The Effect of Verbal Advance Organizers in Complementing Animated Instruction

Lin, Kidwai, Munyofu, Swain, Ausman, Dwyer – The Effect of Verbal Advance ...

237

Journal of Visual Literacy, Autumn 2005Volume 25, Number 2, 237-248

The Effect of Verbal AdvanceOrganizers in Complementing

Animated Instruction

Huifen LinKun Shan University, Taiwan

Khusro KidwaiMine Munyofu

Jeff SwainBradley Ausman

Francis DwyerThe Pennsylvania State University

University Park, Pennsylvania, U. S. A.

AbstractThis investigation explored the instructional effect of verbal advanceorganizers used as enhancement strategies to complement animatedinstruction. Eighty-nine college students were randomly assignedto three treatment groups: (1) control group, (2) verbal descriptiveadvance organizer group and (3) verbal question advance organizergroup. Four independent criterion tests were used to measurestudents’ achievement of the different educational objectives. Resultsindicated insignificant differences in achievement among the threetreatment groups on each of the criterion measures indicating thatthe use of verbal advance organizer treatments used to complementthe visually-animated instruction did not instigate deeper levels ofinformation processing than did the animated instruction alone.

The new electronic technologies have significantly transformed the forminstructional material can take and the means in which it can bedelivered. One promising potential of technology lies in its capability

to create multimedia learning environments in which sounds, visuals, andanimation can be added to print material to improve learning achievement.

Journal of Visual Literacy, Autumn 2005, Volume 25, Number 2

238

Visualization, which has been widely used in both face-to-face learningenvironments and online distance education, has the capability to presentinstructional material, to illustrate and contrast similar and salient portionsof the material as well as to facilitate information processing when it isincorporated to complement print materials (Dwyer, 1994).

Visualization also has been used as rehearsal strategies that, whenappropriately positioned, would enable learners to retain incoming informationin short-term memory for a longer period of time, facilitate deeper informationprocessing and enable students to retrieve information more efficiently andeffectively. The higher the level of information processing, the greater thepossibility that the information can be removed from short-term memory tolong term memory, stored and retained (Murray & Mosberg, 1982).Animation, presented as pictures in motion, is analogous to a “subset of visualgraphics” (Weiss, Knowlton, & Morrison, 2002, p.466).

The most powerful and direct application of animation is to use it topresent instructional materials that are dynamic in nature, too abstract tounderstand or is physically invisible, such as the flow of blood in a humanheart or concepts in physics (DiSessa, 1982; Dwyer, 1994; Kaiser, Proffitt, &Anderson, 1985; Rieber, 1990, 1991). Theoretical justifications for the useof animation in the presentation of instructional material have been wellestablished to support its use in computer-based instruction (CBI) or web-based learning environments. However, research conducted so far on the effectof animation in facilitating learning has yielded inconsistent results. Wilsonand Dwyer (2001) suggested that learners may need additional prompts tofocus their attention on the critical aspects of the content to be achieved inthe animation.

In order to optimize the effect of animated instruction, enhancementstrategies need to be positioned appropriately within the animation to enhancestudents’ acquisition, processing, storing and retrieving of information(Munyofu, Swain, Ausman, Lin, Kidwai, & Dwyer, in press; Torres & Dwyer,1991). Research has well documented the effect of different types ofenhancement strategies to complement instruction in a CBI environment.Advance organizers, introduced prior to the presentation of new material itself,are presented “… at a higher level of abstraction, generality, and inclusiveness”and are the implementations of a pedagogical strategy in which “… progressivedifferentiation and integrative reconciliation are the principles” (Ausubel,1960, p.268). Advance organizers are appropriately relevant and inclusive innature and are used to accomplish progressive differentiation in a subjectmatter by “… using a hierarchical series of organizers, each organizerpreceding its corresponding unit of detailed, differentiated material” (p.271).


239

Advance organizers can be developed in various forms. Some examplesare videos (Hanley, Herron & Cole, 1995), verbal descriptions (Herron, York,Cole, & Linden, 1998; Kirkman & Shaw, 1997), graphics (Alvermann, 1981;Barron & Schwartz, 1984), questioning (Denner & Rickards, 1987; Glover,1989; King, 1992; Osman & Hannafin, 1994) and aural descriptions (Chung& Huang, 1998). Most studies used immediate or delay-free recall andcomprehension questions to measure the effect of different types of advanceorganizers. Stone (1983) in her meta-analysis of 29 advance organizer studiesconducted between 1970 and 1980 found that advance organizers were moreeffective when used in science and mathematics subject matter than in otherdisciplines. The analysis also revealed that achievement tests that measuredfactual or formula knowledge were associated with greater effect size. Themeta-analysis also suggested that advance organizers facilitate factual butnot higher-level conceptual learning.

Statement of the ProblemThis study was designed to investigate the instructional effect of different

types of advance organizers in complementing animated instruction intendedto facilitate students’ achievement of different educational objectives. Thetwo different types of advance organizers were:

• Verbal descriptive statement and• Verbal question.

In his review of experimental studies on the effectiveness of visualizationon instruction, Dwyer (1978) noted shortcomings of previous studies,including:

• Weaknesses in the experimental design;

• Lack of validity and reliability of tests measuring achievements;

• Lack of congruency among levels of instructional objectives,instructional strategies and measures; and

• Inability to provide a rationale for the positioning of the visuals.

This study resolved these shortcomings by employing a systematic andrigorous experimental design based on results of two pilot studies conductedto position the visualization within treatments. Specifically, the aim of thestudy was to investigate the effect of two verbal advance organizers, verbaldescriptions and verbal questions, on student achievement when they wereused to complement animated web-based instruction. The study addressedfollowing question:

What is the relative effectiveness of two types of advance organizerstrategies used to complement animated instruction on tests designed tomeasure different educational objectives?


240

MethodologyInstructional Material

The instructional module used in this study contained a 2,000-wordphysiology unit focusing on the human heart, its parts, locations and functionsduring the diastolic and systolic phases (Dwyer & Lamberski, 1977). Theinstructional script was accompanied with 20 static visuals of the humanheart which were designed and positioned utilizing the principles ofinstructional consistency and congruency (Dwyer, 1994; Canelos, 1983). Thisinstructional unit was selected to explore the effect of two types of advanceorganizers in this study because it engaged learners in different levels ofinformation processing and learning (facts, concepts, rule/procedures,problem-solving). In addition, criterion-referenced measures have beendeveloped to accompany the instructional module to test the objectives ateach level. Two pilot studies were carried out to systematically developinstructional material.

The First Pilot StudyThe purpose of this study was to identify the areas within the instructional

unit that learners experienced difficulty so that animation could be positionedappropriately to improve understanding and the acquisition of difficultconcepts. This procedure was critical because it is not economically justifiableto use animation to present information that students have experienced nodifficulty with the static visualization (Dwyer 1994).

Students participating in the first pilot (N=12) received their instructionin a web based environment. A portion of the instructional module dealingwith facts and simple concepts had been organized in a programmed formatwith five practice units embedded to ensure that the students interacted andacquired the prerequisite competencies needed to profit from the animatedinstruction focusing on higher level learning outcomes. Dwyer and Dwyer(in press) have suggested that one reason why students do not successfullyachieve higher-order learning outcomes from animated instruction is becausethey do not possess the prerequisites. Students interacted with the revisedinstruction and completed the individual criterion measures. Twenty-five ofthe eighty items had an item difficulty below .60 indicating that instructionin the module related to these test items would profit from animated instruction.These items were identified as areas that students have experienced learningdifficulties and were ideal positions that animated instruction may beembedded to improve learning.

The Second Pilot StudyStudents (N=44) in the second pilot study received the programmed

instruction plus the animations designed to improve achievement of the higherlevel learning outcomes. Results of the item analysis after they received thistreatment indicated that twenty-four of the eighty items had a difficulty index


241

of less than .60. These items represented areas in the content when theanimation was not being successful in communicating the designatedinformation. These items were again identified as areas that students haveexperienced learning difficulties even after animations have been embeddedinto instruction and provided ideal positions that the enhancement strategy,i.e., advance organizers, can be inserted to improve learning.

The purpose of the primary study was to investigate the effect of twodifferent types of advance organizers, verbal descriptive statement and verbalquestion in complementing animated instruction. Subjects were randomlyassigned to three groups as:

1. Control group (CG) receiving animated instructional module,

2. Verbal descriptive advance organizer group (VD) receivinganimated instruction plus verbal descriptive advance organizertreatment, and

3. Verbal question advance organizer group (VQ) receivinganimated instruction plus verbal question advance organizertreatment.

In both advance organizer treatments, advance organizers were insertedprior to selective instructional frames that contained the content related tothe difficult items identified in the second pilot study.

ProcedureEighty-nine (N=89) undergraduates majoring in information technology

system, business management and educational psychology constituted thesubject pool. All subjects were randomly assigned to treatments according tothe order they reported to the lab and were instructed to log on to a website,in which respective treatments were located. Students in the control groupread the text located on the left side of the screen and then click a button toview the animation. Students could view the animation as many times asthey would before proceeding to the next frame. For verbal descriptive advanceorganizer group, students were told to look at the static visual at the right sideof the frame and relate it to a descriptive statement that depicted the visual.For verbal question advance organizer group, subjects were informed thatthey need to view the static visual at the right side of the frame and then readthe corresponding question. Subjects then chose an appropriate answer intheir mind and waited for the correct answer to show up in a pop-up window.Students then closed the window and hit “next” to go to the next frame.

Two Types of Advance OrganizersThe most recurring problem that impeded appropriate comparisons of

previous research findings on advance organizers has been the lack ofoperational definitions for organizers (Kloster &Winne, 1989). The studyprovided a precise definition of the two types of advance organizers. Thepurpose of both types of advance organizers was to draw students’ attention


242

to the critical attributes of animation in the instructional material and topromote retention of the higher order learning outcomes. In addition, bothtypes of advance organizers were positioned in selective frames prior to theto-be-learned information. Operational definitions of the two types of advanceorganizers employed in the study follow.

The verbal descriptive advance organizer was inserted before selectiveframes whose content contained material that was found to be difficult forstudents based on the results of an item analysis of the second pilot study.Verbal descriptive advance organizers were a) accompanied with a static visualthat depicted important information to be encountered in the next frame, andb) the most important concept/key word was high-lighted in red and waspresented as a descriptive statement. The purpose of the treatment was todirect students’ attention to important concepts in the animation and to activatelearners’ cognitive structure to interact with the designated content. See Figure1 for a sample screenshot of the treatment.

The verbal question advance organizers were also inserted prior toselective frames whose content was proved to be difficult. The verbal questionadvance organizer was accompanied with a static visual, which was the samevisual as used in verbal descriptive advance organizer; however in thistreatment the advance organizer was presented as a question with four or fivealternatives. Students need to answer the question in their mind and the rightchoice was shown to students in 10 seconds, which further elaborated theanswer. See Figure 2 for a sample screenshot of the treatment.

Figure 1. Sample Frame: Verbal Descriptive Advance Organizer Treatment.


243

Criterion MeasuresThe criterion tests, each consisting of 20 test items (Dwyer, 1978) were

designed to measure different types of learning objectives. Each individualtest consisted of twenty test items. Average Kuder-Richardson formula 20reliability coefficients from a random sampling of studies follows: (Dwyer,1978, p. 45) .83 for the Terminology Test, .81 Identification Test, .83 DrawingTest, .77 Comprehension Test, and .92 for the Total Test. Following is a briefdescription of each criterion measure.

Drawing Test. The drawing test provides students with a numbered listof terms corresponding to the parts of the heart discussed in the instructionalpresentation. Students are required to draw a representative diagram of theheart and place the numbers of the listed parts in their respective positions.For this test the emphasis is on the correct positioning of the verbal symbolswith respect to one another and in respect to their concrete referents.

Identification Test. The objective of the identification test is to evaluatestudent ability to identify parts or positions of an object. This multiple-choicetest requires students to identify the numbered parts on a detailed drawing ofthe heart. The objective of this test is to measure the ability of the students touse visual cues to discriminate one structure of the heart from another and toassociate specific parts of the heart with their proper names.

Figure 2. Sample Frame: Verbal Question Advance Organizer Treatment.


244

Terminology Test. This test consists of items designed to measureknowledge of specific facts, terms, and definitions. The objectives measuredby this type of test are appropriate to all content areas which have anunderstanding of the basic elements as a prerequisite to the learning ofconcepts, rules, and principles.

Comprehension Test. Given the location of certain parts of the heart ata particular moment of its functioning, the students are asked to determinethe position of other specified parts or positions of other specified parts ofthe heart at the same time. This test requires that the students have a thoroughunderstanding of the heart, its parts, its internal functioning, and thesimultaneous processes occurring during the systolic and diastolic phases.

Total Test Score. The items contained in the individual criterion testsare combined into a composite test score. The purpose is to measure totalachievement of the objectives presented in the instructional unit.

ResultsANOVA was conducted to compare the mean differences among three

treatments on the five criterion tests. Alpha was set at the .05 level. Table 1summarized the means and standard deviations achieved by students on eachcriterion test in the three treatments.

Table 1Means and Standard Deviations for

Each Treatment on Each Criterion Test

Treatment CG VD VQ Groups* (N = 29) (N = 30) (N = 30)

Tests Mean St. Dev. Mean St. Dev. Mean St. Dev. Drawing 15.97 3.26 15.76 2.67 17.09 2.01 Identification 17.62 2.47 17.63 2.72 18.16 1.51 Terminology 11.93 5.03 13.04 4.25 13.74 3.89 Comprehension 11.00 3.46 11.85 4.46 13.03 3.74 Total 56.52 11.90 58.37 11.83 62.21 9.35

* CG=control group; VD=verbal descriptive advance organizer; VQ=verbal question advance organizerNote. Maximum score for drawing test, identification test, terminology test and comprehension test=20 respectively.

Maximum score for the total test=80.

To find out if the observed differences in the mean scores of the criteriontests among the three treatment groups were statistically significant, aninspection of the ANOVA source data was conducted. The results indicatedthat insignificant differences on achievement resulted on all measures.(Drawing Test: F =2.37, df = 2/90, p=.10; Identification test: F=.559, df=2/84, p=.574; Terminology test: F=1.279, df=2/84, p=.284; Comprehension test:F=2.067, df=2/84, p=.133; Total test score: F=1.988, df=2/82, p=.143).


245

DiscussionThe purpose of this study was to investigate the instructional effectiveness

of two types of advance organizers used to complement animated instructionon tests measuring different types of educational objectives. The types ofadvance organizers were selected because there is a textual oriented researchbase which supports their use as viable instructional variables.

The insignificant results on the identification and drawing tests wereexpected; the programmed instruction was designed to provide opportunitiesfor the students to interact with the content material and acquire theprerequisite information necessary to achieve the higher-order learningoutcomes presented by the animation, and enhanced by verbal statementsand verbal questions with feedback. The insignificant results on theterminology and comprehension tests were not expected because there was atheoretical foundation based on text-based research indicating that thesevariables would have a positive effect on learning. These results suggest thatthe types of advance organizers used in this study are not effective variablesfor facilitating achievement within animated, web-based instruction.

The advance organizers cued the learners to critical information but didnot create the necessary environment for students to expend the quality effortneeded to rehearse, internalize, and synthesize information in meaningfulways necessary for higher-order learning to occur. The animated instructioninstigated a certain level of interaction with the content to be learned. Theemployment of the advanced organizers were designed to further focus andintensify this interaction so as to hold information in short term memory forlonger periods of time so that it would be able to move from short-termmemory into long-term memory and be available for subsequent retrieval.This effect did not occur as anticipated, indicating that the types of advanceorganizers did not appropriately stimulate the levels of interaction necessaryto achieve the stated objectives. Further research is needed in the developmentof more intensely-interactive advance organizers oriented toward intensifyingthe student interaction with the content so as to achieve the designatedoutcomes.

A number of reasons may be presented to explain why the advanceorganizers employed in this study were not effective. First, the types of advanceorganizers constructed in this study were different from most advanceorganizers, which either summarized or previewed material to be learned. Inthis study advance organizers were constructed in the form of either a questionwith feedback or a descriptive statement, which “cued” the learners aboutupcoming material. In this study the purpose of the advance organizers wasto direct students’ attention to critical attributes in the upcoming material.The verbal description treatment presented a verbal statement to reinforce


246

the critical information. The verbal question treatment asked a question relatedto the critical information, which provided the learner an opportunity to makea covert response and receive immediate feedback. In both treatments theadvance organizers cued learners to information, but they did not engagelearners in ways that were necessary for them to interact with the content inorder to achieve the designated learning objectives. Other types of advanceorganizers designed to stimulate deeper levels of information processingdirectly related to the higher-level learning objectives may have entirelydifferent results. The results of this study raise serious concerns about thegeneralizabilty of prior advance-organizer research focused on low-levellearning outcomes to high-level learning outcomes, and specifically withinan animated, web-based environment. Perhaps the visual impact of theanimated web environment can benefit more from a different combination ofgraphic and verbal organizers.

ReferencesAlvermann, D. E. (1981). The compensatory effect of graphic organizers on

descriptive text. Journal of Educational Research, 75(1), 44-48.

Ausubel, D. P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in the learning andretention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 51(5), 267-272.

Barron, R. F., & Schwartz, R. M. (1984). Graphic postorganizers: A spatiallearning strategy. In C. D. Holley and D. F. Dansereau (Eds.), SpatialLearning Strategies: Techniques, Applications, and Related Issues (pp.275-289), Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Canelos, J. (1983). Instructional congruency as an educational tool forengineering education. Paper presented at the Frontiers in EducationConference.

Chung, J. M., & Huang, S. C. (1998). The effects of three aural advanceorganizers for video viewing in a foreign language classroom. Systems,26, 553-565.

Denner, P. R., & Rickards, J. P. (1987). A developmental comparison of theeffects of provided and generated questions on text recall. ContemporaryEducational Psychology, 12, 135-146.

DiSessa, A. (1982). Unlearning Aristotelian physics: A study of knowledge-based learning. Cognitive science, 6 (1), 37-75.

Dwyer, F. M., & Lamberski, R. (1977). The human heart: Parts of the heart,circulation of blood and cycle of blood pressure. In US: published privately.

Dwyer, F. M. (1978). Strategies for improving visual learning: A handbookfor the effective selection, design, and use of visualized materials. Statecollege, PA: Learning Services.


247

Dwyer, F. M. (1994). One dimension of visual research: A paradigm and itsimplication. In D. Moor & F. Dwyer (Eds.), Visual learning: A spectrumof visual learning (pp.383-401), Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: EducationalTechnology Publications.

Dwyer, F. M., & Dwyer, C. (In Press). Effect of cognitive load and animationon student Achievement. International Journal of Instructional Media,33.

Glover, J. A. (1989). Improving readers’ estimates of learning from text: Therole of inserted questions. Reading Research and Instruction, 28(3), 68-75.

Hanley, J. E. B., Herron, C., & Cole, S. P. (1995). Using video as an advanceorganizer to a written passage in the ELES classroom. The ModernLanguage Journal, 79(1), 57-66.

Herron, C., York, H., Cole, S. P., & Linden, P. (1998). A comparison studyof student retention of foreign language video: Declarative versusinterrogative advance organizer. The Modern Language Journal, 82(2),237-247.

Kaiser, M., Proffitt, D., & Anderson, K. (1985). Judgments of natural andanomalous trajectories in the presence and absence of motion. Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 11, 795-803.

King, A. (1992). Comparison of self-questioning, summarizing, andnotetaking-review as strategies for learning from lectures. AmericanEducational Research Journal, 29(2), 303-323.

Kirkman, G., & Shaw, E. L. (1997). Effects of an oral advanced organizer onimmediate and delayed retention. Paper presented at the 26th AnnualMeeting of Mid-South Education Research Association (MSERA),Memphis, TN.

Kloster, A. M., & Winne, P. H. (1989). The effects of different types oforganizers on students’ learning from text. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 81(1), 9-15.

Munyofu, M., Swain, J., Ausman, B., Lin, H., Kidwai, K., & Dwyer, F. (Inpress). Effect of different chunking strategies in complementing animatedinstruction. Journal of Learning, Media and Technology.

Murray, F. B., & Mosberg, L. (1982). Cognition and memory. In H. E. Mitzel(Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational research (pp.279-285). New York:The Free Press.

Osman, M. E., & Hannafin, M. J. (1994). Effects of advance questioning andprior knowledge on science learning. Journal of Educational Research,88(1), 5-13.


248

Rieber, L. (1990). Animation in computer based instruction. EducationalTechnology Research and Development, 38(1), 77-86.

Rieber, L. (1991). Computer-based microworlds: a bridge betweenconstructivism and direct instruction. Paper presented at the annualconvention of the Association for Educational Communications andTechnology.

Stone, C. L. (1983). A meta-analysis of advance organizer studies. Journalof Experimental Education, 51(4), 194-199.

Torres, J., & Dwyer, F. M. (1991). The effect of time in the instructionaleffectiveness of varied enhancement strategies. Journal of InstructionalDevelopment, 8(4), 2-8.

Weiss, R. E., Knowlton, D. S., & Morrison, G. R. (2002). Principles for usinganimation in computer-based instruction: Theoretical heuristics foreffective design. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 465-477.

Wilson, F., & Dwyer, F.M. (2001). Effect of time and level of visualenhancement in facilitating student achievement of different educationalobjectives. International Journal of Instructional Media, 28(2), 159-167.

The Effect of Verbal Advance Organizers in Complementing Animated Instruction

Documents

Transcript of The Effect of Verbal Advance Organizers in Complementing Animated Instruction