Introduction:
In this activity we applied what our group has
learned about Cognitive Load Theory and CARP Message Design (contrast,
alignment, repetition and proximity) to the “Research Resources” activity
relating periodicals (http://www.libraries.psu.edu/psul/researchguides/periodicals_and_journals.html).
As opposed to the original activity, in which all concepts are grouped together
in one table, our group chunked the concepts into sections. Chunking the material into smaller can reduce
cognitive load for the learner as the material is introduced in small parts to
assist in understanding the types of periodicals. Each concept is grouped into
one of the following ideas: WHO, WHAT, WHERE, & HOW. Each chunk is followed
by a test of some sort to make sure the learner has grasped the idea presented
before moving to the next idea. We also included an element of repetition in our assignment. Each criteria is mentioned above the table
and then mentioned again proceeding the multiple-choice question.
Complete the questions and activity below.
Please discuss your answers and the material in the comments section.
Part I: Types of Periodicals
Purpose: The
purpose of this activity is to inform freshman college students of the types of
periodicals.
Read each table and answer the following questions.
Who: Who is the author? Who is the audience? Who publishes
the journal?
Author
|
Audience
|
Publisher
|
|
Scholarly Journals
|
Researchers and experts
|
Researchers and experts
|
Associations or universities
|
Professional/Trade Journals
|
Staff
writers and experts in the field
|
Members
of a trade or profession
|
Associations
|
Popular Periodicals/ Magazines
|
Staff
writers, although many articles are unsigned
|
The
general public
|
Commercial
organizations
|
Question: People magazine, written for the
general public, is a:
a. Professional/Trade Journal
b. Scholarly Journal
c. Popular Periodical/Magazine
What: What is the purpose
of the journal? What is the content
of the journal?
Purpose
|
Content
|
|
Scholarly Journals
|
To
disseminate research findings
|
Detailed
research reports and methodologies
|
Professional/Trade Journals
|
To
publicize current topics in the field and professional issues
|
Trends,
standards, and new technologies in the field
|
Popular Periodicals/ Magazines
|
To
disseminate general information or to entertain
|
General
interest stories and news; may include personal narrative and opinions
|
Question:
Which
of the examples would be the purpose of a scholarly journal?
a.
Inform the reader of the latest celebrity gossip.
b.
Introduce new research findings in genetics.
c.
Discuss current technology trends of mobile phones.
Where: Where is the information referenced from? Is the place where information was found
referenced in the article of the periodical?
References
|
|
Scholarly Journals
|
Includes
reference lists and bibliography. All quotes and facts are documented.
|
Professional/Trade Journals
|
Reference
lists sometimes included.
|
Popular Periodicals/ Magazines
|
References
rarely included.
|
Question: If the article
does not include a list of references, it is a:
a.
Popular Periodical/Magazine
b.
Scholarly Journal
c.
Professional/Trade Journal
How: How is the information communicated in terms of language? How is the information
delivered?
Language
|
Layout
|
|
Scholarly Journals
|
Jargon
that assumes expertise in the field
|
Highly
structured organization; includes abstract, bibliography, charts or graphs
|
Professional/Trade Journals
|
Jargon
that assumes expertise in the field
|
Structured
organization; usually includes abstract, bibliography, charts or graphs
|
Popular Periodicals/ Magazines
|
Language
that requires no expertise
|
Informal
organization: eye-catching type and format; includes illustrations or
photographs
|
Question: If the
vocabulary used in an article is esoteric AND its format is extremely
structured, it is likely a?
a.
Popular Periodical/Magazine
b.
Scholarly Journal
c.
Professional/Trade Journal
Part II: Reducing Cognitive Load—Applying what your Group has Learned
1) Review the following piece of library
instruction: http://tilt.lib.vt.edu/TILT/intro/index.html.
2) Select a section of the material.
3) Describe how you would chunk it to reduce cognitive
load and at least one specific improvement to message design using CARP
principles.
Discussion Questions
1) Did the design and structure of content on blog
complement how the ideas were chunked into sections the types of periodicals?
Please explain your answer.
2) Were you able to better understand the information
from our blog or from the link provided above? Why do you think this is?
3) What do you like/dislike about our organization of
information? Would you have organized the information differently?
4) Each segment of the content is followed by
multiple-choice question. Would this a
good way facilitate a learner learning this information? Why or why not?
Group 4 response-
ReplyDeletePart II: Reducing Cognitive Load—Applying what your Group has Learned
http://tilt.lib.vt.edu/TILT/intro/preissues.htm
There are some things that we liked about the design of this tutorial. Material is “chunked” well; different sections of information are separated onto different pages of the tutorial so that users have time to digest information before moving on to the next section. But there are other ways that the design could be improved. We are using the above page just as an example, but many of the same issues are repeated throughout the tutorial. The blue border bars contrasts with the white background, making the page more visually interesting to look at. It also contrasts well with the red font used for the title of the page, making it stand out more from the general text. But while this should focus the viewer’s attention inward (to the text in the center) it really does not do that because the text goes over the border on the right side. Not only is this sort of messy looking, but it makes the text hard to read in places. Furthermore, there is too much white space at the bottom of the page. It would be preferable to either include more information on a single page of the tutorial, or to move the available information down a little bit so that the bottom of the page was not so empty. Centering the text better would also keep it from running over the borders.
Discussion Question Answers:
1.The background was really dark and did not contrast well with the blue. It was difficult to follow what was happening with the blog. We don’t care for the way they separated the material. It felt cluttered. We can’t help but wondering if the background assisted in that cluttered feeling.
2.We prefer the information from the link as opposed to the blog. The lighter background is a plus because it feels more open. Also, we liked to search for what we were looking for in one pattern. Separating them in the way they did in the blog was confusing. We understand the reasoning behind the redesign was to “chunk” similar types of information, but the original chart seemed to flow better because the information about a specific type of publication was “chunked together.” In the blog, we had to think of an additional sub heading to find the information. We would rather just search from the longer list. It is less than a page so it’s not that bad, but it may have required a lot of flipping back and forth between pages for larger amounts of information.
3.We wouldn’t have changed the organization of the original information. If you were to change it, we think this was just as good as any.
4.We did not have any particular problem with the multiple choice questions at the end, except that they only asked about one piece of information, while each of the charts had a lot more information. So it was okay with making sure that we understood that one point, but not really anything else. It is better than the original posting though, since it didn’t have anything to check for understanding. We would have spent more time on reviewing.
Group 1 – Zsa-Zsa Booker
ReplyDeletePart I
Who Question = C
What Question = B
Where Question = B
How Question = B
Part II
I would probably try to be more consistent with the way information is given throughout the website. It was confusing. There seemed to be four main points the authors of the web site were trying to get across so I would try to have more repetition because those ideas were not constantly reiterated.
Discussion Questions
1. Neither the design nor the structure of the website allowed for the ideas to be chunked into sections. Especially while in the subsections of the website.
2. The information presented in your blog was definitely clearer than the information that was provided by in the link that you shared.
3. You all did a great job of organizing your information in a way that was easy to follow and easy to learn. Great example!
4. Asking questions after information is introduced is a great way to make sure that learning is going on.
Group 2 Response:
ReplyDeletePart II
The tutorial was difficult to navigate. Once we were able to get into the first module on selecting we saw where some major improvements could be made. First, we would suggest splitting this tutorial into two separate sections: “The Library and the Web” and “Scholarly vs Popular Publications”. In most of the slides the text was too heavy and often repetive. The information could have been conveyed in simple lists and charts. For example, the starting with the library section could have had a single heading simply enumerating the qualities of library resources. In other instances, information could have been presented more simply and included with other parts. For example the “Quality over Quantity” could have been included with the library resources page. Much of the text presented provided information that would have been better suited in the form of a Venn Diagram, chart, or side by side comparison.
Discussion Questions:
1. The information presented was consolidated, clear, and properly grouped. The only issue we took with the first activity was the use of multiple choices which does not require the individual to put in as much effort, but rather allows them to simple guess. An unrelated, but distracting, problem was the poor color contrast of the text and background.
2. The blog was much clearer than the original and would serve as an easier reference tool in addition to aiding in memorization.
3. The use of the “who, what, where, and how” was an excellent way to organize the information. Not only does the scheme fit the information presented, but it is a scheme already existing in learners’ frame of reference.
4. We believe that multiple choice allows the learner the option to guess rather than demonstrate knowledge. We would recommend using fill in the blank activities instead.
I thought it was really interesting how differently the two groups thought when comparing the blog to the link. The first group that commented seemed very fixated on the fact that the background was better in the link. They seemed very bothered by the contrast of colors in the blog, while the second group did not seem to be bothered by that in the least. Also, the first group did not seem to like how information was "chunked" in the blog. The second group actually thought the blog was a more effective teaching tool than the link.
ReplyDeleteI guess this just speaks to different learning styles amongst different people. I guess I was just very surprised that the two groups would differ so greatly about which was the more effective teaching tool.