Using PowerPoint as a lens to focus on linearity in teaching

Journal of Further and Higher Education

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 333-346

  Kinchin, Ian M ^a   Chadha, Deesha ^a   Kokotailo, Patricia ^b  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

Affordances; Concept maps; Powerpoint; University teaching

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957715200     PISSN: 0309877X     EISSN: 14699486     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03098770802392923     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Adams, C., 2006. PowerPoint, habits of mind, and classroom culture. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38: 389–411.
2. Adams, C., 2007. ‘On the ‘informed use’ of PowerPoint’: rejoining Vallance and Towndrow. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39: 229–33.
3. Atkinson, C., 2005. Beyond bullet points: Using Microsoft® PowerPoint® to create presentations that inform, motivate and inspire, Redmond, Washington: Microsoft Press International.
4. Atkinson, C., and Mayer, R. E., 2004. Five ways to reduce PowerPoint overload. http://www.sociablemedia.com/PDF/atkinson_mayer_powerpoint_4_23_04.pdf#search=‘five%20ways%20to%20reduce%20powerpoint%20overload’
5. Biggs, J., 2003. Teaching for quality learning at university, Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education (SRHE)/Open University Press. 2nd ed.
6. Bligh, D. A., 2000. What's the use of lectures?, San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass.
7. Boote, D. N., 2003. Teacher educators as belief‐and‐attitude therapists: Exploring psychodynamic implications of an emerging role. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 9 (3): 257–77.
8. Bradley, J. H., Paul, R., and Seeman, E., 2006. Analyzing the structure of expert knowledge. Information and Management, 43: 77–91.
9. Clement, J., Zeitsman, A., and Brown, D. E., 1989. Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: Finding ‘anchoring conceptions’ for grounding instruction on students' intuitions. International Journal of Science Education, 11 (5): 554–65.
10. Daley, B. J., 2002. Facilitating learning with adult students through concept mapping. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 50 (1): 21–31.
11. Dewey, J., 1910. How we think, Boston: DC Heath & Co.
12. Doumont, J.‐L., 2005. The cognitive style of PowerPoint: Slides are not all evil. Technical Communication, 52 (1): 64–70.
13. Edwards, J., and Fraser, K., 1983. Concept maps as reflectors of conceptual understanding. Research in Science Education, 13: 19–26.
14. Gamache, P., 2002. University students as creators of personal knowledge: An alternative epistemological view. Teaching in Higher Education, 7 (3): 277–94.
15. Geels, F. W., 2005. Technological transitions and system innovations: A co‐evolutionary and socio‐technical analysis, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
16. Gibson, J. J., 1979. The ecological approach to visual perception, Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
17. Gravett, S. J., and Swart, E., 1997. Concept mapping: A tool for promoting and assessing conceptual change. South African Journal of Higher Education, 11 (2): 122–26.
18. Harknett, R. J., and Cobane, C. T., 1997. Introducing instructional technology to international relations. Political Science and Politics, 30: 496–500.
19. Harris, I., and Cavaglioli, O., 2003. Think it–map it! How schools use mapping to transform teaching and learning, Stafford: Network Educational Press.
20. Hay, D. B., and Kinchin, I. M., 2006. Using concept maps to reveal conceptual typologies. Education and Training, 48 (2&3): 127–42.
21. Hay, D. B., Riley, M., and Kinchin, I. M., 2005. “ Entrepreneurial cognition and entrepreneurial learning. ”. 127–39. Proceedings of the Internationalising Entrepreneurship Education and Training Conference, July 10–13, University of Surrey, UK
22. Huxham, M., 2005. Learning in lectures: Do ‘interactive windows’ help?. Active Learning in Higher Education, 6 (1): 17–31.
23. Jones, S. E., 2007. Reflections on the lecture: Outmoded medium or instrument of inspiration?. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31 (4): 397–406.
24. Kennewell, S., 2001. Using affordances and constraints to evaluate the use of information and communications technology in teaching and learning. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10 (1&2): 101–16.
25. Kinchin, I. M., 2001. Can a novice be viewed as an expert upside‐down?. School Science Review, 83 (303): 91–5.
26. Kinchin, I. M., 2006a. Developing PowerPoint handouts to support meaningful learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37 (4): 647–50.
27. Kinchin, I. M., 2006b. Concept mapping, PowerPoint, and a pedagogy of access. Journal of Biological Education, 40 (2): 79–83.
28. Kinchin, I. M., 2007. “ PowerPoint‐præsentation og concept mapping. ”. In Læring og læringsstile–om inikke og fælles veje i pædagogikken [PowerPoint presentations and concept mapping. In: Learning and learning styles–personal and shared pedagogies] Edited by: Knoop, H. H, Lassen, L. M, and Boström, L. 123–51. In Danish. Copenhagen, Dansk Psykologisk Forlag
29. Kinchin, I. M., and Alias, M., 2005. Exploiting variations in concept map morphology as a lesson‐planning tool for trainee teachers in higher education. Journal of In‐service Education, 31 (3): 569–91.
30. Kinchin, I. M., and Cabot, L. B., 2007. Using concept mapping principles in PowerPoint. European Journal of Dental Education, 11 (4): 194–99.
31. Kinchin, I. M., Cabot, L. B., and Hay, D. B., 2008. Visualising expertise: Towards an authentic pedagogy for higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 13 (3): 315–326.
32. Kinchin, I. M., DeLeij, F. A. A. M., and Hay, D. B., 2005. The evolution of a collaborative concept mapping activity for undergraduate microbiology students. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 29 (1): 1–14.
33. Kinchin, I. M., and Hay, D. B., 2007. The myth of the research‐led teacher. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13 (1): 43–61.
34. Kinchin, I. M., Hay, D. B., and Adams, A., 2000. How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educational Research, 42 (1): 43–57.
35. Kinchin, I. M., Lygo‐Baker, S., and Hay, D. B., 2008. Universities as centres of non‐learning. Studies in Higher Education, 33 (1): 89–103.
36. Kozma, R., 2003. The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13 (2): 205–16.
37. Laurillard, D., Stratfold, M., Luckin, R., Plowman, L., and Taylor, J., 2000. Affordances for learning in a non‐linear narrative medium. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 62: 1–19.
38. Lea, M. R., 2005. “ Communities of practice in higher education: Useful heuristic or educational model? ”. In Beyond communities of practice: Language, power and social context, Edited by: Barton, D, and Tusting, K. 180–97. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. Meyer, J., and Land, R., 2003. Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Linkages to ways of thinking and practicing within the disciplines Enhancing teaching‐learning environments in undergraduate courses: Occasional report 4: 1–12. http://www.ed.ac.uk/etl/docs/ETLreport4.pdf
40. Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., and Novak, J. D., 1997. “ Meaningful learning in science: The human constructivist perspective. ”. In Handbook of academic learning, Edited by: Phye, G. D. 405–47. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
41. Northedge, A., 2003a. Rethinking teaching in the context of diversity. Teaching in Higher Education, 8 (1): 17–32.
42. Northedge, A., 2003b. Enabling participation in academic discourse. Teaching in Higher Education, 8 (2): 169–180.
43. Novak, J. D., 1998. Learning, creating and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
44. Novak, J. D., and Symington, D. J., 1982. Concept mapping for curriculum development. Victoria Institute for Educational Research Bulletin, 48: 3–11.
45. Pearsall, N. R., Skipper, J. J., and Mintzes, J. J., 1997. Knowledge restructuring in the life sciences: A longitudinal study of conceptual change in biology. Science Education, 81: 193–215.
46. Shambaugh, R. N., 1995. The cognitive potential of visual constructions. Journal of Visual Literacy, 15: 7–24.
47. Shulman, L., 1987. Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57: 1–22.
48. Shwom, B. L., and Keller, K. P., 2003. The great man has spoken. Now what do I do? A response to Edward R. Tufte's ‘The cognitive style of PowerPoint’. Communication Insight, 1 (1): 1–16.
49. Sugahara, S., and Boland, G., 2006. The effectiveness of PowerPoint presentations in the accounting classroom. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 15 (4): 391–403.
50. Szabo, A., and Hastings, N., 2000. Using IT in the undergraduate classroom: Should we replace the blackboard with PowerPoint?. Computers and Education, 35: 175–87.
51. Trigwell, K., and Shale, S., 2004. Student learning and the scholarship of university teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 29 (4): 523–36.
52. Tufte, E. R., 2003. The cognitive style of PowerPoint, Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press LLC.
53. Tufte, E. R., 2006. The cognitive style of PowerPoint: Pitching out the corrupts within, Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press LLC. 2nd ed.
54. Vallance, M., and Towndrow, P. A., 2007. Towards the ‘informed use’ of information and communication technology in education: A response to Adams' ‘PowerPoint, habits of mind, and classroom culture’. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39: 219–27.
55. Webb, M. E., 2005. Affordances of ICT in science learning: Implications for an integrated pedagogy. International Journal of Science Education, 27 (6): 705–35.
56. Webb, M. E., and Cox, M., 2004. A review of pedagogy related to information and communications technology. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13 (3): 235–86.
57. Willerman, M., and MacHarg, R. A., 1991. The concept map as an advance organizer. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28 (8): 705–11.