Improving audio in e-learning

Several months back when a client came to us and asked, “Does audio in e-learning improve the learning process?” our initial reaction was that finding the research would be a no-brainer. Surprisingly however, finding the evidence-based research proved trickier than anticipated. In short, the answer is “Yes, it can improve the cognitive process” and the evidence exists.

But the evidence presented below isn’t enough as we are sure you will agree. There isn’t any evidence demonstrating in detail how audio can be used effectively. Nor is there any published material on what to avoid, and why.

The word ‘education’ comes from the Latin ‘ex’ meaning ‘out’ and ‘duco’ meaning ‘I lead.’ The principles behind e-learning are exactly the same: the tools are merely guides that aid the cognitive process – the learning is done by the individual, the one leading.

In an interview at the ALT Conference in August 2008, Dr. Itiel Dror asserts that instructional tools are there to aid the learning process: “When technology-enhanced learning is based on the brain and cognitive system and focuses on the learner, it becomes a fantastic instrument to achieve better learning. We have to remember that it’s what students learn that counts, not what you teach! Successful learning is achieved when the cognitive system acquires information and stores it for future use. If teaching is not carried out in the most effective way, students may not acquire information or be able to remember or apply it appropriately.”

Adding multiple senses, in this case sight and hearing, to the learning process improves problem solving. Janet Clarey, a senior researcher at Brandon Hall, writes that researchers recommended the use of spoken rather than printed words in multimedia messages containing graphics with related descriptive words. The animation + narration groups generated between 41 – 114% more solutions than the animation + onscreen text group, even though both groups received identical animation and words.

Clarey goes on to comment on the critics of audio who argue that productivity would be reduced since listening takes longer than reading. She states that time should not be a factor when evaluating an e-learning source. Using the analogy of text messaging and calling, she argues that there is greater value in speech since greater meaning can be inferred through intonation or change of tone, something that onscreen text could never achieve.

In further support of this thinking, we found the following extract from the U.S. Department of Labor: “People tend to be eye-minded, and the impacts visual aids bring to a presentation are, indeed, significant. The studies below reveal interesting statistics that support these findings:

• In many studies, experimental psychologists and educators have found that retention of information three days after a meeting or other event is six times greater when information is presented by visual and oral means than when the information is presented by the spoken word alone.
• Studies by educational researchers suggest that approximately 83% of human learning occurs visually, and the remaining 17% through the other senses – 11% through hearing, 3.5% through smell, 1% through taste, and 1.5% through touch.
• The studies suggest that three days after an event, people retain 10% of what they heard from an oral presentation, 35% from a visual presentation, and 65% from a visual and oral presentation.”

“Presenting Effective Presentations with Visual Aids” May 1996; OSHA Occupational Safety & Health Administration U.S. Department of Labor
http://www.osha.gov/doc/outreachtraining/htmlfiles/traintec.html

In his research into the Modality Effect, referring to how people remember the last few items of a list when presented auditory rather than visually, John Mayer demonstrates that words can be complemented by both pictures and sounds, thus creating a fuller learning environment that draws on a greater number of senses in the human mind (The Cambridge Handbook for Multimedia Learning). By adding pictures and sounds to an otherwise text-formatted learning course, one might increase the productivity and accessibility of the course because it attracts the attention of the learner on more than one level, in the same way that a three lane motorway will allow more traffic than a single lane road.

However, Mayer warns that having words on a page that are spoken by the narration could be seen as redundant and potentially obstructive. Though the two formats might cater to different learning methods, alongside each other they might require more extraneous processing since listening and reading use different parts of the brain that work at different speeds. By reducing the amount of extraneous and unnecessary data on the page, the learner is obliged to follow that which is economically given to him/her. Nevertheless, Mayer remains keen on the idea of audio in e-learning; he simply warns against the bombardment of our senses.

Dr. Ruth Colvin Clark summarises Mayer’s work in a simple statistic:

“He compared learning from versions that explained animations with words in text with versions that explained animations with words in audio. In all comparisons, the narrated versions yielded better learning with an average improvement of 80%.”

It would appear, therefore, that there is little doubt in any of these researchers’ minds about the benefit audio can have in a learning situation. Audio in e-learning is just one more tool in helping the learner take the lead in their knowledge acquisition and retention.

We will be producing a development guide when to use audio in e-learning, best practice on what to avoid in the next newsletter. Send us your experiences with audio in e-learning (good and bad) and we’ll incorporate them into the guide. audio@line.co.uk