Journal of The Korean Association of Information Education (정보교육학회논문지)

Korea Association of Information Education (한국정보교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Effects of Supportive Information Types in Web-Based Learning Using 4C/ID Model

4C/ID 모형을 적용한 웹기반 학습에서 지원정보 유형에 따른 효과

  • Received : 2016.12.23
  • Accepted : 2016.12.29
  • Published : 2016.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of prior-knowledge level and supportive information types in web-based learning using 4C/ID model(Four-Components Instructional Design model) on cognitive load and schema acquisition. To achieve the purpose, this study applied a web based learning. 166 university students participated in web-based learning for 4 weeks. After web-based learning, they checked self report for cognitive load and made concept map for schema acquisition and the datum from them were used for 2 ways ANOVA. According to the findings, groups in prior-knowledge level invested significantly differences on cognitive load and a question group in case of supportive information types didn't invested significant differences on cognitive load with statement group. Second, groups in prior-knowledge level invested significantly differences on schema acquisition and a question group in case of supportive information types invested significantly higher schema acquisition than a statement group. Furthermore, it happened interaction effect between supportive information types and prior-knowledge level on schema acquisition. This research has several implications with regard to suggesting the guidelines and conditions for the authentic task of the novice.

본 연구는 4C/ID 모형(Four-Components Instructional Design model)을 적용한 웹기반 학습에서 학습자의 배경지식 수준과 지원정보 제시 유형이 인지부하와 쉐마획득에 미치는 영향을 규명하는 데 있다. 이를 위하여 웹기반 수업을 설계하고 대학수업 4주 동안 166명의 대학생들을 대상으로 수업을 진행하였다. 수업 후 인지부하 자가보고식 설문지와 쉐마획득 측정을 위한 개념도를 수집하여 이원변량 분석하였다. 연구결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 학습자의 배경지식 수준에 따라 인지부하 점수는 유의한 차이가 있었고, 지원정보 제시 유형에서 질문 집단과 진술문 집단은 인지부하 점수가 유의한 차이가 없었다. 둘째, 학습자의 배경지식 수준에 따른 쉐마획득이 유의한 차이를 나타냈고, 질문 집단이 진술문 집단보다 쉐마획득이 유의하게 높았다. 또한 쉐마획득에서 학습자의 배경지식 수준과 지원정보 제시 유형 간 상호작용효과가 나타났다. 본 연구는 실제적 과제에서 초보 학습자의 수업 설계 및 적용에 고려할 수 있는 조건을 제시했다는 점에서 의의가 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Amidon, E., & Hunter, E. (1967). Improving teaching. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  2. Blayney, P., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2010). Interactions between the isolated-interactive elements effect and levels of learner expertise: Experimental evidence from an accountancy class. Instructional Science, 38(3), 277-287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-009-9105-x
  3. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals: Cognitive Domain. Longman.
  4. Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J., & Ronning, R. R. (1999). Cognitive psychology and instruction (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
  5. Carner, R. L. (1963). Levels of questioning. Education, 83(2), 546-50.
  6. Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M. H., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439-477.
  7. Clarke, T., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2005). The impact of sequencing and prior knowledge on learning mathematics through spreadsheet applications. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 15-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504794
  8. Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. John Wiley & Sons.
  9. Cowan, N. (2001). Metatheory of storage capacity limits. Behavioral and brain sciences, 24(1), 154-176.
  10. Elio, R. (1986). Representation of similar well-learned cognitive procedures. Cognitive Science, 10(1), 41-73. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1001_2
  11. Gagne, R. (1985). The Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction Robert Gagne. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  12. Gallagher, J. J. (1965). Expressive thought by gifted children in the classroom. Elementary English, 42, 559-568.
  13. Gonzalez, C., & Madhavan, P. (2011). Diversity during training enhances detection of novel stimuli. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23(3), 342-350. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2011.507187
  14. Ifenthaler, D., Pirnay-Dummer, P., & Seel, N. M. (2007). The role of cognitive learning strategies and intellectual abilities in mental model building processes. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 5(4), 353-366.
  15. J. H. Noh, S. Y. Park & S. J. Hong. (2008). 정The Impact of Information Presentation Type on Comparison Advertising: Moderating Effect of Attribute Typicality. Korea Journal of Business Administration), 21, 1443-1462.
  16. J. W. Jung., C. S. Nah., & D. S. Kim. (2014). The Effect of Types of Information Presentation on the Flow and the Instructional Efficiency in Multimedia Learning. The Journal of Educational Information and Media, 20(4), 453-474.
  17. K. Kim, D. S. Kim. (2004). The Effects of Modality of Text and Timing of Information Presentation on Cognitive Load, Effectiveness and Efficiency in Web Based Learning. Korean Society for Educational Technology. 20(4), 111-145.
  18. K. S. Wang. (2009). Cognitive load & Instructional design. Elementary educational research, 22(1), 491-522.58
  19. Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and instruction, 12(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00014-7
  20. Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2005). Learners and learning in the twenty-first century: what do we know about students’ attitudes towards and experiences of information and communication technologies that will help us design courses?. Studies in higher education, 30(3), 257-274 https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500095689
  21. Lee, T. D., Chung, W., & Haley, E. (2011). Adherence of retirement mutual fund providers to the securities and exchange commission (SEC)'s advertising guidance: provision and readability of advertising disclosure. Journal of consumer policy, 34(4), 455-474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-011-9176-3
  22. Marcus, N., Cooper, M., & Sweller, J. (1996). Understanding instructions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 49-63. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.88.1.49
  23. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning(2nd ed.). NY: Cambridge University Press.
  24. Mayer, R. E. (2011), Instruction based on visualizations. In R. E. (2011). Mayer, & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 427-445). NY: Routledg.
  25. Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
  26. Merrill, M. D. (1994). Instructional design theory. Educational Technology.
  27. Munbong Lee. (2010). The effect of types of test information on learning performance in the e-Learning contents. Journal of the Korea industrial information systems society, 15(5), 211-219.
  28. Nenkov, Inman, Hulland, Morrin(2010)
  29. Paas, F. G. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of educational psychology, 84(4), 429. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429
  30. Paas, F. G., & Van Merrienboer, J. J. (1994). Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of educational psychology, 86(1), 122. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.122
  31. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1
  32. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2004). Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional science, 32(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021806.17516.d0
  33. Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2012). An evolutionary upgrade of cognitive load theory: Using the human motor system and collaboration to support the learning of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 24(1), 27-45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9179-2
  34. Plass, J. L., Moreno, R., & Brunken, R. (2010). Cognitive load theory. Cambridge University Press.
  35. Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from worked-out examples: A study on individual differences. Cognitive science, 21(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2101_1
  36. Renkl, A. (2011). Instruction based on examples. Handbook of research on learning and instruction, 272-295.
  37. S. A. Oh., H. S. Kim. (2003). Differences in Working Memory Load between Split and Integrated Presentations of Visual and Verbal Information in Multimedia-Aided-Instruction. The Journal of Educational Information and Media, 9(2), 71-99.
  38. Schilling, M. A., Vidal, P., Ployhart, R. E. and Marangoni, A. 2003. Learning by doing something else: Variation, relatedness, and the learning curve. Management Science, 49(1): 39-56 https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.49.1.39.12750
  39. Schnotz, W., & Kurschner, C. (2007). A reconsideration of cognitive load theory. Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 469-508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9053-4
  40. Scouller, K. (1998). The influence of assessment method on students' learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. Higher Education, 35(4), 453-472. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003196224280
  41. Seunghee Lee. (2000). Research of teaching method. Seoul: Wangseowon. Press.
  42. Sim, H. A. (2008). Effects of presentation timing of supportive information and sequencing of practice problems in complex cognitive task practice for novice learners(Doctoral dissertation). Hanyang University.
  43. Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational psychology review, 22(2), 123-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5
  44. Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory: Recent theoretical advances. Cognitive load theory, 29-47.
  45. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). 2 Cognitive Load Theory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation-Advances in Research and Theory, 55, 37.
  46. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer.
  47. T. J. Lee. (2014). The Role of Advertising Disclosure Format, Financial Knowledge, and Financial Education on Financial Consumer’s Decision-Making : The Effort Heuristic. The Korean Journal of Advertising, 25(1), 7-26. https://doi.org/10.14377/KJA.2014.1.15.7
  48. van Merrienboer, J. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2001). Three worlds of instructional design: State of the art and future directions. Instructional Science, 29(4-5), 429-441. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011904127543
  49. van Merrienboer, J. J., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner's mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_2
  50. van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational psychology review, 17(2), 147-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0
  51. van Merrienboer, J. J., & Ayres, P. (2005). Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for e-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 5-13.
  52. van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational psychology review, 17(2), 147-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0
  53. van Merrienboer, J. V., & Kirschner, P. A. (2007). Ten steps to complex learning: A systematic approach to four-component instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  54. van Merrienboer, J. J., Kester, L., & Paas, F. (2006). Teaching complex rather than simple tasks: Balancing intrinsic and germane load to enhance transfer of learning. Applied cognitive psychology, 20(3), 343-352. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1250
  55. van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2007). Alternate models of instructional design: Holistic design approaches and complex learning. Trends and issues in instructional design and technology, 72-81.
  56. van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2007). Ten steps to complex learning: A systematic approach to four-component instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associcates.
  57. van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies. Medical education, 44(1), 85-93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03498.x
  58. Wilkinson, M. (2004). The secrets of facilitation. San Francisco, CA. Josey-Bass.