Module #6-Annoted Bibliography

#1: Ayres, P & Sweller, J. (2014) The split-attention principle in multimedia Learning. In R.
E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. (pp. 206-226). New York:
Cambridge.
(e.g. Chapter 8)

This chapter defines split-attention effect, describes studies done to prove it, and also ways
that split-attention can be avoided. Split-attention is when learners have to divide their
attention between and use several sources of information at one time in order to understand
material that is presented. This will increase the extraneous cognitive load thus affecting
how they learn the information presented.

Studies have been done to test the effect of split-attention on information processing.
These studies were done in many different areas of study, and the results were all common.
For example, many of the studies presented learners with a diagram that had information
about the diagram in text form along the side, or away from the actual diagram. At the same
time, a different group of learners what given the same diagram with the same textual
information, but the text was place strategically next to the proper place on the diagram.
This is called integration of the material. The learners with the integrated material
performed better than those that used the information place to the side, or away from the
diagrams. Tests were also done in which students learned better with computer-based
learning and a paper manual, or just with the e-learning modality as well as testing as to
whether describing information should be given before, after, or simultaneously the learning
task.

The chapter ends with methods that will prevent split-attention. The first is directing
attention by using signaling or color-coding so that learners will not have to search for the
information they need. Another was to use hypertext strategies in e-learning situations in
which students can click on a link that will offer a pop-up of information as needed. This
puts the learner in control of the learning and does not require all of the attention at one
time. Yet another method given was to teach the learner to become active in reducing the
split-attention on their own. They can do the color-coding and signaling on their own in
order to reduce the cognitive load required.

#2: Kalyuga, S. & Sweller, J. (2014) The redundancy principle in multimedia learning. In R.
E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. (pp. 247-262). New York:
Cambridge.
(e.g. Chapter 10)

This chapter discusses the redundancy principle as it is related to instruction. The

redundancy principle is applied when added information is given to learners when it is not
needed for the learning to take place (p. 248). This has negative effects on the learning.
The reason for this is because working memory has limits on how much it can hold, and
how long it can hold it. If too much information, or redundant information, is presented it
presents unnecessary information and overloads the working memory capacity.

Examples of testing done on the redundancy principle are identified next in this chapter. For
example, a test was done on children learning to read. They were presented with the word
and a picture of whatever that word represented. Another group was given the same task,
but without the picture. The students without the pictures performed better when learning to
read. This is because the picture was not involved in the actual task of learning to combine
letters to make words. The pictures required more of the working memory and overloaded it
(p.250).

When presenting information for instruction, the redundancy principle needs to be a source
of concern. If the information can be understood on its own, without anything added, then
additional redundant information should not be added. This includes, but is not limited to,
irrelevant background music or graphics, animations, stories, nonessential words, lengthy
text, and other unrelated details (p. 258).

#3: Pass, F. & Sweller, J. (2014) Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia
learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. (pp. 27-
42). New York: Cambridge.
(e.g. Chapter 2)

This chapter begins by describing how humans acquire knowledge. This knowledge
can be categorized in many different ways, but this chapter speaks mainly of biologically
primary and secondary knowledge. The biologically primary knowledge is knowledge that
we acquire naturally as humans have evolved. Biologically secondary knowledge is that
which has not evolved naturally, but we need in order to function in our cultural society.
The main idea of the chapter is a discussion of the cognitive load theory. The
cognitive load theory used five basic principles for how the human cognitive architecture
process information. Those principles are as follows. First is the information store principle
which functions to store information. Next is the borrowing and reorganizing principle in
which information is acquired. The randomness as genesis principle is how novel, or new,
information is generated. The narrow limits change of principle puts limits on the new
information in order for the information storage to continue functioning properly. Last, the
environment organizing and linking principle takes information from the environment and
puts it together with stored information in order for it to generate the appropriate response.
The cognitive load theory is then focused on. The three categories of the cognitive
load theory are intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. The intrinsic category is
described as when elements must be processed simultaneously with each other in order to
be appropriately used. Extraneous cognitive load is the extra information in an instructional
design that is unnecessary for information processing. Extraneous cognitive load should be
reduced when designing instruction. Lastly is the germane cognitive load. This refers to
how our working memory resources are devoted to intrinsic load as opposed to extraneous
load to enable learning.

#4: Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional
design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295-312.

Learners learn differently from one another. Some find it more difficult than others to learn
what is needed. This paper explains why some things are harder to learn that others.
Schema acquisition and the transferring of learned procedures from controlled to automatic
processing are important learning tools that education depends on (p. 296). The schema
that we have will determine how new information is dealt with. When asked to describe
something each individual learner may have a different description based on their prior
experiences with that particular subject. Schemas are important to learning and processing
new material. We use what we know to integrate with new knowledge, and the more
schema we have, the easier it is to learn.

Element interaction must be considered when designing appropriate instructional material.

If an element can be learned on its own, in separation, the element interaction is low. If the
elements have to be connected, the element interaction is high. Elements that need to be
learned should be organized into schema. The element interaction factor and the prior
knowledge of the learner will determine the amount of cognitive load. The more they know,
the less they will have to input into working memory. The material to be learned should also
be understood. Once this schema moves to an automatic state from a controlled state, then
understanding has occurred (p. 311).

#5 (additional): Yue, C. L., Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2013). Reducing verbal
redundancy in multimedia learning: An undesired desirable difficulty? Journal of
Educational Psychology,105(2), 266-277.
 In this article, the redundancy principle is explained. Experiments were done that
determined that some amount of redundancy may be beneficial for learning. One such
experiment was done with college students in which they were given a presentation of new
information. In one group, the full narration was given on screen along with audio
presentation resulting in redundant information. The other group was given snippets of the
most important information on screen along with the audio. Another group was given no
text, while yet another was just given audio. It was found that the students with the abridged
text on-screen had more recall in the given situation.

As a result, it was determined that some on-screen text is beneficial to learning. Most would
initially think that full text narration on-screen would aid in learning, however the opposite is
true.