Raising cognitive load with linear multimedia to promote conceptual change

Abstract

Two disparate research programs have addressed the challenge of instructional multimedia design. One, based on cognitive load theory, has focused on ways of reducing unnecessary cognitive load during instruction to free up resources for learning. The other, based on constructivism, has centered on interactive multimedia, allowing students to build their own knowledge. Attempting to build on both bodies of literature, in this study, we investigated techniques that can raise the useful cognitive load engendered with linear multimedia. Participating online from home, students were pre-and posttested around a short multimedia intervention that explained Newton's first and second laws. In Experiment 1, students who watched a video dialogue involving alternative conceptions reported investing greater mental effort and achieved higher posttest scores than students who received a standard lecture-style presentation. In Experiment 2, two additional multimedia treatments were evaluated to assess the role of instructional time and the method of addressing alternative conceptions. In all, 272 students participated in the experiments. Interviews suggest that students adopted a more active approach to understanding the material if alternative conceptions were raised. In addition, students who watched the dialogue judged themselves to be similar to the student in the multimedia.

Exploring effectiveness of simulation-based inquiry learning in science with integration of formative assessment

“…Inquiry-based learning with simulations is a promising area for science-based instruction to foster learners' mental interaction with the physical and social world in order to develop scientific understanding, explanation, and communication among science ideas. Researchers have found that SimIn learning works as a remedial process by producing change in the alternative conceptions held by learners (Bell and Trundle 2008;Jimoyiannis and Komis 2001;Muller et al 2008;Srisawasdi et al 2013;Srisawasdi and Kroothkeaw 2014;Srisawasdi and Sornkhatha 2014;Windschitl and Andre 1998;Zacharia and Anderson 2003), improving the performance of gaining intuitive domain-specific knowledge, and promoting more qualitative knowledge than formalized knowledge (de Jong et al 1999;Veemans et al 2006;Suits and Srisawasdi 2013), achieving a more theoretical focus and coherent understanding of the concepts (Winberg and Berg 2007), and promoting positive perception of science learning (Buyai and Srisawasdi 2014;Pinatuwong and Srisawasdi 2014).…”

Qualitative Differences Between Learning Environments Using Videos in Small Groups and Whole Class Discussions: A Preliminary Study in Physics

“…Cox et al (1999) while investigating learning using dialogues on computers, have shown that students who do not actively participate in discussions also benefit through 'vicarious' learning (observing other people discussing ideas). Muller et al (2008) demonstrated that students watching a student and a tutor discussing misconceptions in a short linear video showed larger learning gains than those who watched a video containing just the correct content. The student and tutor dialogue was carefully based on common misconceptions from literature.…”

“…One can argue that such detail can introduce misconceptions and that is likely to be what Sam is trying to resolve. However, the resulting discussion shown below does not evolve into a misconceptions-based dialogue such as those scripted by Muller et al (2008).…”

Research on Organization of Mathematics Knowledge in Good Mathematical Cognitive Structure

“…However, it was obviously inconvenient to conduct quantitative analysis (Zhang and Chen, 2000;Ifenthaler et al, 2001). So the researchers developed some new methods, such as flow-map method (Anderson and Demetrius, 1993) , the technique of "establishment by the subject" (Liu, 1994;Enger, 1996;Ruiz-Primo & Shavelson, 1997;Ruiz-Primo et al, 2001;Lavigne, 2005;Shavelson et al, 2005;Muller et al, 2008;Lindstrom & Sharma, 2011), the method of "Pathfinder Associative Networks" (Casas et al, 2011;Geeslin & Shavelson, 1975;Jonssen et al, 1993;Fenker, 1975;Preece, 1976;Wainer & Kaye, 1974), and the method with HIMATT (Ifenthaler, 2011). After verifying by practice, it could be found these new methods were feasible, they promoted the quantitative research to cognitive structure and made the understanding of MCS to be more distinct and profound.…”