Guess what? PowerPoint-wise, do we know for sure what works, when, with whom, how, or why? Do we really have enough research evidence to design simple PowerPoint® slides so that our audience will actually learn and retain the content we present?
There is only a fist-full of studies on the basic features and instructional uses of PowerPoint® over the past decade. One unpublished review by Kammeyer (2007) analyzed some of the findings. Here’s the list.
TOP 10 CONCLUSIONS:
1. Most students prefer PowerPoint® to traditional lecture (Amare, 2006; Hastings & Attila, 2000; Savoy, Proctor, & Salvendy, 2009), despite how boring it might be (Mann & Robinson, 2009)
2. Traditional PowerPoint® doesn’t produce significant differences in learning (review by Levasseur & Sawyer, 2006) compared to several alternatives
3. Reading text verbatim on a slide off of the screen decreases learning and retention (“redundancy principle”) (Mayer & Johnson, 2008)
4. Gill Sans, Souvenir, and similar fonts are more comfortable to read, interesting, attractive, and professional compared to other fonts (Mackiewicz, 2007a)
5. High-contrast colors and easy-to-read text, graphs, and graphics increase learning (Bradshaw, 2003)
6. High-contrast slides are not more effective than medium-contrast slides in learning and satisfaction (Earnest, 2003)
7. Full-sentence headline (written as an assertion) compared to a word or phrase increases retention of slide content, especially with a clear supportive graphic (Alley & Neeley, 2005; Alley, Schreiber, Ramsdell, & Muffo, 2006)
8. Irrelevant pictures accompanying text and sound effects decrease learning (Bartsch & Cobern, 2003)
9. 2D graphs are preferable to 3D graphs for clarity and comprehension (Mackiewicz, 2007b; Stewart, Cipolla, & Best, 2009)
10. Cool color (blue, green, etc.) high-contrast graphs are preferred over warm colors (Mackiewicz, 2007b)
POSTMORTUM RELECTION: Obviously, these results from slightly more than a dozen studies don’t tell us a lot about how to prepare our slides. Most used very traditional text-on-the-screen formats with some graphics, resembling electronic overheads. Although the sheer scarcity of studies is inadequate to guide current PowerPoint® practices in teaching and other presentations, they do suggest certain preferences you might consider in your slide designs.
That's it. Whatta ya think? Any comments? Let me know your thoughts.
WHAT’S NEXT? Beyond the basics, presenters should consider a multimedia approach to their PowerPoints®. The research on the multimedia options will be examined in the next few blogs.
COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC
