Developing educational hypermedia applications: a methodological approach (2024)

Information Research, Vol. 2 No. 2, October 1996

José Miguel Nunes and Susan P. Fowell
Department of Information Studies
University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

Introduction

Hypertext has played a role in teaching and learning since themid 1980's when the first versions of HyperCard appeared. Thisextremely popular environment and authoring tool presented hypermediaas a technology capable of resolving some of the needs of learnersand educators using instructional technologies. Drawing on workfrom computer science, educational studies and psychology, hypertextand hypermedia designers have since then endeavoured, with varyingdegrees of success, to establish hypermedia as a credible educationaltechnology.

Hypertext systems have been described as providing a number ofbenefits for the learner, including: self paced, self selectivelearning; private learning allowing experimentation in a 'safe'environment; accommodation of different ability levels and typesof learner; open access to information; reduced teaching costs;provision of reliable and timely help information; and reducedpublication costs. However, despite its potential and some successfulcases of its implementation (such as those presented by Ambronand Hooper, 1990), hypermedia technology is not being extensivelyused by schools and universities. The question that immediatelyarises is: why isn't hypermedia being used more widely, giventhe vast amount of interest and discussion about its perceivedbenefits?

In answering this question, researchers and champions of hypermediamay attribute lack of widespread usage to the inertia of educatorsand educational organisations. Focusing on the case of highereducation (HE), hypertext failure could additionally be attributedto the secondary importance attached to teaching in comparisonto research activities by the majority of academics (Darby, 1992) or tothe Not Invented Here syndrome pointed out by Laurillardet al. (1993). This syndrome reflects the fact that academicsare just about prepared to recommend a colleague's textbook, butwould not take on video or computer-based teaching material developedelsewhere, as the teaching philosophy would be unlikely to matchtheir own. This is an important point and should not be dismissedas being simply the protectiveness of teachers to their own teaching. In spite of large amounts of funding being directed towards nationalhypermedia projects, there are only a few examples where the resultingproducts have been widely adopted. The role of hypermedia seemsto be restricted to hypertextbook type applications and to emergingforms of hypermedia now supported by the World-Wide Web. Thepredominant model for hypermedia applications continues to focuson the production of information resources and much less on thelearning activities that the student/learner participates in.

The current situation shows an extraordinary discrepancy betweeneducators' perceptions of the high value and potential of hypermediaas an educational technology and its real use. Such discrepancycannot be justified exclusively by the factors described above. There are other more fundamental application design issues whichneed addressing. The design of hypermedia applications shouldbegin with the production of a conceptual model, whichrepresents the various aspects of the subject matter at differentlevels of abstraction. Additionally, such a design should followa software development methodology, integrating the perspectivesof the main agents involved in the development process: educatorsand software developers. Such a methodology must establish theeducational requirements for the particular subject matter inthe preliminary stage, and then, in subsequent stages developthe application in response to the requirements of the conceptualmodel and the educational specifications.

Failure to establish an appropriate conceptual model and use asuitable software development methodology, results in poor andineffective applications. McKendree uses an analogy with thecamcorder to characterise the current situation:

"It letsamateurs make movies about themselves which they and their immediatefamily and friends can enjoy. However, it is unlikely that youor I will want to rent it from the video-store and watch it. The professionals are much better able to design and make something,for a wider audience. [...] It is fine if some lecturers wantto take time to hack together some on-line material for themselvesand their students. They will probably have the pride and commitmentto get them to use it. However, the material they produce willpossibly not be as flexible or as widely applicable as somethingcrafted professionally." (McKendree, 1994)

The prevailing conceptual model for educational hypertext applicationsis the hypertextbook model. This approach supports the traditionaltextbook approach and enhances its traditional use by offeringa link structure to provide elaborations of key concepts. However,while providing some useful learning resources this use of hypermediadoes not capture the real power of the technology. Therefore,new conceptual models must be developed to take advantage of thehypermedia philosophy and characteristics, as discussed by Nunesand Fowell (1996).

This paper proposes an hypermedia development methodology withthe aim of integrating the work of both educators, who will beprimarily responsible for the instructional design, with thatof software experts, responsible for the software design and development. Hence, it is proposed that the educators and programmers shouldinteract in an integrated and systematic manner following a methodologicalapproach.

Educational hypermedia development methodology

Hypermedia is particularly appropriate for the production of interactiveand exploratory educational applications, where large numbersof links and cross-references are provided and the learner canexplore her/his own interests according to previous experience,background and perspective. To be effective, hypermedia applicationsneed to be tailored to suit the particular learning tasks planned.

In order to do this, the learning process itself must first beanalysed and understood. Learning is a complex process involvinga large range of activities, some active, some passive, some creative,some reactive, some directed, some exploratory (Hammond,1992). Furthermore,as proposed by Nunes and Fowell (1996), academic learning shouldalso be seen as the process of construction of knowledge and thedevelopment of reflexive awareness, where the individual is anactive processor of information. This type of learning occursthrough interaction with rich learning environments, and resultsfrom engaging in authentic activities, and by social interactionand negotiation.

This complexity of the learning process suggests the need forsituated learning, social negotiation and multiple perspectiveson the different aspects of the subject matter, the implicationbeing that a number of different learning strategies must be adoptedto assist the learner in the construction of knowledge. The adoptionof these different strategies creates learning environments thatGrabinger and Dunlap (1995) term Rich Environments for Active Learning(or REALs) [7]. REALs promote learning withinauthentic contexts, and encourage the growth of learner responsibility,initiative, decision-making, intentional learning and ownershipover the acquired knowledge. Additionally, REALs should providean atmosphere which encourages the formation of knowledge buildinglearning communities that assist collaborative social negotiationof meanings and understandings among the members of the community(peers, tutors, and subject matter experts).

In sum, the REAL must essentially support interactions betweenthe tutor, the learner and her/his peers, subject matter specialistsand the learning materials. All these interactions may, or maynot, be computer mediated. Furthermore, and as defined by Nunesand Fowell (1996), an educational hypermedia application is a softwareapplication specifically produced for a particular educationaluse, built using the hypermedia philosophy. They are developedto resolve a particular educational purpose or learning need,and are thus limited to the solution of the problems arising fromthat need. This means that although they might be linked withother hypermedia applications, other software applications, databasesor even computer mediated communications facilities, they haveclearly established boundaries. In this sense, an hypermediaapplication is one component of a much broader learning universe- the REAL in which they are embedded.

REALs can be seen as instructional systems, in the sense put forwardby Nervig (1990): as sets of interacting, interrelated, structuredexperiences that are designed to achieve specific educationalobjectives, but organised into a unified dynamic whole. The designof an hypermedia application, as with any other of the other components,should hence result from the design specifications for the overallREAL. In turn, the design of the REAL results from the processof analysing curricular problems. To design and implement theoverall REAL, instructional systems design (ISD) should be used. The importance of this overall ISD rests in assuring that thewhole REAL is implemented using the same learning theory. Infact, if not carefully planned, the REAL could result in a mixof eventually conflicting techniques from different theoreticalperspectives.

Accordingly, Bednar et al. (1992) defend the notion that effectiveinstructional design and development is only possible if it emergesfrom deliberate application of a particular theory of learning. Furthermore, the developers must have acquired reflexive awarenessof the theoretical basis underlying the design. This will ensurethat instruction design, hypermedia design and development, andthe hypermedia conceptual models selected are compatible and alluse the same learning theory philosophy.

This paper addresses the design and development of hypermediafor higher education (HE). Academic learning is here definedas an active process in which meaning is developed on the basisof experience, in accordance with the constructivist theoreticalframe (). So, to develop hypermedia applications in keeping with a constructivist approach, it is important to have an understandingof the kind of specifications that will result from constructivistinstructional design.

Constructivist instructional design

Traditionally, ISD is seen as a process approached from a systemsstrategy, based on the purpose of the system, using a systematic,data-based process for analysing curricular and instructionalproblems in order to develop tested, feasible solutions (Nervig, 1990). Conversely, constructivist ISD focuses on the learner and on thelearning process rather than solely on the subject matter. Sinceknowledge is constructed, the learning of a concept must be embeddedin the use of the concept. In the traditional ISD, the designeranalyses the conditions which bear on the instructional systemin preparation for the specification of intended learning outcomes(Bednar et al. , 1992). Content, learner and instructional setting are analysed and the instruction is designed using the concepts of learningobjectives and specification of goal outcomes. ConstructivistISD requires the separation of method and content, instructionaldesigners develop learning environments rather then packaged instruction(Kember, 1991).

According to Lebow (1993), this constructivist ISD should be carriedout while bearing in mind the seven primary constructivist values:collaboration, personal autonomy, generativity, reflectivity,active engagement, personal relevance and pluralism. From theseprinciples Lebow draws a set of general design principles to beused in the ISD process:

make instruction relevant to the learner by providing a contextfor learning that supports both autonomy and relatedness;

balance the tendency to control the learning situation with thedesire to promote personal autonomy;

support self-regulation through the promotion of skills and attitudesthat enable the learner to assume increasing responsibility forthe developmental restructuring process;

increase emphasis on the affective domain of learning, treatinglearning and motivation as part of a unified whole process;

strengthen the learner's tendency to engage in intentional learningprocesses, especially by encouraging the strategic explorationof errors.

( Lebow, 1993)

Although using a traditional ISD model, as shown in Fig. 1, thesedesign principles lead to a development based on the constructivistphilosophy. Since knowledge domains are not readily separatedin the world, according to this philosophy, information from manysources bears on the analysis of any particular subject matterand it is not possible to isolate units of information. A centralcore body of information must thus be defined in the analysisphase, but boundaries of what may be relevant should not beimposed. Instead of dividing the subject matter into logicalanalysis of dependencies, the constructivist approach turns towarda consideration of what users of that knowledge domain do in reallife contexts. The ultimate goal of this approach is to movethe learner into thinking in the knowledge domain as if they werean expert user of that domain (Bednar et al.,1992 ). Hence, designers should instead identify the variety of experts on the subject matter and thetasks they do. The designer should than define simplifiedbut still authentic tasks to be experienced by the learner. The goal is to portray authentic tasks, not to define the structure of learning to achieve the tasks, since it is theprocess of constructing a perspective or understanding that isimportant and no meaningful construction is possible if all relevantinformation is prespecified (Bednar et al.,1992 ).

Once identified in the analysis phase, tasks must be designedso that they are situated in real world contexts, are authentic,and provide multiple perspectives on the subject matter. Additionally,some degree of coaching or guidance must be provided, byincluding meaningful examples and the different perspectives ofexperts and peers. A central strategy for achieving this is tocreate collaborative learning environments where both face-to-faceand computer mediated communication are available. Access toextra information sources must also be provided to allow differentlearner's needs to be satisfied whenever needed.

It is in the development phase that all the componentsof the learning environment are implemented according to the specificationscoming from the design phase. Since different types of educationaltechnologies may be needed, to implement all the planned tasks,examples and communication channels, different development methodologiesmay then be applied. If hypermedia applications are needed fora particular instructional task, then a specific hypermedia developmentmethodology must be used, where the specifications are establishedduring the design phase of the ISD. However, no task is isolated,but rather in a REAL it forms part of a larger context. Hencethe testing and evaluation of all components of the learning environmentmust be done in an integrated manner. The hypermedia applicationmust be system tested and field trialled as an embedded componentin the overall learning environment.

In summary, in a constructivist approach, the analysis phase ofthe ISD establishes a core body of information crucial for thesubject matter, identifies the type of experts that use it andthe tasks they perform. The design phase specifies a comprehensiveset of authentic tasks and the coaching and support to be givento the learner. It also must specify the educational tools requiredand the function of each one of these tools. Therefore, if anhypermedia application is needed, its specifications arise fromthe design phase. During the development phase, the differenteducational applications and tools are developed in parallel andthen system tested and field trialled together.

Only educators, instructional designers and educational psychologistsare involved until the design phase. In the development phasesoftware specialists may be required. Thus, the development ofthese hypermedia applications requires software engineering methodologiesthat allow real co-operation between the two types of agents involved:the educators and the software experts. A software engineeringdiscipline is emerging (Nodenot, 1992), called Educational Software Engineering (ESE), which uses methods mainly applied by educatorswith an educational point of view but which also encompasses principlesof good software engineering. This paper proposes such a methodologyspecifically for hypermedia application development.

Hypermedia development methodology

The production of educational hypermedia involves collaborationbetween subject matter and education experts involved in the ISD,and hypermedia development experts involved in the applicationimplementation. Hence, the communication between these agentsbecomes paramount. These groups usually speak different "languages"and do not readily understand the problems of the other (Moonen, 1986). An efficient educational methodology must thus integrate andsupport the dialogue between these different groups.

The software development methodology that best supports this requirementis the rapid prototyping approach. A rapid prototype is a simplifiedand untested equivalent of the actual application, performingall the basic functions specified for the final product (Howell, 1992). As shown in Fig 2, by implementing a prototype first, the hypermediadesigners are able to put forward a fully functioning applicationpresenting all the basic features of the final product such asuser-interface, link structure and coaching facilities. Thisis not a diagrammatic approximation or representation, which tendsto be looked at as an abstract thing, but an actual implementationof the specifications for the application. These prototypes canbe realistically tested and assessed and rapidly changed in aniterative manner until consensus is reached. Evaluation and testingof these prototypes must be done by instructional designers andideally include pilot tests using target learners.

Furthermore, hypermedia applications are inherently differentfrom other software applications. The volume of actual code producedin scripts is relatively low and emphasis is put in user-interfacedesign, link structure design and definition of contents entryas the different multimedia components. These characteristicsalong with widespread availability of authoring tools, make itpossible for rapid development and testing of prototypes.

The Rapid Prototyping Software Development Cycle presentedin Fig. 2, reflects the traditional rapid prototyping philosophy. The Specifications are established during the overallISD process for the REAL where the application should be integrated. Consequently, as discussed above, the System Test mustbe done along with the testing all other components of the REALand as part of its ISD cycle.

After the acceptance of the prototype, a thorough Designof the user-interface, link structure and multimedia integrationmust be undertaken and documented. To assure that the designis done using the constructivist approach, and therefore is inaccordance with the overall philosophy chosen for the REAL, aconstructivist conceptual model for hypermedia applications mustbe adopted. Nunes and Fowell (1996) discuss such a model.

The design phase is followed by Implementation using appropriateauthoring and multimedia development tools. The implementationmust then be subjected to a comprehensive Test. This testingmust of two kinds: technical and instructional. The technicaltest aims at detecting and correcting technical problems, insufficienciesor inadequate use of the different media. It should be performedmainly by technical experts. The instructional-oriented testmust establish if the developed application complies both withthe educational philosophy adopted and the initial specifications. It should be performed by the subject matter experts and instructionaldesigners.

Finally a release version of the application must be producedand handed over to the ISD for further system testing. This finalversion should be accompanied by complete documentation both on-lineand paper-based, including user manuals if necessary. If anyproblems are found, new prototypes are built and the process repeated.

Like any other software methodology, the life-cycle of an educationalhypermedia application should not stop after the implementationand hand-over. It should be maintained and continually improved. As suggested by Thomas, problems reported should be acted onat the earliest opportunity and feedback should be actively soughtfrom learners and teachers (Thomas, 1994).

Conclusions

Implementing hypermedia educational applications means much morethan just designing a few screens and specifying their sequence. Today, such an approach is not sufficient to support effectivelysupport the learning processes envisaged in constructivist, collaborativeor experiential learning philosophies. This paper proposes instructionas the act of supporting the construction of knowledge on a particularsubject matter, by improving the learner's ability to use thecontent domain to carry out authentic tasks, and by providingthese tasks with the tools needed to develop the skills of constructingan informed response and for evaluating alternative responses. Hypermedia applications are one such tool available to the instructional designer, which can be used to support constructivist, collaborative and experiential learning.

Understanding hypermedia as an educational technology, and itsrole within educational practice, is the key to the developmentof successful learning environments. Moreover, the way to preventa backlash against the use of this educational technology liesin recognising both the technical and pedagogic components ofinstructional design and integrating them in a methodologicallycoherent manner. Rapid prototyping is an ideal approach whichfacilitates the integration of the different agents in educationalsoftware development, the subject matter experts, the instructionaldesigners and the software developers.

However, the gap between expert/professional and non-expert/non-professionaldevelopers is narrowing, due to the increasingly more comprehensiveand easy-to-use authoring facilities of the modern hypermediaauthoring tools. Current authoring tools aim to support bothprofessional quality and do-it-yourself endeavours, so that thedeveloper of an hypermedia educational application is now oftenthe educator her/himself. Nevertheless, the need for an adequateconceptual model and a comprehensive design process should alwaysbe present.

References

• Ambron, S. & Hooper, K. Learning with InteractiveMultimedia: Developing and Using Multimedia Tools in Education. Washington: Microsoft Press, 1990.
• Bednar A., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T. & Perry, J. Theoryinto practice: how do we link? In Duffy, T. & Jonassen,D. (Eds.) Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction:A Conversation. New Jersey, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Inc, 1992, pp. 17-34.
• Croft, R. Adapting software design methodologies for instructionaldesign. Educational Technology, August 1993, 24-32.
• Darby, J. The future of computers in teaching and learning. Computers in Education, 19(1/2), 1992, 193-197.
• Grabinger, R. & Dunlap, C. Rich environments for activelearning. Association for Learning Technology Journal,3(2), 1995, 5-34.
• Hammond, N. (1992) Tailoring hypertext for the learner. In: Kommers, P.; Jonassen, D. & Mayes, J. (Eds.) Cognitive Tools for Learning. Berlin: SpringerVerlag, 1992, pp. 149-160.
• Howell, G. Building Hypermedia Applications: A SoftwareDevelopment Guide. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1992.
• Kember, D. Instructional design for meaningful learning. Instructional Science, 20, 1991, 289-310.
• Laurillard, D., Swift, B. & Darby, J. Academics' useof courseware materials: a survey. Association for LearningTechnology Journal, 1(1), 1993, 4-14.
• Lebow, D. Constructivist values for instructional systemsdesign: five principles toward a new mindset. EducationalTechnology Research and Development, 41(3), 1993, 4-16.
• McKendree, J. Design: more than meets the eye? Associationfor Learning Technology Newsletter, 5, 1994, 2.
• Moonen, J. Toward an industrial approach to educationalsoftware development. In: Bork, A. and Weinstock, H. (Eds.)Designing Computer-Based Materials. Berlin: Springer Verlag,1986, pp. 119-151.
• Nervig, N. Instructional systems development: a reconstructedISD model. Educational Technology, November 1990, 40-46.
• Nodenot, T. Educational software engineering: a methodologybased on cooperative developments. In: Tomek, I. (Ed.)Computer Assisted Learning: Proceedings of 4th InternationalConference, ICCAL'92. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1992, pp. 529-541.
• Nunes, J. & Fowell, S.P. Hypermedia as an experimental learning tool: a theoretical model. Information Research New,6(4), 1996, 15-27.
• Thomas, R. Durable, low-cost, educational software. Computersand Education, 22(1/2), 1994, 65-72.

How to cite this paper:

Nunes, José Miguel Baptista & Fowell, Susan P. (1996) "Developing educational hypermedia applications: a methodological approach"Information Research, 1(1) Available at: http://informationr.net/ir/2-2/paper15.html

© the authors, 1996.