Menu
Annotated Bibliography 2
Driscoll, M. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3rd ed.) (pp. 77-91). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Driscoll (2005) begins the examination of short memory by stating that print is more likely to be forgotten than sounds. Selective attention is discussed which means the learner only absorbs information that is important to them. Also, if “…competing tasks…” are present while learning is happening, the learning message could be diminished.” (Driscoll, 2005, p.79) Third, complicatedness of a lesson does affect learner comprehension of the lesson if other interests are in the way. Finally, attention is affected by “…age, hyperactivity, intelligence, and learning disabilities.” (Driscoll, 2005, p.80) Driscoll offers solutions to gain attention such as a classroom indicator to get back to work, changing the way print looks, and longer response time to questions.
Next, automaticity, or the ability to complete a learning task routinely is examined. Learners need to fully grasp the prerequisite skills before completing a complex assignment- such as the ability to read, which requires other skills before one reads well. Related to automaticity is pattern recognition, which means the learner corresponds “…the incoming information to the appropriate [specific] template.” (Driscoll, 2005, p.83) Second, the prototype model uses a generic model to link new information. Third, feature analysis assumes that the brain has a grasp of unique qualities and is able to link the new information.
Furthermore, what the situation is and how a learner looks at that situation can affect pattern recognition. Finally, working memory can expand by chunking, or putting information into huge parts. Information cannot be remembered by merely simple practice unless the information is simple to understand. For more complex information, grouping information into “…outlines...concept trees… [and] mnemonics and mediation…” help learners understand material. (Driscoll, 2005, p.89) Asking questions while reading or listening to a lesson to gain meaning of the written or verbal material is another strategy. These strategies will lead to long term memory storage.
Baddeley, A.D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
Baddeley (1992) explains the three parts of working memory: “…the central executive, which is assumed to be an attentional-controlling system---visuospatial sketch pad, which manipulates visual images and…the phonological loop, which stores and rehearses speech-based information,” (p.556) Two focuses of working memory studies were on reading understanding and rationalizing on standardized tests. Baddeley (1992) then discusses how the central executive has to decipher information bought by visuospatial sketch pad and the phonological loop. When either system is disrupted, the learner will become confused. For example, when the visuospatial sketch pad was interrupted in a chess game, the learner could not recall what to move on the chess board.
In terms of the audiological loop, four features affected working memory. First, if the words sounded comparable in sound, the learner had difficulty remembering these words. Second, if the learner experienced talking unrelated to the content, the learner had difficulty remembering these words. Third, learners had greater difficulty remembering lengthy words than brief words. Fourth, when certain words were taken out of a passage, the learner had difficulty remembering the words.
Finally, the study of phonological loop showed that the learner could remember sounds from their language instead of vocabulary words from a new language. Therefore, the ability to remember sounds from an indigenous language is critical to vocabulary development. Baddeley (1992) study shows the instructional designer that it is critical to make sure that learners’ visual or speech abilities are not suppressed during instruction.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81.
Miller (1956) discusses his research by first stating that humans have a threshold for information they can retain. In one experiment he sees that when a learner is presented with too many sounds, the learner can become puzzled. However, when the learner is given a few sounds, puzzlement over those sounds is less likely. A similar experiment was conducted with taste and found that the learner could only recognize a few tastes. In terms of visual spots on a line, the learner could distinguish more than the taste and sound experiments. Overall, Miller (1956) concludes that the mind does have a threshold in acquiring knowledge.
When conducting experiments that ask the learner to identify two or more characteristics, the learner accuracy decreased dramatically. Miller (1956) concludes that learners can only decipher small parts of information instead of large chunks of information. If instruction is given ahead of the experiment, the learner can identify the stimulus better. Miller (1956) states that increasing the criteria does not help with these experiments because the mind has limits for differentiating stimulus. According to Miller (1956), the amount of information during a lesson is important because the human mind has thresholds.
Miller (1956) proposes giving strategies for information which will help learners understand the information better. For example, learners try to paraphrase information to gain meaning of what they just learned. Recommendations from his research include putting information into sizeable bits of information, looking at strategies that help learners, and continuing with further studies on acquiring knowledge.
Kalyuga, S. (2010). Schema acquisition and sources of cognitive load. In J.L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken, Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 48-64). New York: Cambridge.
Kalyuga (2010) first explains “…a schema is the concept of a chunk of information that has traditionally served as a unit of measurement for memory capacity in studies of short-term memory.” (p.49) Various schemas are available for learners such as sorting and classifying objects into lists. Studies have demonstrated that learners who possess knowledge and understand schemas are more likely to retain information. If a learner does not have a good schema to solve a problem, that learner will more likely utilize an unsystematic approach to the problem and began to experience cognitive load.
Therefore, the point of instruction is that teachers need to rehearse these schemas so learners can activate these skills during the working memory phase of instruction to reduce cognitive load. If a learner experiences too many learning tasks during a problem situation, that will increase cognitive load. Furthermore, when a learner tries to associate the new information with memories from the past that will increase cognitive load. Also, when learners do not have help from the teacher, too much information is presented, instruction is spread out over too much time to remember the concepts taught, and when a learner has to take dual meaning from similar knowledge in a lesson, cognitive load will increase.
Kalyuga (2010) recommends a few strategies: first, the teacher clarifies problem situations by showing a completed problem situation before attempting similar problem situations. Second, the teacher gives proper supervision of a problem situation until the learner is comfortable completing the task without help. Third, learners are exposed to smaller parts of information in lessons instead of larger amounts to reduce cognitive load. Fourth, teachers must adapt to the learner level of understanding in order to reduce cognitive load. These strategies will help short term memory and decrease cognitive load for learners.
Chen, N., Hsieh, S., & Kinshuk. (2008). Effects of Short-Term Memory and Content Representation Type on Mobile Language Learning. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 93-113. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol12num3/chenetal/
I selected the Chen, Hsieh, and Kinshuk article (2008) because of its implications in learning in a technological environment. Many researchers believe that mobile learning cannot be the only instructional tool. The authors provide a brief synopsis on the Baddeley theory of the working memory. Chen, Hsieh, and Kinshuk (2008) posed this question: “If learners are provided with suitable Learning Content Representation types that favor their different STM [Short Term Memory] processing abilities, can we the produce better learning performance?” (p. 94)
Therefore, the authors thought giving both a visual and a language representation would help learners understand new words. The researchers looked at learners who had either low or high phonological loop understanding and/or low or high visuospatial sketchpad understanding. The learners in this study were Chinese University students trying to learn the English language on a mobile device. The participants in the study took a survey, then a pre-assessment, then the students started to study English words on their phones, and then took a test based on memory and identification to see how the technology influenced the learners. Based on the pre-assessment, students were given one of four options on their cell phones: word, word with a sentence, word with a picture, and word with a picture and sentence.
The results showed that learners who preferred visuals but did not have strong phonological skills tested higher on the mobile technology which had words and pictures. The combined methods of pictures, sentences, and words did work well for those who exhibited strong visuospatial and phonological loop qualities. Chen, Hsieh, and Kinshuk witnessed that the learners strong in phonological skills (word with a sentence learning option) did well on identification but not the memory portion of the test. The authors recommend further study for strong phonological learners with more sentences.
Driscoll (2005) begins the examination of short memory by stating that print is more likely to be forgotten than sounds. Selective attention is discussed which means the learner only absorbs information that is important to them. Also, if “…competing tasks…” are present while learning is happening, the learning message could be diminished.” (Driscoll, 2005, p.79) Third, complicatedness of a lesson does affect learner comprehension of the lesson if other interests are in the way. Finally, attention is affected by “…age, hyperactivity, intelligence, and learning disabilities.” (Driscoll, 2005, p.80) Driscoll offers solutions to gain attention such as a classroom indicator to get back to work, changing the way print looks, and longer response time to questions.
Next, automaticity, or the ability to complete a learning task routinely is examined. Learners need to fully grasp the prerequisite skills before completing a complex assignment- such as the ability to read, which requires other skills before one reads well. Related to automaticity is pattern recognition, which means the learner corresponds “…the incoming information to the appropriate [specific] template.” (Driscoll, 2005, p.83) Second, the prototype model uses a generic model to link new information. Third, feature analysis assumes that the brain has a grasp of unique qualities and is able to link the new information.
Furthermore, what the situation is and how a learner looks at that situation can affect pattern recognition. Finally, working memory can expand by chunking, or putting information into huge parts. Information cannot be remembered by merely simple practice unless the information is simple to understand. For more complex information, grouping information into “…outlines...concept trees… [and] mnemonics and mediation…” help learners understand material. (Driscoll, 2005, p.89) Asking questions while reading or listening to a lesson to gain meaning of the written or verbal material is another strategy. These strategies will lead to long term memory storage.
Baddeley, A.D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
Baddeley (1992) explains the three parts of working memory: “…the central executive, which is assumed to be an attentional-controlling system---visuospatial sketch pad, which manipulates visual images and…the phonological loop, which stores and rehearses speech-based information,” (p.556) Two focuses of working memory studies were on reading understanding and rationalizing on standardized tests. Baddeley (1992) then discusses how the central executive has to decipher information bought by visuospatial sketch pad and the phonological loop. When either system is disrupted, the learner will become confused. For example, when the visuospatial sketch pad was interrupted in a chess game, the learner could not recall what to move on the chess board.
In terms of the audiological loop, four features affected working memory. First, if the words sounded comparable in sound, the learner had difficulty remembering these words. Second, if the learner experienced talking unrelated to the content, the learner had difficulty remembering these words. Third, learners had greater difficulty remembering lengthy words than brief words. Fourth, when certain words were taken out of a passage, the learner had difficulty remembering the words.
Finally, the study of phonological loop showed that the learner could remember sounds from their language instead of vocabulary words from a new language. Therefore, the ability to remember sounds from an indigenous language is critical to vocabulary development. Baddeley (1992) study shows the instructional designer that it is critical to make sure that learners’ visual or speech abilities are not suppressed during instruction.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81.
Miller (1956) discusses his research by first stating that humans have a threshold for information they can retain. In one experiment he sees that when a learner is presented with too many sounds, the learner can become puzzled. However, when the learner is given a few sounds, puzzlement over those sounds is less likely. A similar experiment was conducted with taste and found that the learner could only recognize a few tastes. In terms of visual spots on a line, the learner could distinguish more than the taste and sound experiments. Overall, Miller (1956) concludes that the mind does have a threshold in acquiring knowledge.
When conducting experiments that ask the learner to identify two or more characteristics, the learner accuracy decreased dramatically. Miller (1956) concludes that learners can only decipher small parts of information instead of large chunks of information. If instruction is given ahead of the experiment, the learner can identify the stimulus better. Miller (1956) states that increasing the criteria does not help with these experiments because the mind has limits for differentiating stimulus. According to Miller (1956), the amount of information during a lesson is important because the human mind has thresholds.
Miller (1956) proposes giving strategies for information which will help learners understand the information better. For example, learners try to paraphrase information to gain meaning of what they just learned. Recommendations from his research include putting information into sizeable bits of information, looking at strategies that help learners, and continuing with further studies on acquiring knowledge.
Kalyuga, S. (2010). Schema acquisition and sources of cognitive load. In J.L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken, Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 48-64). New York: Cambridge.
Kalyuga (2010) first explains “…a schema is the concept of a chunk of information that has traditionally served as a unit of measurement for memory capacity in studies of short-term memory.” (p.49) Various schemas are available for learners such as sorting and classifying objects into lists. Studies have demonstrated that learners who possess knowledge and understand schemas are more likely to retain information. If a learner does not have a good schema to solve a problem, that learner will more likely utilize an unsystematic approach to the problem and began to experience cognitive load.
Therefore, the point of instruction is that teachers need to rehearse these schemas so learners can activate these skills during the working memory phase of instruction to reduce cognitive load. If a learner experiences too many learning tasks during a problem situation, that will increase cognitive load. Furthermore, when a learner tries to associate the new information with memories from the past that will increase cognitive load. Also, when learners do not have help from the teacher, too much information is presented, instruction is spread out over too much time to remember the concepts taught, and when a learner has to take dual meaning from similar knowledge in a lesson, cognitive load will increase.
Kalyuga (2010) recommends a few strategies: first, the teacher clarifies problem situations by showing a completed problem situation before attempting similar problem situations. Second, the teacher gives proper supervision of a problem situation until the learner is comfortable completing the task without help. Third, learners are exposed to smaller parts of information in lessons instead of larger amounts to reduce cognitive load. Fourth, teachers must adapt to the learner level of understanding in order to reduce cognitive load. These strategies will help short term memory and decrease cognitive load for learners.
Chen, N., Hsieh, S., & Kinshuk. (2008). Effects of Short-Term Memory and Content Representation Type on Mobile Language Learning. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 93-113. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol12num3/chenetal/
I selected the Chen, Hsieh, and Kinshuk article (2008) because of its implications in learning in a technological environment. Many researchers believe that mobile learning cannot be the only instructional tool. The authors provide a brief synopsis on the Baddeley theory of the working memory. Chen, Hsieh, and Kinshuk (2008) posed this question: “If learners are provided with suitable Learning Content Representation types that favor their different STM [Short Term Memory] processing abilities, can we the produce better learning performance?” (p. 94)
Therefore, the authors thought giving both a visual and a language representation would help learners understand new words. The researchers looked at learners who had either low or high phonological loop understanding and/or low or high visuospatial sketchpad understanding. The learners in this study were Chinese University students trying to learn the English language on a mobile device. The participants in the study took a survey, then a pre-assessment, then the students started to study English words on their phones, and then took a test based on memory and identification to see how the technology influenced the learners. Based on the pre-assessment, students were given one of four options on their cell phones: word, word with a sentence, word with a picture, and word with a picture and sentence.
The results showed that learners who preferred visuals but did not have strong phonological skills tested higher on the mobile technology which had words and pictures. The combined methods of pictures, sentences, and words did work well for those who exhibited strong visuospatial and phonological loop qualities. Chen, Hsieh, and Kinshuk witnessed that the learners strong in phonological skills (word with a sentence learning option) did well on identification but not the memory portion of the test. The authors recommend further study for strong phonological learners with more sentences.