The Effect of Presentation Variety of Interactive Multimedia Learning to the Learning Result

Print
International Journal of Computer Applications
© 2015 by IJCA Journal
Volume 122 - Number 10
Year of Publication: 2015
Authors:
Muhammad Ruslia
10.5120/21734-4921

Muhammad Ruslia. Article: The Effect of Presentation Variety of Interactive Multimedia Learning to the Learning Result. International Journal of Computer Applications 122(10):7-12, July 2015. Full text available. BibTeX

@article{key:article,
	author = {Muhammad Ruslia},
	title = {Article: The Effect of Presentation Variety of Interactive Multimedia Learning to the Learning Result},
	journal = {International Journal of Computer Applications},
	year = {2015},
	volume = {122},
	number = {10},
	pages = {7-12},
	month = {July},
	note = {Full text available}
}

Abstract

This research aims to investigate the impact of many kinds of computer-based interactive multimedia learning presentation to the learning result by controlling the student's prior knowledge. The kinds of learning presentation consist of multimedia learning with high interactivity ([animation visualization + narration] and [static visualization + clue + narration]) and multimedia learning with low interactivity ([animation visualization + narration] and [static visualization + clue + narration]). The research method used quasi experimental approach, with the kinds of multimedia learning presentation act as independent variable with 4 kinds of treatment, the student's learning result as the dependent variable, and student's prior knowledge as the covariate variable. The research was conducted in STMIK STIKOM Bali with the research subject is the students of even semester 2013/2014, and the analysis method used the Covariance Analysis. Based on the analysis results, it can be concluded that by controlling the student's prior knowledge of high interactivity multimedia learning group (built by Adobe Flash) is more effective than the low interactivity multimedia learning group (built by PowerPoint and Screencast-O-Matic). Besides that, on the high interactivity multimedia learning group, the effectiveness of the visualization content through animation+narration is equal with the content visualization through static visualization+clue+narration. This condition is also applied with the low interractivity multimedia learning.

References

  • Clark, R. C. (2008). Developing Technical Training: A Structured Approach for Developing Classroom and Computer-Based Instructional Materials. Third Edition. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Clark, R. C. & Mayer, R. E. (2008). E-Learning and The Science Of Instruction. Second Edition. San Francisco: In Print of Wiley.
  • Mayer, R. E. & Moreno, R. (2002). Animation as an Aid to Multimedia Learning. Educational Psychology Review; 14,1; 87-99.
  • Hasler, B. S. , Kersten, B. & Sweller, J. (2007). Learner Control, Cognitive Load and Instructional Animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology Journal; 21; 713-729.
  • McCann, B. M. (2006). The Relationship between Learning Styles, Learning Environments, and Student Success. Journal of Agricultural Education; 47,3; 14-23.
  • Guttormsen Schär, S. G. & Zimmermann, P. G. (2007). Investigating Means to Re-duce Cognitive Load from Animations Applying Differentiated Measures of Knowledge Representations. Journal of Research on Technology in Education; 40,1; 64.
  • Passerini, K. (2007). Performance and Behavioral Outcomes in Technology-Supported Learning: The Role of Interactive Multimedia. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia; 16,2; 183-211.
  • Lin, H. & Dwyer, F. M. (2010). The Effect of Static and Animated Visualization: a Perspective of Instructional Effectiveness and efficiency. Educational Technology, Research and Development; 58; 155-174.
  • Vaughan, T. (2006). Multimedia: Making It Work. Yogyakarta: Andi.
  • Mayer, R. E. & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning. Educational Psychologist; 38,1; 43-52.
  • Santrock, J. W. (2008). Psikologi Pendidikan. Edisi Kedua. Jakarta: Kencana.
  • Rusli, M. , Ardhana, I. W. , Degeng, I. N. S & Kamdi, W. (2014). The Effect of Presentation Strategy on Multimedia Learning—Animation vs Static Visualization—and Learning Style to Learning Result. Journal of Academic Research International; 5,1; 216-226.
  • Sien, V. Y. 2009. BIT 201 Object-Oriented Modelling using UML. Lecture 1-8, lecturing items of Dual-Degree Program. STMIK-STIKOM Bali Denpasar and HELP University College Kualalumpur.
  • Hair, J. F. Jr. , Black, W. C. , Babin, B. J. , Anderson, R. E. & Tatham, R. L. 2006. Multivariate Data Analysis. Sixth Edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
  • Field, A. (2012). Analysis of Covariance. www. discoveringstatistics. com. Accessed date: June 28, 2014.