1 / 20

Learning Styles and Comprehension

Learning Styles and Comprehension. Brought to you by: Jennifer, Annika, and Katharine. The Past . Illustration and explanation are more effective in learning than illustration alone (Mayer and Anderson, 1992).

mavis
Download Presentation

Learning Styles and Comprehension

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Learning Styles and Comprehension Brought to you by: Jennifer, Annika, and Katharine

  2. The Past • Illustration and explanation are more effective in learning than illustration alone (Mayer and Anderson, 1992). • Text with explanative illustrations proves superior for audio-visual styles, and visual styles alone are superior to auditory (Mayer and Gallini, 1990). • Visualization is based on a link between given knowledge, information given prior to visualization, and perceived knowledge. • The less one must create on their own, the more accurate the visualization (Mayer and Anderson, 1992). • Dual-coding hypothesis – the ability for participants to recall given information in both the auditory and visual memory system (Mayer and Anderson, 1991).

  3. Our Ideas… • Our independent variables: • Learning style • Audio-visual, Visual, Auditory • Difficulty of the visualization • Easy (The 5x5 Square), Hard (A new shape! A bed.) • Our hypothesis: • The participants given audio-visual instructions will perform faster and with greater accuracy than those given either visual or auditory instruction. Participants in the visual group will out-perform those in the auditory group. • Participants who are given the easy visualization task will out perform those given the hard visualization task. The participants in the audio-visual group and easy visualization task will have the best performance, while the auditory and hard visualization task will have the worst performance.

  4. Operational Definitions • Visual ~ • Something seen but not heard • Auditory ~ • Something that is heard but not seen • Audio-visual ~ • Something that is seen and heard • Accuracy ~ • The correct instructed placement and position of each piece • Easy ~ • The square shape • Hard ~ • The bed shape Our Method… • Participants • 120 Mount Holyoke Students between the age of 18-50 • 20 in each condition • Randomly assigned • Materials • Two Instructional videos • VCR and television • Table (3x6) and poster board (3x3) divider • 10 shapes (2 5-piece sets) • 2 grids • 2 stop watches (for time record) • Sheet and pen to record results (both time and accuracy record)

  5. Our Actions… • Each participant was recruited and gave informed consent • Each group of participants watched, listened, or saw one of the two instructional videos. • Each participant was then asked to create either the bed or the 5x5 square with their shapes as shown on the tape. • Each participant was timed, but there was no time limit. However, they were allowed to give up at any time. • Each participant was then debriefed. • Time and accuracy were then recorded.

  6. Deja vu… • Hypothesis: • The participants given audio-visual instructions will perform faster and with greater accuracy than those given either visual or auditory instruction. Participants in the visual group will out-perform those in the auditory group. • Participants who are given the easy visualization task will out perform those given the hard visualization task. The participants in the audio-visual group and easy visualization task will have the best performance, while the auditory and hard visualization task will have the worst performance.

  7. Our Analysisisisisisis… • Analysis: • Both Time and Accuracy were analyzed with separate 3 (Learning Styles: audio-visual, visual, auditory) x 2(Difficulty of visualization: easy (square) or hard (bed)) independent groups ANOVA and Post Hoc test (LSD). • Dependent variable measures: • Time was measured in seconds • Accuracy was noted on a scale of 1-10

  8. Time… • Main effect of Learning styles (p<.01) • Audio-visual: 52.085 • Visual: 52.288 • Auditory: 121.416 • No main effect of difficulty of visualization (p>.05) • Easy: 78.210 • Hard: 72.316 • No interaction (p>.05)

  9. Learning Styles on Time

  10. Accuracy… • Main effect of Learning styles (p<.01) • Audio-visual: 9.475 • Visual: 9.125 • Auditory: 6.525 • No main effect of difficulty of visualization (p>.05) • Easy: 8.617 • Hard: 8.133 • No interaction (p>.05)

  11. Learning Styles on Accuracy

  12. Discussion… • Easy vs. Hard Visualization was not significantly different, • Due to the lack of previous published studies • Information about visualization lead to our second IV

  13. The Whys There was no significant difference between the easy and the hard ‘visualization’ (or comprehension) due to the fact that it does not matter whether you are adding knowledge to previous knowledge (easy/square shape) or learning completely new knowledge (hard/bed shape), you were still learning new knowledge Example- statistics vs. experimental methods.

  14. Discussion… • Audio-visual vs. Auditory & Visual vs. Auditory were significantly different, • which is consistent with past research • When testing instructional format of presentation, participants were given varied materials of a braking system. (given auditory,step-by-step illustrations or a combination of both) It was the combination group and the illustrations group that outperformed the auditory group on a comprehensive exam (Mayer & Anderson, 1992)

  15. . . . • Audio-visual vs. Visual was not significant • which is consistent with some past research • Participants were given textual summary with illustrations of either step-by-step workings of the system or the parts used to construct or both parts and steps. Participants understood the system best when they had both types of illustrations (Mayer and Gallini, 1990).

  16. The Whys • Learning styles – three parts- 1/3 • Visualization • Both Audio-visual and Visual instructions gave participants a visualization (given visualization) • Auditory instructions did not give participants a visualization (perceived visualization)

  17. The Whys • Learning Styles- 2/3 • Dual-coding Hypothesis • Mayer found that participants perform better when given both auditory and visual information since they are coding both at the same time. • However, we did not find the same thing. There was no significant difference between the Audio-visual and the visual instructions groups.

  18. The Whys • Learning Styles – 3/3 • Difference in learning style • There was a significant difference between the visual and auditory instructions groups. • Visual performed significantly better than the Auditory group.

  19. In the future…New study-5 conditions • One Task • Eliminate inner voice (in visual group) • Music or speech • Eliminate visualization (in the auditory group) to even it out • Video clip (e.g. “musical” colors) • Time limit of five minutes (will change accuracy) • Take into account giving up

  20. The End

More Related