Content deleted Content added
sm correction |
|||
Line 13:
A few conclusions stood out from the research. One was that films were great at giving overviews of a situation or an operation. However, they were less successful at getting over the details. Some general features of film (and, later, television) stand out. One is that a film goes at its own pace. Another is that no specific responses or activities are required from the viewer. A third is that the audience is varied, sometimes hugely varied. This gives clues to ways of improving instructional films.
In a 1946 experiment at [[Yale University]], questions for students were put between segments of a film on the [[heart]] and [[circulatory system|circulation]], with correct answers given after students had responded (knowledge of results). This added significantly to the amount learnt from the film. Lumsdaine commented that showing the version with questions and answers was as effective as showing the film twice, and faster.<ref name=
The connections between this experiment and those of Pressey were obvious. Active responses by learners and helpful feedback on the activities were now seen as critical elements in any successful system of learning. Pressey's work had been half forgotten, but it was now recognised as significant.<ref>Pressey's work is reprinted in Lumsdaine A.A & Glaser R. (eds) 1960. ''Teaching machines and programed learning I: a source book''. Washington D.C. National Education Association of the United States.</ref>
| |||