HYPERMEDIA AND INTERACTIVITY (2024)

Although we think of active learning or student-directedlearning as a new concept, its origins actually lie in classical Greece.There, the Delphic Oracle spoke to worshipers enigma-tically, and it wastheir own struggle to comprehend that led to a deeper understanding. (Goodrich,1987) Today's multimedia programs allow learners to puzzle their way throughgames and simulations, and challenge users to think. Yet many programsare designed either with a very structured, linear approach, or includeevery feature available to the designer, with little thought to the instructionaloutcome. This paper discusses the important elements of hypermedia, thefour levels of interactivity, describes some criteria for user controlvs machine control, and discusses how an understanding of learning stylescan assist in the design process.

2. HYPERMEDIA DEFINED

Hypermedia is an outgrowth of hypertext, which isa term coined by computer pioneer Ted Nelson in the 1960s. It referredto the non-linear, associative linking to text in a computer file. Itsintent was to empower users by facilitating access in an associative fashion,the same way that the human brain functions. As technology advanced, theterm hypermedia was used to describe a sys-tem where the user creates;interrelationships between text, ideas, images, and sounds.

Hypermedia's most advanced implementation to dateis in a new form of electronic encyclo-pedia. With this new tool, userscan follow their own associative links through material via videotapes,films, articles, bibliographies, and more. Included in the system is thecapability for automatic language translation, continuous updating, andunlimited expansion of the encyclopedia. (Glushko, 1990)

3. HYPERMEDIA FUNDAMENTALS

There are several structural elements common to allhypermedia programs: nodes, links, and buttons. Nodes are the basic unitof information in hypermedia. These may take the form of text fields, digitizedsound bites, visual images, or QuickTime movies.

Students working on research projects soon discoverthat no single fact exists in a vacuum. It depends on links to other chunksof information to give it meaning. A researcher may record facts on 5 X7 cards, and quickly become frustrated when he tries to file them in alogical or alpha-numeric system. Many cards could easily fit in severallocations. Add to this the difficulty of finding references that may bein any of several locations, and the problem grows more complex.

This is the dilemma that is addressed by the linkswithin hypermedia. These links connect nodes of information, and may bestructured by the designer in any way from linear to open-ended. Two usersof the same hypermedia program may well link their way through the know-ledgebase in completely different ways, to arrive at the same end point.

Links may also be established to information externalto the hypermedia program. For example, architecture students may accessa project management software program running on a mainframe to learn aboutthe complexities of scheduling large construction projects. These linksinsure that the content is current, without having to periodically revisethe program.

Buttons are the vehicles which activate links. Astheir name implies, they often appear gra-phically as buttons, knobs, oricons which are activated by clicking a mouse on them. However virtuallyanything on the screen may be used as a button. Words within a text fieldmay be out-lined, and serve as buttons. These may then link to a glossarywith a definition of the word selected. A HyperCard program with iconslinking to different stacks is shown in Figure 1.

One of the major problems with hypermedia programsis disorientation. It may become dif-ficult for the user to visualize howthe information is linked together, and to keep track of where they are.Maps are the best solution to this problem. They typically take the formof graphical representations of how the material is organized. Often aflashing icon or maker on the map shows the user where he or she is. Largeprograms may have parent maps and child maps, and include a visual representationof the links the user has taken to get where they are. Figure 2 shows amap from a typical HyperCard program.

A useful tool for more structured programs is a tableof contents where the user can return to start a new unit of instruction.As each unit is completed, it is automatically checked off on the tableof contents. This permits the user to check his progress at a glance.

4. INTERACTIVITY DEFINED

Four levels of interactivity are generally recognizedin the development of interactive ma-terials. Level 0 is simply a linearpresentation of information, as shown in Figure 3. No interac-tivity takesplace. Also known as 'electronic page turning', it has very limited applicationin interactive media. Generally its use is restricted to brief introductionsor instructions. If course-

ware has a significant amount of text, either asexplanations or exercises, it is better to have a workbook to accompanythe course. For portability, this material may be included on the programdisk as a text file which is printed out by the user.

At level I, shown in Figure 4, the first level ofinteractivity, information is presented and the learner is asked to respondto a question about the material. Feedback is limited to revealing thecorrect answer to the learner. No remediation is supplied. This formatis useful for drill and practice exercises, or electronic flash-cards.

Level II has two subcategories: review of old instruction,and branching to new instruction. In the review of old instruction, whenthe learner makes an incorrect response he or she is bran-ched back tothe original material. This approach has the limitation of not providingthe learner with any insight as to why he made the wrong response. Thealternative, branching to new ma-terial, allows the developer to custom-designresponses to the type of mistake that the learner made. Motivation, instruction,practice-feedback, and evaluation may all be present. This is illustratedin Figure 5. This type of interactivity may be useful for frame-based masteryinstruc-tion. Some hypermedia courses, and most CBT programs fall intothis category, either as a function of limited funds, or vision restrictedto linear or hierarchical presentation of earning materials.

In the final level of interactivity, Level III, theresponse of the learner to a stimulus determines what the next level ofinstruction will be. For example, incorrect responses may each link todifferent remediation frame, based on the nature of the learner's mistake.This may be a video segment, text, or sound narration. A series of correctresponses may permit the user to skip ahead more quickly. Level III interactivityallows for many types of simulation and gaming exercises, as illustratedin Figure 6. It is today's hypermedia programs that support this most advancedlevel of interactivity.

5. USER CONTROL VS. MACHINE CONTROL

Although utilizing hypermedia to its fullest potentialentails design with associative links, some basic needs can be met by developinga more structured environment for students to work in. Some examples include:vocabulary drills, electronic flash-cards, and drill and practice materials.An emphasis on machine control should also be maintained with younger learnersor learners who have little familiarity with the subject material. Amongcollege-age and adult learners, several criteria for level of control havebeen identified: (Gery, 1987). Use a high level of machine con-trol when:

• Learners are used to highly structured learningexperiences.

• Learners are used to being told what to do.

• There are requirements that students have experiencedspecific

material (certification).

• The subject matter requires cumulative knowledgefor

competency.

• Learners don't know what they need or want to knowabout this

content.

• Learners have little experience with independentlearning.

Use a high level of learner control when:

• Learners know what they want or need to learn

• Learners are motivated to learn and see personalrelevance to

learning the material or acquiring the skill.

• Learners have experience and comfort with self-directedlearning.

• The program content is not necessarily linear andthe learning

sequence is not critical.

• Learning the content is largely discretionary ratherthan required.

6. ADAPTING HYPERMEDIA TO LEARNING STYLES

Hypermedia programs may be custom-tailored to addressdifferent student learning styles. One example would be left/right brainlearning. Researchers have determined that the left and right hemispheresof our brain process information differently. The left brain is logical,linear and analytic. The right brain is visual and creative. (Springerand Deutsch, 1985) Further, we know that almost everyone has one cognitiveorientation, or mode of learning, that is either visual or analytic. Only7% of the population is whole brained, or able to function effectivelyin both hemispheres. In Western culture, the left brain is usually dominant.Students who favor a visual mode typically have a great deal of troublewith abstractions. Seeing something usually means understanding it allat once, while abstractions involve linear thinking. In subjects that requiremastery of material that involves both components, virtually all studentswill experience difficulty. Examples of these disciplines include neuroanatomy,mineralogy, architecture, and physiology.

It is important to understand some of the difficultiesthat may arise when teachers teach and learners learn in their preferredstyles, without an understanding of their differences. Teachers often perceivestudents who learn in a manner that does not match their teaching styleas less intelligent or poorly motivated. Students perceive teachers witha style different that their own as poorly organized or ineffective.

An instructor may design a hypermedia program thataddresses the needs of both types of learners, and allows each to approachthe material in the way that feels most comfortable. Through the skillfulweaving of text fields, buttons and links, a program may be created wherestudents can begin the exploration in their preferred style. As comprehensionbegins to take place, students may use the program's links to explore thesame body of knowledge from a different perspective.

Another adaptation of hypermedia to learning stylescould involve structuring groups of exam questions. In Sternberg's modelof mental self-government, three types of learners are identified: executive,judicial, and legislative. (Sternberg 1990) Learners who favor an executivestyle prefer structured problems, and implementing and doing tasks usingfamiliar approaches. Students with a judicial style prefer to compare andcontrast materials created by others. Those favoring a legislative styleprefer open-ended, unstructured problems, where they can use their imaginationto create innovative solutions.

These three groups of students would approach a newbody of knowledge in completely different ways, and would demonstrate theircompetency differently. This in mind, an instructor could design coursematerials that permit students to demonstrate mastery of subject materialin the way they are most comfortable, but also stretch and understand theother styles as well. For example, a course on the history of World WarII might include a computer-based test bank with three types of questionscorresponding to Sternberg's learning styles. Students whose preferredstyle is executive might receive an exam where most of the material isin the form of objective questions - true/false or multiple choice. Learnerswho favor a judicial approach may receive a majority of their questionsin the form of 'compare and contrast' essays, where different historian'sinterpretations of events may be evaluated. Finally, students who workbest in the legislative style might receive a series of essay questionson the history of World War II that are more open-ended and call for agreat deal of creativity. An example may be to play the part of Harry Trumanand create a completely different scenario for the end of the war...withoutthe use of nuclear weapons.

There are many other ways of developing instructionalmaterials in terms of learning styles. There are several models, and thedeveloper must understand which one best serves his or her needs. Materialmay also be developed with respect to gender, (Belenky, 1983) multipleintelligence theory (Gardner, 1986) or student developmental stages (Perry,1970).

7. SUGGESTIONS FOR DEVELOPERS

The most important point for new developers of hypermediamaterials to remember is that it is not the same as creating classroommaterials. The dynamic nature of the classroom allows both teachers andstudents to compensate for inadequately developed materials. Instructorscan offer alternate explanations or put additional diagrams on the board,and students can ask more questions until the information makes sense.

Hypermedia has none of this slack. It is a preciseand unforgiving medium in terms of inadequate organization. New developerswould be well advised to start with a small project, develop it fully interms of flowcharts and story-boards, and test it thoroughly before releasingit. Often it is useful to observe beta testers to see how easily they movethrough the information and if there are points of confusion. The feedbackthat you receive from these people will be invaluable in fine-tuning theprogram. The new developer should start projects long before they willbe needed, as the process just described always takes much longer thanexpected!

Other important criteria are the amount of user controland simplicity of design. As the development process begins, the structuremust be designed with the right amount of user control. Too much freedomor too much structure can alienate your audience. A recommended path throughthe material should be suggested, but the user should be allowed to wanderas his unique interests and mental associations dictate. Many new developersare dazzled with all of the special effects that are easy to incorporatewithin this environment, and feel that their students must be dazzled aswell. Simplicity is the cornerstone of effective instructional materials.Learners should walk away from a program remembering its content, not thetransition effects between frames.

The good news is that you don't have to be a computerprogrammer to develop good instruc-tional materials. Most hypermedia programsallow you to do design work by dragging buttons and fields into place andsizing them. A minimal amount of scripting is necessary, and this is usuallydone in an English-language based environment. About all you need to getstarted is the hypermedia software, time and patience

8. CONCLUSIONS

We are now at a point in our evolution where cultureis no longer driving the technology, rather the technology is driving ourculture. Newer development platforms will soon replace today's multimediaequipment, and it will become increasingly difficult for the educator tostay abreast of the latest developments in hardware and software. Yet witha knowledge of good hypermedia design - allowing the student to link newmaterial with what he or she already knows, the instructor will be ableto develop effective teaching tools that can be readily transported tonew platforms as the technology evolves.

REFERENCES