The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of animation and practice on factual and application learning in computer-based instruction (CBI). Also studied was the extent to which animation and practice promoted near and far transfer of these learning outcomes. Subjects consisted of 192 elementary school students. The CBI content was an elementary physics lesson in Newtonian mechanics. Two levels of Practice (Relevant Practice, Irrelevant Practice) were crossed with three levels of Graphic Type (Graphic, Animated Graphic, No Graphic) and two levels of Text Type (Text, No Text). No significant differences were found for the between-subjects factors of Practice, Graphic Type, and Text Type. Among the within-subject factors (Learning Outcome, Transfer) a main effect was found for transfer: subjects performed significantly better on far transfer questions than near transfer questions. A significant interaction was detected between Learning Outcome and Transfer: far learning was facilitated for factual learning, whereas no difference in transfer was detected for application learning.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
EdwardsJ.NortonS.TaylorS.WeissM.DusseldorpR., How Effective Is CAI? A Review of the Research, Educational Leadership, 33, pp. 147–153, 1975.
2.
Bangert-DrownsR. L.KulikJ. A.KulikC-L. C., Effectiveness of Computer-Based Education in Secondary Schools, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 12:3, pp, 59–68, 1985.
3.
ClarkR., Confounding in Educational Computing Research, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1:2, pp. 137–148, 1985.
4.
ClarkR., Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media, Review of Educational Research, 17:2, pp. 92–101, 1983.
5.
PetkovichM. D.TennysonR. D., Clark's “Learning from Media”: A Critique, Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 32:4, pp. 233–241, 1984.
6.
HannafinM.RieberL., Psychological Foundations of Instructional Design for Emerging Computer-Based Instructional Technologies: Part I. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37:2, pp. 91–101, 1989.
7.
StreibelM., A Critical Analysis of the Use of Computers in Education, Educaational Communications and Technology Journal, 34:3, pp. 137–161, 1986.
8.
CaraballoA., “An Experimental Study to Investigate the Effects of Computer Animation on the Understanding and Retention of Selected Levels of Learning Outcomes,” unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, 1985.
9.
CaraballoJ., “The Effect of Various Visual Display Modes in Computer-Based Instruction and Language Background Upon Achievement of Selected Educational Objectives,” unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, 1985.
10.
KingW., A Comparison of Three Combinations of Text and Graphics for Concept Learning, (Report No. NPRDC-TR-76-16), Navy Personnel Research and Development Center, San Diego, California, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 112 936), 1975.
11.
MooreM.NawrockiL.SimutisZ., The Instructional Effectiveness of Three Levels of Graphics Displays for Computer-Assisted Instruction, (Report No. ARI-TP-359), Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Arlington, Virginia, (ERIC Document Service No. ED 178 057), 1979.
12.
RieberL.HannafinM., Effects of Textual and Animated Orienting Activities and Practice on Learning from Computer-Based Instruction, Computers in the Schools, 5:1/2, pp. 77–89, 1988.
13.
ReedS., Effect of Computer Graphics on Improving Estimates to Algebra Word Problems, Journal of Educational Psychology, 77:3, pp. 285–298, 1985.
14.
BowerG., A Selective Review of Organizational Factors in Memory, in Organization and Memory, TulvingE.DonaldsonW. (eds.), Academic Press, New York, 1972.
15.
PaivioA., Imagery and Verbal Processes, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1979.
16.
DwyerF., Strategies for Improving Visual Learning, Learning Services, State College, Pennsylvania, 1978.
17.
KleinD., Conditions Affecting the Effectiveness of Animated and Non-animated Displays in Computer-Based Instruction, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Development of Computer-Based Instructional Systems, Oakland, California, 1987.
18.
LevinJ.LesgoldA., On Pictures in Prose, Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 26:3, pp. 233–243, 1978.
19.
LevinJ.AnglinG.CarneyR., On Empirically Validating Functions of Pictures in Prose, in The Psychology of Illustration, Volume 2: Instructional Issues, WillowsD.HoughtonH. (eds.), Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 51–85, 1987.
20.
diSessaA., Unlearning Aristotelian Physics: A Study of Knowledge-Based Learning, Cognitive Science, 6:1, pp. 37–75, 1982.
21.
ChampagneA.KlopferL.GunstoneR., Cognitive Research and the Design of Science Instruction, Educational Psychologist, 17:1, pp. 31–53, 1982.
22.
AndersonR.BiddleW., On Asking People Questions about What They Are Reading, in Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 9), BowerG. (ed.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 89–132, 1975.
23.
HamakerC., The Effects of Adjunct Questions on Prose Learning, Review of Educational Research, 56, pp. 212–242, 1986.
24.
WagerW.WagerS., Presenting Questions, Processing Responses, and Providing Feedback in CAI, Journal of Instructional Development, 8:4, pp. 2–8, 1985.
25.
RothkopfE., Learning from Written Instructive Material: An Exploration of the Control of Inspection Behavior by Test-like Events, American Educational Research Journal, 3, pp. 241–249, 1966.
26.
HannafinM.PhillipsT.RieberL.GarhartC., The Effects of Orienting Activities and Cognitive Processing Time on Factual and Inferential Learning, Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 35:2, pp. 75–84, 1987.
27.
HannafinM.PhillipsT.TrippS., The Effects of Orienting, Processing, and Practicing Activities on Learning from Interactive Video, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 13, pp. 134–139, 1986.
28.
GagnéR., The Conditions of Learning (4th Edition), Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1985.
29.
WinerB., Statistical Principles in Experimental Design (2nd Edition), McGraw Hill, New York, 1971.
30.
WhiteB., Designing Computer Games to Help Physics Students Understand Newton's Laws of Motion, Cognition and Instruction, 1:1, pp. 69–108, 1984.
31.
SalisburyD.RichardsB.KleinJ., Designing Practice: A Review of Prescriptions and Recommendations from Instructional Design Theories, Journal of Instructional Design, 8:4, pp. 9–19, 1985.
