What is the Coherence Principle and its most important constraints/criteria?
With technology an ever-increasing presence in education and K-12 classrooms, it is important for teachers to be able to evaluate the quality of multimedia presentations for their students. Furthermore, as creators of many pieces of multimedia content, teachers and presenters need to know how to most effectively design multimedia instruction. Given all the fun and exciting Web 2.0 tools available, it would be easy to assume that more flash and vibrancy included in a presentation, the better the learning might be. Isn’t it true that students are more engaged in novel and exciting material, then something presented in a dry and boring format? The research tells us something quite different.
A foundational principle in the development of multimedia curriculum is the coherence principle. In short, “less is more”. Through multiple studies, researchers Moreno and Mayer, determined that, “Students learn better when extraneous material is excluded rather than included in multimedia explanations.” (Moreno and Mayer, 2000) Although much media and advertising has been devoted to the idea of music enhancing learning, and different students learning better in different auditory environments, we do not yet have research to support such an assertion. It is clear that more research needs to take place, and that we’re still at the beginning of researching this topic. However, the research that we do have available, in carefully controlled studies, has demonstrated that adding background music to a multimedia presentation tends to hurt rather than help the learning process. Even quiet, instrumental background music at a very low level, reduces learning for most subjects. Furthermore environmental sounds added with the intention of enhancing the understanding of an animation, generally have the opposite effect. (Mayer, 1999)
The coherence principle also addresses the use of extraneous graphics. When pictures in textbooks are irrelevant to the current teaching target, they prove “distracting and disruptive of the learning process.” (Clark and Mayer, 2003) The coherence principle also suggests that students learn better from simple illustrations and simple descriptions in text than from more intricate and realistic drawings, or more complex textual explanations. Similar illustrations and explanations require the students to integrate their prior learning, their current information and their targeted concept which allowed them to retain their learning more completely.” (Clark and Mayer, 2003)
Describe and/or include one example of successful and one example of unsuccessful attempts to apply the Coherence Principle in actual instruction and training you have experienced.
The coherence principle reflects many of the principles integrated into Direct Instruction (DI), an approach to learning used with at-risk students and designed by Siegfried Engelmann. In the direct instruction approach, multiple phrases and definitions are carefully tested to determine which are most likely to result in students being able to remember and apply the targeted academic goal. This generally results in a very carefully scripted, minimalist presentation, with multiple opportunities for application. The careful pairing of visual components with verbal instructions is a perfect example of the coherence principal. Students never read and listen at the same time. Visual and auditory channels are carefully aligned and extraneous words, images and information is purposely eliminated. This approach has demonstrated highly effective results for students determined to be “naïve learners”. In short,
”Direct Instruction (DI) is a model for teaching that emphasizes well-developed and carefully planned lessons designed around small learning increments and clearly defined and prescribed teaching tasks. It is based on the theory that clear instruction eliminating misinterpretations can greatly improve and accelerate learning.” (Engelmann, 2013)
Although the DI approach incorporates more than the coherence principle, the other multimedia principles are incorporated. Other elements of instruction including carefully scripted explanations, careful rates of review and practice and almost errorless learning are also involved. Although the DI approach is behavioral rather than cognitive in its foundations, it incorporates much from both theories. In practice, many teachers use direct instruction materials for all learners regardless of their strengths or challenges, merely changing when the material is introduced. For example, the remedial spelling program, “Spelling Through Morphographs” is designed for struggling junior high and high school students. However, in private and home-schools it has been used as the core spelling program for typically developing third and fourth grade students. Because of its careful use of learning principles including the coherence principle, mastery occurs very rapidly. Teachers often comment that the more adept learners need this simple approach only briefly, and then become quickly bored with it, if not challenged by more complex material. Further research is needed on material presentation for both text and multimedia presenters.
An example of the unsuccessful use of the coherence principle was the PowerPoint training my daughter undertook for her food-handlers license, which is currently unavailable. While extraneous images were eliminated from the training, and images were simplified and coordinated with the on screen text, the text was read aloud. Because she has significant learning disabilities, one would think that this would be helpful for her. On the contrary, she did not have the ability to make sense of what she was hearing, simultaneously relate it to the text on screen, and also relate it to the accompanying images. She requested and received a paper text to study. Although this product used too much extraneous text, it was easier for her to use because she was only attending to the written text, rather than the spoken and written text at the same time. She took short notes of the written text, thereby creating her own minimalist text without extraneous details. These notes, paired with illustrations, allowed her to master the material.
Discuss the relationship of the Coherence Principle to other Multimedia Learning Principles examined thus far in your readings.
The Coherence Principle aligns well with the other Multimedia Learning Principles, as they are all built around the same underlying concept: the cognitive load theory.
“Humans possess two channels – visual and verbal – regardless of whether material is presented by book or by computer. Each channel is limited in capacity regardless of whether material is presented by book or computer. Active cognitive processing – including selecting, organizing, and integrating mental representations – promotes meaningful learning regardless of whether material is presented by book or computer.” (Mayer, 2003)
Each of the Multimedia Learning Principles takes this into consideration and builds on research addressing the effectiveness of accessing both the auditory and visual channels during instruction, while not overloading either of them. The multimedia principle indicates that students learn better from a presentation which uses words and pictures rather than only words. The Contiguity Principle indicates that learning is most effective when instructional words are placed near the associated image (special contiguity) and presented at the same time (temporal contiguity). The Modality Principle suggests that instruction is best learned when instructional words are presented as speech, rather than text, to access the auditory channel. This allows the visual channel to access the images presented as part of the multimedia principle. The Redundancy Principle builds on the Modality Principle by demonstrating that providing on screen text does not enhance the learning provided by narration. (Mayer, 2003). Each of these principles builds upon the others, each addressing the need to access without overloading both the auditory and the verbal channels.
Discuss the relationship of the Coherence Principle to fundamental theories of psychology as described by Clark & Mayer in your textbook.
When including decorative graphics, videos, or extraneous sounds, authors and editors are relying on the arousal theory. The arousal theory suggests that by making material more engaging, the student will be a point of optimal arousal, and therefore best able to absorb the material. However, “According to the cognitive theory of multimedia learning, the learner is seeking to make sense of the presented material.” (Clark and Mayer, 2003) Even if included multimedia material arouses the learners, it does not follow that this will result in greater comprehension of the targeted information concept. Instead, extraneous matter distracts the learner, by misguiding his attention; disrupts the learner, by preventing him from linking bits of information; and by seduction, when the extraneous information causes the learner to access inappropriate prior information, related to the targeted concept. According to Clark and Mayer, “Extraneous information is especially damaging students who struggle with processing information.” (Clark and Mayer, 2003) Low ability students that more time looking at extraneous information that the high ability learners. Mayer found that the effect of careful multimedia design was more pronounced for students with low prior knowledge of the subject matter and high rather than low spatial ability. “According to a cognitive theory of multimedia learning, students with high prior knowledge may be able to generate their own mental images while listening to an animation or reading a verbal text so having a contiguous visual presentation is not needed.” (Mayer,1999)
Although the coherence principle indicates that interjecting extraneous material into the core content reduces learning, it does not address whether engaging in extraneous material presented prior to the targeted academic instruction is beneficial to arousal or whether it is distracting even at that point the learning cycle. There is more research to be done. Cognitive load theory suggests that interest is engaged when an individual learner is able to mentally construct a model that makes sense: “Understanding leads to enjoyment. The achievement of cognitive interest depends on the reflection by the learner, rather than exposure to entertaining but irrelevant sights and sounds.” (Clark and Mayer, 2003)
What do you personally like or dislike about this principle? Present a coherent, informed opinion and explain why you hold this opinion. Are there any limitations or qualifications of the principle (caveats) which the authors did not consider and, if so, what are they?
The coherence principle makes good sense to me both as a learner and as an instructor. However, it seems to sidestep some important components of engaging students. While it makes sense to eliminate extraneous materials and targeting a specific learning objective, the coherence principle seems to assume that the student is already invested in mastering that particular objective. In my observation as a teacher, it seems that students need to be interested in the material and engaged before they are willing to attend to any multimedia presentation, regardless how effectively it is presented. Personally, I am not the least bit interested in the way that lightning works. Even a presentation which follows all of the multimedia principles, would not engage in learning this material unless there was a significant reward involved. How then, do we engage students in learning material that, as instructors, we have determined they need to master? I think this brings us back to the bigger question of instructional design, relevancy, student engagement, and the relationships within the classroom in many situations. My courses and online learning discussed building a sense of community before addressing content. My experience with high school students struggling with Shakespeare, is that they are much more willing to engage the material as part of a cohesive group, with the teacher they enjoy and want to impress. Although none of this applies to material that students find intrinsically interesting, much of what students are required to learn, is not initially intrinsically interesting. Sometimes the extraneous material engages them in the topic, before the specific skills or concepts are taught. For example, teaching students about Shakespeare’s insults, or the parallels between hip-hop and Shakespeare makes a writer from long ago more fresh and relevant. Of course this “extraneous material” will not help them to identify the underlying theme of a play. For this we would need good multimedia instruction. The “extraneous material” however, may engage them enough to focus their attention on well created multimedia presentations.
So much of the research we read focuses on the understanding of particular concept. There are many other kinds of learning, that can be facilitated through multimedia presentations. For example, multimedia is often used to help students learn their multiplication facts. I have seen students readily master multiplication facts using singing along with dance moves. I’m not sure how dance moves fits into the multimedia theory.
I have watched different students memorize the Gettysburg Address. Some students learn best from reading it out loud repeatedly. Some students learn better from merely listening to the recording, but not reading it at the same time. Some students learn best only when provided with body movements, pneumonic memory devices, backward chaining strategies, chunking, and intensive incremental review. As I watched what was necessary for each student to memorize the same piece of prose, I wondered how we might more efficiently determine how individual students best learn the different kinds of skills, concepts, content, and applications involved in a K-12 education. All the learning styles inventories that I have ever reviewed seemed to lack both validity and reliability. They tend to identify how students prefer to learn, not how they learn best. My daughter for instance would always choose to learn through acting or games. However, through much trial and error, we have found that she learns best through the old-fashioned method of copying the targeted material. It seems to me that the proponents of the multimedia principles have done some solid research with control groups. Outside the lab setting, there are many more variables that play into a student’s ability to learn. Does the student have a headache? Is the student sitting next to a cute member of the opposite sex? Does the student find the material intrinsically interesting? Is the student more interested in academic achievement or defying authority? I would like to see single subject experimental designs within the natural environment, to evaluate the effectiveness of the best multimedia instruction across multiple settings and individuals.
Clark and Mayer acknowledge that there is still much is unknown about the effectiveness of multimedia instruction. For example, although they were able to demonstrate statistically significant differences between controlled groups in a lab setting, they have not had the opportunity to identify individual learning differences among students, which may make these recommendations inaccurate for a particular student. However they did note that the recommendations they made within the coherence principle were most effective for at-risk students. The research does not address how this information affects students with significant prior knowledge. “In short, research is needed to determine for whom the coherence principle of applies.” (Clark and Mayer, 2003)
References
- Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2003). E-Learning and the science of instruction: proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
- Engleman, S. (n.d.). Basic Philosophy. National Institute for Direct Instruction. Retrieved April 9, 2013, from http://www.nifdi.org/aboutdi/basic-philosophy
- Mayer, R. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: using thesame instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125–139. Retrieved April 6, 2013, from http://www.academia.edu/1828258/The_promise_of_multimedia_learning_using_the_same_instructional_design_methods_across_different_media
- Mayer, R. E. (1999). Multimedia aids to problem-solving transfer. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(7), 611-623.
- Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). A learner-centered approach to multimedia explanations: Deriving instructional design principles from cognitive theory. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning, 2(2), 2004-07. Retrieved March 1, 2009
AECT Standards Addressed in this post:
3.1 Media Utilization Media utilization is the systematic use of resources for learning.
Ginny Cronin: EDTECH Portfolio 