This article was downloaded by: [University of Leeds]

On: 05 July 2015, At: 20:09

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG

Journal of Research on
Computing in Education
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujrt19

The Role of Hypermedia in

Education
a
Rachelle S. Heller
a
The George Washington University
Published online: 25 Feb 2014.

To cite this article: Rachelle S. Heller (1990) The Role of Hypermedia in

Education, Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 22:4, 431-441

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08886504.1990.10781932

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all
the information (the Content) contained in the publications on our
platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors
make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,
completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any
opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and
views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor
& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information.
Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
 reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access
and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-
conditions
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015
 The Role of Hypermedia
in Education:
A Look at the Research Issues
Rachelle S. Heller
The George Washington University

Abstract
Hypertext and its extension, hypermedia, are being used to create new forms of educational
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

software: hwermedia assisted instruction (HAl). In order to create classroom material that is
both instructional and motivating, educators and designers must confront a variety of
educational issues and problems endemic to hypermedia itself, as well as problems related to
education in an unstructured environment. Using techniques usually associated with
metastudies. this paper looks at the research in discovery and incidental learning as well as
hypermedia environments in order to distill those findings that can inform the development of
HAl. (Keywords: computer assisted instruction, hypermedia, instructional design.)

More than 40 years ago Vannevar Bush, director of the Office of Scientific
Research and Development for most of the 1940s and the Science Advisor to
President Roosevelt, described a hypothetical Memex machine (Bush, 1945)
that would allow a user to browse through untold amounts of library-like infor-
mation, using and making associative links between any two points. The
hypothetical, in time, became real. Hypertext, the phrase coined years later by
Ted Nelson (1967) to refer to this type of information, came into existence as a
nonlinear database with tools for selecting information from the database and
presenting the information to the user. In the 1960s Douglas Engelhart, influ-
enced by Bush's writings and using computers unknown to Bush, began to
develop NLS (oN Line System) at Stanford Research Institute in which any
number of reference links could be established between statements within and
between files. In the years since, a variety of software products have been de-
veloped based on hypertext.
Many of these products have gone beyond hypertext to incorporate more than
just databases of textual information. Hypermedia, a term created to describe
these new products, is defined by Halasz and Conklin ( 1989) to be an informa-
tion representation and management system built around a network of multi-
media nodes connected by links. One accesses the system by navigating or
following the predefined links through the network of information. In practice,
Halasz suggests that it is an absolute necessity that this navigation be aided by
some structural overview.
The confluence of a number of factors has brought hypermedia to attention of
educators. These factors include the improvement or refinement of software
products based on early hypermedia concepts, such as Intermedia at Brown
University and Notecards at Xerox PARC; the development of PC-based soft-
ware such as Guide and Hyperties; the investigations of application areas for

Journal of Research on Computing in Education 431

 hypermedia, such as the Writing Environment at the University of North
Carolina; and the use of hypermedia systems in museums. The advent of
HyperCard, a Macintosh-based authoring system that unfortunately lacks sup-
port for building a structural overview in the form of a cognitive map or index,
has catapulted hypermedia to the forefront for evaluation as a potential new
classroom tool.
Hypermedia Assisted Instruction (HAl) is the application of hypermedia
techniques to educational software. HAl is distinguished from Computer As-
sisted Instruction (CAl) by its integrated use of multimedia: video, animation,
graphics, sound, and text, and its node and link structure. While the traditional
forms of CAl- drill and practice, tutorials, simulations, and games-may all
be presented using HAl, typically the HAl educational products are rich
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

environments for student directed investigation. For example, HAl might

present a complete short story augmented with exegesis, glossaries, historical
content, and even short video sequences of related events and dramas. The
student is free to read the story sequentially, to follow one of the many
explanation paths, or make commentaries for other interested students.
What do educators need to consider as they bring HAl into the classroom?
Many are getting on the hyper-bandwagon, seeing it as a new and valuable tool
for education. But Hammond (1989) suggested that while "the [sic. review of
the] literature is enthusiastic and visionary... [it is] largely uncritical" (p. 171 ).
Although the HAl technological approach is new, the philosophy of direct user
control and manipulation in learning and incidental learning in educational
environments is not new. Researchers and educators must review the research
on how students learn in non-computer-based, unstructured environments as
well as look critically at the studies done in the hypermedia environment. The
fields of hypermedia construction, discovery learning, and incidental learning
should be reassessed with the objective of understanding how we may make the
best possible use of HAL
This paper reviews the current computer science and educational literature in
hypermedia. The major issues related to the structure and use of hypermedia
are outlined. The paper then reports on a meta-study of the directed and
incidental learning research in order to extract research results and recommen-
dations. Finally, these results are distilled into guidelines for educators as they
develop new HAl materials.

HYPERMEDIA-RELATED ISSUES

In his seminal paper, Conklin (1987) outlined both the advantages and
disadvantages of hypermedia. While the advantages are many-the ease of
creating and tracing references, the support for structuring and modularizing
information, and the ability to keep many threads of inquiry alive at once-it is
the disadvantages that are more informative to the educator as he or she goes
about designing HAL
Problems endemic to hypermedia are disorientation, cognitive overload
(Conklin, 1987), flagging commitment, and unmotivated rambling (Hammond,

432 Summer 1990

 1989). Conklin defined disorientation as twofold, the more simple problem of
finding out or knowing where you are in the system and the more difficult
problem of discovering how to get some'.vhere else in the system that you
know, or think you know, to exist.
Conklin offered a technical solution to this in the form of graphical, map-like
browsers. The purpose of these browsers is to allow the user to wander around
the hyperspace, looking here and there at the territory. There is, however, a
problem inherent in this solution. These maps may themselves become difficult
to understand as the material represented in the hyperspace becomes vast, with
many nodes of information or complex linking patterns. In addition, if the user
is uninitiated into the content area represented, the map will be hard to use,
much like a street map that is based on symbo~s foreign to the tourist is difficult
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

for the tourist to adjust to.

Within the disorientation phenomena is the difficulty of knowing the extent
or size of the system confronting the user. Browsing is often seen as a technique
for establishing the size of the territory. Browsing by its very nature is informal
and, according to Hammond (1989), caused the users to grossly overestimate
how much of the system they have a~tually seen. Marchionini (Campagnioni &
Ehrlich, 1989) found that high school stude.cts use simple browsing techniques,
following links they perceive to be most relevant, rather than using concise,
well constructed strategies to search for information in a hypertext, encyclope-
dic system. He suggested that users, especially novices, may be unwilling, or
unable, to formulate a search objective and thereby be unable to take advantage
of the richness of the system offered thro"Jgh the browser.
A second problem cited with hypermedia is the fact that the system is so rich
with information and perspectives that the user, student or teacher, is put into a
state of cognitive overload (Jones, 1987). Maps and browsers can be helpful,
but, as Marchionini pointed out, the simple browsing techniques of high school
students suggest novice users use bmwsers to avoid cognitive overload rather
than as a way of dealing with it. Browsing from information node to informa-
tion node requires less confrontation with the material than an organized
deliberate review or examination of the information in the system.
An allied but more elusive proble::n than that of cognitive overload is one of
maintaining the user's commitment to the jypermedia system. A situation
typical of this problem is suggested by Rask~n ( 1987) when he described the
user who is confronted with a butterfly leg on the screen and doesn't know
what information the system will supply when that leg is selected. In the face of
this, the user may not feel the commitment to stay with the system to ferret out
the information.

DISCOVERY AND INCIDENTAL LEARNING ISSUES

Discovery learning can be defined as arr activity of the learner (Evans, 1969)
in which the learning environment provides opportunities for the exploration of
alternatives and results in the understanding of relationships that were previ-
ously unrecognized (Singer, 1977). IncidentzJ learning is usually reserved to

Journal of Research on Computing in Education 433

 refer to the unplanned learning that takes place in a learning environment that
may or may not support other explicitly stated instructional objectives.
Hypermedia shares many of the characteristics that are integral to discovery
and incidental learning. In discovery learning there is large degree of locus of
control reserved for the learner. As in incidental learning, the objectives or the
total scope or intent of the presented material is not always evident to the
learner. Educators have examined discovery and incidental learning in non-
computer-aided environments. The following review of their research results
has been distilled to identify the themes that are related to the development of
HAL
From the start it has been suggested that educational experiences can be
designed and materials produced that enable children to discover for them-
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

selves and learn more actively (Ray, 1966). The results mentioned in the
literature fall into areas related to the age and cognitive style of the learner, the
specific educational discipline and organization, and the impact of this type of
environment on retention, mterest in education, and motivation to learn.

THE NATURE OF THE ENVIRONMENT

Ausubel's theory of learning (1968) relies on the concept of advanced

organizers, much like filhg cabinets, into which learners incorporate new
concepts and ideas. One of the roles of instructional objectives is to orient the
learner so that the learner can decide which material to concentrate on and
which to pay less attention to. Many of the studies reviewed (Duchastel, 1972;
Duchastel & Brown, 1974; Kaplan & Rothkopf, 1972; Main, 1979; Meinke,
1982; Melton, 1978; Morse & Morse, 1978; Sturgis & Frase, 1973; Summers,
1982; Wepner, 1984; Wolk & Svoboda, 1975; Yore, 1986) suggested that
specifically stated objectives have a positive influence on incidental learning
outcomes. The use of learning objectives as advanced organizers presented
before the material significantly increased intended learning and no significant
loss was found for incidental ]earning-in some studies the incidental learning
actually increased. When learners were provided with objectives, even without
instruction feedback, they exhibited the greatest amount of recall and inciden-
tal learning. These effects span age groups showing that students of all ages
benefit from the orientation to learning in the form of objectives.
Others who studied the relationship between the organizing questions and
discovery learning are mixed in their review. Some (Sturgis & Frase, 1973;
Olarewaju, 1987) suggestej that presenting questions about, or elucidating the
hierarchy of, the learning environment insured higher recall while others (Hill-
man, 1979) suggested that questions are more effective if withheld until after
the material is presented. In a study of learning in young children Wepner
( 1985) suggested that everyday logos make an indelible impression on young
children and help them to orient themselves to the material to be learned.

434 Summer 1990

 THE NATURE OF THE LEARNER

Studies involving discovery and incidental learning have investigated the

relationship between age and the learning environment. Incidental learning was
found to increase across ages in studies by Collins (1970), Hale and Piper
(1972), and Hale and Taweel (1974). As children mature they are more capable
of hypothesis scanning and structuring presented information (Elliot & Carroll,
1982; Lane, 1980; Gottfriend, 1975). At age 6 a child simply asks a series of
questions, to test an independent hypothesis with each question bearing no
relation to the previous one. Restraint appears to begin at about age 8. By about
age 11 the student can deal with strategy narrowing questions in order to arrive
at an answer.
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

When studies were made to pinpoint the age at which children are more able
to ignore nonessential information, they suggested that the skill appears in
early adolescence. Kline ( 1971) concluded that eighth-grade students are ca-
pable of self-directed study in the area of earth science. In their study, Carnine,
Kameeniu, and Coyle (1984) pointed out that older students use context clues
more frequently and effectively than younger students and that the closer the
contextual aid is to the word, the more likely the learner is to use that aid. They
also suggest that intermediate grade students, preadolescent, cannot be as-
sumed to have adequate contextual skills. In some studies meant to track the
effect of discovery learning on retention, it is noted that age is probably more
important in considering retention than learning mode (Jamieson, 1971; O'Brien
& Shapiro, 1977).
In addition to age, researchers have pointed to environment as playing a part
in the child's ability to work independently. A very interesting study by Smith
( 1972) suggested that children from higher socioeconomic backgrounds did
better in orienting themselves to new, unfamiliar material. In a similar study,
Taiwo (1976) pointed out that urban children were better able to function in
incidental learning situations.
Many studies investigated the relationship of cognitive style to the ability to
function in an unstructured, discovery based learning situation. Moore (1982)
noted that creative students were more open to new and unusual situations.
Furthermore, students with a lower anxiety about learning were well served by
a discovery approach. Students with high anxiety toward learning benefited
more from an expository or lecture approach, according to research by Clute
( 1984). Segal and Chapman ( 1984) pointed out that less competent learners
require more complete instructions. They need to be told how, where, and when
to use learning strategies.
Finally, some mention should be made of the effect of discovery learning on
interest and motivation toward education and studies in general. One of the
most proved results of discovery learning is the stimulation of motivation to
pursue the learning task (Vidder & Levine, 1979). There seems to be natural,
spontaneous human desire to explore derived from a need to deal with the
environment. In a study relating students' desire to achieve and learning envi-
ronments, students who scored low on desire to achieve did better in a discov-

Journal of Research on Computing in Education 435

 ery environment, while students who are concerned with what others think
about them did better in a non-discovery classroom (Hawkoos & Penick,
1987). In studies representative of those that compare the results of using
discovery learning versus expository learning on attitude and on achievement,
most find that especially in science, discovery learning seems to promote better
attitudes and in some cases promotes intellectual development (Clareoenpit,
1979).

THE NATURE OF THE DISCIPLINE

Many studies were undertaken to establish which content areas are better
suited to discovery learning. Mathematics and science were most often exam-
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

ined as candidates for the discovery process. Some studies report no difference
(AI big, 1973; Becker, 1978; Kline, 1971; Kuhfittig, 1972)., some reported
structured situations to be better (Leggette, 1973), and some suggested di-
rected, or guided, discovery (Hirsch, 1977; Ivins, 1985; Lahnston, 1973; Okpala
& Onocho, 1988; Peters, ] 970; Zabulake, 1970). In mathematics, Maynard and
Strickland ( 1969) suggested that presentation does not matter for boys, but that
girls did significantly better under directed methods. In areas of English and
social studies the results are even less well formed and reports tend to describe
discovery learning environments in these content areas rather than to measure
the results of teaching presentation on learning (Forsyth, 1988; Geller, 1978;
Hawke, 1975).

IMPLICATIONS FOR HAl DESIGN AND RESEARCH

Discovery learning and incidental learning have been an area of study since
they were made popular in the late 50s and early 60s. The findings just
reviewed, combined with the technical issues relating to hypermedia, can act as
catalysts for design metaphors and research into the new area of hypermedia
assisted instruction. The research imperatives fall into two areas: those studies
focusing on the techniques of the media such as information presentation and
navigational aids that will help to refine the technical presentation of HAl, and
those studies that will identify the educational setting, types of students, and the
areas of education that will benefit from HAL
The problem areas within hypermedia and HAl are well documented but
there needs to be more research done on how one comes to understand the
extent and interconnections of the material represented in a hypermedia sys-
tem. Questions that combine technical feasibility with cognitive research must
be addressed. This requires the researcher to determine which of the following
tools:
buttons to click and to link from information node to information node,
which offer a nanuw view of the system, but which give the user control.
maps or indexes that give a broader view of the topology of the hyperspace
and still give the user control to go from node to node or concept area to
concept area.

436 Summer 1990

 guided tours which offer the least amount of user control as they present an
organized conceptual tour of the topology, best give the user an under-
standing of the HAl system, diminishing disorien:ation, and cognitive
overload while increasing commitment.
A question to be answered is: How can we structure the system so that the
user will continue to use it to discover the consequences of following a certain
path, where it will lead, what types of information it will disclose, and how
much information there will be when the system has been searched? Research
on the use of logos and the effectiveness of summary pictures suggests that we
must also inquire into the best graphical representations for nodes of informa-
tion and, by extension, link pointers.
While further studies are needed to inform educators as to the positioning of
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

additional concept map tools, it seems clear that HAl should be accompanied
with clearly stated learning objectives to make the learning event more worth-
while for the student. Some of the problems of HAl disorientation can be
resolved by carefully organizing the material and its presentation. The findings
in discovery learning concerning organizational schemes should encourage
educators to research and design HAl in which the structure of the material is
not just available to the learner through the use of a tool such as browser or
concept map, but is also clearly presented to the learner before the learner
begins to use the system, perhaps as part of introductory material.
Developmental studies need to be performed to evaluate and categorize the
experiences of students with various profiles as they use HAL The profiles
should include age and maturity of the learners, their attitudes toward learning,
their cognitive style, and their intellectual strengths. As Tsai (1988-89) sug-
gested, we must examine how learners orient themselves to new material.
Building on the research in discovery learning we must design ways to see the
relationship between the type of material studies, its structural complexity, and
users' ability to navigate the material. While the aforementioned research
should not preclude the use of HAl with young students, it seems that the first
fruitful areas of research should be with students of at least junior high age. In
the light of what we know about locus of control in learning situations, we need
to determine whether it is possible or necessary to make HAl useful or
available to all types of learners. Research is also required to assess the value
to, and attitudes of, high and low achievers as they use hypermedia assisted
instruction.
The discovery learning research results are encouraging in support of a
positive relationship between independent learning situations such as HAl and
motivation to learn. This should be explored and exploited in further studies.
Because the research gives no clear guidance as to which content areas might
be fruitful areas in which to use HAl, the field is open for discussion. Perhaps
the potential motivational benefits of HAl should be harnesses to "turn a
learner on" to a subject or subjects.
Simply converting traditional forms of CAl into HAl modes does not make
use of the richness of the hypermedia environment We, as educators, must
begin to address the use of HAl in our instructional systems in radically new

Journal of Research on Computing in Education 437

 ways. While we can look to research in discovery learning and incidental
learning, HAl does pose new problems inherent in its nonlinear structure and
presentation. Questions related to whether this type of presentation improves
comprehension and recall of material, whether all learners or only those with a
hyper-mind can follow the conceptual model, and how the classroom teacher
can harness the power of HAl remain to be answered.
Contributor
Rachelle S. Heller is an assistant professor of electrical engineering and
computer science at The George Washington University. Her research interests
include the design and implementation of educational software, as well as
issues of computer courseware integration into the K-12 curriculum. She is the
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

co-author of many articles and textbooks including Bits 'n Bytes About Com-
puting: A Computer Literacy Primer. (Address: Department of Electrical Engi-
neering and Computer Science, The George Washington University, Washing-
ton DC 20052. Email S43@GWUVM.BITNET)
References
Albig, D. ( 1973). A Study of the effects of verbalization on concept formation in
mathematics. Unpublished doctoral Dissertation, The Florida State Univer-
sity.
Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York:
Rineholt and Winston.
Becker, J., & Young, C. (1978). Designing instructional methods in mathema-
tics to accommodate different patterns of aptitude. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 9(1), 4-19.
Bush, V. (1945, July). As we may think. Atlantic Monthly, 176(1), 101-108.
Campagnioni, F., & Ehrlich, K. (1989, June). Information retrieval using
hypertext based help systems. Paper presented at the 12th International Con-
ference on Research and Development in Information Storage and Retrieval,
Cambridge.
Carnine, D., Kameeniu, E., & Coyle, G. (1984). Utilization of contextual
information in determining the meaning of unfamiliar words. Reading Re-
search Quarterly, 19(2), 188-204.
Chambers, D. (1971). Putting down the discovery learning hypothesis. Educa-
tional Technology, 11(3), 54-59.
Clareoenpit. (1979). Dual effects of logical thinking, ability and instructional
approaches in learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylva-
nia State University.
Clute, P. (1984). Mathematics anxiety, instructional method and achievement
in a survey course of college mathematics. Journal of Research in Mathema-
tics Education, 15(1), 50-58.
Collins. W. (1970). Learning media content: A developmental study. Child
Development, 41(4), 1133-42.
Conklin, J. (1987). Hypertext: An introduction and survey. IEEE Computer,
2(9), 17-41.

438 Summer 1990

 Duchastel, P. (1972). Incidental and relevant learning with instructional objec-
tives. Tallahassee: Florida State University.
Duchastel, P., & Brown, R. (1974). Incidental and relevant learning with
instructional objectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66(4), 481-5.
Elliot, S., & Carroll, J. (1982). Immediate and delayed recall of incidentally
learned material: A comparison of paradigms across three developmental
levels. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 7(4), 357-64.
Evans, T. (1969). Discovery as an aspect oflearning. American Biology Teacher,
31 (9), 555-558.
Forsyth, A. (1988). How we learn place location: Bringing theory and practice
together. Social Education, 52(7), 500-503.
Geller, C. (1978). Exploring language in the field. English Journal, 67(9), 38-
39.
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

Gottfriend~ A. (1975). Effects of instructions and stimulus representation on

children's selective learning. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the
Society for Research in Child Development, Denver.
Halasz, F., & Conklin, J. (1989). Issues in the design and application of
hypermedia systems. Austin: CHI '89 Tutorial #26.
Hale, G., & Piper, R. (1972). Developmental trends in children's incidental
learning: Some critical stimulus difference. Developmental Psychology, 8(3),
327-335.
Hale, G., & Taweel, S. (1974). Age differences in children's performance on
measures of component selection and incidental learning. Journal of Experi-
mental Child Psychology, 18(1), 107-116.
Hammond, 1\. (1989). Hypermedia and learning: Who guides whom?. In G.
Goos and J. Hartmanis (Eds.) Lecture notes in computer science: Computer
assisted learning (pp. 167-181 ). Berlin: Springier Verlag.
Hawke, S. (1975). American history and English development program pro-
files of promise. Boulder: ERIC Clearinghouse, EDL04769.
Hawkoos, G., & Penick, J. (1987). Interaction effect of personality characteris-
tics, classroom climate and science achievement. Science Education, 71 (5),
735-43.
Hillman, S. (1979). Information processing as a function of question type and
position. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association An-
nual Meeting, San Francisco.
Hirsch, C. (1977). The effects of guided discovery and individualized instruc-
tional packages on initial learning transfer and retention in second year
algebra. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 8(5), 359-68.
Ivins, J. (1985). A comparison of the effects of two instructional sequences
involving s~ience laboratory activities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Cincinnati.
Jamieson, G. (1971). Learning and retention: A comparison between pro-
grammed and discovery learning at two age levels. Programmed Learning
and Educational Technology, 8(1), 34-40.
Jones, W. ( 1987). How do we distinguish the hyper from the hype in non-linear
text?. In H. Bullinger & B. Shackel (Eds.) Human-computer interaction--
Interact' 87. New York: North-Holland.

Journal of Research on Computing in Education 439

 Kaplan, R., & Rothkopf, E. (1972). The effect of presenting objectives prior to
text. Chicago: Amer=-can Educational Research Association Annual Meeting.
Kline, A. ( 1971 ). A Study of the relationship between self directed and teacher
directed eighth grade students involved in open ended supplementary ESCP.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 8(3), 263-271.
Kuhfittig, P. (1972). The effectiveness of discovery learning in relation to
concrete and abstratt teaching methods in mathematics. Unpublished doc-
toral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers.
Lahnston, A. (1973). A comparison of directed discovery and demonstration
strategies for teaching geographic concepts and generalizations. Paper pre-
sented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting,
:Kew Orleans.
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

Lane, D. (1980). Incidental learning and the development of selective attention.

Psychological Review, 87(3), 316-19.
Leggette, E. (1973). Problem solving ability of capable but poorly prepared
college freshman in mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers
Cniversity.
Main, R. (1979). Effet on intended and incidental learning from the use of
learning objectives with an audiovisual presentation. Presented paper at the
American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, San Fran-
ctsco.
Maynard, F., & Strickland, J. (1969,August). A comparison of three methods of
teaching seleCTed mathematical content in eighth and ninth grade general
mathematics courses. Washington, DC: Final Report. Office of Education.
Meinke, D. (1982). Word frequency effects on memory and incidental/inten-
tional learning. Paper presented at the Rocky Mountain Psychological Asso-
ciation Annual Meeting, Albuquerque.
Melton, R. (1978). Resolution of conflicting claims concerning the effects of
behavioral objectives on student learning. Review of Educational Research,
48(2), 291-302.
Moore, M. (1982). Tbe relationship between problem-finding and originality
craftsmanship and aesthetic value of the written product in two groups of
student writers. State College, PA: Research Report.
Morine, C., & ~lorine~ D. (1973). Discovery: A challenge to teachers. New
York: Prentice Hall.
Morse, J., & Morse, F~ (1978). Effects of instructional objectives on relevant
and incidental learning for experienced and inexperienced possessors. Paper
presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meet-
ing, Toronto.
Nelson, T. (1967). Getting it out of our system. In G. Schecter (Ed.) Informa-
tion retrieval: A critical review (pp. 191-210). Washington, DC: Thompson
Books.
O'Brien, T., & Shapiro, B. (1977). Number patterns: discovery versus recep-
tion learning, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 8(2), 83-87.
Okpala, N., & Onocha, C. (1988). The relative effects of two instructional
methods in students' perceived difficulty in learning physics concepts. Kenya
Journal of Education, 4(1), 147-161.

440 Summer 1990

 Olarewaju, A. (1987). Relative effects of hierarchical versus non-hierarchical
learning tasks on students' achievement in biology. Research in Science and
Technological Education, 5(4), 17-24.
Pe:ers, D. ( 1970). Discovery learning in kindergarten mathematics. Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education, 1(2), 76-87.
Raskin, J. (1987). The hype in hypertext: A critique. Chapel Hill: Proceedings
of Hypertext '87, pp. 325-329.
Ray, H. (1966, December). Instructional media and heuristic learning. Wash-
ington, DC: Office of Education.
Segal, J., & Chipman, S. (1984). Thinking and learning skills: The contribu-
tiom of NIE. Educational Leadership, 42(1), 85-87.
Singer, R. ( 1977, Summer). To err or not to err: A question for the instruction of
psychomotor skills. Review of Educational Research, 47(3), 479-498.
Downloaded by [University of Leeds] at 20:09 05 July 2015

Smith, J. (1972). The preschooler: Socioeconomic status, race and incidental

kaming. Detroit: Michigan State University Report.
Sturgis, P., & Frase, L. (1973). Incidental learning of categorical text items
indu:::ed by specific and general search directions. Paper presented at the
American Educational Research Association Annual .\1eeting, New Orleans.
Su::nmers, M. (1982). Science education and meaningful learning. School
Science Review, 64(227), 361-66.
Taiwo, D. (1976). A study of the nature of incidental physical science knowl-
edge possessed by elementary school children in western state of Nigeria.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 12(6), 565-68.
Tsai, C. (1988-89). Hypertext: Technology, applications, and research issues.
Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 17(1), 3-14.
Vidder, D., & Levine, J. (1979). Discovery learning and motivation. College
Students Journal, 13(4), 387-90.
Weimer, R. (1974). A critical analysis of the discovery versus expository
research studies investigating retention or transfer within the areas of sci-
ence, mathematics, vocational education language and geography from the
1908 to the present. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois
at Urbana Champaign.
Wepner, S. (1985). Linking logos with print for beginning reading success.
Reading Teacher, 38(7), 633-39.
Wolk, S., & Svoboda, C. (1975). The mathemagenic effects of feedback and
c-rienting directions upon text learning. Paper presented at the American Edu-
cational Research Association Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.
Yore, L. (1986). The effects of lesson structure and cognitive style on science
achievement of elementary school children. Science Education, 70( 4 ), 461-
71.
Zubulake, G. (1970). A study of the learning by discovery controversy in
scier~.ce teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Michi-
gan.

Journal of Research on Computing in Education 441