Media – Is it a Noun or a Verb? Adding to the Clark-Kozma Confusion

Media – Noun or a Verb?

Adding to the Clark-Kozma Confusion

Amy D. Lawler

Texas Tech University

Abstract

Since the early 80s, there has been an ongoing, frequently-referenced debate among experts in the field of instructional technology. Do the types of media alone have an influence on learning outcomes? While the study media have on the influence of learning is not a new study, the debate itself came into focus when Richard E. Clark published Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media in 1983. The debate was further extended when Robert B. Kozma challenged Clark’s position in Learning with Media in 1991. The debate continued on through additionally published pieces by Clark in 1994 and later (Clark, 1994; Clark, 2012). Today, many members of the instructional technology field are still left wondering whether media, independently, do or do not influence learning. The purpose of this paper is to summarize both Clark and Kozma’s positions on this question, to discuss the distinction between media and method and why it’s important to the field of instructional design, and finally, to state my position on whether or not media do, in fact, affect learning.

Media – Is it a Noun or a Verb? Adding to the Clark-Kozma Confusion

Media Comparison Studies became popular in the 1960s (Clark, 1983, p. 447-448). Opinions of their validity seem to vary widely among experts in the field. In 1983, Richard Clark affirmed that it was time to put an end to these studies because he felt the results of these studies were confounding (Clark, 1983, p. 447). In 1991, Robert Kozma challenged Clark’s request to halt all media studies because his research clashed with Clark’s findings. To explain the differences in both Clark and Kozma’s research, this paper will summarize the points of each.

Richard E. Clark

Clark argued that, “…media do not influence learning under any conditions” (Clark, 1983, p. 445). He argued that it’s not the media but the change in curriculum that influences learning. He also stated any short-term gains from the use of new media were due to novelty effect (Clark, 1983, p. 448). Novelty effect is the increased effort or persistence that accounts for any observed achievement gains. People still argue this concept carries over to media today (Klosowski, 2014). Clark compared media to instructional delivery vehicles (Clark, 1983, p. 445). He argued that instructional delivery vehicles (media) don’t influence learning outcomes any more than grocery delivery vehicles influence nutrition. He stated only the content of the vehicle (instruction or groceries, respectively) affects the outcome. Clark recommended that researchers refrain from any additional studies that explore relationships between media and learning unless that research could produce a novel theory on the topic (Clark, 1983, p. 457).

Robert B. Kozma

Robert Kozma published an article in 1991 refuting Clark’s research. He stated that capabilities of specific media, along with appropriate methods for using those media, had an impact on the ways learners processed information and also that these differences in processing accounted for varied learning when one medium was used instead of another (Kozma, 1991, p. 179). Kozma conducted several studies using books, television and computers to cite examples of how the media impacted learning outcomes. He stated books have a stability that benefits both low and high readers. The books allowed both types of learners to gain access to information. These methods varied from repeating readings when clarity was needed to skipping information when the learner felt the necessary information had been ascertained (Kozma, 1991, p. 184).” Kozma also observed different media effects when learners were exposed to television. For example, students remained more attentive to television when female voiceovers were used. The belief for this was that children assumed female voices were child-oriented and male voiceovers typically corresponded to adult-oriented content (Kozma, 1991, p. 190). My favorite example was Kozma’s direct correlation between student performance on assessments over bar graphs before and after an experiment involving students inputting temperature into a computer and then seeing the immediate output of that data in the form of a bar graph (Kozma, 1991, p. 196). The computer medium had a direct impact on the students by connecting the data in the bar graph to an experience they could relate to. The students were then able to connect their prior knowledge about temperatures and see the relationship of those temperatures on a graph, thus increasing their understanding of how to better read the data contained in a bar graph.

Distinguishing Media from Methods

In order to adequately distinguish media from instructional methods, we must first understand how media are used in the context of today’s self-study and formalized classrooms. Unlike instruction prior to the 2000s, media can now be used as an independent method of instruction. Think about how often students, our own children, or coworkers, have used different media to obtain information from YouTube, review resources online, or look up a diagram on a Google app. These types of inquiries don’t require an instructional method. They are mostly self-taught. However, the media have a profound impact on the outcome of what the learner was able to acquire from them. In this use, I agree that media can be compared to Clark’s vehicle analogy because the media are, in fact, the instructional delivery vehicles. However, unlike Clark, I do believe media do impact learning.
While media can be used as self-study aids, they are now also an integrative tool for instruction. When conducting more formalized instruction, methods of integrating various new media come into play. Unlike the pre-1970s classrooms, media are no longer something the instructor turns on at the beginning of class and turns off when class time has expired. Media still take more of a role of a noun but are integrated with a verb, the instructional method. In these situations, the methods of teaching (verb) integrate the media (noun) to produce the intended outcome of influencing learning. In this example, Clark’s delivery model doesn’t apply. In this case, the instructional method is the delivery truck, the media are the truck’s enhancing turbochargers ("Top 3 Tips to Make Your Diesel Truck Faster," n.d.), and the learning outcomes are the deliverables. Due to the variables of learners and learner needs, knowing the difference between when media should be a noun or a verb is important in building the most effective instructional design.

Conclusion

Especially with the advancement of the internet, media can and do have a significant influence on learning. This does not negate the belief that quality instructional methods should be viewed as less important. As methods and students evolve, so too does our need for evolving direct instruction. However, as long as humans are social creatures, the need for quality instructors delivering superlative instructional methods will remain.

References

Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459. doi:10.2307/1170217

Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29. doi:10.1007/bf02299088

Clark, R. E. (2012). What is next in the media and methods debate? In Learning from media: Arguments, analysis, and evidence (2nd ed., pp. 327-337). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub.

Klosowski, T. (2014, July 6). The Novelty Effect Explains Why a New App Makes You More Productive. Retrieved from http://lifehacker.com/the-novelty-effect-explains-why-a-new-app-makes-you-mor-1587158104

Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with Media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179-212. doi:10.2307/1170534

Top 3 Tips to Make Your Diesel Truck Faster. (n.d.). Retrieved October 8, 2016, from http://www.autotraining.edu/blog/top-3-tips-to-make-your-diesel-truck-faster/

Teaching and Learning: Taking It Personally Matters

Teaching and Learning:
Taking It Personally Matters

Amy D. Lawler

Texas Tech University

Abstract

One’s teaching style is as individual as the students they teach. How does an instructor know learning has actually occurred? What’s the best method for teaching material to students? Is there a best approach to designing environments that promote maximum learning outcomes? When considering my personal approach to teaching and my philosophy on learning, these questions and several more come to mind. The purpose of this paper is to articulate my learning philosophy, defining what I think it means to learn; define my personal statement of teaching; and explain how I think we, as instructors, can teach effectively and design environments for learning that promote the best outcomes for our students’ ability to learn. In a world where we are constantly reminded, “Don’t take it personally. It’s not personal, it’s business,” we must intentionally give ourselves permission to implement and personalize different practices and philosophies to meet the learning needs of our students because for our students, it is personal.  

Teaching and Learning: Taking it Personally Matters

Just like the instructional technology field itself, there have been numerous learning principles adopted (and adapted) over time. These many philosophies and theories provide educators options that can initially overwhelm novices of the ever-changing field of instructional technology. However, understanding the research behind these theories is important for new instructional designers entering the field so they can continue developing the field. In essence, putting theories, or “tools,” into practice helps instructional designers decide which tools they want to hold in their instructional toolbox.

Learning Philosophy

“If you can’t explain it simply, then you don’t understand it well enough,” is a popular, misattributed quote of Albert Einstein derived from when Einstein spoke about the explanation of physical theories. The actual quote said that all physical theories, their mathematical expressions apart, ought to lend themselves to “so simple a description that even a child could understand them.” ("Albert Einstein - Wikiquote," n.d.) Ertmer and Newby state that learning consists of an ongoing change in behavior or the capacity to behave in a given fashion. (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 45) However, I believe learning has an additional component that is critically important for transfer and long-term memory of the concept. That component is what Einstein implied in his response on the explanation of physical theories. Constructivism states the learner is able to identify the context for which the information is valid and then apply that information in the appropriate setting, (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 58) but I believe authentic mastery occurs when the learner is able to articulate a simplified explanation of the concept so that “a child could understand.” In doing this, problem-based learning (PBL) is practiced and supported through cognitive scaffolds such as questioning, modeling, and argumentation which greatly facilitates long-term transfer (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, pp. 69-70) Constructivism claims that a learner interprets reality based on his or her apperceptions. (Jonassen, 1991, p. 10) The principle of constructivism is further modeled with the use of these scaffolds, helping the learner build their own contextual meaning of the concept in which they are explaining.

Personal Statement of Teaching

“Love is the essence of teaching” (S. Sitton, personal communication, 1999-2001) is a statement one of my undergraduate instructors always used when describing her teaching philosophy. My personal teaching style models this through acceptance, safety and specificity. Providing these three things to my students at the onset of instruction creates an environment that fosters the best possibility for my students to create conceptual meanings for themselves. So, my personal statement is, “Love is the essence of teaching and meaning is the essence of learning.” My classroom is one where high standards are the “standard” and respect is expected from all parties, even me. My first year students attended a Title I school with 98% of the student population on free or reduced lunches. Many of my students were victims of learned helplessness, coming from dysfunctional homes in which they had little to no control over how to improve the situations that occurred in those homes. (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, pp. 88) One of my challenges as their teacher was to provide them with as many tools and as much inspiration as I could in the eight hours I had with them each day in hopes they would find a way to better their potential outcomes. I keep contact with some of these students today. One is in nursing school and several work in the community. While my teaching style wasn’t the only factor in the futures these students are now experiencing, I do believe the expectations I set in my classroom for these students has impacted their lives in a positive manner, at least for the time they were in my class.

Effectively Teaching and Designing Environments for Learning

Effective teaching requires teachers to be informed about instructional theories, student motivation and volition, students’ academic levels, learning objectives, and boundaries in their institutions regarding designing teaching environments. As stated in our text, the field of instructional design fills the role of linking application of researched instructional design theories to appropriate instructional design strategies. (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 43-44) This bridge assists in building learning environments that help teachers be effective in the classroom. Environmental design can assist in ensuring cognitive load is appropriately balanced by stair-stepping students through concept difficulty. Jonassen states that learners have three levels of knowledge: introductory, advanced, and expert. He also states that constructivism is best used in the advanced level while behaviorism is best used in the introductory level. (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 57) When environments are designed effectively, student motivation can be maintained and volition reduced by avoiding the ego-depletion effect. Volition can only be practiced for a limited amount of time, so minimizing distractions, even instructional distractions, can keep students motivated towards learning the content. (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, pp. 86) If teachers use appropriate instructional strategies that have been researched to work most effectively in specific instructional levels, cognitive load is reduced which helps maintain manageable volition, thus increasing the probability that the student will be maximally engaged to process the instruction he or she receives. To conclude, designing appropriate environments for learning requires the designer to have knowledge of the theories and principles that have been researched, know when and how to apply the appropriate strategies from those theories and principles, and follow-up to evaluate the effectiveness of those designs so that modifications can be made to improve learner outcomes.

References

Albert Einstein - Wikiquote. (n.d.). Retrieved September 28, 2016, from https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein#Misattributed

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features From an Instructional Design Perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71. doi:10.1002/piq.21143

Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? ETR&D, 39(3), 5-14. doi:10.1007/bf02296434

Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2012). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.