{"id":260,"date":"2015-03-26T20:35:38","date_gmt":"2015-03-27T00:35:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/chapter\/7-1-thinking-about-the-pedagogical-difference-sof-media\/"},"modified":"2025-05-10T07:13:23","modified_gmt":"2025-05-10T11:13:23","slug":"7-1-thinking-about-the-pedagogical-difference-sof-media","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/chapter\/7-1-thinking-about-the-pedagogical-difference-sof-media\/","title":{"raw":"8.1 Thinking about the pedagogical differences of media","rendered":"8.1 Thinking about the pedagogical differences of media"},"content":{"raw":"&nbsp;\n\n[caption id=\"attachment_28\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"749\"]<a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=5I4rxfnCtxY&amp;list=PL9eEsN9D48mf4GGDAn1_zr-rmXv_Wmjuz&amp;index=3\"><img class=\" wp-image-259\" src=\"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2015\/03\/Caesium-in-water-copy-2-1024x578.jpg\" alt=\"Figure 9. Is slow motion a unique characteristic of video? Image: Poring mercury into liquid nitrogen: University of Nottingham Image: \" width=\"749\" height=\"348\"><\/a> Figure 8.1.1 Is slow motion a unique characteristic of video and film?<br>Image: Pouring mercury into liquid nitrogen: University of Nottingham<br>Click on image to see video[\/caption]\n<h2>8.1.1 Identifying the pedagogical differences between media<\/h2>\nIn the last chapter, I identified three core dimensions of media and technology along which any technology can be placed. In the next two chapters, I will discuss a method for deciding which media to use when teaching. In this chapter I will focus primarily on the pedagogical differences between\u00a0media. In the following\u00a0chapter I will provide a model or set of criteria to use when making decisions about media and technology for teaching.\n<h2>8.1.2 First steps<\/h2>\nEmbedded within any decision about the use of technology in education and training will be assumptions about the learning process.\u00a0We have already seen earlier in this book how different epistemological positions and theories of learning affect the design of teaching, and these influences will also determine a teacher's or an instructor's choice of appropriate media. Thus,\u00a0the first step is to decide what and how you want to teach.\n\nThis has been covered in depth through Chapters 2-5, but in summary, there are five critical questions that need to be asked about teaching and learning in order to select and use\u00a0appropriate media\/technologies:\n<ul>\n \t<li>what is my underlying epistemological position about knowledge and teaching?<\/li>\n \t<li>what are the desired learning outcomes from the teaching?<\/li>\n \t<li>what teaching methods\u00a0will be employed to facilitate the learning outcomes?<\/li>\n \t<li>what are the unique educational characteristics of each medium\/technology, and how well do these match the learning and teaching requirements?<\/li>\n \t<li>what resources are available?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nThis chapter focuses on the fourth of these questions, but they are best not asked sequentially, but in a cyclical or iterative manner, as media affordances may suggest alternative teaching methods\u00a0or even the possibility of learning outcomes that had not been initially considered.\u00a0When the unique pedagogical characteristics of different media are considered, this may lead to some changes in what content will be covered and what skills will be developed.\u00a0Therefore, at this stage, decisions on content and learning outcomes should still be tentative.\n<h2>8.1.3 Identifying the unique educational characteristics of a medium<\/h2>\nDifferent media have\u00a0different potential or 'affordances' for different types of learning. One of the\u00a0arts of teaching is often finding the best match between media and desired learning outcomes. Before exploring this relationship, I will give a\u00a0brief summary of the substantial amount of excellent past research on this topic\u00a0(see, for instance, Trenaman, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Communication-comprehension-J-M-Trenaman\/dp\/B0000CNO5B\">1967<\/a>; Olson and Bruner, 1974; Schramm, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.abebooks.co.uk\/book-search\/title\/big-media-little-media\/author\/schramm\/\">1977<\/a>; Salomon, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Interaction-Media-Cognition-Learning-Exploration\/dp\/0805815457\">1979<\/a>, 1981; Clark, <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.3102\/00346543053004445\">1983<\/a>; Bates, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Broadcasting-Education-Evaluation-Media-Studies\/dp\/009463680X\">1984<\/a>; Koumi, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.routledge.com\/Designing-Video-and-Multimedia-for-Open-and-Flexible-Learning-1st-Edition\/Koumi\/p\/book\/9780415383035\">2006<\/a>; Berk, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/228349436_Multimedia_Teaching_with_Video_Clips_TV_Movies_YouTube_and_mtvU_in_the_College_Classroom\">2009<\/a>; Mayer, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/highereducation\/books\/multimedia-learning\/FB7E79A165D24D47CEACEB4D2C426ECD#overview\">2020<\/a>).\n\nThis research has indicated that there are three core elements that need to be considered when deciding what media to use:\n<ul>\n \t<li>content;<\/li>\n \t<li>content structure;<\/li>\n \t<li>skills.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nOlson and Bruner (1974) claim\u00a0that learning involves two distinct aspects: acquiring knowledge of facts, principles, ideas, concepts, events, relationships, rules and laws; and using or working on that knowledge to develop skills. Again, this is not necessarily a sequential process. Identifying skills then working back to identify the concepts and principles needed to underpin the skills may be another valid way of working. In reality, learning content and skills development will often be integrated in any learning process. Nevertheless, when\u00a0deciding on\u00a0media use, it is useful to make a distinction between <em>content <\/em>and <em>skills.<\/em>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: left\">8.1.3.1. The representation of content<\/h3>\nMedia differ in the extent to which they can <em>represent<\/em> different kinds of content, because they vary in the symbol systems (text, sound, still pictures, moving images, etc.) that they use to encode information (Salomon, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Interaction-Media-Cognition-Learning-Exploration\/dp\/0805815457\">1979<\/a>). We saw in the previous chapter that different media are capable of combining different symbol systems.\u00a0Differences between media in the way they combine symbol systems influence the way in which different media represent content. Thus there is a difference between a direct experience, a written description, a televised recording, and a computer simulation of the same scientific experiment. Different symbol systems are being used, conveying different kinds of information about the same experiment. For instance, our concept of heat can be derived from touch, mathematical symbols (800 celsius), words (random movement of particles), animation, or observance of experiments. Our 'knowledge' of heat is as a result not static, but developmental. A large part of learning requires the mental integration of content acquired through different media and symbol systems. For this reason, deeper understanding of a concept or an idea is often the result of the\u00a0integration of content derived from a variety of media sources (Mayer, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/highereducation\/books\/multimedia-learning\/FB7E79A165D24D47CEACEB4D2C426ECD#overview\">2020<\/a>).\n\nMedia also differ in their ability to handle <em>concrete<\/em> or <em>abstract<\/em> knowledge. Abstract knowledge is handled primarily through language. While all media can handle language, either in written or spoken form, media vary in their ability to represent concrete knowledge. For instance, television can show concrete examples of abstract concepts, the video showing the concrete \u2018event\u2019, and the sound track analyzing the event in abstract terms. Well-designed media can help learners move from the concrete to the abstract and back again, once more leading to deeper understanding.\n<h3 style=\"text-align: left\">8.1.3.2\u00a0Content structure<\/h3>\nMedia also differ in the way they <em>structure<\/em> content. Books, the telephone, radio, podcasts\u00a0and face-to-face teaching all tend to present content linearly or sequentially. While these media can represent\u00a0parallel activities\u00a0(for example, in print, different chapters may deal with events that occur\u00a0simultaneously but from different perspectives) such activities still have to be presented sequentially.\u00a0Computers and television are more able to present or simulate the inter-relationship of multiple variables simultaneously occurring. Virtual reality is an exceptionally powerful example of this. Computers can also handle branching or alternative routes through information, but usually\u00a0within closely defined limits.\n\nSubject matter varies a great deal\u00a0in the way in which information needs to be structured. Subject areas (for example, natural sciences, history) structure content in particular ways determined by the internal logic of the subject discipline. This structure may be very tight or logical, requiring particular sequences or relationships between different concepts, or very open or loose, requiring learners to deal with highly complex material in an open-ended or intuitive way.\n\nIf media then vary both in the way they present information symbolically and in the way they handle the structures required within different subject areas, media which best match the required mode of presentation and the dominant structure of the subject matter need to be selected. Consequently, different subject areas will require a different balance of media. This means that subject experts should be deeply involved in decisions about the choice and use of media, to ensure that the chosen media appropriately match the presentational and structural requirements of the subject matter.\n<h3 style=\"text-align: left\">8.1.3.3\u00a0The development of skills<\/h3>\nMedia\u00a0also differ in the extent to which they can help develop different skills. Skills can range from intellectual to psychomotor to affective (emotions, feelings). Koumi (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.tandfonline.com\/doi\/full\/10.1080\/2331186X.2015.1045218\">2015<\/a>) has used Krathwohl's (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.depauw.edu\/files\/resources\/krathwohl.pdf\">2002<\/a>) revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Learning Objectives (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.uky.edu\/~rsand1\/china2018\/texts\/Bloom%20et%20al%20-Taxonomy%20of%20Educational%20Objectives.pdf\">1956<\/a>) to assign affordances of text and video to learning objectives using Krathwold's classification of learning objectives.\n<p style=\"text-align: left\"><em>Comprehension<\/em> is likely to be the minimal level of intellectual learning outcome for most education courses. Some researchers (for example, Marton and S\u00e4lj\u00f6, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ed.ac.uk\/institute-academic-development\/learning-teaching\/staff\/advice\/researching\/publications\/experience-of-learning\">1976<\/a>) make a distinction between surface and deep comprehension. At the highest level of skills comes the <em>application<\/em> of what one has comprehended to new situations. Here it becomes necessary to develop skills of analysis, evaluation, and problem solving.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Thus a first step is to identify learning objectives or outcomes, in terms of both content and skills, while being aware that the use of some media may result in new possibilities in terms of learning outcomes.<\/p>\n\n<h2 style=\"text-align: left\">8.1.4\u00a0Pedagogical affordances - or unique media characteristics?<\/h2>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">'Affordances' is a term originally developed by the psychologist James Gibson (<a href=\"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1002\/bs.3830260313\">1977<\/a>) to describe the perceived possibilities of an object in relation to its environment (for example,\u00a0a door knob suggests to a user that it should be turned\u00a0or pulled, while a flat plate on a door suggests that it should be pushed.). The term has been appropriated by\u00a0a number of fields, including instructional design and human-machine interaction.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Thus the pedagogical affordances of a medium\u00a0relate to the possibilities of using that medium for specific teaching purposes.\u00a0It should be noted that an affordance depends on the subjective interpretation of the user (in this case a teacher or instructor), and it is often possible to use a medium in ways that are not unique to that medium. For instance video can be used for recording and delivering a lecture. In that sense there is a similarity in at least one affordance for a\u00a0lecture and a video. Also students may choose not to use a medium in the way intended by the instructor. For instance, Bates and Gallagher (1977) found that some social science students objected to documentary-style television programs requiring application of knowledge or analysis rather than presentation of concepts.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Others (such as myself) have used the term 'unique characteristics' of a medium rather than affordances, since 'unique characteristics'\u00a0suggest that there are\u00a0particular uses of a\u00a0medium that are less easily replicated by other media, and hence act as a better discriminator in selecting and using media. For instance, using video to demonstrate in slow motion a mechanical process is much more difficult (but not impossible) to replicate in other media. In what follows, my focus is more on unique or particular rather than general affordances of each medium, although the subjective and flexible nature of media interpretation makes it difficult to come to any hard and fast conclusions.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">I will now attempt in the next\u00a0sections to identify some of the unique pedagogical characteristics of the following media:<\/p>\n\n<ul>\n \t<li style=\"text-align: left\">text;<\/li>\n \t<li style=\"text-align: left\">audio;<\/li>\n \t<li style=\"text-align: left\">video;<\/li>\n \t<li style=\"text-align: left\">computing;<\/li>\n \t<li style=\"text-align: left\">social media<\/li>\n \t<li style=\"text-align: left\">emerging technologies, in particular, virtual\/augmented reality, serious games and artificial intelligence.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nTechnically, face-to-face teaching should also be considered a medium, but I will look specifically at the unique characteristics\u00a0of face-to-face teaching in <a href=\"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/part\/chapter-10-modes-of-delivery\/\">Chapter 11<\/a>, where I discuss different modes of delivery.\n<h2>8.1.5\u00a0Purpose of the exercise<\/h2>\nBefore starting on the analysis of different media, it is important to understand my goals in this chapter. I am NOT trying to provide a definitive list of the unique pedagogical characteristics of each medium. Because context is so important and because the science is not strong enough to identify unequivocally such characteristics, I am suggesting in\u00a0the following sections <em>a way of thinking<\/em> about the pedagogical affordances of different media. To do this, I will identify what I think are the most important pedagogical characteristics of each medium.\n\nHowever, individual readers may well come to different conclusions, depending particularly on the subject area in which they are working.\u00a0The important point is for teachers and instructors to think about what each medium could contribute\u00a0educationally within their subject area, and that requires a strong understanding of both the needs of their students and the nature of their subject area, as well as the key pedagogical features of each medium.\n<h2>8.1.6 A shaggy dog story about media affordances<\/h2>\nListen to the podcast below for an illustration of the differences between media.\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Podcast 8.1 Click play on the above podcast (41 seconds).<\/p>\n[audio mp3=\"http:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/teachinginadigitalage\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2015\/04\/Tony-Shaggy-dog-1.mp3\"][\/audio]\n<h2>References<\/h2>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Bates, A. (1984)\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Broadcasting-Education-Evaluation-Media-Studies\/dp\/009463680X\"><em>Broadcasting in Education: An Evaluation<\/em><\/a>\u00a0London: Constables<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Bates, A. and Gallagher, M. (1977) <em>Improving the Effectiveness of Open University Television Case-Studies and Documentaries<\/em> Milton Keynes: The Open University, I.E.T. Papers on Broadcasting, No. 77 (out of print - copies available from tony.bates@ubc.ca)<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Berk, R.A. (2009) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/228349436_Multimedia_Teaching_with_Video_Clips_TV_Movies_YouTube_and_mtvU_in_the_College_Classroom\">Multimedia teaching with video clips: TV, movies, YouTube and mtvU in the college classroom<\/a>, <em>International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning<\/em>, Vol. 91, No. 5<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Bloom, B. S.; Engelhart, M. D.; Furst, E. J.; Hill, W. H.;\u00a0Krathwohl, D. R<a title=\"David Krathwohl\" href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/David_Krathwohl\">.<\/a>\u00a0(1956).\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.reden.ch\/f7info\/infolisten\/zb_did_meth_bloom_01s.pdf\"><em>Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals<\/em><em>. Handbook I: Cognitive domain.<\/em><\/a> New York: David McKay Company<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Clark, R. (1983) <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.3102\/00346543053004445\">Reconsidering research on learning from media<\/a> <em>Review of Educational Research<\/em>, Vol. 53. No. 4<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\"><span class=\"reference-text\">Gibson, J.J. \u00a0(1979)\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1002\/bs.3830260313\"><i>The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception <\/i><\/a>Boston: Houghton Mifflin<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Koumi, J. (2006)\u00a0<em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.routledge.com\/Designing-Video-and-Multimedia-for-Open-and-Flexible-Learning-1st-Edition\/Koumi\/p\/book\/9780415383035\">Designing video and multimedia for open and flexible learning<\/a>. <\/em>London:<em>\u00a0<\/em>Routledge.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Koumi, J. (2015)\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.tandfonline.com\/doi\/full\/10.1080\/2331186X.2015.1045218\">Learning outcomes afforded by self-assessed, segmented video-print combinations<\/a> <em>Cogent Education<\/em>, Vol. 2, No.1<\/p>\nKrathwohl, D.R. (2002) <em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.depauw.edu\/files\/resources\/krathwohl.pdf\">A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview<\/a>\u00a0<\/em><span style=\"text-align: initial;text-indent: 2em;font-size: 14pt\">in\u00a0<\/span><em style=\"text-align: initial;text-indent: 2em;font-size: 14pt\">Theory into Practice, <\/em><span style=\"text-align: initial;text-indent: 2em;font-size: 14pt\">Vol. 41, No. 4,\u00a0 College of Education, The Ohio State University.\u00a0<\/span>\n\nMarton, F. and S\u00e4lj\u00f6, R. (1997) Approaches to learning, in\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.worldcat.org\/title\/experience-of-learning\/oclc\/12123325\"><em>Marton, F.,\u00a0Hounsell, D. and Entwistle, N. (eds.) The experience of learning<\/em><\/a><a href=\"http:\/\/www.ed.ac.uk\/schools-departments\/institute-academic-development\/learning-teaching\/staff\/advice\/researching\/publications\/experience-of-learning\"><em>:<\/em><\/a> Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Mayer, R. E. (2020) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/highereducation\/books\/multimedia-learning\/FB7E79A165D24D47CEACEB4D2C426ECD#overview\"><em>Multimedia learning<\/em> (3rd ed)<\/a>. New York: Cambridge University Press<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Olson, D. and Bruner, J. (1974) 'Learning through experience and learning through media', in Olson, D. (ed.) <em>Media and Symbols: the Forms of Expression<\/em> Chicago: University of Chicago Press (out of print)<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Salomon, G. (1979) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Interaction-Media-Cognition-Learning-Exploration\/dp\/0805815457\"><em>Interaction of Media, Cognition and Learning<\/em><\/a> San Francisco: Jossey-Bass<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Salomon, G. (1981) <em>Communication and Education<\/em> Beverly Hills CA\/London: Sage (out of print)<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Schramm, W. (1977) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.abebooks.co.uk\/book-search\/title\/big-media-little-media\/author\/schramm\/\"><em>Big Media, Little Media<\/em><\/a> Beverly Hills CA\/London: Sage<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Trenaman, J. (1967) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Communication-comprehension-J-M-Trenaman\/dp\/B0000CNO5B\"><em>Communication and Comprehension<\/em><\/a> London: Longmans<\/p>\n\n<div class=\"textbox exercises\">\n<h3>Activity 8.1 Thinking about the pedagogical differences between media<\/h3>\n<ol>\n \t<li>Examine one of your lessons or courses.\n<ul>\n \t<li>Can you think of content that would best be presented through video or audio rather than through talking or text? What content is still better offered through talking or a textbook? What are your reasons? Are they pedagogical or for other reasons?<\/li>\n \t<li>can you think of a skill that you are teaching that could be better developed by students through the use of media that you are not currently using?<\/li>\n \t<li>can you think of new learning outcomes that you could achieve through the use of media?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nThere is no feedback from me on this activity, but the following chapter may help.\n\n<\/div>","rendered":"<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_28\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-28\" style=\"width: 749px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=5I4rxfnCtxY&amp;list=PL9eEsN9D48mf4GGDAn1_zr-rmXv_Wmjuz&amp;index=3\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-259\" src=\"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2015\/03\/Caesium-in-water-copy-2-1024x578.jpg\" alt=\"Figure 9. Is slow motion a unique characteristic of video? Image: Poring mercury into liquid nitrogen: University of Nottingham Image:\" width=\"749\" height=\"348\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-28\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Figure 8.1.1 Is slow motion a unique characteristic of video and film?<br \/>Image: Pouring mercury into liquid nitrogen: University of Nottingham<br \/>Click on image to see video<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<h2>8.1.1 Identifying the pedagogical differences between media<\/h2>\n<p>In the last chapter, I identified three core dimensions of media and technology along which any technology can be placed. In the next two chapters, I will discuss a method for deciding which media to use when teaching. In this chapter I will focus primarily on the pedagogical differences between\u00a0media. In the following\u00a0chapter I will provide a model or set of criteria to use when making decisions about media and technology for teaching.<\/p>\n<h2>8.1.2 First steps<\/h2>\n<p>Embedded within any decision about the use of technology in education and training will be assumptions about the learning process.\u00a0We have already seen earlier in this book how different epistemological positions and theories of learning affect the design of teaching, and these influences will also determine a teacher&#8217;s or an instructor&#8217;s choice of appropriate media. Thus,\u00a0the first step is to decide what and how you want to teach.<\/p>\n<p>This has been covered in depth through Chapters 2-5, but in summary, there are five critical questions that need to be asked about teaching and learning in order to select and use\u00a0appropriate media\/technologies:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>what is my underlying epistemological position about knowledge and teaching?<\/li>\n<li>what are the desired learning outcomes from the teaching?<\/li>\n<li>what teaching methods\u00a0will be employed to facilitate the learning outcomes?<\/li>\n<li>what are the unique educational characteristics of each medium\/technology, and how well do these match the learning and teaching requirements?<\/li>\n<li>what resources are available?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>This chapter focuses on the fourth of these questions, but they are best not asked sequentially, but in a cyclical or iterative manner, as media affordances may suggest alternative teaching methods\u00a0or even the possibility of learning outcomes that had not been initially considered.\u00a0When the unique pedagogical characteristics of different media are considered, this may lead to some changes in what content will be covered and what skills will be developed.\u00a0Therefore, at this stage, decisions on content and learning outcomes should still be tentative.<\/p>\n<h2>8.1.3 Identifying the unique educational characteristics of a medium<\/h2>\n<p>Different media have\u00a0different potential or &#8216;affordances&#8217; for different types of learning. One of the\u00a0arts of teaching is often finding the best match between media and desired learning outcomes. Before exploring this relationship, I will give a\u00a0brief summary of the substantial amount of excellent past research on this topic\u00a0(see, for instance, Trenaman, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Communication-comprehension-J-M-Trenaman\/dp\/B0000CNO5B\">1967<\/a>; Olson and Bruner, 1974; Schramm, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.abebooks.co.uk\/book-search\/title\/big-media-little-media\/author\/schramm\/\">1977<\/a>; Salomon, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Interaction-Media-Cognition-Learning-Exploration\/dp\/0805815457\">1979<\/a>, 1981; Clark, <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.3102\/00346543053004445\">1983<\/a>; Bates, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Broadcasting-Education-Evaluation-Media-Studies\/dp\/009463680X\">1984<\/a>; Koumi, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.routledge.com\/Designing-Video-and-Multimedia-for-Open-and-Flexible-Learning-1st-Edition\/Koumi\/p\/book\/9780415383035\">2006<\/a>; Berk, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/228349436_Multimedia_Teaching_with_Video_Clips_TV_Movies_YouTube_and_mtvU_in_the_College_Classroom\">2009<\/a>; Mayer, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/highereducation\/books\/multimedia-learning\/FB7E79A165D24D47CEACEB4D2C426ECD#overview\">2020<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p>This research has indicated that there are three core elements that need to be considered when deciding what media to use:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>content;<\/li>\n<li>content structure;<\/li>\n<li>skills.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Olson and Bruner (1974) claim\u00a0that learning involves two distinct aspects: acquiring knowledge of facts, principles, ideas, concepts, events, relationships, rules and laws; and using or working on that knowledge to develop skills. Again, this is not necessarily a sequential process. Identifying skills then working back to identify the concepts and principles needed to underpin the skills may be another valid way of working. In reality, learning content and skills development will often be integrated in any learning process. Nevertheless, when\u00a0deciding on\u00a0media use, it is useful to make a distinction between <em>content <\/em>and <em>skills.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: left\">8.1.3.1. The representation of content<\/h3>\n<p>Media differ in the extent to which they can <em>represent<\/em> different kinds of content, because they vary in the symbol systems (text, sound, still pictures, moving images, etc.) that they use to encode information (Salomon, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Interaction-Media-Cognition-Learning-Exploration\/dp\/0805815457\">1979<\/a>). We saw in the previous chapter that different media are capable of combining different symbol systems.\u00a0Differences between media in the way they combine symbol systems influence the way in which different media represent content. Thus there is a difference between a direct experience, a written description, a televised recording, and a computer simulation of the same scientific experiment. Different symbol systems are being used, conveying different kinds of information about the same experiment. For instance, our concept of heat can be derived from touch, mathematical symbols (800 celsius), words (random movement of particles), animation, or observance of experiments. Our &#8216;knowledge&#8217; of heat is as a result not static, but developmental. A large part of learning requires the mental integration of content acquired through different media and symbol systems. For this reason, deeper understanding of a concept or an idea is often the result of the\u00a0integration of content derived from a variety of media sources (Mayer, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/highereducation\/books\/multimedia-learning\/FB7E79A165D24D47CEACEB4D2C426ECD#overview\">2020<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p>Media also differ in their ability to handle <em>concrete<\/em> or <em>abstract<\/em> knowledge. Abstract knowledge is handled primarily through language. While all media can handle language, either in written or spoken form, media vary in their ability to represent concrete knowledge. For instance, television can show concrete examples of abstract concepts, the video showing the concrete \u2018event\u2019, and the sound track analyzing the event in abstract terms. Well-designed media can help learners move from the concrete to the abstract and back again, once more leading to deeper understanding.<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: left\">8.1.3.2\u00a0Content structure<\/h3>\n<p>Media also differ in the way they <em>structure<\/em> content. Books, the telephone, radio, podcasts\u00a0and face-to-face teaching all tend to present content linearly or sequentially. While these media can represent\u00a0parallel activities\u00a0(for example, in print, different chapters may deal with events that occur\u00a0simultaneously but from different perspectives) such activities still have to be presented sequentially.\u00a0Computers and television are more able to present or simulate the inter-relationship of multiple variables simultaneously occurring. Virtual reality is an exceptionally powerful example of this. Computers can also handle branching or alternative routes through information, but usually\u00a0within closely defined limits.<\/p>\n<p>Subject matter varies a great deal\u00a0in the way in which information needs to be structured. Subject areas (for example, natural sciences, history) structure content in particular ways determined by the internal logic of the subject discipline. This structure may be very tight or logical, requiring particular sequences or relationships between different concepts, or very open or loose, requiring learners to deal with highly complex material in an open-ended or intuitive way.<\/p>\n<p>If media then vary both in the way they present information symbolically and in the way they handle the structures required within different subject areas, media which best match the required mode of presentation and the dominant structure of the subject matter need to be selected. Consequently, different subject areas will require a different balance of media. This means that subject experts should be deeply involved in decisions about the choice and use of media, to ensure that the chosen media appropriately match the presentational and structural requirements of the subject matter.<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: left\">8.1.3.3\u00a0The development of skills<\/h3>\n<p>Media\u00a0also differ in the extent to which they can help develop different skills. Skills can range from intellectual to psychomotor to affective (emotions, feelings). Koumi (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.tandfonline.com\/doi\/full\/10.1080\/2331186X.2015.1045218\">2015<\/a>) has used Krathwohl&#8217;s (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.depauw.edu\/files\/resources\/krathwohl.pdf\">2002<\/a>) revision of Bloom&#8217;s Taxonomy of Learning Objectives (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.uky.edu\/~rsand1\/china2018\/texts\/Bloom%20et%20al%20-Taxonomy%20of%20Educational%20Objectives.pdf\">1956<\/a>) to assign affordances of text and video to learning objectives using Krathwold&#8217;s classification of learning objectives.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\"><em>Comprehension<\/em> is likely to be the minimal level of intellectual learning outcome for most education courses. Some researchers (for example, Marton and S\u00e4lj\u00f6, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ed.ac.uk\/institute-academic-development\/learning-teaching\/staff\/advice\/researching\/publications\/experience-of-learning\">1976<\/a>) make a distinction between surface and deep comprehension. At the highest level of skills comes the <em>application<\/em> of what one has comprehended to new situations. Here it becomes necessary to develop skills of analysis, evaluation, and problem solving.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Thus a first step is to identify learning objectives or outcomes, in terms of both content and skills, while being aware that the use of some media may result in new possibilities in terms of learning outcomes.<\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: left\">8.1.4\u00a0Pedagogical affordances &#8211; or unique media characteristics?<\/h2>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">&#8216;Affordances&#8217; is a term originally developed by the psychologist James Gibson (<a href=\"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1002\/bs.3830260313\">1977<\/a>) to describe the perceived possibilities of an object in relation to its environment (for example,\u00a0a door knob suggests to a user that it should be turned\u00a0or pulled, while a flat plate on a door suggests that it should be pushed.). The term has been appropriated by\u00a0a number of fields, including instructional design and human-machine interaction.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Thus the pedagogical affordances of a medium\u00a0relate to the possibilities of using that medium for specific teaching purposes.\u00a0It should be noted that an affordance depends on the subjective interpretation of the user (in this case a teacher or instructor), and it is often possible to use a medium in ways that are not unique to that medium. For instance video can be used for recording and delivering a lecture. In that sense there is a similarity in at least one affordance for a\u00a0lecture and a video. Also students may choose not to use a medium in the way intended by the instructor. For instance, Bates and Gallagher (1977) found that some social science students objected to documentary-style television programs requiring application of knowledge or analysis rather than presentation of concepts.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Others (such as myself) have used the term &#8216;unique characteristics&#8217; of a medium rather than affordances, since &#8216;unique characteristics&#8217;\u00a0suggest that there are\u00a0particular uses of a\u00a0medium that are less easily replicated by other media, and hence act as a better discriminator in selecting and using media. For instance, using video to demonstrate in slow motion a mechanical process is much more difficult (but not impossible) to replicate in other media. In what follows, my focus is more on unique or particular rather than general affordances of each medium, although the subjective and flexible nature of media interpretation makes it difficult to come to any hard and fast conclusions.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">I will now attempt in the next\u00a0sections to identify some of the unique pedagogical characteristics of the following media:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: left\">text;<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: left\">audio;<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: left\">video;<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: left\">computing;<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: left\">social media<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: left\">emerging technologies, in particular, virtual\/augmented reality, serious games and artificial intelligence.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Technically, face-to-face teaching should also be considered a medium, but I will look specifically at the unique characteristics\u00a0of face-to-face teaching in <a href=\"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/part\/chapter-10-modes-of-delivery\/\">Chapter 11<\/a>, where I discuss different modes of delivery.<\/p>\n<h2>8.1.5\u00a0Purpose of the exercise<\/h2>\n<p>Before starting on the analysis of different media, it is important to understand my goals in this chapter. I am NOT trying to provide a definitive list of the unique pedagogical characteristics of each medium. Because context is so important and because the science is not strong enough to identify unequivocally such characteristics, I am suggesting in\u00a0the following sections <em>a way of thinking<\/em> about the pedagogical affordances of different media. To do this, I will identify what I think are the most important pedagogical characteristics of each medium.<\/p>\n<p>However, individual readers may well come to different conclusions, depending particularly on the subject area in which they are working.\u00a0The important point is for teachers and instructors to think about what each medium could contribute\u00a0educationally within their subject area, and that requires a strong understanding of both the needs of their students and the nature of their subject area, as well as the key pedagogical features of each medium.<\/p>\n<h2>8.1.6 A shaggy dog story about media affordances<\/h2>\n<p>Listen to the podcast below for an illustration of the differences between media.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Podcast 8.1 Click play on the above podcast (41 seconds).<\/p>\n<p><audio class=\"wp-audio-shortcode\" id=\"audio-260-1\" preload=\"none\" style=\"width: 100%;\" controls=\"controls\"><source type=\"audio\/mpeg\" src=\"http:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/teachinginadigitalage\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2015\/04\/Tony-Shaggy-dog-1.mp3?_=1\" \/><a href=\"http:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/teachinginadigitalage\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2015\/04\/Tony-Shaggy-dog-1.mp3\">http:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/teachinginadigitalage\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2015\/04\/Tony-Shaggy-dog-1.mp3<\/a><\/audio><\/p>\n<h2>References<\/h2>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Bates, A. (1984)\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Broadcasting-Education-Evaluation-Media-Studies\/dp\/009463680X\"><em>Broadcasting in Education: An Evaluation<\/em><\/a>\u00a0London: Constables<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Bates, A. and Gallagher, M. (1977) <em>Improving the Effectiveness of Open University Television Case-Studies and Documentaries<\/em> Milton Keynes: The Open University, I.E.T. Papers on Broadcasting, No. 77 (out of print &#8211; copies available from tony.bates@ubc.ca)<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Berk, R.A. (2009) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/228349436_Multimedia_Teaching_with_Video_Clips_TV_Movies_YouTube_and_mtvU_in_the_College_Classroom\">Multimedia teaching with video clips: TV, movies, YouTube and mtvU in the college classroom<\/a>, <em>International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning<\/em>, Vol. 91, No. 5<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Bloom, B. S.; Engelhart, M. D.; Furst, E. J.; Hill, W. H.;\u00a0Krathwohl, D. R<a title=\"David Krathwohl\" href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/David_Krathwohl\">.<\/a>\u00a0(1956).\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.reden.ch\/f7info\/infolisten\/zb_did_meth_bloom_01s.pdf\"><em>Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals<\/em><em>. Handbook I: Cognitive domain.<\/em><\/a> New York: David McKay Company<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Clark, R. (1983) <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.3102\/00346543053004445\">Reconsidering research on learning from media<\/a> <em>Review of Educational Research<\/em>, Vol. 53. No. 4<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\"><span class=\"reference-text\">Gibson, J.J. \u00a0(1979)\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1002\/bs.3830260313\"><i>The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception <\/i><\/a>Boston: Houghton Mifflin<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Koumi, J. (2006)\u00a0<em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.routledge.com\/Designing-Video-and-Multimedia-for-Open-and-Flexible-Learning-1st-Edition\/Koumi\/p\/book\/9780415383035\">Designing video and multimedia for open and flexible learning<\/a>. <\/em>London:<em>\u00a0<\/em>Routledge.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Koumi, J. (2015)\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.tandfonline.com\/doi\/full\/10.1080\/2331186X.2015.1045218\">Learning outcomes afforded by self-assessed, segmented video-print combinations<\/a> <em>Cogent Education<\/em>, Vol. 2, No.1<\/p>\n<p>Krathwohl, D.R. (2002) <em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.depauw.edu\/files\/resources\/krathwohl.pdf\">A Revision of Bloom&#8217;s Taxonomy: An Overview<\/a>\u00a0<\/em><span style=\"text-align: initial;text-indent: 2em;font-size: 14pt\">in\u00a0<\/span><em style=\"text-align: initial;text-indent: 2em;font-size: 14pt\">Theory into Practice, <\/em><span style=\"text-align: initial;text-indent: 2em;font-size: 14pt\">Vol. 41, No. 4,\u00a0 College of Education, The Ohio State University.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Marton, F. and S\u00e4lj\u00f6, R. (1997) Approaches to learning, in\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.worldcat.org\/title\/experience-of-learning\/oclc\/12123325\"><em>Marton, F.,\u00a0Hounsell, D. and Entwistle, N. (eds.) The experience of learning<\/em><\/a><a href=\"http:\/\/www.ed.ac.uk\/schools-departments\/institute-academic-development\/learning-teaching\/staff\/advice\/researching\/publications\/experience-of-learning\"><em>:<\/em><\/a> Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Mayer, R. E. (2020) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/highereducation\/books\/multimedia-learning\/FB7E79A165D24D47CEACEB4D2C426ECD#overview\"><em>Multimedia learning<\/em> (3rd ed)<\/a>. New York: Cambridge University Press<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Olson, D. and Bruner, J. (1974) &#8216;Learning through experience and learning through media&#8217;, in Olson, D. (ed.) <em>Media and Symbols: the Forms of Expression<\/em> Chicago: University of Chicago Press (out of print)<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Salomon, G. (1979) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Interaction-Media-Cognition-Learning-Exploration\/dp\/0805815457\"><em>Interaction of Media, Cognition and Learning<\/em><\/a> San Francisco: Jossey-Bass<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Salomon, G. (1981) <em>Communication and Education<\/em> Beverly Hills CA\/London: Sage (out of print)<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Schramm, W. (1977) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.abebooks.co.uk\/book-search\/title\/big-media-little-media\/author\/schramm\/\"><em>Big Media, Little Media<\/em><\/a> Beverly Hills CA\/London: Sage<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Trenaman, J. (1967) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Communication-comprehension-J-M-Trenaman\/dp\/B0000CNO5B\"><em>Communication and Comprehension<\/em><\/a> London: Longmans<\/p>\n<div class=\"textbox exercises\">\n<h3>Activity 8.1 Thinking about the pedagogical differences between media<\/h3>\n<ol>\n<li>Examine one of your lessons or courses.\n<ul>\n<li>Can you think of content that would best be presented through video or audio rather than through talking or text? What content is still better offered through talking or a textbook? What are your reasons? Are they pedagogical or for other reasons?<\/li>\n<li>can you think of a skill that you are teaching that could be better developed by students through the use of media that you are not currently using?<\/li>\n<li>can you think of new learning outcomes that you could achieve through the use of media?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>There is no feedback from me on this activity, but the following chapter may help.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"media-attributions clear\" prefix:cc=\"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/ns#\" prefix:dc=\"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/\"><h2>Media Attributions<\/h2><ul><li >Caesium in water copy 2       <\/li><\/ul><\/div>","protected":false},"author":1,"menu_order":1,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-260","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":258,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/260","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/260\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":261,"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/260\/revisions\/261"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/258"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/260\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=260"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=260"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=260"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/teachinginadigitalagev3m\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=260"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}