Evaluation of Interoperability of Adaptive Hypermedia Systems by forrests

VIEWS: 5 PAGES: 31

									TU/ e

eindhoven university of technology

Evaluation of Interoperability of Adaptive Hypermedia Systems:
testing the MOT to WHURLE conversion in a classroom setting

Alexandra Cristea1, Craig Stewart2, Tim Brailsford2 and Paul Cristea3
1 - Information System Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Computing Science, Technical University Eindhoven 2 - School of Computer Science and IT, University of Nottingham 3 - Digital Signal Processing Laboratory, “Politehnica” University of Bucharest
3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Outline
• • • • •

eindhoven university of technology

Introduction MOT WHURLE MOT2WHURLE conversion Student Evaluation
– Hypotheses – Results

• Conclusion
3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Introduction

eindhoven university of technology

• Creation of adaptive hypermedia content:
– Extremely time intensive – Complex – Platform lockdown – Lack of standard tools

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Introduction

eindhoven university of technology

• Ideal creation of adaptive hypermedia content:
– Automated (this will aid with the time and complexity factors) – Interoperable (conversion, common language) – Standardised

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Introduction

eindhoven university of technology

• Our answer:
– Develop a series of tools that will allow for interoperability between different systems – We use MOT as an authoring system to author materials for:
• AHA! (an AEH) • WHURLE (an AEH) • Blackboard (a non-adaptive commercial system, uses a pre-adapted methodology)
3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Introduction

eindhoven university of technology

• Here we present an evaluation of the authoring process using MOT and WHURLE • A class of 31 students were introduced to this new authoring paradigm

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e MOT
• • • •

eindhoven university of technology

My Online Teacher Based on the LAOS framework Is a generic AEH delivery system Also a powerful and simple authoring system
– Web-form, therefore a non-technical author can easily use it – Very flexible, as it is easy to extend

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e MOT

eindhoven university of technology

• Domain Maps

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e MOT

eindhoven university of technology

• Goal and Constraint Maps
– AND/OR – Weights – Labels

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e WHURLE

eindhoven university of technology

• An adaptive XML learning environment • Basic content building block: Chunk • Structure applied using Lesson Plans

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e MOT2WHURLE

eindhoven university of technology

• Currently a command line environment • Conceptually maps the MOT Goal & Constraints map structure to the WHURLE Lesson Plan
– A MOT Concept = WHURLE chunks(s)

• It does this using the MOT weights and labels.
3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e MOT2WHURLE

eindhoven university of technology

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e MOT2WHURLE

eindhoven university of technology

• These rules are used to determine which MOT attributes are to be aggregated into WHURLE chunks.
– ‟35‟ = visual – ‟75‟ = verbal – „0‟ = common

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e MOT2WHURLE

eindhoven university of technology

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Student Evaluation
eindhoven university of technology

• A class of 31 students in the 4th year of study for a technical Masters degree at the University of Bucharest, Romania • All subjected to a week long intensive course on AH • Ideal representation for non-AH expert authors. • After initial lectures, they were given the following task:
3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Student Evaluation
eindhoven university of technology

1.

2.

3. 4.

5.

Create 2-3 MOT Domain Concept Maps, with approximately 5-10 concepts on the http://elearning.dsp.pub.ro/mot/ MOT server The attributes of each concept were: title; keywords; introduction; text; conclusion and figure. With limits placed on the type and amount of content in each one (this was done so as that each group would not spend their limited time creating a vast corpus of information). Create a single MOT Lesson (Goal & Constraints Map) using their Concepts maps. Alter the lesson so that the weights and labels of each concept agreed with those described in the second Table previously. Run the „mot2whurle‟ conversion program and copy the files to WHURLE.

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Student Evaluation
eindhoven university of technology

6. 7. 8.

Check that the WHURLE XML files are well-formed. Run and login to WHURLE to check that the lesson matches their design and make any necessary changes. Finally at the end of the week, each student was asked to complete a series of questionnaires: three generic SUS (System Usability Scale) questionnaires, one for each system (MOT, mot2whurle and WHURLE) and a single specific questionnaire designed to determine their level of knowledge about each system, as well as to gather nonstatistical information.

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Evaluation hypotheses
eindhoven university of technology

•

The hypotheses that we wished to examine were:
1.

The systems (MOT, mot2whurle, WHURLE) are simple and intuitive to use, with a minimum amount of explanation. 2. The students understood the theoretical background (Adaptive Hypermedia, LAOS, Adaptive Strategies) of these systems. 3. The students understood the connection between LAOS and MOT. 4. The students used MOT purely for authoring adaptive hypermedia, and perceived it as such. 5. The students used WHURLE solely for delivering adaptive hypermedia, and perceived it as such. 6. Students consider automatic conversion between one-tomany or many-to-many adaptive hypermedia systems useful. 3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Evaluation Results
eindhoven university of technology

• SUS scores:
– MOT
need to learn a lot to use use frequently
5 4,5 4 3,5 3 2,5 2

complex

confident to use

1,5 1 0,5 0

easy

75%
cumbersome learn quickly

need support

well integrated inconsistency

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Evaluation Results
eindhoven university of technology

• WHURLE
need to learn a lot to use

use frequently
5 4,5 4 3,5 3 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0

complex

confident to use

easy

66.6%
cumbersome learn quickly

need support

well integrated inconsistency

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Evaluation Results
eindhoven university of technology

• MOT2WHURLE
need to learn a lot to use

use frequently
5 4,5 4 3,5 3 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0

complex

confident to use

easy

60.7%
cumbersome learn quickly

need support

well integrated inconsistency

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Evaluation Results
eindhoven university of technology

• Hypothesis 1:
– Overall SUS scores:
• MOT: 75% • WHURLE: 66.6% ±19.1% • MOT2WHURLE: 60.7% ±19% ±15%

– NB: SUS scores are comparative

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Evaluation Results
eindhoven university of technology

• Hypotheses 2-5 extracted from questionnaires. • Hypothesis 2:
[The students understood the theoretical background (Adaptive Hypermedia, LAOS, Adaptive Strategies) of these systems.]

– 70% ±24%

• Hypothesis 3:
[The students understood the theoretical background (Adaptive Hypermedia, LAOS, Adaptive Strategies) of these systems.]

– 70% ±21.7%

3rd

• Indicates that students on average understood the theoretical background after an intensive introduction. • However the wide SD indicates a great range of abilities. A3EH workshop at 12 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005
th

TU/ e Evaluation Results
eindhoven university of technology

• Hypothesis 4:
[The students used MOT purely for authoring adaptive hypermedia, and perceived it as such.]

– 25 students out of 29 (86%) selecting MOT to be an adaptive hypermedia authoring system – Indicates that students understand the benefits of using MOT as an authoring system.
3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Evaluation Results
eindhoven university of technology

• Hypothesis 5:
[The students used WHURLE solely for delivering adaptive hypermedia, and perceived it as such.]

– 21 students out of 29 (72%) selecting WHURLE as an adaptive hypermedia delivery system – Indicates that students understand the benefits of using WHURLE as a delivery system.
3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Evaluation Results
eindhoven university of technology

• Hypothesis 6:
[Students consider automatic conversion between one-to-many or many-to-many adaptive hypermedia systems useful.]

– 4.57 (out of 5) approval rating. – Indicates that students understand the benefits of the paradigm shift that we are proposing. I.E. away from a „one-to-one‟ paradigm.

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Conclusion

eindhoven university of technology

• There has been one previous attempt to convert content between systems: AHA! & Interbook. • This is the first (that we are aware of) to empirically test the actual authoring and conversion process between two systems.

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Conclusion

eindhoven university of technology

• The responses from this study have validated our efforts to:
– Create a powerful & flexible authoring environment – Create an interoperable methodology – Use a single authoring environment to deliver content to other AEH delivery systems
3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Conclusion

eindhoven university of technology

• Major disadvantages:
– The majority of which concerned the lack of „polish‟ for the MOT2WHURLE conversion program. – This does not invalidate our methodology but does indicate that additional work needs to be done.

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e Conclusion

eindhoven university of technology

• It appears that a “write once, use often” authoring methodology is desired by authors. • MOT is a simple to use, yet flexible authoring system. • Conceptual mapping between MOT and other authoring systems demonstrates the feasibility of such and approach
3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005

TU/ e

eindhoven university of technology

Questions … ?

3rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005


								
To top