Browse > Article

The Influences of Situational Interest, Attention, and Cognitive Effort on Drawing as a Method to Assist Students to Connect and Integrate Multiple External Representations  

Kang, Hun-Sik (Seoul National University)
Noh, Tae-Hee (Seoul National University)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.26, no.4, 2006 , pp. 510-517 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study investigated the influences of situational interest, attention, and cognitive effort on drawing as a method to assist students to connect and integrate multiple external representations provided in learning chemical concepts. Seventh graders (N=178) at two coed middle schools were taught about the "Boyle's Law" and the "Charles's Law" for two class hours through drawing. They observed macroscopic phenomena through demonstrations. After these observations, they drew their mental model from the external verbal representation, and then compared their drawings with external visual representation. The tests assessing situational interest, attention, cognitive effort, and conceptual understanding were administered as post-tests. Correlation and path analyses supported a causal model which situational interest had a positive direct effect on attention to the drawing. Attention led to conceptual understanding directly as well as through cognitive effort. These results suggest that situational interest may be induced by drawing first of all, and attention and cognitive effort may be direct causes of conceptual understanding in drawing. Educational implications are discussed.
Keywords
multiple representations; drawing; situational interest; attention; cognitive effort;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 강훈식, 김보경, 노태희 (2005). 물질의 입자적 성질에 대한 다중 표상 학습에서 외적 표상들 간의 연계와 통합을 촉진시키는 방안으로서의 그리기와 쓰기. 한국과학교육학회지, 25(4), 533-540
2 Edens, K. M, & Potter, E. F. (2003). Using descriptive drawings as a conceptual change strategy in elementary science. School Science and Mathematics, 103(3), 135-144   ScienceOn
3 Koroghlanian, C, & Klein, J. D. (2000). The use of audio and animation in computer based instruction. The Annual Proceedings of selected research and development papers presented at the national convention of the association for educational communications and technology, Denver. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 455812
4 Song, S. H. (1998). The effects of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction developed through the ARCS model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University
5 Stein, M., McNair, S., & Butcher, J. (2001). Drawing on student understanding: Using illustrations to invoke deeper thinking about animals. Science and Children, 38(4), 18-22
6 Wu, H.-K., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students' use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 821-842   ScienceOn
7 Chen, A., Darst, P. W., & Pangrazi, R. P. (2001). An examination of situational interest and its sources. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(3), 383-400   ScienceOn
8 Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13(4), 351-371   ScienceOn
9 노태희, 유지연, 한재영 (2003). 분자 수준에서의 그림 그리기를 활용한 수업 모형의 효과. 한국과학교육학회지, 23(6), 609-616
10 van Merrienboer, J. J. G., Schuurman, J. G., De Croock, M. B. M., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (2002). Redirecting learners' attention during training: Effects on cognitive load, transfer test performance and training efficiency. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 11-37   ScienceOn
11 Glynn, S. (1997). Drawing mental models. The Science Teacher, 64(1), 30-32
12 박성익, 손지영 (2003). 멀티미디어 활용 학습에서 시각.청각 정보의 제시원리 탐색. 서울대학교 사대논총, 67, 105-120
13 Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 205-226   ScienceOn
14 van Bruggen, J. M, Kirschner, P. A, & Jochems, W. (2002). External representation of argumentation in CSCL and the management of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 121-138   ScienceOn
15 김계수 (2004). AMOS 구조방정식 모형 분석. 서울: (주)데이타솔루션
16 White, R, & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing Understanding. London: The Falmer Press
17 Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33(2-3), 131-152   ScienceOn
18 van Meter, P., & Garner, J. (2005). The promise and practice of learner-generated drawing: Literature review and synthesis. Educational Psychology Review, 17(4), 285-325   ScienceOn
19 Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 151-179   ScienceOn
20 Kester, L., Kirschner, P. A, & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2004). Information presentation and troubleshooting in electrical circuits. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 239-256   ScienceOn
21 Valcke, M (2002). Cognitive load: Updating the theory? Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 147-154   ScienceOn
22 Wu, H.-K., & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education, 88(3), 465-492   ScienceOn
23 Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 125-139   ScienceOn
24 Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 23-52   ScienceOn
25 Seufert, T. (2003). Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 227-237   ScienceOn
26 Ardac, D., & Akaygun, S. (2004). Effectiveness of multimedia-based instruction that emphasizes molecular representations on students' understanding of chemical change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 317-337   ScienceOn
27 Mayer, R. E, Fennell, S., Farmer, L., & Campbell, J. (2004). A personalization effect in multimedia learning: Students learn better when words are in conversational style rather than formal style. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2). 389-395   ScienceOn