1. Norman Stages of Action (28 points)

Transcription

1 Questions 1. Norman Stages of Action (28 points) Part A (14 points) What are the seven stages of action? Provide examples of the seven stages of action. The seven stages of action are forming a goal, forming the intention, specifying an action, executing the action, perceiving the state of the world, interpreting the state of the world, and evaluating the outcome. For example, while sitting at my computer, I am having trouble viewing the dim screen. I decide that I want the screen to be brighter so I can see it better. My goal is to make the screen brighter. I translate my goal into intention that I believe describes the appropriate action in the world: Press the F2 key with the picture on the key that resembles a light with beams that are longer in length than the beams than those shown on the picture shown on the F1 key. I need to specify how to move my fingers up to that key, how to lift my left hand and stretch my left index finger up to reach that key and press on the key until the screen reaches the desired brightness then lifting my finger when the key reaches the desired brightness. The goal is converted into an intention that becomes an action sequence that controls my muscles. After specifying what actions to do, I must actually do them. I execute the action by using my muscles to lift my left hand and stretching my index finger to the F2 key and pressing down on the F2 key. After pressing down on the F2 key, I perceive the state of the world: What happened? Did the screen brightness increases, decrease, or stay the same? Did something else happen instead? I try to make sense of what happened. (For example, if my action had been to press the F5 key instead of the F2 key, the screen brightness would not change but the keyboard brightness would increase instead. I would try to make sense of the state of the world following my actions.) Finally, the last step is evaluation when I compare what happened with what I wanted. If the state of the world that I perceive includes the screen becoming brighter, my evaluation would be that my intentions and expectations were met. Part B (14 points) Norman uses doors as frequent design examples. In this chapter, he mentioned one type of push bar being preferable to another (figure 4.3). Do you agree that one design is clearly better than the other? At what point do you think designers should settle on a learning curve as opposed to being able to use the item the first time? Or should they never settle? Whether or not one design is better than another depends on the situation. For example, as Norman said, push bars offer strong physical constraints, simplifying the task of knowing what to do. In a situation in which a door must be pushed to open, a push bar with a plate on the side to be pushed is the best design to guide the user to the correct action. When a door needs to be pulled to open, a lever placed horizontally causes the user to side his or her hand into the lever vertically and pull. When a lever is placed vertically, the vertical placement causes the user to hold his or her hand in the vertical plane, signifying a slide. Each design creates physical constraints that guide the users actions so that the actions create the desired result of opening the door. One design may be better than another depending on the situation of whether the door opens by pushing, pulling, or sliding. There are situations when the designer should never settle on a learning curve, and there are situations when designers should settle on a learning curve as opposed to being able to use the item for the first time. Whether or not a learning curve can be allowed depends on the user s purpose and needs for the object. The designer should never settle on a learning curve when the user s purpose and need of the design is to be functional on first time use and its function is needed in a high-stakes situation. For example, when designing a door used as fire exit, the designer should never settle on a learning curve. The user must be able to use the fire-exit door

2 correctly on the first attempt. The stakes are high for the user s first time success, and user s needs determine that the purpose of the door is to be functional on the first time use. In contrast, when the user s purpose is for the object to be aesthetically pleasing, and there is no high-stakes situation for success on first time use, the designer may allow for a learning curve. For example, Norman gave the example of CD cabinet door and also kitchen cabinet doors that users must learn to push to open. On these doors, pushing releases a spring that causes the cabinet doors to spring open. The users whose needs must be considered in the design of these objects are the inhabitants of the home. The inhabitants of the home may determine that it is more important for the doors to be aesthetically pleasing, and there is no high stakes situation in which any user of these doors must be able to use the door correctly on their first attempt. After the first time the inhabitants of the home learn to use the doors, they know how to use the doors for the rest of the time in their home. Whether or not a guest in their home is able to use the doors successfully on the first attempt is not as important as the doors being aesthetically pleasing for the inhabitants of the home that will live in the home for year. Successful User Interfaces (32 points) o Part A (16 points) Today's portable computers and mobile devices include use several features to enhance usability including a pointing device such as a mouse, overlapping windows and icons that represent different types of functions, audio cues and touchscreens. Using Norman's terms describe and provide specific examples of how current user interfaces on these mobile devices succeed or fail in applying effective design. Refer specifically to AT LEAST FOUR of Norman's following terms, describe how the preferred computer interface capitalizes on: 1. knowledge in the world, 2. knowledge in the head, 3. physical constraints, 4. semantic constraints, 5. cultural constraints, 6. logical constraints, 7. visibility or 8. feedback. Current user interfaces on today s mobile computers and mobile devices capitalize on knowledge in the world. For example, when the keyboard display on a mobile device such as an iphone labels each key with each letter of the alphabet. The user does not have to have the standard QWERTY keyboard layout memorized to type text, because the keys are labeled on the keyboard display with their corresponding letters. The current user interface on today s mobile devices also capitalizes on knowledge in the head by using the common standard QWERTY keyboard display when text is to be typed in by the user. Users with the knowledge in the head from a lifetime of use of the common QUERTY keyboard are able to type quickly without searching for the location of each letter of the alphabet on the keyboard. By using the common standard QWERTY display, users are able to increase their typing speed using their knowledge in the head to locate keys while typing text. The current user interfaces on mobile devices such as the iphone capitalize on physical constraints. For example, to unlock my iphone, the device only allows the arrow to slide to the right, the correct direction for unlocking the iphone. The interface prevents the arrow for the unlocking to slide in any other direction. Also, sliders in the settings of iphones, such as the sliders to change the volume of the ringer, only allow the user to slide the slider horizontally and only within a certain range, even if the users finger continues further to the left of right on the

3 touchscreen. Another example of physical constraints in the mobile device interface is that the presence of a cursor is restricted to locations where its presence is meaningful. Semantic constraints rely upon the user s knowledge of the meaning of the situation to control the user s possible actions. For example, on a touch screen interface such as an iphone or tablet, semantic constraints determine the users successful navigation between apps. It makes sense to click on the app that the user wishes to open. To return to the home screen, on the iphone and ipad, the user click the button under the touchscreen. To return to the home screen, on an Andriod tablet, you can click the home button or you can hit the back button. On older versions of the Android phones and tablets, the home and back buttons are under the touchscreens. On newer versions of Android phones and tablets, the back and home buttons are at the bottom of the touchscreen and still a part of the touchscreen. Because semantic constraints rely on the user s knowledge of the meaning of the situation to control the user s possible actions, the first time that a user transitions from the iphone and ipad to the Android, the user may encounter some troubles when attempting to return to the home screen. (This has been my experience.) Eventually the user should be able to make sense of the meaning of the situation and identify the back and home buttons on the Android. Another semantic constraint on mobile devices such as mobile phones would be that after typing in text into the textbox, the user would press the send button on the touchscreen to send the text. The current user interface of mobile devices capitalizes on cultural constraints, conventions shared by a cultural group. For example, a cultural constraint is the convention that the graphic on the right-hand side of a display is a scroll bar and that one should move the cursor to it, hold down the mouse button, and drag it down to view objects located below, thus causing the image itself to appear to move upwards. If the interface is a touch screen, the same cultural convention is accomplished by swiping to drag the screen upwards, revealing what is below. Even in the touch screen interface of the iphone and other mobile devices, when using the web browser, the scroll bar is still on the right hand side of the display and moves downward as the objects located below are revealed. This design is determined by cultural constraints. There is nothing that requires the system to act in this way. Another example of cultural constraints is the use of cultural symbols of colors. In the safari web browser and many other web browsers used on mobile devices, a red circle with an x helps the user know where to click to close the web page. Cultural convention of the color red and the letter x have determined this design feature. The current user interface capitalizes on logical constraints when the interface requires the user to employ reasoning to determine the possible alternative actions. For example, when the iphone interface alerts the user to 7 missed text messages, but only 6 text messages are immediately visible when the user clicks on the text app, the user knows, logically, that there is still one text not visible that he or she may scroll down to view. The current user interfaces of mobile devices capitalize on visibility by making relevant parts visible. For example, my iphone and ipod as well as other mobile devices display the name of the song playing when I am using my music apps. Many years ago, in my old devices, this was not the case. Just 5 years ago, I owned an ipod shuffle, and I found it s use frustrating because the songs were not displayed as they played or even as they were selected. Now the ipod shuffle displays the song titles being played. On the iphone and other mobile technologies, visibility in the interface is achieved with sound too. There are both sound and vibration alerts preset and available for different situations including errors, texts, and s. The current user interfaces of mobile devices also capitalize on feedback, specifically feedback that capitalizes on visibility. When the user takes action to install the new operating system update on the iphone, while the new operating system is installing, a visible progress bar shows the user that installation is in progress. When a user enters a web address into the address bar on the Safari internet browser, a moving icon appears at the top of the screen s display that looks similar to an asterisk or starburst, with the illumination of individual lines rotating clockwise to

4 show progress in loading the page. The user receives feedback to let the user know that his or her action was successful. In the case where the action was not successful, the feedback is visible to provide further information. For example, when the page cannot be found by Safari, Safari s web browser window displays a message explaining that Safari cannot open the page because the server cannot be found. Part B (16 points) In what way are cultural constraints similar to or different from semantic constraints? What are the implications of these similarities or differences to the visibility and feedback of instructional design? Both semantic constraints and cultural constraints help the user by acting as clues for the user. Semantic constraints rely upon the meaning of the situation to control the user s possible set of actions. In contrast, cultural constraints rely upon accepted cultural conventions. The cultural conventions do not affect the physical or the semantic operation of the device. In contrast, the semantic constraints are essential to the operation of the device. Semantic constraints are determined by the knowledge of the successful operation of the device. With semantic constraints, there may be only one correct action to ensure proper functioning. With cultural constraints, the constraint isn t determined by the operation of the device but is only determined by culture. For example, when I need to update my apps on my phone, the app store icon displays a red alert with a number corresponding to the number of apps needing updating. The design of the interface uses the cultural convention of the color red to signify to the user that this is an alert of some kind. The red coloring does not in any way affect the operation of the device or the apps or the updating of the apps. In reality, the color of the alert could be purple or pink and it would not affect the functioning of the device. This color red is chosen as a design feature for the user so that it serves only as a clue to the user to guide the user s actions. The red color of the alert is a cultural conventions because it is included in the interface to act as a clue to help the user determine the actions. However, they it does not affect the actual operation of the device. Once I click on the app store icon with this red alert, there are choices the next screen that appears includes semantic constraints that guide my next actions. I can click on the button Update all or the button Update following each individual app that needs updating, or I can push Cancel. Upon choosing any of the update screens, a pop up occurs for me to enter my password enabling the updates. There are two buttons under the text box that say Done and Cancel. Semantic constraints rely upon the meaning of the meaning of the situation for me to know to enter my password. For example, the first time I used it, when I was not experienced, I pressed cancel instead of entering my password because I was afraid that I had to pay for updates, because my previous experience with the app store involved paying and using my password. However, after exploring more and gaining experience and understanding, I learned that I did not have to pay for updates and learned to simply enter my password and press done. For successful updating, the iphone s interface for the app store app provides semantic constraints that control my next actions. Semantic constraints rely upon the user s knowledge of the situation and the world. Visibility and feedback are therefore important to cultural and semantic constraints. Because cultural and semantic constraints operate as clues provided for the user, these clues operate through visibility. For example, a red alert appearing in the app store icon is an example of visibility guiding the user s next action through cultural constraints. Semantic constraints must also be visible for the user to be guided by experience and knowledge of the situation to the next

5 appropriate action. Visible feedback is also essential to the effectiveness of cultural and semantic constraints. Because they both act as clues guiding the user s action, the user needs feedback as to whether or not they interpreted the clues correctly. With semantic constraints, the user may begin as a novice and develop knowledge of appropriate actions through experience. Therefore, visible feedback is especially important for the successful employment of semantic constraints so that the user can gain experience and understanding upon which to base their actions in the future. I would like to return to the example of my installing updates for apps on my iphone. When after I took action to update the apps, I was only aware that my action was successful because the interface provided visibility and feedback. The button for each app in the update list changed from Update to Installing and a progress bar appeared below each app s icon in the list and also below each app s icon on the home screen to let me know the status of the updates. 2. Your Philosophy for Designing Educational Technology (40 points) o Describe your approach to designing educational technology and the philosophies, theories and/or best practices that shape your approach (cite specific sources). Provide at least one example of what you consider to be an outstanding design in educational technology and the theories that seem to have guided its development. Too often, researchers and practitioners adapt the learning to a new technology or a new device. Instead, I believe that the needs of the learner should be the driving force of the design of educational technology. Instead of asking, How can the learning be designed, developed, and refined to effectively harness this technology? the question should be, How can the technology be designed, developed, and refined serve the learning and the learner? My educational philosophy subscribes to the philosophy, theories, and practices of design-based research (DBR), also known as design research and developmental research. Quality DBR is defined by the following factors: being situated in a real educational context, focusing on the design and testing of a significant intervention, using mixed methods of research, involving multiple iterations, involving a collaborative partnership between researchers and practitioners, the evolution of design principles, comparison to action research, and practical impact on practice (Anderson and Shattuck, 2012, pp ). Designing of educational technology should begin with the collaboration between designers and practitioners to establish learning goals and problems. In this way, this approach to designing educational technology mirrors John Dewey s philosophy of educational inquiry. The goals of the design for the educational technology are developed through the collaboration of practitioners and developers in the real world-learning environment. My philosophy mirrors DBR because I think the emphasis for designing educational technology should focuses on the emphasis on the iterative research process. Thee design of the educational technology undergoes systematic testing and refinement cycles in the real-world learning environment. Data is collected systematically to re-define and refine research problems, solutions, and methods. As data is evaluated, new designs are developed, implemented, and new data is collected, analyzed and evaluated, leading to new designs. This process of designing educational technology is a design-reflection-design process. This iterative process of design requires an interventionist approach to research within the learning environment. Amiel and Reeves (2008) contrast DBR with the previously more prominent model of predictive research towards implementing educational technology. They point out that with DBR, an emphasis is placed on an iterative research process that does not just evaluate an innovative product or intervention, but systematically attempts to refine the innovation while also producing design principles that can guide similar research and development endeavors (p.35). The

6 contrasting the predictive research process places the already-developed technology in the in the controlled environment and data is collected in that environment one time. With the predictive model of research, iterations refine the hypothesis and the design theory, but iterative design does not occur. Examples of outstanding design in educational technology include the projects developed by the Education Arcade, found at educationarcade.org. I believe the project Supercharged! is an excellent example of the DBR and its iterative design process. Supercharged! is an educational game designed to correct students misconceptions about electrostatic concepts. The researchers worked with practitioners to develop clearly articulated learning goals for the game. The research focused on learner motivation, pedagogies, and the potential of games for achieving the clearly articulated learning goals more generally. First, the researchers began by conceptualizing, blocking and storyboarding. Next, they designed conceptual prototypes of games that addressed both the questions in education and the questions in game theory. The researchers collaborated with teachers, students, and game designers to gather feedback about their prototypes. From the feedback, they built a prototype the game Supercharged! The researchers used rapid prototyping techniques and testing with dozens of players to test, redesign, and retest different aspects of the game s user interface design. After developing a user interface, the researchers then tested the game with students using a think-aloud process and more test-redesign-and-retest cycles to create a series of game levels that would change users misconceptions about basic electrostatic concepts. Next, the researchers took the game into high school and middle school classes, testing the game as part of the curriculum that had been designed in conjunction with teachers. The researchers used a wide variety of research techniques including both qualitative and quantitative methods in their classroom research. The development of Supercharged!, and as other projects at The Education Arcade, is an excellent example of the iterative Design Based Research process guiding the development of an educational technology. Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-Based Research and Educational Technology: Rethinking Technology and the Research Agenda. Educational Technology & Society, 11 (4), Anderson, T. & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-Based Research A Decade of Progress in Education Research? Educational Researcher, 41 (1), Design of Educational Technology Midterm Review Rubric Name Total points = of 60 points. 1. ( of 28 points) Norman Stages of Action A. ( of 14 points) Response lists Norman's seven stages of action. Response provide examples for each stages of action. B. ( of 14 points) Response explains why / if one design is better than the other? Response explains if and why a learning curve is acceptable.

7 2. ( of 32 points) Successful User Interfaces A. ( of 16 points) Response clearly explains how current interface succeed or fail in using: knowledge in the world knowledge in the head physical constraints semantic constraints cultural constraints logical constraints visibility feedback B. ( of 16 points) Response clearly describes how cultural constraints are different from semantic constraints. Response clearly describes how cultural and semantic constraints can be related to visibility and feedback. 3. ( of 40 points) Your Philosophy for Designing Educational Technology o clear description of your philosophy for designing educational technology o appropriate philosophies, theories, models, best practices cited. o At least one example of an exemplary educational technology design.