{"id":119,"date":"2006-10-20T16:24:37","date_gmt":"2006-10-20T16:24:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/valianthosting.ca\/clients\/daemon\/?p=119"},"modified":"2006-10-20T16:24:37","modified_gmt":"2006-10-20T16:24:37","slug":"dales-cone-of-experience","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/screamingpages.net\/?p=119","title":{"rendered":"Dale’s Cone of Experience"},"content":{"rendered":"

Google<\/a> Dale’s Cone of Experience<\/a> and you’ll find a wealth of sites containing references not only to Edgar Dale’s original research, but to a series of percentages said to be associated with Dale’s Cone. For example, the .pdf file located at www.mc.uky.edu\/pharmacy\/edinnovation\/pdf\/Step%20Dales%20Cone.pdf<\/a> contains a list of percentages associated with the elements in the Cone. This perpetuates a fallicy (or shoddy research practices) that is becoming more well known in recent years. Dale never assigned percentages re: effectiveness of learning activities in his work.<\/p>\n

Will Thalheimer at Work-Learning Research<\/a> delved into Dale’s Cone and discovered that:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. While Edgar Dale<\/a> indeed did indeed create a model of the concreteness of various audio-visual material back in 1946, the model contained no numbers and no research was conducted to create the model. Dale’s Cone was just a hunch, albeit an educated hunch, one that Dale warned shouldn’t be taken too literally.*<\/strong><\/li>\n
  2. The percentages — ‘people generally remember 10% of what they read’ and so on — were most likely added to Dale’s Cone by an employee of the Mobil Oil company in the late 1960s. These percentages have since been discredited.**<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n

    Thalheimer’s complete report is available online at http:\/\/www.willatworklearning.com\/myths_and_worse\/index.html<\/a>.<\/p>\n

    *<\/strong> and **<\/strong> is from the Dales Cone Drum Corps<\/a> article in the Internet TOURBUS<\/a> 07\/27\/06 edition.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Michael Molenda of the Indiana University has witten a paper refuting the inclusion of percentages as part of Dale’s Cone of Experience<\/a>. Mr. Molenda also authored a Reader Comment<\/a> on an article published by Deepak Prem Subramony<\/a> titled Dale’s Cone Revisited: Critically Examining the Misapplication of a Nebulous Theory to Guide Practice?<\/em> in the July-August (2003) issue of Educational Technology.<\/p>\n

    Richard Crowest also wrote a dissertation titled “Making Sense. Multisensory Interpretation and the Visitor Experience<\/a>“. Elements of his research focus on Dale’s original source material and indicates the lack of percentages in his work.<\/p>\n

    A number of adult educators and ID’s have written articles or blogged about this topic, some of the most relevant posts can be found at<\/p>\n