Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
INTEGRATED MULTIMEDIA DESIGN FOR LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|Title:||INTEGRATED MULTIMEDIA DESIGN FOR LANGUAGE LEARNERS|
|Authors:||Mamiya Hernandez, Rachel|
|Contributors:||Menchaca, Michael P. (advisor)|
Learning Design and Technology (department)
Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning
show 3 moreLearning Design
|Publisher:||University of Hawai'i at Manoa|
|Abstract:||As both online and blended language courses grow in popularity (Anderson, 2018; Arrosagaray, González-Peiteado, Pino-Juste & Rodríguez-López, 2019; Meskill & Anthony, 2015) and as face-to-face language courses increasingly rely on technology (Kessler, 2018; Li and Swanson, 2014; Sykes, 2014), understanding how students learn best in multimedia environments becomes essential. Hastings and Tracey (2005) underscore the need for us to move away from simplistic views on media versus methods and towards deeper inquiry on how media and methods align to optimize learning. Similarly, Yang, Wang and Chiu (2014) push us to look beyond the media versus methods debate, to more carefully examine the confluence of the two, and most importantly, to consider the active role of the learner in the learning process. Building on such considerations, this study combines evidence-based principles from cognitive psychology and second language acquisition in an integrated manner to inform learning design. |
This dissertation addressed such questions, presenting an integrated multimedia language learning design framework based on Mayer’s Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (2005, 2014) and VanPatten’s Processing Instruction (1993, 2004) and outlining a mixed-methods study that examines its effectiveness. In particular, it explored how pictorial enhancements in multimedia environments aid Spanish language learners’ processing. Participants (N = 89) were randomly assigned to one of three groups: a group that received a lesson designed using the integrated Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (CTML) with Processing Instruction (PI) framework, a group that received a Processing Instruction designed lesson, and a control group. Both experimental groups significantly outperformed the control group on posttest and delayed posttest measures; however, no significant difference was found between the two experimental groups. Additionally, no significant differences were found between groups in their perceived cognitive load. In the second phase of research, qualitative interviews helped contextualize participants’ attitudes and illuminate learner experiences. Overall, participants had positive feelings regarding the learning environment and highlighted their preference for visual support and learner control of pacing. Further, several participants also shared how they became aware of their errors and redirected their processing strategies.
|Rights:||All UHM dissertations and theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission from the copyright owner.|
|Appears in Collections:||
Ph.D. - Learning Design and Technology|
Please email email@example.com if you need this content in ADA-compliant format.
Items in ScholarSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.