Using Content Acquisition Podcasts to Deliver Core Content to Preservice Teacher Candidates

Abstract

Teacher educators are always looking for instructional strategies that are easy to create and use but are powerful for promoting learning among preservice teacher candidates. Content acquisition podcasts (CAPs) is an example of an instructional strategy that embeds evidence-based instructional design principles to package and deliver critical content in courses such as introductory and foundational special education classes. In this column, a brief overview of current problems of practice that create a need for CAPs, a review research on the use of CAPs for preservice teacher education, and an overview of the processes used to create CAPs are provided.

Full text

http://isc.sagepub.com/
Intervention in School and Clinic
http://isc.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/07/15/1053451214542046
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/1053451214542046
published online 16 July 2014Intervention in School and Clinic
Michael J. Kennedy, Ryan O. Kellems, Cathy Newman Thomas and Jennifer R. Newton
Using Content Acquisition Podcasts to Deliver Core Content to Preservice Teacher Candidates
Published by:
Hammill Institute on Disabilities
and
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at:Intervention in School and ClinicAdditional services and information for
http://isc.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:
http://isc.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
What is This?
- Jul 16, 2014OnlineFirst Version of Record >>
by guest on July 17, 2014isc.sagepub.comDownloaded from by guest on July 17, 2014isc.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Intervention in School and Clinic 1 –6
© Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2014
Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1053451214542046
isc.sagepub.com
Teacher Education
Kristin Sayeski, Associate Editor
Survey and introductory courses on special education are
ubiquitous components of teacher preparation programs
(Reschly, Holdheide, Behrstock, & Weber, 2009). Despite
that these courses are omnipresent on college campuses, the
quality of instruction within them is highly variable. To
illustrate, many instructors’ primary pedagogy is the use of
slide-based presentations (i.e., PowerPoint) to communi-
cate content (Kennedy, Thomas, Aronin, Newton, & Lloyd,
2014). This type of instruction is widely panned by research-
ers who study the scholarship of teaching and learning in
higher education (Gallagher & Reder, 2004–2005; Gier &
Kreiner, 2009; Saville, Zinn, Neef, Van Norman, & Ferreri,
2006). This is not to say teacher candidates do not learn in
these settings; obviously they do. Further, minimal guid-
ance is available within the special education teacher edu-
cation literature base in regard to alternative, effective
instructional practices in higher education (Leko, Brownell,
Sindelar, & Murphy, 2012). Thus, a key question for teacher
educators and other instructors to consider is, Do we use
PowerPoint slides with bulleted text because it is an evidence-
based practice, or more generally, because it is simply “the
way”?
The use of PowerPoint (or other slide presentation soft-
ware) to convey content is not the only culprit contributing
to inefficiency and ineffectiveness in teacher preparation.
Using multimedia (beyond PowerPoint) is also suspect with
respect to its grounded theory and empirical evidence (Clark,
2009). One example is audio-only and enhanced podcasts
(visuals in time with audio). In recent years, these types of
podcasting have gained significant momentum in the higher
education literature as a method for capturing and conveying
content in an efficient manner (Evans, 2008). A close look at
the emerging literature, however, reveals systematic weak-
nesses with its evidence base to date (Heilesen, 2010; Hew
& Cheung, 2013). Specifically, most published studies of
podcasting in higher education reported student satisfaction
or engagement data but not empirical data demonstrating
learning outcomes. While social validity is important when
designing, selecting, and implementing instructional tools, it
542046ISCXXX10.1177/1053451214542046Intervention in School and ClinicKennedy et al.
research-article2014
1University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
2Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA
3University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA
4James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA
Corresponding Author:
Michael J. Kennedy, PhD, University of Virginia, Curry School of
Education, P.O. Box 400273, Charlottesville, VA 29904, USA
Email: MKennedy@Virginia.edu
Using Content Acquisition Podcasts to Deliver
Core Content to Preservice Teacher Candidates
Michael J. Kennedy, PhD1, Ryan O. Kellems, PhD2, Cathy Newman Thomas, PhD3,
and Jennifer R. Newton, PhD4
Abstract
Teacher educators are always looking for instructional strategies that are easy to create and use but are powerful for
promoting learning among preservice teacher candidates. Content acquisition podcasts (CAPs) is an example of an
instructional strategy that embeds evidence-based instructional design principles to package and deliver critical content
in courses such as introductory and foundational special education classes. In this column, a brief overview of current
problems of practice that create a need for CAPs, a review research on the use of CAPs for preservice teacher education,
and an overview of the processes used to create CAPs are provided.
Keywords
use in teacher preparation, technology, issues, technology, education/training/preparation, teacher(s)
by guest on July 17, 2014isc.sagepub.comDownloaded from

2 Intervention in School and Clinic
should take a backseat to whether students actually learn
(Clark, 2009). In addition, most research on podcasts offers
little to no guidance on how podcasts should be developed
and implemented during coursework. Finally, generic audio-
only or enhanced podcasts do not adhere to any specific
theoretical framework that guides instructional design
(Heilesen, 2010; Kennedy, Hart, & Kellems, 2011).
Using a strong and relevant theory to guide the devel-
opment of any intervention is an essential but often-
skipped step in the instructional design process (Clark,
2009; Mayer, 2009). Therefore, podcasting offers promise
for creating instructional materials that are easy to use but
also take advantage of theoretically based instructional
design principles. One example of an emerging technol-
ogy used in this purpose is content acquisition podcasts
(CAPs; Kennedy, Driver, Pullen, Ely, & Cole, 2013). In
essence, CAPs blend the best features of podcasts (e.g.,
ease of creation and use) with validated instructional
design principles. In this article, a brief history of how
CAPs were developed and evaluated is presented. Then,
information on how teacher educators can create and use
CAPs within their programs is provided.
A Cognitive Theory of Multimedia
Learning
Even a cursory review of the empirical literature in the field
of educational multimedia will quickly uncover Mayer’s
(2009) cognitive theory of multimedia learning (CTML)
and accompanying instructional design principles (Mayer,
2008) as an influential framework for instructional design.
The CTML is grounded in cognitive load theory (Chandler
& Sweller, 1991) and the dual processing principle (Paivio,
1986) and also reflects Baddeley’s (1986) model of work-
ing memory. Out of the CTML came 12 instructional design
principles, each grounded in numerous experimental stud-
ies (see Mayer, 2008, for a review). These principles func-
tionally serve to guide instructional designers as they select
content, record narration, position visuals on the screen, and
make other design decisions (see Table 1). CAPs used in
past research studies (Kennedy et al., 2011; Kennedy,
Driver, et al., 2013; Kennedy, Ely, et al., 2012; Kennedy,
Newton, Haines, Walther-Thomas, & Kellems, 2012;
Kennedy & Thomas, 2012; Kennedy, Thomas, Aronin,
et al., 2014) were designed using Mayer’s principles.
Table 1. Mayer’s Design Principles as Aligned With the Triarchic Model of Cognitive Load.
Triarchic Model of Cognitive
Load (DeLeeuw & Mayer, 2008)
Research-Based Instructional Design
Principles (Mayer, 2008, 2009)
Brief Description of Mayer’s Instructional Design
Principles (Mayer, 2008, 2009)
Limit extraneous processing Coherence principle
(ES= 0.97)
Instructional materials are enhanced when irrelevant or
extraneous information is excluded.
Signaling principle
(ES= 0.52)
Learning is enhanced when explicit cues are provided that
signal the beginning of major headings or elements of
the material being covered.
Redundancy principle
(ES= 0.72)
Inclusion of extensive text (transcription) on screen
along with spoken words and pictures hinders learning.
Carefully selected words or short phrases, however,
augment retention (Mayer & Johnson, 2008).
Spatial contiguity principle
(ES = 1.12)
On-screen text and pictures should be presented in close
proximity to one another to limit eye shifting during
instructional presentations.
Temporal contiguity principle
(ES= 1.31)
Pictures and text should shown on screen should
correspond to the audio presentation.
Manage essential processing Modality principle
(ES = 1.02)
People learn better from spoken words and pictures than
they do from pictures and text alone
Segmenting principle
(ES= 0.98)
People learn better when multimedia presentations are
divided into short bursts as opposed to longer modules.
Pretraining principle
(ES= 0.85)
People learn better when there is an advance organizer
that highlights and reviews key content prior to
instruction.
Foster generative processing Multimedia principle
(ES= 1.39)
People learn better from pictures and spoken words than
from words alone.
Personalization, voice, and image
principles (ES = 1.11)
Narration presented in a conversational style result in
better engagement and learning than more formal audio
presentations. Images should be nonabstract and clearly
represent the content being presented.
by guest on July 17, 2014isc.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Kennedy et al. 3
Table 2. To-Date Content Acquisition Podcast (CAP) Studies.
Title Participants (N) Method Dependent Measure Results
Kennedy, Hart, &
Kellems (2011)
79 Two-group posttest
only
Knowledge/retention of
NCLB/TBI
CAP group outperformed audio-
only group (NCLB, d= 0.64; TBI,
d= 0.82)
Kennedy & Thomas
(2012)
164 Two-group
pretest–posttest–
maintenance
Knowledge/retention of
PBIS
CAP group outperformed text-
only group (posttest, 0.98;
maintenance, d= 0.97)
Kennedy, Newton,
Haines, Walther-
Thomas, & Kellems
(2012)
11 Design experiment Qualitative/project
performance whole Intro
to Sped course
10/11 students improved on final
project
Kennedy, Ely, et al.
(2012)
168 Three-group pretest–
posttest
Knowledge/retention of
students with LD and
autism
CAP groups outperformed text-
only group (LD, d= 1.09; autism,
d= 0.79)
Kennedy, Driver,
Pullen, Ely, & Cole
(2013)
148 Two-group
pretest–posttest–
maintenance
Knowledge/retention/
application of
phonological awareness
CAP group outperformed text-
only group (posttest, d = 0.86;
maintenance, d= 0.97)
Kennedy, Thomas,
Aronin, et al. (2014)
164 Two-group
pretest–posttest–
maintenance
Knowledge/retention of
students with LD and
autism
CAP group outperformed text-only
group (posttest: LD, d = 1.09;
autism, d= 1.21) (maintenance:
LD, d= 0.81; autism, d= 1.33)
Note: NCLB = No Child Left Behind; TBI = traumatic brain injury; PBIS = Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports; LD = learning disabilities.
One key principle in the model is the coherence princi-
ple (Mayer, 2009). This principle instructs designers to
constrain content to only essential material to avoid over-
whelming limited cognitive capacity. Thus, a faculty mem-
ber delivering a 75-min lecture filled with interesting but
ultimately unnecessary details is not an acceptable starting
point for a podcast. In order to adhere to this principle, a
podcast would need to break away from a simple recording
of one’s lecture and instead carefully script a pared-down
message that hits key points. The redundancy principle
(Mayer, 2009) holds that learners improve when on-screen
text is not redundant with information provided through the
auditory channel. Therefore, placing text on the screen
(either captioning or bulleted points) would be counterpro-
ductive for student learning. Other principles, such as the
signaling, segmenting, temporal contiguity, and spatial con-
tiguity principles (Mayer, 2009) underscore the importance
of taking large amounts of information and breaking them
down into “bite-sized” segments that (a) strategically place
text and images on the screen, (b) sync with audio, and
(c) do not require extensive eye movement when viewing.
Thus, the development of CAPs requires scripts that
contain only essential information that are synced to dis-
tinct images that illustrate the content being taught.
On-screen text is used judiciously and reinforces essential
terms or concepts. In addition, instead of a 75-min or lon-
ger podcast, CAPs average 6 to 9 min, with occasional
exceptions (in both directions). A website of CAPs used for
introductory courses in special education can be found at
www.SpedIntro.com. These CAPs are freely available and
undergo frequent updates to content and visuals as feed-
back from experts and users are collected. Readers are wel-
come to use these CAPs as they see fit and are invited to
create their own and add to the collection.
Research on Content Acquisition
Podcasts
Research has shown that CAPs can enhance and improve
preservice teacher knowledge acquisition. Table 2 provides
a glimpse at six empirical studies supporting CAPs as an
instructional tool in teacher education coursework. In five
of the six studies, the dependent measure was a test of
knowledge retention to help evaluate teacher candidate
learning following treatment using CAPs or a different
approach (e.g., audio-only podcast, reading a selection from
the textbook).
Following the preliminary CAP studies (Kennedy et al.,
2011, 2014; Kennedy, Ely, et al., 2012; Kennedy & Thomas,
2012), researchers continued to make improvements to
CAPs with respect to their adherence to Mayer’s principles
and to match feedback from student users. To illustrate, an
early CAP on the characteristics of students with learning
disabilities can be found at https://vimeo.com/14444176; its
upgrade can be found at https://vimeo.com/72439473. The
content is a virtual match, but the images reflect significant
improvement. Clear instructional signals to denote key sec-
tions are embedded, and comprehension questions are also
by guest on July 17, 2014isc.sagepub.comDownloaded from

4 Intervention in School and Clinic
embedded to highlight essential information. More recent
CAP studies (e.g., Kennedy, Driver, et al., 2013) have made
use of improved dependent measures that investigated not
only student retention but application of skill. Results
showed that CAPs are useful in helping teacher candidates
improve in both domains. Future research should explore the
extent to which teacher candidates and in-service educators
can improve teaching and K–12 student learning using this
tool. See Table 2 for a summary of CAP studies.
Producing the Podcasts
Figures 1, 2, and 3 provide a step-by-step process for how
preservice teachers can create CAPs. Figure 1 describes
planning steps, Figure 2 lists the production steps, and
Figure 3 contains steps for publishing. In addition, the
information in these figures is presented in a CAP on how to
make a CAP, broken into two parts, available at https://
vimeo.com/24179998 (Part 1) and https://vimeo.com/
24182724 (Part 2). It is important to note that these are not
the only ways to create a CAP. These methods were created
using widely available software and standard hardware
(e.g., PowerPoint software and a microphone connected to
a standard computer). The important thing about creating
CAPs is adherence to the CTML principles and content
standards, not the means of production. Other options for
creating CAPs may include using programs/software such
as Camtasia, Profcast, or Keynote.
Conclusion
Initial research conducted on CAPs demonstrates the
promise of this instructional enhancement on the knowl-
edge acquisition of preservice teachers. CAPs can be used
flexibly in instruction. For example, instructors can opt to
assign CAPs as part of the typical preparation for class
along with readings from the textbook and journal articles.
Some instructors use CAPs for review prior to assess-
ments. Students could be assigned to create their own
CAPs as part of the learning process. A related option is
teaching preservice teachers to create CAPs for a different
purpose, including embedding evidence-based practices
Figure 1. Phase 1 of content acquisition podcast production steps: Preparation.
Phase 1: Preparation
Step 1.0 Identify ONE clear topic or concept to be taught in each CAP. For Example: What are the characteristics of students
with specic learning disabilities?
1. 1 Given your topic, select only the most essential content. If creating a CAP for use in teacher education, make decisions based
on the need to reinforce key points from your lecture or assigned readings. Remember, the goal is to supplement and reinforce,
not replace.
1. 2 As needed, organize content into segments (e.g., Part 1, Part 2, etc.). In our work on CAPs, we often provide the IDEA denition
for the disability category in Part 1, note the prevalence of the disability in Part 2, highlight student characteristics in Part 3,
review major accommodations and modications in Part 4, and note evidence-based practices in Part 5. Another choice
to control the length of CAPs is to split one topic into two videos; one that reviews characteristics of students in a disability
category, and another to highlight evidence-based practices.
Step 2.0: Create ‘standard’ PowerPoint slides (heading and bulleted supporting points) for your topic.
2.1 Create a clear title page slide.
2.2 Create a ‘roadmap’ to serve as an advance organizer for the CAP. Note the purpose for the video, and a heading for each topic.
2.2 Put only one detail or piece of information on each slide.
2.3 Type speaker notes for each slide (under the slide where it says: Click to add a note); print a copy of your slides and speaker
notes to use when recording narration later on.
2.4 Remember to keep it simple—eliminate extra content from slides and comments.
2.5 Create signaling slides that announce the beginning and end of each section.
2.6 Write summary questions to go at the end of each section. Questions can be a preview of forthcoming assessments, or simply
function as a way to cue the viewer’s attention to key information.
by guest on July 17, 2014isc.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Kennedy et al. 5
Figure 2. Phase 2 of content acquisition podcast production steps: Production.
Phase 2: Production
Step 3.0 Replace most of the slides you created in step 2 with images that represent your topic as closely as possible (keep the title slide).
3.1 Select one eye-catching image per key idea. Use google.com/images or another internet search engine to nd copyright-free photos or other
images. Save the image to a folder you create for this project. Store all of your saved pictures in the same folder.
3.2 Select medium to large images that ll most of the available slide space but are not distorted or fuzzy.
3.3 Avoid cluttered images with words or distracting details. The pictures you select should have a central focal point that limits the need for viewers to
move their eyes across the screen.
3.4 For slides where you plan to insert text over a picture to emphasize key terms or ideas, make three copies of that slide.
Step 4.0: Insert text over images by using ‘insert text box’ on the second of the three slides. The rst and third slide should be free of text.
4.1 Select one word or a short phrase (3-4 words) that demonstrates the key idea for the slide and type it into the text box. Using full sentences is not
advised. Be clear and concise.
4.2 Use 40 point or larger font size; select text color that is easy to read given the contrast with the background images and colors. [NOTE: The text box
“ll color” tool make be used to ensure good contrast between images and text.]
4.3 Place text boxes either in the middle of the slide or near a major part of the picture without covering it up.
Step 5.0: Prepare and time your slide narration so it coincides with any on-screen text. For example, when recording a presentation about
making pizza:
5.1 Create three identical slides using the steps above. Insert a text box (See Steps 3.0-4.3 above) in the second of three identical slides that has the
words “add cheese”.
5.2 Begin narrating these slides (See Step 6.0). With Slide 1 of 3 on the screen say, “The next step in making pizza is…”, then hit “Enter” to advance to
the second slide which is already prepared with the text box and say, “add cheese,” (narration will match text on the screen), hit “Enter,” and nish
narration on this part of making a pizza while slide 3 (without any text, but same picture) is on screen.
5.3 Repeat this process for every key piece of information to be addressed in the CAP. VERY IMPORTANT: Not every picture needs additional text—
reserve use of text for the most essential concepts/pieces of information within your CAP.
Figure 3. Phase 3 of content acquisition podcast production steps: Publishing.
Phase 3: Publishing
Step 6.0: Finalize slides and familiarize yourself with the written narrative before recording narration. Save your le.
6.1 Under PowerPoint pull-down menu, click ‘Slide Show’, and then, ‘Rehearse Timings.”
6.2 Rehearse narration using your printed slides and speaker notes—they are your “script”; hit enter to advance through the slides. Note the total length
of your narration when done.
6.3 PowerPoint will ask if you want it to automatically link the amount of time you spent on each slide for later use. CLICK YES.
6.4 Practice recording CAP several times until comfortable and condent.
6.5 Save the le as a movie (.mov). Select the quality of playback (highest quality is recommended)
Step 7.0: Import saved .ppt movie le into your choice of iMovie (MAC) or Windows MovieMaker (PC).
7. 1 There are several options for recording narration and linking to your CAP—there is no ‘correct’ way. Recording narration within PowerPoint is
possible, but is frequently unreliable (based on experience with Office 2011 or previous versions). An easy way for novices to record narration
following the preceding steps is Apple’s iMovie or Window’s Movie Maker programs.
7. 2 Import the saved .mov le from PowerPoint into the video production timeline (at bottom of screen in both iMovie and Movie Maker).
7. 3 Ensure the built in microphone or external mic is functioning properly and at an appropriate volume. Record a test statement to conrm audio level
prior to narration.
7. 4 Record narration in a room free from background noise or other distractions. Preview your recording. If sound is distorted or otherwise imperfect,
diagnose the problem (you were too close to microphone, etc.) and re-record.
7. 5 Speak in a clear, engaging voice; record in front of a mirror or with another person to create a more natural-sounding recording. Use good posture,
smiling, and hand gestures can also improve the quality of vocal recordings.
7. 6 Listen to your recording for unnecessary pauses (um’s or other dead air). If they are noticeable/distracting, re-record your CAP.
7. 7 Save/Export your nished video as a quicktime or windows media le.
Step 8.0 Upload your saved video to the web
8.1 Upload your CAP to course management websites (e.g., BlackBoard) or other le-sharing sites (e.g., www.vimeo.com; www.youtube.com).
by guest on July 17, 2014isc.sagepub.comDownloaded from

6 Intervention in School and Clinic
for teaching students with disabilities. Kennedy and col-
leagues recently (Kennedy, Deshler, & Lloyd, 2013;
Kennedy, Thomas, Meyer, Alves, & Lloyd, 2013) used
CAPs for this purpose, demonstrating the effectiveness of
this tool for a different purpose in instruction. Preservice
educators who create CAPs for use in K–12 teaching
might increase their knowledge of evidence-based prac-
tices by going through a multimedia production process.
Indeed, CAPs can be used to reduce the amount of time
spent lecturing on foundational concepts and allow more
time for case studies, modeling exercises, guest speakers,
discussions, and rehearsing evidence-based practices for
teaching. The shift in how and when to provide static con-
tent can pay large dividends in terms of the engagement
during class and the overall learning of students as deter-
mined by end of course assessments.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the
format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293–332.
Clark, R. E. (2009). Translating research into new instructional
technologies for higher education: The active ingredient pro-
cess. Journal Of Computing in Higher Education, 21, 4–18.
doi:10.1007/s12528-009-9013-8
DeLeeuw, K. E., & Mayer, R. E. (2008). A comparison of three
measures of cognitive load: Evidence for separable measures of
intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 100, 223–234. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.223
Evans, C. (2008). The effectiveness of m-learning in the form of
podcast revision lectures in higher education. Computers and
Education, 50, 491–498. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.016
Gallagher, E. V., & Reder, M. (2004–2005). PowerPoint: What is
the point? Essays on Teaching Excellence, 16(3), 1–6.
Gier, V. S., & Kreiner, D. S. (2009). Incorporating active
learning with PowerPoint-based lectures using content-
based questions. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 134–139.
doi:10.1080/00986280902739792
Heileson, S. B. (2010). What is the academic efficacy of podcast-
ing? Computers & Education, 55, 1063–1068. doi:10.1016/j.
compedu.2010.05.002
Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2013). Use of web 2.0 technolo-
gies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-
based practice. Educational Research Review, 9, 47–64.
doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2012.08.001
Kennedy, M. J., Deshler, D. D., & Lloyd, J. W. (2013). Effects of
multimedia vocabulary instruction on adolescents with learn-
ing disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities. Advance
online publication. doi:10.1177/0022219413487406
Kennedy, M. J., Driver, M. K., Pullen, P. C., Ely, E., & Cole,
M. T. (2013). Improving teacher candidates’ knowledge of
phonological awareness: A multimedia approach. Computers
& Education, 64, 42–51. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.01.010
Kennedy, M. J., Ely, E., Thomas, C. N., Pullen, P. C., Newton,
J. R., Ashworth, K., . . . Lovelace, S. P. (2012). Using
multimedia tools to support teacher candidates’ learning.
Teacher Education and Special Education, 35, 243–257.
doi:10.1177/0888406412451158
Kennedy, M. J., Hart, J. E., & Kellems, R. O. (2011). Using
enhanced podcasts to augment limited instructional time
in teacher preparation. Teacher Education and Special
Education, 34, 87–105. doi:10.1177/0888406410376203
Kennedy, M. J., Newton, J. R., Haines, S., Walther-Thomas,
C., & Kellems, R. O. (2012). A triarchic model for teach-
ing “Introduction to Special Education”: Case studies, con-
tent acquisition podcasts, and effective feedback. Journal of
Technology and Teacher Education, 20, 251–275.
Kennedy, M. J., & Thomas, C. N. (2012). Effects of content acqui-
sition podcasts to develop preservice teachers’ knowledge of
positive behavioral interventions and supports. Exceptionality,
20, 1–19. doi:10.1080/09362835.2011.611088
Kennedy, M. J., Thomas, C. N., Aronin, S., Newton, J. R., &
Lloyd, J. W. (2014). Improving teacher candidate knowledge
using content acquisition podcasts. Computers & Education,
70, 116–127. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.010
Kennedy, M. J., Thomas, C. N., Meyer, J. P., Alves, K. D.,
& Lloyd, J. W. (2014). Using evidence-based multi-
media to improve vocabulary performance of adoles-
cents with LD. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37, 71–86.
doi:10.1177/0731948713507262
Leko, M. M., Brownell, M. T., Sindelar, P. T., & Murphy, K.
(2012). Promoting special education preservice teacher exper-
tise. Focus on Exceptional Children, 44(7), 1–16.
Mayer, R. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: Evidence-
based principles for the design of multimedia instruction.
American Psychologist, 63, 760–769. doi:10.1037/0003-
066X.63.8.760
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York,
NY: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E., & Johnson, C. I. (2008). Revising the redundancy
principle in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 100, 380–386. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.380
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding
approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Reschly, D. J., Holdheide, L. R., Behrstock, E., & Weber, G. (2009).
Enhancing teacher preparation, development and support. In
L. Goe (Ed.), America’s opportunity: Teacher effectiveness
and equity in K–12 classrooms (pp. 41–64). Washington, DC:
National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Saville, B. K., Zinn, T. E., Neef, N. A., Van Norman, R., & Ferreri,
S. J. (2006). A comparison of interteaching and lecture in the
college classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39,
49–61.
by guest on July 17, 2014isc.sagepub.comDownloaded from