E19.2174 Cognitive Science and Educational Technology I
 

Dr. Jan L. Plass
Educational Communication & Technology
New York University

   
  Meeting Agenda | Course Documents | Assignments | Reading
   
 

REQUIRED READING

Mayer, R.E. (Ed.)(2005). Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge.
Driscoll, M.P. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Both titles are available from the NYU Bookstore, listed under E19.2174

READING MATERIALS-WEEKLY ASSIGNMENTS

Past Classes
Future Classes

Foundation and Assumptions of Cognitive Science

Driscoll, M. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. [pp. 71-77]
Guenther, R.K. (1998). Human Cognition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. [ Chapter 1 ]
Smith & Ragan (1999). Instructional Design. New York: Wiley. [ Chapters 1, 2 ]

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Gardner, H. (1985). The Mind's New Science: A History of the Cognitive Revolution. New York: Basic Books.

Human Cognitive Architecture: Sensory, Short-Term, Working Memory Models

Driscoll, M. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. (pp. 77-91)
Baddeley, A.D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
Kalyuga, S. (2010). Schema Acquisition and Sources of Cognitive Load. In J.L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken, Cognitive Load Theoy, ch. 3. New York: Cambridge.

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Miller, G. (1956). The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information. The Psychological Review, 63, 81-97. [ alt link ]

Of interest (mentioned in class):
Yong, E. (2009). Pre-emptive blood flow raises big questions about fMRI. ScienceBlogs.com, January 21, 2009.
Yevgeniy B. Sirotin & Aniruddha Das (2008). Anticipatory haemodynamic signals in sensory cortex not predicted by local neuronal activity. Nature, 457, 475-479 (22 January 2008).


Human Cognitive Architecture: Long-term Memory Models, Dual Coding Theory

Driscoll, M. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. [pp. 91-110]
Clark, J.M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual Coding Theory and Education. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 149-210.
Mayer, R.E., Sims, V.K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 389-401.

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Pylyshyn, Z.W. (2003). Return of the mental image: Are there really pictures in the brain? Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 113-118.


Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning; Integrated Model of Picture & Tect Comprehension

Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2005). Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge. [Chapters 1, 3, 4]

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Mayer, R.E., & Anderson, B. (1991). Animations Need Narrations: An Experimental Test of a Dual-coding Hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 3, 484-490.


Cognitive Load Theory

Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2005). Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge. [Chapter 2]
Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2005). Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge. [Chapters 8, 10]

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

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Brünken, R., Plass, J.L., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 53-61.

Of interest (mentioned in class):
Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R.E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.

Individual Learner Characteristics, Expertise Reversal

Plass, J.L. & Kalyuga, S., & Leutner, D. (2010). Individual Differences and Cognitive Load Theory. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive Load Theory, ch. 4. New York: Cambridge.
Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2005). Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge. [Chapter 21]

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interst, 9(3), 10–119.

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Carroll, J. (1993). Human Cognitive Abilities [Chapter 1, 2]. New York: Cambridge.
Plass, J.L., Chun, D.M., Mayer, R.E., & Leutner, D. (1998). Supporting visual and verbal learning preferences in a second language multimedia learning environment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 25–36.


Managing essential processing, Meaningful Learning: Schema Theory

Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2005). Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge. [Chapter 11]
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2010). Techniques that Increase Generative Processing in Multimedia Learning: Open Questions for Cognitive-Load Research. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive Load Theory, ch. 8. New York: Cambridge.
Driscoll, M. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. [Chapter 4]

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Ausubel, D.P. (1978). In Defense of Advance Organizers: A Reply to the Critics. Review of Educational Research, 48, 251-257.


Reducing extraneous processing in Multimedia learning

Mayer, R.E., & Moreno, R. (2010). Techniques that Reduce Extraneous Cognitive Load and Manage Intrinsic Cognitive Load during Multimedia Learning. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive Load Theory, ch. 7. New York: Cambridge.
Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2005). Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge. [Chapters 9, 15]

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2005). Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge. [Chapters 5, 31]


Control, Interactivity, and Feedback in Multimedia learning

Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2005). Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge. [Chapter 33]
Domagk, S., Schwartz, R., & Plass, J.L. (in press). Interactivity in Multimedia Learning: An integrated Model. Computers in Human Behavior.
Moreno, R. (2005). Role of Guidance, Reflection, and Interactivity in an Agent-Based Multimedia Game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 117 -128.

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Kennedy, G. E. (2004). Promoting cognition in multimedia interactivity research. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 15, 43–61.
Kalyuga, S. (2007). Enhancing Instructional Efficiency of Interactive E-learning Environments: A Cognitive Load Perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 387-399.


Emotion and Cognition in Multimedia learning

Fredrickson, B.L. (2001). The Role of Emotion in Positive Psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218-226.
Isen, A, M., Daubman, K.A., & Nowicki, G.P. (1987). Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 1122-1131.
Um, E. & Plass, J.L. (2010). Emotional Design in Multimedia Learning. Submitted for publication.

Optional (obligatory for PhD students)
Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Damasio, A. R.(2000). Emotion, decision making and the orbitofrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 10, 295 -307.


Visual Learning in Multimedia learning

Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2005). Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge. [Chapters 32, 33]
Plass, J.L., Homer, B., & Hayward, E. (2009). Design Factors for Educationally Effective Animations and Simulations. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21(1), 31–61.
Plass, J.L., Homer, B.D., Milne, C., Jordan, T., Kalyuga, S., Kim, M., & Lee, H.J. (2009). Design Factors for Effective Science Simulations: Representation of Information. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations, 1(1), 16–35.

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Lee, H., Plass, J.L., & Homer, B.D. (2006). Optimizing cognitive load for learning from computer-based science simulations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 902–913.
Höffler, T., & Leutner, D. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17, 722 -738
.


Evaluation of Educational Software

Jones, A., Scanlon, E., Tosunoglu, C., Morris, E., Ross, S., Butcher, P., and Greenberg, J. (1999). Contexts for evaluating educational software. Interacting with Computers, 11, 499-516. [ alternative link ]
Plass, J.L., & Salisbury, M.W. (2002). A living systems design model for web-based knowledge management systems. Educational Technology Research & Development, 50, 35-58.

Optional (obligatory for PhD students):
Norman, D. (1988). The Design of Everyday Things. New York: Doubleday.


Where do I go from here?

-> To learn how to apply these theories to the design of educational materials, take E19.2015 Representation and Interaction Design (Fall 08 syllabus)

->To continue learning about theory, take E19.2175 Cognitive Science and Educational Technology II

 


ADDITIONAL READING MATERIALS

Haertel, G.D., & Means, B. (Eds.) (2003). Evaluating Educational Technology. New York: Teachers College Press.
American Psychological Association (2002). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association Fifth Edition. Washington, DC: APA.
Smith & Ragan (1999). Instructional Design. New York: Wiley.

Theory into Practice Database
The TIP Database can be found at tip.psychology.org

 

   

 

   
  Meeting Agenda | Course Documents | Assignments | Reading