Technology-based learning environments
R. Pirouzmand; M. Rostaminezhad; N. Mohammadhasani; M. Ayati
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Recent advances in computer technology, artificial intelligence, and virtual reality technology have enabled instructional designers to create on-screen pedagogical agents in multimedia learning environments. But what is needed is research on how to make pedagogical agents ...
Read More
Background and Objectives: Recent advances in computer technology, artificial intelligence, and virtual reality technology have enabled instructional designers to create on-screen pedagogical agents in multimedia learning environments. But what is needed is research on how to make pedagogical agents more effective in improving learning at the highest possible level for learners. Therefore, what is currently important in the field of research on animated pedagogical agents is increasing the efficiency of pedagogical agents by using supporting strategies. The important point in the priority of choosing among the types of supporting strategies is to pay attention to the individual differences of learners, which determines the necessity of using different types of strategies. Among the individual differences that can affect the learning and processing of learners and need to be considered by designers in educational design is the difference in the cognitive style of learners considering the importance of individual differences in the design of educational content; also, considering the importance of visual attention in the process of receiving and processing educational content, the present research was conducted with the aim of investigating the effect of visual signaling by the animated pedagogical agent on the attention of students with field-dependent cognitive style in a multimedia learning environment.Methods: The current study was applied research and a single-subject quasi-experimental design, and A-B-A design with follow-up was used in it. First, grouped embedded figure test (GEFT) was conducted and three students with field-dependent cognitive style who had the conditions to participate in the experiment were selected. Then, in the baseline stage, the participants were exposed to English grammar training during 8 sessions using multimedia with animated pedagogical agent, and the eye tracking data of the participants were collected at the same time. Afterwards, the participants were exposed to English grammar training for 8 sessions in the test stage using multimedia with animated pedagogical agent along with visual signaling and the desired data were collected according to the previous phase. The stage of returning to the baseline was also done for 8 sessions, like the baseline stage. Descriptive and inferential statistical methods were used for data analysis using SPSS software and visual chart analysis.Findings: The findings of the research showed that, with the addition of visual signaling to the animated pedagogical agent, the attention of the learner with field-dependent cognitive style increased to the educational content (F=42.09, p=0.001). Also, the examination of the visual diagrams in the present study showed, the back and forth of the learners' attention between the content and the pedagogical agent in the intervention situation was effective and targeted.Conclusion: Considering the positive effect of accompanying visual signaling with animated pedagogical agent on the attention of learners with a field-dependent cognitive style, the design of educational multimedia together with animated pedagogical agent with visual signaling can be used as useful educational content for learners with this cognitive style. Also, considering the positive effect of simultaneous visual signaling with verbal and non-verbal cues of the pedagogical agent, on the targeting of the selection process, in learners with cognitive style dependent on the field, it is recommended to use the sum of verbal and non-verbal cues of the pedagogical agent in the design and compilation of multimedia educational contents.
e-learning
M. Mohammadi; Z. Khoshneshin; N. Mohammadhasani
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Gamification means the use of elements and mechanics of a game in a non-game environment increasingly used in learning environments as a way to increase student motivation and learning outcomes. While several studies have been conducted to investigate the effectiveness of gamification ...
Read More
Background and Objectives: Gamification means the use of elements and mechanics of a game in a non-game environment increasingly used in learning environments as a way to increase student motivation and learning outcomes. While several studies have been conducted to investigate the effectiveness of gamification in education. But there are blind spots regarding the precise application of gamification elements using new educational tools in various educational fields. In this study, using the educational tools of Kahoot and Mentimeter with focus on the leaderboard, the effect of the elements of competition and has been investigated cooperation on learning and approach motivation of math lesson. Methods: The statistical population of the study included all fourth-grade male students in Divandarreh in the academic year 2020-2021. The study sample was selected using the available sampling method from the classes of the city. consisting of two classes of 20 people and placed in experimental groups. The research method was quasi-experimental with pre-test, post-test design. The research instruments included researcher-made learning tests and Aminifar and SalehSadeghpour motivation questionnaire whose reliability coefficient was calculated with Cronbach's alpha criterion for learning test 0.93 and approach motivation 0.81. The learning environment of the experimental groups was presented simultaneously and separately surveyed for ten sessions using the educational tools of Kahoot and Mentimeter were influenced by gamification’s elements of competition and cooperation. Findings: Mean and standard deviation indexes were used to evaluate descriptive statistics. The difference between the mean pre-test and post-test learning of students who were trained in a gamified environment using Kahoot the competition-based educational tools was 19.45 and in a gamified environment using Mentimeter educational tools based on the cooperation element was 23.9. In the variable of approach motivation, the difference between the mean of pre-test and post-test obtained in the gamified environment using Kahoot educational tools based on the competition element was 4.95 and in the gamified environment using Mentimeter educational tools based on the cooperation element was 8.1. respectively. Based on the results of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, the variances were equal and the normality of the data distribution was confirmed. According to the results of the variance homogeneity test, since the significance level is greater than (0.05), the null hypothesis based on variance homogeneity was confirmed and the assumption of variance homogeneity was confirmed at a 95% confidence level. Data analysis by multivariate analysis of covariance (MANOVA) in SPSS statistical package showed that with a significance level of less than 0.05 and a 95% confidence level, there was a significant difference between the use of Kahoot and Mentimeter educational tools based on competition and cooperation gamification’s elements in learning and students' approach motivation. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected and the opposite hypothesis is based on the inequality of the average learning rate and approach motivation in a gamified environment with a focus on the leaderboard using the teaching tools of Kahoot and Mentimeter based on the elements of competition and cooperation, was accepted. Conclusion: The results of this study indicated that the application of the Mentimeter educational tool based on cooperation element, compared to Kahoot educational tool based on competition element, has a more significant effect on student's learning and approach motivation in the gamified environment. Therefore, it is better to design gamified learning.
