Multimedia Learning Brad A. Henry Applying Multimedia Learning to Social and Cognitive Load Theory © 2011 1 Multimedia Learning Social and instructional scientific methods that employ constructs of multi-media learning Presently, multimedia technology-centered training approaches provide instruction through a variety of virtual learning environments commonly referred to as a Learning Content Management System (LCMS). A LCMS is a centralized computer infrastructure that manages processes, documentation and content. The multimedia content within the LCMS represents a variety of electronic sources of words, images, audio, video and other electronic formats. The electronic content is structured, sequenced and encapsulated into a learning object. A primary intention of using a learning object, e.g. content that creates a learning objective, is to present the content as an instructional method of learning to improve a students’ comprehension for testing. The available recent empirical research suggests that multimedia learning can enhance student provided scientific design principles are used (Clark & Mayer, 2008; Mayer, 2009). Cognitive load theory Cognitive Load Theory is based on early work of Baddeley’s model of working memory and was first introduced by Sweller and associates (Sweller, 1999; van Merrienboer, & Paas, 1998; vanMerrienboer & Sweller, 2005). Baddeley’s model of working memory (Baddeley & Hitch, 1986; Baddeley, 1986, 2001, 2007) maintains that working memory is comprised of three main components. The executive control system is a limited capacity control system that manages information entering short term memory and selects strategies to process information. The executive control system controls two sub-systems; the articulatory loop and visuo-spatial sketch pad. The articulatory loop holds short-term verbal auditory information. The visuospatial sketchpad holds short-term information for processing visual and spatial purposes. 2 Multimedia Learning Figure 1 Baddeley’s Model of working Memory (Baddeley, 2000) The working memory model has access to limited attention resources. The limitation on each resource prevents adversely affecting the other subsystems. Another belief is that the executive control system regulates the the two sub-systems. The better the executive control system is at processing information the more effective the sub-systems will function (Baddeley, 1986, 2001, 2007). However, other researchers argue that the working memory is not a separate component of the cognitive memory, but rather works with long-term memory (Miyake, 2001; Miyake & Shah, 1999). The alternate view asserts that working memory is the ability to maintain information in an active state while concurrently processing new information (Conway, Jarrold, Kane, Miyake, & Towse, 2007). It is believed that information is domain-specific. The ability to automatize information is dependent upon the knowledge a person has stored and can recall. In addition, Schacter (2001), asserts that emotional factors play a key role in processing 3 Multimedia Learning information. Negative emotions may present issues in accessing information while a positive mood will increase access to working memory (Oaksford, Morris, Grainger, & Williams, 1996) Researchers, whose primary focus apply uses of technology, have used Baddeley’s model of working memory to develop the Cognitive Load Theory (Kalyuga, Chandler, Tuoviven, & Sweller, 2001; Mayer & Chandler, 2001; van Merrienboer & Sweller, 2005; van Merrienboer & Paas, 1998). Cognitive load theory asserts that some learning environments require more cognitive processes than others and that meaningful learning is dependent upon active cognitive processes in working memory. It assumes that we are limited by the number of cognitive resources that can be accessed in working memory at any given time (van Merrienboer & Sweller, 2005). When cognitive processes become excessive, learners go into essential overload, i.e. a daydream state, and meaningful learning ceases. Intrinsic, extraneous and germane variables may directly affect a persons’ cognitive load. Intrinsic cognitive load is triggered by inherent properties of information to-be learned. The cognitive load requires making connections between information and constructing new knowledge structured in working memory, i.e. schemas. The cognitive load is determined by the experience level in a learners’ given domain. Due to the complexity of the information it cannot be changed without extensive schema acquisition. Intrinsic cognitive load is the level of difficultly of information-to-learned and cannot be altered. Extraneous cognitive load results from how instructional information is presented and to-be learned information may be changed when specific learning instructions and aids are supplied with the information. Germane cognitive load controls processing, construction and automation of schema acquisition and should be promoted while controlling extraneous load. Intrinsic and extraneous cognitive loads 4 Multimedia Learning are additive, if they exceed available working memory learning will cease (Sweller, 2010). Cognitive load theory states that there are three constraints that impact learning; the characteristic of the learner, the complexity of the information to be learned, and the instructional environment. Learning improves when: ● the learner has automatized the relevant information, ● instruction for isolated tasks are designed to utilize smaller cognitive loads, ● information delivery is in segments or chunks and summarized, ● information processing is simultaneously delivered across two modalities. Mayer and Moreno (2003) assert that learners’ have three types of cognitive demands when using multimedia learning. The first demand, essential processing states that a learner must understand the main concepts and have the ability to relate information from memory. The second demand, incidental information may enhance understanding, such as taking notes, however, is not essential. The third demand, representational holding suggests that some information is temporarily stored in memory while processing additional information. An example is recalling a reference from the beginning of presentation and applying the knowledge to the current content being presented. They assert that meaningful learning occurs when the learner is maximizing use of essential processing. Using incidental information and representational holding, when not necessary, may cause unnecessary distractions and cause cognitive overload. Multi-media learning 5 Multimedia Learning The role of technology for educational purposes should apply instructional methods that harness the advantages of a particular technology used for learning (Mayer, 2009). The construction of content and learning environments must look beyond perceptions of applying a standard formula for all content and begin applying methods and technologies that work to enhance learning. Research comparing traditional classrooms methods to online presentations and discussion is showing few signs that technology ‘alone’ cannot produce better learning outcomes (Clark, 1994, 2001, 2003; Salomon, 1984). Educators constructing content for virtual learning environments should have working knowledge of the principles of Cognitive Load Theory. They need to be equipped with working knowledge to know how and when to apply differing instructional design to a diverse set of technologies that use multimedia methodologies for instruction. The cognitive theory of multimedia learning investigates how people learn in electronic learning environments. These basic e-learning principles construct what Mayer calls the “science of instruction.” The science of instruction is guided by research-based theory of instruction and methods that impact learning (Clark & Mayer, 2008; Mayer, 2009). Mayer asserts that in order to construct a science of e-learning researchers must address three areas; evidence, theory and application. Evidence should be able to replicate findings from existing research studies. Theory extends from a research-base model that studies how people learn in distance learning environments. Application is theory-based principles of designing distancelearning environments that can be tested (Mayer, 2003). Mayer (2009) supports his multi-media principles using a theory he refers to as the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. He states the cognitive theory of multimedia learning 6 Multimedia Learning is the creation of scientific research that is based on grounded theory and being evidenced-based. The cognitive theory of multimedia learning is theory that explores learning from words and pictures. Mayer defines learning as a change in the learner’s knowledge caused by an experience in a learning environment. He reports the learning is not observable but may be inferred through testing. The five types of knowledge that may be learned include; facts, concepts, procedures, strategies, and beliefs (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001; Mayer & Wittrock, 2006). Mayer (2009) defines multimedia instruction as the presentation of material using both words and pictures, with the intention of promoting learning. Mayer and his associates assert that the two channels are not equal and that research indicates that information should be delivered in a manner consistent with the way the mind works. By using cognitive theory and understanding how both channels work, designers can develop content allowing a learner able to build meaningful connections using verbal and pictorial representations. Classic research shows that people learn better from printed text and supporting images than text alone (Mayer, 2009; Levie & Lentz, 1982; Levin, Anglin & Carney, 1987). Plass and Jones (2005) assert similar findings for auditory coupled with supporting images when learning foreign languages (Mayer, 2009). According to Mayer’s multimedia principle, adding illustrations, animation, or narration with text helps learners to better understand content being presented rather than using illustrations or words alone. Mayer asserts cognitive processing is primed when the images and words correlate and are meaningful. Learning occurs when learners build systematic connections between word and visually based representations (Mayer, 2009). Fletcher and Tobias (2005) place emphasis on visuals when using the multimedia principles of learning. They state that learning and understanding are enhanced when appropriate images 7 Multimedia Learning that enhance the content are added. It is believed that the benefit of the image is dependent upon the quality and pedagogic value of the graphic (Schnotz & Bannert, 2003; Mayer, 2009). More recently Ruth Clark presented findings that state implicit methods that include relevant graphics and personalization should be used to stimulate psychological activity in the absence of behavioral activity (Clark, & Mayer 2008). Mayer’s (2009) Cognitive theory of multi-media learning maintains three primary assumptions derived from learning sciences; dual channels, limited capacity, and active processing. The dual channel assumption is based on Paivio’s (1986; Clark & Paivio, 1991) dual coding theory and Baddeley’s (1992) model of working memory. The dual channel assumption states that learners have two channels for processing information, pictorial and auditory channels. Information presented is first processed through the auditory or visual channels separately and then concurrently through working memory. 8 Multimedia Learning Figure 2 A generative model of multimedia learning (Mayer, 2010) The limited capacity cognitive load theory assumption states that learners are limited in the amount of information that can be processed at one time (Baddeley, 1999; Chandler & Sweller, 1991). The theory states that learners are limited to 3 to 5 bits, or chunks, of information at any given time. When learners exceed their cognitive capacity capabilities for processing information decisions are made where connections can be made using existing knowledge. Baddeley (1992) states a learner will use their central executive strategies that are constructs developed using metacognitive strategies. When too much information is presented a learner may move into cognitive overload thus limiting or preventing information processing (Mayer, 2001; Clarke, 2005). This theory is based on Sweller’s (Chandler & Sweller, 1991; Sweller, Chandler, Tierney & Cooper, 1990) Cognitive Load Theory. The active learning assumption is that learners are not passive and that they are actively engaged. This assumption states that meaningful learning is dependent upon active cognitive processes during learning. An active learning situation a learner is selecting new relevant information for additional processing while simultaneously organizing and integrating new 9 Multimedia Learning information with existing knowledge (Mayer, 2001; Wittrock, 1989). There are two types of active learning, cognitive and behavioral. The cognitive active learning assumption states that learners are continually cognitively processing mental information, making connections and creating mental models. Deep learning is dependent upon a learner selecting relevant information, mentally organizing information into coherent structures, and the ability to integrate new information with existing knowledge. Behavioral active learning assumption states that human cognition is a result of some interactive combination between memory and behavior (Mayer, 2009; Anderson & Gluck 2001). It is believed that behavioral activity is not always essential for deep learning. Behavior attributed to deep learning is dependent upon activities that combine specific interactive tasks with deeper cognitive processing, such as collecting evidence, incorporating information into knowledge structures, or active manipulation of data. Constructing learning for either type of active learning is dependent upon the generative processing methods used in the learning environment (Monero & Mayer, 2005, 2007). 10 Multimedia Learning Figure 3 Two Kinds of Active Learning (Mayer, 2009) L ev el of B eh a vi or al A cti vi ty Lev el of Co gni tive Acti vity Low High Low Hig h 11 Multimedia Learning Triarchic Theory of Cognitive Load The cognitive theory of multi-media learning is based upon the theory of human cognition in what Mayer calls the triarch theory of multimedia learning (Mayer, 2010). The triarchic theory of cognitive load identified three kinds of processes required during learning; extraneous cognitive load, intrinsic cognitive load, and germane cognitive load. The overall goal is to reduce extraneous cognitive processing, manage essential cognitive processing and foster generative processing that contributes to learning (Mayer, 2009). Table 1 Three goals for instructional design (Mayer, 2009) Cognitive theory of Cognitive load theory multimedia learning Description of cognitive processing Reduce extraneous cognitive Reduce extraneous cognitive Cognitive processing that processing load does not support learning the essential material Manage essential cognitive Manage intrinsic processing processing Cognitive processing aimed at mentally representing the essential material Foster generative processing Foster germane cognitive load Cognitive processing aimed at mentally organizing the representation and integrating it with existing knowledge 12 Multimedia Learning The content developed for multimedia lessons should minimize the amount of extraneous processing of information that does not support the learning requirements of the learner. For example, common causes may include unnecessary content, extraneous information and poorly laid out materials. A learner engaged in large amounts of extraneous processing may not have sufficient cognitive capacity to foster generative processing, otherwise known as extraneous overload. When a learner has exhausted available cognitive resources due to extraneous overload they may experience essential overload. Material that is too complex, unfamiliar or too fast paced may overwhelm a learner’s ability to process information that triggers generative learning. Learners with poor metacognitive capabilities may lack the knowledge or skills of how to process the information in such scenarios. Essential overload is correlated with poor performance, retention of the learning task and minimizes a learner’s ability to comprehend the content. However, as learner becomes familiar with how to construct knowledge and familiar with the content they develop techniques process the information, i.e. essential processing (Mayer & Monero, 2003, Mayer 2005). As the learner develops techniques for processing essential information they will begin to make connections with the content and apply prior knowledge by chunking bits of data into meaningful units. As the user processes the information they begin to construct the units into meaningful schemas (Sweller, 1999). Lessons that have effectively reduced extraneous processing allow a learner to leverage essential processing. When essential processing is minimized the learner has access to cognitive resources that foster generative processing. As generative processes increase a learner’s germane cognitive load increases. The increase germane load triggers relevant 13 Multimedia Learning cognitive activities that processed by the schema acquisition and automation thus contributing to meaningful learning (Sweller, van Merrienboer, & Pass, 1998). Principles for Multimedia Design Mayer (2009) has developed the triarachic framework into the three processes for learning. Within each of the three processes, reducing extraneous processing, managing essential processing and fostering generative processing he has developed twelve basic design principles. The principles are based on evidence comparing the effects of transfer test performance. Principles for Reducing Extraneous Processing; ● Coherence – when extraneous word, sound, and pictures are minimized. The coherence principle states that adding extraneous words or pictures that are irrelevant in multimedia presentations results in poor retention and transfer test performance (Mayer, Heiser, & Lonn, 2001) , ● Signaling – when cues are added to highlight essential material, ● Redundancy – when graphics and narration are presented together rather than text, graphics and narration together in multimedia presentations, ● Spatial Contiguity – when corresponding printed words and pictures are presented near rather than far from each other on the page or screen, ● Temporal Contiguity – when corresponding spoken words and pictures are presented simultaneously rather than successively. Principles for Managing Essential Processing; 14 Multimedia Learning ● Segmenting – when fast paced, complex multimedia lesson is presented in user paced segments rather than as a continuous presentation. Segmenting allows a user to process more information by slowing down the pace of the content presented, ● Pre-training – providing the student with prior knowledge. Pre-training supports quicker learning when the student knows the names and characteristics of the key concepts of a lesson, ● Modality – provides input for two channels, auditory and visual. Graphics and narration displayed simultaneously rather than a singular animation or onscreen text in multimedia presentations. Principles for fostering generative processing; ● Multimedia principle – people learn better from words and pictures, ● Personalization principle – people learn better from multimedia lessons when words are in conversational style, ● Voice principle – people learn better when the narration in multimedia lesson is spoken in a friendly human voice, ● Image principle – people do not necessarily learn better from a multimedia lesson when the speakers image is on the screen. ● Personalization – when the words are presented in conversational style rather than in formal style, ● Voice – when the words are spoken by a friendly human voice rather than by a machine voice, ● Image – not including the speakers’ image on screen (Mayer, 2009). 15 Multimedia Learning Learning Outcomes Mayer asserts a goals of multi-media learning include assessing three learning outcomes, no learning, rote learning, and meaningful learning. Rote learning is indicated by good retention but poor transfer. Common assessment types for understanding are transfer test where a learner must apply meaning, problem solve or construct an essay. Meaningful learning occurs when a learner is able to effectively display deep understanding of the material through transfer and retention skills simultaneously in an organized manner of the content that was presented. An important aspect of meaningful learning is the ability to apply problem-solving transfer skills to new situations (Mayer, 2009). 16 Multimedia Learning Bibliography Anderson, J. R., & Gluck, K. A. (2001). What role do cognitive architectures play in intelligent tutoring systems? In D. Klahr & S. M. Carver (Eds.), Cognition & Instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 227-262). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. Baddeley A. D. (1986). Working memory: Theory and practice. London, UK University Press. Baddeley A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Science 4(11):417-423. Baddeley A. D. (2001). Is working memory still working? American Psychologist, 56, 851-864. Baddeley A.D. (2007). Working memory, thought, and action. New York: Oxford University Press. Baddeley, A.D. & Hitch, G.J. (1974). Working memory. In G.A. Bower (ed.), Recent Advances in Learning and Motivation, Vol. 8 (pp. 47–89). New York: Academic Press. Burns, M. (2006). A Thousand Words: Promoting Teachers' Visual Literacy Skills. MultiMedia & Internet@Schools. 13(1). P.16-20. Clark, R., & Mayer, R. (2008). Learning by viewing versus learning by doing: Evidencebased guidelines for principled learning environments. Performance Improvement, 47(9), 5-13. doi:10.1002/pfi.20028. 17 Multimedia Learning Conway, A.R.A., Jarrold, C., Kane, M.J., Miyake, A., & Towse, J.N. (Eds.) (2007). Variation in working memory. New York: Oxford University Press. Fletcher & Tobias (2005). The multimedia principle. In R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 117-134). New York: Cambridge University Press. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., Tuovinen, J.,&Sweller, J. (2001). When problem solving is superior to studying worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 579–588. Levie, W. H., & Lentz, R., (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educ. Comm. Technol. J. 30: 195–232. Levin, J. R., Anglin, G. J., & Carney, R. N., (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. InWillows, D. M., and Houghton, H. A. (eds.), The Psychology of Illustration: I. Basic Research, Springer, New York, pp. 51–85. Mayer, R.E., (2010). Seeking a science of instruction. Instructional Science Volume 38, Number 2, 143-145, DOI: 10.1007/s11251-009-9113 Mayer, R.E., (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press. Mayer, R. E., (2003). Elements of a science of e-learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 29(3), 297-313. Mayer, R., & Chandler, P. (2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 390–397. 18 Multimedia Learning 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(1), 187-198. Miyake, N., (2001), "Collaboration, technology and the science of learning: Teaching cognitive science to undergraduates," The Annual Report of Educational Psychology in Japan, 40, 218228. Miyake, A., & Shah, P. (1999). Toward Unified Theories of Working Memory: Emerging General Consensus, Unresolved Theoretical Issues, and Future Research Directions. In A. Miyake, A., & Shah, P., (Eds.) Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control (pp. 442-481). New York: Cambridge University Press. Oaksford, M.; Morris, F.; Grainger, B.; & Williams, J. M. G. (1996). Mood, reasoning, and central executive processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(2), 476-492. Plass & Jones, (2005). Multimedia learning in second language acquisition. In The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, R. Mayer, Ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 467-488. Schacter, D. L. (2001). The seven sins of memory. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co. Schnotz & Bannert, (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141–156. 19 Multimedia Learning Spalter, A. M., & vanDam, A., (2008). Digital visual literacy. Theory into Practice, 47(2), 93– 101. Spalter, A. M., & vanDam, A., (2008). The interdisciplinary nature of DVL [image]. Digital visual literacy. Theory into Practice, 47(2), 93–101. Sweller, J.. (2010). Cognitive load theory: Recent theoretical. I Cognitive Load Theory, Plass, J, Moreno, R., & Brunken, R.. Ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 29–47. Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional Design in Technical Areas. ACER:Melbourne. Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review 10: 251–296. doi:10.1023/A:1022193728205. Van Merriënboer, J. & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 147-177. Van Merriënboer, J.J.G. and Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17 (2), 147-177. 20 View publication stats