A comparison of pictorial and written adjunct aids in learning from text.

Snowman, Jack; Cunningham, Donald J.

doi:10.1037/h0076934

Cited by 50 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 10 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A final piece of evidence supporting the assessment hypothesis comes from contrasting the studies of Alesandrini (1981) and Snowman and Cunningham (1975). On the surface, these studies are similar.…”

Section: The Benefits Of Drawing Construction Are Revealed On Higher-mentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Alesandrini's (1981) multiple-choice posttest included factual recognition items, but the majority of test items assessed higher-level comprehension or application of ideas. In contrast, Snowman and Cunningham's (1975) multiple-choice posttest included only factual recognition items.…”

Section: The Benefits Of Drawing Construction Are Revealed On Higher-mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our concern with this number, however, was neither the volume nor the appearance of a large percentage of inappropriate sources. Rather, our concern was that this net failed to capture several sources known to be appropriate (e.g., Hall et al, 1997;Snowman and Cunningham, 1975). Accordingly, alternative search strategies were employed including hand searches of journals in which other drawing studies had appeared, name searching the authors of located articles, and culling reference sections of previously located articles.…”

Section: Empirical Research On Learner-generated Drawingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Promise and Practice of Learner-Generated Drawing: Literature Review and Synthesis

Meter

Garner²

2005

Educ Psychol Rev

310

239

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores learner-generated drawing, a strategy in which learners construct representative illustrations in support of learning goals. Both applied and empirical literature is reviewed with the purpose of stimulating research on this strategy. Clear from this review is the gap that exists between prescriptive readings on learner-generated drawing and research-based understandings. To make sense of inconsistent empirical evidence, the research review is organized around a series of hypotheses grounded in current underA hallmark of sophisticated, expert-like performance is the ability to think flexibly and to transfer knowledge across contexts. In part, this process is reliant on an underlying cognitive structure in which knowledge is integrated across varying representations (de Jong and Ferguson-Hessler, 1986;Silver, 1979) 286Van Meter and Garner (Van Someren et al., 1998). When a student can translate a data table to a linear function (Haverty et al., 2000) or use illustrated text to solve transfer problems (Mayer and Sims, 1994), that student is assessed as functioning at a higher level relative to a student who struggles with these activities. As critical as integration is, learners have a difficult time working with more than one format and integrating verbal and nonverbal representations of complex content (e.g., Scanlon, 1998;Tabachneck-Schiif and Simon, 1998). Given both the value and challenge of this process, strategies that facilitate the integration of different representations, particularly those that cross modalities, have great potential for improving student learning. Learner-generated drawing is one such strategy because drawing involves the construction of an internal, nonverbal representation that is mapped onto elements of the alternative, provided representation. The purpose of this article is to make the case that learner-generated drawing is a strategy that warrants thorough, systematic study.Although learner-generated drawing received some attention in the mid to late 1970s, research interest dried up by the mid 1980s. We believe the loss of interest is partially attributable to inconsistent findings and a body of research which, on balance, is rather disappointing. Along with the obvious value briefly stated above, there are two additional reasons for renewing interest in learner-generated drawing. First, an abundance of prescriptive publications available to classroom teachers tout learnergenerated drawing as a strategy that can meet a number of educational objectives. This is true despite a lack of evidence to support most applications. It is not that these prescriptions are necessarily wrong; rather, the research evidence addressing drawing as a learning process is inconsistent, silent, or qualifying. To highlight the distance between research and practice, the review section of this article begins with an overview of the applied literature before synthesizing the empirical research. We hope the juxtaposition of an array of implementations against scant research evidence ...

show abstract

Section: The Benefits Of Drawing Construction Are Revealed On Higher-mentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: The Benefits Of Drawing Construction Are Revealed On Higher-mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Empirical Research On Learner-generated Drawingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Promise and Practice of Learner-Generated Drawing: Literature Review and Synthesis

Meter

Garner²

2005

Educ Psychol Rev

310

239

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Still other studies have shown that pictures can serve as advance organizers for instructional materials (e.g., Bransford & Johnson, 1972;Brody & Legenza, 1980;Snowman in Cunningham, 1975).…”

Section: Comparisons Of Dual-channel Presentationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Alternative Computer-Based Methods for Preventing Job Task Instructions

Nugent¹

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These studies embody a wide variety of active learning strategies , including (a) visual or verbal elaboration strategies (e.g., Andre & Sola , 1976;Delaney , 1978;Hunter , 1977;Lyon , 1 977;Rasco , Tennyson , & Boutwell , 1975;Snowman & Cunningham , 1975), (b) generative underlining or sentence generation strategies (e.g., Bobrow & Bower, 1969;Frase & Schwartz, 1975;Rickards & August , 1975) & Gardner , 1976;Carter & VanMatre , 1975;Fisher & Harris , 1973;Shimerlik & Nolan , 1976), (f) probl emsolving strategies (e.g., Olshavsky , 1977), and (g) self-reference strategies (e.g., Meichenbaum , 1975;Rogers , 1977). Good literature reviews in this area are provided by Bernstein (1973), Faw andWailer (1976), andShininerlik (1978).…”

Section: Study~ Skillsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer-Managed Instruction: Development and Evaluation of Student Skill Modules to Reduce Training Time

McCombs¹,

Dobrovolny²,

Judd³

1979

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison of pictorial and written adjunct aids in learning from text.

Cited by 50 publications

References 10 publications

The Promise and Practice of Learner-Generated Drawing: Literature Review and Synthesis

The Promise and Practice of Learner-Generated Drawing: Literature Review and Synthesis

Comparing Alternative Computer-Based Methods for Preventing Job Task Instructions

Computer-Managed Instruction: Development and Evaluation of Student Skill Modules to Reduce Training Time

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About