Applying the Coherence Principle
Brian Deyo Applying the Coherence PrincipleAdding Interesting Material Can Hurt Learning • What is the validity and generalizability of the proposed design principle (based on evidence cited, other evidence familiar to you, and/or your own experience as a educator and designer)? What are the most important constraints that define the circumstances under which this principle can be appropriately applied? Adding extraneous material to a learning experience can be detrimental to learning process. Clark and Mayer (2003) speak of distraction, disruption, and seduction as three methods that instructors unfortunately include in their instruction (111-112). Distraction deals with including irrelevant material simultaneously with relevant material. Disruption addresses the interruption of learning by presenting irrelevant material before, after or between relevant items of knowledge. Seduction activates incompatible background knowledge that is unsuccessfully used to connect with the new knowledge. An example of distraction is including music with narration. Mayer (2001) stated that there is better learning when sounds and music are excluded (Clark and Mayer, 2003, 119). An example of disruption could be a lesson that starts by explaining how to fire a weapon, telling a foxhole story about a grenade, and then continuing with explaining how to fire a weapon. An example of seduction could be a lesson that starts by reviewing the learner's experiences with cooking and then continuing with instruction on how to drive a car. 2a) Describe and/or include example(s) of successful and unsuccessful attempts to apply the design principle as you have seen such attempts in actual instruction and training, especially as it might be implemented in PowerPoint-based instruction and training (broadly conceived). Have you ever seen this principle violated or abused? Describe the context of the application/violation in terms of conditions and outcomes. "Walk" the reader/audience through an explanation of how the generalities in the principle relate to the specific attributes of the example(s).
One successful example of incorporating the coherence principle into my own Power-Point-based instruction was when I would teach different songs in English to my second grade students who were learning English as a second language. As we would sing the song, the lyrics of the song would appear. I would design my slides so as to not include extraneous pictures with the text of the song. If the song included a word or phrase that could be illustrated clearly, I would include an illustration near word or phrase. For example, a song had the words "close your eyes." Underneath that phrase appeared an illustration of two closed eyes. The illustrations helped to define the meaning of the song lyrics for the English language learners. Yet, the illustrations were presented in context. Extraneous use of illustrations was avoided. The main goals of the song lessons were practice pronunciation of various English words and learning the meanings of these same English words. Any illustrations that distracted from those goals would hamper the lesson. One unsuccessful application of the coherence principle in my second grade classroom dealt with the creation of organized bulletin boards. I took the approach that if a student was not going to pay attention to my lesson and if that same student would gaze around the room while not paying attention, I as the teacher might as well give this student something useful to look at. Therefore, I utilized every possible inch of available wall space for reference posters ranging from the metric system to parts of speech. Because I gave my students so much visual stimulation, they were more prone to distraction. It was harder for them to locate what they should be looking at in the sea of visual overload. I even went so far as to write lesson vocabulary on plastic ceiling tiles and install them in the ceiling after class. Even though I created an "educational Sistine Chapel," the working memory of my students was on constant overload. • Discuss the relationship of the design principle to more general design principles as these were examined in course readings and discussions. I feel that the principle of coherence relates to the modality principle with respect to the combination of animation, text and sound. Mayer (2001) stated that there is better learning when redundant text is not combined with animation and narration. The bi-visual stimulation of animation and text unnecessarily increases the load on working memory just as distraction in the coherence principle unnecessarily increases the load on working memory. This can be seen with the animation sharing processing time the text through the learner's visual processing (Mayer, 2001 from Clark and Mayer, 2003, 90). In distraction, two separate images are sharing processing time through the learner's visual processing. • Discuss the relationship of the design principle to fundamental theories of psychology as developed in the course readings, videotapes, and discussions. I believe that the coherence principle relates to the overloading of working memory during novel learning events. We can only handle a few (7 +/- 2) memory elements in our working memory at one time. • What do you personally like or dislike about this principle? Present a coherent, informed opinion and explain why you hold this opinion. Are there any limitations or qualifications of the principle (caveats) which the authors did not consider and, if so, what are they? I personally connect with the coherence principle because I see myself as a student and as an instructor informally assessing the learner's processing of novel learning events. When I am a student engaged in a novel learning event, I try to regulate my own working memory by consciously off-loading incoming memory elements. If I see myself becoming confused, I begin reviewing the current memory elements to better process the learning event. If the speed of instruction is not reduced, I see a traffic jam of incoming memory elements. I either try to process as many as I can or just clear my memory and refocus on what the instructor is currently explaining. As an instructor, I try to treat each of my explanations as a novel learning event. I slow my speech slightly and emphasize pronunciation of words a little more. If I am explaining a process, I pause between steps and check for understanding before continuing. If I see more rapid comprehension by the students, I adjust my delivery accordingly. By observing the facial expressions of the learners in a classroom setting, the instructor can modify the presentation to better suit the students. In an online situation, I am curious as to how we as instructional designers can incorporate assessment and feedback to better monitor the students' understanding during novel learning events. One caveat to the coherence principle is its possible misinterpretation, in that, instructors who fear overloading their learners might reduce the comprehensible input of the instruction below the capacity of the learner. This could cause the learner to become bored with the instruction. The learner might lower his/her own learning expectations since the expectations of the instruction have been lowered too far. References
Clark, Ruth Colvin and Mayer, Richard E. (2003). e-Learning and the Science of Instruction. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning . New York: Cambridge University Press. |