Review of Chapters 3 and 4

            This week I will be reviewing two chapters of the book e-Learning and the Science of Instruction, by Ruth Clark and Richard Mayer.  This is a book which I am using as a resource in a Principles of Design and Management in Distance Education class at Liberty University.

Chapter Three

            Chapter three covers application of something the book terms the Multimedia Principle.  The basic principle of this chapter can be summed up in one brief sentence.  According to Clark and Mayer, the use of textual instruction in conjunction with the integration of instructional graphics is significantly more effective than the use of textual instruction alone (2008).

            Beyond this basic principle are a host of details which provide guidance in the application of the Multimedia Principle. For example, some graphics are more effective than others.  Decorative graphics and representational graphics which are just a simple visual representation of an object, are the least effective usage.  Optimal efficacy is obtained when textual instruction is coupled with graphics which demonstrate relationships between processes or concepts .  These types of graphics are called transformational, organizational, or relational graphics (Clark, Mayer, 2008).

            There are some very specific reasons the authors support the use of dual instructional formats.  The first has to do with cognitive learning theory.  The authors subscribe to an active learning theory as opposed to an information acquisition theory.  According to this belief, presentation of the instructional information is not adequate.  The instructional goal for the educator is to launch the learner toward processing of the information in conjunction with previously mastered concepts to achieve understanding of the relationships the new concepts have with the old. 

            The second reason is that research indicates that textual and graphic instructions combined are simply more effective (Clark, Mayer, 2008).  In virtually every instance, studies found that students mastered concepts more thoroughly and performed better on tests when provided combined instruction than students provided only textual instruction.

            The ramifications of the concepts in this chapter are significant.  For many years, direct instruction and traditional adherence to information acquisition theory have led to education primarily as an oral or written presentation of concepts (Gutek, 1995).  Though this educational philosophy can lead to memorization of facts without understanding of the underlying concepts, the ability to regurgitate and recall facts works well with standardized testing procedures, which has lead to the use of information acquisition theory well beyond it’s ability to be justified by research.

            Use of multiple presentation formats is vital especially in a distance learning environment.  In a traditional format, educators can spontaneously provide visual cues for students, such as hand gestures or diagrams on chalk boards that can serve the same functions as the graphics described in this chapter.  The unavailability of spontaneity means the distance educator must be more purposeful in their pursuit of this principle because the graphics must be designed well in advance.

It is encouraging as a parent and educator to see such a foundational change occurring in the application of modern educational theory.  As more and more studies are published that support a constructivist theory of learning in which learners actively build their knowledge, educators will find that the Multimedia Principle will draw learners toward more active engagement of topics and widespread application seems a foregone conclusion.

Chapter Four

            Chapter four is the discussion of a principle that relates closely to the Multimedia Principle discussed above.  The Contiguity Principle is a guideline for the application of the Multimedia Principle.  In its basic form, it states that textual and graphic instruction, when combined, should be presented in an integrated fashion in order to achieve near simultaneity (Clark, Mayer, 2008).

            This principle comes into play in several ways.  Presentations in which an audio portion is presented first, followed by a text and graphic representation of a concept would be an example of a failure to apply this principle.   Presenting both formats in conjunction with each other helps students to make connections and build relationships between concepts.  Timely feedback is another area in which benefits of the Contiguity Principle are made apparent. 

            In hindsight, this principle seems obvious.  Peruse the many presentations available to educators today, and it becomes apparent, however, that designers of many learning objects are not considering contiguity as a tool.  Learners are required to flip from screen to screen or page to page to make connections, or close pop-up windows to view necessary information.

            A good portion of an educator’s job is communication, and this boils down to a basic communications principle as well.  A good communicator considers the perception of the audience, the intention of the communication, the context and the format before initiating a communication (Seiler & Beal, 2008).  Usually, the goal for an educator is to help students make connections with concepts, and it is only common sense to make those connections as easy as possible by minimizing the lengths a learner must go to in order to make them.

           

               

References

Clark, R., Mayer, R., (2008).  E-Learning and the Science of Instruction, Chapter 3, Applying the Multimedia Principle, San Francisco: Pfieffer

Gutek, G, (1995), A History of the Western Educational Experience, 2^nd Ed., Chapter 13, Froebel and Montessori: Early Childhood Education, Waveland Press Inc., Long Grove I

Seiler, W., Beal, M. (2008). Communication: Making Connections, 7^th Ed., Chapter 1, Connecting Process and Principles, Pearson Education Inc., Boston

Assessment, Constructivism, and the Online Environment

            It would appear this blog is turning into a long praise of constructivism.  That was not my intention, though I admit I am an enthusiastic adherent and often find the answers to educational dilemmas to be buried in the constructivist philosophy.  With that said, here it comes again to the rescue.

Constructivism and distance learning make a complementary pairing.  In fact, evidence suggests that educators following a constructivist philosophy in general tend to exhibit more frequent and more effective overall use of technology (Overbay et al., 2010) which may explain why most distance learning environments are designed based on a constructivist educational philosophy ( Pange and Pange, 2011).  What are the reasons this relationship exists?

One of those reasons this may be that technology lends itself toward more complex projects and engaging projects.  The ability to use these learner lead projects as primary assessment tool provides several layers of advantage in the summative assessment stage.  Learners may utilize their strongest learning modality, optimizing their potential to assimilate and demonstrate the new concepts.  They can also minimize extraneous cognitive load by using familiar contexts within which to perform assessed tasks (Sweller, 2007).   As an added bonus, the educator is not forced to grade the exact same project over and over.

Another large advantage of constructivist type assessment in a distance learning environment is the issue of time.  Many e-learning classes are shorter than the traditional classroom option.  Trying to assess traditionally by testing every individual basic concept along the way takes too much time out of an eight week class.  A constructivist, however, realizes that demonstration of the most complex concepts necessitates mastery of the supporting concepts as well, and reduces the total allocation of resources necessary for assessment.

           

David Bennett

Overbay, A., Patterson, A. S., Vasu, E. S., & Grable, L. L. (2010). Constructivism and technology use: findings from the IMPACTing Leadership project. Educational Media International, 47(2), 103-120. doi:10.1080/09523987.2010.492675

Pange, A., & Pange, J. (2011). Is E-learning Based On Learning Theories? A Literature Review. World Academy Of Science, Engineering & Technology, 8062-66

Sweller, John. (2007). Human Cognitive Architecture, Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, (31), 369-381, Taylor and Francis Group

The Beauty of Constructivism

            This week, we will look at learning theory and how it applies to distance education course design.  Specifically, I subscribe to a constructivist learning theory, so that is where I will begin.

            Constructivism is a theory which learning takes place actively within the learner, as he or she builds increasingly complex concepts on the foundation of simpler and previously assimilated concepts (Dunn, 2005).  The theory was popularized by the research of early educational theorists Piaget and Pestalozzi (Gutek, 1995) though it could be said to have been pioneered thousands of years ago by Socrates himself in his Socratic Method.  According to his method, the teacher educates a student by asking leading questions which guide the student toward “discovery” of the intended knowledge or concept mastery.

            Newer theories support the overall concept of constructivism as well.  Cognitive load theory has gained some modern traction in the educational world.   Research in this avenue indicates that the efficiency of new concept assimilation can be positively affected by reducing extraneous cognitive load by introducing new concepts in reference to previously assimilated concepts (Sweller, 2007).

            Adherents to this educational philosophy must be purposeful in the design of their curriculum as every step is built on the previous step and must therefore be in a very specific order.  Traditional synchronous education can be handled in a less planned method because the educator has ample time to adjust. 

The necessity to plan ahead causes the concept of constructivism to lend itself particularly well to many distance education applications because it also makes assessment more predictable and definable.  An end goal can be broken down into ever more basic tasks that can then each be defined for the student and then be easily and individually assessed. 

Defining the concepts required to master each task inherent in the end goal provides a basic curriculum.  Ordering those concepts so that they build on one another further refines the curriculum and creates a natural schedule.  From here one only needs to locate the proper resources and begin lesson planning. This inherent organization is one reason a constructivist approach will be a key element in my own approach to course design, especially that of distance learning. 

There are some drawbacks to truly following a constructivist learning theory however.  For example, traditional methods of assessing subjects such as history or geography have more to do with rote memorization and constructivism provides little aid in disassembling the component concepts of these subjects.

For a more complete explanation of my educational philosophy, visit my homepage at http://www.live4hisglory.net/portfolio/index.html.

Dunn, Sheila G. (2005).  Philosophical Foundations of Education, Connecting Philosophy to Theory and Practice, Pearson Education Inc.

Gutek, G, (1995), A History of the Western Educational Experience, 2^nd Ed., Chapter 10, Republicanism, Revolution, and Education, Waveland Press Inc., Long Grove IL

 Sweller,John. (2007). Human Cognitive Architecture, Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, (31), 369-381, Taylor and Francis Group