Disertation Extracts

Disertation Extract

This page offers the abstract and conclusions of "The Learning Icon™ - Developing a hybrid eLearning visualization strategy", a disertation for the Masters Degree in Electronic Learning Technologies at the Universty of Portsmouth by Pat Godfrey, November 2007. References are offered under a separate post.

Abstract

The measurement of textual literacy as a measure of learning success disenfranchises visual learners and those with cultural or cognitive learning differences. Visual literacy is developing in our society while textual expertise is diminishing.

Visualization is a mature learning strategy that allows for maintaining interest, rapid cognition, and efficient memory processing across language and culture. The Learning Icon™ strategy proposes to exploit the visual interface between screen and learner; a flexible graphic user interface (GUI) strategy that embraces visualization and learning object technologies.

The study includes exploration of graphic and user-interface design principles, learning strategies, and existing visualization lore to provide a stepping stone for eLearning developers to consider for the 21st Century learner. A simple Learning Icon™ format is tested within a small military learner group to prove whether a text-based teaching strategy can be adapted to an iconic form and determine what advantages this may present.

Conclusions

This study bridged a gap between the discussion of learning objects, icons, and visualization toward imparting an improved and more effective learning experience to the diversity of learners of the Defence Medical Services (DMS), and to a broader spectrum of learners across the eLearning World.

The technology and practice of learning objects is no longer emergent but still lacks concise definitions or standards (Morrison, 2003). Existing standards have poor access outside English-speaking commercial eLearning and little value to small, ad-hoc, or local eLearning programmes that do not need, or cannot afford reusability or Learning Management Systems (UserFocus, 2007). This bodes badly for additional strategies for packaging learning within learning objects: if the popular learning object is not yet “right” and remains the focus of standards groups, what chance has
a bespoke visual vehicle such as an icon for imparting learning got? To develop a standard would involve the mitigation of countless others for icon design, colour , meta-data, usability, SCORM compliance, etc., all right and proper to ensure a wide and safe market, but they could turn out to be just too much bother.

Yet, the weight of evidence for visualization to be used in learning is overwhelming and its employment in place of selected texts proven to affect the speed with which learners of mixed ability process information as described by Bhattacharya, (2006), and in this study’s rudimentary assessment of the difference. If this speed of recognition, discrimination,and processing alludes to the reason visualisations create an ease of learning, if a picture paints a thousand words, then perhaps the strategy should be examined more closely in cohort with other eLearning strategies, not separately to them as seems the case in the literature review where each essential component of a bespoke strategy had to draw on multiple
papers just to determine how an icon should be presented, never mind what multimedia and interactive engagement opportunities it might contain.

As for the replacing of selected texts in learning presentation, again there is overwhelming evidence that visualization should assist text to develop understanding of the content conveyed (Technical Advisory Service for Images, 2006, Abdelhamid ,1999, Clark, 2003, and Jewitt, Kress, Jogborn and Tsatsarelis, 2001). This study proved (albeit with a limited population)that the time to complete a simple recognition task was cut in half by changing quite simple text statements for effectively designed icons. Additionally, sterling work such as that organised by Widget Software (2007) to involve learners who have learning, cognitive, and physical
differences is storming ahead in the field of visualization – why? Because it makes some things easier to learn for those who find traditional learning regimens difficult. We are naturally visual whether it is our strongest learning preference, or not. The intellectual snobbery of text-based skills over visual ones (Erickson, 2007) is almost laughable when the age of text, which is a visualisation strategy, is far exceeded by pictograms (Cheyne, 2007).

Given the wide scope of what is involved in producing visualizations, icons and pictograms (Abdullah & Hubner, 2007), or a simple Learning Icon™ strategy with its implementation of learning objects and their standards (Morrison, 2003, and Wiley, 2006), the design, production and coordination of multimedia, the instructional design and the learner’s control of it (Magoulas, Papanikolaou, & Grigoriadou, 2003) – perhaps visualization should take its place alongside text as being every bit as difficult to employ properly and every bit as complex in its symbology, grammar, and literacy.

The 50% of recruits, according to Defence Education and Training Services (Army), 2006), joining the Services with a reading ability less than that expected of an 11-year-old are going to require help in their learning, rehearsal, and application of their skills, which are becoming ever the more essential to our security. Their literacy skills can be enabled to Basic levels, but still their literacy training cannot meet the expectancy of the bright people that graduate through the traditional education system and design their learning. Not every 16-17-year-old joins the Services, either, and not all of them look, speak, or pray in the same language. There are many poor-achieving learners in the UK who might benefit a more visualimage approach to eLearning; a wide market. Perhaps profit can drive forward a strategy that meets the needs of the low-achieving learner? The resulting increases in skills recruitment to industry, even?

Learners can be disadvantaged by text-based learning (Horton, 1995, in Haramundanis, 1996) or their differences of languages and culture, which don’t need to be geographically vast to become a barrier to learning (Holderness, 2007, Minton, 2002, and Lefrancois, 2003). Where we are beginning to understand learning differences as well as learning preferences, where an equal opportunity should be offered to all, and where uptake of Service eLearning is forecast (Defence Training Review 2002), perhaps the measurement of text literacy as a marker to intelligence
and ability (as described by Kimbro, 2005) should stop and make way for the literacy of choice and of communication that works.

The DMS and the wider Services needs competent practitioners, not literary geniuses. A visualization strategy such as the flexible vision of the Learning Icon™ that complements text and offers all the benefits of learning objects as well as an ability to produce effective learning using common mediums such as PowerPoint®, for example, and which may better engage learners than do simple GUI buttons, might offer a solution.

And if the proof of learning isn’t strong enough? The BCD aide memoir is designed to be read by all soldiers; the language tone and colour of the text-boxes has been carefully designed for rapid processing to enable the speedy care of the wounded on the battlefield. A simple test of speed in the recognition of icons over these same text-boxes, acknowledged to have been conducted with too small a sample, was overwhelming found in favour of icon with soldiers. If speed of processing between sensory and shortterm memory indicates a potential to increase the potential to learn, and concise visualization improves learning opportunities over, or alongside text in eLearning, then the thesis is near proven. Within the Defence Medical Services eLearning programmes, Learning Icons™ can replace selected texts to improve the learning of its diverse learners. If not irrefutable, then perhaps investment needs made to make it so?

There really is so much more to be explored.

How to reference

Godfrey, P., (2007), "The Learning Icon™ - Developing a hybrid eLearning visualization strategy", Universty of Portsmouth.

Grateful thanks to:

• Prof. Peter Roberts: Inspiration to get on.
• Dr David Morgan-Jones for his enthusiasm and the opportunities ignited from it.
• Dr Frank Strange: “have you heard of Saussure?”
• Mrs Pricilla Rae and Dr David Holloway, University of Portsmouth: diligent, progressive, and positive.
• All of my tutors at University of Portsmouth, especially Terry King, and Emma Duke-Williams (who eachl marked the project ☺).
• Mr Linton Greatwood, Technical Author DMETA 2007.
• 4 General Support Medical Regiment 2007: loans of guinea pigs.
• LIMMs 2007: the belligerent, "bull-in-a-china-shop" sceptics I needed - sometimes.
• Mr Nick Webb: an ever-ready ear.
• My 3Ks: time.