Skip to main content
Log in

Considering perception and cognition in the design of an instructional software package

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An instructional multimedia software package was developed for use by students taking introductory physics courses. Studies have indicated that many of these students possess a set of common misunderstandings of graphs describing the motion of objects. The software described here was constructed as a student tool which would specifically address these difficulties. The impact of educational psychology, cognitive science, and human factors research on software design and user interface development are described. This work was supported by NSF grant MDR-9154127 with additional support from the RasterOps Corporation, Sony Corporation of America, and Apple Computer, Inc.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. R. Beichner, M. DeMarco, D. Ettestad, and E. Gleason, “VideoGraph: A new way to study kinematics,” in Computers in Physics Instruction, E. Redish and J. Risley (Ed.), Raleigh, NC: Addison-Wesley, pp. 244–245, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Personal communication with Mark Luetzelschwab, Dickinson College, June 14, 1994.

  3. Personal communication with Jack Wilson, Rennsalaer Polytechnical Institute, September 12, 1994.

  4. R. Beichner, “The Effect of Simultaneous Motion Presentation and Graph Generation in a Kinematics Lab,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 27, pp. 803–815, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. Beichner, “Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs,” American Journal of Physics, Vol 62, pp. 750–762, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  6. A. Bell, G. Brekke, and M. Swan, “Misconceptions, Conflict, and Discussion in the Teaching of Graphical Interpretation,” Paper presented at the Second International Seminar in Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  7. H. Brasell, “The effect of real-time laboratory graphing on learning graphic representations of distance and velocity,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 24, pp. 385–395, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. Clement, J. Mokros, and K. Schultz, “Adolescents' graphing skills: A descriptive analysis,” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 1986.

  9. M. Fleming, Dispalys and communication, in Instructional Technology: Foundations, R. Gagné (Ed.), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1987, pp. 233–260.

    Google Scholar 

  10. W. Hendee and P. Wells (Eds.), The Perception of Visual Information, Springer-Verlag: New York, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. Howe and E. Vasu, “The Effect of Two Modes of Sensory Input on Children's Retention and Recall,” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Atlanta, Georgia, 1990.

  12. S. Hulse, H. Egeth, and J. Deese, The Psychology of Learning (5th ed.), McGraw-Hill: New York, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  13. P. Kolers and S. Brison, “Commentary: On Pictures, Words, and Their Mental Representation,” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, Vol. 23, pp. 105–113, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  14. L. McDermott, M. Rosenquist, and E. van Zee, “Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics,” American Journal of Physics, Vol. 55, pp. 503–513, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Mokros and R. Tinker, “The impact of microcomputer-based labs on children's ability to interpret graphs,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 24, pp. 369–383, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  16. B. Perry and P. Obenauf, “The acquisition of notions of qualitative speed: The importance of spatial and temporal alignment,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 24, pp. 553–565, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  17. C. Rutkowski, “An introdution to the human applications standard computer interface, part 1: Theory and principles,” Byte, Vol. 7, No. 11, pp. 291–310, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  18. B. Shneiderman, Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  19. T. Shuell, “Cognitive Conceptions of Learning,” Review of Educational Research, Vol. 56, pp. 411–436, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  20. R. Sternberg, Mechanisms of cognitive development, Freeman: New York, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  21. R. Thornton and D. Sokoloff, “Learning motion concepts using real-time microcomputer-based laboratory tools,” American Journal of Physics, Vol. 58, pp. 858–867, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  22. E. van Zee and L. McDermott, “Investigation of student difficulties with graphical representations in physics,” Paper presented at the Second International Seminar in Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Beichner, R.J. Considering perception and cognition in the design of an instructional software package. Multimed Tools Appl 1, 173–184 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01215937

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01215937

Keywords

Navigation