Johnson, C. & Priest, H. A. (2014). The feedback principle in multimedia learning. In R. E.

Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. (pp. 449-463). New York:
Cambridge.
(e.g. Chapter 19)

With the use of multimedia learning and the individual learning styles that are found within
each classroom, some multimedia tools may be more difficult because they integrate
information across different modalities and content areas (pg. 381). While instructing
students with multiple learning styles, each new piece of content may be learned differently
among each student, therefore feedback to a certain degree is required for optimal learning.
With novice students with very low prior knowledge levels, explanatory feedback provides
students with a principle-based explanation connected to an incorrect or correct solution
(pg. 381). All in all, the guidance from the instructor may reduce the cognitive overload, and
also decrease the amount of extraneous processing when corrective feedback is provided
(pg. 381). With multiple multimedia games tested, the results show that when a game
provides direct explanatory feedback the students were able to develop a deeper
understanding of the material than students who were only provided corrective feedback
(pg. 382).

Feedback principle for multimedia pairs with the cognitive theory of multimedia learning
because learners have separate channels for processing verbal and pictorial information,
the cognitive processing channel is limited, and by selection, organization, and integration
of prior knowledge with the new meaningful information (pg. 383). Even though explanatory
feedback is consistent with improvements in learning and connected to deeper
understanding of material, the feedback that is provided by the instructor or by the
multimedia learning tool they should prompt active processing, consider other design
principles, and be selective according to the individual learner.

Scheiter, K. (2014). The learner control principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer

(Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. (pp. 487-512). New York:
Cambridge.
(e.g. Chapter 21)

Giving students the opportunity to learn at their own pace within a specific amount of time
would allow them to actively use the learner control principle. With student-led learning,
students with higher prior knowledge levels will need little to no instructional support which
could eliminate redundancy. Although, student-led instruction is not beneficial to ALL
students, with additional instructional support which helps orient them in their environment
and structure their time management skills may improve their lower prior knowledge (pg.
411). In order for the learner control principle to work when used in multimedia learning
would be is the multimedia provides encouraging and continuous motivation and if the
learner has the amount of prior knowledge and experiences with such multimedia tools that
will support the choices throughout their learning process. Once again, not all students fit
into one category, so multimedia designers must consider the ideas and principles that may
reach most student learners.
When applying the learner control principle to multimedia learning the designer or instructor
must consider, if the multimedia allows the learner to: exert control over instruction by
selecting and sequencing its content, decide the pace at which they wish to progress, and
select the ways in which the layout displays the content material or information that is
required to-be-learned (pg. 411). All in all, learners should be given the option, but their
learning styles should be the driving factor when selecting their multimedia learning
environments, not the workload of the assignment or activity.

Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2005). Role of Guidance, Reflection, and Interactivity in an
Agent-Based Multimedia Game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1), 117-128.

Guidance in the form of explanatory feedback seemed to produce higher scores, less
incorrect answers, and fewer misconceptions throughout the use of an interactive
multimedia game (pg. 117). While using the same interactive reflections seems to promote
retention of the content when suggested to reflect on program solutions rather than their
own student created solutions (pg. 117). As far as using interactive multimedia games as a
form of instruction, they have great potential to motivate and engage learners (pg. 117). For
the science multimedia game designed and tested the interactivity portion was used by
asking the learner to give a solution to a problem, the reflections portion was used by asking
the learner to explain the correct answer using evidence, and the guidance portion was the
portion that explained why the selected answer was incorrect or correct (pg. 118). While
designing the multimedia learning, designers must be sure of the environment in which the
learner may interact meaningfully with the multimedia tool selected by the instructor.
As for the designer creating an environment that emphasizes guidance, reflection, and
interactivity to foster multimedia learning, one must be aware of the support the learning
environment is able to provide to each student learner in order to build knowledge
successfully (pg. 118). During guided discovery, most instructors prefer that the learners
are exploring, manipulating, and testing hypotheses while building knowledge (pg. 118). Yet
feedback is important when students are learning new content and discovery unknown
solutions. When an educational game uses reflection as a way for learners to elaborate
while reading expository paragraphs, the comprehension levels may improve due to the
inferences made through the reading (pg. 119). Finally, when multimedia games include
interactivity, it may be like the spark that sets the fire going. Interactivity may trigger prior
knowledge in long-term memory, which may allow the student to organize the incoming
information quicker. Even though, instruction may be included along with the discovery
learning, to eliminate frustration by novice learners.
Kalyuga, S. (2007). Enhancing Instructional Efficiency of Interactive E-learning
Environments: A Cognitive Load Perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 387-399.

When designing multimedia learning environments the instructor or designer may consider
the main features and limitations of each learner's cognitive limitations and structure (pg.
387). Interactivity for multimedia learning is when the learning environment has the
capability to respond to the learners actions and promote deep cognitive processes in
which the learner is able to construct understanding of new knowledge (pg. 387). As
designers construct E-learning environments they focus on whether the learning is efficient
rather than effective (pg. 388). Therefore, even with lower prior knowledge students, E-
learning environments that are designed and executed at a high level of motivation, all
learners will learn some content from the interactive environment. Efficiency in learning the
content throughout the interactive E-learning environment is all about learning faster and
with little to no cognitive stress (pg. 388).
Cognitive processing is a major factor when discussing the amount of learning done within a
given time and if that instruction is presented in order to create a little to no cognitive stress
on the working memory of a learner. With the working memory being the activated portion
of the long-term memory, then the duration and limited new information may contribute to
overload (pg. 388). Cognitive load may be created throughout instruction by the instructor
or through E-learning environments, so in order to reduce this extra working memory
cognitive load the instructional design needs to tailor the learners expertise in a specific
task domain (pg. 390). E-learning environments can also reduce cognitive overload by
reducing irrelevant forms of working memory load that may cause the learner to use
cognitive resources to learning processes, which would lower the efficiency of the
environment (pg. 390).
The six interact components that combine to makeup the interact model are:
Responsiveness to learners actions
Some level of learner or system control
Providing a pre-determined level of feedback on specific actions
Real-time, online change according to learner actions
Responses that are tailored to learners previous behaviors
Environments that involve flexible adapted responses to students live inquiries
(Pg. 392- 393).

Ottman, L.R. Jr. (). The Effect of Student-Directed versus Traditional Teacher-centered
Presentations of Content on Student Learning in a High School Statistics Class.
SmartTech.com. New Jersey: Haddon Heights.

With the increase in technology within the classroom and the push to have 1:1 devices
throughout the schools across the district, teachers are feeling the shift towards E-learning
environments. With new interactive presentation devices, the shift from teacher-centered
instruction to student-led instruction and collaboration has been appearing in all content
area classrooms. Traditional teaching is becoming more old-school while engaging,
student-led, collaboratively constructed lessons taught by the students are becoming more
efficient (pg. 4). Even though, the traditional has proven to be successful over student-led,
this may be because the instructional design does not need to change when the learning
environment is modified to include technology or multimedia learning (pg. 9). The
collaboration among students may be an instructional method used throughout a unit of
study, but should be used interchangeably with the traditional teacher directed instruction,
as well.