A Cognitive-Based Training Program for Graphic Designers to Improve Science Textbook Illustrations

Document Type : Researches for promotion to assistant professor and professor degrees

Author

Lecturer at Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Faculty of Education, Ain-Shams University, Roxy 11757, Cairo, Egypt.

Abstract

Illustrations are an inseparable part of science textbooks. To design effective illustrations, the science textbook graphic designers need to understand about how the student’s mind functions. Unfortunately, the lack of training of the graphic designers in Egypt has resulted in a generation of designers who are unable to apply effective cognitive principles of visual design in the textbooks. This study was carried out to examine the effect of a cognitive-based training program for graphic designers on the quality of science textbook illustrations. The training program was prepared to encourage graphic designers to apply effective cognitive principles when designing science textbook illustrations. Nine graphic designers were asked to design a lesson of "density" before and after the training program. A list of criteria was prepared to examine the quality of illustrations. Thirty three science teachers were asked to use this criteria to evaluate the illustrations in the designed lessons. The teachers pointed out that the pre-training illustrations were more compatible with the cognitive principles than the post-training illustrations. These results can serve as a reference for reform of the graphic preparing and training programs.

Keywords

References

  1. Aro, L. & B. Woodard (2005). Visual images and information literacy. Reference and User Services Quarterly, 45 (1), 27-32.
  2. Baddeley, A. (2003). Working Memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4 (10), 829-839.
  3. Birisci, S. & Metin, M. (2010). Developing an instructional material using a concept cartoon adapted to the 5E model: A sample of teaching erosion. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11 (1), 1-16. Retrieved from http://www.ied.edu.hk/apfslt/
  4. Carney, R. & Levin, J. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students’ learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 5-26.
  5. Chen, H. (2004). A Review of learning theories from visual literacy. Journal of Educational Computing, Design, and Online Learning, 5 (3), 1-8.
  6. Cheng, M., Chou, P., Wang, Y., & Lin, C. (2014). Learning effects of a science textbook designed with adapted cognitive process principles on grade 5 students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, published online: Jan., 1-22. doi: 10.1007/s10763-013-9471-3
  7. Chrosniak, P. (2009). Seeing what we know, knowing what we see: the involvement of visual literacy in learning. In J. Pedersen & K. Finson (Eds.), Visual data: Understanding and applying visual data to research in education (pp. 133–150). Rotterdam: Sense
  8. Clark, R. & Lyons, C. (2004). Graphics for learning. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
  9. Clement, P. (2008). Introduction to the special issue of SEI-relating to critical analysis of school science textbooks. Science Education International, 19 (2), 93-96.
    1. Cook, M. (2008). Students’ comprehension of science concepts depicted in textbook illustrations. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 12 (1), 39–54.
    2. DeLeeuw, K. & Mayer, R. (2008). A comparison of three measures of cognitive load: Evidence for separable measures of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100 (1), 223-234.
    3. Doolittle, P. E. (2002). Multimedia learning: empirical results and practical applications. Irish Educational Technology Users' Conference, Carlow, Ireland. Retrieved from http://scr.csc.noctrl.edu/courses/edn509/resources/readings/multimediaLearningEmpericalResults.pdf
    4. Florax, M. & Ploetzner, R. (2010). What contributes to the split-attention effect? The role of text segmentation, picture labeling, and spatial proximity. Learning and Instruction, 20 (3), 216-224. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.021
    5. Halkia, Kr. & Theodoridis, M. (2001). Latent aspects in science textbooks pictures, Proceedings of the third International Conference on Science Education Research in the Knowledge Based Society, II, 850-852.
    6. Helfand, J. (2012). "What is graphic design?". AIGA | the professional association for design. Retrieved from http://www.aiga.org/what-is-design/ 
    7. Hodges, E. (2003). The Guild Handbook of Visual illustration. Second Edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
    8. Kaptan, A. & Kaptan, S. (2005). Design problems and the effects on students' learning level textbooks. Journal of 19 Mayıs University, Faculty of Education, 19, 59-66.
    9. Kirsh, D. (2002). Why illustrations aid understanding. In R. Ploetzner (Ed.), International Workshop on Dynamic Visualizations and Learning, Tubingen, Germany: Knowledge Media Research Center.
    10. Lee, V. R. (2010). Adaptation and continuities in the use and design of visual representations in US middle school science textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 32 (8), 1099-1126. doi:10.1080/09500690903253916
    11. Lohr, L. & Gal, J. (2008). Representation strategies. In J. Spector, M. Merrill, J., Van Merrienboer, & M. Driscoll (Eds.) Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd Ed.) (pp. 85-96). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    12. Mayer, R. (2000). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    13. Mayer, R. (2008). Applying the science of learning: Evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American Psychologist, 63 (8), 760-769.
    14. Mayer, R. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd Ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
    15. Mayer, R. (2010). Applying the science of learning to medical education. Medical Education, 44, 543-549. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03624.x
    16. Mayer, R. (2014). Research- based principles for designing multimedia instruction in Benassi, V., Overson, C., & Hakala, C. (Eds.) Applying the science of learning in education: Infusing psychological science into the curriculum (pp. 59-70). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
    17. Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary (11th Ed.). (2005). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster
    18. Mikk, J. (2000). Textbook: Research and Writing. Frankfurt: Peter Lang GmbH.
    19. Pettersson, R. (2003). Gearing communications to the cognitive needs of students: findings from visual literacy research. Journal of Visual Literacy, 24 (2), 129-154.
    20. Piht, S., Raus, R., Kukk, A., Martin, K., & Riidak, K. (2014). Students´ interpretations of the 6th grade science textbook design. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 861 - 872. Elsevier. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1243
    21. Schnotz, W. (2005). The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    22. SEG Research. (2008). Understanding Multimedia Learning: Integrating multimedia in the K-12 classroom. Pennsylvania: New Hope.
    23. Slough, S., McTigue, E., Kim, S., & Jennings, S. (2010). Science textbooks’ use of graphical representations: A descriptive study of four sixth grade science texts. Reading Psychology, 31, 301-325. doi:10.1080/02702710903256502
    24. Sorden, S. D. (2005). A cognitive approach to instructional design for multimedia learning. Informing Science Journal, 8, 263-279.
    25. Stull, A. & Mayer, R. (2007). Learning by doing versus learning by viewing: Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author-provided graphic organizers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 808-820.
    26. Sweller, J. (2005) Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp.19-30). New York: Cambridge University Press.
    27. Vinisha, K. & Ramadas, J. (2013). Visual Representations of the water cycle in science textbooks, Contemporary Education Dialogue, 10 (1), 7-36. doi: 10.1177/0973184912465157

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics