Project Links
Educational Technology Review
Module: Constrained Optimization
Version: 1.0
Date: April 31, 1998
Reviewers: Tricia R. Meyer, Kim Kenyon, Aliya Holmes
Three reviewers, all specializing in instructional technology and one from The Evaluation Consortium reviewed the "Constrained Optimization" module on 3-3 1-98 at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Two developers were present at the "Inventory Control" module, and one developer was present at the "Constrained Optimization" module to answer questions throughout the review. Pam Kott, Technical Manager for Project Links, was also present for a portion of the review session. This summary includes comments and questions where consensus and/or convergence was noted. Because Project Links modules have many common elements (e.g., navigation, formatting, etc.), this report not only provides formative feedback concerning the instructional technology aspects of "Constrained Optimization", but also provides formative feedback for all Project Links modules, regardless of stage of development.
This report is divided into two sections. Part I addresses the technical aspects of the module. Part II addresses the pedagogical aspects of the module. Any comments referring to aspects that are uniform across all modules are applicable to both modules reviewed below.
Part I. The following comments relate to the technical aspects of the module:
Links in and out
- Project Links page is well developed!
- The help links were underdeveloped at the time of review. Links should be provided to external (WWW) and internal resources that focus on practice and application of the project.
- The reviewers noted positively that there were links from the module to other Project Links modules (at least planned, if not functional) however, there were no links within the module to the WWW. A decision on the use of these links should be made by the executive committee. The literature on instructional technology is divided on the extent to which learners should be free to explore (ex., some think novices should have limited freedom to explore, others disagree). Some instructional technology "experts" would suggest this limited access represents underutilization of web-based instruction.
Navigation
- Navigation instructions need work. Primarily, the instructions on how to maneuver through the program were few, and those that were there were hidden under the "help" button, leaving the learner to explore and "figure it out". A possible solution is to have navigational instructions at the beginning of the lesson.
- "Module map" hides a very helpful outline of the module, and was only found by the reviewers at the end of completing the modules. This should be made more available.
- Learner should have instructions/button to end program without having to click through entire program
- There should be icons labeled "back" and "next" for effective use of the environment, in lieu of scrolling through screens. Screens should be uncluttered and shortened. "Next" and "back" buttons should be located at the bottom of each page in case a remote location is frames handicapped.
- There is a need to establish consistent use of the "get" and "go" buttons. "Get" would actually be more appropriate on the navigational bar.
- A help button giving "how to" knowledge would be useful for the simulations/applets, for those beginners who become confused or need assistance.
- Reviewers managed to get lost, either through a hotlink or through going to a related module. When this occurs, the only way to return to the module, was to retype the WWW address. This needs to be addressed.
- Some applets pop-up and cover all the questions that the learner should be answering concurrently. This should be corrected.
Visual/Aesthetics
- The frames portion of the site was appealing. Aside from simulations/applets, the rest of the site may be a bit bland to the learner. Applets should be explained in more detail before or during use, and decreased if necessary, to fit the size of the screen without needing to scroll. Also, in some cases applets cover the questions students need to answer, requiring toggling back and forth between windows.
- Use of visual capabilities of the web were not fully utilized.
- Questions, remarks, keywords, and other important information should be in color other than the text color (some were gray, some red)
- The colors in the applet are strong and wearing on the eyes. Softer, contrasting colors and textures should be considered for those who are colorblind.
- Graphics could also liven up the page, drawing attention to a key concept or thought.
- Color should be used to denote which areas are done/read by learner that is, use a change in color as a bookmarker.
- Graphics of mouse, and "think bubble" confusing. Reviewers tried to click on them, figuring they were icons to another link.
Part II. The Module also was examined from a pedagogical perspective; that is, reviewers evaluated the extent to which the module is consistent with instructional/learning principles. The following comments relate to the pedagogical aspects of the module:
Orientation
- The objectives and assumptions of the program were very helpful, but could be made even more specific, and linked with a more detailed summary or review for those learners hesitant about their readiness for the program.
- External documentation should be available for modules, expressing underlying assumptions, length of time needed for module completion, assumptions regarding hardware needs, and range of appropriate learning settings.
- The reviewers had many questions about the underlying assumptions of the module; for example, what are the assumed learning conditions (ex., individual, cooperative, independent with instructor present, etc.). This aspect should be made clear.
Content Linkages
- The content is informative, but should be compartmentalized a bit more. Scrolling through long pages is unappealing.
- Additional information, like a glossary of terms, formulas or concepts would also aid the learner.
- External links to WWW references would be interesting and useful to the learner
- "Remarks" seemed to be more informative than the lesson.
- Building on ideas, and summarizing after each section may be an effective approach of keeping learners focused and organized.
- Be sure all steps to answering problems are made explicit. Some steps were assumed, in which case some learners may have difficulties finishing the problems.
Motivation
- The simulations/applets in the beginning of the program were quite interesting although there needs to be more text explaining the procedures and outcome expected. Interaction should extend throughout the module to keep optimal motivation.
- An idea for more motivation: expand on the realm and depth of the "real-life application" references, and provide continuity by carrying related examples/problems throughout the entire program (an entire experience). A learner could follow steps to complete an entire "experience", linking it to real-life. Otherwise, the learner may lose the integration of the entire experience through fragmentation.
Questions/Input
- All questions in the module tended to focus on lower level cognitive processes. Higher level questions should be developed. Questions are also reflective of an individual method of Learning, rather than of cooperative learning.
- When using lower-level questioning, developers should develop consistency with students' answers to questions, such as having them send all answers to professors via e-mail, or handouts, etc. Something to Consider: In some cases when questions are given to students, they should be given choices as to the answers of the questions. They could receive immediate feedback on the correctness/incorrectness of their answer choice, with an explanation as to why/why not their choice was correct.
- The "answer" key has danger of learner lacking incentive to work out the problem, if answer is easily available.
- Questions should be dispersed throughout the module; and available in a variety of types. Item types should include higher level questions, as well as lower level