Significance of the Study
Comics can be an invaluable teaching tool, but aside from the occasional non-serial graphic novel, they are underused. For every Maus, Fun Home, and American Born Chinese, countless superhero comics are disregarded as too superficial for the level of analysis afforded “real” works of literature. But comics can serve three primary roles in the classroom:
- They can facilitate a better understanding of complex required texts by serving as a preliminary reading activity;
- They can extend the analysis of a classic work of literature, either by providing examples of derivative fiction or by making strong allusions to the classics;
- They can replace less-accessible works from the literary canon while still conveying the same messages and using the same literary and rhetorical conventions.
Words and Pictures Together Increase Recall and Problem Solving “…the low-level students receiving the high-level text with the comic strip scored significantly higher than their counterparts receiving the high-level text only.” —Jun Liu. “Effect of Comic Strips on L2 Learners’ Reading Comprehension.” TESOL Quarterly, 2004. http://sfl.ieu.edu.tr/tdu/TESOL_Quarterly_Reading.pdf
“Across the eleven studies, people who learned from words and graphics produced between 55 percent to 121 percent more correct solutions to transfer problems than people who learned from words alone. Across all studies, a median percentage gain of 89 percent was achieved with a median effect size of 1.50.” — Mayer, Richard E. and Clark, Ruth Colvin. e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning. Pfeiffer, 2011. “Results of Study 2 find that verbatim recognition was superior with graphic novel texts compared to traditional textbooks.” —McKenny, Aaron, Short, Jeremy, & Randolph-Seng, Brandon. Abstract: “Graphic presentation: an empirical examination of the graphic novel approach to communicate business concepts.” http://www.academia.edu/2210806/Graphic_presentation_an_empirical_examination_of_the_graphic_novel_ approach_to_communicate_business_concepts “
Results document children’s deliberate use of images and point to the important role of images in text processing.” —Arya, Poonam & M. Feathers, Karen. (2015). “Exploring Young Children’s Use of Illustrations in a Picturebook.” Language and Literacy. 17. 42-62. 10.20360/G2630C. Comics Aid Comprehension “A graphic adaptation of a traditionally taught text (Poe’s “The Cask of Amontillado”) was explored as (a) a replacement text and (b) a supplemental text. The study design utilized a factorial analysis of variance with three independent variables: text type, grade level, and gender.
A reading comprehension test was developed to serve as the dependent variable. Findings indicated significant effects for all factors.” —Cook, M.P. (in press). Now I “see”: Graphic novels promoting reading comprehension in high school English classrooms. Literacy Research & Instruction. 10.1080/19388071.2016.1244869 “…24 mixed-ability fifth grade students chose to read six novels: two traditional novels, two highly illustrated novels and two graphic novels. …
In this study, reading of graphic novels stimulated more student discussion using the structure of thinking skills and greater story comprehension. … The mean number of student responses to the de Bono thinking skill prompts initiated by students was higher for the graphic novels than for either of the other two novel forms. …Graphic novels also increased student comprehension as measured by the midterm assessment writing prompts and final project scores. …Student midterm assessment responses for graphic novels showed higher assessment scores than either of the other two novel forms. …The survey results showed that the students reading graphic novels reported greater enjoyment of reading and stronger interest in the story than when reading either of the other two novel forms. —Jennings, K. A., Rule, A. C., & Zanden, S. M. V. (2014). “Fifth Graders’ Enjoyment, Interest, and Comprehension of Graphic Novels Compared to Heavily-Illustrated and Traditional Novels.” International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 6(2), 257–274. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1013 &context=ci_facpub “…a diverse group of second grade students during a nine week unit of study focused on graphic stories. …Images, written text, and dialog are utilized to scaffold reading comprehension and to practice fluency. Then, students construct their own graphic stories based on characters from books, popular culture, and personal experiences. …The results indicate student growth in the areas of comprehension and fluency.” —Brown, S. (2013). “A Blended Approach to Reading and Writing Graphic Stories.” The Reading Teacher, 67(3), 208–219. https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.1211
Comics Have a High Average Vocabulary Level Comic books average 53.5 rare words per thousand, while children’s books average 30.9, adult books average 52.7, expert witness testimony averages 28.4, and the conversations of college graduates with friends average 17.3. —“Big Ideas in Beginning Reading: Vocabulary.” University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning. http://reading.uoregon.edu/big_ideas/voc/voc_what.php
Learning Coaches can prompt students to delve into their reading analyses by using the questions below. Also, the questions can be tailored to fit a student’s level of academic progress. Here are some question ideas based on the 5 Ws (and How).
Who
- Who is the main character and what are their traits?
- Who is the antagonist and what are their characteristics?
- Who are the supporting characters and how would you describe them?
- Who is your favorite character and why?
- Who is your least favorite character and why?
- Who do you think is responsible for the conflict?
What
- What happened in this chapter?
- What is at stake for the protagonist? What is being risked?
- What does the protagonist want and why?
- What does the antagonist want and why?
- What do you think is going to happen next?
- What are some themes in the story?
- What do you feel is the story’s overall message?
Where
- Where does this story take place?
- Does the location impact the characters or the storyline?
- Could this story take place at any other location? Why or why not?
When
- When does this story take place?
- Does the time period impact the story or characters?
- Could this story take place at any other time? Why or why not?
- When is the inciting incident?
- When does the story’s arc take place?
- When does the story’s resolution take place?
Why
- Why are the protagonist and antagonist at odds with one another?
- Do you sympathize with the protagonist? Why or why not?
- Do you sympathize with the antagonist? Why or why not?
- Why do you think the author created this story?
- Why is this an enjoyable/unenjoyable story for you?
How
- How does the protagonist overcome obstacles?
- How does the protagonist resolve the conflict?
- How does the antagonist create obstacles for the protagonist?
- How do you feel about the story’s ending?
- How does the author use literary devices such as metaphor, symbolism, and simile?
- If you could, how would you change the story?
Psychometric Model
Most reading comprehension assessments are analyzed using classical test theory methodology, where examinees’ scores are total number of correct answers or some scaling thereof Psychometric Model Most reading comprehension assessments are analyzed using classical test theory methodology, where examinees’ scores are total number of correct answers or some scaling thereof
Visual texts, which are increasingly prevalent in our daily lives, also play a crucial role in reading comprehension assessments such as SAT, TOEFL, PISA, and PIRLS. These assessments specifically measure students’ ability to make inferences, conclude, and critically analyze the relationship between textual and visual information, thereby assessing higher-level skills (Cahalan et al., 2002; Cohen & Upton, 2006; Unsworth, 2014; Mullis et al., 2017; OECD, 2019). Additionally, well-constructed visual texts with captivating visual stimuli enhance students’ motivation for exams (Glenberg & Langston, 1992; Hoyt, 1992). However, creating visual texts and writing visual reading comprehension items can be challenging and time-consuming compared to other item types (Author, 2023). Visual texts demand effective integration of visual elements with accompanying text, including selecting appropriate visuals that align with the content and purpose of the item. Balancing textual and visual components coherently and meaningfully can be more complex than writing text-only items (Daly & Unsworth, 2011; Sabatini et al., 2014). The images used in visual texts must accurately represent the information presented in the text be clear, appealing, and effectively convey the intended message. Additionally, factors such as layout, design, and readability of visuals should align with the objectives of the item and support comprehension for the target audience (Hoyt, 1992). Furthermore, the integration of visual and auditory elements has become a compelling feature of computer-based tests, making them highly appealing and widely used in modern educational settings. Sayın, 2024 382 As a result, computer-based testing is shown to be an effective method for assessing students’ visual reading comprehension skills. Computer-based tests offer flexible testing options and rapid score calculation, benefiting educators and students alike (Chen et al., 2019; Gierl et al., 2021). This flexibility is particularly advantageous in classroom practice, where traditional paper-and-pencil exams can be time-consuming to score due to large class sizes and other responsibilities (Chen et al., 2019). It provides swift feedback, allowing teachers to identify individual learning needs promptly and facilitate targeted support (Weber et al., 2003). Moreover, the use of multimedia elements, such as photos and videos, in electronic tests enhances assessment opportunities and supports diverse item types (Gierl et al., 2021; Kosh et al., 2019). However, digital assessments or computer-based tests also face challenges, particularly in the context of distance education (Arrend, 2007). Security concerns and the need to create a substantial item pool are noteworthy issues. To prevent the disclosure of items before exams, synchronous test administrations have been adopted, but this approach sacrifices the flexibility that computer-based tests can offer (ÖSYM, 2020). Furthermore, the practice effect, where repeated test performance influences scores, can compromise the validity and reliability of measurement (Hausknecht et al., 2007). To ensure diverse items for inclass follow-up tests and personalized assessments, a substantial item pool with established psychometric properties is essential (Hausknecht et al., 2007). For that, creating an item pool with scalable difficulty is crucial, and it applies not only to the textual components but also to visuals in visual reading comprehension items. Ensuring that visuals are adaptable to difficulty levels adds flexibility to computer-based tests, allowing students to take the test at different times and locations, such as over three days. However, it’s worth knowing that this process is challenging and resource intensive. To address this challenge, the field of AIG has emerged, combining computer technology with cognitive and psychometric theories (Arendasy & Sommer, 2012; Embretson & Yang, 2006; Gierl & Haladyna, 2012b). Automatic item generation Automatic item generation (AIG) is the process of automatically generating tests, exams, or items for educational and assessment purposes. It leverages cognitive and psychometric theories along with computer technology to produce high-quality items efficiently (Embretson & Yang, 2006; Gierl et al., 2019; Gierl & Lai, 2018; Gierl et al., 2012; Irvine & Kyllonen, 2013). AIG aims to continuously generate and diversify new items to assess student’s various abilities and learning styles. It ensures items meet assessment criteria such as objectivity, reliability, and validity (Gierl & Haladyna, 2012a). AIG enables the creation of item pools for individual-specific tests, facilitates adaptation to updated curricula and learning objectives, and saves time and costs compared to traditional item writing processes (Gierl et al., 2019; Kosh et al., 2019
Children can learn to form images to accompany the words they read if we teach them to do that. We don’t need complicated procedures, expensive technology, fancy organizational charts, or anything other than a very clear focus, humor, and relaxed time with the children
Visual processing is the brain’s ability to interpret and make sense of visual information from the environment (different from visual acuity which measures how sharp your vision is at distance). In the context of reading, visual processing involves recognizing letters, decoding words, and understanding the spatial arrangement of text on a page. Good visual processing is necessary for these important reading skills:
- Letter Recognition: One of the fundamental skills in reading is the ability to recognize letters. Efficient visual processing allows individuals to quickly identify and distinguish between different letters, which forms the basis for word recognition.
- Word Decoding: Decoding involves translating written symbols (letters) into their corresponding sounds to pronounce words. Efficient visual processing facilitates rapid and accurate decoding, which helps to read fluently.
- Visual Tracking: Reading requires smooth and accurate eye movements to track text from left to right across a page. Strong visual processing skills help to maintain focus and prevent skipping or repeating lines while reading.
- Visual Memory: Remembering and recalling visual information, such as the shapes of letters and words, is essential for building vocabulary and comprehending text. A strong visual memory enables readers to recognize words encountered previously which helps us to read fluently.
Here are some important foundations of visual processing abilities:
- Visual Discrimination: being able to recognize the differences and similarities between objects, symbols or shapes (in this case letters).
- Visual Memory: being able to remember what something looks like, which helps remember letters, sight words, and spelling rules.
- Visual Form Constancy: knowing that letters can exist in different contexts and being able to identify them across contexts.
- Visual Sequential Memory: being able to understand the sequence of order of words after viewing them. This helps with spelling and decoding words (ordering letters in a particular sequence). Difficulties here can result in meaning of words being changed and impacting understanding.
- Visual Figure-Ground: ability to distinguish and find a particular object (or word) which helps with scanning text to find a particular piece of information.
- Visual Closure: being able to recognise a word when only a part of it is shown which helps to recognise a word without having to fully decode it each time it is encountered.
What is Auditory Processing?
Auditory processing is the brain’s ability to interpret and make sense of sounds. In reading, auditory processing skills are important for skills in phonemic awareness, understanding spoken language, and recognizing the letter-sound correspondence. Efficient auditory processing is necessary for these reading skills:
- Phonemic Awareness: Phonemic awareness involves the ability to identify and manipulate individual sounds (phonemes) in spoken words. Good auditory processing skills enable children to identify subtle differences in sounds, which is crucial for phonemic awareness and phonics instruction.
- Letter-Sound Correspondence: Understanding the relationship between sounds and written symbols is fundamental to learning to read. Strong auditory processing skills facilitate the association between spoken sounds and their corresponding letters or letter combinations, which aids in recognising and decoding words.
- Oral Language Comprehension: Reading comprehension relies on the ability to understand spoken language. Effective auditory processing enables individuals to extract meaning from oral language, which translates to improved comprehension when reading written text.
Here are some important foundations of auditory processing abilities:
- Auditory Awareness: ability to detect where a sound is coming from
- Auditory Discrimination: ability to detect differences in specific sounds. This helps to identify differences such as /th/ and /f/.
- Auditory Identification: ability to attach meaning to particular sounds which aids in having good letter-sound association
Visual and Auditory Processing and Reading Comprehension – The Workshop Reading Centre
Data Collection
Discuss the Science of formulating Psychometric Questions based on Logic compared to Discrete Mathematics and Pedagogy Science’s Logic all the same theory of Decision Making
Discrete Mathematics in Psychometrics Logical Programming Questions for Reading Comprehension questions based on formulating questions after the text:
Discussed at a Later timeData Collection
Discuss the Science of formulating Psychometric Questions based on Logic compared to Discrete Mathematics and Pedagogy Science’s Logic all the same theory of Decision Making
Discrete Mathematics in Psychometrics Logical Programming Questions for Reading Comprehension questions based on formulating questions after the text:
Discussed at a Later time
A logic Program is typically, a collection of Clauses that consist of preconditions for running the clause and a should be taken. Matching exercises in a Cognitive Compression way to develop a child’s brain to think Logically and Mathematically even about Reading Compression.
Designed for Fuzzy Logic in A.I in advanced way to train Human Interactions and Brain Cognitive and Generally how Programming works
#35. In context which of the following would NOT improve sentence 14
Whatever their experience, I believe that more and more women are playings, sports today, than ever before did play sports, and I think that is has many positive consequences for LARGER SOCIETY
- Delete “ I believe that:
- Delete “than ever before did play sports.”
- Delete: I think that “
- Insert the word” trend: after “this.:
- Replace “many” with : alot of .”
Imagine if utilized Daydreamin Comics with a computational abstraction: in OCR( optical character recognition) a child’s imagination of reading a comic book or literature give a survey of comments to what the context of the story was about, not knowing it , training for great reading compression. example
COMMENT BOX AND ABOVE IS THE FOLLOWING:
- Delete “ I believe that:
- Delete “than ever before did play sports.”
- Delete: I think that “
- Insert the word” trend: after “this.:
- Replace “many” with : alot of .”
Computational Abstractions
Introduction
Pupils should be taught to: design, use and evaluate computational abstractions that model the state and behavior of real-world problems and physical systems.
In computer science, abstraction is the process by which data and programs are defined with a representation similar in form to its meaning (semantics), while hiding away the implementation details. Abstraction tries to reduce and factor out details so that the programmer can focus on a few concepts at a time. A system can have several abstraction layers whereby different meanings and amounts of detail are exposed to the programmer refines the definition of computational thinking to six concepts: a thought process, abstraction, decomposition, algorithmic design, evaluation, and generalization. All of these concepts are employed in problem solving processes. Again, the emphasis in this list of concepts is on thought processes, not the production of artefacts or evidence.
The Computing Progression Pathways (Dorling and Walker, 2014) is an example of a non-statutory assessment framework. It was produced by a small team of authors and reviewers, all teachers, based on their classroom experiences. It is an interpretation of the breadth and depth of the content in the 2014 national curriculum for computing program of study. It includes the dependencies and interdependencies between concepts and principles. This may help non-specialist teachers and inexperienced teachers to understand what should be taught in the classroom. It is publicly available at this link:
Evidence of assessing computational thinking Given that computational thinking concepts have been defined (Selby and Woollard, 2013) and an assessment framework for the computing program of study has been proposed (Dorling and Walker, 2014), a mapping can be developed to illustrate how computational thinking can be assessed over the full breadth and depth of the computing programme of study.
2.3. Problem solving techniques.
2.3.1. Introduction Now, it’s easy to write down these stages but harder to see how they apply in practical problem solving for programming.
Significance of the Study:
Logo is a programming language that was developed in the late 1960s by a team of researchers at Bolt, Beranek and Newman (BBN) led by Wally Feurzeig, Seymour Papert, and Cynthia Solomon.
The language was designed to be a simple and intuitive tool for teaching children the principles of computer programming. The development of Logo was closely tied to the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and the broader movement to make computers more accessible to the general public.
Feurzeig, Papert, and Solomon were all influenced by the work of the pioneering AI researcher Marvin Minsky, who believed that children could learn to think logically and computationally if they were given the right tools.
At the time, most programming languages were designed for use by professional programmers, and were considered too difficult for children to learn. Logo was different in that it was designed to be simple and intuitive, with a focus on using graphics and turtle-based commands to create simple programs and animations.
The first version of Logo was implemented on a DEC PDP-1 computer, using a turtle as a visual representation of the cursor. The turtle could be moved around the screen by giving it commands in Logo, allowing children to create simple drawings and animations.
This innovative approach to teaching programming quickly gained popularity, and by the early 1970s, Logo was being used in schools around the world.
In the 1980s, it was adapted for use on home computers, including the Apple II and the Commodore 64, and became widely accessible.
One of the key features of Logo is its use of English-like commands, which made it easy for children to learn and use. This was a major departure from other programming languages of the time, which were often difficult for non-experts to understand.
Over the years, Logo has evolved and been implemented on a variety of different platforms, including personal computers and mobile devices.
One of the most famous uses of Logo was the development of the first widely-used educational robotics platform, the LEGO Mindstorms system. Using the Logo programming language, students were able to create simple programs that could control LEGO robots and make them move, turn, and interact with their environment.
In the decades since its inception, the Logo programming language has evolved and grown in complexity, but it remains a popular choice for educators looking to introduce children to the world of computer programming.
The Logo Programming Language, a dialect of Lisp, was designed as a tool for learning. Its features — modularity, extensibility, interactivity, and flexibility — follow from this goal.
For most people, learning Logo is not an end in itself, and programming is always about something. Logo programming activities are in mathematics, language, music, robotics, telecommunications, and science. It is used to develop simulations, and to create multimedia presentations and games. Logo is designed to have a “low threshold and no ceiling”: It is accessible to novices, including young children, and also supports complex explorations and sophisticated projects by experienced users.
The most popular Logo environments have involved the Turtle, originally a robotic creature that sat on the floor and could be directed to move around by typing commands at the computer. Soon the Turtle migrated to the computer graphics screen where it is used to draw shapes, designs, and pictures.
Some turtle species can change shape to be birds, cars, planes, or whatever the designer chooses to make them. In Logo environments with many such turtles, or “sprites” as they are sometimes called, elaborate animations and games are created.
Out Into the World
Widespread use of Logo began with the advent of personal computers during the late 1970s. The MIT Logo Group developed versions of Logo for two machines: The Apple ][ and the Texas Instruments TI 99/4. The Logo language itself was similar in both versions, but the video game hardware of the TI 99/4 lent itself to action-oriented projects, while the Apple version was best suited to turtle graphics, and language projects.
In 1978 a pilot project sponsored by MIT and Texas Instruments was begun at the Lamplighter School in Dallas, Texas with 50 computers and a student population of 450. In 1980 the Computers in Schools Project was initiated by the New York Academy of Sciences and Community School Districts 2, 3, and 9 in New York City, and supported by Texas Instruments and MIT. Twelve TI 99/4 computers were placed in six New York City Public Schools. These were later joined by a few Apple ][s.
Both projects offered teachers extensive training and support through intensive two-week Summer Institutes and follow-up workshops during the school year.
These projects have had lasting results. Theresa Overall, who was a leader in both the Dallas and New York workshops, continued to teach Logo at Lamplighter and to offer summer workshops. Michael Tempel, then of the New York Academy of Sciences is now President of the Logo Foundation, a nonprofit organization that provides Logo professional development and support services to schools and districts throughout the world, including New York City Community School District 3. Two of the teachers who represented that district in the original project, Peter Rentof and Steve Siegelbaum, went on to form the Computer School, one of the District’s alternative middle schools where Logo is still in use today.
The prototype Logo implementations used in those pioneering projects evolved into commercial products. TILOGO was released by Texas Instruments. Terrapin Software, a company that was set up in 1977 to distribute robot floor Turtles, licensed the Apple ][ version of MIT Logo and has marketed it and upgraded it to this day.
A new company, Logo Computer Systems, Inc. (LCSI) was formed in 1980. Many of the researchers, teachers, programmers, and writers who were involved in this venture have played major roles in the subsequent development of Logo. Seymour Papert is LCSI’s chairman. Brian Silverman was Director of Research and guided the development of all of LCSI’s products. Cynthia Solomon, who was on the team that created the original Logo in 1967, headed up LCSI’s first development office in Boston and later directed the Atari Cambridge Research Center. Michael Tempel provided educational support services from LCSI’s New York City office for ten years until he started the Logo Foundation in 1991.
LCSI developed Apple Logo, followed by versions for a host of other computers. With commercial availability, Logo use spread quickly.
Another important event occurred in 1980 – the publication of Seymour Papert’s Mindstorms . Teachers throughout the world became excited by the intellectual and creative potential of Logo. Their enthusiasm fueled the Logo boom of the early 1980s.
New versions of Logo were implemented in more than a dozen spoken languages on a variety of machines, many with video game style graphics and sound capabilities. Logo for MSX computers was popular in Europe, South America, and Japan. Atari Logo and Commodore Logo were popular in North America.
Logo received considerable support from mainstream computer manufacturers. Apple Computer marketed LCSI’s Apple Logo and, at one point, bundled it with the computers given away to each school in California. IBM marketed LCSI’s IBM Logo and Logo Learner.
Atari not only distributed Atari Logo, but set up the ambitious Atari Cambridge Research Center under the direction of Cynthia Solomon.
By the mid 1980’s the computers with video game capabilities had dropped off the market and taken their versions of Logo with them. MSDOS machines increasingly dominated the world of educational computing, except in the United States where Apple was the school favorite. Logo developers concentrated on these machines. Although new implementations added features and took advantage of the increased speed and memory of newer computers, the most popular versions of Logo in use in 1985 were similar to those of 1980.
Around this time there was also some interest in using Logo as a “serious” programming language, especially for the new Macintosh computer. MacLogo from LCSI added new functionality to the Logo environment. Coral Software, developed an object-oriented version of Logo called Object Logo. It included a compiler which allowed programs to run at higher speed, and stand-alone applications could be created. But Logo did not become popular among applications programmers.
1.2 Discrete Mathematics Preparation
Discrete Mathematics
Discrete mathematics is foundational material for computer science: Many areas of computer science require the ability to work with concepts from discrete mathematics, specifically material from such areas as set theory, logic, graph theory, combinatorics, and probability theory.
1.3 Common Lisp
The material in discrete mathematics is pervasive in the areas of data structures and algorithms but appears elsewhere in computer science as well. For example, an ability to create and understand a proof is important in virtually every area of computer science, including (to name just a few) formal specification, verification, databases, and cryptography. Graph theory concepts are used in networks, operating systems, and compilers. Set theory concepts are used in software engineering and in databases. Probability theory is used in artificial intelligence, machine learning, networking, and a number of computing applications.
Consequently, a Common Lisp program tends to provide a much clearer mapping between your ideas about how the program works and the code you actually write. Your ideas aren’t obscured by boilerplate code and endlessly repeated idioms. This makes your code easier to maintain because you don’t have to wade through reams of code every time you need to make a change. Even systemic changes to a program’s behavior can often be achieved with relatively small changes to the actual code. This also means you’ll develop code more quickly; there’s less code to write, and you don’t waste time thrashing around trying to find a clean way to express yourself within the limitations of the language.2
Common Lisp is also an excellent language for exploratory programming–if you don’t know exactly how your program is going to work when you first sit down to write it, Common Lisp provides several features to help you develop your code incrementally and interactively.
For starters, the interactive read-eval-print loop, which I’ll introduce in the next chapter, lets you continually interact with your program as you develop it. Write a new function. Test it. Change it. Try a different approach. You never have to stop for a lengthy compilation cycle.3
Other features that support a flowing, interactive programming style are Lisp’s dynamic typing and the Common Lisp condition system. Because of the former, you spend less time convincing the compiler you should be allowed to run your code and more time actually running it and working on it,4 and the latter lets you develop even your error handling code interactively.
Another consequence of being “a programmable programming language” is that Common Lisp, in addition to incorporating small changes that make particular programs easier to write, can easily adopt big new ideas about how programming languages should work. For instance, the original implementation of the Common Lisp Object System (CLOS), Common Lisp’s powerful object system, was as a library written in portable Common Lisp. This allowed Lisp programmers to gain actual experience with the facilities it provided before it was officially incorporated into the language.
Bottom of Form