A Comprehensive Study of Three Distributed Learning Systems

2000

Dr. Margaret Storey, Department of Computer Science

Dr. Janet Bavelas, Department of Psychology

Bruce Phillips, Ph.D., ABD, Department of Psychology

Mei Wang, Msc. student, Department of Computer Science

Mechthild Maczewski, Ph.D. student, Department of Child and
Youth Care

Overview

The proposed interdisciplinary study examined the usability of three distributed learning tools deployed for use in the spring 2000 section of SENG 310: Human Computer Interaction, taught by Dr. Storey. Distributed learning systems (e.g., using Internet technologies to deliver course notes, keep track of grades, and have online discussions) are increasingly being used as an adjunct to, and instead of, traditional classroom instruction. These systems offer the potential to combine the best features of traditional education with the advantages of computer technologies. Appropriate technologies may: provide improved accessibility for students who, because of geographic or time constraints, may not be able to attend in person; create new opportunities for students to discuss course materials; and promote new ways of creating course content and monitoring student progress.

There are a number of different distributed learning tools on the market, each providing different capabilities [1]. The two studies we conducted were designed to examine two complementary aspects of commercially available systems: course presentation/administration and student interaction. The systems used in the study were Blackboard (http://www.blackboard.com), LearningSpace (http://www.learningspace.org), and WebCT (http://www.webct.com). Participants for both studies were volunteers from
the class who used these systems as part of their regular course activities.

Study #1: A Qualitative Study of 3 Distributed Learning Systems

Three learning modules were selected from the course material. For each module, participants were assigned, in counter-balanced order, to one of the three systems. For each module, participants completed a questionnaire (with both structured and open-ended questions) on the usability of the system. This design provided empirical evidence for us to compare the strengths and weakness of each system. A content analysis of the open-ended questions captured common themes and provided anecdotal evidence of participants' preferences.

Distributed learning systems should allow both teachers and students to focus on learning, not on the learning tools. This usability study helped to identify the strengths and weaknesses with these systems as well as provided evidence for their suitability in this type of course. It is expected that the results will also be used in the development of useful add-on tools for these systems.

Study #2: An Experimental Study of Synchronous and Asynchronous
Communication Tools in Distributed Learning Environments

Formal and informal social interactions amongst teachers and students are important elements of teaching and learning. Therefore, most systems for distributed learning incorporate tools for asynchronous communication (e.g., e-mail and bulletin boards) and synchronous (real-time) communication amongst the users. These tools permit groups of users to exchange information, brainstorm ideas, and discuss issues raised in class. We propose that, just as ergonomic design fits equipment to the way humans bend, move, and work, designers of distributed learning systems---and the educators using them---should fit the communication components of these systems to the way humans naturally communicate [2]. The purpose of this study was to compare small group face-to-face and computer-mediated student interactions as a way of testing the utility of communication technologies to support distributed synchronous and asynchronous encounters in educational settings.

The study compared group dialogue structures and performance in three counter-balanced communication conditions (face-to-face, synchronous, and asynchronous). The study employed both traditional experimental and discourse-analytic procedures and measures, adapted in part from our previous research on mediated communication [3]. Specifically, we looked at (1) group dialogue coordination (such as turn-taking and coherence) and (2) communication quality (such as task performance and the amount of individual versus collaborative contribution).

References

[1] Neal, Lisa. (1997) Virtual Classrooms and Communities. Proceedings of GROUP 97, 81-90.

[2] Bavelas, J., Hutchinson, S., Kenwood, C., & Matheson, D. H. (1997). Using face-to-face dialogue as a standard for other communication systems. Canadian Journal of Communication, 22, 5-24.

[3] Phillips, B., & Bavelas, J. (Manuscript in Preparation). Models of turn-taking and listener behaviour in computer-mediated communication.