Presenting Strategies On Ropes+Model For CBI Lesson Design[English]

Abstract

Computer-based instruction (CBI) has strong historical roots in behavioral psychology. Recent advances in CBI have changed instructional environment for CBI design. In addition, CBI designs have been influenced by technological improvements and human factors. The purpose of the study is to examine of the effects of presenting strategies on ROPES+ Model for CBI lesson design from an integrated perspective. ROPES- Model is not a CBI model; it is a meta-model that provides requirements of instruction for CBI models. These requirements arc Retrieving, Orienting, Presenting, Encoding, Sequencing, and additionally Contextual (+) factors. The effectiveness of components is discussed with presenting phase to create effective computer screen design for CBI lessons. The processes are classified as psychological, instructional, and technological dimensions for screen design based on ROPES+ model. In addition, cognitive structure of instruction based on ROPES+ Model was developed to provide effective strategies for adaptation of instruction in CBI. As a result, directions for the next Web-based instruction (WBI) or CBI lessons by screen design research and theory findings were presented with the contributions of ROPES+ Model in this study. Thus, cognitive structure of instruction on ROPES+ Model can be used in the future classes for creating high quality interactive designs as well as creating traditional CBI lesson designs. 

Keywords

• Presenting lesson
• screen design
• visual effects in learning
• computer-based instruction

Presenting Strategies On Ropes+Model For CBI Lesson Design[English]

Abstract

Bilgisayarla öğretim davranış psikolojisinde çok güçlü tarihsel köklere sahiptir. Son zamanlardaki gelişmeler bilgisayarla öğretimin tasarımı için öğretim ortamını değiştirmiştir. Bunun yanında, bilgisayarla öğretim tasarımları teknolojik ilerlemeler ve insan faktörlerinden etkilenmiştir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, bilgisayarla öğretimde derslerin tasarımını birleştirilmiş yaklaşımlara göre ROPES+ modeli olarak bilinen bir yaklaşımda ele almaktır. Bu model bir bilgisayarla öğretim modeli olmayıp, bilgisayarla öğretim için öğretimin gereklerini içeren ve bilgiler sunan bir çerçevedir. Buradaki öğretim sunusunda gereklilikler, bilgileri geriye getirme (Retrieve), oryantasyon (Orienting), sunuş (Presenting), bilgileri açığa çıkarma, transfer etme (Encoding), sıralama (Sequencing) ve diğer bilgiler (Contextual (+) gibi faktörleri içerir. Bu çalışma bu faktörlerden sunu (presentasyon) stratejilerini bilgisayar ekranı tasarımı ve bilgisayarla öğretim derslerinin tasarımı bakımından sınıflandırmıştır. Ek olarak, bilişsel öğretim süreci ROPES+ modeline dayalı olarak bilgisayarla öğretimin adaptasyonunda etkili stratejiler sağlamak için geliştirilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, gelecekte WEB ile öğretim ya da ekran tasarımı araştırma ve teorisindeki bulgulara göre oluşan bilgisayarla öğretim derslerine ilişkin yönergeler ROPES+ modelinin katkıları ile çalışmada sunulmuştur. Bunun için, ROPES+ modeli üzerinde oluşan öğretimin bilişsel süreci gelecekte bilgisayarla öğretimdeki derslerin tasarımında olduğu kadar yüksek kalitede etkileşimli tasarımların yaratılmasında kullanılabilir.

Keywords

• Bilgisayar
• öğretim davranış
• tarihsel kök

References

1. Alessi, S. M, & Trollip, S. R. (1985). Computer-Based Instruction: Methods and Development. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
2. Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (2001). Multimedia For Learning: Methods And Development. (2nd Ed.) Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
3. Berry, L. H., & Dwyer, F. M. (1982). Interactive effects of color realism and learners' IQ on effectiveness of visual instruction. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 54, 1087-1091.
4. Dwyer, F. M. (1967). Adapting Visual Illustrations for Effective Learnin g. Harvard Educational Review, 37, 250-263.
5. Dwyer, R. M. (1978). Strategies for Improving Visual Learning. State College, PA. Learning Services.
6. Faiola, T. &. DeBloois, M. L. (1988, August). Designing a visual factors-based screen display interface: The new role of Graphic Technologist. Educational Technology, 12-21.
7. Fleming, M. & Levie, H. (1984). Instructional Message Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.
8. Gillingham, M. G. (1988, Winter). Text in computer-based instruction: What the research says. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 15(1), 1-6. Glaser, R. (1976). Components of psychology of instruction: Toward a science of design. Review of Educational Research. 46. 1-24.

9. Grabinger, R. S. (1983). CRT text design: Psychological Attributes Underlying t h e Evaluation of Models of CRT Text Displays. (Dissertation. Indiana University Bloomington) (University Microfilms International. Ann Arbor. MI: 1988)
10. Grabinger, R. S. (1989). Screen Lavoul Design: Research in the Overall Appearance of the Screen. (Report no IR-013-872) Dallas, TX: Annual Meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (ERIC Documentation Reproduction Service No. ED 308 812)
11. Gropper, G. L. (1988, April). How text displays add value to text content. Educational Technology. 29(4), 15-21.
12. Hannafin, M.J. & Hooper, S. (1989). An integrated framework for CBI screen design and layout. Computers in Human Behavior. 5, 155-165.
13. Hannafin, M. J. & Rieber, L. P. (1989a). Psychological foundations of instructional design for emerging Computer-Based Instructional technologies: Part I. Educational Technology Research and Development. 37(2), 91-101.
14. Hannafin, M. J. & Rieber, L. P. (1989b). Psychological foundations of instructional design for emerging Computer-Based instructional technologies: Part II. Educational Technology Research and Development. 37(2), 102-114.
15. Hannafin, M. J. & Peck. K. (1988). The Design, Development, and Evaluation of Instructional Software. New York: Macmillan.
16. Hannafin, M. J. & Phillips.T. L. (1987, Fall). Perspectives in the design of interactive Video: Beyond tape versus disc. Journal of Research and Development in Education. 21(1), 44- 60. Hathaway, M. D. (1984, January). Variables of Computer Screen Display and How they affect Learning. Educational Technology, 7-11.
17. Heines, J. M. (1984). Screen Design strategies for Computer-Assisted Instruction. Bedford. MA: Digital Press.
18. Hooper, S. & Hannafin, M.J. (1991). Psychological perspectives on emerging instructional technologies: A critical analysis. Educational Psychologist. 26(1). 69-95.
19. Hooper, S. & Hannafin, M. J. (1988, July). Learning the ROPES of instructional design: Guidelines for emerging interactive technologies. Educational Technology. 14-18.
20. Hooper, S., & Hannafin, M. J. (1986). Variables affecting the legibility of computer generated text. Journal of Instructional Development. 9, 22-29.
21. Ipek, I. (2001). Bilgisayarla öğretim: Tasarım, geliştirme ve yöntemler (Computer-Based Instruction: Design, development and methods). (Pelikan) Tıp-Teknik Kitapcılık Ltd. Sti. Ankara, Turkey.
22. Isaacs, G. (1987. January)- Text Screen Design for Computer-Assisted Learning. British Journal of Educational. Technology. 18(1). 41-51.
23. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1986, January). Computer-assisted cooperative learning. Educational Technology. 26(1), 12-18. Jonassen, D. H. (1988). Instructional Design for Microcomputer Courseware. Hillsdale. KJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, Associates. Inc.
24. Jonassen, D. H. (1989). Functions. Applications, and Design guidelines for multiple window environments. Computers in Human Behavior. 5, 185-194.
25. Keller, J. M., & Suzuki, K. (1988). Use of the ARCS motivation model in course design. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Instructional Design for Microcomputer Courseware, (pp. 401-434). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Inc.
26. Kerr, S. T. (1989). Discussion: Influences of research on screen design. Computers in Human Behavior. 5, 195-197.
27. Morrison, G.R., Ross, S. M. O'Dell, J. K., Schultz, C. W. & Wheat, N. H. (1989). Implications for the design of computer-based instruction screens. Computers in Human Behavior. 5, 167- 173.
28. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M. & O'Dell. J. K. (1988, Summer). Text density level as a design variable in instructional displays. Educational Communications Technology Journal. 36(11), 103-115.
29. Paivio, A. (1979). Imagery and Verbal Processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
30. Price, R. V. (1991). Computer-Aided Instruction: A Guide for Authors. Belmont, CA: Wads worth, Inc.
31. Rambally, G. K. & Rambally, R. S. (1987). Human factors in CAI design. Computer Education. 11(2), 149-153.
32. Rieber, L. & Hannafin, M. J. (1988). Effects of textual and animated orienting activities and practice on learning from computer-based instruction. Computers in the Schools. 5(1/2), 77-89.
33. Ross, S. M., Morrison, G. R. & O'Dell, J. K. (1988, Fall). Obtaining more out of less text in CBI: Effects of varied text density levels as a function of learner characteristics and control strategy. Educational Communications Technology Journal. 36(3), 131-142,
34. Salomon, G. (1979). Interaction of Media, Cognition, and learning. San Francisco. CA: JosseyBass.
35. Taylor, I. A. (1960). Perception and Visual Communication. In J. Ball, & F. Bynes (Eds.), Research Principles and Practices in Visual Communications. DAVI.