SlideServe
Télécharger Obtenir Pro
Menu
Accueil Pro
Préférences
ApparenceLight Aide et commentaires
© SlideServe · v2026

Effects of Multimedia Learning on Vocabulary Acquisition

rudyk avatar
rudyk
24 diapositives · 295 Views · Dec 20, 2019

Investigating the efficacy of multimedia learning on word acquisition, enhancing vocabulary instructions, and providing effective strategies for learners through cognitive theories. Research examines different input methods and learning strategies. Study involves participants assigned to text and picture, text, audio, and picture, and enhanced text, audio, and picture groups, with pre and post-tests conducted. Results show the enhanced group performing the best in meaning recognition and spelling tasks.

#effects of multimedia learning on vocabulary acquisition #effects of multimedia learning on vocabulary acquisition ppt #powerpoint #presentation
Effects of Multimedia Learning on Vocabulary Acquisition - slide 1
01 / 24Effects of Multimedia Learning on Vocabulary Acquisition
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

Effects of Multimedia Learning on Vocabulary Acquisition
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation

  1. Effects of Multimedia Learning on Vocabulary Acquisition June 25, 2010 AATK 2010 Washington University Jason Bumyong Sung University of Hawaii at Manoa

  2. Research Objectives • To investigate effects of multimedia learning on word acquisition. • Measure effectiveness of inputs; auditory input & enhanced text input. • Enhance quality of vocabulary instructions and ultimately, provide empirically proven as effective vocabulary strategy to learners.

  3. Frameworks: Multimedia Learning Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (Mayer 2003) • Mayer, Richard E. (1997, 2001) proposed and developed the cognitive theory of multimedia learning that consists of three important assumptions: 1)dual channels, 2)limited capacity and 3)active processing (Mayer, 2001). • Extension of two theories, dual-coding theory (Paivio:1981,2006) and Wittrock’s gererative theory oflearning (1974,1990).

  4. Multimedia Learning con’t First Assumption: Dual Channels Dual Code Theory: two channels to process information. 1)verbal representations: speech or writing, 2)non-verbal representations: images (Paivio 2001) Second Assumption: Limited Capacity

  5. Multimedia Learning con’t Third Assumption: Active Processing Generative Theory of Learning (Wittrock 1974, 1990) Four learning strategies • 1) recall, 2) integration, 3) organization, and 4) elaboration integration of new ideas with the learner's existing schemata, particularly by using four types of learning strategies. Mayer asserts • Three essential cognitive processes, 1)selecting relevant information from newly presented materials, 2)organizing the selected information into coherent mental representations, and 3)integrating organized information with prior knowledge (Mayer, 1997, 2001)

  6. Research Design • 52 participants from 1st semester of Beginning IA class. • Randomly assigned to three groups. 1)TP (Text&Picture)  Gr.1 2)TAP (Text, Audio, & Picture)  Gr. 2 3)eTAP(enhanced Text, Audio & Picture)  Gr. 3 • Pre-test & Posttest is given(meaning & spelling). • Background information sheet. • ANOVA & Post Hoc

  7. Research Design

  8. TAP group Picture Audio boy friend: 남자친구 Text

  9. Research Hypothesis • The eTAP group will outperform the other groups in the meaning recognition test and the spelling production test. • The TAP group will outperform the TP group only in the meaning recognition test and the spelling production test. • Differences in score will be greater in the spelling production test. (Salem 2006)

  10. Data Analysis • Outliers were eliminated. (ex. Learning difficulties, proficiency level or etc…) • Out of 52 participants, 42 participants were selected. • ANOVA • Post Hoc Comparison Test: LSD & Tukey HSD

  11. Data Analysis - score rubrics Meaning recognition test: 1 pt. for each question: total 10 pts. Spelling production test: 1)Whole Word Scoring (WWS): 1 pt. is given out if the whole word is spelled accurately. (adopted from Barcroft, 2004) 2)CVS (Consonant & Vowel Scoring): 1pt. is given out for each accurately placed consonant & vowel.

  12. Result – meaning recognition • All scored perfect except 3 who scored 9 out of 10. • Even those who scored zero on the spelling production test scored all questions right. • Subjects took an extremely short time to complete the meaning recognition test.

  13. Result – spelling production WWS 10 pts. CVS 54 pts.

  14. Results • The TAP group (Gr. 2) outperformed the other two groups. • The eTAP group (Gr. 3) outperformed the TP group only. • There was a significant difference between the TAP group and the TP group(in WHS, not in CVS). • No significant difference was found between the TP group and the eTAP group.

  15. Results - WWS Post Hoc Comparison Test *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. F (2, 27) = 3.79

  16. Results - CVS Post Hoc Comparison Test

  17. Results WHS CVS

  18. Conclusion • The TAPgroup outperformed the other two groups. •  1) Audio input facilitates vocabulary learning. • The eTAPgroup outperformed the TP group only.  Limited capacity (2nd assumption)  Needed more time to process all input. • TAP input was more effective in the spelling production test  Confirmation of Salem 2006.

  19. For Future Study • Increased sample size. • Long-term effect: Delayed posttest. • Effectiveness of writing as reading out loud.

  20. References Barcroft, J. (2004). "Effects of sentence writing in second language lexical acquisition." Second Language Research(20): 303. Barcroft, J. (2006). "Can writing a new word detract from learning it? More negative effects of forced output during vocabulary learning." Second Language Research 22(4): 487-497 Chen, Z. (2006). The Effects of Multimedia Annotations on L2 Vocabulary Immediate Recall and Reading Comprehension: A Comparative Study of Text-Picture and Audio-Picture Annotations under Incidental and Intentional Learning Conditions. Department of Secondary Education College of Education and Department of World Language Education, University of South Florida. Doctor of Philosophy. Mayer, R. E. (1997). "Multimedia learning: are we asking the right questions? ." Educational psychologists 32: 10-19.  Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia Learning. New York, Cambridge University Press. Mayer, R. E. (2003). "Elements of a science E- Learning." Journal of Educational Computing Research 29(3): 297-313.

  21. References Lee, D.-E. (2007). "Discussion of KFL Learner's Spelling Issues and Ways for Improvements: Focusing on Heritage Learners of Korean." Korean Linguistics 35: 335-362 Sadoski, M. and A. Paivio (2001). Imagery and Text: A dual coding theory of reading and writing Mahwah, New Jersey; London, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Salem, E. B. (2001). The influence of electronic glossess on word retention and reading comprehension with Spanish language learners. Curriculum and Teaching, University of Kensas. PhD. Wittorck, M. C. (1989). "Generative processes of comprehension " Educational Psychologist 24: 345-376. Yeh, Y. and C. Wang (2003). "Effects of multimedia vocabulary annotations and learning styles on vocabulary learning " CALICO Journal 21(1): 131-144.

  22. Q & A

  23. Research Objectives

  24. Research Objectives