You are here:

Classroom Learning in a Dual-Screen-Based Environment
PROCEEDINGS

, , National Chung-Cheng University, Taiwan ; , National Chung-Cheng University/ TaTung Institute of Commerce and Technology, Taiwan

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Vienna, Austria ISBN 978-1-880094-65-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explore the effect of dual-screen presentation system on student performance in a classroom setting and how this system might facilitate instructors’ classroom teaching. A dual-screen presentation system requires two projection screens on which people can manipulate two PowerPoint slides at the same time in order to provide a more diverse multimedia learning environment for students and instructors in the classroom. The design of this system is based upon the assumptions of cognitive theories. Students’ learning performances in both dual-screen group and blackboard group were examined. Both students’ and the instructor’s perceptions regarding the use of dual-screen presentation were reported. It is hoped this new presentation system could bring a new and effective way to facilitate classroom teaching and learning.

Citation

Chen, Y.C., Chang, T.W. & Kuo, F.O. (2008). Classroom Learning in a Dual-Screen-Based Environment. In J. Luca & E. Weippl (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2008--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 5579-5586). Vienna, Austria: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 6, 2021 from .

© 2008 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Baddeley, A.D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  2. Baddeley, A.D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
  3. Baddeley, A.D. (1999). Human memory. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  4. Brunken, R., Steinbacher, S., Schnotz, W., Leutner, D. (2001). Mental models and effects of presentation and retrieval cue codality in multimedia learning. Zeitschrift fur Padagogische Psychologie 15 (1), 16-27.
  5. Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293-332.
  6. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal of
  7. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1996). Cognitive load while learning to use a computer program. Applied cognitive Educational Psychology, 62, 233-246.
  8. Clark, J.M. & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 149-210.
  9. Clark, R.C., Mayer, R.E. (2003). E-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. Preiffer, John Wiley& Sons.
  10. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351-371.
  11. Kester, L., Kirschner, P.A., & Van Merriënboer, J.J.G. (2003). Just-in-time information presentation during multimedia learning: Effects on search behavior and learning outcomes. Paper presented at the biannual meeting of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, August 26-30, Padua, Italy.
  12. Kester, L., Lehnen, C., Van Gerven, P.W.M. & Kirschner, P.A. (2006). Just-in-time, schematic supportive information presentation during cognitive skill acquisition. Computers in Human Behavior; 22-1, 93-112.
  13. Mayer, R.E. & Anderson, R.B. (1991). Animations need narrations: An experimental test of a dual-coding hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 484-490.
  14. Mayer, R.E. & Anderson, R.B. (1992). The instructive animation: Helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 444-452.
  15. Mayer, R.E. (1999). The promise of educational psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Merrill.
  16. Mayer, R.E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  17. Mayer, R.E. (2005). The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. 31-47, 84-89.
  18. Mayer, R.E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 12, 125-1 41.
  19. Mayer, R.E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43-52.
  20. Mayer, R.E., & Sims, V.K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 389-401.
  21. Mayer, R.E., Moreno, R., Boire, M., & Vagge, S. (1999). Maximizing constructivist learning from multimedia communications by minimizing cognitive load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 638-643.
  22. Miller, G.A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
  23. Owens, P. & Sweller, J. (2008). Cognitive load theory and music instruction. Educational Psychology, 28(1), 29-45.
  24. Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and Verbal Processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart& Winston.
  25. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  26. Renkl, A.(2005). The Worked-Out Examples Principle in Multimedia Learning. In R. Mayer (ed.) The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 229-245.
  27. Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Schuh, J. (2003). Are multiple examples neccessary for schema insduction? In F.
  28. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
  29. Sweller, J. (1994). "Cognitive Load Theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design". Learning and Instruction, 4, 295-312.
  30. Sweller, J. (1999). Instruction design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: ACER.
  31. Sweller, J., Chandler, P., Tierney, P. & Cooper, M. (1990). Cognitive load as a factor in the structuring of technical matter. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 176-192.

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