3D Learning

3D Learning

Please see video for more in-depth explanations: https://youtu.be/NUbf5hi1sP4

To cite this:

Pastore, R. (2019). 3D Learning. Retrieved from http:// http://raypastore.com/wordpress/2019/03/3d-learning/

Link to PDF version: http://raypastore.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/3dLearning-1.pdf

1.0 What is 3D Learning?

  • Theory that expands on prior 2D cognitive theories (i.e. theories that focused on text and images) to explain how we process content to learn in the real world through all domains (psychomotor/affective/cognitive), from games, experience, virtual reality, hand on activities, etc.
  • Its organic – living and changing
  • Research has only begun to scratch the surface

2.0 Background Framework

Atkinson & Shiffrin (1968) – Memory Theory/Information Processing

  • Memory has 3 parts – sensory, short term, and long term.
  • Information is first delivered to sensory memory. In this stage the learner decides how to handle the information or its forgotten
  • Short term/Working Memory – This is where information is processed.
  • Long term memory – indefinite storage capacity. Information can be stored here and retrieved for later use in working memory.

Miller (1956) – Working memory capacity

  • Learners can hold 7 concepts, plus or minus 2, in working memory at one time depending on how meaningful they are

Baddeley & Hitch (1974) and Baddeley (2000) – Model of Working Memory

  • Working memory/short term memory has a short duration and is controlled by the central executive. It has 2 channels, one for visual/spatial information and one for verbal information

Paivio (1979) and Paivio (1986) – Dual Coding Theory

Working memory is composed of two channels – verbal and nonverbal (visual). Each channel can function independently or they can work together to use information or store it in long term memory.

Mayer (2001) and Mayer (2005) – Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (CTML)

  • Expands on Baddeley and Paivio’s theories
  • The CTML is based on three assumptions
    • (1) working memory is made up of a dual modality (dual coding) input channel system,
    • (2) there is a limited capacity in working memory, and
    • (3) that learners engage in active processing.

Moreno (2006) – Cognitive Affective Theory of Multimedia Learning

  • The CATML is Based on the following assumptions:
    • independent information
    • processing channels
    • limited working memory capacity and virtually unlimited
    • capacity long-term memory
    • dual coding
    • active Processing
    • affective mediation
    • metacognitive mediation
    • individual differences

3.0 Problem:

  • These are limited in scope – 2D – Only focused on verbal and visual information (*CATML does focus on more but still only hypothesizes that we use verbal and visual channels)
  • We still have people trying to use learning styles and multiple intelligences even though research does not support them because they seem to make ‘sense’ to people
  • How does any of this account for real hands on learning? Gaming? Virtual reality? Where we use other means of learning besides images and words (narration).
  • Much of our learning combines all domains of learning. Psychomotor and affective tasks require cognitive resources (i.e. are using in working memory). The domains of learning are great for instructional strategy development but do not help explain what happens in working memory.

So I started digging…

  • One of the first surprising pieces of information I found was from Baddeley (2012). This really sent me down the rabbit’s hole. “…can other modalities such as smell and taste be added without impacting visual or verbal capacity? Are there separate subsystems for smell and taste?” (p. 23) (Baddeley 2012)
  • Then I started finding things like this from Quak, et al (2015) who says that we tend to look at the way we process information in a stationary fashion, examining 1-2 channels at a time (i.e. text and images) whereas in real life we take on many at a time – hearing, smell, sight, taste, etc.

Then I started to look at the way we work, play games, use our senses…

  • For example, when we play a video game we are using our ears, eyes, and hands. So I started looking at the biology of humans. Specifically focusing on the senses and found that biologists recognize many senses (20-30 or more) such as Visual, Auditory, Haptic/kinesthetic, Olfactory, etc. I was surprised, but yes, we have many other senses. More than the standard 5 many of us learned in grade school. For example, hunger and thirst. Our body has a lot of senses.

And just like that, I realized we have researched some of these other modalities, though that research was rare and scattered. For instance, Jonsson et al (2011, p.1023) state that examining how the senses (i.e. olfactory system) operate in working memory has “received almost no attention in the literature”. Here is a sample of what I found:

  • Andrade and Donaldson (2007) conducted a series of experiments that found that there was a modality specific space in working memory for a learner’s olfactory system. These results were then again confirmed by Jonsson, et. al (2011).
  • Lerch, Cui, Patwardhan, & Visell (2016) conducted an experiment which found that haptic information can be stored in working memory and has its own channel. Seaborn, Riecke & Antle 2010 found similar results.
  • So we have some initial evidence that these senses have their own place in working memory! Now this makes sense. The research is aligned to what we really experience. This explains what is happening in working memory when we learn from games, virtual reality, and in the real world! Now I am excited!

4.0 What I realized is that we have been focusing on a very small piece to a very large puzzle!

3D Learning

  • 3D Learning is a theory that expands on prior 2D cognitive theories (i.e. theories that focused on text and images) to explain how we process content to learn in the real world through all domains (psychomotor/affective/cognitive), from games, from experience, in virtual reality, from hand on activities, etc.
  • Its organic – living and changing
  • Research has only begun to scratch the surface
  • The model:
    • Multiple Input sources
      • Multiple input sources – There are a number of input sources that humans experience. These include vision, hearing, feeling, doing, smelling, tasting and many more
    • Sensory Memory
      • Sensory memory is where we first experience the input and put it into working memory or dismiss it
    • Working Memory
      • Learners have/can process information through a number of channels in working memory (i.e. visual, verbal, haptic/kinesthetic, olfactory, and more)
      • Learners can process multiple channels at the same time (can work together or independently from one another).
      • No matter how many channels we have, we can still only store a limited # of concepts in working memory
      • Training can improve each channel.
      • Learners will have natural strengths and preferences for one channel vs another.
      • Learners can work with prior knowledge from long term memory
    • Long term Memory
      • Long term memory is said to be indefinite

5.0 What’s next…

  • We need to expand the multimedia principles…and probably should be calling them the principles of learning
  • What are the other channels/how many?
    • Olfactory, haptic/kinesthetic, taste, etc. How many do we have?
  • What combinations work best? How many is too many?
    • For example, using our eyes, ears, and hands. Is that too many? How does that impact cognitive load?
  • This is especially crucial to the gaming literature as virtual reality starts to become more common for hands on training

6.0 Sources:

Andrade J. & Donaldson L. (2007). Evidence for an olfactory store in working memory?

Psychologia, 50, 76-89.

Atkinson, R.C., and Shiffrin, R.M.(1968). Human memory: a proposed system and its control processes. Psychol. Learn. Motiv. 2, 89–195.doi:10.1016/s0079- 7421(08)60422-3

Baddeley, A.D., and Hitch, G.(1974).Working memory. Psychol. learn. Motiv. 8, 47–89. doi:10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60452-1

Baddeley, A. (2012). Working Memory: Theories, Models, and Controversies Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2012.63:1-29.

Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417-423.

Jonsson, F., Moller, P., & Olsson, M. (2011). Olfactory working memory: effects of verbalization. Memory and Cognition, 39, 1023-1032.

Lerch, R., Cui, H., Patwardhan, S., & Visell, Y. (2016). Exploring haptic working memory as a capacity-limited information channel. Presented at the IEEE Haptics Symposium Conference.

Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Mayer, R., E. (2005). Introduction to multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), The cambridge handbook of multimedia (pp. 1-16). NY: Cambridge University Press.

Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations. New York: Oxford University Press.

Paivio, A. (1971).Imagery and Verbal Processes, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York (Reprinted 1979, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey).

Quak, M., London, R., & Talsma, D. (2015). A multisensory perspective of working memory. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 9, 1-11.

Seaborn, Katie & Riecke, Bernhard & Antle, Alissa. (2010). Exploring the interplay of visual and haptic modalities in a pattern-matching task. Paper presented at the 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Haptic Audio Visual Environments and Games

Please see the video for more info:

Online learning vs eLearning vs Distance Learning?

We have multiple types of delivery formats available to us, however, many times we use words interchangeably and never think about what they really mean. This causes problems when talking to clients because what they envision as eLearning might be what you consider distance learning and all of a sudden your final product does not meet their needs. So its always best to define and describe during your proposal so that an operational definition can be established. In this post I will describe some of differences between all of these common terms so that you can more easily describe to clients what you are designing.

Online learning – Online learning is any type of learning that takes place online. However, to most people this refers to 100% asynchronous learning where there is no live meeting and the learners have 24/7 access to the content

eLearning – Self paced learning that is computer or mobile based. The module is completed without an instructor. A lot of people also refer to this as online learning and use the two words interchangeably.

Distance learning – Again, this is another term that people use interchangeably with online and elearning. However, distance learning means learning that takes place at a distance without an instructor. There is no technology requirement but it can exist. In fact, the first distance education courses were developed in the 1800s.

Virtual learning – Learning that takes place in a virtual environment, that is live, and uses video conference technology.

Face to face learning – learning that happens real time in a classroom.

As you can see, there are real differences between all of these but most clients wont know those differences so you need to be careful when discussing them to make sure that you and the client are on the same page.

Call For Papers – Journal of Training, Design, and Technology (JTDT)

Call for Papers

Journal of Training, Design, and Technology (JTDT) – http://tdtjournal.blogspot.com/

ISSN 2475-0921

Call for papers:

The Journal of Training, Design, and Technology (JTDT) is a new online journal seeking submissions.

JTDT is designed to bring together current practices and research. The journals focus is on the following:

Instructional Design
Instructional Technology
Research – manuscripts
Practice – case studies, lessons learned, etc
Instructional Models
Instructional Strategies
Technologies
Usability
Virtual Reality
Mobile Technology
Learning/Training
Multimedia
Games/simulations
Instructional Development
Analysis and Evaluation
Performance Improvement

Types of papers:

Research Manuscripts
Brief articles (on current practice or theory)
Book reviews
Technology reviews
Strategy reviews (Using a strategy in the workplace/classroom)
Case studies
Special Topic papers
Literature Reviews

All papers are blind peer reviewed.

Please see our submission guidelines and submit papers to tdtjournal@gmail.com

Deadline – There is no deadline as volumes will continuously be released. First volume will be published 3/1/2017 with more after that.

Learning as a dependent variable in experimental research

I am reading through a number of peer reviewed studies and noticing that there are pieces missing from each. So if you are conducting an experimental study where learning is a dependent variable you must do the the following (note these are the things I keep seeing that are missing):

  1. Pre test. This is to ensure that differences found in your study are due to the condition and not prior knowledge. Be aware that if you give the same pre test as post test, its a violation of validity but it can still be done (its better than no pre test). Thus I recommend giving a different pre test.
  2. Content Validity. Is the content you are using correct? And is the assessment measuring the objectives from the content? How do you know this? Explain this. Has an expert reviewed it? Have you piloted it?
  3. What is the reliability of the test? Please provide us this information.
  4. Provide the M, SD, and Effect.

I know all of this seems like common sense but I am seeing top tier journals publishing articles that do not contain this basic information.

Call for Proposals Now Open: Global Learning Technology Conference

Call for Proposals Now Open:  Global Learning Technology Conference

We invite you to submit a proposal to present at the annual Global Learning Technology Conference to be held October 10-11 in Wilmington, North Carolina.

This year’s conference theme, Journey from Learning to Life focuses on Instructional Design from K-12/higher education/business and industry.

Proposals must be submitted by April 30, 2013

The Innovative Instructional Strategies category, instructors/teachers from higher education or K-12 will share successful cutting edge methods. These sessions may range from strategies for individual domains or interdisciplinary strategies for multiple domains.  The sessions will be identified as K-12 or higher education focused.

 

The Community Partnership category is for both business and any level educators.  These sessions will be for both business partnerships and educators to learn how educators are preparing students and skills businesses require for gainful employment.

 

The Training & Professional Development category will be for the community business members to share training and professional development strategies that are successful in obtaining and keeping employee’s knowledge and skills current while maximizing transfer of knowledge and minimizing cost.

 

Topics for the above categories may include:

·         Emerging technologies

·         Mobile learning

·         Professional learning

·         Team-based learning

·         Design thinking

·         Assistive technology

·         Social media

·         Virtual learning environment

·         Distance education/e-learning

·         Applied learning

·         Assessment and evaluation

·         Digital Content

 

To submit a proposal or for additional information on the conference, visit our website at http://www.uncw.edu/ed/gltc or email gltc@uncw.edu

Call for proposals: Global Learning Technology Conference (GLTC) now open

Submit Here

GLTC advances awareness of technology for learning and connects educators, technology coordinators, administrators, instructional designers, developers, researchers and scientists who use and study technology for learning. Conference presentations and exhibits will focus on technological innovations and their impact on learning and transforming education and training.

Sessions choices are a hands-on-workshop (90 minutes) or a concurrent session (45 minutes).   Keep the proposal length to a minimum of 250 words.  You will also be asked to supply a statement of what the audience will walk about from your session knowing.   

Submit a proposal on any of the following categories:

The Innovative Instructional Strategies category, instructors/teachers from higher education or k-12 will share and learn methods that are cutting-edge and successful according to research. These sessions may range from strategies for individual domains or interdisciplinary strategies for multiple domains.  The sessions will be identified as k-12 or higher education focused.

The Community Partnership category is for both business and any level educators.  These sessions will be for both business partnerships as well as educators to learn how educators are preparing students as well as the skills businesses require gainful employment.

The Training & Professional Development category will be for the community business members to share training and professional development strategies that are successful in obtaining and keeping employee’s knowledge and skills current while maximizing transfer of knowledge and minimizing cost.

Topics for the above categories may include:

  • Emerging technologies
  • Mobile learning
  • Professional learning
  • Team-based learning
  • Design thinking
  • Assistive technology
  • Social media
  • Virtual learning environment
  • Distance education/e-learning
  • Applied learning
  • Assessment and evaluation
  • Digital Content

Submit a proposal for one of the following types of session

  • Concurrent sessions where presenters speak on their work, research or a subject relevant to the conference theme. There will be time set aside for discussion and questions
  • Workshops where participants are provided an opportunity for hands-on exploration. We encourage proposals where workshops are designed for participants to work around a tool, platform, or concept. Workshops are scheduled should be highly participatory.

We encourage interactive presentations and ask that you describe how your session addresses the theme of the conference in up to 200 words.

Conferences of this sort might often find the need of screening important information on LED screens for the ease of its participants. Visual Impact LED Screen Rentals gives you the option of renting big LED screens for such events. Look them up today.

20 Reasons you should read more

Here is the list, click on the article for descriptions

Enhances the senses
Enables lifelong learning
Allows for better skill retention
Improves creativity
Better verbal abilities
Increases one’s stores of knowledge
Higher test scores
Reduced stress levels
Improves critical thinking
Staves off dementia
Dementia settles in at a slower rate
Better reasoning
Confidence-building
More white matter
Increases brain flexibility
Improved memory
Builds relationships between parents and children
Better listening skills
An easier time concentrating
Alleviates mental health disorders

Are digital e-books and tablets a cheaper option than standard textbooks?

This is a question I have been pondering: Has a cost benefit analysis been done on this? Here is what I have found in my limited research on this topic..if anyone has more research please let me know and keep in mind I am focusing on cost, not learning here. Apparently it might cost as much or more to go digital. There might also be accessibility issues. However, there are trends changing this that could make it significantly cheaper. So it seems that the answer to my question, what is the cost benefit? Well I guess it can go either way but if its more expensive now, it will probably be significantly cheaper in the future. Here is the section from an article that discusses this (http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERB1002.pdf). If anyone has any other research about this cost please post as I am interested in this question:

“Many believe that digital textbooks are the solution to textbook affordability and accessibility on college campuses. Research by the Student Public Interest Research Groups (Student PIRGs) suggests that many digital textbooks do not currently provide lower-cost alternatives to traditional print books when total cost of ownership is calculated.19 Digital editions can be as costly and sometimes more costly to produce than traditional print editions, particularly as the content moves toward more interactive or “born digital” editions. As digital editions become more interactive, the learning value might increase, but accessibility to individuals with various disabilities can be affected. Accessibility issues can create legal and educational challenges for institutions.20 For many institutions, there is a financial return that comes from course materials sales. That revenue most often goes to financial aid and tuition sustainability, student activities, or capital projects. The loss of revenue in a time of shrinking budgets, particularly revenue to support financial aid, could result in improved textbook affordability at the cost of overall educational affordability.

There are interesting opportunities on the horizon to help reduce textbook costs with digital solutions. Several institutions have found print-on-demand to be an effective way to improve affordability. Some of the open access textbook initiatives also show great promise for improving affordability, and this is an area getting much attention at state and federal levels, as well as among private investors. Most students still prefer print, however, and will often choose to pay for a print edition rather than take a digital version for free. While we expect this trend to change, universities could combine these two areas of opportunity, adding value for students while reducing textbook costs and maintaining campus financial returns.”