Highlights of the Evaluation Report 1995-2000
Overview of the SURWEB Evaluation
Chapters:5
Appendices:
A | B | C | D | E
F | G | H | I | J
Contacts:
SURWEB
Dr. F. Lynn Bills
Director
435-637-1173
Media,
Analysis & Practice
Kathleen Tyner
About
the Author
Page 2
|
Appendix H |
Hypermedia and the Construction of Knowledge
Papert (1987) and Nicol (1989) and a growing number of educational
technologists support a “constructivist” school of hypermedia which is based
on the belief that students should reconstruct their own understanding of their
studies and assume a more active role in their education. Marchionini (1988)
maintains that when students create their own hypermedia stacks, they present
knowledge in a way that matches their own schematic framework of understanding.
Ashton (1992) has suggested that when students reconstruct knowledge for
themselves they tend to learn more because the information is internalized.
Bodner (1986) argued that until recently the accepted model for instruction was
based on the hidden assumption that knowledge can be transferred intact from the
mind of the teacher to the mind of the learner. He points out that teaching and
learning are not synonymous; teachers may teach and teach well, but students
will not necessarily learn. Von Glaserfeld (1979) and other Constructivists
advocate an approach in which students identify topics or issues, locate
resources, plan investigations and activities, and practice self-evaluation (all
with teacher support). Under this model the emphasis is shifted from activities
that teachers do, to those that students perform during the learning process.
Hypermedia Development and Cognition
A considerable body of research exists which supports the usefulness of
hypermedia-based learning environments (Conklin, 1987; Hammond, 1989; Heller,
1990; Jonassen, 1996). The concept has existed for quite some time as indicated
by an early reference by Nelson (1967) who defined the process as “a
combination of natural language text with the computer’s capacity for
interactive branching and the dynamic display of nonlinear (information).”
According to Jonassen, a hypermedia system consists of fragments of information
that can be text, graphics, sound or video. He refers to these fragments of
information as “nodes” and notes that nodes can be linked to other nodes to
create complex knowledge structures. Jonassen considers hypermedia knowledge
structures to be similar to processes through which information is stored in the
human memory system. A user of a hypermedia system can navigate through the
knowledge structure and determine which path to follow as well as the sequence
and length of viewing. Structures are created so that the user can “jump
around” within the program to related or more detailed information as desired.
Much of the early literature on hypermedia, is descriptive or theoretical and
addresses users of hypermedia systems rather than the effect of engaging in the
construction of hypermedia on students’ knowledge structures.
Taylor (1980), in his pioneer work on computers in education, described three
major functions of computer usage: computers as tutors, tutees and tools. When
used as tutors and tutees, computers help students understand difficult concepts
and check student comprehension of those concepts. Used as a tool, computers
empower students to create and manipulate knowledge, organizing it in a variety
of cognitively useful ways. Toolistic use of the computer has gained increasing
acceptance among educators with the advent of inexpensive and easy to use
hypermedia authoring software (Hasselbring, Goin, & Wissick, 1989). Fabris
(1992) found that the use of a such software provides rich learning experiences
for all students, regardless of cultural, social, economic, or ethnic
background.
Most recent studies on hypermedia have focused on this “toolistic” approach
in which teachers create their own multimedia stacks for students to use as an
alternative to traditional texts (Jonassen, 1986; Bowers & Tsai, 1990). This
type of multimedia implementation requires more knowledge on the part of the
classroom teacher since he/she is no longer merely “applying” multimedia but
“creating” multimedia presentations and then “applying” them to course
content in meaningful ways (Landow, 1989).
Other studies have focused on students as hypermedia authors (Brigham,
Hendricks, Kutcka, & Schuetta, 1994). Hooley and Toomey (1993) advocate the
student use of computers to store, share, and reconstruct knowledge through
hypermedia applications. Pea (1991) has suggested that the full educational
potential of multimedia technology will not be realized until students are
empowered to create their own multimedia projects to use them to communicate
their understanding and organization of the topic being studied. Pea’s claims
are supported by Stevens (1993) who studied the use of computer software
programs and student activities utilizing the computer in secondary social
studies classrooms. Stevens concluded that the successful use of computers in
social studies instruction depends upon the design of student created projects.
Lehrer (1993) constructed a framework for the cognitive processes involved in
the development of hypermedia which identifies the four types of cognitive
processes involved. These processes include planning, transforming, evaluating
and revising the hypermedia document. With Erickson and Connell (1994) he
studied the cognitive effects of the development of hypermedia projects on ninth
grade students in an American History class and concluded that the students
acquired skills such as interpreting information and communicating knowledge
through the development of intricate hypermedia documents.
Lund and Hildreth (1997) investigated an instructional model that incorporated
the personal computer and a multimedia authoring tool into an assignment to
write and illustrate a multimedia story. Subjects were 21 public school students
in a fifth-grade classroom. Students were instructed in the writing of
interactive stories using the process approach to writing and the software and a
scoring rubric was used to evaluate the finished stories. The researchers
concluded that: (1) students’ writing improved in quantity and quality; (2)
students were more motivated to complete the assignment; (3) the computer
allowed for greater flexibility in writing due to its nature as a word
processing tool; (4) even a single computer could be effectively used in
integrating computer technologies into the classroom, and; (5) “there were
inherent difficulties associated with integrating computer technologies into
classrooms---many students did not have experience with computers, even those
who do have experience may lack keyboarding skills, and finding time to
accomplish such a project requires outside help.” These findings suggest that,
with appropriate support, computers can be used to enhance writing instruction
and improve the quality of written work.
A number of studies have reported benefits when hypermedia authoring tools are
placed in the hands of students. Velasco and Mendivil (1992) reported that when
students use authoring tools in a constructivist environment, motivation
increases. In addition, the use of graphics, sounds, video clips, and peripheral
devices for photographic material is very attractive for image-centered
learning, and the hypermedia environment demands careful planning which implies
the exercise of higher skills in structural design and thinking.
Reed and Rosenbluth (1992) focused on students as creators rather than users of
programs to determine whether collaboratively creating HyperCard stacks that
presented information on four decades (i.e. the 1920s, 1930s, 1945-60 and the
1960s) affected the amount of knowledge and the inter relatedness of
informational units students had on the assigned decades. Thirteen high school
seniors utilized hypermedia authoring tools to produce a multimedia-based strand
of instruction during a four week academic enrichment program. Results indicated
that students engaging in the development of the hypermedia program featuring
the various factors affecting the values of certain decades exhibited an
increased awareness of the inter relatedness of these factors and that these
changes in perceptions were due to the linking nature of the hypermedia
authoring language.
Oughten and Clevenger (1997) examined the effects of prior computer experiences
on graduate students’ cognitive levels as they developed Hyperstudio projects.
Students participating in their study were asked to describe their use of
Hyperlogo, HyperStudio’s programming language and to create concept maps which
depicted the inter-relationships of the language’s features and processes. The
researchers found that students with more experience focused on the procedural
aspects of the Hyperlogo while students with less experience concentrated on the
declarative aspects of the language.
Heidenreich (1997) investigated the effects of using Hyperstudio, a hypermedia
authoring tool, and concluded that the Hyperstudio method of instruction was not
effective in raising the achievement level of participating seventh grade social
studies students. However, he noted at students who used the authoring tool had
a more positive attitude toward learning, their partners, and cooperative
learning in general.
The positive effects of hypermedia on student perceptions were also noted by
Smith (1993) who investigated the hypermedia learning environment from the
perspective of high school students learning about U.S. culture. Qualitative
methods were used to determine student perceptions about learning with
hypermedia tools. Data were collected from daily observations, interviews,
student products, formal and informal discussions and from the use of
questionnaires. The researcher concluded that there are a number of student
perceptions that are supportive of the use of a hypermedia learning environment.
Students indicated that the nature of hypermedia products promoted considerable
motivation. Hypermedia documents were viewed by students as much more public
than traditional work. Producing a hypermedia document promoted understanding at
a deeper level than using a traditional assignment. Teachers participating in
the study concurred that learning was enhanced and all participants in the
program indicated the use of a hypermedia learning environment to be
advantageous.
In a similar descriptive experiment involving Constructivist use of hypermedia
Volker (1992) hypothesized that students would more readily use primary source
information if their goal was to create a hypermedia project. During the
three-month study students created the program design and content treatment for
portions of a math and science hypermedia project while teachers served as
content advisors. Prior to the implementation and field test of the project,
participants completed attitudinal surveys on technology, their fear of it,
their level of knowledge before using the materials, and their preference for
working on their own.
Following the field test, 35 student users, 3 teachers, and 3 student producers
again responded to attitudinal survey instruments. Participants reported that,
compared to traditional instruction, hypermedia was more interesting and that
they preferred using it instead of traditional textbooks, videotapes, etc.
Teachers also expressed enthusiasm for the motivational aspects of this
approach, claiming that students showed more interest in math and science.
Nearly all teachers recognized and supported the shift in emphasis from teacher
centered instruction to student based learning.
As a follow-up to a four year longitudinal study, Tierney and Kieffer (1997)
examined the impact of hypertext on students’ learning in science and English
classes. The first study compared the impact of HyperCard stacks and regular
textbook presentation of ideas in biology on ninth grade students assigned to
study these materials. Students in the second study developed their own
multimedia projects in science and English courses using HyperCard and their
standard textbooks. The researchers analyzed interviews, videotaped
observations, and outcome and process measures and concluded that hypermedia was
an effective alternative to traditional print-based texts. Specific findings
indicated that (1) students suggested that the hypertext offered alternatives to
standard print texts, (2) students considered hypermedia projects more
interesting than conventional texts and assignments, (3) hypermedia texts
created by students contained more main ideas, enlisted more illustrations, were
more multilayered, and provided clearer links between illustration and the text,
(4) hypertext allowed a flexible exploration of ideas across several layers
simultaneously, (5) students were motivated to explore its possibilities and
were willing to share new findings with other students and (6) the use of
hypertext supported the acquisition of complex ideas and relations between those
ideas involving science tasks. Findings suggest that students view the
advantages of hypertext as providing a way to “architecture” a space that
affords different opportunities for engagement by others. Tierney concluded that
students engaged in developing hypermedia “developed notable experience in
problem solving, integrating visual representations of ideas with text, and
developing refining and restructuring ideas.”
A considerable body of evidence suggests that when employed as a constructivist
tool, the use of hypermedia authoring software by students can significantly
increase their ability to retain knowledge. Classic research by Geisman (1988)
suggests that students retain 20 percent of what they see, 40 percent of what
they see and hear, and 70 percent of what they see, hear and do. Since the use
of student produced hypermedia projects facilitate seeing, hearing and doing by
students, it is reasonable to assume that students’ achievement on tests and
retention of information will likely improve when these approaches to learning
are utilized by teachers in constructive ways.
Hypermedia Construction and Information Problem Solving
Many educators and researchers advocate engaging students in activities
which require more than the simple application of rules and procedures. Collins,
Brown and Newman (1989) contend that few educational resources, including
interactive multimedia, are devoted to higher-order problem solving activities.
To date, there appears to be little research into whether creative thinking,
problem-solving and other higher order thinking skills can be developed through
the use of hypermedia.(Herrington and Oliver, 1998).
Polya (1957) developed a model for problem-solving which included four principal processes:
- Understanding the problem
- Developing a plan
- Implementing and carrying out the plan
- “Looking back” or accessing the effectiveness of the plan
In the first step, understanding the problem, the problem solver represents the
problem, identifies the unknowns of the data, and determines the conditions of
the problem. The second step of the model consists of developing a plan to solve
the problem which meets the conditions identified in step one. In this step, the
problem solver determines the relationships between the data and the conditions
of the problem in order to formulate a plan. In the third step, the problem
solver implements and executes a plan designed to address the conditions of the
problem. The final step of the model is assessment or looking back. In this
step, the problem solver determines the “correctness” of the solution and
assesses whether it adequately meets the conditions of the problem.
Lehrer’s (1993) four-step framework for describing the cognitive processes
involved hypermedia development are in close alignment with Polya’s
problem-solving steps. Lehrer’s planning stage can be seen as being equivalent
to Polya’s first steps of understanding the problem and devising a plan.
According to Lehrer, planning tasks include the determining the audience,
content, topics, relationships among topics, and interface design of the
hypermedia project. Lehrer’s transforming stage is similar to Polya’s second
step of implementing and carrying out the plan. Transforming tasks include
accessing, interpreting, and determining how to represent the information.
Lehrer’s evaluation and revision stages are equivalent to Polya’s looking
back step. Evaluation and revision tasks include assessing the presentation and
organization of information, testing the program soliciting the feedback of
users, and, finally, restructuring the program to make it more accessible or
meaningful.
Reed and Liu (1994) compared the effects of programming in BASIC versus
developing hypermedia with HyperCard on graduate students’ problem solving
skills. They found that the BASIC group increased their problem-solving skills,
whereas, the HyperCard group did not. Liu (1998) conducted a follow-up study to
the Reed and Liu (1994) study. The treatment in the Liu study specifically
focused on using HyperCard’s scripting features. Findings indicated that the
students increased their problem-solving skills from pretreatment to post
treatment.
McKenzie (1995) developed a research model and rubric for assessing students’
information problem-solving skills based on the work of Lehrer and several
models including standards and rubrics proposed by NCREL. McKenzie’s research
cycle includes seven steps: questioning, planning, gathering, sorting and
sifting, evaluating and reporting. According to McKenzie, the student passes
through several repetitions of the first six stages until sufficient information
is gathered to form insights worthy of reporting. Such research is based upon a
decision to be made or a solution to be proposed--- research devoted to the
exploration of essential questions. During the research process, students
maintain “research logs” which track the reasoning used as well as the
research actions taken while cycling through the process.
Hypermedia Construction and Creative Thinking
The term “creative thinking” as used in this study refers to a set of
generalized mental abilities, identified by Torrance (1984) commonly presumed to
be brought into play in creative achievements. Other researchers (Wallach &
Kogan, 1965; Guilford, 1970; Hattie, 1980) have used the term in various
contexts to refer to such constructs as divergent thinking, productive thinking,
inventive thinking or imagination. Over a period of 25 years Torrance and his
associates have developed several batteries of test activities at predicting the
ability of an individual to behave creatively. These batteries are incorporated
into the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (Torrance & Ball, 1984) which
approach the construct of creativity through the theoretical rationale of a
series of criterion referenced indicators which include fluency, originality,
abstractness of titles and resistance to premature closure.
Harkow (1996) used a combination of strategies to improve creative thinking
skills in second- and third-grade gifted students. Sixteen students were
targeted for the intervention. Over a 12-week implementation period, students
participated in 90-minute interventions twice weekly. The intervention was
comprised of 30-minute creative problem-solving encounters with peers; 30
minutes of computer software use to produce original writing, and to experiment
and create in open-ended settings; and a 30-minute period of activities
alternating between relaxation and imagery exercises and the use of imagery in
creative writing. There were four objectives to the intervention: (1) increasing
verbal and figural creativity; (2) increasing figural and verbal fluency; (3)
increasing figural and verbal originality; and (4) increasing verbal
flexibility. The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking, Figural and Verbal Models
and the Inventory of Creative Behaviors were used to assess the impact of the
intervention. Informal teacher observations were conducted throughout
implementation.
The Inventory of Creative Behaviors was completed weekly and at the conclusion
of the implementation period. Findings indicated that the proposed number of
students met the projected percentage of increase of 80 percent or above in
overall figural and verbal creativity, verbal originality, and verbal
flexibility.
Liu (1998) examined whether engaging elementary school students in hypermedia
authoring would promote their creative thinking. The researcher reported
significant correlations between hypermedia development and scores on the
Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking.