You are here:

Broadening Established Theories of Multimedia Learning: An Extended Model of Multimedia Learning Design Based on Learning Object Technology
PROCEEDINGS

, , , , University of Macedonia, Greece

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Orlando, FL USA ISBN 978-1-880094-60-0 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

A trend is currently being attempted in the multimedia learning technology field to examine the impact of certain additional and potentially significant parameters. Beginning with established theories of multimedia learning such as the Cognitive Load Theory and the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning, we have attempted to provide a broader framework that more explicitly takes account of several of these parameters. The parameters included in the model discussed in this paper are the knowledge level of the learner, the manipulation of germane and intrinsic cognitive load, the support provided by the multimedia learning environment, and the active cognitive processing encouraged of learners by the environment. On a technical level, the multimedia learning environment is based upon the use of learning objects; the metadata packaging of the learning content has been used to provide information to the system concerning the above parameters in a standardized way. The paper discusses the design stages that were followed and focuses on particular development issues.

Citation

Giouvanakis, T., Samaras, H., Bousiou, D. & Tarabanis, K. (2006). Broadening Established Theories of Multimedia Learning: An Extended Model of Multimedia Learning Design Based on Learning Object Technology. In E. Pearson & P. Bohman (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2006--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 507-514). Orlando, FL USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 11, 2019 from .

© 2006 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Bannert, M. (2002) Managing cognitive load– recent trends in cognitive load theory, Learning and Instruction, 12 139-146.
  2. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293-332.
  3. Goldman, S.R. (2003). Learning in complex domains: when and why do multiple representations help? (Commentary). Learning and Instruction, 13, 239-244.
  4. Hede, A. (2002). An Integrated Model of Multimedia Effects on Learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 11(2), 177-191.
  5. Kirschner, P.A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 1-10.
  6. Koumi, J. (2003). Synergy between Audio Commentary and Visuals in Multimedia Packages. Journal of Educational Media, 28(1), 19-34
  7. Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13, 205-226
  8. Levie, W.H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: a review of research. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30(4), 195-232.
  9. Levin, J.R., Anglin, G.J., & Carney, R.N. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In D.M. Willows & H.A. Houghton, (Eds.), The psychology of illustration, Vol. 1(pp. 51-86) New York: Springer.
  10. Lewalter, D. (2003). Cognitive strategies for learning from static and dynamic visuals. Learning and Instruction, 13, 177-189.
  11. Lowe, R.K. (2003). Animation and learning: selective processing of information in dynamic graphics Learning and Instruction, 157-176
  12. Mayer, R.E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: using the same instructional design methods across different media Learning and Instruction, 13, 125-139
  13. Mayer, R.E. (2001). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge: University Press.
  14. Mayer, R.E., & Anderson, R.B. (1991). Animations Need Narrations: An experimental test of a dual-coding hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(4), 484-490
  15. Mayer, R.E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 312-320
  16. Mayer, R.E., & Moreno, R. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: the role of modality and contiguity. Journal of educational psychology, 91(2), 358-368
  17. Najjar, L.J. (2001). Principles of educational multimedia user interface design. In R.W. Swezey & D. Nathan M. & Robinson C. (2001). Considerations of learning and learning research: revisiting the "media effects" debate. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12, 69-88
  18. Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45, 255-287.
  19. Pollock, E., Chandler, P., Sweller, J. (2002) Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction, 12, 61–86 Samaras H., Giouvanakis T., Bousiou, D. & Tarabanis K. Towards a New Generation of Multimedia Learning Research. AACE Journal (AACEJ), former Educational Technology Review (ETR), 14(1), 2006 7
  20. Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141-156.
  21. Schnotz, W. & Bannert, M. (1999). Einflüsse der Visualisierungsform auf die Konstruktion mentaler Modelle beim Text-und Bildverstehen [Influence of the type of visualization on the construction of mental models during picture and text comprehension]. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 46(3), 217-236.
  22. Seufert, T. & Brünken, R. (2004). Supporting coherence formation in multimedia learning. In: Gerjets, P., Kirschner, P.A., Elen, J. & Joiner, R. (Eds.), Instructional design for effective and enjoyable computer-supported learning. Proceedings of the first joint meeting of the EARLI SIGs Instructional Design and Learning and Instruction with Computers (pp 138-147) (CD DASHDASH
  23. Sweller, J., and Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12 (3), 185-233.
  24. Sweller, J. (1989). Cognitive technology: Some procedures for facilitating learning and problem solving in mathematics and science. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81 (4), 457-466.
  25. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
  26. Van Merriënboer, J.J.G., Schuurman, J.G., de Croock, M.B.M., & Paas, F.G.W.C. (2002). Redirecting learners’ attention during training: effects on cognitive load, transfer test performance and training efficiency. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 11–37.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections