Hi Phil,
The DNER & Learning Objects study came up with its own definition of
interactivity, and criteria to evaluate JISC 5/99 content for
interactivity. This was done in a very simple way:
Firstly we noted the ICONEX project's definition of interactivity:
"At the most basic level, interaction involves communication and the
degree of control a user is afforded over the learning resource. A user
acts, the system reacts and the resultant process is termed
interaction."-ICONEX web site:
http://www.iconex.hull.ac.uk/interact.cfm.
However, we created a simpler and more practical definition for the
purposes of the study:
"For the purposes of DNER&LO an interactive element is defined as an
activity that the user of a resource may perform, which may result in
more than one potential response from the resource. Examples of
interactive content include simulations and multiple-choice
assessments."
We then defined 3 levels of interactivity as follows:
"No" Interactivity:
No interactive elements within the resource e.g. CSCCA Digitisation
Project's pilot resource 'Unit 1: Pioneers and Their Practice: A
Reference Guide' (http://vads.ahds.ac.uk/learning/pictiva/CSC/), which
consists of web-based text, collections data, and images only.
"Some" Interactivity:
There are interactive elements within the resource e.g. Bristol BioMed
Learning & Teaching's tutorials
(http://www.brisbio.ac.uk/bblt/res.html), some of which include
interactive multi-choice self-assessment exercises.
"Yes":
The entire resource is interactive, or is based around interactivity
e.g. Virtual Learning Arcade (http://www.bized.ac.uk/virtual/vla/),
which consists of large and small scale economics simulations,
accompanied by resources which support their use.
Evaluating resources for interactivity was a side issue in this study,
which was primarily looking at reusability and interoperability of the
5/99 projects.
The results of this study will be online soon on the project website:
http://www.strath.ac.uk/Departments/CAP/dnerlo/index.html
They will be announced on the CETIS EC SIG and Metadata lists.
Cheers
Sarah
Phil Barker wrote:
>
> Hello all,
> There's some intersting interpretation of interactivity levels in the
> latest Online Learning e-News mailling from vnulearning.com. It's a bit on
> the long side, so I won't forward it all, you can find it in the
> vnulearning archive at http://www.vnulearning.com/archive.htm, from the Oct
> 22 link in the first column (the e-news archive).
>
> In short, they have three different views, the first describes
> interactivity levels in terms of possible navigation routes, the second in
> terms of the complexity of the information / task contained in the lesson,
> the third in terms of the role of the learner, from observation, through
> participation to ownership.
>
> I'll come out and state that my sympathy lies with the third interpretation.
>
> Does anyone have any other guidelines for how to record interactivity
> level, or any comments on the applicability these interpretations?
>
> Best regards, Phil
>
> --
> Phil Barker Learning Technology Advisor
> ICBL, School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
> Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS
> Tel: 0131 451 3278 Fax: 0131 451 3327
> Web: http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/~philb/
--
*******************************************
Ms. Sarah Currier
Coordinator
CETIS Educational Content Special Interest Group
Dept. of Computer and Information Sciences
University of Strathclyde
Room 13.08, Livingstone Tower
26 Richmond Street, Glasgow G1 1XH
Tel: +44(0)141 548 4846 Fax: +44(0)141 553 1393
Mob.: 07980 855 801
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Web (EC-SIG): http://www.cetis.ac.uk/educational-content/
Web (Dept.): http://www.cis.strath.ac.uk/
*******************************************
|