oday

Uploaded from authorPOINTLite
Views:
 
Category: Education
     
 

Presentation Description

No description available.

Comments

Presentation Transcript

Slide1: 

Danton H. O’Day, PhD Department of Biology UTM Animated Teaching: Home-made Animations and their Use as Pedagogical Tools

Introduction: 

Introduction Students learn in different ways Students have different backgrounds Use of diversity of teaching tools Animations are one type of tool

Slide3: 

Value of Animations For communicating dynamic events Can reveal complex interactions Facilitate communication in lecture Can post on web—Distance learning; AccessAbility

Technical Issues: 

Technical Issues Animation programs are difficult to learn Programs are relatively expensive Making animations is time-consuming Once completed animations cannot be changed

Slide5: 

Why Make Your Own? No available animation exists Available animations aren’t suitable

The Solution: 

The Solution Use PowerPoint™ Capture PowerPoint™ animation with Camtasia Studio™ Export animation in appropriate format

Pedagogical Parameters: 

Pedagogical Parameters Stage-appropriate material (Tversky & Morrison ‘02) Images & text adjacent (Mayer ‘03) Term/Text spoken as it appears (Mayer ‘03) Narration in conversational tone (Lowe ‘03) Some student control (Tversky & Morrison ‘02) Visual cues reflect change (e.g., Colour/ Shape; Wilson-Pauwels, 1997)

Slide8: 

A Sample Animation is Available Online at: www.utm.utoronto.ca/~w3bio315/restricted/anim.htm

Sequence of Events: 

Sequence of Events

Slide10: 

Move item position on successive slides Add/Remove items to/from successive slides Use Custom Animation: -make items appear sequentially in one slide -Animation path: make items move within single slide Ways to Animate

Camtasia Studio™: 

Camtasia Studio™ Program is a PowerPoint™ 2003 add-on When animation ready click on “Record” Presentation starts and stops recording Export animation in any movie format www.techsmith.com 3 month free demo (education pricing: $149USD)

Initial Results: 

Initial Results Graphic vs Animation Group I: Graphic 5 Min. = 69.4 ± 3.9SE Group II: Graphic 15 Min. = 71.3 ± 3.4SE Group III: Animation 5 Min. = 57.6 ± 2.1SE Group IV: Animations 15 Min. = 84.4 ± 4.1SE ANOVA 1-way analysis of variance: IV significantly different from I, II, III (P<0.05)

Student Comments: 

Student Comments Animation better than graphic (77%)| Many comments on animation quality Prefer access to both Each has its place/value Issue: computer access for animation

Final Comments: 

Final Comments Method: simple & pedagogically sound Animations are easily revised/updated Can share PowerPoint™ files: others can adapt to their needs Opens door to getting more info. on uses, value of animations

Future Goals: 

Future Goals Further analysis of value (e.g., long-term retention) Can add true interactivity: e.g., multiple choice quizzes in flash files Web pages: Series of animations & quizzes—step-by-step learning packages

References: 

References Lowe, 2003. Learning and Instruction 13: 157-176. Mayer, 2003. Learning and Instruction 13: 125-139. Tversky & Morrison, 2002. Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 57: 247-262. Wilson-Pauwels, L. 1997. Journal of Biomedical Communication. 24: 12-16.

email doday@utm.utoronto.ca: 

email doday@utm.utoronto.ca Acknowledgement This work was supported by a grant from the Information Technology Courseware Development Fund