Assignment 3

The Use of Multimedia in Learning By Robyn Wood

INTRODUCTION: THE USE OF MULTIMEDIA IN LEARNING

By Robyn Wood

This PowerPoint builds on my earlier critique of Mayer & Sims (1994) ‘For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning’ and further explores the role of multimedia in learning by examining the following questions:

• What is the impact of multimedia on learning?

• How does the way multimedia is used impact on learning?

• How does the design of multimedia impact on learning?

An Overview of the Use of Multimedia in Learning

21st Century teaching and learning has dramatically changed understandings of how the brain works continually developing Literacy now encompasses the ability to communicate through multimedia (van Daal

& Sandvik, 2012)

the use of multimedia in learning includes: spoken or printed text, illustrations, photos, apps, graphs, animation or video (Mayer, 2005 as cited by

Reed, S, 2009) or ‘”non-interactive linear presentation (e.g. a cinema presentation) and Hypermedia

○ graphics, audio, visual, plain text and hyperlinks intertwined to create a generally non-linear medium of information. (e.g. world wide web) (Ohara & Pritchard, 2010 and Wikipedia, Hypermedia, 2013

Considerable research re. the effect of multimedia on learning includes: English speakers of other languages reading comprehension language acquisition learner motivation embedded use of multimedia in learning etc.

What is the Impact of Multimedia on Learning?

Research results appear to be very mixed

Examples of research that SUPPORT the use of multimedia in learning:

Ohara & Pritchard (2010) literature review suggests multimedia use can enhance literacy development, improve language

acquisition student personal knowledge is built and modified through the rich experiences that technology

offers

Zhao (2005) concluded multimedia presentations can: create stronger memory links than text alone video offers rich linguistic and culturally relevant material to learners comprehension can be enhanced through learner control of multimedia (e.g. playbacks)

Kamil, Intractor & Kim (2000)• children from language and cultural minority background can benefit • comprehension facilitated through ‘mental model’ building

Pearson et al (2005) meta-analysis of 20 research studies relating to digital tools and learning environments concluded digital tools enhance reading comprehension, vocabulary development and all aspects

of literacy development

The Impact of Multimedia on Learning Continued

Examples of research that concluded multimedia use made LITTLE impact:

Lankshear & Knobel (2003)• effects of technology on early literacy were ‘radically under-researched’

Burnett (2010)• strengths of multimedia were not being exploited therefore its effect could not be

determined

Kirschner, (2002) • use of technology causes cognitive overload

van Daal & Sandvik (2012) conducted a meta-analysis re. effects of multimedia on the early literacy

development of at risk children concluded literacy-related multimedia applications (e.g. video, TV, e-books.

computer assisted instruction) have a small to moderate effect on literacy learning outcomes for children at risk

second language learners appear to benefit the most further research is required

How does the way multimedia is used impact on learning? Mayer (2011) suggests:

the use of video does not make good learning there is no one multimedia better than another good learning is determined by effective teacher with sound pedagogy, learning objectives

identified and a strong program design

Mayer developed a design of multimedia learning systems based on Paivio’s dual coding theory:• multimedia principle (using both pictures and words)• coherence principle (avoiding extraneous media), • modality principal (using narration rather than text) • spatial contiguity principle (placing words and pictures close together) • temporal contiguity principle (present words and pictures at the same time) • redundancy principle (learn better from animation and narration than from animation,

narration and on-screen text)• Individual differences principle

Reed, (2009) challenges Mayer’s principles suggests ‘manipulation’ rather than perception of objects based on Engelkamp’s (1998) multimodal model of action-based learning suggests the performance of an act creates “additional memory codes” and results in better

recall manipulation of objects may be a promising method of instruction

Chambers et al., (2006) suggest embedded multimedia enables learners multiple pathways to retain and comprehend to be effective embedded multimedia must be in association with other effective teaching

practices, such as co-operative groups, working with the teacher etc.

Example of research into the Way Multimedia is Used :A Critique of The Interactivity Effect in Multimedia Learning (Evans &

Gibbons, 2007) – A Brief Summary PURPOSE OF RESEARCH: to determine whether the addition of interactivity enhances the process of learning from computer-based systems to determine the hypothesis of active-learning or passive learning (see notes)

RESEARCH METHODS: Participants - 33 second-year Business and Management undergraduates Randomly split into interactive group (I) and not interactive (NI) 2 computer-based multimedia versions were developed to teach how a bicycle pump works

Interactive features (I system) –included control of pace, self-assessment questions and interactive simulation Non-interactive features (NI system) – involved clicking a button to show static images /annotations Post-tested on (i) memory recall and (ii) understanding based on problem-solving

MAIN FINDINGS OF THIS RESEARCH: No significant difference in the overall post-test results

Interactive group: performed significantly better in transfer test took significantly less time to complete post-test took significantly longer to complete actual lesson did not significantly increase their retention of material

Test scores suggest: interactivity increased the depth of learning or understanding confirmed the active-learning hypothesis interactivity does not appear to increase memory retention

A Critical Review of this Research

Analysis: easy to understand, quantitative research builds on the considerable works of Mayer (1994, 1999, 2001, 2003)

Evaluation: discusses Mayer’s principles (2001) regarding the design of multimedia learning system does not discuss the theoretical framework underpinning this research literature review relies heavily on the work of Mayer and perhaps lacks depth and breadth

Problem Solving: methodology appears quite simplistic – I wonder if it were too simplistic? limitations were not acknowledged however suggestions are given for future research

Decision Making: the implications of this research (although sparse) are appropriate given the results (see notes)

Reasoning: builds on the significant contributions of Mayer’s research regarding the use of multimedia in

learning and in particular its design. given its strong alignment (e.g. it used the same example of the bicycle pump), the simplicity of

the research, and the clear results (when broken down – not necessarily overall), I believe the conclusions and implications are reasonable

How does the design of multimedia impact on learning?

Reed (2006) suggests the 6 cognitive architectures relevant to multimedia learning are shown in table 1 belowsuggests these theories are not rivals as they focus on different aspects of multimedia learning

Rieber’s (1990) research supports hypothesis that cognitive practice promotes deeper levels of mental processing (Craik & Lockhart, 1972).

Based upon this and others research, it would seem logical that the design of multimedia should include a practice component

Multimedia learning is underpinned by cognitive load using up the word limit capacity does not use up the picture limit capacity the design of multimedia can ‘off-load’ meaningful information from one modality to another by using fewer words or

pictures. NB this only works if the pictures and words directly support each other (Mayer, 2001a as cited in Chambers et al)

Example of research examining the design of multimediaA Critique of Achievement Effects of Embedded Multimedia in a

Success for All Reading Progam

Authors:

Bette Chambers Ph.D, Alan Cheung, Nancy A Madden Ph.D., Robert E. Slavin, Ph.D. all based at John Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA involved with the Success for All foundation (reading program)

Purpose of Research: To determine the academic effects of embedded multimedia on learners beginning to read

Research Methods: 394 first graders from 10 different schools 5 schools used embedded multimedia program, 5 schools same program without multimedia Year long study – pre and post tests Hispanic sub-group Qualitative data collected relating to word attack, word identification, passage comprehension and

DIBELS* . Analysed with hierarchical linear model

Results: experimental group did significantly better on word attack but other areas tested were not statistically

significant unable to determine if Hispanic sub-group benefited the researchers suggest embedded multimedia use has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of

beginning reading instruction for disadvantage children partially supports the expectation that the addition of embedded multimedia would enhance children’s

reading content

Critical SynthesisAnalysis: relatively easy to understand, good use of tables, large sample of participants discussion suggests embedded multimedia has “potential to enhance the effectiveness of beginning

reading instruction for disadvantaged children” however there is no mention in the purpose that this research was investigating at risk learners

Evaluation: builds on earlier research the separate investigation into the effect on Hispanic children was hidden within the research and not stated

in the purpose or method. Had this been deliberately planned for in the methodology, would there have been a different result?

Problem Solving: development of a two level model for hierarchical analyses seemed appropriate, however I did not

necessarily understand re. covariates and regression coefficients

Decision Making: the suggestion that the study partially supports the use of embedded multimedia to improve children’s

reading achievement is wise given the results are not statistically significant for individuals but as a group

Reasoning: study is underpinned by solid theory and literature review. limitations and the need for further research are acknowledge. I believe this research builds strongly upon Mayer’s assertion that teacher practice along with strong

pedagogy makes a difference however the use of multimedia may further enhance student achievement

Summing Up Wide reading suggests debate re. the actual impact of multimedia on student learning

Paivio’s DCT suggests it should be easier for students to retain information using multimedia however Mayer suggests that this in itself is not the magic wand for enhancing achievement. I tend agree with this.

An analysis of the differing research methods reviewed in this assignment (and preceding), suggest that an element of teacher effectiveness could in fact have a large impact on achievement. None of the research I reviewed examined this factor. Perhaps this is why there is little difference between some experimental and control groups?

Logic suggests research should inform practice, however I would argue this is not always the case (e.g. teachers adopting new multimedia (e.g. iPads) without having explored underpinning theories around this) . Going full circle, In topic 1 of this course, Rich, (2013) stated computer screens as being a “stimulus poor environment” and challenged the impact of technology on learning, which in turn leads me to Mayer’s research into the design of multimedia and the role it has on enhancing learning.

My final comment – I believe further research is required. As we continue to understand more about the brain and how it learns, the way we use and design multimedia should reflect these understandings in everyday practice.

ReferencesChambers, B., Cheung, A.C.K., Madden, N.A., Slavin, R. E. & Gifford, R. (2006). Achievement effects of embedded multimedia in a Success for All reading program. Journal of Educational Psychology 98(1), 232-237.

Evans, C. & Gibbons, N.J. (2007). The interactivity effect in multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 49, 1147-1160. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.008

Reed, S. K. (2006). Cognitive Architectures for Multimedia Learning. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 87-98.

doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_2

Reed, S.K. (2011). Manipulating Multimedia Materials. In Zheng, R. (Ed). Cognitive effects of multimedia learning (pp. 51-64). San Diego, USA: Information Science Reference.

Rieber, L.P. (1990). Using computer animated graphics in scientific instruction with children. Journal of Educational Psychology82) 1, 135-140.

van Daal, V. & Sandvik, J.M. (2012). Synthesis of Multimedia Effects on Literacy Achievements in Children at Risk. Paper presented at the Early Education and Technology For Children Conference, Norway. Retrieved from http://www.eetcconference.org/wp-content/uploads/Multimedia_Meta_EETC2012.pdf

Youtube (2011). Prof. Richard E. Mayer – On the role and design of vide for learning. Retrieved from ww.youtube.com/results?search_query=richard+mayer&oq=richard+mayer&gs_l=youtube1.0.0l2.7790.10793.0.13233.13.10.0.3.3.1.315.1856.3j1j5j1.10.0...0.0...1ac.1.11.youtube.woWUyS6J5I4

Youtube (2011). Rich. M. (M.D., M.P.H.) The orienting response. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZO3vYrJlaY

Assignment 3. 'FINAL POWER POINT' 40%Three focused research questions listed on the first slide of your Final Power Point. Y

References to up to THREE on-line empirical studies related to your topic. Y

May include graphics and hotlinks (to websites etc). Y

Notes reflect your critical synthesis of material rather than being solely descriptive. Y

Aspect 1: Descriptive and interpretative skills:  13/15%

 

 The reviews are impressive, and apart from the statistics, accurate interpretation of articles

Aspect 2: Analytical skills: 

This was part of your critical analysis and done well with the help of a rubric 14/ 15%

 

Aspect 3: Analytical, argumentative and creative skills:  9/10%

  I think you come to a fair conclusion/summary that is based on the evidence

You show clear, relevant connections that show a thorough understanding of Paper Readings, as well as additional, relevant readings. No much change to exemplify precision and flair in word choice, fluency and grace in syntax but the register was excellent. Accuracy in referencing.

MARK 36/40 

Aspect 1: Descriptive and interpretative skills: An 'A' student will clearly evoke what happened in a particular piece of research and will show the ability to theorise about what happened from more than one perspective or position. (15%)

 

Aspect 2: Analytical skills: An 'A' student will shown convincingly that they are aware that epistemology creates and shapes reality (that is how the way knowledge is constructed shapes our beliefs about the world). They will illustrate this awareness by making connections between the research method (the way the knowledge was constructed) used, the language of a text and the way these construct literacy or literate practices in a particular way. (15%)

 

Aspect 3: Analytical, argumentative and creative skills: An 'A' student will provide evidence and argue a case for a relationship between the research and practice. (10%)