Journal of Engineering Education Transformations

Journal of Engineering Education Transformations

DOI: 10.16920/jeet/2020/v33i3/144816

Year: 2020, Volume: 33, Issue: 3, Pages: 48-61

Original Article

Proposing Effective Framework for Animation Based Learning Environment for Engineering Students

Rajesh Kumar Kaushal *, Surya Narayan Panda , Naveen Kumar
  • Chitkara University Institute of Engineering & Technology, Chitkara University, Punjab, India
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Computer animations have been used since a long time to improve comprehension and the learning outcome but the outcomes of the past empirical studies were not uniform. Some studies statistically proved the effectiveness of computer animations but other studies failed to produce evidences in favour of computer animations. There is need of a standard framework that can suggest what should be there in an effective computer animation based learning environment. The present research is proposing a standard framework that suggests under which conditions computer animations are effective, which combination of scaffolding is effective in such environments, does design principles matter while making animations and which design principles are the most effective. A meta-analysis was conducted to find out the effective conditions. An empirical study was conducted to find out effective combination of scaffolding and another empirical study was conducted to find out the effective design principles. The study discovered that computer animations are effective when offered to high prior knowledge students. The study also found that indirect support and adaptive fading is the best combination of scaffolding. Segmentation, cueing/signaling, prediction prompts and modality are proved as the effective design principles.

References

  • Ali, A. Z. M., & Madar, A. R. (2010). Effects of segmentation of instructional animation in facilitating learning. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 2(2).

  • Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., Winters, F. I., Moos, D. C., & Greene, J. A. (2005). Adaptive human scaffolding facilitates adolescents' self-regulated learning with hypermedia . Instructional Science, 33(5-6), 381-412.

  • Barzilai, S., & Blau, I. (2014). Scaffolding game-based learning: Impact on learning achievements, perceived learning, and game experiences. Computers & Education, 70, 65-79.

  • Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Olsen, M. W., & Leary, H. (2015). A pilot meta-analysis of computer-based scaffolding in STEM education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 183.

  • Berney, S., & B�trancourt, M. (2016). Does animation enhance learning? A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 101, 150-167.

  • Boucheix, J.-M., & Guignard, H. (2005). What animated illustrations conditions can improve technical document comprehension in young students? Format, signaling and control of the presentation. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20(4), 369-388.

  • Boucheix, J.-M., & Schneider, E. (2009). Static and animated presentations in learning dynamic mechanical systems. Learning and Instruction, 19(2), 112-127.

  • Byrne, M. D., Catrambone, R., & Stasko, J. T. (1999). Evaluating animations as student aids in learning computer algorithms. Computers & Education, 33(4), 253-278.

  • ChanLin, L. (2001). Formats and prior knowledge on learning in a computer-based lesson. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(4), 409-419.

  • Chanlin, L.-J. (1999). Visual treatment for different prior knowledge. International Journal of Instructional Media, 26(2), 213.

  • Cornoldi, C., & Vecchi, T. (2004). Visuo-spatial working memory and individual differences. Psychology Press.

  • Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 428.

  • De Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2007). Attention cueing as a means to enhance learning from an animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 21(6), 731-746.

  • De Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2011). Improved effectiveness of cueing by self-explanations when learning from a complex animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), 183-194.

  • de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher-student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271-296.

  • Devolder, A., van Braak, J., & Tondeur, J. (2012). Supporting self-regulated learning in computer-based learning environments: systematic review of effects of scaffolding in the domain of science education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(6), 557-573.

  • Fischer, S. (2008). Temporal Manipulations in Instructional Animation Design: Is Attention Guiding Thought? Logos Verlag.

  • Fischer, S., Lowe, R. K., & Schwan, S. (2008). Effects of presentation speed of a dynamic visualization on the understanding of a mechanical system. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 22(8), 1126-1141.

  • Fong, S. F. (2013). Effects of segmented animated graphics among students of different spatial ability levels: A cognitive load perspective. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(2).

  • Garg, A., Norman, G. R., Spero, L., & Maheshwari, P. (1999). Do virtual computer models hinder anatomy learning? Academic Medicine.

  • Garg, A. X., Norman, G., & Sperotable, L. (2001). How medical students learn spatial anatomy. The Lancet, 357(9253), 363-364.

  • Geyskens, I., Krishnan, R., Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Cunha, P. V. (2009). A review and evaluation of meta-analysis practices in management research. Journal of Management, 35(2), 393-419.

  • Hasler, B. S., Kersten, B., & Sweller, J. (2007). Learner control, cognitive load and instructional animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 21(6), 713-729.

  • Hays, T. A. (1996). Spatial abilities and the effects of computer animation on short-term and long-term comprehension. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 14(2), 139-155.

  • Hegarty, M. (2004). Dynamic visualizations and learning: Getting to the difficult questions. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 343-351.

  • Hegarty, M., & Kozhevnikov, M. (1999). Types of visual-spatial representations and mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 684.

  • Hegarty, M., Kriz, S., & Cate, C. (2003). The roles of mental animations and external animations in understanding mechanical systems. Cognition and Instruction, 21(4), 209-249.

  • Hegarty, M., & Waller, D. (2005). Individual differences in spatial abilities. The Cambridge Handbook of Visuospatial Thinking, 121-169.

  • H�ffler, T. N., & Leutner, D. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 722-738.

  • H�ffler, T. N., Prechtl, H., & Nerdel, C. (2010). The influence of visual cognitive style when learning from instructional animations and static pictures. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(5), 479-483.

  • Hui-Yu, Y. (2016). The effects of attention cueing on visualizers' multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(1), 249.

  • Huk, T. (2006). Who benefits from learning with 3D models? The case of spatial ability. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(6), 392-404.

  • Isaak, M. I., & Just, M. A. (1995). Constraints on the processing of rolling motion: The curtate cycloid illusion. Journal of Experimental Psyc hology: Human P er ce ption a nd Performance, 21(6), 1391.

  • Jeung, H.-J., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). The role of visual indicators in dual sensory mode instruction. Educational Psychology, 17(3), 329-345.

  • Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., & Reisslein, M. (2015). Supporting multimedia learning with visual signalling and animated pedagogical agent: Moderating effects of prior knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(2), 97-115.

  • Kalyuga, S. (2008). Relative effectiveness of animated and static diagrams: An effect of learner prior knowledge. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 852-861.

  • Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 13(4), 351-371.

  • Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2000). Incorporating learner experience into the design of multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 126.

  • Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2001). Learner experience and efficiency of instruc tional guidance . Educ ationa l Psychology, 21(1), 5-23.

  • Khacharem, A., Zoudji, B., Kalyuga, S., & Ripoll, H. (2013). Developing tactical skills through the use of static and dynamic soccer visualizations: An expert-nonexpert differences investigation. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 25(3), 326-340.

  • Khacharem, A., Zoudji, B., & Ripoll, H. (2013). Effect of presentation format and expertise on attacking-drill memorization in soccer. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 25(2), 234-248.

  • Khacharem, A., Zoudji, B., Spanjers, I. A. E., & Kalyuga, S. (2014). Improving learning from animated soccer scenes: Evidence for the expertise reversal effect. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 339-349.

  • Khooshabeh, P., & Hegarty, M. (2010). Inferring cross-sections: When internal visualizations are more important than properties of external visualizations. Human-Computer Interaction, 25(2), 119-147.

  • Kopper, K. E., McKenzie, D., & Peterson, D. L. (2009). The evaluation of meta-analysis techniques for quantifying prescribed fire effects on fuel loadings. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-582. Portland, OR: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 24 P., 582.

  • Lajoie, S. P., Guerrera, C., Munsie, S. D., & Lavigne, N. C. (2001). Constructing knowledge in the context of BioWorld. Instructional Science, 29(2), 155-186.

  • Large, A., Beheshti, J., Breuleux, A., & Renaud, A. (1996). Effect of animation in enhancing descriptive and procedural texts in a multimedia learning environment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(6), 437-448.

  • Lee, D. Y., & Shin, D.-H. (2011). Effects of spatial ability and richness of motion cue on learning in mechanically complex domain. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1665-1674.

  • Lee, E. A.-L., & Wong, K. W. (2014). Learning with desktop virtual reality: Low spatial ability learners are more positively affected. Computers & Education, 79, 49-58.

  • Lin, L., Atkinson, R. K., Savenye, W. C., & Nelson, B. C. (2016). Effects of visual cues and self-explanation prompts: empirical evidence in a multimedia environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(4), 799-813.

  • Lowe, R., & Boucheix, J. (2007). Eye tracking as a basis for animation design. In Bi-annual meeting of the European Association of Research on Learning and Instruction, Budapest.

  • Malone, S., & Br�nken, R. (2013). Assessment of driving expertise using multiple choice questions including static vs. animated presentation of driving scenarios. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 51, 112-119.

  • Mautone, P. D., & Mayer, R. E. (2001). Signaling as a cognitive guide in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 377.

  • Mayer, R. E., & Anderson, R. B. (1992). The instructive animation: Helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 444.

  • Mayer, R. E., & Chandler, P. (2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 390.

  • Mayer, R. E., DeLeeuw, K. E., & Ayres, P. (2007). Creating retroactive and proactive interference in multimedia learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(6), 795-809.

  • Mayer, R. E., Dow, G. T., & Mayer, S. (2003). Multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent-based microworlds? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 806.

  • Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A splitattention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 312.

  • Mayer, R. E., & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 389.

  • McEldoon, K. L., Durkin, K. L., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2013). Is self-explanation worth the time? A comparison to additional practice. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(4), 615-632.

  • McElhaney, K. W., Chang, H.-Y., Chiu, J. L., & Linn, M. C. (2015). Evidence for effective uses of dynamic visualisations in science curriculum materials. Studies in Science Education, 51(1), 49-85.

  • Moreno, R. (2007). Optimising learning from animations by minimising cognitive load: Cognitive and affective consequences of signalling and segmentation methods. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 21(6), 765-781.

  • Moreno, R. (2009). Learning from animated classroom exemplars: The case for guiding student tea che rs' observa tions with metacognitive prompts. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15(5), 487-501.

  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 358.modality and contiguity. ournal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 358.

  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Learning science in virtual reality multimedia environments: Role of methods and media. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 598.

  • Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177-213.

  • Murphy, N., & Messer, D. (2000). Differential benefits from scaffolding and children working alone. Educational Psychology, 20(1), 17-31.

  • Narayanan, N. H., & Hegarty, M. (2002). Multimedia design for communication of dynamic information. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57(4), 279-315.

  • O'Neil, H. F., Mayer, R. E., Herl, H. E., Niemi, C., Olin, K., & Thurman, R. A. (2000). Instructional strategies for virtual aviation training environments. Aircrew Training and Assessment, 105-130.

  • Ollerenshaw, A., Aidman, E., & Kidd, G. (1997). Is an illustration always worth ten thousand words? Effects of prior knowledge, learning style and multimedia illustrations on text comprehension. International Journal of Instructional Media, 24(3), 227.

  • Park, O., & Gittelman, S. S. (1992). Selective use of animation and feedback in computerbased instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(4), 27-38.

  • Park, S. I., Lee, G., & Kim, M. (2009). Do students benefit equally from interactive computer simulations regardless of prior knowledge levels? Computers & Education, 52(3), 649-655.

  • Plass, J. L., Chun, D. M., Mayer, R. E., & Leutner, D. (2003). Cognitive load in reading a foreign language text with multimedia aids and the influence of verbal and spatial abilities. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(2), 221-243.

  • Pratt, M. W., & Savoy-Levine, K. M. (1998). Contingent tutoring of long-division skills in fourth and fifth graders: Experimental tests of some hypotheses about scaffolding. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 19(2), 287-304.

  • Rieber, L. P. (1990). Using computer animated graphics in science instruction with children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 135.

  • Rittle-Johnson, B. (2006). Promoting transfer: Effects of self-explanation and direct instruction. Child Development, 77(1), 1-15.

  • Schneider, S., Beege, M., Nebel, S., & Rey, G. D. (2018). A meta-analysis of how signaling affects learning with media. Educational Research Review, 23, 1-24.

  • Schnotz, W., & Rasch, T. (2005). Enabling, facilitating, and inhibiting effects of animations in multimedia learning: Why reduction of cognitive load can have negative results on learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 47.

  • Sharma, P., & Hannafin, M. J. (2007). Scaffolding in technology-enhanced learning environments . Interactive Learning Environments, 15(1), 27-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820600996972

  • Sims, V. K., & Hegarty, M. (1997). Mental animation in the visuospatial sketchpad: Evidence from dual-task studies. Memory & Cognition, 25(3), 321-332.

  • Smit, N., van de Grift, W., de Bot, K., Jansen, E., de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2017). A classroom observation tool for scaffolding reading comprehension . Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271-296.

  • Spanjers, I. A. E., Wouters, P., Van Gog, T., & Van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2011). An expertise reversal effect of segmentation in learning from animated worked-out examples. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 46-52.

  • Stebner, F., K�hl, T., H�ffler, T. N., Wirth, J., & Ayres, P. (2017). The role of process information in narrations while learning with animations and static pictures. Computers & Education, 104, 34-48.

  • Steinke, M., Huk, T., & Floto, C. (2003). Helping teachers developing computer animations for improving learning in science education. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3022-3025).

  • Tversky, B., Morrison, J. B., & Betrancourt, M. (2002) . Animation: can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57(4), 247-262. van Wely, M. (2014). The good, the bad and the ugly: meta-analyses. Oxford University Press.

  • Xie, H., Wang, F., Zhou, Z., & Wu, P. (2016). Cueing effect in multimedia learning: A metaanalysis.Acta Psychologica Sinica, 48(5), 540-555

  • 01 January 2020
  • VIEWS 2368
  • PDF 1182

Year: 2020, Volume: 33, Issue: 3


SCImago Journal & Country Rank

More articles

DON'T MISS OUT!

Subscribe now for latest articles and news.