You are here:

Effects of Precomputer Website Framing on Student Recall and Knowledge Restructuring

, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada ; , Edith Cowan University, Australia

IJET Volume 7, Number 2, ISSN 1077-9124 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA


This study examined the effects of student-created paper-based website frames on their recall and knowledge restruc-turing. Statistical and observational comparisons were made of 25 students' knowledge and web page products in Frame and Nonframe groups. The Nonframe group outperformed the Frame group on the posttest immediately after class lec-tures. While both groups improved in their knowledge of content after the authoring activity, the experimental (Frame) group had a statistically superior improvement in test scores (n=18) and out-performed the control group (the group with-out the precomputer framing activity) on the final recall test. Implications of the study are reported and future directions discussed. The results are intended to inform researchers and teachers about how to reverse a trend among students who prefer to approach website programming as a technocentric design activity that is largely dependent on the capabilities of the computer system.


Brown, E. & Mann, a.B. (2001). Effects of Precomputer Website Framing on Student Recall and Knowledge Restructuring. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(2), 129-163. Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved February 22, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Crook, C. (1991). Computers in the zone of proximal development: Implications for evaluation. Computers and Education, 17(1) , 81-91.
  2. Derry (1984). Effects of an organizer on memory for prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76 , 98-107.
  3. Manual for Education 3040. (8th ed.). St. Johns, NF: School of Gener-
  4. Hergert , T. (1995). Two applied revisions of a multimedia tool: Assessing
  5. Johnson, J. (1997). Web Workshop. Learning and Leading withTechnology, 25(2) , 44-48.
  6. Lookatch, R. (1997). Multimedia Improves Learning —Apples , Oranges, and the Type I Error. Contemporary Education, 68 , 110-113.
  7. Mann, B. (1997). Explorer centres: Good practice and assessment for
  8. Mann, B. (1998a). Instructional design for online learning: A cases tudy of WebCT developers. Universities in a Digital Era: Transformation, Innovation and Tradition. Proceedings of The Seventh Annual EDEN Conference University of Bologna, Italy, June 26.
  9. Mann , B . (1998b) . Three phases of web-based instructional development .
  10. Mann, B. (1994). Approaching change: Searching for the best policies to bring computers into our schools. Prospects, 1(3) , 10-13.
  11. Mann, B. (1995). Focus attention with temporal sound. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27 (4) , 16-29.
  12. McAleese , R. (1985). Some problems of knowledge representation in an authoring environment. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 22, 299-306.
  13. Merrill , D . (1983). Component display theory. In C.M. Reigeluth Instructional design: Theories and models. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  14. Plato. The Meno. In R.E. Allen (1966). Greek Philosophy: Tha les to Aristotle. (pp. 108-110). Translated by W.K.C. Guthrie. New York: The Free Press.
  15. Rieber, L. (1994). Computers, graphics and learning. Madison, WI: Brown and Benchmark.
  16. Ross , W . (1991) . Teaching with computers: High-tech , low-touch? Compu ters in the Schools, 1, 20-31.
  17. Rueter, J. (1996). Self-Assessment of Technology Skills. [Online]. Available: November 30.
  18. Stemler , L. (1997). Educational characteristics of multimedia: A literature review. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia 6(3 /4) , 339-359.
  19. Web W inners (1996) . W4: The Web Winners design contest . [Online]. Available: .html
  20. Zhao, Y. (1998). Design for adoption: The development of an integrated Webbased education environment. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 30(3) , 307-328.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. The Post and Vote Model of Web-Based Peer Assessment

    Bruce Mann, Memorial University, Canada

    EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2005 (Jun 27, 2005) pp. 2067–2074

  2. Student teachers as educational Web site creators: an evaluation of their difficulties with regard to the Web design and development process within a constructivist and collaborative learning environment

    Marina Papastergiou, University Of Thessaly, Greece

    EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2004 (2004) pp. 3406–3411

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact