Rick wrote...
To bring this back to the original question: if we are going to do
research
directly comparing the use of PowerPoint to traditional lecture, we need
to
allow both forms to fully play to their strengths. We need to get away
from
simplistic comparisons showing that if you directly translate your lecture
into PowerPoint, surprise, there will be no benefit to using PowerPoint.
On
the other hand, if you allow the additional opportunities afforded by
PowerPoint to transform your lecture, you will be at the starting point
for
a more useful comparison of the two formats.

Aubyn writes...
Some very helpful insights here, Rick, thanks. You address what is perhaps
the more ecologically interesting question - is there a way of making use
of PP that will enhance student learning? I am interested in the answer to
this question. I suspect that the answer is yes - though I also suspect
that colleagues who chose not to use PP can (and often do) get at least as
much learning from their students. (At some point in the past, was there a
raging controversy over the use of the chalkboard?).

But my interest is in admittedly a more limited question - does presenting
information via PP result in better retention than presenting the same
information in traditional lecture format? The design here is fairly
straightforward (and the answer seems to be "no"). Clearly there still may
be good reasons for making use of PP (I use PP in about 1/3 to 1/2 of my
class sessions).

PP may allow creative teachers to explore new ways of teaching and
learning - but it seems likely that the confident assertion, often made in
educational and business settings, that presenting information in PP
increases retention, is simply not true (this may not be surprising to you
and me, but it would be a big surprise for a lot of public presenters). In
somewhat more sophisticated forms the claim is often made that PP
increases retention via some kind of "dual processing" or by encouraging
more active processing. Again, I have not seen any evidence to support
these claims. In fact, my own observation is that, unless the teacher is
careful, PP may lead to less active, less effortful processing by leading
students to passively copy material from the slides.

If you were to compare a creative, "transformed" PP lecture to a standard,
"uncreative" traditional lecture you probably would not be making much of
a fair comparison either. It seems likely that good, creative teachers
will get a roughly equivalent learning effect with or without PP, ditto
poor, unimaginative teachers.

One last thing - one reason I use PP is that my penmanship (chalkmenship?)
is atrocious and my spelling worse.


Aubyn


****************************************************
Aubyn Fulton, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
Chair, Behavioral Science Department
Pacific Union College
Angwin, CA 94508

Office: 707-965-6536
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*****************************************************

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to