This material is made available under license from CANCOPY for personal use only by students enrolled in EDPY488 and EDIT 571 during the Spring Session, 2001, at the University of Alberta. Any alteration to the content or further distribution in any form is strictly prohibited.

DESIGNING HYPERMEDIA SYSTEMS FOR INSTRUCTION

CHIA-SHING YANG

National Open University in Taiwan

DAVID M. MOORE

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS, Vol.24(i) 3-30, 1995-96.

ABSTRACT

In recent years, hypermedia has been widely adopted in education. However. negative effects have been reported. There is not much 'instruction" in existing hypermedia systems. Also, most hypermedia designs are based on the capabilities of technology, not on instructional theories or research tindings. This article explored the principles and theories relevant to the design of effective hypermedia courseware. The micro-design, which concerns the designing of discrete screens, discussed guidelines in five categories: information formats, language usages, highlighting techniques, operating directions, and screen layouts. The macro-design, which addresses the interrelationships of screens, explored the content organization and presentation flow of hypermedia systems. Finally, a courseware template and a real product were constructed to exemplify the designing principles of "instructional" hypermedia systems.


The concept of hypermedia extends back to the 1940s [1). However, only in recent years has hypermedia been widely accepted through the computer industry, commerce, and education.

In the computer industry, hypermedia was first realized by the integration of the data base and multimedia technologies. Then, software engineers used hypermedia systems to construct information networks and manipulate audio-visual devices. For the computer industry, hypermedia systems are authoring or communication tools.

In commerce, many museums and publishing companies use hypermedia to link and search information. Business companies use hypermedia systems to control video and sound in order to make an attractive presentation or demonstration. The application of hypermedia in commerce is as a resource or presentation tool. For instance, Grolier's electronic encyclopedia is a resource tool, and a public kiosk system is a presentation tool.

Motivated by the success of hypermedia systems in industry and commerce, educators have embraced hypermedia with great expectations. More and more hypermedia systems are implemented in instructional settings [2, 3]. It is even extolled as one of the most promising media for future educational reform [4, 5].

Although fascinated by the powerful medium, educators need to be aware that most hypermedia systems are not intended for instructional purposes [6, 7]. Generally, they are used as authoring tools, resource tools, or presentation tools. Only a few of them are designed for teaching or learning.

HYPERMEDIA AS AN INSTRUCTIONAL TOOL

Hypermedia has two fundamental characteristics. One is the non-linear association of information. The informational fragments in the hypermedia environment are linked based on users' real-time decisions, not on a predetermined sequence. The other characteristic is the use of multiple information formats. Text, charts, graphics, animation, video, and sound are all possible in hypermedia systems.

These two characteristics have excited the imaginations of many educators. They expect that the non-linear association will put an end to arbitrary teaching styles and encourage active, individualized learning [6, 8]. They also expect that the multiple information formats will not only motivate learners, but also more faithfully and efficiently represent the knowledge [9].

Although having no doubt of hypermedia's potentials in education, educators should not adopt it without knowing its relevance to instruction [10, 11]. In designing computer-based instruction, Alessi and Trollip suggest that courseware should include four instructional phases: presenting information, guiding learning, practicing, and assessing achievement [12]. Missing any phase could cause instruction to fail.

Gagne, Briggs, and Wager also assert that instruction is a set of external events deliberately arranged to support internal learning activities [13]. A complete instruction includes nine events: gaining attention, informing objectives, stimulating recall of prerequisite learning, presenting stimuli, providing guidance, eliciting performance, providing feedback, assessing achievement, and enhancing retention and transfer. Although some of these events may be provided by learners, the design of instruction should consider all these events.

If hypermedia systems are going to have a significant role in instruction, they must function in as many elements as possible in the instructional process. From the viewpoint of instruction, most existing hypermedia systems are not suitable media. They are not designed to fit into the instructional process. To fulfill the expectations most educators have for hypermedia, the design of instructional hypermedia systems must be drastically changed.

POTENTIALS OF HYPERMEDIA IN

INSTRUCTION

A hypermedia system is a multi-format knowledge base that enables users to gather information through a nonlinear sequence. Adopted in instruction, it has these following potentials [6, 14, 15].

1. Providing rich and realistic contexts for multichannel learning: Manipulating sophisticated audio-visual devices, a hypermedia system can present vivid information in various formats. A learner can then select the most comfortable and effective format to grasp the meaning [9]. The huge information base forms a rich and realistic resource for learners to explore.

2. Accessing information non-linearly: Hypermedia breaks the classroom's arbitrary, linear teaching style. It allows learners to access randomly the stored information based on their needs, interests, or whims. The process of finding and organizing information will not only give true meaning to knowledge, but also facilitate the construction of learner cognition [16].

3. Focusing learner attention on the relationship of facts: The usefulness of facts is limited if they are isolated. The structure of hypermedia systems inherently helps learners focus their attention on learning relationships among facts. Therefore, it produces better usage of information [17].

4. Encouraging active, student-centered learning: A hypermedia system is an interactive environment. Since there are always decisions about where to link, learners must be actively engaged in the retrieving process. They control learning speed, amount, and path based on their abilities and needs. Hypermedia systems thus provide an individualized environment for learners.

5. Promoting collaboration: Hypermedia systems allow learners to "author" the contents or the structures. Learners annotate, delete, or modify the stored information to correspond to their cognition. Thus, they are not only knowledge receivers. They are knowledge contributors, too. A group of learners can also share a hypermedia package. They work together and exchange ideas through authoring functions. The "collaborating" process blurs the distinction of authors and users. It also induces the cooperation between learners.

PITFALLS OF HYPERMEDIA USE

IN INSTRUCTION

Hypermedia fascinates educators and develops ideas for educational reform. However, several problems plague the adoption of hypermedia systems in instruction [18-20].

1. Too much learner-control: In hypermedia systems, learners are granted full control of navigation without specifying learning objectives or pedagogic strategies. Should those who are novices in the subject matter, poorly-motivated, or lacking meta-cognitive skills take control of learning? Many studies failed to prove that learner control resulted in better learning effects [21, 22]. Clark's research even indicated that when learners had control over learning, they "may learn less from the options they like the most" [23, p.3].

2. Lost in navigation: A hypermedia system contains a huge amount of information nodes. Most nodes connect with multiple other nodes. While learners have the freedom to jump from one node to another node, they are easily lost in the complex hyperspace. They will not know where they are, where to go, or how to get there. This is especially true for young or novice learners who are easily distracted by unrelated information and then are buried in the fascinating but confusing information maze.

3. Cognitive overload: During the navigation in hypermedia systems, learners have to continuously make decisions about where to go and to make sense out of the connection. There are tremendous efforts demanded in the process. It consumes learners' limited mental resources which otherwise can be used on learning content knowledge [24].

Another consumption of mental resources comes from the use of complex navigational tools. Novice learners spend a great deal of time figuring out the operational functions. Mental efforts as well as learning time are wasted.

4. Missing important information: Most hypermedia systems are "open" environments where no specific objectives or learning paths are specified. It is up to the learner to decide what to learn and when to terminate the learning. The networked paths in hypermedia systems are so complex that most learners are unsure of whether or not they have completed the important topics. Also, there is no way to measure whether the learning objectives are satisfied because no summative evaluation or feedback is provided. Learners, therefore, either prematurely terminate the course or waste time repeating the same paths [25].

REVIEW OF DESIGN STRATEGIES TO

IMPROVE HYPERMEDIA

To solve those problems, various designers have proposed strategies to improve the effects of hypermedia systems on instruction. Providing cognitive maps is a frequently suggested strategy [26, 27]. Cognitive maps are graphic representations of the content structure. They can be global overview maps which show the organization of major topics. They can also be local association maps which show the linkages between the current node and its immediate linked nodes. It has been postulated that these maps will help learners understand the content organization and thus the disorientation of hypermedia is reduced.

Several researchers propose structured content to resolve the problem of distraction in hypermedia environment [8, 17, 28]. They believe that structuring hypermedia knowledge and then mapping this structure onto learners' cognition will improve learning.

Use of advance organizers is another strategy proposed by instructional designers. Studies show in use with traditional media, that advance organizers provide higher level conception frameworks and help learners anchor new information into such frameworks [24]. Its use seems promising in dealing with a huge, yet unfamiliar hypermedia environment.

All these three strategies provide extra structural information to the learner. However, some other designers suggest instruction~l cues and adjunct questions to direct learner attention and integrate the accessed information. Instructional cues are hints to remind the learner to view the elaborated information [29]. Adjunct questions preview or summarize knowledge presented on the content screens. Both instructional cues and adjunct questions can be placed before or after the subject content.

A discrete tutor, also known as a computer advisor, is probably the most complex strategy of improving hypermedia performance. It relies on a monitoring tool and a prescription formula. The monitoring tool collects the progress information of each learner. Based on this information, the prescription formula determines whether the difference between an optimum performance and the actual performance of the learner is significant. If this difference exceeds a limit, the computer tutor will interpret the learner-controlled navigation and suggest advisement [20].

Some of these strategies have been studied by quantitative research means. The results are mixed. Reynolds and Dansereau found that knowledge maps increased the overall satisfaction of using hypermedia [30]. Jonassen and Wang reported that providing structural information by cognitive maps reduced the time spent in reviewing the knowledge base [26]. Stanton found that the provision of content maps as navigational aids led to poorer performance and lower perceived control over the hypermedia system [27]. They warned designers that a spatial map is not a cognitive map and we should not assume that any map will facilitate the navigation of hypermedia.

The advance organizer has been shown effective when used with linear text. When it was examined in a hypermedia environment, Tripp and Roby reported positive effects, although not significant [24]. However, they also warned that if other navigational aids such as graphic metaphors were added, the effects became negative. They attributed the negative effects to the mental conflict between two different navigational aids.

Lee and Lehman reported aptitude-treatment interactions in a study of instructional cues [29]. They found that for passive and neutral learners instructional cues improved learning. But for active learners, no significant difference was found.