skip to main content
10.1145/1017833.1017847acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesidcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

What's so "new" about "new media?": comparing effective features of children's educational software, television, and magazines

Published:01 June 2004Publication History

ABSTRACT

Often, researchers use data from past studies to inform the design of current products, However, whereas these "past studies" typically include prior usability tests and other formative research on interactive technology, they often do not include existing formative research in other media. The present literature review identifies some of the features that have been found to contribute to the educational effectiveness of magazines, television programs, and interactive media for children. Although each medium certainly poses its own unique issues, the review demonstrates that, in fact, many of the same features contribute to educational effectiveness across media.

References

  1. Anderson, D. R., Bryant, J., Wilder, A., Santomero, A., Williams, M. & Crawley, A. M. (2000). Researching Blue's Clues: Viewing behavior and impact. Media Psychology, 2, 179-194.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Bryant, J., Zillman, D., & Brown, D. (1983). Entertainment features in children's educational television: Effects on attention and information acquisition. In Bryant, J., & Anderson, D. R. (Eds.), Children's understanding of television: Research on attention and comprehension (pp. 221-240). New York: Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Cherow-O'Leary, R. (2001). Carrying Sesame Street into print: Sesmae Street Magazine, Sesame Street Parents, and Sesame Street books. In Fisch, S. M., & Truglio, R. T. (Eds.), "G" is for growing: Thirty years of research on Sesame Street (pp. 197-214). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Collins, W. A. (1983). Interpretation and inference in children's television viewing. In Bryant, J., & Anderson, D. R. (Eds.), Children's understanding of television: Research on attention and comprehension. New York: Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Collins, W. A., Wellman, H., Keniston, A. H., & Westby, S. D. (1978). Age-related aspects of comprehension and inference from a televised dramatic narrative. Child Development, 49, 389-399.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. CTW Program Research. (1999a). Make-a-Story parent-child interaction study. Unpublished research report. New York: Children's Television Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. CTW Program Research. (1999b). One Tree Hill comic study, Unpublished research report. New York: Children's Television Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. CTW Program Research School-Age Team. (1998). Magazine research: What we've learned. Unpublished research report, New York: Children's Television Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Druin, A., & Solomon, C. (1996). Designing multimedia environments for children. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Eckhardt, B. B., Wood, M. R., & Jacobvitz, R. S. (1991). Verbal ability and prior knowledge: Contributions to adults' comprehension of television. Communication Research, 18, 636-649.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Fisch, S. M. (2000). A capacity model of children's comprehension of educational content on television. Media Psychology, 2, 63-91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Fisch, S. M. (in press). Characteristics of effective materials for informal education: A cross-media comparison of television, magazines, and interactive media. In M. Rabinowitz, F. C. Blumberg, & E. Everson (Eds.), The impact of media and technology on instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Fisch, S. M., Cohen, D. I., McCann, S. K., & Hoffman, L. (1993). Square One TV research history and bibliography. New York: Children's Television Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Fisch, S. M., & McCann, S. K. (1993). Making broadcast television participative: Eliciting mathematical behavior through Square One TV. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41 (3), 103-109.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Fisch, S. M., Wilder, G., Yotive, W. M., & McCann, S. K. (1994, July). How different is "different?": Diversity in the context of overall trends regarding Ghostwriter and Square One TV. In Wilson, B. J. (Chair), Reaching specific audiences through the mass media: Lessons from the Children's Television Workshop. Invited symposium presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Sydney, Australia.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Hanna, L., Risden, K., Czerwinski, M., & Alexander, K. J. (1999). The role of usability research in designing children's computer products. In Druin, A. (Ed.), The design of children's technology (pp. 3-26). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufman Publishers, Inc. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Huston, A. C., & Wright, J. C. (1983). Children's processing of television: The informative functions of formal features. In J. Bryant & D. R. Anderson (Eds.), Children's understanding of television: Research on attention and comprehension (pp. 35-68). New York: Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Kafai, Y. B. (1999). Children as designers, testers, and evaluators of educational software. In Druin, A. (Ed.), The design of children's technology (pp. 123-145). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufman Publishers, Inc. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Kirk, G., & Bernstein, L. (1975). March, 1975 Sesame Street Magazine research report. Unpublished research report. New York: Children's Television Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Lesser, G. S. (1972). Assumptions behind the writing and production methods in Sesame Street. In Schramm, W. (Ed.), Quality in instructional television (pp. 108-164). Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Lesser, G. S. (1974). Children and television: Lessons from Sesame Street. New York: Vintage Books/Random House.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Levin, S. R., & Anderson, D. R. (1976). The development of attention. Journal of Communication, 26, 2, 126-135.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Lieberman, D. (1999). The researcher's role in the design of children's media and technology. In Druin, A. (Ed.), The design of children's technology (pp. 73-97). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufman Publishers, Inc. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Link, N, & Cherow-O'Leary, R. (1990). Research and development of print materials at the Children's Television Workshop. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38, 4, 34-44.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. McGhee, P. E. (1980). Toward the integration of entertainment and educational functions of television: The role of humor. In Tannenbaum, P. (Ed.), The entertainment functions of television (pp. 183-208). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. National Institute of Mental Health. (1982). Television and behavior: Ten years of scientific progress and implications for the Eighties, vol. 1: Summary report. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Nielsen, J. (2000). Designing web usability. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Pace, A. J. (1980). The ability of young children to correct comprehension errors: An aspect of comprehension monitoring. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Pace, A. J. (1981). Comprehension monitoring by elementary students: When does it occur? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Los Angeles, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Reiser, R. A., Tessmer, M. A., & Phelps, P. C. (1984). Adult-child interaction in children's learning from Sesame Street. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 32, 217-223.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Reiser, R. A., Williamson, N., & Suzuki, K. (1988). Using Sesame Street to facilitate children's recognition of letters and numbers. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 36, 15-21.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Revelle, G. L., Strommen, E. F., & Medoff, L. (2001). Interactive technologies research at the Children's Television Workshop. In Fisch. S. M., & Truglio, R. T. (Eds.), "G" is for growing: Thirty years of research on Sesame Street (pp. 215-230). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Salomon, G. (1977). Effects of encouraging Israeli mothers to co-observe Sesame Street with their five-year-olds. Child Development, 48, 1146-1151.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Schauble, L. (1990). Formative evaluation in the design of educational software at the Children's Television Workshop. In Flagg, B. N. (Ed.), Formative evaluation for educational technology (pp. 51-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Shneiderman, B. (1998). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Strommen, E. F., & Revelle, G. L. (1990). Research in interactive technologies at the Children's Television Workshop. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38, 4, 65-80.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Valkenburg, P. M., & Janssen, S. C. (1999). What do children value in entertainment programs? A cross-cultural investigation. Journal of Communication, 49, 2, 3-21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Williams, M. E., Hall, E., Cunningham, H., Albright, M., Schiro, K., & Fisch, S. (1997). Ghostwriter Research History and Bibliography. New York: Children's Television Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Wilsdon, A. (1989). 3-2-1 Contact redesign test. Unpublished research report. New York: Children's Television Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Wilson, K. S., & Talley, W. J. (1990). The "Palenque" project: Formative evaluation in the development and design of an optical disc prototype. In Flagg, B. N. (Ed.), Formative evaluation for educational technology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Zillman, D., Williams, B. R., Bryant, J., Boynton, K. R., & Wolf, M. A. (1980). Acquisition of information from educational television programs as a function of differently paced humorous inserts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 170-180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    IDC '04: Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Interaction design and children: building a community
    June 2004
    190 pages
    ISBN:1581137915
    DOI:10.1145/1017833

    Copyright © 2004 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 1 June 2004

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • Article

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate172of578submissions,30%

    Upcoming Conference

    IDC '24
    Interaction Design and Children
    June 17 - 20, 2024
    Delft , Netherlands

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader