Awareness And Cognitive Load Levels Of Teacher Candidates Towards Student Products Made By Digital Storytelling

Year 2014, , 94 - 107, 01.09.2014

Figen Kılıc

https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.90227

Cited By: 6

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to assess the student products created by digital storytelling, and to determine the awareness towards learning the topic and the cognitive loads of students during the process. Research was performed with a total of 52 teacher candidates attending 2nd class at “Classroom Teacher” department of Mersin University Faculty of Education in 2012-2013 education years. General scanning model was used to determine the cognitive loads and awareness of student products, created by teacher candidates through digital storytelling, for learning the topic. As a result of the Research, we reached the conclusion that the awareness related to basic concepts and program created by digital storytelling increased, and there was not a cognitive overload. Also, students’ opinions were taken on the process and according to acquired data, it was concluded that the students were pleased with the process, their awareness increased, and they made plans to improve what they learned and use them in the future. In line with acquired findings, it was suggested that experimental studies should be made on this topic.

Keywords

Digital Storytelling, Cognitive Load, Awareness

References

• Anglin, G. J., Vaez, H. & Cunningham, K. L. (2004). Visual Represantation and Learning:
• The Role of Static and Animated Graphics. D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communication and Technology. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Anstey, M. & Bull, G. (2006). Teaching and Learning Multiliteracies: Changing Times,
• Changing Literacies. Delaware: International Reading Association. European Commission (2007). Directorate-general for Education and Culture. Key
• Competences For Lifelong Learning European Reference Framework, Brussels, Belgium, EC Lifelong Learning Programme. http://ec.europa.eu./dgs/education culture/pub 1/pdf/II-learning/keycomp_en.pdf retrieved on 28.05.2013.
• Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L. & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind,
• Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Dunlosky, J. & Metcalfe, J. (2008). Metacognition. USA: Sage Publications.
• Gelen, I. (2004). Bilişsel Farkındalık Stratejilerinin Türkçe Dersine İlişkin Tutum,
• Okuduğunu Anlama ve Kalıcılığa Etkisi, (The Effects of Metacognitive Strategies on Attitudes Toward Turkish Course, Reading Comprehension Achievement and Retention), XIII. National Congress of Educational Sciences, 6-9 July, Inönü University, Educational Faculty, Malatya. Hull, G. A. & Nelson, M. E. (2005). Locating The Semiotic Power of Multimodality Written
• Communication. Research in the Teaching of English, 22(2), 224-261. Karasar, N. (2008). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi (Scientific Research Method (17th
• Edition)]. Ankara: Nobel. Kablan, Z. (2005). Bilgisayar Destekli Fen Bilgisi Öğretiminde Yazılı Metin ve Animasyonlara Uygulanan Mekansal Konumlandırma Yaklaşımlarının (Ekranda Ayırma
• Kılıc, E. (2006). Çoklu Ortamlara Dayalı Öğretimde Paralel Tasarım ve Görev Zorluğunun
• Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Başarılarına ve Bilişsel Yüklenmelerine Etkisi, (Multimedia- Based Instructional Design and Task Parallel University of Difficulty and Cognitive Load Effects on Students' Achievement), Unpublished, Ph.D. Thesis, Ankara University, Institute ofEducational Sciences, Ankara. Mann, B. L. (2005). Selected Styles in Web_Based Edicational Research, USA: Idea Group Publishing.
• Mausavi, S.Y., Low, R. & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing Cognitive Load by Mixing Auditory and Visual Presantation Modes, Journal of Educational Psychology, 87 (2), 319-334.
• Marzano, R. J. And others. (2011). http://www.andrews.edu/~bshep/Dimension%202.PPT retrieved on 29.05.2013.
• 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, 638-643. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia Learning, Cambridge University Press.
• Merill, D. M. (1994). Instructioanal Desing Theory, New Jersey: Educational Technology
• Publications Englewood Cliffs. Ogle, D. M. (1998). K-W-L: “A Teaching Model That Develops Active Reading of Expository
• Text”, Reading Teacher, 39, 564-570. Paas, F. & Van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (1993). The Efficiency of Instructional Conditions: An
• Approach to Combine Mental Effort and Performance Measures, Human Factors, 35, 737- 7
• Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Sezgin, E. (2009). Çok Ortamlı Öğrenmede Bilişsel Kuram İlkelerine Göre Hazırlanan
• Walters, S. & Walters, K. (2001). Lifelong Learning, Higher Education and Active
• Citizenship: From Rhetoric to Action. Int. J. Lifelong Educ., 20 (6): 471-478. www.tech4learning.com, (2007). Retrieved on 28.05.2013