Abstract
Slowmation and blended media are two ways for school and university students to engage with science content by making their own digital representations to explain science. A slowmation is a 3–5 min narrated stop motion animation and was first created in 2005 by the chapter author as a new way for students to represent content. It is a relatively simple way for students to make an animation using their own technology. Blended media was created in 2012 by the chapter author and is an extension of slowmation whereby students’ digital explanation can be enhanced by including media created by others in the form of still images from Google Images and video from YouTube. The nature of the learning in both slowmation and blended media involves students making multiple decisions to create a “learning system” whereby knowledge in the representations build upon each other and cumulate to produce a multimodal digital explanation of science. This engagement and learning can be further enhanced by displaying the media product for others to provide feedback on accuracy and improvement. Both slowmation and blended media are underpinned by the “self-explanation effect” whereby a good way to learn a concept is to explain it others using student-generated digital media.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M., & Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environments. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 475–488). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Chan, M. S., & Black, J. B. (2005). When can animation improve learning? Some implications for human computer interaction and learning. In Proceedings of world conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications (pp. 2581–2588). Norfolk, VA: AACE.
Chang, H., Quintana, C., & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). The impact of designing and evaluating molecular animations on how well middle school students understand the particulate nature of matter. Science Education, 94, 73–94.
Chi, M., De Leeuw, N., & Chiu, M. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477.
Clark, D., & Jorde, D. (2004). Helping students to revise disruptive experientially supported ideas about thermodynamics: Computer visualizations and tactile models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 1–23.
Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, action and knowing: Towards an ecological psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum.
Gilbert, J. (2007). Visualization. In J. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualisation in science education (pp. 9–27). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Hoban, G. (2002). Teacher learning for educational change: A systems thinking approach. Buckingham, UK/Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Hoban, G. (2005). From claymation to slowmation: A teaching procedure to develop students’ science understandings. Teaching Science, 51(2), 26–30.
Hoban, G., Loughran, J., & Nielsen, W. (2011). Slowmation: Preservice primary teachers representing science knowledge through creating multimodal digital animations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching., 48(9), 985–1009.
Hoban, G., & Nielsen, W. (2011). The Five Rs: A new teaching approach to encourage slowmations of science concepts. Teaching Science, 56(3), 33–38.
Hoban, G., & Nielsen, W. (2012). Using “Slowmation” to enable preservice primary teachers to create multimodal representations of science concepts. Research in Science Education, 42(6), 1101–1119.
Hoban, G., & Nielsen, W. (2013). Learning science through creating a “Slowmation”: A case study of preservice primary teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 35(1), 119–146.
Hoban, G., Nielsen, W., & Shepherd, A. (Eds.). (2016). Student-generated digital media in science education: Leaning, explaining and communicating science. London: Routledge.
Hubscher-Younger, T., & Hari Narayanan, N. (2008). Turning the tables: Investigating characteristics and efficacy of student-authored animations and multimedia. In R. Lowe & W. Schnotz (Eds.), Learning with animation: Research implications for design (pp. 235–259). New York: Cambridge University.
Jonassen, D., Myers, J., & McKillop, M. (1996). From constructivism to constructionism: Learning with hypermedia/multimedia rather than from it. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments (pp. 93–106). Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Jones, A., & Issroff, K. (2007). Motivation and mobile devices. Research in Learning Technologies, 15(3), 247–258.
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.
Lambert, J. (2003). Digital storytelling: Capturing lives, creating community. Berkley, CA: Digital Diner Express.
Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Linn, M., & Eylon, B. (2011). Science learning and instruction: Taking advantage of technology to promote knowledge integration. New York/London: Routledge.
Marbach-Ad, G., Rotbain, Y., & Stavy, R. (2008). Using computer animation and illustration activities to improve high school students’ achievement in molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 273–292.
McClune, B., & Jarman, R. (2010). Critical reading of science-based news reports: Establishing a knowledge, skills and attitudes framework. International Journal of Science Education, 32(6), 727–752.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Science literacy: Concepts, contexts, and consequences. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards (National committee on science education standards). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Nielsen, W., & Hoban, G. (2015). Designing a digital teaching resource to explain phases of the moon: A case study of preservice teachers making a slowmation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(9), 1207–1233.
Prain, V. (2006). Learning from writing in secondary science: Some theoretical and practical implications. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 179–201.
Reid, G., & Norris, S. (2016). Scientific media education in the classroom and beyond: A research agenda for the next decade. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(1), 147–166.
Schank, P., & Kozma, R. (2002). Learning chemistry through the use of a representation-based knowledge building environment. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21, 253–279.
Sperling, R., Seyedmonir, M., Aleksic, M., & Meadows, G. (2003). Animations as learning tools in authentic science materials. International Journal of Instructional Media, 30(2), 213–221.
Tversky, B., Morrison, J., & Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57(4), 247–262.
Tytler, R. (2008). Re-imagining science education. Melbourne, VIC: ACER.
Yore, L., & Hand, B. (2010). Epilogue: Plotting a research agenda for multiple representations, multiple modality, and multimodal representational competency. Research in Science Education, 40, 93–101.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hoban, G. (2020). Slowmation and Blended Media: Engaging Students in a Learning System when Creating Student-Generated Animations. In: Unsworth, L. (eds) Learning from Animations in Science Education. Innovations in Science Education and Technology, vol 25. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56047-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56047-8_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-56046-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-56047-8
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)