what matters ?
TRANSCRIPT
What matters(?)B.L. William Wong
Professor of Human-Computer InteractionHead, Interaction Design Center
School of Engineering and Information Sciences
Annual Learning and Teaching Conference 29 June 2010
ENGAGING THE DIGITAL GENERATION IN ACADEMIC LITERACY
2
Scope
What matters(?) Academic literacy
Digital Generation
Engaging
HCI Research
Lessons from HCI Research forengaging the digital generation in academic literacy
The 7 Habits
As Educators …
3
Academic Literacy: What is it?• To engage in the on-going intellectual conversations
– Competencies in thinking, reading, writing, speaking– Awareness of logical, emotional and personal appeals used in
argument– Understanding of audience, tone, language usage, rhetorical strategies– Skills that enable one to define, summarize, detail, trace, explain,
evaluate, compare and contrast, analyze and synthesize, dissect and (re)combine ideas, make connections to related topics, anticipate
• Critical thinking skills to enable complex analytical work• Society has changed
– Nomadic – agricultural – industrial – knowledge– Abstract problems– Interpret, judge, and assemble evidence about value, significance or
relevance– Tolerate ambiguity– Distinguish between results of conjecture vs evidence-based
Intersegmental Committee of the Academic Senates (2002). Academic Literacy: A statement of competencies expected of students entering California’s public colleges and universities
4
Academic Literacy: Why?
• Why does this matter?• To foster success in higher education
– Success is motivating and addictive– Affects retention and completions
• To be effective contributors and participants in advancing our communities and society – Discernment – Advancement– Better citizens, better consumers
5
The Digital Generation
• The Generations– Gen X => 1960 – 1970s Baby Boomers– Gen Y => 1970s – 2000– Gen Z => early/mid-1990s – 2012
• The Digital Generation, the Google Generation– Those born and immersed into a world of technology,
communications, constant connectivity, the WWW, instant messaging, text messaging, YouTube, MP3 players, mobile phones
• Our concern: Educating this generation– How they learn, communicate and socialize differs significantly from
previous generations– They are now coming through universities– To get the best out of them, we need to re-think how we teach
6
Google Generation: Typical Stereotype
• Web savvy young people whose first port of call for information is Google
• “On the screen was some history/ physics/English document, but also his Facebook and iTunes pages. In his ears were the iPod plugs, playing back a podcast. And sometimes, just to fracture his concentration even further, he might have had a half-played video running on YouTube as well.”
– (Catherine O’Brien (2008). How the Google generation thinks differently, The Times, 9 July 2008, http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article4295414.ece)
7
The Google Generation• 89% of college students use search engines to begin an information
search (while only 2 per cent start from a library web site)• 93% are satisfied or very satisfied with their overall experience of using
a search engine (compared with 84 per cent for a librarian-assisted search)
• search engines fit college students’ life styles better than physical or online libraries and that fit is `almost perfect’
• college students still use the library, but they are using it less (and reading less) since they first began using internet research tools
• `books’ are still the primary library brand association for this group, despite massive investment in digital resources, of which students are largely unfamiliar
– College Students’ Perceptions of the Libraries and Information Resources: A Report to the OCLC Membership. Dublin, OH: OCLC, 2006, in Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future: A CIBER Briefing Paper, Jan 2008, UCL
8
The Claims: How true is all this?• Generally true:• They are more competent with technology• They have very high expectations of ICT• They prefer interactive systems and are turning away from being passive consumers of
information• They prefer visual information over text (but text is still important)• Open:• They have shifted decisively to digital forms of communication: texting rather than talking• They multi-task in all areas of their lives• They are used to being entertained and now expect this of their formal learning experience at
university• They think everything is on the web (and its all free)• They do not respect intellectual property • They are format agnostic• No:• They have zero tolerance for delay and their information needs must be fulfilled immediately• They find their peers more credible as information sources than authority figures• They need to be feel constantly connected to the web• They are the ‘cut-and-paste’ generation• They pick up computer skills by trial and error• They prefer quick information in the form of easily digested chunks rather than full text• They are expert searchers
– Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future: A CIBER Briefing Paper, Jan 2008, UCL
9
What is the extent of this?
• 27% of UK teenagers could really be described as having the kind of deep interest and facility in IT as the term ‘Google Generation’ suggests
• 57% use relatively low level of technology to support their basic communication or entertainment needs
• 20% who actively dislike and avoid using technology whenever possible
– Synovate (2007). Leisure Time: Clean living youth shun new technology. www.synovate.com/current/news/article/2007/02
10
Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants• “Our students have changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the
people our educational system was designed to teach.” (Prensky, 2001)• Digital natives – born into the world of technology and the internet
– Like receiving information quickly from multiple media sources.– Like parallel processing and multi-tasking.– Like processing pictures, sounds and video before text.– Like random access to hyperlinked multimedia information.– Like to network with others.– Like to learn “just in time”.
• Digital immigrants – those, not born, but have adopted technology– Like slow and controlled release of information from limited sources.– Like singular processing and single or limited tasking.– Like processing text before pictures, sounds and video.– Like to receive information linearly, logically and sequentially.– Like to work independently.– Like to learn “just in case”.
• However, not everyone born in this period are ‘natives’, although they can be connected to it
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5).
11
How do they search for information?
• Horizontal information seeking– 60% of e-journal users view no more than 3 pages and the majority (65%) never return
• Navigation– They spend as much time finding their bearings as they spend viewing what they
found• Viewers, rather than readers
– Typically (‘power’) browse for 4-8 minutes• Squirreling behaviour
– Download and store• Diverse information seekers
– Geography, gender, type of university, status … all very different• Checking information seekers
– Assess authority and trust by cross-checking
Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future: A CIBER Briefing Paper, Jan 2008, UCL
12
The UBiRD study• In total: 34 participants (16 female, 18 male)
– A Russell Group University: 12 (5 UG, 3 PG & 4 Researchers)– A 1994 Group University: 10 (6 PG & 4 Researchers)– Million+ University: 12 (5 UG, 4 PG & 3 Researchers)
• Two stage study:– Stage 1: Focus Groups – Stage 2: Observation & in-depth interviews ~ 2 hours
• 3 tasks of increasing difficulty and ambiguity to find information in library and non-library systems
• 68 hours of video and audio recordings• Retrospective protocol analysis
– Wong, B. L. W, Stelmaszewska, H., Bhimani, N., Barn, S., & Barn, B. (2009). User Behaviour in Resource Discovery: Final Report. Available at: www.ubird.mdx.ac.uk, November 2009. JISC Grant Ref. Num. CSSERSA2 / SERV ENHANCE
13
User information search and retrieval
PK/E Used: Friends and personal networks = 29 / 34
Wong, B. L. W, Stelmaszewska, H., Bhimani, N., Barn, S., & Barn, B. (2009). User Behaviour in Resource Discovery: Final Report. Available at: www.ubird.mdx.ac.uk, November 2009. JISC Grant Ref. Num. CSSERSA2 / SERV ENHANCE
Search Start Points:Google, Wikipedia, YouTube etc = 19 / 34Library resources = 4 / 34Publishers resources = 12 / 34
14
e-Gov, e-Social Service Information: Citizens’ Advice Bureau
Portal
Wong, B. L. W., Keith, S., & Springett, M. (2005). Fit for Purpose Evaluation: The case of a public information kiosk for the socially disadvantaged. In D. Benyon, J. Gulliksen & T. McEwan (Eds.), People and Computers XVIV, Proceedings of HCI 2005. (Vol. 1, pp. 149-165): Springer Verlag.
Information is hierarchically organized and silo-based
15
Users are looking for answers and relationships that span hierarchies and silos
16
Do low literacy users have problems accessing online information?
• 9 times longer to complete the task– On average time spend on a task in seconds by high lit 84.81 and low lit 776.81
• Visited 8 times more web pages– On average for a task total number of pages visited by high lit 4.47 and low lit 39.56
• Back-tracked 13 times more– On average back tracked by clicking the back button by high lit .83 and low lit 13.19
• 4 times more likely to re-visit web pages– On average revisited previously visited pages by high lit 12% and low lit 51%
• Spent 1/3 more time on a web page– On average time spent on a web page in seconds by high lit 19.6 and low lit 21.85
• 13 times more likely to get lost – On average lostness for the tasks by high lit 0.07 and low lit 0.91
• They were generally less successful in finding information
– Kodagoda, N. & Wong, W. Effects of low & high literacy on user performance in information search and retrieval, in Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on HCI 2008: People and Computers XXII: Culture, Creativity, Interaction - Volume 1. 2008, British Computer Society: Liverpool, United Kingdom.
17
High Literate User Info Search Model
Low Literate User Info Search Model
Kodagoda, N., B.L.W. Wong, and N. Khan (in press). Information seeking behaviour model as a theoretical lens: High and low literate users behaviour process analysed as way of informing interface design. In Proceedings of ECCE 2010, the European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics
18
•Very large amounts of data, about many different and some possibly related, but much un-related topics, and within each topic area may have fragmentary information relating to several threads•Supplied by many different sources, reside on possibly un-connected or loosely coupled data sets•Be of different formats such a numerical, video, photos, un-structured text•Varying quality, reliability, ambiguous, similar yet different •Be incomplete with missing data, and out of sequence•Entities with unknown and unexpected relationships
Frame of Reference
Visual Analytics: Making Sense of Data
Lack of the ‘big picture’
Jig-saw puzzle(not one, but many)
- Looking for patterns - Looking for patterns that triggers- Structuring, modifying, re-arranging, identifying relationships- make an estimate of what is happening- create a ‘hypothesis’- search for evidence to support- Mosaic Theory vs Medical Diagnosis Theory
19 P. Pirolli, & Card, S. (1995). Information foraging in information access environments. Paper presented at the Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ‘95, Mosaic of Creativity, Denver, CO.
Information Foraging
20
Line of enquiry
Theories
Questions
Info. seeking strategies
Evidence
Knowledge reps
Lines of enquiry
Investigators
Theories
Questions
Info. seeking strategies
Evidence
Knowledge reps
Lines of enquiry
Investigators
Theories
Questions
Info. seeking strategies
Evidence
Knowledge reps
Lines of enquiry
Investigators
Theories
Questions
Info. seeking strategies
Evidence
Knowledge reps
Lines of enquiry
Investigators
Recursive decomposition
Attfield, S. and Blandford, A., (in press) Making Sense of DigitalFootprints in Team-based Legal Investigations: The Acquisition of Focus.Human Computer Interaction Journal, Special Issue on Sensemaking
21
Workflow model
Attfield, S. and Blandford, A., (in press) Making Sense of DigitalFootprints in Team-based Legal Investigations: The Acquisition of Focus.Human Computer Interaction Journal, Special Issue on Sensemaking
22
Qualitative Data Analysis: Emergent Themes
Wong, B. L. W., & Blandford, A. (2002). Analysing ambulance dispatcher decision making: Trialing Emergent Themes Analysis. In F. Vetere, L. Johnston & R. Kushinsky (Eds.), Human Factors 2002, the Joint Conference of the Computer Human Interaction Special Interest Group and The Ergonomics Society of Australia, HF2002 (pp. CD-ROM publication). Melbourne.
23
Academic Literacy: Similarities across different domains
• Academic literacy shares many similarities with sense-making– Competencies in thinking, reading, writing, speaking– Awareness of logical, emotional and personal appeals used in
argument– Understanding of audience, tone, language usage, rhetorical strategies– Skills that enable one to define, summarize, detail, trace, explain,
evaluate, compare and contrast, analyze and synthesize, dissect and (re)combine ideas, make connections to related topics, anticipate
– Interpret, judge, and assemble evidence about value, significance or relevance
– Tolerate ambiguity– Distinguish between results of conjecture vs evidence
• Frame of reference – Knowledge of the subject or domain– Theories and concepts– Methods in the subject
24
Engaging the Digital Generation: Learn, communicate, and socialize
• Moving from Twitter’s 142 char to 1500 word documents that require integrative and sustained thinking, reflection and intellectual dialog
• Success in engaging the Digital Generation– The Digital Generation Project
• http://www.edutopia.org/digital-generation
– Digi-Teen Project • http://digiteen.ning.com/
– Flat Classroom Project• http://www.flatclassroomproject.org/
25
‘Classroom21’ Project • A pilot study to identify factors that influence how children learn with and through
Information and Communications Technology– University of Otago, NZ, in 2000
• Standard 4 children (10-11 year olds) • Prepare a core group of primary school teachers to develop multimedia and
internet-based project such as a website that has QuickTime Virtual Reality environment and multimedia.
– Bradford Primary School, Kaikorai Primary School, MacAndrew Bay Primary School, St Clair's Normal School
• The children learnt the tools and methods– QTVR Authoring Toolkit, KidPix, HyperStudio, Clarisworks, DreamWeaver, HomePage – digital photography, art, sound, movie editing, storyboarding, webpage development
• Created a QuickTime Virtual Reality record of a site they visited and then to have that visit posted on the internet.
– e.g. Portobello Marine Laboratory, the Royal Albatross Colony, Larnarch’s Castle• Children researched and reported on aspects of the visit
– Biology, marine life, the Royal Albatross, history– Research skills: reading, writing, assembling
• Hot links created from the VR environments to relevant aspects of their researchPeterson, K. A, and Wong, W. B. L, (2000), Interactive Children: The Use of Virtual Reality and Web Technologies, Ozchi2000, C. Paris, N. Ozkan, S. Howard and S. Lu, Sydney, CSIRO Mathematical and Information Sciences, 12-14.
26
27
QTVT movie, requires QuickTime 7
28
29
30
31
QTVT movie, requires QuickTime 7
32
What matters(?) in these projects
• … or at least, appear to matter:• Empowerment• Create-ability• Collaboration
33
Empowerment: CRISIS• “… the attention span of a gnat”?• From computer games and training simulation CRISIS: What matters(?)• System performance
– Good frame-rate, for several/many simultaneous players• Realism
– Rendering, movement and physics• visualisation - realism of objects and characters, including their rendering, as well as their
movement in the scene• Interaction – compatibility of I/O devices with the type of game or training
– Believable (socio-behavioral) scenarios• Require situation assessment, and (team) decision making• Require relevant expertise and competency
• Realistic decision making• Collaboration and problem solving • Storyline control
– Control over responses and what is to be done
CRitical Incident management training System using an Interactive Simulation environment
FP7-SEC-2009-1 Grant Agreement No. FP7-242474
34
Team work in crisis management: Similarities between the real-world, and
online gaming environmentsJane Barnett
35
Real-world• Commander – overall
responsibility; give orders to rest of team
• Ambulance – life preservers• Firefighters – extinguish fire
Online• Commander – overall
responsibility; give orders to rest of team
• Healers – life preservers• Damage dealers – extinguish threat
Expertise
Jane Barnett
36
Empowerment
• Control– Control over how they act, respond and learn
• ‘Classroom21’ • Their teachers guided the learning• Our researcher taught the technical skills• The children controlled
– the design and development– researching and developing the projects– Deep vs shallow learning
37
Create-ability
• 3D-in-2D Displays for Air Traffic Control– EUROCONTROL CARE INO III Innovation Research
Programme, EEC Contract No. C06/12399BE
Ciampino ATC
Rome Area Control Centre,
Ciampino Airport, Italy
40
Proof of concept: DV’s Lente
41
Proof of concept: SA’s Distortion Lens
42
43
44
45
Wong, B. L. W., Rozzi, S., Gaukrodger, S., Boccalatte, A., Paola, A., Fields, B., et al. (2008). Human-Centred Innovation: Developing 3D-in-2D Displays for ATC. In D. Vu N., A. Zellweger, D. George & J.-M. Garot (Eds.), Proceedings of ICRAT 2008, the Third International Conference on Research n Air Transportation (pp. Accepted for publication).
46
Create-ability
• Competence – Knowledge and skills that enable them to carry out real tasks– 3D/2D Sound understanding of the air traffic task, goals and constraints– 3D/2D Understanding how technology affects how we do things, and how that
changes the demands that places for new technology• Courage and confidence
– Courage to apply, and ability to learn from their mistakes– 3D/2D Novelty requires breaking the norm
• Creative and initiative– Familiar with problem solving, lateral thinkers– Initiates and tinkers (because it is seldom that we get it right the first time)– 3D/2D Requires knowledge of state of the art, theories and concepts,
operational concepts, and not just a wacky idea• Critical thinking
– Slice and dice, analyze and dissect, distinguish between ‘shades of grey’– 3D/2D The 3C’s Framework – Containers / Controls / Content
47
Collaborate
• INVISQUE Project INteractive VIsual Search and QUery Environment
– JISC RI Rapid Innovation Programme Ref. IEDEVC19 / RI
• INVISQUE demo
48
49
Collaborate
• Co-discovery– Collaborate and working in teams to discover or
accomplish together– Librarians and Users (researchers and students) to
understand the problem in order to innovate– Developers to flesh out the concept
• Communicate – Able to articulate their ideas and to coordinate and
implement them– Particularly difficult as the novel concepts were very
difficult to explain, and to overcome prior thinking
50
So, What matters(?): The 7 Habits• Competence
– Knowledge and skills that enable them to carry out real tasks• Control
– Control over how they act, respond and learn• Courage and confidence
– Courage to apply, and ability to learn from their mistakes• Co-discovery
– Collaborate and working in teams to discover or accomplish together• Communicate
– Able to articulate their ideas and to coordinate and implement them• Creative and initiative
– Familiar with problem solving, lateral thinkers– Initiates and tinkers (because it is seldom that we get it right the first time)– Requires knowledge of state of the art, theories and concepts, and not just a
wacky idea• Critical thinking
– Slice and dice, analyze and dissect, distinguish between ‘shades of grey’
51
In Conclusion …
What matters(?) Academic literacy
Digital Generation
Engaging
What do we focus on?Technology Most visible, most tangible, most seductive
As Educators …
52
In Conclusion …
What matters(?) Academic literacy
Digital Generation
Engaging
Empowerment, Create-ability, Collaboration
53
In Conclusion …
What matters(?) Academic literacy
Digital Generation
Engaging
The 7 HabitsCompetence; Control; Courage and confidence;
Co-discovery; Communicate; Create and initiate; Critical thinking
Empowerment, Create-ability, Collaboration
54
Thank-you