EDUC 633 (Module
1): Webliography blog
Chapter 7
Applying the Redundancy Principle
EXPLAIN VISUALS WITH WORDS IN AUDIO OR TEXT: NOT BOTH
In this chapter the authors start by explaining some of the
terminology and principles found in the chapter title. When e-learning is designed to incorporate
audio narration (someone speaking) as well as visual graphics that also include
the printed words of the audio narration the technique is called redundant
on-screen text (Clark & Mayer, 2012).
The words are spoken and visually depicted on the screen so a redundancy
has occurred. As soon as the authors
clarify the redundancy principle they get right to the point and state that
evidence will be given that demonstrates that learners learn best when they are
presented with concurrent graphics and audio instruction. Learners have more difficulty when the
instruction includes concurrent graphics, audio, and redundant on-screen text
(2012).
After the intro, the first major section of the chapter
delves deeper into why on-screen text should not be added to the instruction if
narrated graphics are already incorporated.
One reason is that when the learner is reading words on the screen they cannot
be looking at the graphics (Clark & Mayer, 2012). So the contribution the graphics should have
made will be reduced considerably. It is
also mentioned that if the learner attempts (consciously or subconsciously) to
sync up the visual words with the audio, more cognitive processing must take
place (2012). So it would be a waste of
your brains resources. Approximately one
half of this first section is spent on explaining the psychological reasoning
(learning styles and information acquisition theory) that seems to back
on-screen redundant text and the psychological reasoning (cognitive theory)
that disproves it (2012). The second
half of the first section presents a half dozen recent studies that provide
evidence that learners are negatively impacted when they have to process
redundant on-screen text in addition to graphics and narration (2012). There is virtually no evidence to back the
learning styles and information acquisition theory that lends to the assumption
that e-learning must benefit if the information is delivered in three formats
(2012)
The second major section of the chapter discusses exceptions
to the rule. Again the authors have
already provided a consider amount of empirical evidence that demonstrates
instruction should not include graphics, audio narration, and redundant
on-screen text. This is especially true
if the instruction is fast paced and the on-screen text includes many words
(Clark & Mayer, 2012). The first
exception is when the instruction does not include graphics. This isn’t a true exception but it is
mentioned because the authors have taken the stance that of the three delivery
formats discussed, on-screen redundant text is the problem child that should be
removed. The authors want to be fair so
they do mention evidence that backs situations where audio narration with
accompanying on-screen redundant text (but not additional graphics) can produce
higher test scores (2012). The key
factor in all of this comes down to visual overload. If there is audio and graphics, don’t
visually overload the learner by adding redundant text. If there isn’t graphics then you could
consider combining audio narration with on screen text because you will not
visually overload the learner. Other
exceptions that were mentioned involved learners who were not fluent in the
language so the redundant text could be beneficial, the on-screen text only
included a few key words, or the pace was so slow the learners were not at risk
of visual overload (2012).
Overall the authors did exactly what they said they would do
in the chapter intro, which was to provide ample evidence that visual overload
is a real possibility if instruction is designed to include on-screen redundant
text on top of audio narration and additional graphics. Like always there are exceptions to the rule
but in general we should remember the chapter tag line, explain visuals with
words in audio or text but not both (2012).
Reference
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). E-learning and the
science of instruction, proven guidelines for consumers and designers of
multimedia learning. (3 ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Chapter 8
Applying the Coherence Principle
ADDING MATERIAL CAN HURT LEARNING
In this chapter the authors stick to their approach of
telling the reader up front (via the title and intro) what the chapter is going
to expound on which in this case is the coherence principle. With this principle the reader is instructed
to focus on the instructional goal and to avoid adding additional material that
does not explicitly support that goal (Clark & Mayer, 2012). The remainder of the chapter can be split
into three distinct sections focusing individually on extraneous audio,
graphics, and words.
The first major section in chapter eight explores e-lessons
containing extraneous audio. Again it is
disclosed upfront that learning psychology and solid research based evidence
indicates that irrelevant background sounds to include music should be avoided. The reason for the avoidance is that
extraneous sounds have the potential to overburden working memory (Clark &
Mayer, 2012). The conditions that
maximize the potential for working memory overload include situations where
instruction is fast passed, the material is new to the learner, and when the
e-lesson is automated meaning the learner is not in control (2012). The common assumption for including
extraneous sounds can normally be traced back to logic based on arousal theory
which promotes the idea that entertaining effects can increase emotional
arousal which should in turn affect cognition (2012). This logic is flawed when applied to
e-learning and the authors could find no evidence to support the claim.
On the contrary the authors again (as they did in chapter
seven) point to cognitive theory for reasons to avoid extraneous audio in
e-learning. Cognitive theory takes into
consideration our limited working memory, cognitive abilities, and
susceptibility to sensory overload (Clark & Mayer, 2012). Simply put the unnecessary background noise
can fill up our audio channel and working memory which slows down our cognitive
abilities. The first section on
extraneous audio is closed out with the presentation of the results from
several studies that show dramatically lower test scores by learners who were
exposed to extraneous audio.
The next section focuses on e-lessons containing extraneous
graphics and the initial warning is the same; avoid the incorporation of
extraneous graphics in e-learning. The
false logic that encourages many to add unrelated graphics for the sake of
entertainment is again based on arousal theory and again there is no evidence
to support this approach. The addition
of unrelated graphics can distract the learner or get in the way of
concept/knowledge linkage (Clark & Mayer, 2012). Even worse the irrelevant graphics may cause
the learner to prime irrelevant knowledge which hinders the processing of new
material (2012). Just like the first
section, this one is also closed out with the presentation of the results from
several studies that show the negative impact of extraneous graphics in
e-learning.
The third and final section examined the merits of
extraneous words in e-learning. Any
guesses on the outcome? I almost wish I
could throw in a curveball but just like audio and graphics, extraneous words
can be harmful so don’t add them. The
psychological reasoning was the same, arousal theory, but cognitive theory wins
again. The key here is that no matter
how interesting unrelated words may be (i.e. a side factoid that is interesting
but not directly related) the result is distraction which hampers
learning. The authors really hammer home
the presentation of research based evidence in this last section by covering
the results of studies that examined three different reasons for adding
extraneous words.
Seductive reasons for adding extraneous words to e-learning
content:
• Added for
Interest
• Added to
Expand on Key Ideas
• Added for
Technical Depth
The results from the studies were all the same. Unrelated, unnecessary, extraneous words
regardless of the reason for adding them always had a negative impact on test
results compared to e-learning that used words in a basic and concise manner. So once again by the end of the chapter the
simple tag line “adding material can hurt learning” (Clark & Mayer, 2012,
p. 151), was successfully drilled into the reader’s head and the abundant use
of evidence-based research really upped the scholarly feel to the chapter in my
opinion.
Reference
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). E-learning and the
science of instruction, proven guidelines for consumers and designers of
multimedia learning. (3 ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
According to chapter 7 & 8 it summarize the importance
of multimedia principles that has expand over twenty five years of research by
Richard Myer at the University of California. In these two chapters it will
reveal how the guideline, evidence are reveal in different ways to be the best
way to use visuals, text, and audio, as well as content in segmenting and
sequencing in e-learning. However the redundancy principle: explaining graphics
with audio and redundant test can hurt learning. Some e-Lessons provide words
in text and in audio that reads the text. This might seem like a good way to
present information in several formats and thus improve learning. Controlled
research however, indicates that learning is actually depressed when a graphic
is explained by a combination of text and narration that reads the text (2012).
In studies conducted
by Mayer and by others, researchers have found that better transfer learning is
realized when graphics are explained by audio alone rather than by audio and
text. Mayer found similar results in two studies for an average gain of
79%.There are exceptions to the redundancy principle as recently reported by
Roxana Moreno and Mayer. In a comparison of a scientific explanation presented
with narration alone and with narration and text, learning was significantly
better in conditions that included both narration and text. The researchers
conclude that, “An effective technique to promote broader learning with
multimedia explanations is to use the auditory and visual modalities
simultaneously for verbal information if no other visual material is presented
concurrently.” Therefore there will be limited situations in which narration of
onscreen text could be helpful to learning such as when there is no graphic on
the screen or when readers lack good reading skills. It’s common knowledge that
e-Learning attrition can be a problem. In well-intended efforts to spice up e-Learning,
some designers use what I call a Las Vegas approach. By that I mean they add
glitz and games to make the experience more engaging. The glitz can take a
variety of forms such as dramatic vignettes (in video or text) inserted to add
interest, background music to add appeal, or popular movie characters or themes
to add entertainment value. In the 1980’s research on details presented in text
that were related to a lesson explanation but were extraneous in nature found
them to depress learning. Such additions were called “seductive details.” In
more recent research, Mayer has found similar negative effects from seductive
details presented either via text or video (2012).
Mayer did several studies together with S. F. Harp to
determine why seductive details depress learning. In these experiments they
evaluated the hypotheses that these added materials did their damage by:
Distracting learners from key instructional points, disrupting the learner’s
organization of information into a coherent mental model, or activating
irrelevant prior knowledge. They created three versions of lessons that
included seductive details but that also added instructional methods that
should compensate for their damaging effects. Only one of their compensatory
treatments reduced the negative effects of the seductive details. Seductive
details placed at the beginning of a lesson were more damaging than the same
information placed at the end of the lesson (1998). I agree with Mayer and
others, hat researchers have found that better transfer learning is realized
when graphics are explained by audio alone rather than by audio and text. With
all the research that was done and collected it prove to be a fact that supports
Mayer and other researcher.
Reference
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). E-learning and the
science of instruction, proven guidelines for consumers and designers of
multimedia learning. (3 ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
