Comparing the Extraneous Cognitive Load of Designing an Instruction with Merrill's Model between Instruction by Multimedia and Traditional Methods

Subject Areas : Infomartion Technology

Mohammad Zare ¹ ( Young Researchers and Elites Club, Malayer Branch, Islamic Azad University, Malayer, Iran )
Esmail Zarei Zavaraki ² ( Associate Professor of Educational Technology, Allameh Tabatabai University, Tehran, Iran )
Mohammad Hasan Amirteimoury ³ ( Assistant Professor of Educational Technology, Allameh Tabatabai University, Tehran, Iran )
Rahele Sarikhani ⁴ ( Young Researchers and Elites Club, Malayer Branch, Islamic Azad University, Malayer, Iran )

Received: 2015-01-18 Accepted : 2015-07-27 Published : 2016-04-20

Keywords: extraneous cognitive Load, Merrill's instructional design model, multimedia method, conventional method,

Abstract :

This study intends to examine the extraneous cognitive load within instruction that it had been designed building upon Merrill's model and conducted by multimedia and traditional methods in a biology course. This study was a practical research and also the quasi-experimental research methodology had been utilized. The research statistical population was the whole of the senior high school students in Malayer city. Research sampling was selected via convenience sampling and then they categorized into control and experimental groups. The experimental group instructed through independent variable (instructional multimedia according to Merrill's instructional design model) and the designed biology content based on Merrill's instructional design model instructed to the control group. Likewise, Brunken, Plass and Leutner questionnaire of extraneous cognitive load assessment with the reliability of 0.83 was applied to gathering data. The result showed that extraneous cognitive load in the instruction of biology course, which was designed according to Merrill's model, in traditional method is lower than multimedia method.

References:

1. Amirteimoury, M. H. (2011). Instructionalmessages design. Tehran: SAMT. (in Persian).


2. Biyabangard, E. (2011). Educational psychology. Tehran: Virayesh. (in Persian).


3. Brünken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2004). Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning with dual-task methodology: Auditory load and modality effects. Instructional Science, 32,115-132.


4. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1996). Cognitive load while learning to use a computer program.Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 1-20.


5. Dinarvand, H. (2011). Instructional design for teaching effectivenes. Tehran: Ayij. (in Persian).


6. Hofstetter, F. T. (2001). Multimedia literacy. McGraw- Hill.


7. Kalyuga, S. (2012). Cognitive load and instructional design (Translated by Amirteimoury, M. H., Mosa Ramezani, S., Velayati, E.). Tehran: Avaye Noor. (in Persian).


8. Karami, Z., & Ataran, M. (2006). The effect of making by students’ in their learning in science of grade five. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1(2), 55-82. (in Persian).


9. Mahbubi, T., Zare, H., Sarmadi, M. R., Fardanesh, H., & Feyzi, A. (2012). Effect principles of instructional design on cognitive load topics learning In multimedia learning environments. Journal of Higher EducationCurriculum Studies, 3(6), 29-46. (in Persian).


10. Malekian, F., & Akhundi, A. (2010). The effect of multimedia learning. New Thoughts on Education, 6(1), 23-56. (in Persian).


11. Mayer, R. E. (1989). Models for understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59, 43-64.


12. Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychology, 32, 1-19.


13. Mayer, R., & Gallini, L. (1990). When is an illustration worth ten thousand words? Educational Psychology, 82, 715-726.


14. Mayer, R., Moreno, R., Boire, M., & Vagge, Sh. (1999). Maximizing constructivist learning from multimedia communications by minimizing cognitive load. Educational Psychology, 91(4), 638-643.


15. Morrison, G. R., Ross, E. M., & Kemp, G. A. (2008). Designing effective instruction (Translated by Rahimidoost, G. H.). Ahvaz: University of Shahid Chamran. (in Persian).


16. Mosa Ramezani, S., Kanani, E., & Velayati, E. (2013). Investigation effect control the load imposed on the storage and retention of learning english grammar. New Thoughts on Education, 9(1), 105-132. (in Persian).


17. Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixingauditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 319-334.


18. Norozi, D., Ahmadzade Bayani, A., & Aghabarati, N. (2011). The effect of multimedia on learning and retention of students in mathematics remained. Journal of Psychology of Exceptional, 1(4), 23-51. (in Persian).


19. Smit, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design (3rd ed). Hoboken, NJ: Sons, Inc.


20. Sweller, J. (1989). Cognitive technology: Procedures for facilitating learning and problem solving in mathematics and science. Educational Psychology, 81, 457-466.


21. Sweller, J. (1993). Some cognitive processes and their consequences for the organization and presentation of information. Australian Journal of Psychology, 45, 1-8.


22. Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty and instructional design.Learning and Instruction, 4, 295-312.


23. Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell: ACER Press.


24. Sweller, J. (2003). Evolution of human cognitive architecture. In B. Ross (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 43, 215-266. Sandiego: Academic Press.


25. Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 9-31.


26. Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 185-233.


27. Sweller, J., Chandler, P., Tierney, P., & Cooper, M. (1990). Cognitive load and selective attention as factors in the structuring of technical material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 176-192.


28. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251- 296.


29. Sweller, L. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.


30. Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). When to sensory modes are better than one. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3, 257-287.


31. Zare, M. (2014). Investigation external load multimedia teaching methods based on the model of Instructional Design Merrill. Master Thesis, Allameh Tabatabei University. (in Persian).


32. Zarei Zavaraki, E., & Gharibi, F. (2012). Effect of multimedia learning on learning and retention mathematics fourth grade students' mentally retarded girl in Arak City. Journal of Psychology of exceptional, 2(5), 1-19. (in Persian).


33. Zheng, R., Mcalack, M., Wilmes, B., Evans, P. K., & Williamson, J. (2009). Effects of multimedia on cognitive load, self-efficacy, and multiple rule-based problem solving. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(5), 790-803.