| International | |
|
Traditional learning | Resource based |
Teacher as expert model | Teacher as facilitator/guide |
Textbook as primary source | Variety of sources/media |
Facts as primary | Questions as primary |
Information is packaged | Information is discovered |
Emphasis on product | Emphasis on process |
Assessment is quantitative | Assessment is qualitative/quantitative |
The instructional design concepts shown in Table 1 consolidate the instructional design activities of Dear (1987), the events of instruction proposed by Gagne, Briggs & Wager (1988) and Gagne, Wager, & Rojas (1981), the design guidelines of Hannafin and Peck (1988) and the strategies of instructional design by Merrill (1997).
Figure 1. Summary of Instructional Design Concepts for the Behavior, Cognitive and Resource Learning Theories
The learning principles shown in Figure 1 consolidate and enhance the instructional design models of the above-mentioned authors with additional design concepts. These design concepts take advantage of the Web's interactivity as well as the capability for student control and navigation through a learning module. Additional principles include the changing role of instructors in Web-based training, the learner's control of the learning experience, and variation of learning styles.
Web-Design Success Factors
Similar to the success factors shown in Figure 1, which was developed by consolidating the findings of instructional design researchers, Web-based researchers have found additional factors affecting learning success. Especially important is the concept of a non-linear approach to a lesson. A non-linear approach is defined as the capability to move through a lesson plan with a variety of learning paths. The user is presented alternative paths other than that of just clicking the "NEXT" button. This non-linear approach permits the student to control the flow of the lesson to some degree (Molina, 1995).
In the design phase, the overall flow and the degree of independence given to the student are important. The flow is truly independent in that the learner is given the navigation tools to skip or choose modules. However, on the negative side of independent navigation, students might avoid particular learning goals. Garrison (1989) reports a mixture of independence as well as control where learners can choose their learning path, once evidence of competency has been shown in particular areas
The impact of using a variety of media styles cannot be underestimated. Ward and Lee (1995) report the average adult attention space is twenty minutes, therefore a combination of slides, overheads, audio, video, hands on exercises are vital in design considerations. While much of the earlier theory of learning was based on studies of infants, juveniles, and the intellectually impaired, Ward and Lee put forward their work on the basis of studies of adult learners, thereby adding to its importance.
Spensley etal (1990), also stress the importance of variation in teaching. The potential of an adaptive Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) depends upon having a variety of presentation techniques for the learner. Jonassen et al (1995) expand the concept of a variety of presentation styles. They show that the computer provides the opportunity to develop problems for students that either replicate or are analogous to the kinds of real world problems faced by citizens, consumers, or business professionals. They argue further that these problems provide challenging situations for students to work together to solve real problems as contrasted to the traditional classroom where the resource information may not be available.
Martin (1995) offers suggestions for the design of Web-based modules, which he believes, is basically navigation through a cluster of interlinked nodes. His suggestions may seem intuitive, but it is important that his work validates what others have surmised from anecdotal evidence. The suggestions are:
1. Provide consistent navigation aids, these aids (back, forward, glossary) should be found at the same location on every page.
2. Maintain every major node less then five clicks away
3. Make a limited use of graphics
4. Exclude large quantities of on-line text
5. Use templates to create each page to facilitate the process
6. Make printed copy valuable and easy to print (implying that external links are minimal and nested links within a page are desired)
Synthesis of the model
There is a need for a methodology and system to support educators, IS professionals and corporate trainers in the development of more effective tutorials. This model should assist in building of an individual learning concept or one tutorial; it is not intended to be a course management tool.
Current authoring systems for individual tutorials (FrontPage, PowerPoint, Authorware, Director) support the HTML (HyperText Markup Language) component of building tutorials. Course management authoring tools such as WebCT, BlackBoard, and TopClass facilitate the migration of learning materials to the Web, as well as the management of these materials on the Web. These course management tools provide the capability for building effective pedagogy, but they do not automatically prompt the author for the concepts shown in Figure 1. If the course developers know effective learning theory then they will build effective courseware, however course management tools do not assist in the development of instructional materials (Janicki and Liegle, 2000).
There are many tutorial-building efforts by independent IS professionals that incorporate the success factors detailed in the previous section, but all in all the IS professionals lack the expertise, time and guidance to implement them effectively (Murray, 1998). In effect these are single use modules and the process of design starts over with each new learning module.
To help replace or supplement this single use model, a new model is proposed that could be used by many disciplines for the creation of Web-based learning tutorials. Shown in Figure 2 the Computer Supported Learning System (CSLS) model merges the instructional design concepts shown in Figure 1 with the Web-Based concepts detailed earlier in this section. An authoring system could be developed to prompt the developer to build a Web-based learning model based on pedagogy.
Figure 2. Computer Supported Learning System (CSLS) Model
Table 2 details the learning theory that each of the major components of the CSLS supports and promotes. Not shown in the model is the management of the HTML coding process. It is recognized that the CSLS should facilitate a consistent layout to the screens, incorporate help menus, and link to test taking routines in course management tools.
Table 2
Pedagogy promoted via the Computer Supported Learning System
Model Concept (Automatic Prompting) | Learning Theory Supported |
Definition of Learning Objectives | Behavior, Cognitive, Resource |
Listing of Prerequisites | Cognitive |
Variation of learning styles for lesson content | Behavior, Cognitive, Resource, with interactivity of Web-Based capabilities |
Testing and Feedback | Behavior with Web-Based capabilities |
Control of the flow by the learner (learner may select one or all of the presentation styles of the lesson material | Cognitive, Resource with Web-Based capabilities |
A common interface and set of navigational features allowing the learner to focus on the learning objectives instead of learning and re-learning instructional interfaces | All would be managed by the system |
The CSLS model incorporates the following learning and design concepts that combine the interactivity, tracking, multimedia and self-navigation features of CBT and Web-Based modules with effective pedagogy:
1. Gain user attention with clear and understandable designs, consistent navigation tools, and a feeling of a personalized session.
2. Inform the learner of the objectives of the tutorial
3. List any prerequisites that should be accomplished before executing this session.
4. Maintain student interest/engagement through a variety of presentation styles (text, graphics, video, and audio).
5. Provide feedback for learners through enhanced help menus, and the capability to ask questions.
6. Adapt to the needs of individual students with more than one method to present a concept
7. Strengthen learner performance through problem sets and projects.
8. Provide feedback about performance to the learner and the instructor
9. Assess performance through testing.
10. Monitor and track progress for the instructor.
The key benefits to both the developer and learner in a Web-based environment are envisioned as:
1. Learning pedagogy – follows accepted learning concepts.
2. Design – automatically provides the author with screen images based on design concepts that have been shown to impact learning in a positive manner.
3. Flexibility – provides the instructor the capability to offer many types of tutorial content (text, audio, video).
4. Interactivity and self direction - where both the student and instructor may modify the path (non-linear approach) of learning. Focuses the learner on the problem and steps to its solution, not just the ‘right answer’.
5. Stakeholders - help the instructor build the models at a reasonable amount of time and effort, as well as being easy for the learner to utilize.
6. Testing and Feedback – provides the student self-evaluation techniques, and provides the author a means to incorporate feedback into the model.
Variation of Learning Styles
Initially, we propose the CSLS model support three variations of learning styles as shown in Table 2. These variations are: narrative (tell), example (show), and exercise (do). Learners have different preferences in the manner they learn best. Some learners like to learn by reading a narrative of new information, as in reading a textbook or article. Collins and Brown (1997) encourage a second view of learning style, that being the inclusion of examples. They discuss this style of learning as similar to the way crafts are learned from an expert in the field. In the real world, the craft apprentice begins by watching an expert in action and asking questions. Further students may begin the learning process by watching an expert involved in a process or strategy. Then the students will incorporate this experience into their knowledge base and eventually become the craftsperson themselves. In a similar view, Ives and Jarvenpaa (1996) agrees that conceptual knowledge can be closely linked to concrete examples via the multidimensional nature of the World Wide Web.
A third view of learning is the doing of mini-quizzes or exercises. Schank (1998) is a proponent of doing. He views the computer as an excellent device to get learners to do and Schank notes that this doing cannot be accomplished in a traditional classroom. Leinder & Jarvenpaa (1993), Cole et al (1997) and Jonassen et al (1995) all agree and report that the computer provides the opportunity to provide learners with exercises similar to real world situations
These three variations were chosen because of the ease of implementation. Authoring tools can be built to assist the developer in the tell, show and do methods of learning. These three variations also support learning theories from the cognitive, behavior and resource based learning styles as shown in Table 2. From the learner viewpoint, the Web can support interactivity of quizzes, demonstrations of examples (such as a video) and tell (textbook and PowerPoint) content.
Discussion
For many disciplines computer aided instruction has been demonstrated to be an improvement for effective learning due to its capability to be personalized to a learner's needs as well as time independence. Computer assisted learning has evolved from a focus on drill to one of learning environments in which the student determines the sequence of what happens in the pursuit of learning. Some recent Web-based learning modules have an approach in helping the learner not just get the right answer but understand the path to that answer through self discovery and the taking advantage of the Web's resources and multi-media capability.
This paper has detailed the development of a model that may be used as a guide in the creation of computer-based and Web-based learning tutorials. Many researches have called for an increased pedagogical foundation in authoring tools for computerized aids to learning (Hamalainen et al., 1996 and Robin & McNeil, 1997) . However the average faculty member in higher education lacks the background in educational theory (Murray, 1998 and Kearsley, 1998). We propose that learning module developers may be aided in enhancing their instructional presentation through the use of increased learning theories in their development.
The methodology for the CSLS framework is based on recognized learning principles and provides a developer a guide to building more effective learning modules. The model matches the characteristics of effective pedagogy with a method to implement these principles into an interactive learning medium. It encourages the transfer of knowledge in a more stimulating and interesting manner; engages learners at their level of learning; provides for a variety of learning styles; and finally provides detailed assessments and feedback. Research has shown that this pedagogy does not exist in the current authoring systems and course management systems.
The next step in this research would be to develop a computerized authoring system based on the concepts in the model. This computerized system should then be tested to measure the learning effectiveness and practicality of the model.
References
Alavi, M. (1994). Computer mediated collaborative learning: an empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18 (2), 159-174.
Anderson, J. and Reiser, B.(1985) The LISP tutor. Byte Magazine, 10 (4), 159-175.
Barrett-Murie, D. (1995). Distance Learning spurs growth in VSAT Market Satellite Communication, 19 (9), 87-90.
Bork, A. (1986). Advantages of computer based learning. Journal of Structured Learning, 9 (1), 63-76.
Brandt, S. (1997). Constructivism: Teaching for Understanding of the Internet Communications of the ACM, 40 (10), 112-117.
Brevik, P. (1992). Education for the Information Age. In Farmer and Mech (Eds.) Information Literacy: Developing Students as Independent Learners. San Francisco CA: Jossey Bass Publishing.
Byrne, J. (1995). Virtual B Schools. Business Week, n3447, 64-68.
Cole K.; Fischer, O.; and Saltzman, P.(1997), Just-In-Time Knowledge Delivery, Communications of the ACM, 40(7), 49-53.
Collins, A. and Brown, J.S. (1987). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching students in the craft of reading, writing and mathematics. Cognition and Instruction. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dear, B. (1987). AI and the Authoring Process. IEEE Expert, 2 (4), 17-23.
Filipczak, B. (1995). Putting the Learning into Distance Education. Training, 32 (10), 111-117.
Fletcher-Flinn, C. and Gravatt, B. (1995). The efficacy of computer assisted instruction: a meta analysis. Journal of Educational Computer Research, 12(3), 219-242.
Frasson C. and Aimeur E. (1996). A comparison of three learning strategies in intelligent tutoring systems. Journal of Educational Computer Research, 14 (1), 363-371.
Garrison, D. (1989). Understanding Distance Education. London: Routledge Publishing.
Gagne, R.; Briggs, L. and Wager, W. (1988). Principles of Instruction Design Third Edition. New York: Holt, Reinhard, & Winston.
Gagne, R.; Wager, W. and Rojas, A. (1981). Planning and Authoring Computer-Based Instruction Lessons. Educational Technology, 21 (9), 17-26.
Gubernick L. and Ebeling A. (1997). I got my degree through E-mail. Forbes Magazine, 6/16/97.
Hamalainen, M.; Whintson, A. and Vishik, S. (1996). Electronic markets for learning: education brokerages on the Internet Communications of the ACM, 39 (6), 51-58.
Hannafin, M. and Peck, K. (1988). The Design Development and Evaluation of Instructional Software. New York: MacMillian Publishing.
Ives, B. (1994). Transforming the Learning Industry, MIS Quarterly, 18 (1), v-vii.
Ives, B. and Jarvenpaa, S. (1996). Will the Internet revolutionize business education and research? Sloan Management Review, 37 (3), 33-40.
Janicki, T. and Liegle J. (2000). More than Class Notes? A features review of current Web-based courseware and their adherence to accepted learning pedagogy. Proceedings of the Allied Academy of Educational Leadership, April 2000.
Jonassen, D.; Davidson, M.; Collins, M.; Campbell J.and Haag, B. (1995). Constructivism and Computer Mediated Communication in Distance Education. American Journal of Distance Education, 9 (2), 7-25.
Kearsley, G. (1998). Educational Technology: A Critique. Educational Technology, 38(3), 47-51.
Leidner, D. and Jarvenpaa, S.(1993), The Information Age Confronts Education: Case Studies on Electronic Classrooms, Information Systems Research, 4 (1), 24-51.
Martin, T. (1995). The development of interactive WWW courseware for students of engineering and technology at deakin university. Proceedings of the Australian World Wide Web Conference. Lismore Australia: AUSWEB.
McGee, M. (1998). Save on Training, Information Week, n708, 141-146.
Merrill, M.D. (1997). On Instructional Strategies. Instructional Technology Magazine, 2 (1).
Molina, C. (1995). Transitioning to CBT. Performance & Instruction, 35 (9), 26-33.
Murray, T. (1998). Authoring Knowledge Based Tutors: Tools for Content, Instructional Strategy, Student Model, and Interface Design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(1) 5-64.
Murray, T. (1996). Special Purpose Ontologies and the Representation of Pedagogical Knowledge. Proceedings of the International Conference for the Learning Sciences. Charlottesville VA: AACE.
Rakes, G. (1996). Using the Internet as a tool in a resource based learning environment. Educational Technology, 6 (2), 52-29.
Robin, B. and McNeil, S. (1997). Creating a course-based Web site in a university environment. Computer & Geosciences, 23 (5), 563-572.
Saljo, R. (1979). Learning in the learner’s perspective, some common sense conceptions. Reports from the Institute of Education, University of Gothenburg, 76.
Schank, R. (1993). Learning Via Multimedia Computers. Communications of the ACM, 36 (5), 54-56.
Schank, R. (1998). Horses for courses. Communications of the ACM, 41 (7), 23-25.
Solso, R. (1984). Cognitive Psychology. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
Spensley, F.; Elsom-Cook, M.; Byerley, P.; Brooks, P.; Federici, M. and Scaroni, C. (1990). Using Multiple Teaching Strategies in ITS. In Frasson and Gauthier (Eds). Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 188-205). Norwood NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Suchman, J. (1962). The elementary school training program in scientific inquiry. Report to the U.S. Office of Education. Project Title VII. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois.
Ward, E. and Lee, J. (1995). An instructors guide to distance learning. Training & Development, 49 (11), 40-44.
Internet Resources
MSNBC On-Line News - http://www.msnbc.com/news/248039.asp
Southern Regional Electronic Campus - http://www.srec.sreb.org/
IJET Homepage | Article Submissions | Editors | Issues
Copyright © 2002. All rights reserved.
Last Updated on 14 December 2002. Archived 5 May 2007.