No one on this list objects to a semiotic approach to ISD and/or no one understands what that means. These are just two of the possible meanings for the "silence" on this list. A third is that many of us are just lurking about as I have been. I am in favor of a semiotic approach and I think I know what that means but I would like to know some of your thoughts on implementation. How do we design instruction so that instead of just memorized inert information we engender relevancy and meaning for the leaner? Marcy says that in a semiotic framework, "instructional goals are defined in terms of standard or desired interpretations of signs, and the learning task depends on the gap between a learner's current interpretations and those that are desired for goal performance." She also suggests one possible way for finding out where the gaps are: "presenting a prototypic learner with a knowledge base or subject matter tutor and observing the learning process, perhaps through questioning or think-aloud techniques." My question is "Let's say you find the gaps, how do you close them or get the learner to make the desired interpretations?" I think there also might be problems in finding the gaps because many learners, being products of a system of memorize and regurgitate, will need practice to become more reflective and in seeing that there may be more than one "correct" way of seeing things.