Tag: #RRUMALAT #digitallearningtool

Evaluative Tool Overview 

Marshall Hartlen, Bobbi Donnison, Krista Frate, & Nicolette Young

Using the design thinking process (Stanford University Institute of Design, 2016) and LORI (Leacock & Nesbitt, 2007) as guides, we decided to assess our assigned Digital learning tools (DLT) on criteria which we felt were fair representations of: design, flexibility of use, accessibility, user awareness, and problem assessment. The various descriptors are inter-related with some aspects being dependant on the successful representation of other aspects.

	Excellent	Proficient	Satisfactory	Limited
Design	Digital tool design is engaging and facilitates understanding through intuitive design properties. Design choices effectively promote cognitive load distribution	Digital tool design is effective and facilitates understanding through well chosen design properties. Design choices promote cognitive load distribution	Digital tool design is adequate and facilitates understanding through simplistic design properties. Design choices may effectively promote cognitive load distribution	Digital tool design is ineffective and does not promote understanding through inadequate design properties. Design choices do not promote cognitive load distribution
Usability and accessibility	The DLT is intuitive and includes a variety of built in features that accommodate a wide range of users	The DLT is fairly intuitive and includes some built in features that accommodate a wide range of users	The DLT is effective and includes some built in features that accommodate  average users	The DLT is counter-intuitive and built in features only accommodate the most basic range of users
User awareness (empathy)	DLT is astutely designed with the needs of the end user in mind, and empathetic design features are clearly evident	DLT is proficiently designed with the needs of the end user in mind, and empathetic design features are evident	DLT is competently designed with the needs of the end user in mind, and empathetic design features are fairly evident	DLT design is inadequate with the needs of the end user not clearly considered. Empathetic design features are not evident
Problem Assessment	The DLT serves as a perceptive solution to problem(s) outlined in the empathy phase of design thinking.	The DLT serves as an insightful solution to problem(s) outlined in the empathy phase of design thinking.	The DLT serves as an adequate solution to problem(s) outlined in the empathy phase of design thinking.	The DLT does not provide an adequate solution to problem(s) outlined in the empathy phase of design thinking.

Figure 1 Evaluative Rubric

Design

Design refers to more than just an aesthetically pleasing and functional tool, but should also work to make learning easier for the user by minimising cognitive load, while maintaining ease of use. Poor presentation design can lead to users being having their verbal, visual or both, channels overloaded (Mayer & Moreno, 2003). According to Leacock and Nesbitt (2007) incorporating text, conceptual diagrams, audio and other formats can lead to a more effective and functional design.

Usability and Accessibility

Usability and accessibility to the majority of users ultimately determines the viability of DLTs.  Most tools are designed by software experts and not people in the field of education (Nam & Smith-Jackson, 2017), this leaves the actual learning enabled via the tool suspect. It is difficult to design a tool that embraces constructivist learning (Martindale, Cates & Quan, 2005). Haderouitt (2010, emphasises the need to bridge technical and pedagogical usability that considers technical usability, as well as learning goals and theory. By considering both, the DLTs true educational impact is more easily measured.

User Awareness

Any successful digital tool should be designed around the needs of the user, not the whims of the design team. Empathetic design seeks to guide innovative efforts, discover and keep an awareness of human emotion, and discover needs that users have, but may not be aware of (Stanford University Institute of Design, 2016). By keeping empathy at the core of any design, the design team is more likely to yield a purposeful product by improving usability since the user experience is paramount. In addition, adhering to principles of empathy, problem assessment should also be addressed.

Problem Assessment

Addressing user generated problems requires first understanding the user. Doing so in the empathy phase of design thinking, should lead to a problem assessment that provides focus for the problem, inspires creative design that recognizably addresses the user problem(s) (Stanford University Institute of Design, 2016). Leacock and Nesbitt ( 2007) stress the importance of linking learning activities to the problem, and hold this to be a key feature of their framework. By focussing on the solving the problem, the DLT ultimately serves its purpose of facilitating user learning, and this determiner could be seen as the most important to the overall assessment.

 

References

Hadjerrouit, S. (2010). A conceptual framework for using and evaluating web-based learning resources in school education. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 9, 53-79.

Leacock, T. L., & Nesbit, J. C. (2007). A framework for evaluating the quality of multimedia learning resources. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(2).

Martinidale, T., Cates, W. M., & Qian, Y. (2005). Analysis of recognized Web-based educational resources. Computers in the Schools, 21(3), 101-117.

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.

Nam; C. S., & Smith-Jackson, T. L. (2007). Web-based learning environment: A theory-based design process for development and evaluation. Journal of Information Technology Education, 6, 23- 44.

Stanford University Institute of Design. (2016). Bootcamp Bootleg. Retrieved from http://dschool-old.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/METHODCARDS-v3-slim.pdf

To make sure I am ticking  off all the boxes, I am just going to leave the format of the activity here. to guide my discussion.

• Description: The school I work with is implementing a BYOD scheme for grade 10 and 11 next year. My didgital resource will help teachers manage this change by providing them with both digital resource training and pedagogical training.
• Learning Goals: I would like the users to achieve a consistent and common minimum comfort level with both digital resource usability and digital learning pedagogy to promote effective digital learning in the classroom.
• Intended Audience: The primary audience will be secondary school teachers at my school, but secondary beneficiatries will be the students who are partaking in the BYOD program, the design will help to ensure the smotthness of transition for them as well.
• Rationale: I have alredy identified that my users need more support with this transition than initially anticipated. The users have little to no background in effective digital pedagogy, and very limited technological experience period. I plan to use Google Classroom as  hub for a variety of digital tools that will help familiarise the users with the medium that the school is asking us to use (GSuite for Education) and will also provide the ability to link other tools and tutorials to this centralised resource location.
• Tools: I will be using Google Classroom as my centralising hub, but within this will be a variety of links to other resources, including video tutorials and links to to other digital learning tools.
• Google Classroom was chosen because it in itself will be used by the student users to manage their learning , so by using it as the central hub of my digital tool, it forces the teacher users to also be familiar with it. While Google Classroom is limited in that it is not a complete LMS, it does offer a variety of flexibility within the context of the school, which has “gone Google” and is pusing  teachers ans Students to be familiar withthe platform. provide a summary of the tools that you will use to develop your digital learning resource and clearly justify why you would like to use them.
• Assessment Plan: Some of the activities will able to be assessed by completion of the assignments themselves, for example: an assignment that requires students to demonstrate knowledge of pedagogical awareness, would ask them to design an activity using the digital tools they have been shown how to use. I have considered having the users also create and deliver a lesson to be taught to the other users, this would give them the opportunity to practice what they have learned, and it would also give the other users an opportunity sit on the side of the student learners, which should help them empathise with their end users. Ultimate satisfactory completion of the skills will be evaluated by me.
• Learning Theories & Instructional Design Principles Used: Digital learning in the k-12 sector requires knowledge of constructivist learning theory. This is the theory which this learning tool will hope to root its instruction in. By having users both create resources, and use resources created by other users, empathy will be kept front and center throughout the process, hopefully leading to a better overall user experience.
• Instructions for Use: The adult users will be required to work through a series of “assignments” that will be loaded on the Google Classroom site. These activities will include a variety of tutorials to support further learning, and learly and concisely outline instructions for how learners will use your digital learning resource.
• Plan for Use: The Google Classroom site will be public to all who have a Google account, and the appropriate access code, whoch will be provided by me.