Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

156676-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
The current study investigated how multimedia pacing (learner-control versus system-paced) and presentation styles (visual-only versus audio/visual) impact learning physics concept material, mental effort, and self-efficacy. This 2X2 factorial study randomly assigned participants into one of four conditions that manipulated presentation style (visual-only versus audio/visual) and pacing of the content (system-paced

The current study investigated how multimedia pacing (learner-control versus system-paced) and presentation styles (visual-only versus audio/visual) impact learning physics concept material, mental effort, and self-efficacy. This 2X2 factorial study randomly assigned participants into one of four conditions that manipulated presentation style (visual-only versus audio/visual) and pacing of the content (system-paced versus learning-controlled). Participant's learning was measured by recording their retention of information and ability to transfer information. Measures of perceived difficulty (mental effort) and perceived ability (self-efficacy) were also obtained. No significant effects were observed in this study which doesn’t support the existence of either the modality or reverse modality effect at least in these noisier online learning environments. In addition, the hypothesis that their effects could be an artifact of experimental design could not be proven as the learner control condition did not yield any significant results.
ContributorsKrause, Tyler (Author) / Craig, Scotty D. (Thesis advisor) / Gray, Robert (Committee member) / Branaghan, Russell (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
155101-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
The purpose of this study was to investigate the impacts of three types of instructional presentation methods on learning, efficiency, cognitive load, and learner attitude. A total of 67 employees of a large southwestern university working in the field of research administration were randomly assigned to one of three

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impacts of three types of instructional presentation methods on learning, efficiency, cognitive load, and learner attitude. A total of 67 employees of a large southwestern university working in the field of research administration were randomly assigned to one of three conditions. Each condition presented instructional materials using a different method, namely dynamic integrated, dynamic non-integrated, or non-dynamic non-integrated. Participants completed a short survey, pre-test, cognitive load questions, learner attitude questions, and a post-test during their experience. The results reveal that users of the dynamic integrated condition treatment showed significant improvement in both learning and efficiency. The dynamic non-integrated participants had a faster mean time to complete an assigned task, however, they also had significantly lower average test scores. There were no other significant findings in terms of cognitive load or learner attitude. Limitations, implications and future studies are discussed.
ContributorsBrown, Andrew (Author) / Nelson, Brian (Thesis advisor) / Savenye, Wilhelmina (Committee member) / Atkinson, Robert (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
155180-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
The present study explored the use of augmented reality (AR) technology to support cognitive modeling in an art-based learning environment. The AR application used in this study made visible the thought processes and observational techniques of art experts for the learning benefit of novices through digital annotations, overlays, and side-by-side

The present study explored the use of augmented reality (AR) technology to support cognitive modeling in an art-based learning environment. The AR application used in this study made visible the thought processes and observational techniques of art experts for the learning benefit of novices through digital annotations, overlays, and side-by-side comparisons that when viewed on mobile device appear directly on works of art.

Using a 2 x 3 factorial design, this study compared learner outcomes and motivation across technologies (audio-only, video, AR) and groupings (individuals, dyads) with 182 undergraduate and graduate students who were self-identified art novices. Learner outcomes were measured by post-activity spoken responses to a painting reproduction with the pre-activity response as a moderating variable. Motivation was measured by the sum score of a reduced version of the Instructional Materials Motivational Survey (IMMS), accounting for attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction, with total time spent in learning activity as the moderating variable. Information on participant demographics, technology usage, and art experience was also collected.

Participants were randomly assigned to one of six conditions that differed by technology and grouping before completing a learning activity where they viewed four high-resolution, printed-to-scale painting reproductions in a gallery-like setting while listening to audio-recorded conversations of two experts discussing the actual paintings. All participants listened to expert conversations but the video and AR conditions received visual supports via mobile device.

Though no main effects were found for technology or groupings, findings did include statistically significant higher learner outcomes in the elements of design subscale (characteristics most represented by the visual supports of the AR application) than the audio-only conditions. When participants saw digital representations of line, shape, and color directly on the paintings, they were more likely to identify those same features in the post-activity painting. Seeing what the experts see, in a situated environment, resulted in evidence that participants began to view paintings in a manner similar to the experts. This is evidence of the value of the temporal and spatial contiguity afforded by AR in cognitive modeling learning environments.
ContributorsShapera, Daniel Michael (Author) / Atkinson, Robert K (Thesis advisor) / Nelson, Brian C (Committee member) / Erickson, Mary (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016