No - we (at least I do) still talk about dual coding. Several very important factors in teaching may have been discovered awhile ago - but they still have merit. Indeed in some cases the research base supporting them just continues to pile up. There is a great blog John Willis Lloyd does at UVA called Teach Effectively. He has some great info there. I don't stop teaching about critical teaching behaviors just because Rosenshine, Ellis and colleagues wrote about it more than 5 years ago - did we stop teaching about gravity, because if I recall correctly that was discovered more than 5 years ago as well. Some people get so caught up in 'cutting edge' that they drop elements of instructional design that are very important. Like attention. Simple, I know - but I think my retirement would be just around the corner if I had a dollar for every time I see/saw etc someone starting instruction without having the attention of every student.
Dr. Dawn Hamlin
Assistant Professor
Educational Psychology, Counseling and Special Education
500 Fitzelle Hall
SUNY Oneonta
Oneonta, NY 13820
Office: 607.436.3526
President, New York State Council for Exceptional Children
www.nyscec.org
From: Teaching Breakfast List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Pence, Harry ([log in to unmask])
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 8:26 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Not quite Learning Styles
Dear Steve,
Several years ago, I remember Nelson talking to me about the idea of dual coding, that is, combining images and text to improve recall. I think the research was associated with Paivio, if I remember correctly. This approach suggested that if the instructor combined text and appropriate images, the combined memory was easier to access because it could be accessed in two different ways (i.e. dual coding). This also seemed to be better adapted to the current generation of students, who seem to process images better than text. (I know, this difference is probably overstated, but images definitely have a greater impression on students than text alone.)
I used this approach for many years with considerable success, but I haven't notice any mention of dual coding in the recent past. (That is, I Googled it and found that the references were from the 1990s.) To me, this explained the power of PowerPoint; the images are the key. My experience with images was the bigger the better. Some of the newer presentations software packages, like Prezio, seem to have be popular, even though they aren't as good as PowerPoint at juxtaposing images with text.
My question is, whatever happened to dual coding? Is this another concept, like learning styles, that wasn't supported by later research, did it just go out of style, or have people just ignored an important idea in teaching?
Cordially,
Harry
Harry E. Pence
SUNY Distinguished Teaching Professor Emeritus
SUNY Oneonta
________________________________
From: Teaching Breakfast List [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gilbert, Steven ([log in to unmask])
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 5:31 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Learning Styles
Hi everyone: I AM on the TB mailing list, and follow much of the dialog with interest.
I am aware of some of the research on learning styles.
Jack sees a faucet.
Jill hears a voice say "faucet."
The next day, Jack and Jill are asked what object they were exposed to.
After seeing the picture of a faucet, Jack may clearly remember what the faucet looked like because Jack is an unusually good learner of visual information. And after hearing a voice say "faucet," Jill may clearly remember what the voice sounded like because Jill is an unusually good learner of auditory information. But if the task is to remember what object they had been exposed to -- a question of meaning -- Jack and Jill are likely to do equally well at remembering that it was a faucet. So... People do differ in their ability to make and remember visual discriminations, and to make and remember auditory discriminations. Concomitantly, they differ in how happy and comfortable they are, and how efficacious they feel when information is presented to them visually or through speech. But these individual differences do not result in differential learning of meaning, when information is presented visually vs. in spoken form.
It's terrible when an idea that is sensible, coherent, believable, compelling,
well-formed, and nicely matches our preconceived ideas, turns out to be empirically false. That seems to be the case with the learning styles hypothesis.
Steve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven J. Gilbert, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus of Psychology
State University of New York, College at Oneonta
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Home Page: http://employees.oneonta.edu/gilbersj/stevepage.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________
From: Teaching Breakfast List [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Conway, Paul ([log in to unmask])
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 1:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Learning Styles
Jim -
Is Steve Gilbert on the TB mailing list? It would be interesting to get his take on the study cited with Rick's article that debunks the concept of learning styles. For years students told me that their learning styles were based more on visual cues than listening and taking notes; I was always skeptical!
Cheers,
Paul
Paul Conway
1 College Park Drive
Oneonta, NY 13820
607-432-6988
________________________________
From: Teaching Breakfast List [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Greenberg, Jim
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 1:32 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Learning Styles
Rick,
My friends in Education and Educational Psychology have been very patient over my 31 years here trying to move me in more constructive directions when it comes to teaching and learning. Those of us not in these fields often get caught up in the popular media constructed debate on how to "fix" education. Technology! Problem Based Learning! Student Centered Learning! have all been recent mantras. If only learning was that simple.
Mr. James B. Greenberg
Director Teaching, Learning and Technology Center
Milne Library
SUNY College at Oneonta
Oneonta, New York 13820
email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
phone: 607-436-2701
fax: 607-436-3677
Twitter: greenbjb
"Ignorance is curable, stupidity lasts forever"
From: "Jagels, Fredric ([log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>)" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Reply-To: Teaching List <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:24:06 -0500
To: Teaching List <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Learning Styles
Today's breakfast discussion touched briefly on "learning Styles". Since it is such an appealing concept I thought this contrary-view short article would fuel some flames:
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/learning-styles-debunked-there-is-no-evidence-supporting-auditory-and-visual-learning-psychologists-say.html
The referenced study is linked below:
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf
Rick Jagels
Education Specialist
College Assistance Migrant Program
111 Wilsbach Hall
State University of NY College at Oneonta
(607)436-2297
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>