This chapter is a selective review of spatial development, stressing several points. First, we suggest that spatial development can be usefully considered to have two strands: (a) the development of intraobject (or intrinsic) representations along with the ability to transform them (e.g., in mental rotation) and (b) the development of interobject (or extrinsic) representations and the ability to use them to navigate. Second, we argue that both lines of development begin from strong starting points, but also undergo considerable development. They are far from innately specified, nor do they have a modular architecture. Third, we discuss the amplification of spatial skills by human symbolic capabilities, including language, use of maps and models, and gesture. Fourth, we identify areas where research is lacking, most notably the formal description of intraobject skills and the charting of their normative development, the exploration of the sources of individual differences in navigation-relevant skills, and the applications of research to education.

This article examines two issues: the role of gesture in the communication of spatial information and the relation between communication and mental representation. Children (8–10 years) and adults walked through a space to learn the locations of six hidden toy animals and then explained the space to another person. In Study 1, older children and adults typically gestured when describing the space and rarely provided spatial information in speech without also providing the information in gesture. However, few 8-year-olds communicated spatial information in speech or gesture. Studies 2 and 3 showed that 8-year-olds did understand the spatial arrangement of the animals and could communicate spatial information if prompted to use their hands. Taken together, these results indicate that gesture is important for conveying spatial relations at all ages and, as such, provides us with a more complete picture of what children do and do not know about communicating spatial relations.

Teachers use remote labs and simulations to augment or even replace hands-on science learning. We compared undergraduate students' experiences with a remote lab and a simulation to investigate beliefs about and learning from the interactions. Although learning occurred in both groups, students were more deeply engaged while performing the remote lab. Remote lab users felt and behaved as though they completed a real scientific experiment. We also examined whether realistic visualizations improved the psychological and learning experiences for each lab. Students who watched live video of the device collecting their data in the remote lab felt most engaged with the task, suggesting that it is the combination of the realistic lab and realistic video that was of the greatest benefit.

No abstract