The
Coherence Principle essentially applies focus to any presentation. It states
that any material that does not support the instructional goal should be
avoided (Clark and Mayer, 2008, p. 151). The Coherence Principle should be
thought of as message proof reading. Just as Hemingway edited his writing by
eliminating any extraneous words or phrases, so too should an instructor
examine his presentation to ensure that the concept of one slide, one idea is
followed.
The
classic misapplication of the Coherence Principle is the extraneous clip art
found in most Power Point presentations. At Millstone Power Station, there are
three reasons for the existence of these annoying distractions. First, the art of
creating info-graphics defies most instructors. Few possess the ability to
distill a complex concept into a single illustration. As a result, instructors
fill their Power Point slides with words and the clip art is an entertaining
afterthought. The second reason is technical in nature. Very few instructors
understand photo editing program. Additionally, because instructors work from
company computers connected to a network, the downloading of open sourced
software such as Gimp is forbidden. The last reason is one of methodology.
Since the advent of Power Point, instructors are more inclined to read their
lessons from their presentation rather than use the slides to enhance their
instruction.
The
above slides illustrate a good use of the Coherence Principle. It is being
presented as part of lesson on atoms. The first slide informs the learner on
the standard notation for an atom. The second provides a specific example in
which that standard notation is displayed both graphically and in text. If both
these illustrations were presented together, the result would be cluttered and
confusing. By laying the groundwork in the first slide, the second clarifies
the concept for the learner. Good use of the Coherence Principle promotes
effective learning.
Thus
far, the principles we’ve learned have one thing in common. They are designed
to provide multiple, unfettered paths to the brain, thereby facilitating
learning. In an odd way all learning reflects the way we teach very young
children. Consider, for a moment, how we teach our children to count to five.
Every parent, at one time or another has done this. We sit with the child and count one to five
while raising our fingers. This simple act illustrates all the principals we
have learned thus far. We are combining our words with visual stimulation in
accordance with the Multimedia Principle. As per the Modality Principle, we use
spoken word rather than text. The Contiguity Principle dictates that we
coordinate our words with the graphics, and therefore no parent would say the
word “three” while holding up two fingers. Lastly, such an act is usually
performed during quiet time to minimize distractions thus applying the
Coherence Principle. The end result, of course, is that every child learns to
count. This simple fact buttresses that which we are learning.
The
authors mention that some believe that including extraneous material may
psychologically arouse the interest of the student and thus increase their
attentiveness. I strongly disagree with this opinion. A good instructor can
hold the attention of the class both with their demeanor and an effective
presentation. A study published in 2014 found that teacher charisma induces
student interest (Lee, Lu, Mao, Ling, Yeh & Hsieh, 2014, p. 1147). True, it
is much more difficult to create good graphical representations, but a well
thought out info graphic combined with engaging presentation methods will not
only hold the attention of the class, but will focus them on the topic at hand.
In short, an expertly baked and flavorful cake does not need frosting.
These
thoughts are contested by the results of a study conducted in 2008 in
Australia. In the study, researchers from the University of Sydney compared the
results of two astronomy courses. One group of students was given a course on
stellar spectra that presented only the information which was germane to the
topic. The others were presented with a course that included an extra fifty
percent of related, but extraneous material. The test scores between the two
groups were not significantly different. The authors of the study used these
results to conclude that the assumptions made by the Coherence Principle were
flawed (Muller, Lee & Sharma, 2008, p. 219).
I
disagree with the researcher’s interpretation of the study. They set the
Coherence Principle as the baseline for their results, and as the results from
the second group did not drop below the baseline, they conclude that the
assumptions of the Coherence Principle are wrong. However, if we consider the
case of those who advocate student’s interest as important, then, in reality,
those students who received the extraneous detail should have been more
interested and thus performed better on the exam.
To me,
the Coherence Principal is incredibly important. It allows the instructor to
present the material effectively and lead the learners. It promotes a
systematic approach to presentation. Often times, when an expert in the subject
matter prepares a course, they overlook the step by step approach that they
used when initially learning the material. The Coherence Principle forces the
designer to take the baby steps required to ensure that the information does
not overwhelm the learners. There are assertions made that this principle
should not apply to higher level learners. I would argue that, done right, the
principle applies to all learners. Obviously, the instructor is not going to
teach a class of Einstein, Newton and Fermi fundamental algebra, but if they
were present in a class on bootlegging whiskey, these principles would apply
and would be effective. The only downside I can see to the Coherence Principle
is that adhering to it would require a great deal more work from the
instructor. Limiting the extraneous material on each slide, results in the need
to create more slides. However, the benefits to the learners more than justify
such efforts and make for an outstanding opportunity.
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2011). E-Learning
and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley &
Sons.
De-Chih Lee, Jung-Jei
Lu, Ko-Min Mao, Szu-Hsing Ling, Mei-Chun Yeh & Chih ling Hsieh. (2014). Does Teachers Charisma Can
Really Induce Students Learning Interest ?. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1143-1148.
Muller,
D. A., Lee, K. J., Sharma, M. D. (2008). Coherence or interest: Which is most
important in online multimedia learning? Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 24(2), 211-221.
No comments:
Post a Comment