Knowledge Acquisition Theories
There are many theories of knowledge acquisition which attempt to conceptualize how knowledge is acquired and interpreted in the mind. The following sections focus on general schema theory, cognitive flexibility theory and visual learning.
Schema Theory
The most noted theoretical framework for understanding the cognitive process is schema theory (Rumelhart & Ortony, 1986, 1977). Schema theory proposes that when individuals obtain knowledge, they attempt to fit that knowledge into some structure in memory that helps them make sense of that knowledge. Schema theory proposes that the individuals breakdown information into generalizable chunks which are then categorically stored in the brain for later recall (Gagne, 1993). Schema theory is an active strategy coding technique necessary for facilitating the recall of knowledge. As new knowledge is perceived, it is coded into either a pre-existing schema or organized into a new script (Gagne, 1993). In essence, schemata are organized mental structures that aid the learnersÕ ability to understand and associate what is being presented to them. Piaget (1952) was the first to introduce the notion of schema theory with his concepts of accommodation and assimilation. Today, these concepts as are best defined as assimilation being schema usage and accommodation as schema change (Anderson, 1977). Rumelhart & Ortony (1986) extended these notions by refining the elements to include accretion as the accumulation of factual information within the context of an existing schema; tuning referring to the use and modification of existing schema; and restructuring as the formation of new knowledge structures.
Furthering the discussing of schema attributes, Vosniadou and Brewer (1987) argued that knowledge structuring conceptualization can be seen as either global or domain specific. Global structuring is best exemplified by PiagetÕs theory of child development. In defining his four stages of development (sensormotor, preoperational, concrete operational and formal operations) he suggested that the transition between each occurs because of a radical restructuring of schema. As such, children are able to acquire knowledge in all domains. However, Vosniadou and Brewer argue that the ability to acquire knowledge in all domains results when a child becomes an expert of the knowledge. Novices hold a different view of knowledge and as such cannot appropriate modify or adjust the knowledge to different domains. Hence, some researchers argue that the ability to make knowledge functional is a problem associated with how the knowledge is first received.
Cognitive Flexibility Theory
Cognitive Flexibility Theory (CFT) is a schema type theory of knowledge acquisition and transfer in complex and ill-structured domains (Feltovich, P. J. , Spiro, R. J., & Coulson, R. L., 1989; Jacobson & Spiro, 1992). The researchers advocate that general schema theories may work for introductory level courses. But, the researchers caution that it may give an oversimplified perspective of the topic that may cause misconceptions. With advanced knowledge acquisition, there is much interconnectedness among the concepts; thus, there needs to be flexibility in how the complex knowledge is learned. It should be noted that well-structured problems typically have solutions that have a consensual agreement. In ill-structured domains, however, such solutions donÕt readily exist (Wicker, 1987). Moreover, some researchers reject the idea that concepts have definable attributes (Wittgenstein, 1968). Ideas have similarities that criss-cross and overlap. One of the key elements of cognitive flexibility theory is based on this notion of multiple representations.
Multiple representations. Knowledge acquisition in complex domains is best acquired by having the learner "criss-cross the knowledge landscape" (Feltovich, P. J. , Spiro, R. J., & Coulson, R. L., 1989); thus, the learner should be able to acquire the knowledge from multiple perspectives. This would make it flexible in the learnersÕ minds so that the learner may readily apply it to a variety of situations. Furthermore, cognitive flexibility theory is based on studies which suggest that an oversimplification of knowledge interferes with the studentsÕ ability to learn advanced knowledge and that oversimplification promotes misconceptions (Feltovich, P. J. , Spiro, R. J., & Coulson, R. L., 1989). In essence, teachers may simplify instruction to make it easier for students to take notes and to prepare for tests. Many linear forms of teaching including videotapes often present an oversimplification. CFT avoids oversimplification by stressing component interaction as is accomplished in hypertext domains. Extending these ideas to visual learning, one can see that visual learning itself is a complex domain requiring flexible knowledge acquisition.
Visual Learning
The first stage of visual learning is differentiation (Couch, Caropreso & Miller, 1994). Differentiation is the critical or analytical component of decoding during which relevant information is identified or recognized and classified into categories. This information becomes the basis for the "intended message" or the literal message that eventually stimulates the schema. The second stage is interpretation. "Viewers cannot interpret a visual message unless they can extract the factual or realistic information, that is, the literal meaning of the visual. Interpretation involves synthesizing the analyzed factual or realistic information, connecting the new or unfamiliar information with existing knowledge, and then making inferences and judgments about the new and newly integrated information." (Couch, Caropreso, & Miller, 1994, p.279). Moreover, creativity is an important aspect of interpretation. It is creativity that helps enhance understanding the meaning of the visual (Couch, Caropreso, & Miller, 1994).
Despite the debate over creative thinking, the proficiencies mentioned above could easily be applied to multimedia and subsequently to what makes a person visually literate. With fluency, a student will be able to interpret multiple media as related to various prior experiences. Moreover, flexibility would permit various interpretation of the media which will subsequently allow for multiple interpretations. Originality and elaboration will permit students to look beyond the obvious and search for the hidden meaning.
Cognitively, use of visuals for knowledge acquisition purposes does not come without concern. Researchers do argue that visuals more often than not are "distortions from reality " (Miller & Burton, 1994, p. 77). Further, prior experiences and expectations mostly effect what it is we will see. So, an individual would have trouble acquiring knowledge from a visual scene or visual material, if it contradicts what stored in his/her memory. Moreover, "when an image is mislabeled, words are not correctly illustrated, or when there is any other instance of showing one thing while saying another, the natural relationship is destroyed and the result is visual-verbal discontinuity" (Braden, 1994, p. 194).
For knowledge acquisition purposes, visuals can be defined into 5 categories: (Braden, 1994, p. 195):
In processing visual information, studies show that adults process information faster than children do because cognitive tasks develop with age. However, this is quickly changing with multimedia because young children, contrary to research (Gross, 1985, Welsandt & Meyer, 1974), are becoming accustomed to multi-tasking information processing. Miller and Burton (1994) state that "generally the literature suggests that young children tend to possess less skill than adults in processing information stored in the sensory registers. Several possible reasons are suggested for this inadequacy, including developmental changes, lack of facilitating strategies, and the type of (unrealistic) tasks in and experimental design" (p.71). Clearly, my proposed study would help clarify if indeed children do have the ability to better process multi-sensory information.