CHI 2003

Workshop

Designing for Learning

Susanne Jul (sjul@acm.org)

Chris Quintana (quintana@umich.edu)

Attendees

Position Papers
(Password-protected)

Overview

Products

Topic

Questions

Format

Design Exercise

Preliminary Schedule

Dissemination of Results

Technology Requirements

Participants

Selection

Responsibilities

Call for Participation

Organizers

Susanne Jul

Chris Quintana

Free Registration

References

Important Dates

Apr. 6-7, 2003

Workshop

Attendees

Overview

This two-day workshop is aimed at providing designers with a richer framework for the design of user interfaces that promote learning, focusing on learning as a problem in design rather than a problem in psychology or education The goal for the workshop is to develop a conceptual foundation for characterizing different types of learning challenges, drawing implications of different learning challenges for design, and exploring principles for design to meet those challenges in a variety of design situations. The 16 workshop participants will be selected with a view to creating a diversity of perspectives and backgrounds to ensure that a broad spectrum of learning and design situations are considered.

Specific questions and issues for discussion include:

•  Learning challenges posed by different learning outcomes or contexts. From a learning perspective, what are the similarities and differences between, for example, students learning science process and content in a classroom setting, shoppers learning to use a new automatic checkout scanner at the supermarket, and internet users learning better search strategies?

• Design challenges posed by meeting different learning challenges. From a design-for-learning perspective, what are the similarities and differences between designs for meeting these different challenges in different design settings and learning contexts? For example, what might designs to help students understand information search strategies have in common with an interface designed to allow an internet user do so in the course of completing a search task?

• Design elements and examples. What specific elements can be designed and implemented to meet different learning challenges? For example, how can multiple views and multiple representations be used to support concept formation and categorization? What other design techniques might be used?

• Professional issues. From different professional perspectives, e.g., research, education, design practice, what professional issues do these questions raise? What recommendations can be made to different professions with respect to designing for learning?

The workshop is organized around a friendly design competition aimed at providing a tangible context for discussing and answering these and other important questions. The anticipated outcome of the design contest is a set of design mockups or prototypes that CHI attendees may review and comment upon during the CHI poster sessions. These designs will be presented in conjunction with a workshop poster describing the more theoretical results.

Goals

• Develop a general framework for understanding how to design software technology that promotes learning
  • Place current design understanding in this framework
  • Identify issues and areas about the design of learning technologies areas requiring new design understanding
• Bring together researchers and practitioners from a variety of fields in order to consolidate specific lessons related to learning into a general framework for design
• Develop a set (or sets) of principles for design and/or design recommendations for designing software that promotes learning

Products

• Poster for CHI 2003 poster session
• Workshop report for SIGCHI bulletin
• Proposed article for Communications of the ACM or interactions
• A description of the framework for the design space of designing for learning that describes
  • Dimensions of the design space (e.g., learning setting, target audience, type of learning)
  • Learning challenges given different dimensions in the design space
  • Design elements or properties that promote or impede learning
  • Factors that constrain different design elements
  • Strategies, elements, and recommendations for design
• Prototypes or design mockups that can be reviewed and commented on by other CHI attendees

Topic

Learning is essential to life as we know it. The rate of social and technological change has increased to a point where an individual must constantly acquire new skills and knowledge in order to maintain their place in society. Once, an apprenticeship served before age 14 offered sufficient learning to last a lifetime. Today, society presumes 12 years of schooling in general knowledge, followed by 4-12 years of specialized education or on-the-job apprenticeship. Much of the knowledge acquired is often obsolete even before this education is complete.

Fortunately, the computing technology that is a driving force behind these social changes offers a means of meeting the very need it creates. User interfaces and technologies can be designed to promote "deep learning" ¾ learning that goes beyond knowing how to use the tool to understanding the concepts and skills necessary to do the task. However, even for designers of learning technologies, design for learning is, in many ways, still a non-systematic “craft.” For designers of general technologies, design for learning is largely a black art.

Researchers and designers in other communities have explored issues surrounding learning and computational tools for learning and teaching, primarily focusing on

• Understanding learning as a psychological process. Simply defining "learning" is challenging. A plethora of learning theories have yielded competing approaches to supporting learning, e.g., behaviorist theories and "learning machines" [14], information processing theories and intelligent tutors [1, 2, 4], social constructivism and scaffolded software approaches [9-11, 13].
• Developing technology to support specific types of learning. A variety of approaches have been employed to meet the needs of particular learning challenges in particular design situations, e.g., learning new content and processes [5-7, 12, 15, 16] in classroom settings, learning the use of modern technology itself [8] .
• Adapting educational settings to take advantage of computational technology. Since classrooms are the most easily recognized learning setting, many efforts have focused on developing new curricula and educational approaches that incorporate technology [3] and teacher professional development.

However, these other communities focus primarily on psychological theories of learning or support for educators and specific educational settings. The focus of this workshop, in contrast, is on the needs of design and designers.

Questions

Specifically, the workshop will explore the following questions:

• What are the primary dimensions of the problem space of designing for learning? What aspects of learning design problem and tasks might impose different constraints on the design?
• How does the learning setting and context affect design? For example, how would design considerations differ given the following learning settings:

1. Educational: More formal guided learning where learning is the primary goal. For example, learning in a classroom setting.
2. Instruction-less: Self-directed learning where learning is a (semi-)conscious goal. For example, learning to use a new automatic teller system.
3. Incidental: Learning that is necessary to achieve some other goal or that occurs while accomplishing some task. For example, learning better ways of searching the internet while making travel reservations.

• What other issues arise from the learning context and how do these issues affect design? For example:
  • How is a design affected by collaborative versus individual learning, or the need for collective versus individual learning?
  • How does the content domain affect design?
  • How does the type of learning outcome affect design, e.g., learning physical skills versus abstract concepts?
• What are the specific design characteristics or strategies that fosters or supports learning and why are these characteristics effective for learning?
  • How do these characteristics differ across dimensions of the design space?
  • How do these characteristics strategies relate to specific design elements?
  • What properties of design elements should be manipulated to foster learning?
  • Can a design strategy be implemented in different ways for different design situations or learning contexts?
• How may such design knowledge be articulated and transmitted to software designers and developers?

Format

Each participant will be assigned to a design team and a birds-of-a-feather (BOF) group. Each design team will be composed of 3-5 individuals with different professional perspectives and interests, e.g., research, education, design. These teams are charged with developing prototypes or mockups as part of the design competition. They will also be expected to report on issues encountered and insights gained while doing so. BOF groups, in contrast, are composed of individuals with shared professional interests and perspectives. They are charged with providing specialized views on the issues raised and provide an opportunity for participants to engage in more detailed professional discussion. Participants will be asked to join particular design teams and BOF groups based on their expressed interests.

Workshop sessions will alternate between plenary, design breakout and BOF discussion sessions. Time is allowed both for design teams and BOF groups to report back to the workshop, as a whole, and for the workshop to reflect on consolidated synthesized versions of these reports. Note that provisions are made for an individual to provide assistance in synthesizing information in parallel with workshop discussions.

Design Exercise

Each design team will be asked to design a specific technology to help users negotiate the Copenhagen (Denmark) metro area transit system. Among the challenges posed by this system is a complex (some would say, insidious) system of ticketing. This system is based on geographic zones and punch cards that are issued in 5 colors (in both adult and child versions).

Ticketing involves a calculation of the number of zone "rings" to be traversed, the scheduled time from the start of the first leg to the start of the final leg of the journey, and the number and ages of individuals traveling. This calculation is used to determine the requisite number and color of tickets to be punched. Colors and punches are additive, e.g., 3 yellow = 1 gray, which is valid for 1 adults in 6 or more zone rings for 2 hours or 3 adults in 3 or fewer zone rings for 1 hour (and various other combinations including permutations allowing substitution of children for adults and dogs for children).

Each design team will be assigned to one of three design scenarios. The desired learning outcome (understanding the ticketing system) is the same in all scenarios, in order to provide common ground for discussion. However, that learning is embedded differently in design and learning contexts in different scenarios.

Ground Rules

1. This is a friendly competition: Eavesdropping, espionage, selling of team secrets and theft of other teams' insights are strongly encouraged.

2. As composite lists of learning challenges, design elements or properties and general issues are developed they will be posted on the walls. Teams and individuals are encouraged to annotate and contribute to these postings at any time during the workshop.

Design Challenge

Learning Outcome

The learner should come to understand the zone-pricing system used by the Copenhagen metro area transit system. Note that the actual learner may differ from the user for whom the design is intended. You must design for the intended user, but keep the learning needs of the actual learner in mind.

Design Scenarios

1. Educational Setting (Mr. Kobalevsky)

The design team is designing instructional materials about Copenhagen, focusing on the transit system unit.

2. Instruction-less Setting (Ms. Thibodeaux)

The design team is designing a web page for the official site explaining ticket purchase and use.

3. Incidental Setting (Ali)

The design team is designing a kiosk interface for purchasing tickets to be placed at all train stations and key transfer points. Reliance upon a help system should be minimized.

Design Evaluation

Resulting designs or design fragments will be evaluated (or at least reviewed) by CHI participants during the CHI poster sessions.

Preliminary Schedule

Note: The format (F) column indicates the format of the session:

P	Plenary
DT	Design team breakout
BOF	Birds-of-a-feather group breakout

WA refers to the workshop assistant for whom free registration is requested.

Sunday, April 6, 2003

Monday, April 7, 2003

Dissemination of Results

• Poster and design sketches for CHI 2003 poster session

• Workshop report for SIGCHI bulletin

• Articles targeted for publications such as Communications of the ACM, interactions, Design Studies and/or other venues identified by workshop participants

Technology Requirements

The following technological support is requested:

• 1 Easel

• 1 Overhead projector

• Power sources for personal laptops used as development platforms during the design exercise

Participants

Participation will be strictly limited to 16 participants, including the two organizers.

Selection

Selection will be based on submitted position papers of 2500 words or less covering the applicant's understanding and views on the topic and a brief description of the applicant's background. The primary selection criteria will be

• Insightfulness of the position paper

• Demonstrated understanding of the problems of designing for learning

• Commitment to work in the area

Secondary selection criteria will be aimed at creating diversity among participants across

• Professional perspective, e.g., researcher, practitioner, educator, etc.

• Intellectual background (disciplinary background, cultural and subcultural influences, etc.)

• Learning setting of interest (e.g., educational, instruction-less, incidental, etc.)

• Philosophies on learning and design

Responsibilities

Workshop participants will be expected to accept the following responsibilities:

Prior to the workshop:

• Read position papers of all participants

• Begin formulating thoughts about designs and initiate conversations among design team members

At the conference:

• Participate in the creation of a poster for the CHI 2003 poster session

• Participate in the CHI 2003 poster session, including the presentation of design sketches

After the workshop:

• Review a report on the workshop before its submission to SIGCHI bulletin

• Contribute to articles identified during the workshop

Call for Participation

Learning is essential to life as we know it. The rate of social and technological change has increased to a point where an individual must constantly acquire new skills and knowledge in order to maintain their place in society. It is imperative that the complex technological tools that drive this change also help users acquire new knowledge and skills. This two-day workshop is aimed at developing a conceptual framework for the design of user interfaces that promote learning, focusing on learning as a problem in design rather than a problem in psychology or education. The workshop is organized around a friendly design competition aimed at providing a tangible context for discovering and discussing theoretical as well as applied issues. Workshop participants will be selected with a view to creating a diversity of perspectives and backgrounds to ensure that a broad spectrum of learning and design issues are considered. Design mockups or prototypes resulting from the competition will be presented for review by CHI attendees at the CHI poster sessions.

16 participants will be selected on the basis of a 2500 word position paper. Priority will be given to individuals demonstrating a strong commitment to work in the topic area. Position papers should describe the applicant's understanding of the topic, current work or plans for work in the topic area and include a brief description of the intellectual background of the applicant (e.g., intellectual, cultural or subcultural influences). Position papers must be submitted electronically (preferably as URL's) to learning03@umich.edu by Jan. 17, 2002.

See http://www.sjul.org/learning03 for further information

Organizers

Susanne Jul, University of Michigan

I am completing my PhD in Computer Science at the University of Michigan. My dissertation develops a conceptual framework for the design of navigational support in electronic spaces. This work decomposes the navigational design space and identifies specific constraints that navigational cognition imposes on design. I hope to apply this approach of analyzing a complex cognitive task as a problem in design in order to derive design knowledge to the cognitively more complex task of learning, in the near future. My particular interest is in producing application development tools, such as application frameworks, that foster the development of applications that promote incidental learning.

Prior to returning to school, I spent six years in the software industry, first as a software engineer, later as a user interface designer and manager. I have been active in the CHI community since 1990, as author and reviewer for both conferences and journals. I have served the UIST conference as registration chair, demos chair and program committee member. At the CHI conference in 1997, I co-chaired the Basic Research Symposium and the Workshop on Navigation in Electronic Worlds. I have organized numerous workshops for the Danish Scout Corps, and am currently active in developing and presenting training workshops for the American Red Cross. As a regular visitor to Copenhagen, I am painfully aware of some of the pitfalls the ticketing system of its transit system presents to the uniformed user.

Chris Quintana, University of Michigan

I am currently a research scientist with the School of Education at the University of Michigan, where I work with the Center for Highly Interactive Computing in Education (hi-ce) and the College of Engineering. My research interests include the application of human-computer interaction, software engineering, and information visualization principles to the design of educational technology. My recent work has focused on articulating a learner-centered design approach for educational software. This has involved exploring, developing and assessing educational software and software-based "scaffolding features", and on developing different design guidelines for educational software.

My Ph.D. (Computer Science) dissertation at Michigan focused on support for learners engaging in complex new practices, specifically science inquiry practices. I have been active in the CHI community since 1992, serving as a reviewer, session chair and author. I have also published papers in conferences such as the International Conference of the Learning Sciences and the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, and presented learner-centered software design tutorials at the International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies and the Mobile HCI conference.

Free Registration

In addition to the two organizers, free registration is requested for a student to to serve as workshop assistant. The student's primary responsibility will be to consolidate and compose information generated by design teams and BOF groups, and to present this synthesized information for review. This individual is not included in the count of workshop participants.

References

1. Anderson, J.R. The Architecture of Cognition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1983.

2. Anderson, J.R., Reder, L.M. and Simon, H. Radical Constructivism and Cognitve Psychology. in Ravitch, D. ed. Brookings, Papers On Educational Policy 1998, Brookings Institute Press, Washington D.C., 1998.

3. Blumenfeld, P.C., Fishman, B., Krajcik, J., Marx, R.W. and Soloway, E. Creating Usable Innovations in Systemic Reform: Scaling Up Technology-Embedded Project-Based Science in Urban Schools. Educational Psychologist, 35 (3). 149-164.

4. Card, S.K., Moran, T.P. and Newell, A. The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1983.

5. Edelson, D.C., Gordin, D.N. and Pea, R.D., Creating Science Learning Tools From Experts' Investigation Tools: A Design Framework. in Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, (Oak Brook, IL, 1997).

6. Loh, B., Radinsky, J., Russell, E., Gomez, L.M., Reiser, B.J. and Edelson, D.C., The Progress Portfolio: Designing Reflective Tools for a Classroom Context. in Human Factors in Computing Systems: CHI '98 Conference Proceedings, (Los Angeles, 1998), Addison-Wesley, 627-634.

7. Metcalf, S.J., Krajcik, J. and Soloway, E. Model-It: A Design Retrospective. in Jacobson, M.J. and Kozma, R.B. eds. Innovations in Science and Mathematics Education, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 2000, 77-115.

8. Norman, D.A. Cognitive Engineering. in Norman, D.A. and Draper, S.W. eds. User Centered System Design, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1986.

9. Papert, S. The Children's Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer. Basic Books, New York, 1993.

10. Piaget, J. The Construction of Reality in the Child. Basic Books, 1954.

11. Quintana, C., Carra, A., Krajcik, J. and Soloway, E. Learner-Centered Design: Reflections and New Directions. in Carroll, J.M. ed. Human Computer Interaction in the New Millennium, ACM Press, New York, 2001, 605-626.

12. Quintana, C., Eng, J., Carra, A., Wu, H. and Soloway, E., Symphony: A Case Study in Extending Learner-Centered Design Through Process-Space Analysis. in Human Factors in Computing Systems: CHI '99 Conference Proceedings, (Pittsburgh, 1999), Addison-Wesley.

13. Reiser, B.J., Why Scaffolding Should Sometimes Make Tasks More Difficult for Learners. in Proceedings of CSCL 2002, (Boulder, CO, 2002), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 255-264.

14. Skinner, B.F. Cumulative Record: Definitive Edition. B.F. Skinner Foundation, Morgantown, WV, 1959.

15. Slotta, J.D. and Linn, M.C. The Knowledge Integration Environment: Helping Students Use the Internet Effectively. in Jacobson, M.J. and Kozma, R.B. eds. Innovations in Science and Mathematics Education: Advanced Designs for Technologies of Learning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey, 2000, 193-226.

16. Wallace, R., Soloway, E., Krajcik, J., Bos, N., Hoffman, J., Hunter, H.E., Kiskis, D., Klann, E., Peters, G., Richardson, D. and Ronen, O., ARTEMIS: Learner-Centered Design of an Information Seeking Environment for K-12 Education. in Human Factors in Computing Systems: CHI '98 Conference Proceedings, (Los Angeles, 1998), Addison-Wesley, 195-202.