Bev's ETEC 533 Blog

I recently read two studies that focused on using technologies that would stimulate multiple body modalities to help students learn. Results seemed to indicate that these technologies can increase student learning. Although there is no conclusive explanation for this, some researchers suggest that reduced cognitive load may have a role to play in this.

As I am a very tactile person, I found Haptic Augmentation of Science Instruction: Does Touch Matter? (Jones et al, 2005) a really interesting article, because touch really matters to me. Jones et al describe a study they conducted where middle and senior students participated in a computer-mediated inquiry activity called Investigating Viruses: They Mystery of the Sick Puppy. The students were divided into three groups. The first group conducted the activity using just a mouse, the other two groups used a haptic device, each with different sensitivities. The purpose of the investigation was to determine if the different instructional treatments would affect students knowledge and attitudes. The results showed that these hands-on activities made a difference in learning, and the type of hands-on experiences make a difference. Those students who used the most sensitive haptic tool showed the greatest change in both knowledge and attitude.

I think this study provides some really interesting ideas about multi-sensory learning. The cognitive load theory developed by Sweller (1994) suggests that we only have so much working memory. If we can reduce the cognitive load, we can process information more effectively. He also suggests that each one of our five senses has its own working memory. “It is thought that if multiple channels or modalities are employed the cognitive load on an individual can be reduced (Jones et al, p. 112). By providing the tactile information, students immediately access previous learned knowledge accessed from the tactile working memory without having to mediate any other concepts or symbols thus reducing cognitive load.

The second article I read provides another example of multi-sensory learning. When Does Immersion in a Virtual Environment Help Students Construct Understanding? (Winn et al, 2002) describes a study done to examine whether immersion in a virtual environment will increase student understanding of water movement, tides and salinity. The subjects in this study participated in a computer simulation of tidal currents and salinity in Puget Sound. The first group completed the activity using a desktop computer screen, while the second group( the immersive group) used virtual reality (VR) technology. The results of the study showed that the students in the immersive group had a better understanding of the water movement, but not of salinity and tides. The authors explained that an understanding of water movement was something that could best be understood by looking around. This was not an easy thing for the desktop group to do, where it was a natural action for the VR group. Information on salinity and tides was provided by digital read outs and graphs for both groups, which would explain why there was no difference in their understandings.

I think that Sweller’s cognitive load theory can help explain why the use of the haptic devices and the VR technology increased student learning. The more we can engage the whole body, the more working memory we can employ, allowing students to focus on the new information.

References:

Jones, G.M., Minogue, J., Tretter, T.R., Neigishi, A., & Taylor, R. (2006). Haptic augmentation of science instruction: Does touch matter? Science Education, 90, (1), 111-123.

Sweller, J. ( 1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295-312.

Winn, W., Windschitl, M., Fruland, R., & Lee, Y. (2002). When does immersion in a virtual environment help students construct understanding? Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.