ARTIC LE

Using Animations To Teach Biology:

Past & Future Research on the Attributes that Underlie
Pedagogically Sound Animations

he most effective teachers use a diversity of methods
and approaches to assist their students in the learning process. Multiple technical resources (commonly referred to as
multimedia) are currently used by many instructors to communicate difficult topics and concepts to their students in
meaningful ways. The issue that arises is not only how to use
the various multimedia but how to use them effectively. One
area of rapid development is in the area of short instructional
animations that can be used in class or made available online.
An extensive literature exists on the value of animations in
teaching in many different disciplines, but studies in biology
are few. Various sources have shown that animations are more
effective than static sequential images (Pollock et al., 2002;
Nicholls & Merkel, 1996). Clearly, things that are by nature
dynamic should benefit by being represented in a dynamic
way (Tversky & Morrison, 2002). Here we will evaluate how
animations can be and have been used as effective teaching
and learning tools in biology and what more needs to be
done to understand their true value.

Animated Biology
Various authors have been involved in major projects
aimed at developing top quality animations for the teaching of biological events and processes. Heyden (2004), a
multimedia consultant, provides detailed insight into some
of the attributes that underlie the production of effective multimedia, and comments on many of the popular animation
packages. The animation programs that have been used vary
in their difficulty to learn as well as in the time and cost of
producing animations, but each has its own value. McClean
et al. (2005) are part of a consortium (The World Wide Web
Instructional Committee at North Dakota State University)
that was formed to develop high-quality animations for
the teaching of cell and molecular biology. Their VCell
animations present excellent 3D renderings of a diversity of
primarily molecular processes from gene expression to protein synthesis. They have also provided data supporting the
value of animations in the learning process particularly when
coupled with in-class discussion (McClean et al., 2005). Stith
Danton H. ODay, Ph.D., is Professor, Department of Biology,
University of Toronto at Mississauga, Mississauga, Ontario,
Canada L5L 1C6; e-mail: danton.oday@utoronto.ca.

274

The American Biology Teacher, Volume 70, No. 5, may 2008

D a n t o n H . O D ay

(2004) has produced a diversity of short and effective animations of many biological processes using Macromedia FLASH.
His animations are freely available online and have been
used by him and others to assess the value of animations in
teaching biology (ODay, 2007). FLASH produces very good
animations that are scalable with the potential to make them
interactive. ODay (2006) has developed a simpler method
that any student or faculty member can use for making effective, high quality, and pedagogically-sound animations. While
this method lacks some attributes afforded by other true
animation packages, it benefits from its simplicity, the ability
to revise animations as needed, and the ability to make animations in a very short period of time. In fact, as reflected in the
apprehension principle discussed below, simplicity may be
a redeeming feature of quality teaching animations.

Pedagogical Parameters: The

Attributes of Effective Animations
A number of fundamental elements must be included to
produce an effective instructional animation. These are summarized in Table 1. Often, one of our failings as teachers is to
overlook the abilities and interests of our students. The first
step in being a good teacher is getting your students attention. The second is holding that attention. There are unlimited ways to have a successful Step One. There are also many
ways to lose your students attention. One of these is clear:
Discussing or lecturing on material that is beyond student
comprehension will generate frustration in ones students.
This is also true for animations. It is well documented that the
material provided to students must be appropriate to the topic
at hand and to their educational status. The Apprehension
Principle states that in order for a learner to gain a proper
understanding of the material, the content must be easily and
accurately perceived and understood. Animations that move
too quickly or contain excessive extraneous detail or realism
may overwhelm the learner, leading to little comprehension
(Tversky & Morrison, 2002, Table 1). Related to this is the
inclusion of too much material. Animations are not very
effective if they contain more information than is appropriate
(Tversky & Morrison, 2002). This is the Coherence Effect
(Mayer, 2003; Table 1). Thus, it is essential to define ones
goals and keep focused on those goals. For complex processes, it is wiser to break up the content into smaller packages

Table 1. Pedagogical parameters used in making educational animations.

Component

Comment References

Stage-appropriate material

Apprehension Principle. Content must be aimed at the

comprehension/educational level of your audience.

Absence of extraneous
material/information

Coherence Effect. Keep content focused. Mayer, 2003

Images & text adjacent

Spatial Contiguity Effect. Reinforces association of Mayer, 2003

term with structure/event.

Term (text) spoken as it

appears next to image

Multimedia Effect. Reinforces association of Mayer, 2003

term with structure/event and how terms are spoken.

Oral narration

Oral narration in conversational tone

Concurrent with visual information; reinforces learning. Sweller, 1994; Lowe, 2003

Tversky & Morrison, 2002

Personalization Effect. Reinforces learning. Mayer, 2003

Give student some control Interaction reinforces learning.

Tversky & Morrison, 2002

Use visual cues to reflect change

Wilson-Pauwels, 1997

Color/shape reinforce that an event has occurred.

than attempt to cover it all in a single animation.

In any field, terminology is critical. Specific components,
structures, and events have specific names. Animations provide
an effective way to link words or terms to components, structures, or events. Mayer (2003) presents evidence that students
learn more effectively when printed words or terms are placed
adjacent to corresponding pictures (Spatial Contiguity Effect,
Table 1). Furthermore, when words or terms are spoken at
the same time in an animation, the learning value is further
enhanced (Multimedia Effect; Table 1) compared to words or
pictures alone. Oral narration in general has been shown by others to be an effective complement that reinforces learning (Lowe,
2003; Mayer & Anderson, 1992; Sweller, 1994). Mayer (2003)
espouses an additional Personalization Effect that results when
such narration is conversational as opposed to pedantic (Table
1). These results are all consistent with the cognitive load theory
that is based upon the concept that there is a limited amount of
working memory, and by using both visual and auditory channels, working memory is increased (Mayer et al., 2001; Sweller,
1994; Mayer & Anderson, 1992). In an animation, changes and
events can be signaled in a variety of ways, including the use of
sounds as well as changes in the color and shape of displayed
components. While the role of sounds as useful adjuncts remains
to be clarified, visual cues (color, shape) have been shown to be
effective elements that enhance learning when they are components of animations (Wilson-Pauwels, 1997; Table 1).
Animations, as well as other teaching tools, are more effective when the student has an element of control. Many studies
support the concept that interactivity reinforces the learning
process, but little if anything has been done in applying this to
educational animations used in a learning environment (e.g.,
Tversky & Morrison, 2002; Table 1). Interactivity may be as
simple as the ability to stop, start, rewind, and replay an animation. It can be as complex as involving the students in answering
questions correctly before they can progress. True interactivity
engages the students, encouraging them to put the new material
into context with previously-learned information, and to formulate new ideas about that material (Tversky & Morrison, 2002).

While this may not seem to be an inherent quality of animations,

the comments of some students suggest otherwise (ODay,
2006). Results suggest that students who view educational animations are not doing so passively, but in fact are actively thinking about what they are viewing, especially when they know they
will be tested on what theyve viewed. Clearly, this point of view
can be tested by asking students what thoughts they have as they
view teaching animations or assessing the types of questions
they ask in class after viewing an animation.

Recent Research Data on the Value of

Animations in Biology
While it is generally agreed that animations are valuable
aids for teaching dynamic events, the specific research done on
the value of animations for teaching the life sciences is limited.
Stith (2004) carried out a study in which, after a lecture on
apoptosis (controlled cell death), one group of 31 students who
viewed an animation on apoptosis was compared to a group
of 27 students who did not. While the students who saw the
animation obtained significantly higher test scores than those
who didnt, it cant be ruled out that the extra few minutes of
exposure to the topic alone could explain, at least in part, the
improved grade. An article published a year later in the same
journal by McClean et al. (2005) was a bit more comprehensive,
involving 59 students. In their study, the students were divided
into groups that viewed a 3D animation of protein synthesis in
various combinations of individual study versus a formal lecture.
Their results were compared to a study group that had individual
study followed by a lecture, but no animation. The groups viewing the animation obtained significantly higher test scores than
the group that didnt. ODay (2006) did a slightly larger study
with a group of 86 students divided into four subgroups of 1633 students. In keeping with the previous studies, the students
who viewed the animation of a complex signal transduction
pathway scored better on a subsequent test than those who
viewed a graphic with an equivalent legend, but only after sufficient time was provided (ODay, 2006). A study involving a
much larger number of students supports the results of those

Animations

275

earlier studies and adds additional insight on the value of animations over static graphics (ODay, 2007). That study involved
213 students divided into five groups that viewed one of three
different animations lacking a narration, a graphic lacking a legend, or a graphic with a legend. The results supported the value
of a narrative in both animations and graphics, but surprisingly
students were still able to generate good test scores after viewing
an animation lacking a spoken narrative. The second part of that
study provided the first insight into the value of animations in
long-term memory retention. Of the original group of students,
180 students remained to be tested for the retention of what they
learned 21 days later. In all cases, those students who viewed
the animations lacking the narration scored significantly higher
on the retention tests than those who viewed the equivalent
graphic, even when a legend was present (ODay, 2007). In
fact, for two of the animations, the students retained 87-93% of
the information they originally remembered from watching the
animations. This is the first study on the value of animations in
long-term memory retention, and provides strong evidence that
students retain information learned from animations longer than
from graphics.

Animations: Pros & Cons

While there is much data supporting the value of animations for teaching complex processes in many areas, not all
agree that students perform better with animations as compared
to static graphics (Mayer & Jackson, 2005; Lowe, 2003). The
studies of those who disagree provide insight into issues that
need to be considered when developing or using teaching ani-

mations. Lowe (2003) presents data based on novice students

viewing complex animations of meteorological events showing
that those animations did not have any greater teaching value
than static graphics. Others have suggested that such negative
results are based upon results using animations that contain
more information than appropriate for the group being evaluated (i.e., a cognitive load problem; Tversky & Morrison, 2002;
Reimann, 2003). Thus a clutter effect may exist: The simultaneous occurrence and overlap of multiple dynamic events
occurring over time at multiple levels is simply intellectually
overwhelming to the novice learner. The problem might also be
due to insufficient time to comprehend the information, a situation that can be rectified by providing more time to view the
material (ODay, 2006).
Clearly the issue of sufficient viewing time must be considered in future studies on the value of animations in teaching and learning. Furthermore, because of the Apprehension
Principle, animations that move too rapidly or that contain
excessive extraneous information can be overwhelming, especially to novices (Tversky & Morrison, 2002). The ability to
rewind and review the animated material can at least partially
override this concern if the material is clearly represented and
not too advanced. One of the problems faced by instructors in
the evolving area of animations is that the accumulated data
on the value of animations in teaching and learning is based
on diverse subject areas. Most of the studies that generate
controversy attempt to compare results across diverse disciplines. Each study also differs in the type of animation that was
evaluated, how the evaluation was done, and in many other

Table 2. PowerPoint/Camtasia animations versus current software packages used in biomedical teaching animations.
Animation Package Strengths

Weaknesses Ease of Use

Approx. Cost

PowerPoint/Camtasia 1 Easy to learn. Most teachers

2D animations only. Easy
Camtasia Studio
animations
already use PowerPoint.
Weak scripting tools. USD $179

Camtasia Studio is an Good for quick Web

easy-to-use capture program.
content.
Flash CS32 Relatively easy to learn.
Small file sizes. Vector-

based graphics (resizable).
Interactivity. Free player.

2D animations only. Easiest to use

Weak scripting
of true
Tools. Not for quick
animation
Web content.
software.

~US $700

Director2
True 3D animations.
Large file sizes. Vector-

based graphics (resizable).
Interactivity. Free player.

Need to learn Moderately

script language.
Complex.
Not for quick
Web content.

~US $1000

LightWave3
True 3D animations.
Need to be
Large file sizes. Vector-
a programmer.

based graphics (resizable). Used by gaming/
Interactivity.
movie industry.

Complex. Expensive
Professional
software.

Maya4
True 3D animations.
Need to be
Large file sizes. Vector-
a programmer.

based graphics (resizable). Used by gaming/
Interactivity.
movie industry.

Complex. Expensive
Professional
software.

Web sites for more information: 1www.techsmith.com; 2www.macromedia.com; 3www.lightwave3d.com; 4www.alias.com.

276

The American Biology Teacher, Volume 70, No. 5, may 2008

attributes. It is proposed here, that educational animations should all include at

least the fundamental and proven pedagogical parameters detailed in Table 1.
Any effective teacher can tell you
that different students learn in different
ways. Students echo this critical point.
In the study by ODay (2006), while
the majority of cell biology students
preferred an animation over equivalent
static graphics with text, they also overwhelmingly stated that each has its place
in the learning process. While the animation was valuable for showing the complete dynamic process, many students
said that static graphics allowed them
to focus on specific details. More importantly, many expressed concern that they
dont always have access to multimedia,
while printed material is easily accessible
at all times. As access to technology continues to change, this issue may be less of
a concern in the future. Today it remains
a critical matter.

The Future: A Call to Arms

The goal of this and future work is to understand all of
the essential parameters that will make animations an essential
complementary learning tool. The only way this information
can be acquired is for more teachers to gather data. This can
be done by using animations that are freely available online.
A Web site titled Animated Cell Biology that provides links
to some of these has been set up (http://www.utm.utoronto.
ca/~w3cellan/). Some published questionnaires are also available that could be used to study some of the parameters as
discussed below (e.g., ODay, 2006, 2007; Stith, 2004). Heyden

(2004) has reviewed many of the available animation packages

and provides links to animations made using each of them.
Some of the more popular animation packages are summarized
in Table 2. Teachers should consider developing their own
animations, especially course-specific animations that can help
them clarify difficult concepts in their classrooms. This is not
as challenging a task as some have suggested (Heyden, 2004).
A simple, cheap, and effective method for making teaching animations is based upon PowerPoint and the capture program
Camtasia Studio (ODay, 2006, 2007). Many students have
commented on the excellent quality of these animations and,
after viewing them, have scored as high as or higher than students who have viewed animations made with more complex
3D animation programs (ODay, 2007).

Table 3. Issues to consider in future studies.

Issue

Comment/Methodology

Length of animation

Are shorter (one to three minutes) animations better than longer ones?
What relationship exists between length and retention?

Length of viewing

Would other studies have obtained (e.g., Lowe, 2003) different results with longer/sufficient time for viewing?

Interactivity
What level of interactivity, if any, is required for effectiveness? Clearly interactivity enhances retention.
Do teaching animations involve active or passive learning?
Classroom discussion (interactivity) What is the value of in-class discussion in assisting students to understand the content of animations (e.g.,
McClean et al., 2005)?
Value of sounds to indicate change Does using sound (e.g., crash, trumpet, etc.) to signify an event or change enhance understanding/retention?
Value of background music

Will music enhance the learning experience? What type? This opens a level of great complexity.

Animation complexity

Can single animation be used to teach all levels? What should be changed/included to meet the needs of
students of different ages/experience?

Assessing value of animations

There is a need to develop questionnaires that provide deeper insight into exactly what aspects of learning are
enhanced through the use of animations. Few studies exist using freshman/sophomore students in college/
university. None exist in life sciences on the value to high school students.
Animations

277

Acknowledgments
This work was supported by a
grant from the Information Technology
Courseware Development Fund at the
University of Toronto. I would like to
thank my Advanced Cell Biology students
for their participation in this study.

References
Heyden, R.J. (2004). Approaches to cell biology: Developing educational multimedia. Cell Biology Education, 3, 93-98.
Lowe, R.K. (2003). Animation and learning: Selective processing of information in dynamic graphics. Learning and
Instruction, 13, 157-176.
Mayer, R.E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different
media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125139.

While the fundamental parameters of effective teaching

animations have been detailed above, many aspects remain
to be studied especially as they apply to students at different
levels (Table 3). A single study exists suggesting animations
lead to better long-term memory retention but more studies
are required (ODay, 2007). Similarly more work needs to be
done on the significance of the length of effective animations
and appropriate viewing time (ODay, 2006, 2007). McClean et
al. (2005) complemented their animations with in-class discussions, an area that also needs further detailed analysis, especially in determining whether students are active or passive viewers
of educational animations. When students view educational
animations in class, are they functioning as active or passive
learners? As mentioned above, some post-viewing comments
by students indicate they are not viewing these animations
passively (ODay, 2006). How much additional interactivity is
needed for animations to be more effective teaching and learning tools? Many animations have been made with background
sounds to reflect change. Is the use of sound effects as effective
as the use of color and shape to indicate a change has occurred
in an event or item (Wilson-Pauwels, 1997)? Does background
music enhance or hinder learning? What kinds of music are
appropriate?
Dealing with animation complexity is a more difficult
issue but one that needs to be considered. For this, student
input would be extremely valuable in the development of
teaching animations. The types of questions asked can also
provide insight into when animations are most appropriate.
Stith (2004) defined questions as rote memory (definition),
which apparently did not benefit from viewing animations,
while those involving dynamic processes (order or location
of events) did. Work by others would suggest that there are
a number of aspects of learning that could be addressed (e.g.,
Lowe, 2003). Writing a diversity of meaningful questions could
provide needed insight into the aspects of teaching and learning that benefit best from using animations. Finally, most studies in the sciences have focused on advanced college/university
students. It is critical to gain data on the value of animations for
teaching life sciences to lower level college/university students
and particularly high school students.

278

The American Biology Teacher, Volume 70, No. 5, may 2008

Mayer, R.E. & Anderson, R.B. (1992). The instructive animation:

Helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology,
84, 444-452.
Mayer, R.E. & Jackson, J. (2005). The case for coherence in scientific
explanations: Quantitative details can hurt qualitative understanding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 13-18.
Mayer, R.E., Heiser, J. & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on
multimedia learning: When presenting more material results
in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93,
187-198.
McClean, P., Johnson, C., Rogers, R., Daniels, L., Reber, J., Slator,
B.M., Terpstra, J. & White, A. (2005). Molecular and cellular
biology animations: Development and impact on student learning. Cell Biology Education, 4, 169-179.
Nicholls, C. & Merkel, S. (1996). The effect of computer animation
on students understanding of microbiology. Journal of Research
on Computing in Education, 28, 359- 372.
ODay, D.H. (2006). Animated cell biology: A quick & easy method
for making effective high-quality teaching animations. CBE: Life
Sciences Education, 5, 155-163.
ODay, D.H. (2007). The value of animations in biology teaching: A
study of short-term and long-term memory retention. CBE: Life
Sciences Education, 6, 217-223.
Pollock, E., Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex
information. Learning and Instruction, 12, 61-86.
Reimann, P. (2003). Multimedia learning: Beyond modality. Learning
and Instruction, 13, 245-252.
Stith, B.J. (2004). Use of animation in teaching cell biology. Cell
Biology Education, 3, 181-188.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and
instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295-312.
Tversky, B. & Morrison, J.B. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate?
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57, 247-262.
Wilson-Pauwels, L. (1997). Bringing it into focus: Visual cues
and their role in directing attention. Journal of Biomedical
Communication, 24, 12-16.