Robert B. Kozma

Learning with Media

This article describes learning with media as a complementary process within which representations are constructed and procedures performed, sometimes by the learner and sometimes by the medium. It reviews research on learning with books, television, computers, and multimedia environments. These media are distinguished by cognitively relevant characteristics of their technologies, symbol systems, and processing capabilities. Studies are examined that illustrate how these characteristics, and the instructional designs that employ them, interact with learner and task characteristics to influence the structure of mental representations and cognitive processes. Of specific interest is the effect of media characteristics on the structure, formation, and modification of mental models. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Will Media Influence Learning? Reframing the Debate

This article addresses the position taken by Clark (1983) that media do not influence learning under any conditions. The article reframes the questions raised by Clark to explore the conditions under which media will influence learning. Specifically, it posits the need to consider the capabilities of media, and the methods that employ them, as they interact with the cognitive and social processes by which knowledge is constructed. This approach is examined within the context of two major media-based projects, one which uses computers and the other, video. The article discusses the implications of this approach for media theory, research and practice.

Multimedia and Understanding: Expert and Novice Responses To Different Representations of Chemical Phenomena.

In two experiments, we examined how professional chemists (i.e., experts) and undergrad- uate chemistry students (i.e., novices) respond to a variety of chemistry representations (video segments, graphs, animations, and equations). In the first experiment, we provided subjects with a range of repre- sentations and asked them to group them together in any way that made sense to them. Both experts and novices created chemically meaningful groupings. Novices formed smaller groupings and more often used same-media representations. Experts used representations in multiple media to form larger groups. The rea- sons experts gave for their groupings were judged to be conceptual, while those of novices were judged to be based on surface features. In the second experiment, subjects were asked to transform a range of rep- resentations into specified alternative representations (e.g., given an equation and asked to draw a graph). Experts were better than novices in providing equivalent representations, particularly verbal descriptions for any given representation. We discuss the role that surface features of representations play in the un- derstanding of chemistry, and we emphasize the importance of developing representational competence in chemistry students. We draw implications for the role that multiple representations—particularly linguis- tic ones—should play in chemistry curriculum, instruction, and assessment.

The Material Features of Multiple Representations and Their Cognitive and Social Affordances for Science Understanding

Abstract This article reviews experimental and naturalistic studies conducted by our research group to examine the role of multiple representations in understanding science. It examines the differences between expert chemists and chemistry students in their representational skills and in their use of representations in science laboratories. It describes the way scientists use the material features of multiple representations to support their shared understanding and laboratory practices and contrasts this with the way students use representations. Scientists coordinate features within and across multiple representations to reason about their research and negotiate shared understanding based on underlying entities and processes. Students, on the other hand, have difficulty moving across or connecting multiple representations, so their understanding and discourse are constrained by the features of surface individual representations. Implications are drawn for the design and use of technology-based systems that provide students with coordinated, multiple representations and collaborative activities that afford the development of shared understanding in science. These implications are explored in a pilot study.

The Roles of Representations and Tools in the Chemistry Laboratory and Their Implications for Chemistry Learning.

In this historical and observational study, we describe how scientists use representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory, and we derive implications from these findings for the design of educational environments. In our observations we found that chemists use representations and tools to mediate between the physical substances that they study and the aperceptual chemical entities and processes that underlie and account for the material qualities of these physical substances. There are 2 important, interrelated aspects of this mediational process: the material and the social. The 1st emphasizes the surface features of both physical phenomena and symbolic representations, features that can be perceived and manipulated. The 2nd underscores the inherently semiotic, rhetorical process whereby chemists claim that representations stand for unseen entities and processes. In elaborating on our analyses, we � Examine the historical origins and contemporary practices of representation use in one particular domain-chemistry-to look at how developments in the design of representations advance the development of a scientific community, as well as the understanding of scientists engaged in laboratory practice. � Examine representations spontaneously generated by chemists, as well as those generated by their tools or instruments, and look at how scientists-individually and collaboratively-coordinate these 2 types of representations with the material substances of their investigations to understand the structures and processes that underlie them. � Draw implications from the study of scientists to make recommendations for the design of learning environments and symbol systems that can support the use of representations by students to understand the structures and processes that underlie their scientific investigations and to engage them in the practices of knowledge-building communities.

Technology and Classroom Practices

Abstract This study examines the findings from 174 case studies of innovative pedagogical practices using technology from 28 participating countries. The study looks at how classrooms world-wide are using technology to change the practices of teachers and students. Within many of these classrooms, the use of technological tools and resources supports students as they search for information, design products, and publish results. Teachers create structure, provide advice, and monitor progress. Beyond these commonly exhibited practices, the study identifies specific patterns of classroom practice that are more likely to be associated with reports of certain desirable student outcomes. Examples are provided.

Students Becoming Chemists: Developing Representationl Competence

This chapter examines the role that representations and visualizations can play in the chemical curriculum. Two types of curricular goals are examined: students’ acquisition of important chemical concepts and principles and students’ participation in the investigative practices of chemistry—“students becoming chemists.” Literature in learning theory and research support these two goals and this literature is reviewed. The first goal relates to cognitive theory and the way that representations and visualizations can support student understanding of concepts related to molecular entities and processes that are not otherwise available for direct perception. The second goal relates to situative theory and the role that representations and visualizations play in development of representational competence and the social and physical processes of collaboratively constructing an understanding of chemical processes in the laboratory. We analyze research on computer-based molecular modeling, simulations, and animations from these two perspectives and make recommendations for instruction and future research.

A reply: Media and methods

Media and methods together influence learning. This article illustrates an approach to research that allows us to look at the cognitive mechanisms by which learners interact with instructional designs and use media and methods to construct understanding. It critiques Clarks (1994) replaceability challenge.

Comparative Analysis of Policies for ICT in Education

National policies and programs can be an important tool for the realization of ICTs promise in education and some of their major components are the focus of this chapter. The chapter presents a framework of alternative rationales and program components that can be used by researchers and policymakers to analyze, formulate, revise, and compare national ICT efforts. The framework consists of four alternative policy rationales-or “strategic” policy positions-and five components of ICT programs, or “operational” policies. Strategic and operational policies of various countries are used to illustrate these rationales and components. The chapter concludes with recommendations that countries can use when formulating or updating their educational ICT plans.

Reflections on the State of Educational Technology Research and Development

In this article, I comment on the seven articles that appeared in the special issues of Educational Technology Research and Development (1998, 46(4); 1999, 47(2)) and an associated American Educational Research Association (AERA) symposium, as well as other selected developments in educational technology as presented in a recent edited volume (Jacobson & Kozma, in press). I address the importance of the research and development (R&D) described in these articles and identify five interconnected themes that cut across many of them: the centrality of design, the enabling capabilities of technology, collaboration with new partners, scaling up of projects, and the use of alternative research methodologies. Together, the projects described in these articles are defining new directions for educational technology that put it at the forefront of educational R&D. At the same time, I direct a critique and challenge to traditional instructional systems design (ISD) technology programs.