JLynn

Making them happy

2006-04-12T21:06:00.000-05:00

Attractive Things Work Better
Donald A. Norman

I've heard about other studies with results that fall in line with what Norman is talking about.

- In his book, Blink, Malcolm Gladwell told about a study which found that surgeons who spent just three minutes longer with their patients were much less likely to be sued for malpractice. There was no significant difference in the quality or the amount of information the doctors provided their patients. Instead, the difference was in the way the doctors spoke with thie patients. The doctors that weren't sued were more likely to use use "orienting comments" and engaged in active listening. Basically, these doctors made their patients comfortable, put them at ease. And because the patients liked these doctors better, they were much less likely to sue for malpractice.

- I can't place the second study I'm thinking of, but basically the experiment had people rating strangers in a series of pictures. The people in the pictures were rated based on attractiveness, friendliness and intelligence (with different people providing rating based on different attributes). Essentially what they found is that pretty people were attributed as being both friendlier and smarter than their less attractive counterparts.

All of these studies show how our emotions effect our decisions. People love to see themselves as objective observers able to make decisions based solely on the facts at hand. But this just doesn't happen.

"Designers can get away with more is the product is fun and enjoyable," (p. 6). This is true no matter what kind of designer you are... As an instructional designer I've got to remember that we can't assume people with learn simply because the content is there... instead, we've got to aim to please the visceral as well as the reflective level.

Information Architecture

2006-03-22T16:26:00.000-05:00

In the past few years, I've read a number of articles on information architecture which try to give meaning to the symbols used. I gotta say that Jessie James Garret's explanation is by far, the best I've seen. After reading his explanation I can actually see how mapping out a site's architecture could actually be helpful in a project's early stages! Until now, it just seemed like something I'd be able to do only once I had the site/application already designed.

I downloaded one of the symbol libraries and used it in powerpoint. The links were made automatically, but were still able to be modified. Since I usually have to fight with a program to get it to flowchart the way I'd like, this really seemed like magic!

Please clarify

2006-03-22T15:41:00.000-05:00

In his paper, Information Interaction Design: A Unified Field Theory of Design, Nathan Shedroff defines and discusses "Information Interaction Design." In a nutshell:

Information Design: organization of data into information
Interaction Design: the creation of the interactive experience. Look to the performing arts for richest development in this area
Sensorial Design: addresses influence and interaction that the creation/presentation of of media has with the five senses.

Overall, I thought the paper was interesting. But he made some pretty broad statements that I didn't agree with. While I understand the paper was meant to provide just a cursory explanation of the topic, I'd be interested to see his rationale for them:

"The process of creating is roughly the same in any medium," (p.1) I have a hard time equating the process of taking part in an impromptu conversation, with the process of say, writing a novel, which gives the producer of the interaction a great deal more time deliberate.

He illustrates his "continuum of Interactivity" by placing certain activities on the continuum. He starts by saying that reading a book and watching TV are passive activities - and I agree - but then he goes on to say that painting and TV production is interactive. I thought is was strange to discuss the degree of interaction of both the audience AND the producer; his illustration confuses me because the former activities are activities of an audience, while the later are activities of the producers. I guess I'm looking for a clearer definition of "interaction."

Response: Anchored Instruction: Why We Need It and How Technology Can Help

2006-03-15T22:11:00.000-05:00

Bransford begins this article by explaining why we need anchored instruction. In short the reason is transferability. He explains how logarithms were able to make life so much easier for astronomers of the 1600s. It's really a great example of how learning can address a real need.

And I totally agree that students "treat the knowledge as ends rather than means to an important ends." It's true classroom learning tends to remain separate from a student's list of tools for life.

The astronomers' learning context held such meaning for them because it was actually part of their real life - their work-life, probably. But most examples of anchored instruction that Bransford uses, and that I've come across elsewhere, are contrived. The contexts aren't ones that would naturally be in the student's life. Students first need to step out of himself, taking on some kind of artificial role, then take part in the learning context. Once completed, the student still needs to integrate that learning into their own reality - essentially the knowledge remains an end in itself. Don't get me wrong, I think the idea of anchored instruction is great. And that placing knowledge acquisition into some kind of context is better than teaching that knowledge with no context at all - at least the students are getting to see their learning in action rather than an isolated (inert) element. I wonder, however, in what situations can we place learning so that it truly addresses a students' reality?

Lollipops & Learning: Design Document

2006-03-08T10:17:00.000-05:00

Analysis
Background and Problem Description
Motivation has been found to be integral to reading instruction (Colker, Date not provided, p 1). Unfortunately, the current literacy models employed by educational institutions treat literacy skills as ends in themselves, reinforcing these skills outside of the natural context of reading and writing (Powell, 2005, p 249). One way to motivate learners is to teach them to appreciate the aesthetic value of literacy as portrayed by reader response theory.
Martinez summarizes the perspective of reader response theory as embracing “the notion that literacy involves more than comprehending the literary object; that reading involves perceiving the complex relationships offered by multiple perspectives” (2000, p 166). According to this theory readers bring to every reading a stance, or “mental set”: either an aesthetic stance or an efferent one. In educational settings, learners are generally asked to take on an efferent stance in which “attention focuses on accumulating what is to be carried away at the end of the reading” (Rosenblatt, p. 73). For example students are asked to provide the main idea of a given paragraph or story or to retain details of a text.
By reading with an aesthetic stance “attention will shift inward, will center on what is being created during the actual reading. A much broader range of elements will be allowed to rise into consciousness, not simply the abstract concepts that the words point to, buy also what those objects or referents strip up of personal feelings, ideas, and attitudes. The very sound and rhythm of the words will be attended to.” (Rosenblatt, p 73)
According to reader response theory reading is made up of “transactions,” the give and take of both the reader and the text at a particular time and under particular circumstances. Readers bring a predominantly aesthetic stance or efferent stance to a reading and the transaction (or multiple transactions) within (Rosenblatt, p 73, p 75).
In his research on the effects of readers’ implicit models of reading Shraw found when readers hold this transactional model of reading as a belief, “they generate more critical and personal responses without sacrificing their understanding of important text propositions.” He goes on to suggest “that those with a transactional epistemology were more likely to engage a text, rather than merely process it” (Wineburg, 1991 as sited in Schraw, 1996, p301)
While it is the efferent stance that is most widely utilized within educational institutions, it is the aesthetic stance that enables a reader to be moved by a reading. “Aesthetic reading, by its very nature has an intrinsic purpose, the desire to have a pleasurable, interesting experience for its own sake” (Rosenblatt, p 83).
If we can teach young learners how they can interact with a reading and utilize the aesthetic stance, they are likely to value reading experiences and become motivated to continue reading on their own. As reading (or being read to) becomes an experience to savor, the increased exposure is likely to increase the other skills required for proficient literacy.

Target Audience/Learners
Children between the ages of 5 and 8 are the primary target audience for this animated instructional unit. The unit will be geared to children without significant learning disabilities. The targeted learners are also without physical disabilities which would prevent interaction with the text. Additionally, since research suggests that children who read with adults attain better levels of comprehension, we should consider parents/guardians and teachers to be a secondary audience (Gimbert and Cristol, 2004, p 208).

Review of Existing Projects/Research and Their Shortcomings & Media Review
Research aimed at studying the best way to integrate technology into English language arts is quite limited (McNabb, 2005, p 113). This of course is the greatest shortcoming of the existing research. However, the research that has been done suggests that Cued Animations and Sound Effects (CASE) should be supportive of the story, and should be limited even then (Trushell, 2005, p 59, p 64). While relevant sounds do not hinder learning, they also do not enhance it (Moreno et al, 2002, p 163)
Additionally, interactive media allows for venturing beyond the single page via the use of hypertext and hypermedia. Conventional reading strategies apply only a single page of a website. While there is some evidence indicating significant differences between this multi-linear way of reading and conventional linear readings, little is known about the cognitive processes involved with venturing beyond this first page (McNabb, 2005, p 114).

Design
Learner Characteristics
The learners of this unit will be male and female English language learners between the 5 and 8. They are beginning readers without disabilities (learning, physical, developmental) significant enough to prevent interaction with the text. As young children, they have short attention and are unfamiliar with abstract concepts.

Content Analysis
To be successful in teaching young learners to utilize the aesthetic stance we will need to use well written texts that appeal to their senses. Imagery and rhythm and fantasy are all things that would enhance the aesthetic reading of a text. The computer narration (which can be turned on/off) should be as realistic as possible and utilize voice inflection to give life to additional emphasis.
The exercises included should elicit the personal nature of the student’s transaction with the text. Text can evoke emotion and the learners should be encouraged to relive the experience. Rosenblatt suggests that a question/answer atmosphere tends to shut down aesthetic experience, so students should be encouraged to extend the experience by nonverbal means: drawing, playacting, painting etc. (p 84). Simulating the full tactile experience that these exercises evoke would be difficult, if not impossible. However the program may encourage the symbolic use of color in relation to a given text. It could also help the students to relive the rhythmic aspects of a text.

Goal, objectives, evaluation
Goal
Increase readers’ motivation to read.
Objectives
1: Enhance the readers’ aesthetic appreciation of given text.
2: Provide readers’ with the tools to “relive” given text.
Evaluation
Empirical evaluation of the unit would be difficult. One way to evaluate successful achievement of the objectives would be to provide learners with questionnaires both before beginning the unit and at completion. The questionnaires would ask about the reader’s personal response to a given text. Recalling Rosenblatt’s suggestion that the question/answer environment tends to close down the aesthetic experience, this kind of evaluation would most likely be a poor measure. Rosenblatt suggests that, “A most eloquent verbal sign that the story or poem is being aesthetically experienced is the child’s “Read it again” (Rosenblatt, p78). This could hardly be considered an empirical measure. Qualitative means are the best way to measure achievement of the objectives.
Measuring achievement of the overall goal (Increase readers’ motivation to read) would also be difficult to measure empirically. In addition, true success in achieving this goal can not be measured in the short term. Instead, effective evaluation would require longitudinal study in order to see if changes in motivation sustained.

Description of delivery platform (Hardware, Software)
Delivery would most likely be via CD (for those with limited bandwidth) or downloadable software.

Relevant theories
In addition to literacy based theories we will also need to consider theories regarding cognitive architecture. The research surrounding short term memory and cognitive load will be key. The cognitive load research regarding the modality effect and the redundancy effect will be of particular use. For example, Moreno et al found “the disadvantage of redundant verbal explanations over spoken explanations disappeared when presentations were made sequential. (2002, p 162). This should be kept in mind as the various options available are designed.

Cognitive Load Research: interesting, but how big a help is it, really?

2006-02-22T09:25:00.000-05:00

Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design; Sweller et. als
Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning; Mayer & Moreno

The research on Cognitive Architecture and Cognitive load make it seem easy to dissect learning materials. The problem is that it doesn't enable us understand the big picture. It's great to know how to best place pictures in reference to describing text, and how/ why we need to present chunks of knowledge to learners. But how should we create a curriculum or even something as small as a single lesson. And consider the following: "Ideal instructional designs may be heavily dependent on instructors accurately assessing their student' levels of expertise" (p.285). Do designers ever really get a chance to assess learners' levels of expertise? And if they did get the opportunity for accurate assessment? It's unlikely that the target audience, as a group, will have levels of expertise similar enough that the designer will be able to develop a single curriculum to address their needs?

Bransford Chapters Response

2006-02-15T13:50:00.000-05:00

How People Learn:
Chapter 6: The Design of Learning Environments
Chapter 9: Technology to Support Learning

On the plus side, these chapters are easy reads. On the minus side, they seem like a great deal of fluff to me. Reading these chapters was kinda like reading a brochure. I felt like Bransford provided an extremely superficial view of learning environments and the technology to support them. And if I'd like to know more, I'd need to call some 800 number and talk to a sales associate.

"Initially, teachers working with the Jasper Woodbury playground adventure (described above) had trouble finding time to give students feedback about their playground designs, but a simple computer interface cut in half the time it took teachers to provide feedback (see, e.g., Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt, 1997)."

Well... it's great that the interface cut response time in half... but what the heck was the interface like?! Did and how did they provide feedback BEFORE the interface?!

I'm guessing the purpose of the book was to provide a superficial overview of the learning process... but I just didn't feel I getting the whole picture - even on a superficial level.

The Costs of This Article Seem to Outweigh the Benefits.

2006-02-08T14:23:00.000-05:00

Design Issues for Learning Environments by Allan Collins

Gotta say that I found this paper to be the most laborious we've read. Not because it has the most difficult content, but because it could have been written more succintly if he utilized an outline or bullets.

I'm not sure if Collins intended to guide the reader into making decisions based on the costs an benefits. Sometimes he noted his preferences, other times he didn't. If he intended to simply present the costs and benefits and leave the decision making to the reader, he should have been consistant about this.

Another irritant of the article (for me) was that Collins frequently referred to other software, but explained so little about the software that I failed to grasp the connection. It seems the intended audience was already familiar with the software he referred to.

That said, I generally agreed with the costs/benefits that Collins articulated. I do wish, however, a more current article could have been assigned so that we'd have the opportunity to relate to his examples.

User-Centered Design

2006-02-01T14:38:00.000-05:00

Design of Everyday Things

So much of this article made me think back to the challenges we faced at the educational software company where I used to work. I worked primarily with the manager, the company's proprietary learning management system that was integrated with our curriculum. The manager was a fairly complex piece of software that teachers and lab instructors utilized to get infomation about student progress.

In designing (and redesigning) the manager we tried to make the system usable for the instructors, but the funny thing is... it couldn't be too usable. Norman writes "Any necessary instruction or training should be needed only once..."(p 188). We tried to simplify and standardize the user interface, but we were often reminded that usability should not be our top priority. Making the program run smoothly wasn't the only reason for this. As a company we earned some of our revenue from training hours. This was the reason the system couldn't be too friendly. Makes me wonder how many other applications are created with training in mind.

Cognitive Load

2006-01-25T16:09:00.000-05:00

"Theories of Learning and their Application to Technology" by Mayer

"Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design." Sweller, J.,et al

Previous classes I've had have given me some knowledge of constructivism, but my thoughts were still a bit muddy. Mayer starts off by discussing what constructivism is, what it is not, and how it compares to the various learning theories out there. He notes that constructivist instruction "...fosters appropriate cognitive processing ... rather than the level of bahavioral activity that it requirs." In other words, as an instructional designer my goal isn't to simply have a learner do something, but to instead have them do something in such a way that cognitive processing occurs and schemas are built.

The bare bones of cognitive processing is: Select, Organize, Integrate. In that order. The key is that learners needs enough working memory available to select and organize. Extraneous infomation (visual and/or audio), adding to the cognitive load, slows down the processing and often times, prevents integration from happening altogether. Both articles discuss the various theories surrounding cognitive load and how to best make use of the working memory.

The articles presented many caveats. Sweller, et all write:

When dealing with multiple sources of information that cannot be understood in isolation, cognitive load can be reduced by physical integration to reduce split-attention. When dealing with multiple sources of information that can be understood in isolation, integration can increase, rather than decrease, cognitive load."

"Understood in isolation." This one of the things that makes it so difficult to create educationally effective and cost-effective learning environments. You see, what is understood in isolation by an expert learner, is not necessarily understood in isolation by the novice learner. This makes it harder to repurpose materials to be used among audiences of different abilities.

Copyleft???

2005-10-12T09:40:00.000-05:00

My response to "Of Birkenstocks and Wingtips: Open Source Licenses" by P.Gandel and B.Wheeler in EUDCAUSE Review.

Copyrighted content basically clarifies the ownership of the content and requires that any reproduction of the content must be authorized by the holders of the copyright and frequently requires exchange of money. An open source license places the given material in the public domain – for anyone to use and reproduce. However, not all open source licensing is the same. In fact there seems to be two main camps in the open source arena: proponents of copyleft and proponents of the licensing known as open/open.

The article at the heart of this post, "Of Birkenstocks and Wingtips: Open Source Licenses", compares and contrasts these two opensource license models. On the one hand we have copyleft. In it’s discussion of copyleft the GNU.org website states: "To copyleft a program, we first state that it is copyrighted; then we add distribution terms, which are a legal instrument that gives everyone the rights to use, modify, and redistribute the program's code or any program derived from it…”

The same is can be said about open/open software.

GNU’s description of copyleft goes on to say: “…but only if the distribution terms are unchanged. Thus, the code and the freedoms become legally inseparable.”

It’s here that the camps divide. You see, open/open licensing allows users who make modifications, even small ones, to license these ‘new’ materials however they wish. This includes the ability to copyright the ‘new’ code or content if they choose. In this case, materials once available to the community at large may become be lost to proprietary licenses.

Now it’s taken me a long time to sort out my thoughts on this issue. Both sides seem convinced that their license of choice will best promote further development. In truth, I still can’t make heads or tails of the way open/open code (a la http://www.uportal.org/) sustains both its free and its proprietary versions simultaneously. I have, however, solidified my thoughts as they pertain to open source content.

I checked out MITOpenCourseware (OCW) and they seem to share all aspects of these open source courses: the syllabus, calendar, reading list, lecture notes, assignments (sometimes with student responses) and even study materials. Having all of that knowledge vetted for you by top scholars is really pretty amazing. I simply can’t imagine an open/open type model that would make a meaningful contribution to this world knowledge. I can only image that it will effectively cut off these points of knowledge.

What I don’t see at OCW is a means for others to contribute. I have no idea how this would work, but it seems putting out only the original course contents takes us only part way there. Collaboration is integral to the opensource community and integral the development of knowledge.

Thinking about the usefulness of collaboration made me think of another site, a cooking site actually. Recipes.com. You can go to the site and find all sorts of highly rated recipes. Making the site (and recipes) better still, are the comments supplied by others who followed recipe. Ingredient substitutions, altering amounts, clarification of the directions – all of these thing make a good recipe even better.

Okay, so I haven't posted this until 11/22. The thing is - 10/12 was actually my first attempt at putting my thoughts down on paper. Guess I'm a bit slow :(

Nothing Stays the Same

2005-10-06T21:02:00.000-05:00

First was the move the Ed School. Then, the change in administration. Next, the new and, ahem, improved VC....

And now it seems, even Centra, our virtual classroom will be changing hands (Thanks to Kevin Kruse at eLearning Guru). Saba will be acquiring Centra. I imagine we won't be seeing any changes this semester (on the user-end) but who knows! Check out the press release for more details.

Seems a bit Harsh

2005-10-03T09:54:00.000-05:00

I came across this article while exploring the web for my Small pieces response.

Michael Gorman, president-elect (probably president by this point) of the American Library Association, wrote Revenge of the Blog People!

Seems like an angry man with an axe to grind. But against bloggers? Kinda strange.

Big and Small joined how?

2005-10-02T20:29:00.000-05:00

Our latest journal assignment states:

Considering what you already know about using "small pieces loosely joined" - a
common way of describing what the writer of this article is referring to - and
your own time-management skills, reflect on what you think is needed to
effectively conduct a class using "loosely joined" media and programs - and also
while trying to keep up with the pace of knowledge in this field.

The writer referred to is Clark Aldrich and the article is Small Pieces Loosely Joined.

After reading the assignment I dutifully read this short article. Then I went back to the assignment and thought "huh?"

I just didn't get it.

Well, I did have some idea. They're talking about the way we bring pieces (large and small) together to create a whole - a whole that's either strictly defined (tightly joined) or one with ambiguous, evolving boundries (loosely joined). But how did loosely joined pieces of any size relate to time magement?

So I began googling, hoping to read something to inspire an epiphany. I wanted someone to provide me with a clear definition of this term people seemed to be throwing around. I was thrilled when I came across David Weinberger's page: Small Pieces Loosely Joined I looked around the site thinking that he was sure to have a clue what it was all about. Alas, no clear cut definition was to be found... guess he wants me to buy the book.

So after checking out what the web at large had to say, and reading through some of my classmates posts (Splindarella, Between the Pipes.) With the help of everything I read I finally came to a better understanding of Small Pieces Loosely Joined and how, when related to LMSs, it actually does relate to time management. Marc, from Between the Pipes, wrote:

Small pieces are fine as the “why” of the course, but not for the “how.” In
other words, you should not impose how something gets done unless it is an
explicit part of the course. Let students and groups decide to use Wiki’s,
but do not impose them as a document management tool.

I agree with Marc on this point. Instructors shouldn't limit the pieces of technology students can use to fulfill course requirements. By allowing them to explore and make sure of the different technologies students are bound to gravetate toward those technologies that best complement their learning styles.

Marc also wrote:

If we are contemplating any course in any field, then the concept of "loosely
joined media and programs" does not pose any problem what-so-ever. Teachers have
always been the stitching that holds multiple media together- switching from the
slide projector to the dittos, then passing around a book. The content holds the
curriculum together and the curriculum should be held together by a few big
ideas. In curriculum design the guiding principle is to join the objectives,
assignments and assessments together. Media is never mentioned except as a
medium for delivery. Of course, the instructor must weigh the goal of the lesson
and the time the lesson will take against the difficulty of the technology and
the time it will take to learn & use the technology. If the payoff is low,
students will see the technology as the lesson.

Here, I agree only somewhat. As technology advances and we move away farther from the overhead projectors and ditto of yesteryear technology is integrating itself with all areas of academic study. Technology takes on roles greater than just the medium for delivery.

Consider the study of medicine. Modern medicine can no longer be separated from the technology used for patients' care. Technology has become part of medical content. Not only does technology make up some of the pieces of modern medicine but it also makes up many of the joins that keep the pieces together.

Business education is another example of an industry that can no longer exist without the technological pieces it has entangled throughout.

But how do these small pieces loosely joined relate to time management? As Marc mentioned, it has to do with the delivery aspect of a virtual classroom. In a class utilizing the model of of small pieces loosely joined, it is extremely important for the instructors to have a thorough understanding of the technologies used for delivery. The delivery means for today's online course tend to be far buggier than the dittos and overhead projectors teachers used to contend with. Restricted by the timeframe of a class session, and the attention spans of students, teachers who desire to have students understand the day's lesson can not cloud it up technologies (including the means of content delivery) that distract.

Reflecting on “Blogging + Video = Vlogging”

2005-09-26T10:10:00.000-05:00

I’m hooked (for the moment anyway). It’s been only a few days since I read the assigned article (“Blogging + Video = Vlogging” by Katie Dean), but since then I’ve been keeping current with Rocketboom, hosted by Amanda Congdon. On that first day, a notice posted where her vlog would usually appear:

Amanda was held at gun point and robbed in midtown last night… luckily she is fine, but 9/22 episode to come later today.

And it did. The Daily Show-esqe vlog, published each weekday, actually had the full five features this week; illustrating of the dedication Congdon has to her fans.

Dean sited one vlogger who claims to spend no less that two hours on each video he posted. The amount of effort people put into these vlogs amazes me.

I remember the kids who, back in high school, loved to make home movies. Whenever a project was assigned they somehow manipulated the assignment to encompass a video of them jumping through their backyards. I’m guessing it’s many of these same people who are now taking hours each day to post these vlogs.

As with anything, this format certainly has its pros and cons.

Pros
· Potential educational value
· Another means to get yourself heard.
· Additional points of view- getting to hear a different side of the stories you hear on TV
· Affordable means to share knowledge on just about anything.

Cons
· More unrelated links to sift through when searching for what you need
· Additional points of view – Another means for Experts [AKA: everyone and their brother] to espouse misleading, misguided or flat out wrong ‘facts’ and take advantage of people willing to believe anything.
· New ways to break laws that have yet to be written
· A lot of boring video

Hello and Welcome!

2005-09-18T15:33:00.000-05:00

Hey there~ Thanks for checking out my very first blog post. As a part time grad student in Instructional Design this blog is actually part of my homework. I'm not quite sure of the direction I'll be taking here, but if you bear with me, I promise to try to go somewhere interesting. ~JLynn