"Over the past decade, learning technologies have evolved from
environments in which highly structured information is presented
electronically, to environments where the learner is supported in
meaning-making or in constructing knowledge. This shift in control
from the computer to learner is evident in multimedia and, in particular,
hypermedia environments, where the onus is on the learner to make
decisions about optimal learning paths and semantic linking."
Tomorrow's Professor Msg.#564 ADULT LEARNERS AND HYPERMEDIA ENVIRONMENTS
Folks:
The posting below is an extensive discussion on how to promote
effective online, e-learning . It is from Chapter 5, From Text to
e-Text - Message Design, in E-ffective Writing for e-Learning Environments,
by Katy Campbell. Published in the United States of America by,
Information Science Publishing (an imprint of Idea Group, Inc.),
701 E. Chocolate Avenue, Suite 200, Hershey, PA 17033-1240. [http://www.idea-group.com].
Copyright © 2004 by Idea Group Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted
with permission.
Regards,
Rick Reis
reis@stanford.edu
UP NEXT: Leadership development for the Next Generation
Tomorrow's Teaching and Learning
------------------------------------- 2,412 words -------------------------------
ADULT LEARNERS AND HYPERMEDIA ENVIRONMENTS
Multimodal Learning
Over the past decade, learning technologies have evolved from environments
in which highly structured information is presented electronically,
to environments where the learner is supported in meaning-making
or in constructing knowledge. This shift in control from the computer
to learner is evident in multimedia and, in particular, hypermedia
environments, where the onus is on the learner to make decisions
about optimal learning paths and semantic linking.
David Jonassen (1990, 1994, 1996), Roger Schank (1993), and Brent
Wilson (1999) are three of many learning theorists who believe that
learners should be "doing something, not just watching something"
and that if this occurs, "multimedia offers serious improvements
to instruction through computers." (Yaverbaum, 1997, p. 141).
Both multimedia and hypermedia environments have the ability to
support and/or create active learning environments, affording the
learner opportunities to engage with and think about the information
(Hill, 1998). In the best of these contexts, learners must develop
their own learning strategies, which is a cognitive process that
encourages deep learning. If this process involves the social negotiation
inherent in collaborative decision-making with others, knowledge
construction is much enriched. Thus, the learning environment is
much enhanced through the dynamic, interactive, and visual capabilities
of multimedia learning. (Crosby & Stelovsky, 1995).
Ewing, Dowling, and Coutts (1998) have identified several features
of the World Wide Web (Web) as an information source. In brief,
information is semantically structured by creators of Web sites
who embed links to other information according to their own individual
or personal preferences and perceptions. These embedded links are
dynamic, evolving almost daily, and are extended by the site users
who follow the links through multiple stages and branches. In this
process, the user is making his/her own semantic links or building
a personal pathway structured by the way that the information is
connected or the meaning that he/she brings to the relationships.
The amount of information and the rate at which it is expanding
is unknown and unknowable.
Although hypermedia environments have great potential to foster
the critical thinking required to actively structure them for learning,
they have to date resembled early CD-ROMs, that is, they are mostly
linear text (Child, 1998). Ewing, Dowling, and Coutts (1998) speculate
that the potential richness of hypermedia has not been realized
because traditional perspectives on structuring learning tasks do
not correspond easily to these environments. Planning for computer-based
learning has been based on identifiable outcomes, with structured
objectives on which activities are based and assessed. Teachers
may have trouble re-conceptualizing their roles as instructional
planners, just as learners may be confused about how to proceed
with a structured task in the context of unstructured environments
(Ewing, Dowling, & Coutts, 1998). Carver, Lehrer, Connell, and
Erickson (1992, in Child, 1998) suggested that the lack of effective
implementation of multimedial environments is rar!
e because both teachers and students lack the skills necessary to
function in environments where they are "collaborative designers
rather than transmitters and recipients of knowledge" (p. 69).
The Learning Benefits of Hypermedia Environments
The instructional paradigm is shifting from a teaching environment
to a learning environment, with a focus on "practice-centered
learning." This orientation aligns with adult learning theory
(andragogy), in which the notion of self-directed learning is fundamental
to the design of learning contexts. Hypermedia environments support
self-directed, life-long learning if structured to stimulate and
motivate learners to be able to independently locate the resources
necessary to continue learning (Diaz, 1998).
Technologies that facilitate self-directed, practice-centered learning
and meet the andragogical challenge include hypermedia, real-time
chats, threaded discussion, and tools such as VRML, Shockwave, and
Java applets that make the Web interactive while delivering rich
content. These technologies have been related to both learning and
cost effectiveness, as they tend to influence the ways in which
a learner represents and processes information (Kozma, 1991) as
an active strategy in which he/she is required to structure the
learning process as a co-designer of his/her own experience. Diverse
learning and cognitive styles are supported through multiple presentations
of information, improving retention and performance, and increasing
motivation to learn (Crosby & Stelovsky, 1995; Daughtery &
Funke, 1998; Oz & White, 1993; Yaverbaum et al., 1997).
Criticizing conventional educational environments that help to shape
'compliant thinking. "Hill (1998) describes learners who lack
the "orientation, mental models, and strategies (or capabilities
for creating them) for open-ended learning environments, where divergent
thinking, multiple perspectives, and independent learning are critical"
(p. 79).
Learning is now deemed heavily influenced by social interactions
and environmental factors such as culture, technology, and instructional
practices. As educators and researchers increasingly accept the
views of Vygotsky, (1978) and Bruner (1986) that interaction is
the origin of all mental activity and grown, student learning is
increasingly analyzed in a social context. From this perspective,
meaning is seen as a negotiation and knowledge building process
within a learning community (Bonk & Reynolds, 1998). These communities,
characterized by their open-ended nature, are exemplified by the
Web, which shows significant promise by its very structure, or lack
of it, and in its support of communication tools that enable dialogue
across and among diverse communities of knowers.
The social environment results in learning gains and increased
creativity of outcomes that develops from collaborating and working
in groups (Nelson & South, 1999). Internet-based communication
tools such as e-mail, Internet-relay chat (IRC), threaded discussion
forums, and synchronous conferencing enable dialogue that can help
students think critically and make better decisions. Using computers
as collaborative tools can be seen as a type of social constructivism
whereby knowledge is generated problem-solving skills are scaffolded
through group activity (Clements & Natasi, 1992). In these groups,
students frequently reach a state of conflict that must be reconciled
in the form of a solution. The solution represents a "qualitatively
different third perspective (combining) two opposing ideas into
a coherent, higher-level idea" (p. 243). Cooperative learning
and cooperative problem-solving groups enhance opportunities for
generative learning, generating a wider diversity !
of ideas, most reflective thinking, and increased creative responses
(CTGV, 1990, 1992; Oliver, Omari, and Herrington, 1998, in Oliver,
1999, p. 10)
Open-ended, hypermedia, collaborative environments are more engaging,
can support diverse interests and cognitive styles, support independent
and self-directed learning, increase retention and performance,
and enhance critical-thinking and problem-solving skills by exposing
learners to multiple perspectives. However, unless designed carefully
these environments can be problematic and counter-productive for
adult learners. Many of these problems stem from the very elements
that make hypermedia environments so unique and effective: open-endedness,
self-directed learning strategies; learner control.
Design Challenges for Adult Learners
An earl supporter of hypermedia texts, Jonassen (1988, 1990) accentuated
the structural differences of hypertext-based organization of knowledge
over the linear representation found in textbooks. According to
him at that time, because hypertext is a node-link system based
upon semantic structures, it should map fairly directly the structure
of knowledge it is presenting (Tergan, 1997). However, Jonassen
acknowledged that it is not merely the structure of the information
that is important, it is the "active and constructive processing
of the learner to meet the cognitive requirements of the anticipated
task which are relevant for effective processing of hypertext"
(Tergan, 1997, p. 260). He subsequently described the greatest problem
related to hypertext-based learning as "how learners will integrate
the information they acquire in the hypertext into their own knowledge
structures Learners must synthesize new knowledge structures
for all the information contained in the !
hypertext" (Jonassen, 1996, p. 190)
Similarly, Myers (1993, in Oliver, 1999) found that students needed
a semester or even a school year to learn how to process hypermedia
deeply. Simply embedding strategies in the system did not cue higher-order
thinking unless the teacher similarly cued the students. Most learners
cannot cope adequately with such complex systems and keep on studying
texts in a fashion that is quite similar to linear text processing,
following frames of information as presented in computer-based tutorials.
A major result of this and related studies is that learning outcomes
are ultimately determined by the quality of learners' goal-oriented
activity, although learners who are more field-independent or who
are domain experts, may perform better in unstructured environments
(Tergan, 1997; Wenger & Payne, 1996).
Research shows that users are often unable to explore hypertext
without experiencing navigational problems at some point. McDonald
and Stevenson (1996), describe the keyhole problem, in which learners
don't understand the position of hypertext nodes in relation to
the rest of the document, since it may be hidden. Detriments, other
than the lack of adequate overview of the scope of resources, include
cognitive overload, inefficiency because more time is spent learning
how to navigate rather than processing information, and interference
with the critical and creative comprehension necessary to solve
open-ended problems (Oliver, 1999).
Interestingly, however, Mayes, Kibby, and Anderson (1990), in McDonald
and Stevenson (1996), suggest that in certain circumstances, disorientation
may be a necessary precondition for conceptual understanding. For
example, in discovery learning the whole point is that learners
should engage in a continual process of restructuring their knowledge
by integrating the new information encountered into existing knowledge
structures.
There is evident that hypertext-based learning may be enhanced
when it is integrated into a broader educational context. According
to Cunningham, Duffy and Knuth (1993) the successful use of a hypertext
system in university classes is mainly due to the instructional
supports offered (i.e. explicit modeling and scaffolding and the
system's embeddedness in a social context.)
Design for Effective Hypermedia Environments
Is there an appropriate theory of learning for hypermedia environments?
Many theorists believe that Piaget's theory of accommodation provides
an epistemological basis for planning for experiences in which thinking
and learning involves making links through new knowledge and past
knowledge by organizing, ordering, classifying, identifying relations,
transforming, and explaining.
Similarly, Nunes and Fowell (1996) and Ryser, Beeler and McKenzie
(1995) suggest that hypermedia most effectively supports tasks requiring
the acquisition of high-level skills of problem-solving and critical
thinking. Learners actively increase their knowledge and understanding
by working in collaborative learning environments that encourage
them to adjust their views of the world. In this view, learning
is likely to be the result of active involvement in internal mental
processes (thinking) while interacting with others.
Interaction, especially in cooperation learning activities, appears
to be a key factor for success in many hypertext-based learning
tasks. Equally important, however, is the intellectual and technical
support provided as adults learn to navigate these environments
and structure their own learning in ways appropriate to the learning
tasks and outcomes. The essential components of an effective hypermedia
environment then, are: well-defined goals and explicit scaffolding
support (Guzdial & Kehoe, 1998; Tergan, 1997); participation
in determining learning goals and processes (Glaser, 1991); authentic
learning environments in which knowledge is socially constructed
(Denning & Smith, 1998; Rogoff, 1990); and navigational/cognitive
devices such as spatial and conceptual maps.
Numerous models of learning have been examined for those best supported
by hypertext frameworks. Learning is suggested to be most effective
if it embedded in social experience and if it is situated in authentic
problem-solving contexts that entail cognitive demands relevant
for coping with real life situations. In this notion, learning is
characterized by the cognitive ability to effectively criss-cross
landscapes of information (Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, & Coulson,
1988, 1991) represented by the semantic units in hyperdocuments
and the development of cognitive flexibility. Opportunities to critically
reflect on new learning are maximized by social activity and the
expectation that new conceptions will be shared and negotiated in
dialogue with others (Fosnot, 1998; van Dusen & Worthen, 1993).
Embedding opportunities for reflection and summarization in social
conversation helps solidify student learning and restructure student
knowledge (Bonk & Reynolds, 1997). Naturally how all participants
share representations is a key issue in the design of these learning
environments. Zhao (1998) suggests that the critical feedback of
peers required for learners to reshape their ideas and learn new
information that they might not discover on their own. Another closely
related factor is conceptual conflict resolution. According to Harasim
(1990), group controversy may lead members to question their own
concepts and seek new information and perspectives.
Apprenticeship learning and goal-based scenarios (GBS) are two
learning designs that show promise for critically reflective, socially-based,
authentic learning. Both are based on the idea that the learner
acts as his/her own agent in determining learning progress and taking
more executive control and he/she negotiates navigates a learning
task.
Apprenticeship learning is when students learn through active participation
in a task. At first it may be limited as students gain an understanding
through observation and making small contributions, but the involvement
develops into full participation and eventually task ownership (Guzdial
& Kehoe, p 290, 1998).
Goal-based scenarios are where students are provided wit an interesting
situation in which they have goals to achieve. Students have the
resources and tools with which to achieve goals. Progress is compared
against a model of a successful process. When students fail they
are provided with conceptual and process information in the form
of a story of practice to allow them to understand and correct their
faults. Often there is no single correct process and as learners
articulate their learning in conversation with peers and coaches,
they begin to move toward a personal conception of domain expertise.
Browsing is not an effective instructional strategy in either of
these environments, as it supports incidental rather than intentional
learning (Tergan, 1997). Rather, cognitive strategies such as the
creation of a conceptual map require the learner to trace and elaborate
his/her learning progress.
How can we design a virtual community that supports learning? Schrage
(1991) offers a model that highlights the importance of collaboration.
According to Schrage, the goal is to create a shared experience
rather than an experience that is shared. An experience that is
shared is passive. A shared experience is one that is participatory
and can be understood by comparing a conversation or a discussion
(negotiated discourse) to a lecture or a television broadcast (didactic
instruction).
McLellan (1997) outlines 13 design themes in Schrage's model of
virtual community: competence, a shared, understood goal; mutual
respect, tolerance, and trust; creation and manipulation of shared
spaces; multiple forms of representation; playing with representations;
continuous but not continual communication; formal and informal
environments; clear lines of responsibility but no restrictive boundaries;
decisions that do not have to be made by consensus; virtual presence;
selective use of outsiders for complementary insights and information;
and collaboration (p. 186). Hypermedia environments that support
communications tools and that are structured by a problem-solving
model are able to support the self-directed and collaborative learning
in which adult learners are successful.
References
Bonk, C.j., & Reynolds, T.H. (1997). Learner-centered Web instruction
for higher-order thinking, teamwork, and apprenticeship. In B.H.
Khan (Ed.), Web-Based Instruction (pp.167-178). Engelwood Cliffs,
NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA.:
Harvard University Press.
Carver, S.M., Lejrer, R., Connell, F., & Erickson, J. (1992).
Learning by hypermedia design: Issues of assessment and implementation.
Educational Psychologist, 27, 377-395.
Child, D.A. (1998). The effects of system response time on user
behavior in a hypermedia environment. Journal of Educational Multimedia
and Hypermedia 8(1), 65-87.
Clements, D.H., & Natasi, B.K. (1992). The role of social interaction
in the development of higher-order thinking in Logo environments.
In E.D. Corte, M.C. Linn, H. Mandl, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.),
Computer-based learning environments and problem solving (pp. 229-248).
Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1990). Anchored instruction
and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher,
19(5), 2-10.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992). The Jasper
experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional
design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(1),
65-80.
Crosby, M.E., & Stelovsky, J. (1995). From multimedia instruction
to multimedia evolution. Journal of Educational Media and Multimedia,
4, 147-162.
Cunningham, D.J., Duffy, R.M., & Knuth, R.A. (1993). The textbook
of the future. In C. McKnight, A. Dillon, & J. Richardson (Eds.),
Hypertext: A psychological perspective (pp. 19-50). Chichester,
England: Ellis Horwood.
Daugherty, M., & Funke, B.L. (1998). University faculty and
student perceptions of Web-based instruction. Journal of Distance
education, 13(1), 21-39.
Denning, D., & Smith, P. (1998). A case study in the development
of an interactive learning environment to teach problem-solving
skills. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 9(1), 3-36.
Diaz, D.P. (1998). CD/Web Hybrids: Delivering multimedia to the
online learner. Journal of Multimedia and Hypermedia 8(1), 3-22.
Ewing, J.M., Dowling, J.D., & Coutts, N. (1998). Learning using
the World Wide Web: A collaborative learning event. Journal of Educational
Multimedia and Hypermedia 8(1), 3-22.
Frosnot, C.W. (1996). Constructiveness: A psychological theory
of learning. In C.W. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives
and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Glaser, R. (1991). The maturing of the relationship between the
science of learning and cognition and educational practice. Learning
and Instruction, 1(2), 129-144.
Guzdial, M., & Kehoe, C. (1998). Apprenticeship-based learning
environments: A principled approach to providing software-realized
scaffolding through hypermedia. Journal of Interactive Learning
Research, 9(3/4), 289-336.
Harasim, L.M. (1990). On-line education: An environment for collaboration
and intellectual amplification. In L. Harasim (Ed.), On-line: Perspectives
on a new environment. (pp. 39-64). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
Hill, J. (1998). Distance learning environments via the World Wide
Wed. In B.H. Khan (Ed.), Web-based instruction. (pp. 75-80). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Jonassen, D.H. (1988). Designing structured hypertext and structuring
access to hypertext. Educational Technology, 28(11), 13-16.
Jonassen, D.H. (1990). Semantic network elicitation: Tools for
structuring hypertext. In C. Green & R. McAleese (Eds.), Hypertext:
State of the art. Oxford: Intellect Books Ltd.
Jonassen, D. (1994, April.) Thinking technology. Educational Technology,
34-35.
Jonassen, D.H. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for
critical thinking. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kozna, R.B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational
Research, 61(2), 179-211.
McDonald, S. & Stevenson, R. (1996), Disorientation in hypertext:
The effects of three text structures on navigation performance.
Applied Ergonomics, 27(1) pp. 61-68.
McLellan, H. (1997). Creating virtual communities via the Web.
In B.H. Khan (Ed.), Web-Based Instruction (185-190). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ; Educational Technology Publications.
Nelson, L.M., & South, J.B. (1999, February). A process model
for guiding naturally effective collaborative problem-solving. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational
Communication Technology, Houston, Texas.
Nunes, J.M.B., & Fowell, S.P. (1996). Hypermedia as an experiential
tool: A theoretical model. Information Research, 2(1). http://www.shek.ac.uk/uni/academic/I-M/is/lecturer/paper12.html
Oliver, K. (1999, February). Computer-based tools in support of
Internet-based problem-solving. Paper presented at the annual meeting
of the Association for Educational Communication Technology, Houston,
Texas.
Oliver, K., Omari, A., & Herrington, J. (1998). Exploring student
interactions in collaborative World Wide Web computer-based learning
environments. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia,
7(2/3), 263-287.
Oz, E. & White, L.D. (1993). Multimedia for better training.
Journal of Systems Management, 44(5), 34-38, 43.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Ryser, G.R., Beeler, J.E., McKenzie, C.M., (1995). Effects of a
computer-supported intentional learning environment on students'
self-concept, self-regulatory behavior, and critical thinking ability.
Journal of Educational Computing Research, 13(4), 375-385.
Schank, R.C. (1993). Learning via multimedia computers. Communications
of the ACM, 36(5), 54-56.
Schrage, M. (1991). Shared minds: The new technologies of collaboration.
New York: Random House.
Spiro, R.J., Coulson, R.L., Feltovich, P.J., & Anderson, D.K.
(1988). Cognitive flexibility theory.
Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains, 10. Annual
Conference of the Cognitive Science Society Proceedings (pp. 375-383).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Jacobson, M.J. & Coulson, R.L
(1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Randon
access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill structured
domains. Educational Technology, 31, 24-33.
Tergan, S.O. (1997). Misleading theoretical assumptions in hypertext/hypermedia
research. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 6(3/4),
257-283.
Van Dusen, L.M., & Worthen, B.R. (1993). Factors that facilitate
or impede implementation of integrated learning systems. In G.D.
Bailey (Ed.), Computer-based integrated learning systems. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Wenger, M.J., & Payne, D.G. (1996). Comprehension and retention
of non-linear text: Considerations of working memory and material-appropriate
processing. American Journal of Psychology, 93-130.
Yaverbaym, G.J., Kulkarni, M., & Wood, C. (1997). Multimedia
projection: An exploratory study of student perceptions regarding
interest, organization, and clarity. Journal of Educational Multimedia
and Hypermedia, 6, 139-154.
Zhao, Y. (1998). The effects on anonymity on computer-mediated
peer review. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications;
4(4), 311-345.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOMORROW'S PROFESSOR MAILING LIST
is a shared mission partnership with the
American Association for Higher Education (AAHE) http://www.aahe.org/
The National Teaching and Learning Forum (NT&LF) http://www.ntlf.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|