The interactivity effect in multimedia learning

The aim of this study was to determine whether the addition of interactivity to a computer-based learning package enhances the learning process. A sample of 33 (22 male and 11 female) undergraduates on a Business and Management degree used a multimedia system to learn about the operation of a bicycle pump. The system consisted of a labelled diagram of the pump, followed by a description of twelve stages in its operation. The sample was randomly divided into two groups who used either an interactive (I) or a non-interactive (NI) version involving both images and text. The I system differed from the NI system by the incorporation of control of pace, self-assessment questions and an interactive simulation. Students then undertook two different types of tests to assess their learning: one designed to evaluate their memory by recalling facts from the lesson, and another designed to assess their understanding through solving novel diagnostic problems. Students using the I system outperformed those using the NI system in the problem-solving test, and needed less time to complete both memory and problem-solving tests. This result is consistent with the hypothesis that interactive systems facilitate deep learning by actively engaging the learner in the learning process. This suggests that educational designers who seek to foster deep learning (as opposed to mere factual recall) should adopt the incorporation of interactivity as a design principle.

[1]  R. Mayer,et al.  When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? , 2001 .

[2]  Alfred Bork,et al.  Multimedia in Learning , 2001 .

[3]  James C. Lester,et al.  The Case for Social Agency in Computer-Based Teaching: Do Students Learn More Deeply When They Interact With Animated Pedagogical Agents? , 2001 .

[4]  R. Mayer,et al.  Animations need narrations : an experimental test of a dual-coding hypothesis , 1991 .

[5]  M. Moore Editorial: Three types of interaction , 1989 .

[6]  R. Mayer,et al.  A Split-Attention Effect in Multimedia Learning: Evidence for Dual Processing Systems in Working Memory , 1998 .

[7]  Lloyd P. Rieber,et al.  Using Computer Animated Graphics in Science Instruction with Children , 1990 .

[8]  D. Jonassen Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? , 1991 .

[9]  Zane L. Berge,et al.  Creating Student Interaction within the Educational Experience: A Challenge for Online Teachers , 2009 .

[10]  Rod Sims,et al.  Interactivity: A Forgotten Art? , 1997 .

[11]  Helmut Krueger,et al.  Using New Learning Technologies with Multimedia , 2000, IEEE Multim..

[12]  Joan K. Gallini,et al.  When Is an Illustration Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1990 .

[13]  Khaled Sabry,et al.  Evaluation of the interactivity of web-based learning systems: principles and process , 2003 .

[14]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent , 2003 .