Purposeful Visuals In eLearning: Forms, Modes, And Functions

From Verbal Content To Purposeful Visuals

As knowledge progresses from concrete to abstract, verbal language becomes the dominant medium for conveying that knowledge. You can use cave art to create a simple how-to-kill-a-mammoth guide, but you need words (a lot of words) to write an academic article on the implications of quantum entanglement for cryptographic security. You can explain how to use a simple home appliance with a series of pictures, but you need at least a few words to explain how to troubleshoot it or contact customer support.

The Words-Centric Approach

Instructional Designers often default to the words-centric approach when creating training materials, unless the subject naturally demands visual demonstrations, such as a user manual for a piece of equipment or a tutorial on how to navigate a software system. This approach can be based on the assumption that verbal language is the only meaningful way to explain the subject matter to the learner.

The words-centric approach usually yields “bullet point parades”; slides, pages, or screens (depending on the training delivery format) filled with bullet points representing key ideas. Even when key ideas explicitly refer to a visual, maybe a chart or graph, and we use that visual, this may be done only because the relevance of the visual is obvious and it already exists. However, this does not divert from the words-centric approach, as the bullet points still represent the essence of our training material.

Incorporating Purposeful Visuals In Instructional Design

Most Instructional Designers know that training materials should be not only informative but also visually appealing. This is why, even if we use the words-centric approach, we decorate our bullet point parades with some pretty images from our stock art subscriptions. While these decorative images may indeed have a positive impact on visual appeal, they don’t add any value to the learning process and can, in certain cases, shift the learner’s focus or cause cognitive overload.

As an Instructional Designer and enthusiast of Mayer’s Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning, I believe that purposeful visuals can be powerful tools in any learning experience, especially in a self-paced eLearning environment where the inability to interact with the instructor in real time significantly increases the learners’ dependence on the learning material. This means our goal, as Instructional Designers, should be to design the best possible materials for our eLearning customers, with a logical flow of content, a strong narrative supported by quality voiceover, and purposeful visuals that promote learning.

Forms, Modes, And Functions Of Instructional Visuals

I have adapted R. Clark and C. Lyons’s categorization of instructional visuals presented in their book Graphics for Learning, using the perspective of my own experience designing visuals for eLearning.

Forms

While the terms “visuals” and “graphics” are often used interchangeably in the context of Instructional Design, I distinguish between them as follows: instructional visuals encompass all visual elements used within instructional materials to facilitate learning, whereas graphics represent one of the forms of instructional visuals, referring specifically to pictorial representations. The other two forms are text-based and mixed visuals.

• Graphical visuals
  Include images, diagrams, charts, graphs, and other visual elements that convey information primarily through pictorial representations.
• Text-based visuals
  Include text organized in ways that visually enhance understanding, such as lists, tables, and typography-based designs.
• Mixed visuals
  Combine both graphical elements and text to present information in a cohesive and integrated manner. Examples include infographics, annotated diagrams, concept maps, etc.

Modes

There are three distinct modes in which instructional visuals can be developed and presented:

• Static
  Visuals that do not move or change.
• Dynamic
  Moving or changing visuals, such as animations, videos, or kinetic typography.
• Interactive
  Visuals that allow learners to engage with the content, such as interactive maps, simulations, drag-and-drop activities, and so on.

Functions

The main functions of instructional visuals include representational, organizational, relational, interpretive, and mnemonic.

• Representational visuals
  Depict real objects, people, places, or concepts in a realistic or highly recognizable manner. Examples include photographs and videos capturing real-life objects, people, or scenes; realistic illustrations and drawings (such as an illustration of the human heart showing its structure and components or a schematic drawing of a piece of equipment); screenshots and screen recordings demonstrating how to use a software tool.
• Organizational visuals
  Help structure and organize information, making it easier for learners to understand complex systems and ideas. Examples include tables, matrices, timelines, hierarchical diagrams, layered pyramids, and onion diagrams.
• Relational visuals
  Highlight relationships between different concepts, items, or variables. Examples include Venn diagrams, fishbone diagrams, mind maps, and input-output models.
• Interpretive visuals
  Help interpret data, processes, and abstract concepts. Examples include infographics, pie charts, bar charts, column charts, flowcharts, histograms, graphs, and pictograms.
• Mnemonic visuals
  Help remember information by associating the new content with familiar and easily recalled knowledge. Most common examples include icons, analogies, and acrostic-style acronyms (such as “HOMES” to remember the Great Lakes).

Conclusion

The use of well-designed purposeful visuals in eLearning courses has significant benefits for the learner:

• They reduce cognitive overload by clarifying and simplifying complex information through visual representations.
• They support the transfer of knowledge by leveraging the power of visual memory and creating associations.
• They promote deeper understanding by building effective mental models.
• They draw attention to important elements of the instructional content.
• They cater to different learning styles, providing a richer and more inclusive learning experience.
• They support learners’ motivation by making the training material more meaningful and engaging.

Moreover, incorporating purposeful visuals into the Instructional Design process unlocks new creative potentials for Instructional Designers and deepens their understanding of the subject matter.

Despite my drawing skills never advancing beyond the level of an average 5-year-old and not having received any graphic design training, my desire to use a holistic approach to Instructional Design, where verbal and visual languages are closely connected, helps me generate ideas for visually representing verbal content in a meaningful way.

References

• Mayer, R. 2021. Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. In R. Mayer, and L. Fiorella (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. pp. 57-72. Cambridge University Press.
• Clark, R. and Lyons, C. 2011. Graphics for Learning: Proven Guidelines for Planning, Designing, and Evaluating Visuals in Training Materials. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.