the girl is drinking” and “the girl will drink” are presented to the right hemisphere in such studies, participants struggle to tell the difference between the two. This suggests that the recognition of syntactic and phonological forms is largely left-lateralised. What else could we do to further test localisation and lateralisation theories?

🔎 Find out more

• Fernández, E. & Smith Cairns, H. (2010). Fundamentals of psycholinguistics. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Ch. 3.

• Ingram, John C. L. (2007). Neurolinguistics: An introduction to spoken language processing and its disorders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Part I. 

• Gazzaniga, M. S., & Hillyard, S. A. (1971). Language and speech capacity of the right hemisphere. Neuropsychologia, 9(3), 273–280.

• Language and Lateralization (explorable.com)

• Lateralization of Brain Function & Hemispheric Specialization (simplypsychology.org)

[LAW] If you don’t wear a seatbelt in a car accident, are you liable for your own injuries? 🚗

It is a statutory requirement (laws enacted by Parliament) for people to wear seatbelts in vehicles, and you can be fined if you do not wear one. So, if you aren’t wearing a seatbelt in a car accident that someone else caused, can you sue them for all your injuries? You weren’t at fault for the fact that you received injuries at all, but you would have received fewer injuries if you were wearing a seatbelt. It is important to note that in the UK, the law is also created by the judiciary (the courts) which is called ‘common law’. So, there are laws and rules that must be followed that are made from past cases, as can be seen in this instance.

💡 Things to consider

• Froom v Butcher [1976] QB 286: Froom was in a car accident when they crashed into Butcher’s car because Butcher was driving negligently. Froom was not wearing a seatbelt, so sustained more injuries than if they had been wearing a seatbelt. Butcher was entirely at fault for the accident, but claimed there was ‘contributory negligence’ on the part of Froom meaning Froom was partly responsible for his own injuries and couldn’t fully blame Butcher. It was held that Froom contributed to the damage caused by the negligence so there was ‘contributory negligence’.

• Contributory negligence: The result of Froom v Butcher is that accidents and the damage caused must be separated. The accident was caused by Butcher, but the damage was caused by both Butcher and Froom. Generally, in terms of apportionment, there is no reduction in damages (money awarded for wrongs) if wearing a seatbelt would make no difference, a 15% reduction if wearing a seatbelt would have reduced the injuries, and a 25% reduction if wearing a seatbelt would have avoided all injury. It was also held in O’Connell v Jackson [1971] WLR 463 that a similar rule also applies for failure to wear a motorcycle helmet.

• Underlying reasons behind contributory negligence: In Jones v Livox Quarries [1952] 2 QB 608, Lord Denning held that there is contributory negligence if a person should reasonably have foreseen that if they didn’t act like a ‘reasonable, prudent man’ then they may hurt themselves. Similarly, Section 1 of the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 notes that where a person suffers damage through partly their own fault and partly someone else’s, the damages available will be reduced. Therefore, if you don’t wear a seatbelt, know that if you get into an accident, your injuries will be worse, so you won’t be able to claim the full amount of damages.

🔎 Find out more

• Pearson v Anwar [2015] EWCA Civ 1011

• Road Traffic Act 1988 S14-S18

• https://frankrogerslaw.co.uk/blog/uk-seat-belt-law

• https://www.gov.uk/seat-belts-law

• Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945

⚖️ LittleLaw: Want to become a lawyer, or interested in the world of law and business more generally? Check out this UK-based newsletter run by our friend, Idin, which makes legal news engaging and easy to understand. They rock 🙌

🗳️ Poll

👀 Keep your eyes peeled for…

• 4th December - University of Cambridge Y12 Access and Application Support Programme Deadline (for students from the North East or East Riding of Yorkshire)

• 5th December - University of Oxford Year 10 Astrophysics Taster Morning

• 6th December - QMUL Year Abroad Taster Session for Languages Students

• 6th December - St Mary’s University Webinar: Factors to Consider When Selecting Your Top 5 UCAS Choices

• 6th December - University of York Open Lecture: Clinical AI - Cure or Disease?

• 7th December - UEA Webinar: How Do I Manage My Money At University?

• 7th December - University of York Open Lecture: Disability representation in past, present, and future stories

• 8th December - University of Oxford Access to Banking session