Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning
- The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Part I Background
- Part II Theoretical Foundations
- Part III Basic Principles of Multimedia Learning
- Part IV Principles for Reducing Extraneous Processing in Multimedia Learning
- Part V Principles for Managing Essential Processing in Multimedia Learning
- Part VI Principles Based on Social and Affective Features of Multimedia Learning
- Part VII Principles Based on Generative Activity in Multimedia Learning
- 28 The Generative Activity Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 29 The Mapping Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 30 The Drawing Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 31 The Imagination Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 32 The Self-Explanation Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 33 The Guided Inquiry Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 34 The Feedback Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 35 The Learner Control Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 36 The Cognitive Load Self-Management Principle in Multimedia Learning
- Part VIII Multimedia Learning with Media
- Author Index
- Subject Index
- References
28 - The Generative Activity Principle in Multimedia Learning
from Part VII - Principles Based on Generative Activity in Multimedia Learning
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 November 2021
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning
- The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Part I Background
- Part II Theoretical Foundations
- Part III Basic Principles of Multimedia Learning
- Part IV Principles for Reducing Extraneous Processing in Multimedia Learning
- Part V Principles for Managing Essential Processing in Multimedia Learning
- Part VI Principles Based on Social and Affective Features of Multimedia Learning
- Part VII Principles Based on Generative Activity in Multimedia Learning
- 28 The Generative Activity Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 29 The Mapping Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 30 The Drawing Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 31 The Imagination Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 32 The Self-Explanation Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 33 The Guided Inquiry Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 34 The Feedback Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 35 The Learner Control Principle in Multimedia Learning
- 36 The Cognitive Load Self-Management Principle in Multimedia Learning
- Part VIII Multimedia Learning with Media
- Author Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
Generative learning involves actively making sense of the learning material by engaging in activities for organizing the material and integrating it with one’s existing knowledge. This chapter explores activities that support generative learning from multimedia lessons: verbalizing, visualizing, and enacting. Verbalizing activities involve generating words to distill key ideas (learning by summarizing) or make inferences to clarify the meaning of the material for oneself (learning by self-explaining) or for others (learning by teaching). Visualizing activities involve generating external visuospatial representations that depict physical structures (learning by drawing) or abstract relationships (learning by mapping), or internal mental images that depict the content of the lesson (learning by imagining). Enacting activities involve generating movements such as hand gestures (learning by gesturing) or object manipulations (learning by manipulating) to map abstract concepts onto meaningful actions.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning , pp. 339 - 350Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Ainsworth, S., & Loizou, A. (2003). The effects of self‐explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27(4), 669–681.Google Scholar
Bargh, J. A., & Schul, Y. (1980). On the cognitive benefits of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(5), 593.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bean, T. W., & Steenwyk, F. L. (1984). The effect of three forms of summarization instruction on sixth graders’ summary writing and comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16(4), 297–306.Google Scholar
Berthold, K., Eysink, T. H., & Renkl, A. (2009). Assisting self-explanation prompts are more effective than open prompts when learning form multiple representations. Instructional Science, 37, 345–363.Google Scholar
Bisra, K., Liu, Q., Nesbit, J. C., Salimi, F., & Winne, P. H. (2018). Inducing self-explanation: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30, 703–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobek, E., & Tversky, B. (2016). Creating visual explanations improves learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 1(27), 1–14.Google ScholarPubMed
Brooks, N., & Goldin‐Meadow, S. (2016). Moving to learn: How guiding the hands can set the stage for learning. Cognitive Science, 40(7), 1831–1849.Google Scholar
Butcher, K. R. (2006). Learning from text with diagrams: Promoting mental model development and inference generation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 182–197.Google Scholar
Carbonneau, K. J., Marley, S. C., & Selig, J. P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 380.Google Scholar
Cheng, L., & Beal, C. R. (2020). Effects of student-generated drawing and imagination on science text reading in a computer-based learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 225–247.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Self-explaining expository texts: The dual processes of generating inferences and repairing mental models. In Glaser, R. (ed.), Advances in Instructional Psychology (pp. 161–238). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M. Lewis, M., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, E. B., Brown, A. L., & Rivkin, I. D. (1997). The effect of instructional explanations on learning from scientific texts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(4), 347–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colliot, T., & Jamet, É. (2018). Does self-generating a graphic organizer while reading improve students’ learning? Computers & Education, 126, 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, S. W., Mitchell, Z., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2008). Gesturing makes learning last. Cognition, 106(2), 1047–1058.Google Scholar
Cooper, G., Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2001). Learning by imagining. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 68–82.Google ScholarPubMed
Cox, R. (1999). Representation construction, externalised cognition and individual differences. Learning and Instruction, 9, 343–363.Google Scholar
de Bruin, A. B., Thiede, K. W., Camp, G., & Redford, J. (2011). Generating keywords improves metacomprehension and self-regulation in elementary and middle school children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109(3), 294–310.Google Scholar
de Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M., & Paas, F. (2011). Improved effectiveness of cueing by self-explanations when learning from a complex animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 254, 183–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, X., & Zhang, Q. (2019). Tracing worked examples: Effects on learning in geometry. Educational Psychology, 39(2), 169–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Kuhlmann, S. (2020). Creating drawings enhances learning by teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(4), 811–822.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2013). The relative benefits of learning by teaching and teaching expectancy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(4), 281–288.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2014). Role of expectations and explanations in learning by teaching. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(2), 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2015). Learning As a Generative Activity. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016a). Eight ways to promote generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 717–741.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016b). Effects of observing the instructor draw diagrams on learning from multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(4), 528–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2017). Spontaneous spatial strategy use in learning from scientific text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 49, 66–79.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L., Stull, A. T., Kuhlmann, S., & Mayer, R. E. (2020). Fostering generative learning from video lessons: Benefits of instructor-generated drawings and learner-generated explanations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(5), 895–906.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Zhang, Q. (2018). Drawing boundary conditions for learning by drawing. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 1115–1137.Google Scholar
Ginns, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). When imagining information is effective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 229–251.Google Scholar
Ginns, P., Hu, F. T., Byrne, E., & Bobis, J. (2016). Learning by tracing worked examples. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(2), 160–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glenberg, A. M., Gutierrez, T., Levin, J. R., Japuntich, S., & Kaschak, M. P. (2004). Activity and imagined activity can enhance young children’s reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 424–436.Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S., Cook, S. W., & Mitchell, Z. A. (2009). Gesturing gives children new ideas about math. Psychological Science, 20(3), 267–272.Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S., Nusbaum, H., Kelly, S. D., & Wagner, S. (2001). Explaining math: Gesturing lightens the load. Psychological Science, 12, 516–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holley, C. D., Dansereau, D. F., McDonald, B. A., Garland, J. C., & Collins, K. W. (1979). Evaluation of a hierarchical mapping technique as an aid to prose processing. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 4, 227–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoogerheide, V., Deijkers, L., Loyens, S. M., Heijltjes, A., & van Gog, T. (2016). Gaining from explaining: Learning improves from explaining to fictitious others on video, not from writing to them. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44, 95–106.Google Scholar
Hoogerheide, V., Loyens, S. M., & van Gog, T. (2014). Effects of creating video-based modeling examples on learning and transfer. Learning and Instruction, 33, 108–119.Google Scholar
Hoogerheide, V., Renkl, A., Fiorella, L., Paas, F., & Van Gog, T. (2019). Enhancing example-based learning: Teaching on video increases arousal and improves problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(1), 45–56.Google Scholar
Johnson, C. I., & Mayer, R. E. (2010). Applying the self-explanation principle to multimedia learning in a computer-based game-like environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1246–1252.Google Scholar
Kapur, M. (2014). Productive failure in learning math. Cognitive Science, 38(5), 1008–1022.Google Scholar
King, A., Staffieri, A., & Adelgais, A. (1998). Mutual peer tutoring: Effects of structuring tutorial interaction to scaffold peer learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 134–152.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, K. (2019). Learning by preparing‐to‐teach and teaching: A meta‐analysis. Japanese Psychological Research, 61(3), 192–203.Google Scholar
Koh, A. W. L., Lee, S. C., & Lim, S. W. H. (2018). The learning benefits of teaching: A retrieval practice hypothesis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32(3), 401–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kontra, C., Lyons, D. J., Fischer, S. M., & Beilock, S. L. (2015). Physical experience enhances science learning. Psychological Science, 26(6), 737–749.Google Scholar
Kurby, C. A., Magliano, J. P., Dandotkar, S., Woehrle, J., Gilliam, S., & McNamara, D. S. (2012). Changing how students process and comprehend texts with computer-based self-explanation training. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 4(4), 429–459.Google Scholar
Lachner, A., Ly, K. T., & Nückles, M. (2018). Providing written or oral explanations? Differential effects of the modality of explaining on students’ conceptual learning and transfer. The Journal of Experimental Education, 86(3), 344–361.Google Scholar
Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2012). Science text comprehension: Drawing, main idea selection, and summarizing as learning strategies. Learning and Instruction, 22(1), 16–26.Google Scholar
Leopold, C., & Mayer, R. E. (2015). An imagination effect in learning from scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 47–63.Google Scholar
Leopold, C., Mayer, R. E., & Dutke, S. (2019). The power of imagination and perspective in learning from science text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(5), 793–808.Google Scholar
Leopold, C., Sumfleth, E., & Leutner, D. (2013). Learning with summaries: Effects of presentation mode and type of learning activity on comprehension and transfer. Learning and Instruction, 27, 40–49.Google Scholar
Leutner, D., Leopold, C., & Sumfleth, E. (2009). Cognitive load and science text comprehension: Effects of drawing and mentally imagining text content. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 284–289.Google Scholar
Lin, L., Lee, C. H., Kalyuga, S., Wang, Y., Guan, S., & Wu, H. (2017). The effect of learner-generated drawing and imagination in comprehending a science text. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85(1), 142–154.Google Scholar
Macken, L., & Ginns, P. (2014). Pointing and tracing gestures may enhance anatomy and physiology learning. Medical Teacher, 36(7), 596–601.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., & Johnson, C. I. (2010). Adding instructional features that promote learning in a game-like environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(3), 241–265.Google Scholar
McNamara, D. S. (2004). SERT: Self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novack, J. D. (2010). Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge: Concept Maps As Facilitative Tools in Schools and Corporations (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2012). An evolutionary upgrade of cognitive load theory: Using the human motor system and collaboration to support the learning of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 24(1), 27–45.Google Scholar
Padalkar, S., & Hegarty, M. (2015). Models as feedback: Developing representational competence in chemistry. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 451–467.Google Scholar
Parong, J., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). Learning science in immersive virtual reality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(6), 785–797.Google Scholar
Pilegard, C., & Fiorella, L. (2016). Helping students help themselves: Generative learning strategies improve middle-school students’ self-regulation in a cognitive tutor. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 121–126.Google Scholar
Ponce, H. R., & Mayer, R. E. (2014). An eye movement analysis of highlighting and graphic organizer study aids for learning from expository text. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 21–32.Google Scholar
Ponce, H. R., Mayer, R. E., López, M. J., & Loyola, M. S. (2018). Adding interactive graphic organizers to a whole-class slideshow lesson. Instructional Science, 46(6), 973–988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponce, H. R., Mayer, R. E., Loyola, M. S., & López, M. J. (2020). Study activities that foster generative Learning: Notetaking, graphic organizer, and questioning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(2), 275–296.Google Scholar
Rau, M. A., Aleven, V., & Rummel, N. (2015). Successful learning with multiple graphical representations and self-explanation prompts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 30–46.Google Scholar
Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from worked‐out examples: A study on individual differences. Cognitive Science, 21(1), 1–29.Google Scholar
Renkl, A., Stark, R., Gruber, H., & Mandl, H. (1998). Learning from worked-out examples: The effects of example variability and elicited self-explanations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 90–108.Google Scholar
III Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255.Google Scholar
Roscoe, R. D. (2014). Self-monitoring and knowledge-building in learning by teaching. Instructional Science, 42(3), 327–351.Google Scholar
Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. T. (2007). Understanding tutor learning: Knowledge-building and knowledge-telling in peer tutors’ explanations and questions. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 534–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schleinschok, K., Eitel, A., & Scheiter, K. (2017). Do drawing tasks improve monitoring and control during learning from text? Learning and Instruction, 51, 10–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidgall, S. P., Eitel, A., & Scheiter, K. (2019). Why do learners who draw perform well? Investigating the role of visualization, generation and externalization in learner-generated drawing. Learning and Instruction, 60, 138–153.Google Scholar
Schroeder, N. L., Nesbit, J. C., Anguiano, C. J., & Adesope, O. O. (2018). Studying and constructing concept maps: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30, 431–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spirgel, A. S., & Delaney, P. F. (2016). Does writing summaries improve memory for text? Educational Psychology Review, 28(1), 171–196.Google Scholar
Stull, A. T., Gainer, M. J., & Hegarty, M. (2018). Learning by enacting: The role of embodiment in chemistry education. Learning and Instruction, 55, 80–92.Google Scholar
Stull, A. T., & Hegarty, M. (2016). Model manipulation and learning: Fostering representational competence with virtual and concrete models. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(4), 509–527.Google Scholar
van Meter, P. (2001). Drawing construction as a strategy for learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 129.Google Scholar
van Meter, P., Aleksic, M., Schwartz, A., & Garner, J. (2006). Learner-generated drawing as a strategy for learning from content area text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(2), 142–166.Google Scholar
van Meter, P., & Garner, J. (2005). The promise and practice of learner-generated drawing: Literature review and synthesis. Educational Psychology Review, 17(4), 285–325.Google Scholar
van Meter, P., & Firetto, C. M. (2013). Cognitive model of drawing construction. In Schraw, G., McCrudden, M. T., & Robinson, D. (eds.), Learning through Visual Displays (pp. 247–280). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625–636.Google Scholar
Wittrock, M. C. (1989). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24(4), 345–376.Google Scholar
Zhang, Q., & Fiorella, L. (2019). Role of generated and provided visuals in supporting learning from scientific text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 59, 101808.Google Scholar
- 4
- Cited by