‘CourseScape’ - An interface tool for online study: rationale and description
Vivek Williams
Formerly of The University of Southern Queensland
Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia
Email: vivek.williams@townshend.cz
Abstract
This article suggests that currently the needs of students are not being met efficiently by the use of conventional index-based systems in most online courses. Some essential considerations for those working through a course of study include navigation, organization, guidance, and tracking. The theoretical constructs supporting these elements are explored and their relevance to the digital medium is emphasized. Finally, the structure and function of CourseScape is presented, as an interface tool that embodies the application of this theory in today’s electronic environment.
Introduction
Effective online study courses demand more than just the simple supplanting of book learning by a metaphoric corollary on the Web. Learners require a picture of the broader landscape, showing them where they have come from, what lies ahead, perhaps what to expect, and also what may be expected of them. This is a landscape of topics, timelines, and educational objectives, over which navigation should be seamless and intuitive. For these purposes, the humble book-index, even dressed up as a collapsible menu, seems hopelessly deficient.
CourseScape is a software application designed specifically for the information visualization, navigation, and control of an online or CD-based course. It allows users to customize how they choose to ‘see’ their course, as well as giving authors the ability to monitor, control and guide the learning process.
The Needs of Learners and Authors
To date, much dissatisfaction has been expressed about the unimaginative way in which teaching and learning has been ‘translated’ to the computer-based environment . King voices this common concern: "Online delivery requires new metaphors that are based not in the simple transposition of study guides to electronic forms" .
So what should be the essential features of an interface that provides relevant information about course progress, guidance, and navigation? Before considering this question it would be appropriate to outline some of the needs of students and authors of study material on the Web?
Organizers
Aids such as planners, indexes and advance organizers provide learners with a mental framework of the content structure. They provide a context and picture of ‘what lies ahead’, and how it ‘fits in’ with other subjects or courses. The benefits of advance organizers in learning have been extensively researched and well documented . In the domain of hypertext, where non-linearity is the basic paradigm, the use of advance organizers becomes even more vital than in a conventional linear environment . Therefore, extending beyond the content specific use of organizers to create conceptual bridges, there needs to be a broader representation providing links to the micro ‘concept world’ as well as to the macro ‘course world’.
Navigation
The concept of ‘hypertext’ originated as far back as 1945 , when a device called ‘Memex’ was designed expressly for the purpose of supplementing the user’s memory by efficiently being able to retrieve documents and communications by linking two items together. Since then, non-linear navigation has become commonplace with the widespread use of hypermedia and the pervasiveness of the Web.
The prevalent navigational issue concerning interface designers has been that of disorientation, and it has been demonstrated that a large percentage of users frequently make navigational errors while searching for digital information . It is difficult to become lost in a linear index-based system, but the opposite is true when faced with multiple links and pathways. Therefore it is vital that the navigator is fully aware of the position of their current node (usually a Web page), and then is able to select their route in an informed and intuitive manner.
Tracking
A Web navigational system should enable users to answer three basic questions :
Whereas ‘Where am I?’ is an essential question of navigation, ‘Where have I been?’ and ‘Where can I go?’ can be thought of as questions of tracking. This distinction has been made specifically to emphasize the importance of these elements within the broader context of an educational setting.
When a student returns to the computer after a lengthy absence from a unit of study, they need to establish their bearings in terms of what has been covered to date, and what is imminently required of them. Pure navigation provides aids such as a ‘history’ and ‘bread-crumb trails’, whilst what is additionally required in the learner’s context are indicators of educational outcome. These indicators would display the fulfillment of specific pedagogical objectives, and the completion of activities and assessment tasks. It may also be desirable to indicate the degree of traffic recorded on the course, both for the individual and for the collective.
Once their current status has been established, the student can then make an informed decision on the best way forward or back.
Guidance and control
There exists an important balance between teacher-guided and learner-controlled environments. An overly-flexible environment will result in the novice learner becoming lost and unmotivated, whilst an overly-rigid framework will constrict and limit the learning experience of an expert. This balance can be exercised through navigational constraints , as well as through the thoughtful instructional design and sequencing of material .
In an electronic environment the author is able to guide students by providing course metadata (information about the course), and by allocating a dynamic navigational pathway.
Providing course metadata is an extension of the advance organizer concept, and includes the following types of information:
· A suggested time allocation: how much time should be spent in the study of a particular section or topic;
· The number of text pages: reflecting of the amount of reading needed in a section;
· The number of illustrations;
· The number of activities, exercises, and interactive simulations;
· Flagging of changes or updates to sections;
· Assessment items relevant to a section;
· The amount of time actually spent in a particular section;
· The amount of time the collective has spent in a particular section;
· The degree to which specific objectives have been met in each section: this may include self-evaluation, or completion of assessment and activities.
The relevance/advantages/disadvantages of each could be debated at length, and it goes beyond the scope of this article to discuss their various social and ethical implications when applied to particular courses of study.
Allocation of a dynamic navigational pathway may be accomplished through:
· Time-lapse: where certain sections become navigable only after a set duration or date;
· Objective completion: where progress to sections is allowed only after objectives, assessment or activities have been completed. These can be self-evaluations and/or formal quizzes.
Customization
"Someday, not too far in the future, all the information will be available on electronic devices whose displays will allow the same information to be presented in a variety of ways: different layouts for different needs."
By this point it should be becoming increasingly evident that there is a vast array of information pertaining to courses that can be made available to users. The degree of relevance is largely dependent on the individual and their preferences. As is implicit in Donald Norman’s statement above, the real forte of an electronic interface is the capacity to present data in a way that is meaningful to the individual user. As an example, (and deliberately a controversial one), many users may be predominantly ‘assessment driven’, and would thus choose to view their course environment according to assessment relevant to each topic. Although how this is possible may yet be ambiguous, it will become evident subsequently as the capabilities of CourseScape are illustrated.
CourseScape Description
The term ‘treemap’ was coined to describe the space-constrained visualization of a hierarchically structured data set, first proposed about a decade ago . Since then the applicability of this algorithm to many and varied disciplines and practices has been demonstrated by the widespread proliferation of numerous similar visualization applications on the Web .
The use of a ‘city’ or ‘city block’ metaphor has proven to be highly successful and robust for conceptualizing and navigating through intricate information spaces .
CourseScape utilizes this methodology in presenting an interface that facilitates the customized viewing of course information, whilst also acting as the pivotal navigational instrument. The diagram below displays some of the major features.
Diagram 1. CourseScape: major features
In this instance the student has chosen to view the course at the topic level, with rectangle size representative of time allocation (suggested by the course author), and colour gradations reflective of learning-objective completion. By choosing from the drop-down menu options, any number of different configuration combinations can be instantly displayed. In addition to this visualization, relevant information pertaining to the topic selected is displayed numerically in the uppermost title bar.
Students self-evaluate their competence in objectives by providing input (e.g. sliders, checkboxes etc.), where the objectives are restated at the end of the topic. In the above diagram, the student has completed all of Module 1 and is "50%" competent with the first topic of Module 2. The following diagram demonstrates an input mechanism, where a four-point checkbox system has been used.
Diagram 2. Example of data input from student
Navigational control is accomplished via the mouse, and right-clicking gives a pop-up menu as shown in the diagram below.
Diagram 3. Navigational pop-up
Whilst working through online content, students can reference CourseScape as a miniature pop-up, separate window, or individual frame. This would be dependent on the design of the particular courseware.
Data flow
As an active agent, CourseScape requires its working information to be updated by a number of sources:
- Server statistics: required if visualization of individual and collective traffic/time is seen as necessary.
- Student input: submitted information on learning-objective completion, and assessment quizzes.
- Author input: all data regarding course structure. Dependency information (i.e. specifying when, where, and under what circumstances navigation to particular topics is permitted).
Diagram 4. Data sources and flow
As with programming issues, the mechanism of author input goes beyond the scope of this article. However, it is quite feasible to suggest that if course data is available through other formats (e.g. management systems databases, XML databases), that much of this process could be automated, and would not require duplication of information by authors.
Conclusion
In observing the process of Web-based courses pupating out of a textbook legacy, it is beneficial to stand back occasionally and reflect on the capabilities and true power of the electronic medium. It is a medium that can give us instant information, how, when, and where we need it. It connects us, and delivers us into a world that is both abstract and very real, depending on our needs and imagination.
Students engaged in study on the Web need to be aware of the ‘whole’ picture, they should not easily loose their way and become discouraged. They must feel guided and confident in their movements, whilst being constantly updated on their progress. In the past, numerous tools for data visualization and navigation have been developed and successfully employed for scientific and research purposes. CourseScape is designed specifically for the learning environment of a rapidly growing generation of online students, and can be seen as just another small contribution to the evolution of a future paradigm.
References
Bush, V. (1945). As We May Think. The Atlantic Monthly, July.
De Smedt, K. (1998). Beyond courseware as giftpaper, The Future of the Humanities in the Digital Age: Problems and perspectives for humanities education and research (Vol. 2002, pp. 106-109). Norway: University of Bergen.
Dempsey, J. V., & Sales, G. C. (1993). Interactive instruction and feedback. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs.
Dieberger, A., & Frank, A. U. (1998). A city metaphor for supporting navigation in complex information spaces. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 9, 597-622.
Forsythe, C., Ring, L., Grose, E., Bederson, B., Hollan, J., Perlin, K., & Meyer, J. (1996). A Review and Update. Paper presented at the Human Factors Research and Development for the Internal Web, Sandia National Laboratories.
Gagné, R. M., & Briggs, L. J. (1974). Principles of instructional design. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
King, B., McCausland, H., & Nunan, T. (2001). Converting To Online Course And Program Delivery: The University Of South Australia Case Study. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 1(2).
Kommers, P. A. M., Grabinger, S., & Dunlap, J. C. (1996). Hypermedia learning environments. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McManus, T. F. (2000). Individualizing Instruction in a Web-Based Hypermedia Learning Environment: Nonlinearity, Advance Organizers, and Self-Regulated Learners. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11(2), 219.
Nelson, T. (1965). A File Structure for the Complex, The Changing and The Indeterminate. Paper presented at the ACM 20th National Conference.
Nielsen, J. (2000). Designing Web Usability. Indianapolis, Indiana, USA: New Riders Publishing.
Norman, D. (1993). The Power of Representation, Things That Make Us Smart - Defending human attributes in the age of the machine (pp. 60). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Shneiderman, B. (1992). Tree visualization with tree-maps: 2-d space-filling approach. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 11(1), 92-99.
Shneiderman, B. (2002). Treemaps for space-constrained visualization of hierarchies. Human-Computer Interaction Lab. Retrieved February, 2002, from the World Wide Web:
Stone, C. L. (1983). A meta-analysis of advance organizer studies. Journal of Experimental Education, 54, 194-199.