The Effects of Multimedia Courseware Design Based on Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning on Academic Achievement and Instructional Efficiency

Öz

The main aim of this study is to search the effect of teaching software which was designed based on Mayer’s Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning Principles (2001) on students’ academic achievement, retention levels and instructional efficiency. With this aim, post-test scores and repeated post-test scores of second grade students for Measurement and Evaluation course at Cukurova University, Faculty of Education, Computer and Instruction Education Technology Department were used. The study was carried out with the experimental group including 37 students and the control group consisting of 36 students on statistical concepts. While the teaching for the experimental group was carried out via software prepared considering cognitive theory principles in multimedia learning, the control group was taught via a computer presentation prepared by a subject expert. To collect the data for the study, statistical concepts academic achievement test and cognitive load scale were utilized. The results of the study indicated that teaching via a software designed in line with cognitive theory principles in multimedia learning was found to be more successful in students’ academic success, retention in learning and instructional efficiency when compared with teaching via computer presentation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cognitive theory of multimedia learning,Cognitive load,Statistical concepts,Instructional efficiency

Kaynakça

1. Aldağ, H., & Sezgin, E. (2003). Çok ortamlı öğrenmede ikili kodlama kuramı ve bilişsel model. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11, 11, 121–135.
2. Baddeley, A. (2003a). Essentials of human memory. UK: Psychology Press Ltd.
3. Baddeley, A. (2003b). Working memory: looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews-Neuroscience. 4, 829–839.
4. Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of the instruction. Cognition and Instruction. 8, 293–332.
5. Kablan, Z. (2005). Bilgisayar destekli fen bilgisi öğretiminde yazılı metin ve animasyonlara uygulanan mekansal konumlandırma yaklaşımlarının (ekranda ayırma, ekranda bütünleştirme) bilişsel yük açısından karşılaştırılması. Unpublished doctorate dissertation, Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
6. Kablan, Z. & Erden, M. (2008). Instructional efficiency of integrated and separated text with animated presentations in computer-based science instruction. Computers&Education, 51, 2, 660–668
7. Kılıç E. (2006). Çoklu ortamlara dayalı öğretimde paralel tasarım ve görev zorluğunun üniversite öğrencilerinin başarılarına ve bilişsel yüklenmelerine etkisi. Unpublished doctorate dissertation, Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
8. Mautone, P. D., & Mayer, R.E., (2001). “Signaling as a cognitive guide in multimedia learning”, Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 377–389.

9. Mayer, R. E. (1999). Multimedia aids to problem-solving transfer. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 611–623.
10. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11. Mayer, R. E. & Anderson, R. B. (1991). Animations need narrations: An experimental test of dual coding hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology. 83, 484–490.
12. 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, 4, 444–452.
13. Mayer, R. E. & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia leaarning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 3, 389–401.
14. Mayer, R. E., Bowe, W., Bryman, A., Mars, R. & Tapangco, L. (1996). When less is more: Meaningful learning from visual and verbal summaries of science textbook lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology. 88, 64–73.
15. Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 187–198.
16. Mayer, R. E., Mautone, P. & Prothero, W. (2002). Pictorial aids for learning by doing in a multimedia geology simulation game. Journal of Educational Psychology. 94, 1, 171–185
17. 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.
18. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002a). Aids to Computer-Based Multimedia Learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 107–119.
19. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002b). Animation as an aid to multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 1, 87–99.
20. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43–52.
21. Mayer, R. E., Steinhoff, K., Bower, G. & Mars, R. (1995). A generative theory of textbook design: Using annotated illustrations to foster meaningful learning of science text. Educational Technology Research and Development. 43, 31–44.
22. Mayer, R.E., & Gallini, J. K. (1990). When is an illustration worth ten thousand words?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 4, 715–726.
23. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. The Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
24. Moreno, R. & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia design: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358–368.
25. Moreno, R.,& Mayer, R. E. (2002). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 156–163.
26. Mousavi, S.Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 319-334.
27. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4.
28. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H. & Van Germen, P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38 (1), 63–71.
29. Paas, F., & Van Merriënboer, J.J.G. (1994). Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 6, 51–71.
30. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental Representations: A Dual-coding Approach, New York: Oxford University Press.
31. Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45(3), 255–287.
32. Rieber, L. P. (1990). Using computer animated graphics in science instruction with children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 1, 135–140.
33. Rouet, J. F., Levonen, J., & Biardeau, A. (Eds.). (2001). Multimedia learning: Cognitive and instructional issues. Pergamon.
34. Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J.J.G., & Paas, F.G.W.C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10,3.
35. Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J.J.G., & Paas, F.G.W.C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10,3.