当前位置：文档库 › Making the abstract concrete Visualizing mathematical solution procedures

Making the abstract concrete Visualizing mathematical solution procedures

Making the abstract concrete:Visualizing

mathematical solution procedures

Katharina Scheiter

a,*,Peter Gerjets b ,Richard Catrambone c a Applied Cognitive Psychology and Media Psychology,Konrad-Adenauer-Strasse 40,

University of Tuebingen,72072Tuebingen,Germany

b Knowledge Media Research Center,Tuebingen,Germany

c Georgia Institute of Technology,Atlanta,GA,USA

Available online 2March 2005

Abstract

This paper reports on an experiment investigating the e?ects of di?erent kinds of com-puter-based visualizations on the acquisition of problem-solving skills in the domain of probability theory.Learners received either purely text-based worked examples,text plus an instruction to mentally imagine the examples ?contents,or the possibility of retrieving either static pictures or concrete animations that depicted the problem statement and the problem states achieved by applying a speci?c solution-step.It could be shown that fre-quent use of both static pictures and imagining the examples ?contents improved perfor-mance on isomorphic problems.Frequent use of animations,in contrast,led to substantial increases in learning time and a decrease in performance.Thus,the use of concrete animations to visualize solution procedures was more harmful than helpful for conveying problem-solving skills.Reasons for these outcomes are discussed in the light of cognitive load theory.

Keywords:Problem solving;Skill acquisition;Worked-out examples;Visualizations;Pictures;Animation;Imagery;Cognitive load

*Corresponding author.

E-mail address:k.scheiter@iwm-kmrc.de (K.

Scheiter).

Computers in Human Behavior 22(2006)

9–25

Computers in

Human Behavior

10K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–25

1.Introduction

Understanding mathematical solution procedures is a necessary prerequisite for solving both familiar problems,as well as novel problems requiring adaptation of acquired solution procedures.However,it has been noted that students often face severe di?culties in understanding solution procedures even when they have received elaborate instructional explanations of the individual solution-steps.This may result from the fact that the solution-steps are often conveyed in a rather abstract way so that learners experience di?culties in imagining which changes in the problem state are achieved by applying a speci?c solution-step to a problem.

The use of multimedia learning environments may o?er ways to overcome these di?culties(Mayer,2001).In multimedia learning environments,information presen-tation can be accomplished by using di?erent representational formats(textual and pictorial)which may be processed in di?erent sensory channels(auditory and visual). Additionally,information presentation is not restricted to static displays(e.g.,dia-grams,pictures,written text),but the representations used can involve changes over time(e.g.,dynamic visualizations,spoken text).

This research addresses the e?ects of augmenting a purely text-based hypertext environment called H YPER C OMB by di?erent kinds of visualizations.H YPER C OMB tea-ches students how to calculate the probability of complex events.Calculating com-plex event probabilities is related to situations where the probability of randomly selecting a particular con?guration of elements out of a set of elements has to be determined(cf.Fig.1).

The main instructional principle underlying H YPER C OMB is the use of worked-out examples for conveying knowledge on di?erent problem categories.Worked-out examples consist of a problem statement and a step-by-step solution procedure. Research over the last20years has shown that worked-out examples are of great help for knowledge acquisition,especially in well-structured domains like mathe-matics,physics,or computer programming(Atkinson,Derry,Renkl,&Wortham, 2000).

In a series of prior experiments,di?erent example formats in H YPER C OMB(Ger-jets,Scheiter,&Catrambone,2004)were compared.Conventionally designed or mo-lar examples focus on explaining how to categorize problems according to multiple structural task features and how to apply category-speci?c solution formulas.Molar examples demonstrate a fast and convenient approach to problem solving,but may also impose high cognitive demands on learners who have to simultaneously con-sider multiple problem features in order to solve a problem.Thus,an alternative modular example format was developed which completely avoids references to molar concepts like problem categories or formulas and where complex solutions are broken down into smaller,meaningful solution elements that can be conveyed sep-arately.Though it was demonstrated that a modular example format reduces cogni-tive load and boosts performance compared to conventionally designed molar examples(Gerjets et al.),there is still space left for improvement.We assumed that this space might be claimed by the bene?ts achieved through the use of visualizations.

According to Mayer ?s multimedia principle (2001),embellishing textual learning materials by static pictures or dynamic visualizations (i.e.,animations)helps pro-mote the learners ?understanding of instructions.With regard to the acquisition of problem-solving knowledge,visualizations of worked-out examples may ?rst help learners understand the situation described in the problem statement (i.e.,the initial problem state)and thus to correctly represent its meaning in a situation model (Nathan,Kintsch,&Young,1992).Second,visualizations of the solution-steps may promote an understanding of changes with regard to the initial problem state that are achieved by applying a solution-step to a problem.Visualizing worked-out examples can be done by presenting either static pictures,animations,or an instruction to mentally imagine the examples ?contents.

1.1.Static pictures

Static pictorial representations are known to foster the immediate and delayed retention of facts contained in the accompanying text (cf.for a review Carney &Levin,2002;Levin,Anglin,&Carney,1987).Moreover,with regard to the acquisi-tion of problem-solving knowledge in domains like mathematics and physics,the added value of abstract diagrammatic and graphical representations has been acknowledged (e.g.,Shah &Hoe?ner,2002;Vekiri,2002).These types of visualiza-tions are said to be computationally e?ective in that they facilitate speci?c

inferential Fig.1.Screenshot of a worked-out example with external visualization.

K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior 22(2006)9–2511

12K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–25

processes needed for some learning tasks(Larkin&Simon,1987).However,the researchers have found no research on whether concrete pictures depicting a problem situation and its modi?cation caused by the application of a solution procedure pro-mote acquisition of problem-solving knowledge in abstract domains.There is re-search on the use of video demonstrating the application of observable procedural skills(e.g.,tying nautical knots,Schwan&Riempp,2004);however,this does not allow for predicting the e?ectiveness of concrete visualizations for teaching abstract mathematical skills that do not have a natural representation in the real world.

It can however be assumed that representing the problem statement in a picture will help to understand which features and interrelations of objects are relevant to the solution of the problem and thus to build a situation model of it(Nathan et al.,1992).For instance,in the sprinter example in Fig.1seven sprinters on the race-track are depicted out of whom three can win a medal(i.e.,gold,silver,and bronze), represented by the pedestal.Additionally visualizing the solution-steps may support learners in inferring which change is achieved by applying a solution procedure when they compare the new problem state to the previous one.For instance,comparing the picture illustrating the second solution-step with the one depicting the?rst step helps clarify the fact that only six sprinters are eligible for the silver medal in the sec-ond solution-step,because one sprinter has already been assigned the gold medal in the?rst solution-step and thus already stands on the pedestal.

1.2.Animations

An animation is‘‘any application which generates a series of frames,so that each frame appears as an alteration of the previous one,and where the sequence of frames is determined either by the designer or the user’’(Betrancourt&Tversky,2000,p. 313).Thus,animations do not only depict the current state of objects;they also deliver information concerning changes of objects and their position over time(mo-tion)as well as information concerning the direction of these changes(trajectory, Rieber,1990).Several?ndings suggest that animations can be used successfully for delivering abstract content such as mathematical rules,Newton?s laws,or com-puter algorithms(Baek&Layne,1988;Byrne,Catrambone,&Stasko,1999; Catrambone&Seay,2002;Rieber,1990).With respect to conveying problem-solving knowledge,the visual-spatial properties of the visualization may be used to deliver information on the current problem state and its relevant structural fea-tures.Moreover,the changes over time that can be depicted in an animation may be used to re?ect the changes in problem states that result from applying a solu-tion-step to a speci?c problem state of the example–without the need to compare multiple representations as is necessary when using static pictures.

However,learning from animations is known to impose certain requirements on the learners that they may have di?culty meeting(Betrancourt&Tversky,2000). Pane,Corbett,and John(1996)have demonstrated that learners often fail to use animations to a su?cient extent and thus miss important information.Lowe (1999)suggests that learners have trouble focusing on the most relevant parts of an animation and are often distracted by salient,but irrelevant details.Furthermore,

K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–2513

due to the dynamic changes of the display,the information that has to be remem-bered can only be viewed for a limited amount of time and may therefore have van-ished before learners have identi?ed it.Finally,dynamic visualizations may lead to overly passive information processing and prevent learners from performing e?ortful cognitive processes required for a deeper understanding(Palmiter&Elkerton,1993; Schnotz,Boeckheler,&Grzondziel,1999).In line with Salomon?s principle of least e?ort(1984)learners may refrain from deeply processing the contents of an anima-tion and passively watch it like an ongoing movie.

1.3.Imagery

To circumvent the problem of passive information processing,learners can be in-structed to imagine the contents of a text-based worked-out example by mentally envisioning objects and their relations included in the examples.In this case,learners do not receive any pictorial representations,but are told to construct their own visu-alizations.Hodes(1992)compared the e?ectiveness of imagery instructions and instructional visuals for fact recall and understanding.Both instructional methods were helpful in inducing an imagery strategy and in improving posttest performance; however,for some performance measures,achievements due to presenting external visuals were larger than for the imagery instructions.Ginns,Chandler,and Sweller (2003)showed that imagining procedures(vs.studying text-based materials)was only helpful for learners possessing su?ciently high prior knowledge in the domain. This replicates?ndings of Cooper,Tindall-Ford,Chandler,and Sweller(2001)who found interactions between domain-speci?c abilities and the type of instruction gi-ven.Ginns et al.explained these?ndings by assuming that‘‘to successfully imagine a procedure or a concept,all of the relevant elements must be processed simulta-neously in working memory.That may be possible only after a schema had been con-structed’’(p.231).Contrary to the experiment outlined in the remainder of this paper,learners in these studies(Cooper et al.,2001;Ginns et al.,2003)were not in-structed to imagine a worked-out example?s concrete objects.Rather,they were told to envision the operations they needed to perform in order to solve a problem(e.g., adding an addition sign to an equation)and the examples did not contain any con-crete elements,but only the mathematical information.

Comparing the three di?erent visualization methods(static pictures,animations, and imagery)to each other yields insights on speci?c advantages as well as draw-backs associated with these methods.The trade-o?between these advantages and drawbacks may determine learning outcomes(Table1).Learning from static pictures may engage learners in a more active way,because they have to compare multiple visualizations in order to understand the to-be-learned solution procedures.As this information is permanently visible,these comparisons may be conducted without overloading the cognitive system.However,learners may make erroneous inferences and may miss important information so that their internal representation of the solu-tion procedures may be incorrect as well as incomplete.Moreover,because the exter-nal representations cannot be modi?ed by a learner,they are not adapted to his or her preferences or prior knowledge level.Dynamic pictures may reduce learner activ-

14K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–25

Table1

Advantages(+)and drawbacks(à)of visualization methods

Static pictures Dynamic pictures Imagery Learner activity+à+ Cognitive load+ààCorrectness/completenessà+àAdaptation to learner preferences/knowledgeàà+

ity and induce a rather passive style of processing.The cognitive demands imposed by the need to extract the relevant information from a changing display and to mem-orize this information may be rather high.Unless animations are highly interactive, they do not allow for any adaptation to a learner?s preferences or prior knowledge. However,an advantage of dynamic visualizations of solution-steps is that all the information that is needed to understand problem states and their changes is in prin-ciple contained in the representation and thus it is correct as well as complete.Final-ly,while imagery instructions should foster learner activity in an optimal way,the need to envision all information may require rather demanding processes that may be overwhelming for learners with low cognitive prerequisite knowledge in the do-main(Cooper et al.,2001;Ginns et al.,2003).There is also the danger that learners may miss important information or that they make incorrect inferences.A possible advantage of mental imagery is that,because it is based on self-generated images, these images are adapted to a learner?s preferences and prior knowledge level.

These trade-o?s between possible promises and drawbacks were investigated in the experiment outlined in the remainder of the paper.

2.Experiment

2.1.Method

2.1.1.Participants

Participants were124students(88female,36male)at the University of Tuebin-gen,Germany,who participated for either course-credit or payment.One participant in the static-pictures condition had to be excluded from the analysis,because learn-ing time was more than4SD above the mean learning time in this condition. Twenty-nine participants were in the text-only condition,30in the static-pictures condition,32in the animation condition,and32in the imagery condition.The aver-age age was23.60years(SD=4.28).Most of the participants were familiar with the domain of probability theory and were experienced computer users.

2.1.2.Materials and procedure

H YPER C OMB consisted of a technical instruction,a short introduction to the do-main,an example-based learning phase,and a subsequent test phase.Before starting with the experiment,participants?lled in a multiple-choice questionnaire with11

K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–2515 questions on important concepts and de?nitions from the?eld of probability theory. This questionnaire was used to measure prior knowledge.In the?rst part of H YPER-C OMB,learners were given a short technical introduction to the system and to the experiment.After that,the basic notion of random experiments and the general rationale behind calculating the probability of outcomes were explained in a short introduction to the domain.In the subsequent example-based learning phase,learn-ers had to acquire knowledge on four di?erent problem categories,where each cat-egory was explained by means of two worked-out examples.Depending on the experimental condition,participants also received an imagery instruction or could retrieve static pictures or dynamic visualizations that augmented the worked-out examples.Participants were not forced to process these visualizations;rather,they could choose to select them by clicking on a button in order to view them.The visu-alizations depicted the contents of the worked-out examples in a concrete way(cf. Fig.1).For every worked-out example there was always one visualization of the problem statement and one of every worked-out solution-step.In accordance with the coherence principle(Mayer,2001)the visualizations were kept as simple as pos-sible and were not cluttered with irrelevant details.Participants could decide by themselves when to start working on the test problems.The instructional materials were no longer available during problem solving.

Before solving the test problems,learners had to give an estimate of the cognitive load they had been experiencing during learning(see Section2.1.3for details).For the11test problems transfer distance with respect to the worked-out examples was varied by presenting?ve isomorphic and six novel problems.Isomorphic test problems di?ered from the instructional examples only with regard to their surface features.Novel test problems were constructed in a way that two complex-event probabilities had to be considered whose outcomes had to be multiplied in order to calculate the required probability.An example of a novel test problem would be: At a soccer stadium,there are two dressing rooms for the two opposing teams.

The11players from Oxford wear T-shirts with odd numbers from1to21and the11players from Manchester have even numbers from2to22.Because the aisle from the dressing rooms is very narrow only one player at a time can enter the?eld.The players of the two teams leave their rooms alternately with a player from Oxford going?rst.What is the probability of the?rst?ve players entering the?eld having the numbers5,2,13,8,and1(i.e.,the?rst has the number5,the second has the number2,and so on)?

2.1.

3.Design and dependent measures

Participants studied in one of four instructional conditions.In the text-only con-dition only the written worked-out examples were available.In the imagery condition learners were additionally told to mentally imagine the contents as vividly and with as many details as possible.Mental imagery was trained at the beginning of the experiment by instructing learners to imagine the contents of a short text passage describing a tra?c situation involving multiple cars approaching an intersection from di?erent directions.Moreover,the participants were constantly reminded to

16K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–25

use imagery in the example-based learning phase by a sticker‘‘imagine the situation’’attached to the frame of the computer screen.In the pictures condition,static visual-izations could be retrieved for each component of the worked-out examples,whereas in the animation condition clicking the play-button for any of the example compo-nents resulted in the presentation of a dynamic visualization.In the sprinter anima-tion,for example,the sprinters were?rst shown entering the racetrack(problem statement)and were then running around the track.The visualization of the solu-tion-steps always depicted one sprinter passing the?nishing line and ascending the pedestal.The last frame of the animation was always used as the static picture(cf. Fig.1)depicting the problem state resulting from the application of the respective solution-step.

The dependent measures were problem-solving performance for isomorphic and novel test problems,time spent learning(learning time),and cognitive load.For each of the11test problems,1point was assigned for a correct answer;no partial credits were given.The sums across the?ve isomorphic problems and across the six transfer problems were each transformed into a percentage for ease of interpretation.Cogni-tive load was assessed by means of a modi?ed version of the NASA-TLX(Hart& Staveland,1988),which had been successfully used in order to distinguish between di?erent aspects of cognitive load in prior studies(Gerjets et al.,2004).This cognitive load measure consisted of three items,each rated on a scale from0(very low cogni-tive load)to100(very high cognitive load).The following subscales were used:?task demands?(How much mental and physical activity was required,e.g.,thinking, deciding,calculating,remembering,looking,searching etc.),?e?ort?(How hard the participant had to work to understand the contents of the learning environment), and?navigational demands?(How much e?ort the participant had to invest to navi-gate the learning environment).According to Cognitive Load Theory(Sweller, van Merrie¨nboer,&Paas,1998)task demands are caused by inherent properties of the learning task(intrinsic cognitive load),higher-level processes for achieving a deeper understanding–as re?ected in the availability of sophisticated and auto-mated schemata(germane load),and activities not directed to learning such as deci-sion processes required for navigation and information selection(extraneous load). Thus,a mapping is assumed between the theoretical assumptions of Cognitive Load Theory and the items of the modi?ed version of the NASA-TLX.

The control measures were learners?intrinsic motivation prior to learning deter-mined by a shortened version of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory(Ryan,1982), domain-speci?c prior knowledge determined by a questionnaire included in the envi-ronment,and spatial abilities determined by the mental rotation test(Vandenberg& Kuse,1978).

2.2.Results

The statistical analysis is divided into three parts.First,all four instructional con-ditions were compared in an overall ANOVA in order to detect possible di?erences between them with regard to problem-solving performance,learning time,and cog-nitive load.In a second step,a closer look was taken at the utilization of external

K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–2517 visualizations(i.e.,static pictures and animations)and the way this a?ects the afore-mentioned variables.Finally,the external-visualization conditions were compared to the imagery condition to answer the question of whether learners can generate help-ful visualizations on their own by envisioning the contents of the worked-out exam-ples.Within the last two steps of analysis,the respective?ve conditions(i.e., frequent/sparse use of static pictures/animations,imagery)were also contrasted with the text-only condition to test whether using a speci?c type of external visualization either frequently or sparsely and whether instructing learners to imagine the worked-out examples was superior to presenting only text.

2.2.1.Overall analyses

Prior knowledge,intrinsic motivation,and spatial abilities were comparable across all four instructional conditions(prior knowledge:F<1,intrinsic motivation: F<1;spatial abilities:F(3,119)=1.65;MSE=51.22;p>0.10).

In a?rst step,problem-solving performance and learning time across all four con-ditions were analyzed by means of one-factor ANOVAs(Table2).Performance on isomorphic problems varied slightly,though not signi?cantly,as a function of instructional condition(F(3,119)=2.32;MSE=769.06;p<0.10),while perfor-mance on novel problems was left una?ected by the experimental manipulation (F<1).Learning time increased rather naturally with the more instructional mate-rials being available for processing(F(3,119)=6.21;MSE=48052.96;p=0.001). Furthermore,there were no di?erences between the four instructional conditions with regard to task demands,e?ort,and navigational demands experienced by learn-ers(all F s<1).

Thus,at?rst sight it seems that although presenting external visualizations in-creased the time learners devoted to learning,these increases were not accompanied by gains in performance.Contrarily,performance for isomorphic problems was worst in the animation condition.However,it is not clear whether the?nding that problem-solving performance was only slightly a?ected by variations of the instruc-tional materials is due to the ine?ectiveness of these variations or whether it is due to the fact that learners did not su?ciently use the external visualizations.To address Table2

Means and SD for learning time(in seconds),problem-solving performance(in%correct)and cognitive load as a function of instructional condition

Instructional condition

Text Static pictures Animation Imagery Performance

Isomorphic problems49.7(23.1)51.3(33.5)38.1(24.0)55.6(29.1) Novel problems19.5(23.2)15.6(17.5)18.8(25.3)20.3(20.6) Learning time493.6(204.9)530.8(184.5)678.3(302.3)457.4(152.2) Task demands34.8(23.6)34.2(25.5)34.1(20.8)42.0(22.8) E?ort52.1(23.6)57.0(19.7)54.4(24.6)55.3(19.0) Navigational demands16.6(19.6)18.3(24.0)24.2(24.0)19.1(24.2)

18K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–25

this question,the frequency by which learners retrieved these visualizations was ana-lyzed in a second step.

2.2.2.E?ects of utilizing external visualizations

For every participant it was possible to determine how often(s)he had retrieved visualizations.Though there were a total of31visualizations available in each of the conditions,these visualizations were seldom retrieved(see Fig.2).The?gure dis-plays the number of participants using a speci?c number of visualizations in each of the two conditions.For instance,nine participants in the animation condition and11 participants in the static pictures condition used only one or two visualizations.On average,static pictures were viewed7.0times,animations10.3times.Thus,less than one quarter of the available static pictures and only one-third of the animations were used for learning.

For the further course of the statistical analyses,a median split within each of the two conditions was conducted to distinguish between learners who sparsely used external visualizations and those who made frequent use of the representations.In the static pictures condition the median for visualization retrieval was Mdn=3,with 18participants being classi?ed as sparse users and12as frequent users.In the ani-mation condition the median was Mdn=9with17participants classi?ed as sparse users and15as frequent users of visualizations.The resulting variable was used as a second factor in an ANOVA(instructional condition·visualization utilization).

Analyzing performance for isomorphic problems in the two conditions with exter-nal visualizations(Table3)by means of this ANOVA yielded a signi?cant main e?ect of instructional condition in favor of learning from static pictures (F(1,58)=5.56;MSE=743.58;p<0.05)as well as a marginally signi?cant main ef-fect for the utilization of visualizations(F(1,58)=3.08;MSE=743.58;p<0.10). Moreover,there was a signi?cant interaction(F(1,58)=7.20;MSE=743.58; p<0.01)indicating that–when frequently used–static pictures were superior to animations(t(25)=3.44;p<0.01),while there were no di?erences when the visual-izations were sparsely used(t(33)=à0.24;p>0.80).

K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–2519 Table3

Means and SD for learning time(in seconds),problem-solving performance(in%correct)and cognitive load as a function of visualization utilization in the two external visualization conditions Visualization utilization Instructional condition

Static pictures Animation

Sparse use Frequent use Sparse use Frequent use Performance

Isomorphic problems38.9(28.7)70.0(32.5)41.2(26.9)34.7(20.7) Novel problems15.7(20.2)15.3(13.2)24.5(30.7)12.2(16.0) Learning time503.1(211.0)572.4(133.3)495.4(219.2)885.6(244.5) Task demands36.1(23.4)31.3(29.2)30.6(24.1)38.0(16.2)

E?ort56.4(21.1)57.9(18.3)50.3(26.8)59.0(21.8) Navigational demands15.8(19.6)22.1(30.1)24.7(24.9)23.7(23.8) There were no signi?cant main e?ects for novel problems(instructional condition: F<1;information utilization:F(1,58)=1.30;MSE=474.28;p>0.20)nor interac-tions(F(1,58)=1.12;MSE=474.28;p>0.20).Learning times were longer for stu-dents in the animation condition than in the static pictures condition (F(1,58)=7.97;MSE=44333.61;p<0.01)and increased dramatically with fre-quent use of visualizations(F(1,58)=18.02;MSE=44333.61;p<0.001).Moreover, a signi?cant interaction(F(1,58)=8.78;MSE=44333.61;p<0.01)revealed that frequently using static pictures compared to using them sparsely had no impact on learning time(t(33)=0.11;p>0.90),while frequent use of animations almost dou-bled the time spent with the instructional materials(t(25)=à3.95;p=0.001).

Interestingly,learners did not experience any di?erences on cognitive load during learning.That is,the task demands,amount of e?ort,and navigational demands were judged as being equal across instructional conditions and irrespective of infor-mation utilization behavior(all F s<1with one exception:instructional condi-tion·visualization utilization for task demands:F(1,58)=1.05;MSE=545.14; p>0.30).

In a?nal step the problem-solving performance,learning times,and cognitive load of learners in the four visualization groups(Table3)were compared to those of learners who had only text at their disposal(i.e.,the baseline,Table2)by means of multiple t-tests.

Frequently using static pictures was clearly associated with a better performance on isomorphic problems compared to learning from text only(t(39)=2.27;p<0.05), while there were no di?erences for novel problems(t(39)=à0.60;p>0.50).At the same time,this frequent use did not require more learning time(t(39)=1.23; p>0.20)nor did it coincide with increases in cognitive load experienced by learners (task demands:t(39)=à0.58;p>0.50;e?ort:t(39)=à0.22;p>0.80;and naviga-tional demands:t(39)=1.23;p>0.20).

Whenever static pictures were only sparsely used there were no e?ects on problem-solving performance(isomorphic problems:t(45)=à1.42;p>0.15;novel problems: t(45)=à0.57;p>0.50),learning time t(45)=0.15;p>0.80,or cognitive load(task

20K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–25

demands:t(45)=0.18;p>0.80;e?ort:t(45)=0.60;p>0.50;and navigational demands:t(44)=à0.12;p>0.90).

Frequently using animations was associated with a signi?cant decrease in perfor-mance for isomorphic problems compared to learning from text only(t(42)=à2.11; p<0.05).There were no di?erences for novel problems(t(42)=à1.09;p>0.20). Not astonishingly,a frequent use of animations increased the time for learning (t(42)=5.61;p<0.001).No signi?cant di?erences could be detected for the three cognitive load measures(task demands:t(42)=0.47;p>0.60;e?ort:t(42)=0.90; p>0.30;and navigational demands:t(42)=1.06;p>0.20).

Sparsely using animations was not related to any changes in performance(iso-morphic problems:t(44)=à1.13;p>0.20;novel problems:t(44)=0.62;p>0.50) or in learning time(t(44)=0.03;p>0.90)when compared to the text baseline.Sim-ilarly,there were no di?erences with regard to cognitive load(task demands: t(44)=à0.58;p>0.50;e?ort:t(44)=à0.22;p>0.80;and navigational demands: t(44)=1.23;p>0.20).

To sum up,using static pictures frequently was superior to learning from ani-mations in that it was associated with a better performance for isomorphic prob-lems while at the same time requiring less learning time.Based on the comparisons to the text baseline,static pictures proved to be a helpful augmenta-tion of verbal materials.On the contrary,frequently using animations led to sub-stantial increases in learning time while at the same time an inferior performance as compared to learning from text.Sparse users of external visualizations pro-duced the same outcomes as learners who did not have visualizations at their disposal.

Therefore,whereas concrete visualizations of the contents of the worked-out examples supported learning,the dynamics contained in the animations were unnec-essary or even harmful.If complex dynamic visualizations cannot be recommended for learning,the question arises whether there is a need for external visualizations at all.That is,if simple visualizations like static pictures of the content help to achieve an understanding of the principles,maybe learners are able to generate these images by themselves.The question whether external visualizations are more helpful than the instruction to imagine the contents of the worked-out examples is addressed in the remainder of this paper.

2.2.

3.The bene?ts of imagery compared to external visualizations

In this?nal analysis,the imagery condition was compared to the two external-visualization conditions by means of multiple t-tests whereby in the latter two sparse and frequent users of visualizations were distinguished.

The imagery condition had no impact on any of the performance measures when compared to the group of learners who had frequently used static pictures(isomor-phic problems:t(42)=1.42;p>0.10;novel problems:t(42)=à0.78;p>0.40).How-ever,learning from static pictures took more time than imagining the contents of the examples(t(42)=2.30;p<0.05).There were no di?erences with regard to any of the cognitive load measures(task demands:t(42)=à1.30;p>0.20;e?ort:t(42)=0.41; p>0.60;and navigational demands:t(42)=0.34;p>0.70).

K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–2521 Instructing learners to imagine the contents of the worked-out examples improved performance on isomorphic problems slightly,though not signi?cantly,compared to a sparse use of static pictures(t(48)=à1.96;p<0.10),while there were no di?er-ences for novel test problems(t(48)=à0.76;p>0.40).There were no di?erences with regard to learning time between the two groups(t(48)=0.88;p>0.30)nor with regard to any of the cognitive load measures(task demands:t(48)=à0.87;p>0.30; e?ort:t(48)=0.18;p>0.80;and navigational demands:t(48)=à0.48;p>0.60).

Mental animation was thus more e?ective and e?cient compared to a sparse use of static pictures in that it slightly improved performance without requiring more time.Moreover,it was more e?cient than frequent use of static pictures as it led to the same problem-solving performance with lower time demands.It can be ex-pected that this pattern of results will be even more pronounced when comparing the mental animation condition to the groups of learners using external animations.

Learners in the mental animation condition clearly outperformed learners who had frequently used external animations with regard to isomorphic problems (t(45)=à2.51;p<0.05),while the di?erences for novel problems were not pro-nounced(t(45)=à1.34;p>0.10).Moreover,frequently using external animations led to prolonged learning times(t(45)=7.32;p<0.001).Again,none of these di?er-ences was re?ected in learners?judgments of cognitive load(task demands: t(45)=à0.62;p>0.50;e?ort:t(45)=0.59;p>0.50;and navigational demands: t(45)=0.61;p>0.50).

Finally,imagery was slightly superior to sparse use of dynamic visualizations(iso-morphic problems:t(47)=à1.70;p<0.10;novel problems:t(47)=0.57;p>0.50), while requiring the same amount of learning time(t(47)=0.71;p>0.40).There were no di?erences for the cognitive load measures(task demands:t(47)=à1.64; p>0.10;e?ort:t(47)=à0.76;p>0.40;and navigational demands:t(43)=0.77; p>0.40).

Thus,imagining the contents of the examples was more e?ective than learning from dynamic visualizations and more e?cient in that it improved performance while requiring equal or even less amounts of learning time.

Finally comparing mental animation to the text-only condition yielded no signif-icant di?erences with regard to performance(isomorphic problems:t(59)=à0.88; p>0.30;novel problems:t(59)=à0.14;p>0.80),learning time(t(59)=0.79; p>0.40),or cognitive load(task demands:t(59)=à1.21;p>0.20;e?ort: t(59)=à0.57;p>0.50;and navigational demands:t(59)=à0.44;p>0.60).

3.Discussion

Evidence for the di?erential e?ectiveness of external and internal visualizations for cognitive skill acquisition has been presented here.The results support the assumption that learners might bene?t from a concrete visualization of problem states tied to worked-out examples.Interestingly,generating these visualizations by oneself in the imagery condition produced learning outcomes similar to those in the‘‘best’’external visualization condition(i.e.,frequent use of static pictures)

22K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–25

and was more e?cient than any of the external visualization conditions by requiring less learning time.Unfortunately,the e?ects of imagery were not strong enough to yield signi?cant di?erences with the text-only condition.Before addressing possible reasons for the latter result,the di?erential e?ectiveness of external visualizations observed in this experiment are?rst discussed.

While it was demonstrated that a frequent use of static pictures was associated with performance improvements on isomorphic problems,frequently retrieving ani-mations coincided with the opposite e?ect in that it was related to a signi?cant de-crease in problem-solving performance.The sparse use of external visualizations was no di?erent to not having visualizations at all.Thus,similar to prior?ndings, it could be demonstrated that considering strategic variables(i.e.,frequency of using di?erent types of external visualizations)is important,as these variables may mod-erate the relationship between design variables and learning outcomes(Gerjets& Scheiter,2003).

The initial idea behind using animations had been that the dynamics of an anima-tion might be helpful for illustrating information on changes in problem states that occur due to applying a speci?c solution-step.However,it seems that explicitly rep-resenting these changes was more harmful than helpful in that it may have distracted learners.These results are in line with prior?ndings(Lowe,1999;Pane et al.,1996).

Interestingly,in contrast to results of prior experiments(Gerjets et al.,2004),no di?erences in cognitive load as measured with the modi?ed version of the NASA-TLX could be detected.Rather than doubting its sensitivity in the current context, two factors which have e?ects in opposite directions may have contributed to this result.On the one hand,based on the?ndings by Lowe(1999)or Pane et al. (1996),one might assume that dynamic visualizations should be associated with higher navigational demands and e?ort ratings.Salomon?s?ndings(1983,1984), on the other hand,suggest that the amount of invested mental e?ort is in?uenced by the learners?perception of the medium and the demands it imposes.Viewing an animation–similar to watching TV as in the Salomon study(1984)–is often per-ceived as being‘‘easy’’and thus learners may decide to refrain from a deeper process-ing of the presented information.Accordingly,from a prescriptive point of view learners would need to invest more resources into learning from animations;how-ever,from a descriptive point of view they might not experience this need and may refrain from performing e?ortful cognitive processes required for a deeper understanding(Schnotz et al.,1999).Accordingly,it does not necessarily have to be the case that learners report higher cognitive load values for the animation condition.

This research,thus,pursues the idea of further reducing the cognitive demands imposed by animations,while at the same time hindering that learners passively watch the visualizations.A reduction of cognitive load is aimed at by using abstract rather than concrete dynamic visualizations of the worked-out examples.These ab-stract animations are characterized by the fact that the visualizations of all examples share a common representation of objects and of the relevant relations among them. That is,irrespective of an example?s cover story,objects such as the sprinters are rep-resented by marbles selected from an urn.This common representation across exam-

K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–2523 ples should help learners to focus on the structural similarities and di?erences be-tween the examples while being able to ignore their surface features.Thus,there is not only less information that needs to be processed in total,the ratio between math-ematically relevant and irrelevant information is improved compared to the concrete animations investigated in the current paper.Thus,this simpli?ed representation should be less demanding and should leave cognitive resources free in order to cope with the dynamics of the visualization.

At the same time,instructional methods which reduce the danger of a super?cial processing of the presented animations and which force learners to engage in a dee-per processing of the instructional materials and invest more mental e?ort in the learning task will be investigated.Until now,the animations have been non-interac-tive;that is,learners had no opportunity to stop or replay the visualizations,which may enhance the impression of an ongoing movie whose presentation is predeter-mined.Accordingly,it is planned to implement interactive animations in a subse-quent experiment.Interactivity seems to be a value in its own right and produces positive results rather consistently(Betrancourt&Tversky,2000;Ferguson&He-garty,1995;Gonzales,1996;Mayer&Chandler,2001;Tversky,Bauer Morrison, &Betrancourt,2002).In particular,it a?ords learners in thinking about whether they have grasped the information presented or whether they should replay the animation.

Additionally,the work with regard to cognitive skill acquisition from static pic-tures and imagery will be continued.First,research will be carried out on ways of improving the learners?use of static pictures.In particular,the e?ectiveness of retrie-val prompts which guide learners to use static pictures more often will be tested.Prior studies demonstrated that prompting learners to retrieve pro?table information units is an e?ective means to foster problem-solving performance,especially for students with low prior knowledge(Gerjets,Scheiter,&Schuh,2005).Second,once static pic-tures have been retrieved,their processing should be supported by additional instruc-tional guidance.In particular,learners may receive instructions to compare multiple static pictures to enable them to more easily discover changes in problem states that have occurred due to applying a solution-step.

Finally,the use of imagery might be further improved.In the current experiment, learners were instructed to use imagery only at the beginning of the experiment and the reminder they received during the learning phase could be easily overlooked.This may also explain why giving an imagery instruction neither extended learning times nor increased e?ort ratings compared to the text-only condition,which one might expect if learners are asked to envision an example?s content in addition to merely reading the text.The argument is similar to the one made with regard to the observed lack of di?erences for cognitive load ratings between the animation condition and the other instructional conditions.That is,if learners in the imagery condition had invested the amount of mental e?ort required to bene?t from imagining worked-out examples,then this should have expressed itself in longer learning times and higher cognitive load ratings.The fact that these di?erences with the text-only con-dition were not observed indicates that learners did not engage in the imagination task to a su?cient degree.In order to circumvent this problem,computer-based

24K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–25

prompts that frequently remind learners to envision the examples?contents are to be investigated in future experiments.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt-Foundation(Trans-Coop-Program).We thank the participants of the practical course in experimental psychology(summer semester2003)for conducting the experiment.

References

Atkinson,R.K.,Derry,S.A.,Renkl,A.,&Wortham,D.(2000).Learning from examples:instructional principles from the worked examples research.Review of Educational Research,70,181–214. Baek,Y.K.,&Layne,B.H.(1988).Color,graphics,and animation in a computer-assisted learning tutorial lesson.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction,15,131–135.

Betrancourt,M.,&Tversky,B.(2000).E?ect of computer animation on users?performance:a review.Le Travail Humain,63,311–329.

Byrne,M.D.,Catrambone,R.,&Stasko,J.T.(1999).Evaluating animations as student aids in learning computer https://www.wendangku.net/doc/9a16769949.html,puters&Education,33,253–278.

Carney,R.N.,&Levin,J.R.(2002).Pictorial illustrations still improve students?learning from text.

Educational Psychology Review,14,5–26.

Catrambone,R.,&Seay,F.A.(2002).Using animations to help students learn computer algorithms.

Human Factors,44,495–511.

Cooper,G.,Tindall-Ford,S.,Chandler,P.,&Sweller,J.(2001).Learning by imagining.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Applied,7,68–82.

Ferguson, E.L.,&Hegarty,M.(1995).Learning with real machines or diagrams:application of knowledge to real-world problems.Cognition and Instruction,13,129–160.

Gerjets,P.,&Scheiter,K.(2003).Goal con?gurations and processing strategies as moderators between instructional design and cognitive load:evidence from hypertext-based https://www.wendangku.net/doc/9a16769949.html,cational Psychologist,38,33–41.

Gerjets,P.,Scheiter,K.,&Catrambone,R.(2004).Designing instructional examples to reduce intrinsic cognitive load:molar versus modular presentation of solution procedures.Instructional Science,32, 33–58.

Gerjets,P.,Scheiter,K.,&Schuh,J.(2005).Instruktionale Unterstu¨tzung beim Fertigkeitserwerb aus Beispielen in hypertextbasierten Lernumgebungen(Instructional support for skill acquisition from examples in hypermedia-based learning environments).Zeitschrift fu¨r Pa¨dagogische Psychologie,19, 25–38.

Ginns,P.,Chandler,P.,&Sweller,J.(2003).When imagining information is e?ective.Contemporary Educational Psychology,28,229–251.

Gonzales,C.(1996).Does animation in user interfaces improve decision making.In?R.Bilger,S.Guest,& M.J.Tauber(Eds.).,Proceedings of the CHI96conference on human factors in computing systems (pp.27–34).New York:ACM Press.

Hart,S.G.,&Staveland,L. E.(1988).Development of NASA-TLX(task load index):results of experimental and theoretical research.In P.A.Hancock&N.Meshkati(Eds.),Human mental workload(pp.139–183).Amsterdam:North-Holland.

Hodes,C.L.(1992).The e?ectiveness of mental imagery and visual illustrations:a comparison of two instructional variables.Journal of Research and Development in Education,26,46–56.

Larkin,J.H.,&Simon,H.A.(1987).Why a diagram is(sometimes)worth ten thousand words.Cognitive Science,11,65–99.

K.Scheiter et al./Computers in Human Behavior22(2006)9–2525 Levin,J.R.,Anglin,G.L.,&Carney,R.N.(1987).Validating functions of pictures in prose.In D.M.

Willows&H.A.Houghton(Eds.),The psychology of illustration.Basic research(Vol.1,pp.51–86).

New York:Springer.

Lowe,R.K.(1999).Extracting information from an animation during complex visual learning.European Journal of Psychology of Education,14,225–244.

Mayer,R.E.(2001).Multimedia learning.Cambridge,MA:Cambridge University Press.

Mayer,R.E.,&Chandler,P.(2001).When learning is just a click away:does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages?.Journal of Educational Psychology,93,390–397. Nathan,M.J.,Kintsch,W.,&Young,E.(1992).A theory of algebra-word-problem comprehension and its implications for the design of learning environments.Cognition and Instruction,9,329–389. Palmiter,S.,&Elkerton,J.(1993).Animated demonstrations for learning procedural computer-based tasks.Human–Computer Interaction,8,193–216.

Pane,J.F.,Corbett,A.T.,&John,B.E.(1996).Assessing dynamics in computer-based instruction.In M.

J.Tauber(Ed.),Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp.797–804).Vancouver,Canada:ACM.

Rieber,L.P.(1990).Animation in computer-based https://www.wendangku.net/doc/9a16769949.html,cational Technology Research& Development,38,77–86.

Ryan,R.M.(1982).Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere:an extension of cognitive evaluation theory.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,43,450–461.

Salomon,G.(1983).The di?erential investment of mental e?ort in learning from di?erent sources.

Educational Psychologist,18,42–50.

Salomon,G.(1984).Television is‘‘easy’’and print is‘‘tough’’:the di?erential investment of mental e?ort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions.Journal of Educational Psychology,76, 647–658.

Schnotz,W.,Boeckheler,J.,&Grzondziel,H.(1999).Individual and co-operative learning with interactive animated pictures.European Journal of Psychology of Education,14,245–265. Schwan,S.,&Riempp,R.(2004).The cognitive bene?ts of interactive videos:learning to tie nautical knots.Learning and Instruction,14,293–305.

Shah,P.,&Hoe?ner,J.(2002).Review of graph comprehension research:implications for instruction.

Educational Psychology Review,14,47–69.

Sweller,J.,van Merrie¨nboer,J.J.G.,&Paas,F.(1998).Cognitive architecture and instructional design.

Educational Psychology Review,10,251–296.

Tversky,B.,Bauer Morrison,J.,&Betrancourt,M.(2002).Animation:can it facilitate?.International Journal of Human–Computer Studies,57,247–262.

Vandenberg,S.G.,&Kuse,A.R.(1978).Mental rotations,a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization.Perceptual and Motor Skills,47,599–604.

Vekiri,I.(2002).What is the value of graphical displays in learning?Educational Psychology Review,14, 261–312.

Unit 4 Making the news教案

Unit 4 Making the news Period 1 Warming up and reading Teaching aims: 知识目标 1. Let students talk about jobs in newspapers and what is needed to work in a newspaper office. 2.Have students read the passage and know about Zhou Yang's first work assignment. 能力目标 Develop students' reading ability and let them learn different reading skills. 情感目标 Stimulate students' interest in newspaper and the basic procedure of making the news. Teaching important points: 1.Let students talk about jobs in newspapers and what is needed to work in a newspaper office. 2.Have students learn different reading skills. Teaching difficult points: 1.Develop students reading ability. 2.Let students talk about what is needed to work in a newspaper office. Teaching methods: Task-based teaching and learning & Discussion. Teaching Procedures Step 1 Lead in Show students some pictures and talk about where we can get the news from all over the world? News: five forms of the news media. Step 2 warming up 1.Do you know how to make the news? Can you tell some jobs in a newspaper company? What are their jobs involves? Types of jobs What it involves Reporter/ journalist Interview people or finds out events from onlookers Photographer Takes photos of important people or events Editor Makes sure the writing is clear, concise and accurate, check facts Designer Lays out the articles and photographs

Unit 4 Making the news重点词汇详解

高二必修5 Unit 4 Making the news重点词汇详解新课标人教版高二第五模块第四单元单词解读（Making the News） 1.eager(keen, anxious) adj. 热切的；渴望的(after, about, for) The boy was eager for success. 男孩子急于获得成功。 He is eager for his parents to meet his girlfriends. 他盼望他的父母去见他的女朋友。 The saleswoman in the shop is always eager to please everybody. "商店里的那个女售货员总是十分殷勤,希望使人人满意。" 【习惯用语】 be eager for 渴望, 渴求, 争取 be eager about 渴望, 渴求, 争取 be eager after 渴望, 渴求, 争取 be eager to do 急欲, 渴望做【参考词汇】 eager /keen /anxious 意思都含“渴望的”。 eager指“以巨大的热情渴望实现愿望或达到目的的”, 有时也指“由于其他感情影响而表现急不可耐的”, 如: He was eager to see her. 他渴望见到她。 keen 指“对某人、某物怀有极大兴趣或热情的”, 如: They were keen to win. 他们急于取胜。 anxious 指“热切地希望实现愿望,并因顾虑愿望落空而心情不安,感到焦虑的”, 如: l'm anxious to know the final result. 我急于想知道最后的结果。 eagerly adv. eagerness n. 2.work/task/ duty/job/responsibility 【参考词汇】 work 常指正式职业和职位的经常性、一般性工作，不含有“艰巨”、“沉重”等意思。是不可数名词。at work在工作 work hard at努力工作（或学习）；out of work失业。My work is as a doctor.我当医生（职业）。 task 一般指必须完成的“任务”, 是可数名词。如: Mother set me the task of sweeping the floor.母亲把扫地的任务交给了我。task 往往含有“艰巨”、“沉重”等意思。而work 除另有修饰语外不含此种意思。 duty指“道义上的责任”, 较强调“自觉性”, 如: Every citizen has the duty to construct his country. 每个公民都有建设祖国的责任。 job指“活、事、一份工作”时是可数名词,多指为换取报酬而进行的日常活动，尤指作为某人的手艺、行业或职业的工作。可数。Washing the windows is not my job. 洗窗子不是我的事儿（任务）。习惯表达: a good job一件好事lose one's job失业be out of a job失业do a

必修unitmakingthenews课文原文

My first work assignment “Unforgettable”, says new journalist Never will I Zhou Yang(ZY) forget his first assignment at the office of a popular English newspaper. His discussion with his new boss, Hu Xin(HX), was to strongly influence his life as a journalist. HX: Welcome. We’re delighted you’re coming to work with us. Your first job here will be an assistant journalist. Dou you have any questions? ZY: Can I go out on a story immediately? HX: (laughing) That’s admirable, but I’m afraid it would be unusual! Wait till you’re more experienced. First we’ll put you as an assistant to an experience journalist. Later you can cover a story and submit the article yourself. ZY: Wonderful! What do I need to take with me? I already have a notebook and camera. HX: No need for a camera. You’ll have a professional photography with you to take photographs. Yo u’ll find your colleagues very eager to assist you, so you may be able to concentrate on photography later if you’re interested. ZY: Thank you. Not only am I interested in photography, but I took an amateur course at university to update my skills. HX: Good. ZY: what do I need to remember when I go out to cover a story? HX: You need to be curious. Only if you ask as many different questions will you acquire all the information you need to know. We say a good journalist must have a good “noose” for a story. That means you must be able to assess when people are not telling the whole truth and then try to discover it. They must use research to inform themselves of the missing parts of the story. ZY: What should I keep in mind? HX: Here comes my list of dos and don’ts: don’t miss your deadline, don’t be rude, don’t talk too much, but make sure you listen to the interviewee carefully. ZY: Why is listening so important? HX: Well, you have to listen for detailed facts. Meanwhile you have to prepare the next question depending on what the person says. ZY: But how can I listen carefully while taking notes? HX: That is a trick of the trade. If the interviewee agrees, you can use a recorder to get the facts straight. It’s also useful if a person wants to challenge you. You have the evidence to support your story. ZY: I see! Have you ever had a case where someone accused your journalist of getting the wrong end of the stick? HX: Yes, but it was a long time ago. This is how the story goes. A footballer was accused of taking money or deliberately not scoring goals so as to let the other team win. We went to interview him. He denied taking money but we were skeptical. So we arranged an interview between the footballer and the man supposed to bribe him. When we saw them together we guessed from the footballer’s body language that he was not telling the truth. So we wrote an article suggesting he was guilty. It was a dilemma because the footballer could have demanded damages if we were wrong. He tried to stop us publishing it but later we were proved right. ZY: Wow! That was a real “scoop”. I’m looking forward to my first assignment now. Perhaps I’ll get a scoop too! HX: Perhaps you will. You never know.

Unit 4 Making the news知识点总结

Book 5 Unit 4 Making the news 一、重点词汇总结 1.concentrate：vi. 聚精会神，集中思想，多与on 和upon 或连用; Concentrate on your work. 集中精神工作。 A driver should concentrate on the road when driving. 司机开车的时候应该集中注意力在路上。 Industrial development is being concentrated in the west of the country. 工业发展主要集中在本国的西部地区。 2.acquire：vt. 获得, 学到，取得，拥有；分词：acquired, acquiring； She acquired a knowledge of the English by careful study.她通过认真学习获得英语知识。 Some smoking and alcoholic drinks are an acquired taste and are not in born. 一些香烟和酒精饮料的口味不是天然的，而是加工获得的。 3.accuse sb. of doing sth. 指责，指控;分词：accused, accusing； The police accused him of murder. 警方指控他谋杀。 She accused him lying. 她指责他说谎. He was wrongly accused of stealing. 他误遭控告犯偷盗罪. 4.be of interest/ importance/value/use/help,… = interesting/important/valuable/useful/helpful... ，……是感兴趣的/重要的/有价值的/有用的/有帮助的…… This is a matter of great importance. 这是一件非常重要的事。 The book is of great value to me. 这本书对我来说有很大价值。 There is nothing interesting/of interest in today's newspaper. 今天的报纸没什么有趣的内容。 5.Journalist：n.新闻记者；新闻工作者 He is a professional journalist. 他是一位专门的新闻从业人员 6.Delighted：a. 高兴的, 快乐的。 I am really delighted. 我真的很高兴。关联词语：delight n. 高兴, 愉快；vt. 使高兴, 乐于；vi. 感到高兴(或愉快、快乐)

必修5 Unit 4 Making the news教学设计

必修5 Unit 4 Making the news教学设计教材分析 I．教学内容分析本单元的中心话题是“新闻”，内容涉及新闻工作者应该具备的素质和新闻采访的基本程序等。语言技能和语言知识主要围绕“新闻”这一中心话题进行设计的。 W arming up部分通过讨论来引出报社各工作人员的工作类别和所负的责任。关键在于What’s the job?和What it involves? Pre-reading部分首先通过一个调查问卷来引导学生去考虑一个优秀的记者应该具备的素质；然后引导学生谈他们难忘的经历和感受；最后通过一个“假设”为下一部分的学习做好准备。 Reading部分通过Zhou Yang,一个跃跃欲试的新手和他的上司Hu Xin, 一个经验丰富的资深记者之间的谈话引导学生了解新闻工作者应该具备的素质，新闻采访的基本程序及采访时应该注意的要点等。 Comprehending设计了四个教学活动来加深学生对“阅读”（Comprehending）部分的理解和复习。第一个活动要求学生根据要求，通过阅读找到所需要的信息，重新组织后再呈现出来。第二个活动要求学生把阅读部分分成三个小节，并说明每个小节的要点。第三个活动通过形容词归类进一步去引导学生思考一个优秀的文字记者和摄影记者应该具备的素质。第四个活动要求学生朗读后半部分对话，练习句子重音和语调。 Learning about language 归纳和运用了本单元的一些重点词汇和语法。 Using language部分涵盖了听，说，读，写四项语言基本技能。第一部分学生首先通过阅读“获得‘独家新闻’”一文。写出“新闻”报道的步骤和见报前的有关程序，然后讨论这位“影星”可能说了什么谎话。第二部分首先听一段对篮球明星姚明的采访。随后的练习设计既训练了学生获取要点的能力，又引导学生如何获取细节。最后要求学生通过开展两人对话活动复习巩固有关交际功能“约会”的用语。 Summing up部分归纳了本单元的主要学习内容并引导学生对学习效果进行自我检测。 Learning tip部分建议学生尽可能多的阅读一些适合于中学生的英文报纸。教师不妨

必修makingthenews课文原文

必修 m a k i n g t h e n e w s课文原文集团档案编码：[YTTR-YTPT28-YTNTL98-UYTYNN08]

M y f i r s t w o r k a s s i g n m e n t “Unforgettable”, says new journalist Never will I Zhou Yang(ZY) forget his first assignment at the office of a popular English newspaper. His discussion with his new boss, Hu Xin(HX), was to strongly influence his life as a journalist. HX: Welcome. We’re delighted you’re coming to work with us. Your first job here will be an assistant journalist. Dou you have any questions? ZY: Can I go out on a story immediately? HX: (laughing) That’s admirable, but I’m afraid it would be unusual! Wait till you’re more experienced. First we’ll put you as an assistant to an experience journalist. Later you can cover a story and submit the article yourself. ZY: Wonderful! What do I need to take with me? I already have a notebook and camera. HX: No need for a camera. You’ll have a professional photography with you to take photographs. Yo u’ll find your colleagues very eager to assist you, so you may be able to concentrate on photography later if you’re interested. ZY: Thank you. Not only am I interested in photography, but I took an amateur course at university to update my skills. HX: Good. ZY: what do I need to remember when I go out to cover a story? HX: You need to be curious. Only if you ask as many different questions will you acquire all the information you need to know. We say a good journalist must have a good “noose” for a story. That means you must be able to assess when people are not telling the whole truth and then try to discover it. They must use research to inform themselves of the missing parts of the story. ZY: What should I keep in mind? HX: Here comes my list of dos and don’ts: don’t miss your deadline, don’t be rude, don’t talk too much, but make sure you listen to the interviewee carefully. ZY: Why is listening so important? HX: Well, you have to listen for detailed facts. Meanwhile you have to prepare the next question depending on what the person says. ZY: But how can I listen carefully while taking notes? HX: That is a trick of the trade. If the interviewee agrees, you can use a recorder to get the facts straight. It’s also useful if a person wants to challenge you. You have the evidence to support your story. ZY: I see! Have you ever had a case where someone accused your journalist of getting the wrong end of the stick? HX: Yes, but it was a long time ago. This is how the story goes. A footballer was accused of taking money or deliberately not scoring goals so as to let the other team win. We went to interview him. He denied taking money but we were skeptical. So we arranged an interview between the footballer and the man supposed to bribe him. When we saw them together we guessed from the footballer’s body language that he was not telling the truth. So we wrote an article suggesting he was guilty. It was a dilemma because the

Unit4Makingthenews

Unit4Makingthenews unit 4 making the news一. 教学目标(teaching aims)1. 能力目标(ability aim)enable the ss to recognize the variety of jobs there are in newspapers and what is needed to work in a newspaper office.enable the ss to know what is needed to become a reporter and how to conduct an interview.2.. 语言目标(language aim)重点词汇和短语occupation, do research, on one’s own, cover, concentrate on, acquire, accuse…of, so as to, scoop重点句子1) not till you are more experienced!2) you’ll find your colleagues very eager to assist you and if you are interested in photography, it may be possible for you to concentrate on that later on.3) not only am i interested in photography, but i took a course at university, so it’s actually of special interest to me.4) only if you ask many questions will you acquire all the information you need to know. 5) we say a good reporter must have a “nose”for a story.6) this is a trick of the trade.7) have you ever had a case where somebody accused your reporters of getting the wrong end of the stick?8) perhaps i too will get a scoop!二. 教学重难点(teaching important points)know what is needed to

_Unit4_Making_the_News_全单元教案

Period 1 Reading Ⅰ. Teaching aims: 1. Target language occupation, do research, on one’s own, cover, concentrate on, acquire, accuse…of, so as to, scoop 1)Not till you are more experienced! 2)You’ll find your colleagues very eager to assist you and if you are interested in photography, it may be possible for you to concentrate on that later on. 3)Not only am I interested in photography, but I took a course at university, so it’s actually of special interest to me. 4)Only if you ask many questions will you acquire all the information you need to know. 5)We say a good reporter must have a “nose” for a story. 6)This is a trick of the trade. 7)Have you ever had a case where somebody accused your reporters of getting the wrong end of the stick? 8)Perhaps I too will get a scoop! 2. Ability goal 1)Enable the students to talk about qualities needed to be a good reporter and how to conduct a good interview 2)Train the students’ reading ability(skimming, detail reading) Ⅱ. Teaching important points: Help the students learn about the qualities need to be a good reporter, how to get an accurate story and how to protect a story form accusation. Ⅲ. Teaching difficult points: How to help the students learn about the qualities need to be a good reporter, how to get an accurate story and how to protect a story form accusation. Ⅳ. Teaching methods: Cooperative learning, task-based learning, fast-reading

Unit 4 Making the news语言点

学习目标重点词汇 delighted, assist，eager, acquire, inform，demand, accurate, approve, 小词简析重点短语 accuse of, in the process of, concentrate on, defend against, have a nose for, depend on, ahead of 重点句型 1. so as to 引导目的状语 2. ... case +定语从句重点词汇 delighted 【原句回放】We’re delighted you’re coming to work with us. 你来与我们一起工作，我们很高兴。【点拨】delighted adj.感到欣喜的，感到快乐的，用于表示人的内心感觉。常用搭配： be delighted to do sth. 高兴做某事 be delighted at/ by 因......而高兴 be delighted that 因......而高兴 She was delighted to hear the twitter of the birds somewhere near her window. 她很高兴地听着窗外鸟儿的鸣叫声。 The mother was delighted at the recovery of her baby. 那位母亲因为她的婴儿恢复了健康而非常高兴。 We’re delighted that you’ll be here soon. 你不久就来这里了，我们真高兴。【拓展】 delight vt.使（某人）高兴，使（某人）欣喜n.快乐，高兴，使人快乐的人或事。 delightful adj.令人愉悦的常用短语： take delight in (doing) sth. 喜爱，以......为乐 to one’s delight 令人高兴的是