Coordinating the Complexity of Tools, Tasks, and Users: On Theory-based Approaches to Authoring Tool Usability
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Tom Murray
- 关键词：Authoring tools ; Intelligent tutoring systems ; Complexity science ; Epistemic forms ; Activity theory ; Hierarchical complexity theory
- 刊名：International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education
- 出版年：2016
- 出版时间：March 2016
- 年：2016
- 卷：26
- 期：1
- 页码：37-71
- 全文大小：1,536 KB
- 参考文献：Abelson, H., & Sussman, G. J. (1983). Structure and interpretation of computer programs. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Ainsworth, S., Major, N., Grimshaw, S., Hayes, M., Underwood, J., Williams, B. & Wood, D. (2003). REDEEM: simple intelligent tutoring systems from usable tools. Chapter 8 In MURRAY , T. , BLESSING , S. & AINSWORTH , S. (Eds.). Authoring tools for advanced technology learning environments. Springer: Netherlands.
Aleven, V., & Sewall, J. (2010). Hands-on introduction to creating intelligent tutoring systems without programming using the cognitive tutor authoring tools (CTAT). In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences-Volume 2 (pp. 511–512). International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Aleven, V., McLaren, B. M., Sewall, J., & Koedinger, K. R. (2006). The cognitive tutor authoring tools (CTAT): Preliminary evaluation of efficiency gains. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 61–70). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Aleven, V., McLaren, B., Sewall, J., VAN Velsen, M., Popescu, O., Demi, S., Koedinger, K. (2015). An Effective Paradigm for Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Example-Tracing Tutors.
Anderson, J. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press.
Benbya, H., & McKelvey, B. (2006). Toward a complexity theory of information systems development. Information Technology & People, 19(1), 12–34.CrossRef
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2006). Education for the knowledge age: design-centered models of teaching and instruction. In P. A. Alexander, & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 695–713). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schauble, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 289–325). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bruner, J. (1987/2004), ‘Life as narrative’, Social Research, 71: 691–710.
Byström, K., & Järvelin, K. (1995). Task complexity affects information seeking and use. Information Processing and Management, 31(2), 191–213.CrossRef
Campbell, D. J. (1988). Task complexity: a review and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 40–52.
Chilana, P. K., Wobbrock, J. O., & Ko, A. J. (2010). Understanding usability practices in complex domains. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2337–2346). ACM.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A. Lehrer R. Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher 2003; 32, 1.
Collins, A., & Ferguson, W. (1993). Epistemic forms and epistemic games: structures and strategies to guide inquiry. Educational Psychologist, 28(1), 25–42.CrossRef
Commons, M. L., & Pekker, A. (2008). Presenting the formal theory of hierarchical complexity. World Futures: Journal of General Evolution, 64(5–7), 375–382.CrossRef
Commons, M. L., & Pekker, A. (2009, unpublished). Hierarchical complexity and task difficulty. http://dareassociation.org/papers.php . Accessed Monday, November 30, 2009.
Commons, M. L., & Richards, F. A. (1984). A general model of stage theory. In M. L. Commons, F. A. Richards, & C. Armon (Eds.), Beyond formal operations: Late adolescent and adult cognitive development (pp. 120–141). New York: Praeger.
Commons, M. L., Trudeau, E. J., Stein, S. A., Richards, F. A., & Krause, S. R. (1998). Hierarchical complexity of tasks shows the existence of developmental stages. Developmental Review, 18, 238–278.CrossRef
Conklin, J. (2005). Wicked Problems & Social Complexity. Chapter 1 of Dialogue Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems, Wiley.
Constantin, A., Pain, H., & Waller, A. (2013). Informing the design of an authoring tool for developing social stories. In Human-Computer Interaction–INTERACT 2013 (pp. 546–553). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Cook-Greuter, S. R. (2000). Mature ego development: a gateway to ego transcendence. Journal of Adult Development, 7(4), 227–240.CrossRef
Cook-Greuter, S.R. (2005). Ego development: nine levels of increasing embrace. Available at www.cook-greuter.com .
Cristea, A. (2005). Authoring of adaptive hypermedia. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 8(3).
Dawson, T. L., & Stein, Z. (2011). We are all learning here: Cycles of research and application in adult development. Hoare, C. (Ed.). (2011). The Oxford handbook of reciprocal adult development and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dawson-Tunik, T. L., Commons, M., Wilson, M., & Fischer, K. (2005). The shape of development. The European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 2, 163--196.
Demetriou, A., Efklides, A., & Shayer, M. (Eds.). (2005). Neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development: Implications and applications for education. Routledge.
Engestrom, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamaki, R.-L. (Eds.) (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fischer, K. (1980). A theory of cognitive development: the control and construction of hierarchies of skills. Psychological Review, 87(6), 477–531.CrossRef
Fischer, K., & Yan, Z. (2002). The development of dynamic skill theory. In Conceptions of development: Lessons from the laboratory, 279-312.
Gentner, D., & Stevens, A. (Eds.) (1983). Mental models. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
Gersh, J. R., McKneely, J. A., & Remington, R. W. (2005). Cognitive engineering: understanding human interaction with complex systems. Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest, 26(4), 377–382.
Graesser, A. C., Chipman, P., Haynes, B. C., & Olney, A. (2005). AutoTutor: an intelligent tutoring system with mixed-initiative dialogue. IEEE Transactions on Education, 48, 612–618.CrossRef
Grünwald, P. D., & Vitányi, P. M. (2003). Kolmogorov complexity and information theory. With an interpretation in terms of questions and answers. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 12(4), 497–529.CrossRef MathSciNet MATH
Haynes, S. R., & Kannampallil, T. G. (2004). Learning, Performance, and Analysis Support for Complex Software Applications. Proc. of the 3rd Ann. Workshop on HCI Research in MIS, 30–34.
Heffernan, N., & Heffernan, C. (2014). The ASSISTments ecosystem: building a platform that brings scientists and teachers together for minimally invasive research on human learning and teaching. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 24(4), 470–497.CrossRef MathSciNet
Johnson, C. W. (2006). Why did that happen? Exploring the proliferation of barely usable software in healthcare systems. Quality & Safety in Health Care, 15, i76–i81.CrossRef
Johnson, W. L., & Valente, A. (2008). Tactical Language and Culture Training Systems: Using Artificial Intelligence to Teach Foreign Languages and Cultures. In AAAI (pp. 1632–1639).
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Jonassen, D., & Rohrer-Murphy, L. (1999). Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(1), 61–79.CrossRef
Jordan, T., Andersson P., & Ringnér, H. (2013). The Spectrum of Responses to Complex Societal Issues: Reflections on Seven Years of Empirical Inquiry. Integral Review, February 2013, Vol. 9, No. 1.
Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Knight, C. C., & Sutton, R. E. (2004). Neo-Piagetian theory and research: enhancing pedagogical practice for educators of adults. London Review of Education, 2(1), 47–60.CrossRef
Koedinger, K. R., Anderson, J. R., Hadley, W. H., & Mark, M. A. (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8, 30–43.
Kumar, P., Samaddar, S. G., Samaddar, A. B., & Misra, A. K. (2010, June). Extending IEEE LTSA e-Learning framework in secured SOA environment. In Education Technology and Computer (ICETC), 2010 2nd International Conference (Vol. 2, pp. V2-136). IEEE.
Mirel, B. (2004). Interaction design for complex problem solving. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman.
Mitrovic, A. (2012). Fifteen years of constraint-based tutors: what we have achieved and where we are going. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 22(1–2), 39–72.CrossRef
Mitrovic, A., Martin, B., Suraweera, P., Zakharov, K., Milik, N., Holland, J., & McGuigan, N. (2009). ASPIRE: an authoring system and deployment environment for constraint-based tutors. Artificial Intelligence in Education, 19(2), 155–188.
Morrison, D., & Collins, A. (1995). Epistemic fluency and constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology, 35(5), 39–45.
Murray, T. (1996). Having It All, Maybe: Design Tradeoffs in ITS Authoring Tools. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Third International Conference, ITS’96, Montreal, Canada, June 12–14, 1996. Proceedings (Vol. 1086, p. 93). Springer.
Murray, T. (1999). Authoring intelligent tutoring systems: analysis of the state of the art. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10(1), 98–129.
Murray, T. (2003a). An overview of intelligent tutoring system authoring tools: updated analysis of the state of the art. In T. Murray, S. Blessing, S. Ainsworth (Eds.), Authoring tools for advanced technology learning environments. Netherlands: Springer.
Murray, T. (2003b). Eon: Authoring tools for content, instructional strategy, student model, and interface design. In T. Murray, S. Blessing, S. Ainsworth (Eds.), Authoring tools for advanced technology learning environments. Netherlands: Springer.
Murray, T. (2004). Design tradeoffs in usability and power for advanced educational software authoring tools. Educational Technology Journal, 2004, 10–16.
Murray, T., & Woolf, B. (1992). Tools for teacher participation in ITS design. In Frasson, Gauthier, & McCalla (Eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Second Int. Conf. (pp. 593–600). New York: Springer Verlag.CrossRef
Murray, T., Blessing, S., & Ainsworth, S. (Eds.) (2003). Authoring tools for advanced technology learning environments: Toward cost-effective adaptive, interactive, and intelligent educational software. Netherlands: Springer.
Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. AP Professional: Boston.MATH
Nielsen, J. (1994). Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 152–158). ACM.
Norman, D. (1988). The design of everyday things. NY: Doubleday.
Oja, M. K. (2010). Designing for collaboration: improving usability of complex software systems. In CHI’10 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3799–3804). Chicago: ACM.
Olsen, J. K., Belenky, D. M., Aleven, V., & Rummel, N. (2013). Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Collaborative Learning: Enhancements to Authoring Tools. In Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 900–903). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Piaget, J. (1972). The principles of genetic epistemology. NY: Basic Books.
Razzaq, L., Patvarczki, J., Almeida, S. F., Vartak, M., Feng, M., Heffernan, N. T., & Koedinger, K. R. (2009). The assistment builder: supporting the life cycle of tutoring system content creation. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 2(2), 157–166.CrossRef
Ritter, S. (2015). Authoring for the product lifecycle. Available from the author at Carnegie Learning.
Ritter, S., & Blessing, S. (1998). Authoring tools for component-based learning environments. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(1), 107–132.CrossRef
Shaffer, D. W. (2006). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers & Education, 46(3), 223–234.CrossRef
Sitaram, S., & Mostow, J. (2012). Mining data from project LISTEN’s reading tutor to analyze development of children’s oral reading prosody. In Proceedings of the 25th Florida artificial intelligence research society conference (FLAIRS-25), 478–483. Marco Island, Florida.
Soloway, E., Guzdial, M., & Hay, K. E. (1994). Learner- centered design: the challenge for HCI in the 21st century. Interactions, 1(2), 36–48.CrossRef
Sottilare, R. A., Brawner, K. W., Goldberg, B. S., & Holden, H. K. (2012). The generalized intelligent framework for tutoring (GIFT). Orlando, FL: US Army Research Laboratory–Human Research & Engineering Directorate (ARL-HRED).
Sottilare, R., Graesser, A., Hu, X. & Goldberg, B. (2014). Design recommendations for intelligent tutoring systems: volume 2: instructional management. U.S. Army Research Laboratory Human Research & Engineering Directorate.
Specht, M. (2012). E-Learning Authoring Tools. In Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (pp. 1111–1113). Springer US.
Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Suraweera, P., Mitrovic, A., & Martin, B. (2010). Widening the knowledge acquisition bottleneck for constraint-based tutors. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 20(2), 137–173.
Vanlehn, K., Lynch, C., Schulze, K., Shapiro, J. A., Shelby, R., Taylor, L., … Wintersgill, M. (2005). The Andes physics tutoring system: lessons learned. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15(3), 147–204.
Woolf, B. P. (2010). Building intelligent interactive tutors: Student-centered strategies for revolutionizing e-learning. Morgan Kaufmann.
Woolf, B. & McDonald, D. (1984). Design issues in building a computer tutor. IEEE Computer, Sept. 1984.
Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(1), 7–44.CrossRef - 作者单位：Tom Murray (1)
1. School of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA - 刊物类别：Artificial Intelligence (incl. Robotics); Educational Technology; User Interfaces and Human Computer
- 刊物主题：Artificial Intelligence (incl. Robotics); Educational Technology; User Interfaces and Human Computer Interaction; Computers and Education;
- 出版者：Springer New York
- ISSN：1560-4306
文摘
Intelligent Tutoring Systems authoring tools are highly complex educational software applications used to produce highly complex software applications (i.e. ITSs). How should our assumptions about the target users (authors) impact the design of authoring tools? In this article I first reflect on the factors leading to my original 1999 article on the state of the art in ITS authoring tools and consider some challenges facing authoring tool researchers today. Then, in the bulk of the paper, I propose some principled foundations for future authoring tool design, focusing on operationalizing the construct of complexity—for tool, task, and user. ITS authoring tools are major undertakings and to redeem this investment it is important to anticipate actual user needs and capacities. I propose that one way to do this is to match the complexity of tool design to the complexity of authoring tasks and the complexity capacity of users and user communities. Doing so entails estimating the complexity of the mental models that a user is expected to build in order to use a tool as intended. The goal is not so much to support the design of more powerful authoring tools as it is to design tools that meet the needs of realistic user audiences. This paper presents some exploratory ideas on how to operationalize the concept of complexity for tool, task, and user. The paper draws from the following theories and frameworks to weave this narrative: Complexity Science, Activity Theory, Epistemic Forms and Games, and adult cognitive developmental theory (Hierarchical Complexity Theory). This exploration of usability and complexity is applicable to the design of any type of complex authoring application, though the application area that motivated the exploration is ITS authoring.