Newsprint Manufacturing in the Southeast

Abstract

This paper is a response to the two-fold thesis of Bartz; namely, that (1) maps are not really important in our society today, and (2) educators say that they value maps and mapping, but the evidence of children's performance in using maps is contradictory. In exploring problems related to Bartz's contention, the author arrives at four tentative conclusions :

1. A child can and does learn many but not all of the map concepts and skills at an earlier age when taught them developmentally, systematically, functionally, and effectively.

2. Mere manipulation of materials does not constitute a concrete experience for a child.

3. Map-related concepts must be taught prior to, and continued concurrently with, map skills.

4. The commercially prepared map tends to appear near the highest level of abstract mapping and is therefore not necessarily the most effective means of map instruction for the elementary teacher.

A most significant implication from the conclusions is the need to re-examine the preparation of the elementary teacher. If the focus of the education of a teacher moves in the direction outlined in this paper, Bartz's premise could be reversed.