A Study on the Impact of Using Multimedia to Improve the Quality of English Language Teaching

One of the most important uses of technology is that it makes it easy for instructors to incorporate multimedia into their teaching. There are different multimedia tools. Three of the most popular ones are visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic in which students take in information. Some students are visual learners, while others are auditory or kinaesthetic learners. While students use all of their senses to take in information, they seem to have preferences in how they learn best. In order to help students learn, teachers need to teach as many of these preferences as possible. Therefore, teachers can incorporate these multimedia tools in their curriculum activities so that students are able to succeed in their classes. This study is an analysis of multimedia tools for Iranian EFL students. Over 100 students complete a questionnaire to determine if their multimedia tools are auditory, visual, or kinaesthetic. The purpose of this study is to increase faculty awareness and understanding of the impact of multimedia tools on the teaching process. A review of the literature along with analysis of the data will determine how multimedia tools affect the teaching process.

[1]  Mehmet Fatih Ozmantar,et al.  A functional taxonomy of multiple representations: A tool for analysing Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge , 2012 .

[2]  W. Barbe,et al.  What We Know about Modality Strengths. , 1981 .

[3]  Cynthia D. Melton.  Bridging the Cultural Gap: A Study of Chinese Students' Learning Style Preferences , 1990 .

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

[5]  C. Penney.  Modality effects and the structure of short-term verbal memory , 1989, Memory & cognition.

[6]  Shaaron Ainsworth,et al.  The functions of multiple representations , 1999, Comput. Educ..

[7]  J. Reid.  The Learning Style Preferences of ESL Students. , 1987 .

[8]  K. Dunn,et al.  Teaching Students Through Their Individual Learning Styles: A Practical Approach , 1978 .

[9]  Ken Hyland.  Culture and Learning: A Study of the learning style preferences of Japanese Students , 1993 .

[10]  R. Mayer,et al.  Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning , 2003 .

[11]  Troy W Heffernan,et al.  Learning Styles of On-Campus and Off-Campus Marketing Students: The Challenge for Marketing Educators , 2003 .

[12]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[13]  Michel Dubois,et al.  Multimedia design: the effects of relating multimodal information , 2001, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[14]  R. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning: The Promise of Multimedia Learning , 2001 .

[15]  R. Mayer,et al.  Aids to computer-based multimedia learning , 2002 .

[16]  Irma M. Olmedo.  Language Mediation among Emergent Bilingual Children , 2003 .

[17]  Robert J. Beichner,et al.  Essentials of Educational Technology , 1998 .

[18]  Kate Corby,et al.  Schwartz, James E. and Robert J. Beichner (1999). Essentials of Educational Technology. Needham Heights, MA : Allyn & Bacon. , 1999 .

[19]  M. Peacock.  Match or mismatch? Learning styles and teaching styles in EFL , 2001 .

[20]  J. V. Rauff,et al.  In-Line/On-Line: Fundamentals of the Internet and the World Wide Web , 1999 .

[21]  P. Wild,et al.  Data‐logging: effects on practical science , 1996 .

[22]  R. Kozma.  Learning with Media , 1991 .

[23]  M. Carbo.  Research in Reading and Learning Style: Implications for Exceptional Children , 1983, Exceptional children.

[24]  Jerry Willis,et al.  Educational Computing: Learning with Tomorrow's Technologies , 1992 .

[25]  Michael Sankey,et al.  A Neomillennial Learning Approach: Helping Non-Traditional Learners Studying at a Distance , 2006 .