Much of the analysis of multimedia research extending from the past few decades to the present substantiates the claim that multimedia instruction increases student learning. The research done by Stewart (1998) cites several examples, for instance, Peterson, White and Stephan (1984) who reported a 51 percent increase in learning and an 82 percent increase in retention when more than one method of presentation was used during the teaching process. They used interactive multimedia computer tutorials designed to appeal to the auditory, visual and kinesthetic senses. According to the Kahn and Janson studies (1992, cited in Stewart, 1998), with more than one sense engaged, the multimedia learning process fostered increased learning and retention.
Consistent with these research results, McDermott and Combs (1991) studied disinterested, at-risk students in various multimedia projects and proposed that its use was a factor in stopping the students' cycle of failure. Smith and Jones (1991) used multimedia to teach college chemistry and reported superior student performance and decreased institutional costs relative to traditionally taught classes. Coffin and Thurnau (1991) showed how multimedia instruction could be used to more effectively teach foreign languages by creating a cultural context for language instruction. (all cited in Stewart, 1998)
Garrett (1995) felt that Intelligent Computer Assisted Language Learning (ICALL) had the potential to individualize the learning process and to adapt to learners who varied in learning style, aptitude, skills and strategies. Not to be overlooked was the ability of the computer to record, tabulate and organize data, a feat which goes well beyond what a human can easily do.
Niemiec and Walberg (1987) and Kulik and Kulik (1987) reported the results of a meta-analysis of 199 comparative studies of traditional and multimedia instruction, 101 of which were conducted in colleges and universities. The authors wrote that each of the 199 studies analyzed "was a controlled, quantitative study that met our predefined standards for methodological adequacy" (p.4).They concluded that students learned more, and with less instructional time, in classes in which computer-assisted instruction was used. Students also responded more favorably on affective measures relative to controls.
More recently, Najjar (1996), in an effort to look past the hype and
often unsupported assertions about multimedia, examined over 200 empirical
studies. He suggested that the reason for its popularity with educators
was related to the assumption that multimedia information and instruction
helped people learn. The perception was that the application of interactive
video, audio, pictures, animation and text was more effective for learning
than traditional methods because it appealed to more senses. He reported
there were many impressive findings indicative of improved learning through
multimedia. Conditions conducive to learning are itemized in the following
references:
i) when the instruction was interactive and learner-paced, (Bosco,
1986; Fletcher; 1989, 1990; Verano, 1987)
ii) when it encouraged referential processing and dual coding (Mayer
and Anderson, 1991; Paivio, 1967, 1991; Paivio and Csapo, 1973; Severin,
1967; Nugent, 1982) ,
iii) when the media supported one another, (Bransford and Johnson,
1972; Levie and Lentz, 1982; Peeck, 1974; Winn, 1987, 1989 and Bahrick
and Gharrity, 1976)
iv) when it was presented to learners with low prior knowledge or aptitude
in the domain being learned, (Mayer 1993; Mayer and Gallini, 1990; Kunz,
Drewniak and Schott, 1989; Blake and Wardle, 1982).
He suggested, however, that some of these results may have had more to do with the extra organization and structure required for multimedia versus traditional instruction, the increased interactivity, the learner control of the learning pace and the novelty of the instruction. Najjar also cautioned about the limited number of empirical studies in this area and made reference to the fact that most design models appear to be a judgment call on the part of the designer that leave many unanswered questions about the pedagogical theory behind multimedia design.
This view had also been put forward by Park and Hannafin. (1993) They suggested that guidelines for interactive multimedia design were based not upon empirical evidence, but on the intuitive beliefs of designers. Their findings indicated that some of these programs failed to include a sound pedagogical foundation or theoretical base in terms of how a subject should be taught and what should be emphasized in a program using multimedia. They concluded that ìdesigners must expand their perspective to consider teaching and learning methods and models heretofore unfeasible or unavailable.î (p.81)
Saddy and Watson (1996) also proposed that, although software continues
to improve, there is a belief that todayís educational computer programs
are akin to ìEdutainmentî, a term used to describe the merging of entertainment
and education. They reported that many of the current educational software
packages stimulate the right side of the brain (responsible for image processing)
more so than the left side (responsible for language processing and higher-order
reasoning). Children may become overwhelmed by the visually appealing images
and neglect to learn anything of substance. According to the authors,
ìheavy use of multimedia may be building a generation of children who
are deficient in left-brain skills such as language processing.î (p. 57)
In his keynote address to educators at the 1993 Annual Conference on
Multimedia in Education and Industry , H. Dan Ellis referenced the past
50 years of computer technology use in education. He noted few successes
in the field and pondered why multimedia had people so excited. Regarding
this comparatively new phenomenon in our formal education system, he cautioned,
"It is tempting to take the view that multi-media will finally unlock
the gate separating the promise (of technology bringing about a revolution
in education) from its realization. After all, multi-media can be very
exciting, very engaging, can provide an array of sensory input...allow
free-range exploration, guided exploration, hyperbrowsing, highly structured
learning experiences, and all on relatively inexpensive technologyî.(p.1)
Yet, citing the influence of big business intent on developing affordable,
entertainment oriented multimedia, he noted, however, it is undoubtedly
here to stay. Furthermore,
"Our job, as people with learning outcomes and costs in mind, is to
try to ensure that considerable research is put into using the delivery
technology effectively.î (p.5)