Artırılmış Gerçeklikle Beraber Özetleme Stratejisi Kullanmanın Öğrencilerin Bilişsel Yük ve Başarısına Etkisi

Öz

Artırılmış gerçeklik birçok alanda olduğu gibi eğitim alanında da son yıllarda yaygın olarak kullanılmaya başlanan bir teknolojidir. Bu nedenle de araştırmacıların ilgisini çeken bir konu durumundadır. Ancak yapılan çalışmalarda artırılmış gerçekliğin bilişsel yük ve başarı üzerindeki etkilerine ilişkin farklı sonuçların ortaya çıktığı görülmüştür. Bu çalışma bağlamında artırılmış gerçeklik ile beraber üretici öğrenme stratejilerinden biri olan özetleme stratejisini kullanmanın öğrencilerin bilişsel yük ve başarılarına etkisi araştırılmıştır. Çalışmada nicel araştırma yöntemlerinden olan ön test-son test kontrol gruplu yarı deneysel desen kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın katılımcılarını bir devlet üniversitesindeki Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesinin Acil Yardım ve Afet Yönetimi Bölümünde 2022-2023 eğitim öğretim yılı güz döneminde öğrenim görmekte olan 3. sınıf öğrencileri oluşturmaktadır. Çalışmada yer alan 34 öğrencinin 17’si deney, 17’si kontrol grubuna yansız olarak atanmışlardır. Veri toplama aracı olarak katılımcıların demografik özelliklerini belirlemek için kişisel bilgi formu, uygulanan yöntemin etkililiğini belirlemek için başarı testi ve bilişsel yükü belirlemek için ise bilişsel yük ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Deneysel uygulama sırasında deney grubundaki öğrencilerden bir konu içeriğini artırılmış gerçeklik ile beraber özetleme stratejisi kullanarak çalışmaları istenirken, kontrol grubundaki öğrencilerden aynı konu içeriğini sadece artırılmış gerçeklik kullanarak çalışmaları istenmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular doğrultusunda deney grubundaki öğrencilerin başarı puanlarının kontrol grubundaki öğrencilerinkine göre anlamlı bir farklılık gösterdiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Ayrıca deney grubundaki öğrencilerin bilişsel yükleri kontrol grubundaki öğrencilerinkine göre daha düşük olmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Artırılmış Gerçeklik
• Bilişsel Yük
• Çoklu Ortam
• Öğrenme
• Özetleme Stratejisi

The Effect of using Summarizing Strategy in Learning with Augmented Reality on Students' Cognitive Load and Achievement

Abstract

Augmented reality technologies have been widely used in the field of education as well as in many other fields. Thus, it has attracted attention of many researchers. However, studies show different results regarding the effects of augmented reality on cognitive load and achievement. In the context of this study, the effect of using augmented reality and the summarizing strategy, which is one of the productive learning strategies, on students' cognitive load and success was investigated. In this study, a quasi-experimental design with a pretest - posttest control group, which is one of the quantitative research methods, was used. The participants of the study consist of 3rd year students studying in the Emergency Aid and Disaster Management Department of the Faculty of Health Sciences at a state university in the fall semester of the 2022-2023 academic year. During the study, 17 of the 34 students were assigned to the experimental group and 17 to the control group. As a data collection tool, a personal information form was used to determine the demographic characteristics of the participants, an achievement test to determine the effectiveness of the applied method, and a cognitive load scale to determine the cognitive load. During the experimental application, the students in the experimental group were asked to use augmented reality, which describes the content of a topic, together with the summarization strategy, while the students in the control group were asked to use augmented reality, which describes that. According to the findings, it was concluded that the achievement scores of the students in the experimental group showed a significant difference compared to the students in the control group. This means that the students in the experimental group had higher success. Furthermore, it was observed that the cognitive load of the students in the experimental group was lower than that of the students in the control group.

Keywords

• Augmented Reality
• Cognitive Load
• Multimedia
• Learning
• Summarizing Strategy

References

1. Akçayır, M., & Akçayır, G. (2017). Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: A systematic review of the literature. Educational Research Review, 20(2017), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edu- rev.2016.11.002
2. Alvarez-Marin, A., & Velazquez-Iturbide, J. A. (2022). Augmented reality and engineering education: A systematic review. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 14(6), 817-831. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2022.3144356
3. Altınpulluk, H. (2019). Determining the trends of using augmented reality in education between 2006-2016. Education and Information Technologies, 24(2), 1089-1114.
4. Anderson, M. C., & Thiede, K. W. (2008). Why do delayed summaries improve metacom prehension accuracy? Acta Psychologica, 128(1), 110-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.10.006
5. Arslan, G. B., Kızılay, E., & Hamalosmanoğlu, M. (2022). Eğitimde teknoloji entegrasyonu ile ilgili Türkiye’de yapılan çalışmaların incelenmesi. Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1), 39-55. https://doi.org/10.34056/au- jef.976627
6. Aydoğdu, F. (2021). Türkiye’de artırılmış gerçeklikle ilgili eğitim alanında yapılan lisansüstü tezlerin incelenmesi. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 11(2), 338- 357. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.878443
7. Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355-385. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355
8. Azuma, R., Baillot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2001). Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 21(6), 34-47. https://10.1109/38.963459

9. Baniasadi, T., Ayyoubzadeh, S. M., & Mohammadzadeh, N. (2020). Challenges and practical considerations in applying virtual reality in medical education and treatment. Oman Medical Journal, 35(3), e125. https://doi.org/10.5001/ omj.2020.43
10. Bednall, T. C., & Kehoe, J. E. (2011). Effects of self-regulatory instructional aids on selfdirected study. Instructional Science, 39(2), 205-226. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11251-009-9125-6
11. Bodzin, A. M. (2008). Integrating instructional technologies in a local watershed investigation with urban elementary learners. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(2), 47-58. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.39.2.47-58
12. Breitwieser, J., & Brod, G. (2021). Cognitive prerequisites for generative learning: Why some learning strategies are more effective than others. Child Develop ment, 92(1), 258-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13393
13. Brod, G. (2021). Generative learning: Which strategies for what age? Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1295-1318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020- 09571-9
14. Boyce, M. W., Rowan, C. P., Shorter, P. L., Moss, J. D., Amburn, C. R., Garneau, C. J., & Sottilare, R. A. (2019). The impact of surface projection on military tactics comprehension. Military Psychology, 31(1), 45-59. https://doi.org/10.108 0/08995605.2018.1529487
15. Buchner, J., Buntins, K., & Kerres, M. (2022). The impact of augmented reality on cognitive load and performance: A systematic review. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(1), 285-303. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12617
16. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
17. Carmigniani, J., & Furht, B., (2011) Chapter 1: Augmented reality: An overview. Handbook of augmented reality (3-41). Springer, New York.
18. Cheng, K. H. (2018). Surveying students’ conceptions of learning science by augmented reality and their scientific epistemic beliefs. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(4), 1147-1159. https://doi. org/10.29333/ejmste/81811
19. Cheng, K. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). Affordances of augmented reality in science learning: Suggestions for future research. Journal of Science Education and Techno- logy, 22(4), 449-462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9405-9
20. Chiang, T. H., Yang, S. J., & Hwang, G. J. (2014). An augmented reality-based mobile learning system to improve students’ learning achievements and motivations in natural science inquiry activities. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 352-365.
21. Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053004445
22. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29.
23. Craig, A. B. (2013). Interaction in augmented reality. In Understanding augmented reality (pp. 185–207). Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-240- 82408-6.00006-0
24. Davis, M., & Hult, R. E. (1997). Effects of writing summaries as a generative learning activity during note taking. Teaching of Psychology, 24(1), 47-50. https://doi. org/10.1207/s15328023top2401_10
25. Demir, M. (2018). Using online peer assessment in an instructional technology and material design course through social media. Higher Education, 75(3), 399-414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0146-9
26. Dey, A., Billinghurst, M., Lindeman, R. W., & Swan, J. E. (2018). A systematic review of 10 years of augmented reality usability studies: 2005 to 2014. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5(37), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2018.00037
27. Fidan, M. (2021). What makes an educational augmented reality application good? Through the eyes of teachers, as its practitioners. In Designing, deploying, and evaluating virtual and augmented reality in education (pp. 124-142). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-5043-4.ch006
28. Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Eight ways to promote generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 717-741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015- 9348-9
29. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
30. Friend, R. (2001). Effects of strategy instruction on summary writing of college students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(1), 3-24. https://doi. org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1022
31. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2019). IBM SPSS statistics 26 step by step: A simple guide and reference. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429056765
32. Höllerer T. H., Feiner, S. K. (2004) Mobile augmented reality. In Karimi HA, Hammad A (eds) Telegeoinformatics: location-based computing and services (pp. 392- 421). CRC Press.
33. Hsu, T. C. (2019). Effects of gender and different augmented reality learning systems on English vocabulary learning of elementary school students. Universal Ac- cess in the Information Society, 18(2), 315-325. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10209-017-0593-1
34. Hugues, O., Fuchs, P., Nannipieri, O. (2011). New Augmented Reality Taxonomy: Technologies and Features of Augmented Environment. In B. Furht (eds) Handbook of augmented reality. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0064-6_2
35. İstanbullu, A. & Yalçın, B. (2022). Artırılmış gerçeklik teknolojisinin kullanım durumunun bibliyometrik analiz ile incelenmesi ve araştırmacılara öneriler. Pamuk- kale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 52, 29-45. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1115885
36. Karakaş, M., & Özerbaş, M. (2020). Fizik dersinde artırılmış gerçeklik uygulamalarının öğrencilerin akademik başarılarına etkisi. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 10(2), 452-468. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.691179

37. Kılıç, E., & Karadeniz, Ş. (2004). Hiper ortamlarda öğrencilerin bilişsel yüklenme ve kaybolma düzeylerinin belirlenmesi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 10(4), 562-579.

38. Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00014-7

39. Klingenberg, S., Jørgensen, M. L., Dandanell, G., Skriver, K., Mottelson, A., & Makransky, G. (2020). Investigating the effect of teaching as a generative learning strategy when learning through desktop and immersive VR: A media and methods experiment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(6), 2115-2138. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13029
40. Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179- 211. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543061002179
41. Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7-19.
42. Küçük, S., Kapakin, S., & Göktaş, Y. (2016). Learning anatomy via mobile augmented reality: Effects on achievement and cognitive load. Anatomical Sciences Education, 9(5), 411-421. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1603
43. Lai, A. F., Chen, C. H., & Lee, G. Y. (2019). An augmented reality-based learning approach to enhancing students’ science reading performances from the perspecti- ve of the cognitive load theory. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 232-247. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12716
44. Lee, H. W., Lim, K. Y., & Grabowski, B. (2009). Generative learning strategies and metacognitive feedback to facilitate comprehension of complex science topics and self-regulation. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 18(1), 5-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9153-6
45. Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2012). Science text comprehension: Drawing, main idea selection, and summarizing as learning strategies. Learning and Instruction, 22(1), 16-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.05.005
46. Makransky, G., Andreasen, N. K., Baceviciute, S., & Mayer, R. E. (2021). Immersive virtu- al reality increases liking but not learning with a science simulation and generative learning strategies promote learning in immersive virtual re- ality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(4), 719–735. https://doi. org/10.1037/edu0000473.
47. Mayer, R. E. (2002). Multimedia learning. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 41, pp. 85-139). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079- 7421(02)80005-6 Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (Second Edition, pp. 43– 71). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9781139547369.
48. Morimoto, T., Kobayashi, T., Hirata, H., Otani, K., Sugimoto, M., Tsukamoto, M., Yoshihara, T., Ueno, M., & Mawatari, M. (2022). XR (extended reality: virtual reality, augmented reality, mixed reality) technology in spine medicine: status quo and quo vadis. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 11(2), 470. https://doi. org/10.3390/jcm11020470

49. Nielsen, B. L., Brandt, H., & Swensen, H. (2016). Augmented Reality in science educati-on–affordances for student learning. NorDiNa, 12(2), 157-174. https://doi. org/dx.doi.org/10.5617/nordina.2399

50. Osborne, R. J., & Wittrock, M. C. (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67(4), 489-508.

51. Özbek, F., & Şerife, A. K. (2020). İlkokul 4. sınıf Türkçe dersinde artırılmış gerçeklik uygulaması: Başarı ve motivasyona etkisi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 28(4), 1668-1679. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.4003

52. Paas, F. G., & Van Merrienboer, J. J. (1993). The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and performance measures. Human Factors, 35(4), 737-743.

53. Pellas, N., Fotaris, P., Kazanidis, I., & Wells, D. (2019). Augmenting the learning experience in primary and secondary school education: A systematic review of recent trends in augmented reality game-based learning. Virtual Reality, 23(4), 329-346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-018-0347-2
54. Roelle, J., Schweppe, J., Endres, T., Lachner, A., Aufschnaiter, C. von, Renkl, A., Eitel, A., Leutner, D., Rummer, R., Scheiter, K., & Vorholzer, A. (2022). Combining retrieval practice and generative learning in educational contexts. Zeits- chrift Für Entwicklungspsychologie Und Pädagogische Psychologie, 54(4), 142–150. https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000261
55. Sayımer, İ., & Küçüksaraç, B. (2015). Yeni teknolojilerin üniversite eğitimine katkısı: İleti- şim fakültesi öğrencilerinin artırılmış gerçeklik uygulamalarına ilişkin görüşleri. International Journal of Human Sciences, 12(2), 1536-1554. http:// doi.org/10.14687/ijhs.v12i2.3488
56. Sırakaya, M., & Alsancak-Sırakaya, D. (2022). Augmented reality in STEM education: A systematic review. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(8), 1556-1569. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1722713
57. Sırakaya, M., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2016). Öğrenme ortamlarında yeni bir araç. Bir eğitlence uygulaması olarak artırılmış gerçeklik. A. İşman, H. F. Odabaşı ve B. Akkoyunlu (Ed). Eğitim teknolojileri okumaları 2016, (25. Bölüm, ss. 417-438). TOJET ve Sakarya Üniversitesi, Adapazarı.
58. Somyürek, S. (2014). Öğretim sürecinde z kuşağının dikkatini çekme: Artırılmış gerçeklik. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 4(1), 63-80. https://doi. org/10.17943/etku.88319
59. Sullivan, R., Neu, V., & Yang, F. (2018). Faculty development to promote effective instruc- tional technology integration: A qualitative examination of reflections in an online community. Online Learning, 22(4), 341-359. https://doi. org/10.24059/olj.v22i4.1373
60. Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. The Cam- bridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 3(2), 19-30.
61. Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123-138. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5
62. Tezer, M., Yıldız, E., Masalimova, A., Fatkhutdinova, A., Zheltukhina, M., & Khairullina, E.
63. (2019). Trends of augmented reality applications and research throughout the world: Meta-analysis of theses, articles and papers between 2001- 2019 years. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(22), 154-174. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i22.11768
64. Thiede, K. W., & Anderson, M. C. (2003). Summarizing can improve metacomprehension accuracy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(2), 129-160. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00011-5
65. Tobias, S. (2010). Generative learning theory, paradigm shifts, and constructivism in educational psychology: A tribute to merl wittrock. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 51-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903433612
66. Valtchanov, D., & Ellard, C. G. (2015). Cognitive and affective responses to natural scenes: Effects of low-level visual properties on preference, cognitive load and eye-movements. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 184-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.07.001
67. Van Blerkom, D. L., Van Blerkom, M. L., & Bertsch, S. (2006). Study strategies and genera- tive learning: What works? Journal of College Reading and Learning, 37(1), 7-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2006.10850190
68. Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Re- view, 17(2), 147-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0
69. Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies. Medical Education, 44(1), 85- 93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03498.x
70. Vortmann, L. M., & Putze, F. (2020). Attention-aware brain computer interface to avoid distractions in augmented reality. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-8). https://doi. org/10.1145/3334480.3382889
71. Wang, X., Ong, S. K., & Nee, A. Y. (2016). A comprehensive survey of augmented reality assembly research. Advances in Manufacturing, 4(1), 1-22. https://doi. org/10.1007/s40436-015-0131-4
72. Wittrock, M. C., & Alesandrini, K. (1990). Generation of summaries and analogies and an- alytic and holistic abilities. American Educational Research Journal, 27(3), 489-502. https://doi.org/10.3102/000283120270034
73. Wittrock, M. C. (1989). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24(4), 345-376. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2404_2
74. Wittrock, M. C. (1992). Generative learning processes of the brain. Educational Psychologist, 27(4), 531-541. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2704_8
75. Wittrock, M. C. (2010). Learning as a generative process. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903433554.
76. Wolf, M., Söbke, H., & Baalsrud-Hauge, J. (2020). Designing Augmented Reality Applications as Learning Activity. In Geroimenko, V. (Ed), Augmented Reality in Education. Springer Series on Cultural Computing. Springer, Cham. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42156-4_2
77. Wu, H. K., Lee, S. W. Y., Chang, H. Y., & Liang, J. C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, 41-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.024
78. Yıldız, E. P. (2021). Augmented Reality Research and Applications in Education. In Augmented Reality and Its Application. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/ intechopen.99356
79. Yuen, S., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2011). Augmented reality: An overview and five directions for AR in education. Journal of Educational Technology De- velopment and Exchange, 4(1), 119-140. https://doi.org/10.18785/jet- de.0401.10
80. Yuen, S.CY., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2013). Augmented Reality and Education: Applications and Potentials. In Huang, R., Kinshuk, Spector, J.M. (eds) Re shaping Learning. New Frontiers of Educational Research. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32301-0_17
81. Zhu, E., Hadadgar, A., Masiello, I., & Zary, N. (2014). Augmented reality in healthcare ed- ucation: An integrative review. PeerJ, 2, e469. https://doi.org/10.7717/ peerj.469