A science of e-learning involves the scientific investigation of how people learn in electronic learning environments. Three elements of a science of e-learning are: a) evidence—a base of replicated findings from rigorous and appropriate research studies; b) theory—a research-based theory of how people learn in electronic learning environments, which yields testable predictions; and c) applications—theory-based principles for how to design electronic learning environments, which themselves can be tested in research studies. This article provides examples of these three elements from a program of research on multimedia learning.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonL. W.KrathwohlD. R.AirasianP. W.CruikshankK. A.MayerR. E.PintrichP. R.RathsJ.WittrockM. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing. New York: Longman.
2.
BaddeleyA. (1999). Human memory. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
3.
ClarkR. C. (1999). Developing technical training (2nd ed). Washington, DC: International Society for Performance Improvement.
4.
ClarkR. C.MayerR. E. (2003). e-learning and the science of instruction. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
ClarkR. E., (Ed.) (2001). Learning from media. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
6.
CubanL. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.
7.
CubanL. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8.
KozmaR. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61, 179–211.
9.
LevinJ. R.O'DonnellA. (1999). What to do about educational research's credibility gaps?Issues in Education, 5, 177–239.
10.
MautoneP. D.MayerR. E. (2001). Signaling as a cognitive guide in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 377–389.
11.
MayerR. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12.
MayerR. E. (2002). Multimedia learning. In RossB. H. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 41, pp. 85–139). San Diego: Academic Press.
13.
MayerR. E. (2003). Learning and instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
14.
MayerR. E.AndersonR. B. (1991). Animations need narrations: An experimental test of a dual-coding hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 484–490.
15.
MayerR. E.AndersonR. B. (1992). The instructive animation: Helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 444–452.
16.
MayerR. E.ChandlerP. (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.
17.
MayerR. E.DowG. T.MayerS. (in press). Teaching students to solve insight problems: Evidence for domain specificity. Journal of Educational Psychology.
18.
MayerR. E.HeiserJ.LonnS. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 187–198.
19.
MayerR. E.MathiasA.WetzellK. (2002). Fostering understanding of multimedia messages through pretraining: Evidence for a two-stage theory of mental model construction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 147–154.
20.
MayerR. E.MorenoR. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 312–320.
21.
MayerR. E.MorenoR.BoireM.VaggeS. (1999). Maximizing constructivist learning from multimedia communications by minimizing cognitive load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 638–643.
22.
MayerR. E.SimsV. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 389–401.
23.
MorenoR.MayerR. E. (1999a). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358–368.
24.
MorenoR.MayerR. E. (1999b). Multimedia-supported metaphors for meaning making in mathematics. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 215–248.
25.
MorenoR.MayerR. E. (2000a). Engaging students in active learning: The case for personalized multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 724–733.
26.
MorenoR.MayerR. E. (2000b). A coherence effect in multimedia learning: The case for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia instructional messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 117–125.
27.
MorenoR.MayerR. E. (2002a). Learning science in virtual reality environments: Role of method and media. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 598–610.
28.
MorenoR.MayerR. E. (2002b). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 156–163.
29.
MorenoR.MayerR. E.SpiresH.LesterJ. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents?Cognition and Instruction, 19, 177–214.
30.
O'NeilH. F.Jr.MayerR. E.HerlH.ThurmanR.OlinK. (2000). Instructional strategies for virtual environments. In O'NeilH. F.AndrewsD. H. (Eds.), Aircraft training: Methods, technologies, and assessment (pp. 105–130). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31.
PaivioA. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
32.
SchnotzW. (2002). Towards an integrated view of learning from text and visual displays. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 101–120.
33.
ShavelsonR. J.TowneL. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
34.
SlavinR. E. (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31, 15–31.
35.
SalomonG. (1979). Interaction of media, cognition, and learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
