In reply to Kurt's [Rowley, 11 Nov 94] explanation of SEMIOTIC LITE: Thank you for the brief history and derivations for the discussion. Three questions occurred to me:
First, how does semiotic evaluation add greater strength to Instructional Designer efforts (in terms of focusing on the learner) than the current demands for learner-centered evaluation of prior knowledge and characteristics before designing?
Second, from the constructivistic point of view, isn't detailed knowledge of the individual's learning strengths and weaknesses a necessary component in providing a learning environment that promotes the transference of data into knowledge? If so, how does semiotic evaluation differ, and why put ourselves through the acquisition of a different set of verbalizations, in armchair philosophical discussions, if the existing paradigms provide effective guides?
Third, what does semiotic philosophy and/or viewpoint contribute to our current requirements for efficiency and effectiveness in encouraging and developing strategies, for the enhancement of learning, that we can take with us into the twenty-first century?