Today's hardware is powerful enough to let us create realistic and instructive animations of a wide area of topics. The saying 'a picture is worth a thousand words' could be extended to 'an animation is worth a thousand pictures'. But is this true?
In which areas of teaching do you avoid animations?
Michael,
I think Clark and Mayer (2011) offer some useful guidance:
"It appears that static visuals might be most effective to promote understanding of processes, whereas animated visuals may be more effective to teach hands-on procedures. Additionally, animations can serve an interpretive function when designed with special effects that reveal relationships not otherwise visible" (p. 86).
A little delayed, though I think quite helpful!
Barb
Michael,
I think Clark and Mayer (2011) offer some useful guidance:
"It appears that static visuals might be most effective to promote understanding of processes, whereas animated visuals may be more effective to teach hands-on procedures. Additionally, animations can serve an interpretive function when designed with special effects that reveal relationships not otherwise visible" (p. 86).
A little delayed, though I think quite helpful!
Barb
Thanks for your response, Barb. I've cited Clark/Mayer in a recent article on practices promoting eHealth online. It appears to me that static and animated visuals are always 'somewhat' superior to text materials. Am I misinterpreting Clark/Mayer and many other colleagues here?
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Teaching