AJET 5(2): Hedberg (1989) - selection of learning technologies

重新考虑学习技术的选择
约翰 G Hedberg
新南威尔斯大学 在这文章里, 标准为选择现代 学习技术被商谈并且它被建议四teaching/learning 活动也许形成 为选择的依据与一定数量的类型结合概念性表示法。最重要的方面 为设计师是比赛在学习任务和它的能力由这个学习者提出或操作之 间使用一个减少的信息范围技术。 第十五个世纪欧洲‘ 知道‘, 那天空由闭合的同 心水晶球形做成, 转动在中央地球附近和运载星和行星。‘ 知识‘ 构造一切他们做了和想法, 因为它讲他们真相。然后伽利略的望远 镜改变了真相。(室息, 1986 年, p.9) 过去三年我们看 主要变化在信息技术上。与最最近的计算机的出现譬如下台工作站 , 我们被出席与使能词, 数字, 视觉, 声音, 字典, 分类词词典, 和外部事件, 经常同时, 被控制, 操作和代表对用户在形式品种和 并且对其它用户连接入网络的一个黑匣子。在这, 重大发展并且发 生在概念化研究入对媒介的用途在教育和训练。这是形成这文章依 据的这个关系; 这次讨论将被划分成三个扼要元素技术, 教育设计 , 和有些方式跨接文化和选择现代媒介。
我们居住在想法和操作可能简单地达到与工具譬如计算机 和电脑控制的机器人的世界, 挑战为教育设计师将认可可能性和使 用这个学习者能操作想法, 概念和甚而物理技能被教的技术。在过 去媒介被选择为学会的, 算法经常聚焦在属性的简单证明, 行动对 寂静, 颜色对黑和白色, 射出对不透明, 等(参见例如 , Kemp, 1977 年& Romiszowski, 1981) 。与今天的老于世故学会 技术, 这些相当简单构想不再是充分的。选择经常是在一个媒介之 内而不是在媒介形式品种之间。分类诡计难使用什么时候你正在看 形式的组合在这一个教训介绍之内。达到对信息技术的比较好的用 途教育设计师比技术的可能性的过分单纯的掌握需要更多。 看技术
许多型技术供给这个设计师自从第一个黑板被 使用视觉上展示概念用不是可能的与讲话单独的方式。经过岁月老 师被带有使比较巨大的经验包括在教育过程的资源和硬件。与各自 的介绍技术变得比较容易接近的根据一个许多依据, 各自的学生得 以进入这些工具在这间教室和在家。
运动往系统和技术的更多综合化提供 一个有趣的环境为设计师。它正在变得较不必要得知不同的硬件系 统变化当他们开始采取共同用户接口和使用一两个格式为交付。通 过一个简单的例子, 新驱动器可得到与最新的Macintosh 计算机可 能读和写苹果电脑公司II, Macintosh 和IBM, 到处密度格式 - 一驱动适合所有! 如此概念化任何东西用狭窄硬件术语不 会演讲概念学会和这项任务的认知要求。 技术作为硬件
对期限技术的用途经常被 混淆在文献。教育技术历史上是技术视同与 技术和硬件 。这提到视听媒介或印刷品, 音像, 录影和胶片通信技术 。在这间教室, 这‘ 正在显示一盘录影带‘ 在录影带记录器或‘ 正 在演奏一盒录声磁带‘ 在录音带记录器。许多设计师仍然观看期限 教育技术在这machine-based 上下文。
这种 方法由必要的设备的可及性总限制, 但技术的这样一个有限的构想 不应该是驱动力为开发教育节目为下十年。硬件的费用正在减少, 并且数字的元素要求形成一台有用的工作站并且下降。
工作站概念, 增 长与文字处理软件和微型计算机出现, 多数根据, 使能概念的介绍 和操作用方式早先只可能与媒介形式或复杂计算机系统的组合。想 法的操作和介绍的这力量没未被注意由这样个拥护者至于对技术的 使用在教学数学想法(Kaput, 1986 年; Papert, 1980; 豌豆 , 1987) 。首要在这些热心者之中是Seymour Papert, 引起有些兴 趣的挑战为教育家与他的书 Mindstorms 刚好 超过八年前。因为那些第一个挑战, 技术, 使能想法的操作和世代 , 并且显现出。四到五年前Macintosh 爆炸这个场面和假设用户与 一个图表接口作为标准。这名用户比是可得到的在电脑主机或根据 有些个人计算机能够然后视觉上和比较直觉地操作概念记忆操作系 统。
这些强有力的工具供应使概念比较完全地被了解和比较高 效率地学会。了解商标积分结石可能导致复杂数学想法在直觉上下 文很好在这名学生进步对正式可使用想法的水平之前。处理摄影表 示法并且使这个设计师提出复杂概念以是seductively 简单对这个 学习者的形式。形状可能由操作舒展和变形" 老鼠" 附有" 把柄" 这个图。最新的图表绘图工具用途正切线" 处置" 改变曲度和创造 复杂光滑图。
技术, 和特殊信息技术, 是于他们能容易地集成组分品种 入一个设备的点。随着小型系统的力量的增加有并且预言技术和对 应的减少比较伟大的综合化在当前被考虑的分开 hardware/communications 技术的其它趋向。Nicholas Negroponte, 麻省理工学院媒介实验室的主任, 描述这个情况作为 重叠的圈子系列。使用图1, 他表明对高级主管在通信产业他们的战 略计划为将来应该考虑到技术汇合并且他们的产品愈来愈变得互换 性和‘ playable ‘ 在这一个电脑为主的系统。

图1: 聚合技术产业(Negroponte, 在 Brand, 1988)
Negroponte 的构想带领的一个优秀例子是 epitomised 虽则新发展在个人计算机里, 譬如Steve 工作的下台 计算机, 一定数量的信息存储设备, 相当逐字地, 被结合入一个黑 匣子。这些发展可能证明boon 对这个设计师更多感觉可能被使用在 学习互作用在这个学习者和技术之间。然而, 他们同时提高教育设 计挑战关于互作用应该被开发的方式。在技术和硬件的研究中, 学 会由硬件没提高只有的学生, 其它因素, 特别是这个设计学习材料 使用技术, 是比较重要的(克拉克, 1983 年, Johnson 等, 1988 年 ; Salomon, 1979) 。 技术作为过程
有是聚焦在技术和过程方法的 增长的运动。被引述的例子是在军事 andindustrial 设置。训练人员采取这种方法对交付的完全教育经 验。这种密集的方法经常设法生产能是独立性和工作没有对一个专 家的辅导员的需要的课程。在高被聚焦的训练环境里这种方法是易 察觉的; 结果和经验可能清楚地被定义, 未受训练的辅导员能提出 一条好路线, 并且标准为成功的表现可能清楚地陈述。在学校教室 , 这种方法由课程运动掩没。这种方法生产象物质开发商的教育设 计和媒介选择技能是只一样有效的课程材料(参见, 克拉克, 1983 年; Bangert Bangert-Downs, Kulik & Kulik, 1985 年;Roblyer 等, 1988 年为研究阶分析和回顾) 。
在70 年代和80 年代其间, 许多作者写过关于技术和过程 方法给课程设计(Reiser, 1987 年; Percival 和 Ellington, 1988) 。一个最近总结, Percival 和Ellington (1988) 概述这种方法的改变的主要关心和: 一个逐渐转移往学生被集 中的方法学会, 譬如用途对被赋予个性的学会以它的各种各样形式 。
ever-widening 认识有比教事实更多对教育, 和经验应该包括认知 技能, 非认知技能和态度。
对信息技术的一个迅速地增长的用途 在教育和训练。
当技术看似使能被赋予个性的学会, 有一个增长的趋向往 小组基于活动使用技术。Percival & Ellington (1988) 主张上述 趋向被交织在使能组合的认知的模仿和比赛并且其它元素在学会。 电脑控制的机器人的建筑可能是一锻炼在小组合作尽量创造性解决 问题。课程材料根据技术和过程方法经常包括可能被使用象教育战 略为小组或个体的活动。事业教育材料 要求工作者 ... (Steele, 1988) 被设计被使用在两个教育战略。单 独通入工作站只被要求为单独诊断。
Australian Journal of Educational Technology
1989, 5(2), 132-160.AJET 5
Rethinking the selection of learning technologies
John G Hedberg
University of New South Wales
In this paper, the criteria for selecting modern learning technologies are discussed and it is suggested that four teaching/learning activities might form the basis for selection combined with a number of types of conceptual representations. The most important aspects for a designer are the match between learning task and its ability to be presented or manipulated by the learner using a decreasing range of information technologies. Fifteenth century Europeans ‘knew‘, that the sky was made of closed concentric crystal spheres, rotating around a central earth and carrying the stars and planets. That ‘knowledge‘ structured everything they did and thought, because it told them the truth. Then Galileo‘s telescope changed the truth. (Burke, 1986, p.9)
Over the past three years we have seen major changes in the information technologies. With the advent of the most recent computers such as the NeXT workstation, we are presented with a black box which enables words, numbers, visuals, sounds, dictionaries, thesauri, and external events to be controlled, manipulated and represented to the user in a variety of forms, often simultaneously, and also to other users linked into a network. Over this period, significant developments have also occurred in conceptualising research into the use of media in education and training. It is this relationship which forms the basis of this paper; the discussion will be divided into three main elements-technology, instructional design, and some ways of bridging the cultures and selecting modern media.
We live in a world where ideas and manipulations can be achieved simply with tools such as computers and computer-controlled robots, the challenge for instructional designers is to recognise the possibilities and employ technologies through which the learner can manipulate the ideas, concepts and even physical skills being taught. In the past where media have been selected for learning, the algorithms often focussed upon the simple identification of attributes, motion versus still, colour versus black and white, projected versus opaque, etc (see for example, Kemp, 1977 & Romiszowski, 1981). With the sophistication of todays learning technologies, these rather simple conceptions are no longer adequate. The choices are most often within one medium rather than between a variety of media forms. The classification schemes are difficult to use when you are looking at combinations of forms within the one lesson presentation. To achieve better use of information technologies the instructional designer needs more than a simplistic grasp of the possibilities of the technology. Looking at technologies
Technologies of many types have been available to the designer since the first blackboard was used to demonstrate a concept visually in ways that were not possible with speech alone. Over the years teachers were provided with resources and hardware that enabled greater experiences to be included in the instructional process. With individual presentation technologies becoming more accessible on a mass basis, individual students have access to these tools in the classroom and at home.
The movement towards more integration of systems and technologies has provided an interesting environment for designers. It is becoming less necessary to learn about the diversity of different hardware systems as they start to adopt common user-interfaces and employ one or two formats for delivery. By way of a simple example, the new disk drives available with the latest Macintosh computers can read and write Apple II, Macintosh and IBM, high and low density formats - one drive suits all! Thus conceptualising anything in narrow hardware terms will not address the concepts to be learned and cognitive requirements of the task. Technology as hardware
The use of the term technology has been often confused in the literature. Historically educational technology was technology equated with technology-as-hardware. This has referred to the audiovisual media or the communications technologies of print, audio, video and film. In the classroom, this has been ‘showing a videotape‘ on a videotape recorder or ‘playing an audiotape‘ on a audiocassette recorder. Many designers still view the term educational technology in this machine-based context.
This approach has always been limited by the availability of the necessary equipment, but such a limited conception of technology should not be the driving force for developing instructional programs for the next decade. The cost of hardware is decreasing, and the number of elements required to form a useful workstation is also declining.
The workstation concept, which has grown with the advent of the word processor and the microcomputer, on which most are based, has enabled the presentation and manipulation of concepts in ways previously only possible with combination of media forms or more sophisticated computer systems. This power of manipulation and presentation of ideas has not gone unnoticed by such proponents for the use of technology in the teaching of mathematical ideas (Kaput, 1986; Papert, 1980; Pea, 1987). Foremost among these enthusiasts has been Seymour Papert, who generated some interesting challenges for educators with his book Mindstorms just over eight years ago. Since those first challenges, the technologies, which enable the manipulation and generation of ideas, have also developed. Four to five years ago the Macintosh burst onto the scene and provided the user with a graphic interface as a standard. The user was then able to manipulate concepts visually and more intuitively than had been available on mainframes or under the mnemonic operating systems of some personal computers.
The provision of these powerful tools has enabled concepts to be understood more completely and learned more efficiently. Understanding the integral calculus of LOGO can lead to complex mathematical ideas in an intuitive context well before the student has progressed to levels of formal operational thought. Dealing with pictorial representations has also enabled the designer to present complex concepts in forms that are seductively simple to the learner. Shapes can be stretched and distorted by manipulating a "mouse" attached to "handles" of the figure. The latest graphics drawing tools use tangential line "handles" to change curvature and create complex smooth figures.
Technologies, and particularly information technologies, are at a point where they can easily integrate a variety of components into one device. With increasing power of small systems there are also other trends which predict a greater integration of technologies and a corresponding reduction in the currently considered separate hardware/communications technologies. Nicholas Negroponte, Director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab, has described the situation as a series of overlapping circles. Using figure 1, he indicated to senior executives in the communications industries that their strategic planning for the future should take into account the convergence of technologies and that their products would increasingly become interchangeable and ‘playable‘ on the one computer-based system.

Figure 1: Converging technology industries (Negroponte, in Brand, 1988)
An excellent example of where Negroponte‘s conception would lead is epitomised though recent developments in personal computers, such as Steve Job‘s next computer, where a number of information storage devices are combined, quite literally, into one black box. These developments can prove a boon to the designer in that more senses can be employed in the learning interaction between the learner and the technology. However, at the same time they raise instructional design challenges about the way the interaction should be developed. In studies of technology-as-hardware, student learning has not been enhanced by the hardware alone, other factors, in particular the design of the learning materials using the technology, have been more important (Clark, 1983, Johnson et al, 1988; Salomon, 1979). Technology as process
There has been a growing movement which has focused upon the technology-as-process approach. The most quoted examples have been in military andindustrial settings. Training personnel have adopted this approach to delivering complete instructional experiences. This intensive approach often tried to produce a curriculum which could be self-contained and work without the need for an expert instructor. In the highly-focused training environment this approach is sensible; outcomes and experiences can be clearly defined, untrained instructors can present a good course, and the criteria for successful performance can be clearly stated. In the school classroom, this approach has been masked by curriculum movements. The approach has produced curriculum materials which have been only as effective as the instructional design and media selection skills of the material developers (See, Clark, 1983; Bangert-Downs, Kulik & Kulik, 1985; Roblyer et al, 1988 for meta-analyses and reviews of studies).
During the 1970s and 1980s, numerous authors have written about the technology-as-process approach to curriculum design (Reiser, 1987; Percival and Ellington, 1988). In a recent summary, Percival and Ellington (1988) outline the changing major concerns of the approach as: a gradual shift towards more student-centred approaches to learning, such as the use of individualised learning in its various forms.
an ever-widening realisation that there is more to education than teaching facts, and experiences should include cognitive skills, non cognitive skills and attitudes.
an rapidly increasing use of information technology in education and training.
While technology appears to enable more individualised learning, there is a growing trend towards group-based activities using the technology. Percival & Ellington (1988) claim that the above trends are interwoven in simulations and games which enable the combination of cognitive and other elements in learning. Construction of computer-controlled robots can be an exercise in group co-operation as much as creative problem solving. Curriculum materials based on the technology-as-process approach often include activities which can be employed as instructional strategies for group or individuals. The career education materials Ask the Workers... (Steele, 1988) were designed to be used in both instructional strategies. Individual access to a workstation was only required for individual diagnosis.
Within this context, any technology might be described as a mediator between the three human components of the interaction; the subject matter/ content expert, the instructional designer and the learner. Technology, on its own, is inanimate and lifeless; the human manipulation of the interaction creates the power of the technology for learning. The link between the original expert and the learner can be considered to be mediated through the attributes of the technology employed and the skills of the instructional designer (who incidentally may also be the teacher or instructor). The content organisation and the attributes of the technology the designer employs to present the ideas will help or hinder the learner‘s comprehension of them (Salomon, (1979). Learners, in turn, have their own individual understanding or conceptual sets which they apply to the presented materials to achieve mastery of the knowledge and information presented. Engelbart (1988) illustrated the concept, when he described the attributes of a hypermedia (note 1), environment (Figure 2), which augments human capabilities. His thesis is that most human capabilities are composites; any "example capability" can be thought of as a combination of the human-system and the tool-system capabilities. This process is possible, given the human skills and knowledge, to employ these systems. It is this last skill-the knowledge to employ-which is a major variable in technology adoption.

Figure 2: Extending the capabilities of the individual through technology (Engelbart, 1988)
In order to demonstrate how the instructional designer and the learner can use appropriate technology to improve skills, conceptual understanding and the process of communication of ideas, it becomes important to examine the current conceptions of how technology might be employed and what skills are required of both instructor and learner. Technology as life
Although computers have become relatively commonplace in the workforce and in everyday living, there still exists a comparatively large number of individuals for whom computer interaction consists of waiting while the teller completes the transaction at the computer terminal, or perhaps, watching the prices being added on the cash register while the checkout operator ‘waves‘ the articles over the barcode reader. Those who can access their money via the electronic barking ‘black box‘ are moving into more sophisticated levels of technology use.
Many of those coming to terms with technology in higher education are representative of these groups. Greater emphasis is being placed on learner involvement in learning, and demands are being made for a broader knowledge base. Thus learners are being compelled to venture into areas which were once the realms of specialists. For example, work has been undertaken with interactive videodiscs (note 2) where students can explore databases of realistic situations in the security of the classroom, and the technology enables them to become involved and make decisions. These decisions can be about key issues, such as, chemical experimentation or future employment. This interaction can occur without fear of failure (Scriven and Adams (1988): Ambron & Hooper, 1988).
Word processing and literature searching are two common examples of increasing technology use as an extension of human capabilities. Traditionally, assignments were handwritten or an author employed a typist to create a respectable assignment presentation. The proliferation of word processors has changed that. Assignments must now be at least typewritten, preferably word processed, spellchecked and, in some instances, be presented with integrated illustrations and graphics laid out using a page layout program. Hard copies are not always required either. Some instructors request assignments to be submitted on disk, or in the case of distance education, assignments can be downloaded via a modem or placed on a bulletin board.
In the area of literature searching, the contents of the school or institution‘s library sufficed or, if not, a researcher made an appointment with the "on-line search" specialist librarian to conduct a (rather costly) literature search. The advent of databases on CD-ROM (note 3) has enabled a "do it yourself" approach. This easy and cheaper alternative is encouraging academia to incorporate a more comprehensive review of the literature in areas which were once the kingdom of the textbook. Realistically though, not everyone employs technology in achieving a goal and many teachers, while using a technology at a basic functional level, do not think in terms of its potential to assist human thought and concept development. (Office for Technology Assessment, 1988; Roblyer, et al, 1988).
From the work at the MIT media lab and the growing awareness of integrating technologies such as CD-ROM, CD-I (note 4), and DV-I (note 5), there are predictions that, not only will the future classroom be well equipped, but these systems will also allow home use at reasonable cost. The move over the next few years will be to publish and present knowledge in these technologies (see for example, Bitter, 1988; Hativa, 1986, Hedberg, 1989).
Information technology-based, teaching materials are often confined to the role of a sophisticated presentation devices. However, with existing applications software, there is the opportunity for the student to use applications software packages for knowledge generation as well as knowledge presentation. (See for example, Hedberg, 1988a). Technology and the learner
Interface issues
Unfortunately the provision of sophisticated technology has often taken for granted the human capabilities in using them. Many writers have described the complexities of the human-computer interface which can create "technostress" - the problems associated with living in a world where technology dictates the speed and style with which tasks are done (Brod, 1984). For example, Shneiderman, (1982,1987) describes the problem as it applies to the computer-user:
Frustration and anxiety are a part of the daily life for many users of computerised information systems. They struggle to learn command language or menu selection systems that are supposed to help them to do their job. Some people encounter such serious cases of computer shock, terminal terror, or network neurosis that they avoid using computerised systems. These electronic-age maladies are growing more common; but help is on the way!
...the diverse use of computers in homes, offices, factories, hospitals, electric power control centers, hotels, banks, and so on is stimulating widespread interest in human factors issues. Human engineering, which is seen as the paint put on the end of a project, is now understood to be the steel frame on which the structure is built (Shneiderman, p. v, 1987).
While new and exciting aspects of information technology and its use are constantly being brought to the attention of the higher education community, the human-technology interface seems to have attracted attention in education only in recent years (e.g. Barrett and Hedberg, 1987; Shneiderman, 1987). This issue becomes more important when considered in the light of the problems faced by teachers as learners as they attempt to understand and use the technology as a tool. In summarising the state of technology adoption by teachers, the Office of Technology Assessment (1988) found that interactive technologies take more time and effort to learn than many other curricular innovations, and their use made teaching a bit tougher, at first. The choice of an appropriate technology for learning might focus on these issues, if more general use is to be made of the technology by teachers.
Learner control
A study carried out by McNamara (1988) is typical of a number of studies of teachers working in technology-based contexts. She gathered data working with teachers as students in a self-instructional computer environment. Teachers (with differing levels of computing experience) were asked to complete a set of tasks requiring the acquisition of information from a database on CD-ROM. She identified three areas of technology problems, which hindered the learning progress: Computer-based (procedural, operational) problems, application package (program) problems and human related (attitudes, expectations) problems.
Several participants had never used a computer before. Not only was the idea of a data storage on a small disc unfamiliar to them, so too was the means of accessing the disc. Some of the most prohibiting factors were the necessity of knowing specific identifying words, the need to press specific keys for the generation of particular information, and the methods of correcting errors in typing or input. At a deeper level, several participants were willing to accept the first instance of information which appeared on the screen, without checking for details or the appropriateness of the response. They firmly believed that the computer could not err - (even if the error was in human input), and therefore the information must be correct. Beside the need for keyboard skills, which created a barrier to effective use of the technology, many participants concentrated more upon following correct procedures, rather than the information being presented. Optimistic assumptions about teachers‘ ability to use technology frequently cause problems with the instructional strategies in which the technology is employed.
A related problem has been that some current application software appears to the novice user to have been written by those "in the know". Although most applications programs incorporate "help" mechanisms (approximately twenty-two screens of help were found in one database program), these resources are beyond the grasp of the novice user or one unfamiliar with the "language" of how to get to, and be able to read the "Help" file.
The most important catchcry of the computer-based education enthusiasts has been learner control. However, while there are numerous studies indicating its importance for motivation and efficient learning, its actual implementation in courseware is often only lip service. Learners, to take control over their learning experience with technology, still need to understand how the software they are using works and where they stand in their performance so that they can make informed decisions about where to venture next. The current enthusiasm for Hypercard (note 6) as a medium for exploration is based on the ability of the keen learner to choose a path and enjoy the options. At any moment the student can review where they have been and jump directly to a particular screen (through the "recent" review function); this degree of flexibility and graphic summary of progress has either not been possible before in courseware or simply too difficult to include. While its impact has not been fully explored, the opportunity for a "hyperview" of their learning sequence does enable greater control of what and how some things can be learned. An extensive summary of the hypermedia options becoming available has been provided by Ambron and Hooper (1988), and this challenges the developers of computer-based software to conceive of different formulations of instructional sequences in place of the routine drill and practice, tutorial, simulation, and problem solving strategies of the past. Learning styles and technology
A brief examination of some of the assumptions regular users of the technology make, highlights some of the issues which must be faced by designers of materials using information technology in education (Hedberg & McNamara, 1989). While perhaps a minor consideration, even the placement of the power switch on the computer can be a deterrent to those unfamiliar with the equipment. When using software programs, the differences between expert and novice users become even more pronounced. Most obvious has been the time taken to complete tasks which increases as the response required by software becomes more obtuse and less inherently conceptual (Hedberg & McNamara, 1985). With regard to differences in learning styles and personality approaches to learning, those who like to know what‘s happening each step of t
_xyz