Developing Innovative e-Learning Solutions
Marcello Castellano and Francesco Antonio Santangelo
Politecnico di Bari, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e dell’Informazione
Via E. Orabona 4, 70125 Bari, Italy
Keywords: e-Learning, Usability, Evaluation, Learner-centered Design, Virtual Learning Environment.
Abstract: Nowadays, the interest in applications of e-learning is becoming more and more meaningful in various
social and production areas. There are numerous proposals for new learning solutions mediated by
technologies that depart from technological innovations. In this paper a method for development innovative
solutions in e-learning applications based on the centrality of the studies of human-computer interaction is
proposed. In particular, it explores the concept of usability and proposes a design framework. An
application to the construction of an e-learning system is also presented.
1 INTRODUCTION
The design of computer systems is based on
appropriate paradigms whose goal is the creation of
a good system (Haoyu and Haley, 2012). In recent
years, particular interest has focused on usability as
a significant aspect of the design of computer
applications (Jacko and Sears, 2003).
The usability is that form of organization of
knowledge in human-machine interaction (HCI) in
order to improve the quality of system, i.e. the way
in which the objectives are achieved by a user point
of view. Evaluate the usability of a system is the first
step in order to provide more adequate performance.
The usability evaluation of a system is a complex
task that requires the development of special
mechanisms for analysis and diagnosis, in order to
activate strategies (Mehlenbacher et al, 2005).
The field of study of the formation mediated by
information technology, although it can be traced
back to several years ago is always very timely. This
is due to the strategic importance of education and
training, which strongly depends the development
and future of our society, and by the speed with
which new ICT technologies are evolving. Although
you can record interesting advances in computer
applications in the field of e-learning, little attention
has so far been paid to the systematic study of the
usability criteria (Squires and Preece, 1996; Oztekin
et al, 2010).
A recurrent position in literature in development
of e-learning is that the achievement of learning
objectives can be improved through the application
of the criteria of usability. In particular, in section 2
is discussed the learner-centered design approach, in
section 3 is defined the concepts of personalization,
in section 4 is discussed the design of an e-learning
system usability based, and it is highlighted the
importance of usability evaluation. Finally in section
5 is designed a sample application on the proposed
framework, defining a Virtual Learning
Environment.
2 LEARNER CENTERED DESIGN
The Learner-Centered Design (LCD) is
characterized by an analysis centered on the
motivations that support or contrast the learning.
While in some cases the designer must take into
account the reasons that induce a person to learn, in
other cases the user may not be interested to learn.
So, the problem is to solicit the student's curiosity
and generate new learning objectives.
In e-learning applications, the effectiveness of
the system will be also the position between student
and technology. In fact, in these cases, the
effectiveness of learning is mediated by the
technological component. Therefore a significant
study of student-technology must also be considered
already in the design phase in order to develop a
good system. It is in fact necessary to identify a
technique, or a combination of techniques, in order
to define a user interface which can be measured.
484
Castellano M. and Santangelo F..
Developing Innovative e-Learning Solutions.
DOI: 10.5220/0004625304840489
In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Information Retrieval and the International Conference on Knowledge
Management and Information Sharing (KMIS-2013), pages 484-489
ISBN: 978-989-8565-75-4
Copyright
c
2013 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)
The interface design of a course is one of the crucial
choices since it can have a positive or negative
impact on the performance of the target audience
(Jones, 1994; Tselios et al, 2001).
In this aspect, the usability role is to improve the
quality of e-learning using its methods of design and
evaluation. In particular, it considers the following
characteristics (ISO, 1998):
effectiveness, which measures the accuracy and
completeness of the objectives achieved;
efficiency, which measures the accuracy and
completeness of goals achieved with
available resources;
satisfaction, which measures the comfort and
acceptability of the system to its users and
other people which refer to its use.
In general, it can be said that usability has to do
with aspects of human-computer interaction
(Shackel, 1991).
The LCD systems are characterized by a highly
interactive form of activity, and therefore their
application in the field of e-learning leads to the
development of highly interactive computer systems.
In this sense, the usability of these systems becomes
a significative element of analysis and development.
Knowing the user profile is the best way to
design usable systems (Penna and Stara, 2007). The
interface should be hold fonts and colors suitable for
reading on the screen in order to create consistency,
predict lower download times and provide printable
versions of the files. The interface should be also
interactive and provide feedback, have specific
objectives, be constantly updated, providing
appropriate tool, to prevent any inconvenience
during the use of the course.
These specifications refer to a user-friendly
design, following the approach LCD. But since that
learning follows a series of characteristics based on
single student, it is necessary to use a recursive
design, which integrates the constant feedback of
end users at every stage of the design. The high-
level specifications for the development of a design
framework LCD based are shown below (Murphy,
2004):
define the target, in order to identify a suitable
interface;
through a task analysis understand the
objectives of the target and its mental model;
structuring a prototype and evaluate the
correspondence of this model compared to
the target model;
test the prototype with users through a real
method applicable;
create a beta version of the system that unlike
the prototype include all functions of the
system, test it on a small number of users;
proceed in the design process until the launch
of the product.
3 TOWARD PERSONALIZATION
Students have different: characteristics, knowledge,
skills, motivations and needs. In order to make the
learning process more effective and efficient, and
motivate students, it is required the presentation of
information in different and appropriate way (Jara-
Roa et al, 2010).
Some requirements for educational adaptive
system solutions are:
it should adapt to what a learner already knows
(prior knowledge) and what it can do already
(previous skills);
it should adapt to the different learning abilities
of students;
it should fit to particular preferences or learning
styles of students;
it should adapt to a suitable level of
performance of different learners and to their
state of knowledge (i.e. the system should
provide adequate and consistent feedback);
it should adapt to the educational interests of
students;
it should adapt to a student's personal situation
(place, time, etc.).
it should adapt to students' motivation.
Tutoring can be seen as an adaptation to the
individual student, expanding the concept of the
LCD seen in the previous section, that instead
involves a “class” of users. The concept of
customizing the presentation of information is
closely linked with that of usability of the system, as
it introduces the ability to function effectively and
efficiently, while providing the personal satisfaction
for their users (Notess, 2001).
The supporters, developers and designers of
educational environment are needed to obtain
effective, accessible, flexible, attractive designed
and distributed systems based on learning
personalized specification. The main characteristics
of e-learning systems are their ability to recognize
the students’ needs, educational behavior and also
their capabilities. These systems should be able to
make the appropriate recommendations to improve
the efficiency of the education process (Saberi and
Ali Montazer, 2012).
DevelopingInnovativee-LearningSolutions
485
4 DESIGN AN “USABLE”
e-LEARNING SYSTEM
4.1 Framework Project
The design of an e-learning system from the
methodological and technological perspective must
contemplate the collaboration of several key actors:
disciplinary experts, educational advisors, technical
experts, tutors and, of course, end users, i.e.
students. While taking into account the fact that it is
a recursive process, we can identify three main
phases concerning: the preliminary phase of the
design, the design-methodological and the phase
related to the technological infrastructure, as shown
in Figure 1.
Figure 1: The usability based framework proposed to
design an e-learning system.
In this scheme we can place standards and
guidelines as follows:
user profiling: classification of the different
types of users of the system;
pedagogical-didactic model: methods and
instructional strategies to apply, as well as
indicators to assess the quality of education;
activities and content: guidelines for the
creation of educational content and
educational programs to be implemented;
conceptual design and definition of the virtual
learning environment: parameters for the
accessibility and usability of websites and
web platforms.
During the Predesign phase we can identify the
paradigms and theories of reference: in order to
arrive at the choice of an appropriate theoretical
paradigm we can examine theories and models of e-
learning training. The choice of a learning model
implies a theoretical choice and, consequently, the
choice of a suitable architecture teaching; in learning
theories the design models represent the most
general level, within which we can delineate
teaching strategies, methodologies, technical skills
and student activities. If we have clear theoretical
foundations that are upstream of the assumptions on
learning and knowledge we will be able to design
properly the learning environment.
Reasoning from the educational point of view,
the effectiveness of an e-learning system must be
related to a number of factors, ranging from the type
of learning theory to which one intends to inspire
and to its teaching strategy to implement it, the type
of target, the context in which it must fit the training
activity, the objective constraints such as the number
of users, to economic resources to design and create
the training process, the tractability of electronic
content to be provided, and so on (McDonald and
Schvaneveldt, 1988).
From the above, it clearly emerges that the
definition and the choice of the type of e-learning
approach to be taken is of great importance not only
from the point of view didactic-pedagogical but also
from the more markedly operating. In fact we can
consider the efficiency of the system in terms of
human resources required to design, execution and
operation of the process, the technologies to be used
and the organizational structure able to support,
manage and communicate between all system
components.
This step is followed by profiling of potential
users in order to evaluate the parameters related to
personal satisfaction: special educational needs are
different for groups, types and individuals, and it is
therefore necessary to describe these different types
to identify their specific needs. To complete the
predesign phase we can consider the analysis of
learning needs and the identification of prerequisites
that must be owned, developed or enhanced.
In the Teaching-Methodological Design phase
we proceed to identify teaching methods and
strategies of communication in relation to the
pedagogical-didactic model chosen. Each model, in
fact, provides the procedural frameworks for the
systematic production of training, allowing you to
define role and functions of subjects and objects, as
well as the ways and means of evaluation of
learning.
In many situations the chosen learning model
encourages in the definition of educational mediator,
i.e. in the process that tends to favor the flow of
knowledge by a issuer (the teacher) to a receiving
(the student). For example, a behaviorist model has
often driven the development of self-instructional
materials in the field of training aspects. The
cognitive model, often interpreted with problem-
KMIS2013-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing
486
solving strategies or exploration of environments
and situations, recalls the need for action combined
network of tutors and teaching materials (not
necessarily in a self-instruction form). The
constructivist model, aimed to the acquisition of
complex knowledge through social interaction with
peers, implies the organization of groups learning
facilitated by an energetic action of tutoring.
In the step of contents production we carry out
the planning and scheduling of actions. We also
define the organization and preparation of content
and teaching resources, which must meet the
usability and accessibility criteria, and the choice of
instruments communication and interaction in
relation to the approach chosen, the definition of
tutorial by teachers, tutors, support staff. It is
essential to be attention to the quality of the support
staff, which must have specific expertise in the
management, organizational, technological and
educational content.
Finally, in the Technological Design phase, we
define the construction of the e-learning system
starting from the Conceptual Design, which consists
in defining the communication architecture and
interface design. Here we define the technical
specifications for the accessibility and usability of
the platform. The design of the Virtual Learning
Environment (i.e. the e-learning system) provides, in
detail, the design of the tools of communication and
interaction to set up and implement the learning
environment and the identification of hardware and
software support (adaptive technologies and
assistive).
4.2 The Importance of Usability
Evaluation
In order to evaluate the usability of the system
(Granic, 2008), the analysis of user interaction
within system interface is based on walktroughs test,
guided by predefined steps. Due to the fact that
usability, as quality of use in context, is related to
the process of use, the usability evaluation is
accomplished by testing usability with real users,
which are the central focus of the entire system. It is
based on criteria expressed in terms of (ISO, 1998;
Macleod et al, 1997):
objective performance measurement of
effectiveness (the level of correctness and
completeness with which users achive
specified goals) and efficiency (the resources
expended in relation to the correctness and
completeness of goals achieved) in using the
system;
users’ subjective assessment in system usage.
These objectives stress the need to quantify
usability in terms of user performance and
satisfaction. They are measured by the extent to
which the intended goals of use are achived, the
resources that have to be expended in order to
achieve them, and the extent to which the user finds
the use of e-learning system acceptable. Such testing
is understood to be a combination of behaviour and
opinion based measures with some amount of
experimental control, usually chosen by an expert. It
affords information about how users (teachers or
students) use the system (in the creation of learning
objects and the interaction with the e-learning
system, respectively) and identifies the exact
problems with a particular interface (Granic, 2008).
4.3 Methodology and Schedule of the
Evaluation
Taking into account that the usability of a particular
system depends on the characteristics of the users,
the tasks and the purpose of the system, the concept
of usability is not simple and meaningful during the
design phase. Therefore indicators usability assume
empirical values during the design phase and can be
evaluated only during the use of the system.
Consequently, in order to understand the quality of
e-learning system designed we must evaluate the
effect of such a system in a specific situation and
operational work, for example considering a basic
scenario simplified, i.e. detailing a working scenario
consists of a sequence of typical tasks and actions
that a sample of users to perform. The objectives of
usability will be achieved if the potential of the
system will actually be used in an effective way
(with respect to a given level of performance of
users) is efficiently (with respect to a level of
subjective evaluation suitably specified). Thus, the
usability evaluation based on this scenario includes:
a preliminary questionnaire (Argentero et al,
2009);
an evaluation test using the technique of
usability walkthrough (Lewis et al, 1990);
a memo test (Granic et al, 2004);
a satisfaction questionnaire usability (Harper
and Norman, 1993; Lewis, 1995).
Users of evidence that will provide assessment
will form a sample as representative as possible of
the end users of the e-learning system under
consideration and will be tested with real tasks (i.e.
based on learning of a knowledge acquired regarding
a selected topic), under conditions as close as
possible to those of use of the real system
(environment class). When we carry out usability
evaluation, according to the assertions of Faulkner
(Faulkner, 2003) that shows the benefits of increased
sample size compared to five users of the
DevelopingInnovativee-LearningSolutions
487
Table 1: Usability attributes specification for evaluation.
Effectiveness
measurements
Efficiency
measurements
Satisfaction
measurements
Suitability % goals achived
during the
walthrough test
Time to
complete the
test
Questionnaire
rating scale
Learn-
ability
% goals achived
completing a task
from the
walthrough test
Time to
complete a
task
Questionnaire
rating scale
Error rate Errors /
perfomed actions
completing a task
from the
walthrough test
# of errors
completing a
task from the
walkthrough
test
Questionnaire
rating scale
Memor-
ability
% functions
memorized
successfully
Time to
complete the
memo test
Questionnaire
rating scale
Subjective
satisfaction
Questionnaire
rating scale
Overall
subjective
satisfaction
Questionnaire
rating scale
usability testing, the evaluation process must
therefore be conducted on a group of users of at least
10 students. The evaluator will meet with the group
and explain the purpose of the evaluation, presenting
an overview of usability evaluation. At the end of
this, the session will proceed with the analysis of the
results obtained that will begin to give a measured
“weight” to the usability of the designed system.
The evaluation session allow the acquisition of
the principal measures of usability system. Because
we consider tests made by the users, like all
empirical studies show, their evaluation requires a
theoretical framework for definitions and measures,
therefore quantifiable attributes are defined, as
shown in Table 1.
5 AN APPLICATION OF THE
e-LEARNING FRAMEWORK
In this section, as a sample application on the
proposed framework, we present the definition of a
Virtual Learning Environment in which the previous
conceptual analysis has highlighted the importance
of an element can provide the customization of
presentation of educational solutions. This
component aims to show skills training and
operating the different educational situations, trying
to provide an environment for each individual
student, in order to develop a direct interaction and
dedicated to the professional educator, and
presenting the necessary resources at the appropriate
time, which are adapted to different individuals. The
choice of learning strategy must reflect the specific
model of e-learning system which is expected to put
in place, as well as being functional learning style
model that seeks to promote. Given these premises,
we can model, in the first instance, our e-learning
system based on proposed Framework, as shown in
Figure 2 (Castellano et al, 2007).
Figure 2: Architecture of Virtual Learning Environment
based on proposed Framework.
The proposed approach is to design a Virtual
Learning Environment with the components for:
didactic planning and production of the
contents: it favours the development of the
process enriching it with in progress
evalutation;
distribution of the contents by Learning
Management System (LMS): it expose
mechanisms to measure, in progress, the
abilities that the student has acquired;
monitoring: it acquire and storage evaluation
data and trigger the control component if a
knowledge learning degree is in debt;
intelligent control: it can be waked up by the
monitoring component. Its task is to effect
the correct action of control in an intelligent
way. This module is able to processing of
cases never seen before.
The advantage of such solution is that we can
provide different integrated environments, where
coexist functionality for the production and
management of content, activities for interpersonal
communication, for the evaluation and tracking of
KMIS2013-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing
488
paths that fulfill the users in the use of the material,
and so on. This, as well as offering the possibility to
standardize the various components of the learning
environment (definite advantage to the user), it must
also meet the need of interoperability between the
different platforms, provided of course that each
feature is according to the international standard.
The use of adaptive and intelligent technologies
that add functionality to a targeted and precise
educational system, allows a specific design
approach, able to consider both communicational
and cognitive aspects and represents the functional
relationship that links these two concepts, able to
increase the benefits that these aspects can bring in
terms of learning and education, thanks to the way
they constantly check the level of knowledge of the
student, increasing transparency and personalization
of the learning environment.
6 CONCLUSIONS
The new ICT technologies in recent years have
allowed the systems of learning and education to
evolve into new forms of distance learning. In this
work we proposed a method for innovative e-
learning system based on the centrality of the studies
of human-computer interaction. In particular, we
explored the concept of usability, and we proposed a
design framework. Finally, it was presented a
sample application of e-learning system. Future
work will further deepening of the proposed
framework with the intention of developing new
mechanisms and functions related to the analysis of
usability in e-learning.
REFERENCES
Argentero, P., et al, 2009. Valutazione dell’usabilità di un
sistema per l’e-learning in ambito sanitario, Giorn.
Ital. Med. del Lav. ed Erg., Vol. 31, No. 1, A45-A51.
Castellano, M., et al, 2007. Neural Techniques to Improve
the Formative Evaluation Procedure, in Proceeding of
the 2007 IEEE Int. Conf. on Comp. Intelligence for
Measurements Systems and Applications, IEEE.
Faulkner, L., 2003. Beyond the five-user assumption:
benefits of increased sample sizes in usability testing,
in Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 35, 379-383.
Granic, A., 2008. Experience with usability evaluation of
e-learning systems, in Univ. Acc. Inf. Soc. 7:209-221.
Granic, A., et al, 2004. Usability Evaluation Methods for
Web-Based Educational Systems, in Proceedings 8th
ERCIM Workshop “User Interfaces For All”, 28-29
June 2004, Vienna, Austria.
Haoyu, W., Haili, Z., 2012. Basic Design Principles in
Software Engineering, in 4th International Conference
on Computational and Information Sciences (ICCIS).
Harper, B., Norman, K., 1993. Improving user
satisfaction: The questionnaire for user interaction
satisfaction Version 5.5, in Proc. of the 1st Annual
Mid-Atlantic Human Factors Conf., pp. 224-228.
ISO, 1998. Ergonomic requirements for office work with
visual display terminals, in ISO 241-11:1998(E).
Jacko, J.A., Sears, A., 2003. The Human-Computer
Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving
Technologies and Emerging Applications, Mahwah,
N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jara-Roa, D., et al, 2010. An adaptive Multi-Agent based
Architecture, in IEEE EDUCON Educ. Eng. 2010.
Jones, M.G., 1994. Visual information access: a new
philosophy for screen and interface design, in Imagery
and visual literacy: selected readings from annual
conference of the international visual literacy
association, Tempe, October 12-16, 264-272.
Lewis, C., et al, 1990. Testing a walktrough methodology
for theory based design of walk-up-and-use interfaces,
in Proceedings of ACM. CHI ’90 Conf., Seattle, WA.
Lewis, J., 1995. IBM computer usability satisfaction
questionnaires: Psychometric evaluation and
instructions for use, I. J. Hum. Comp. Int. 7(1), 57-58.
Macleod, M., et al, 1997. The MUSiC performance
measurement method, Behav. Inf. Tech. 16, 279-293.
McDonald, J., Schvaneveldt, R., 1988. The application of
user knowledge to interface design, in Guindon, R.,
Cognitive Science and its Applications for Human-
Computer Interaction, Hillsdale, NJ.
Mehlenbacher, B., et al, 2005. Usable E-Learning: A
Conceptual Model for Evaluation and Design, in
Proc. of HCI Int. 2005: 11th Int. Conf. HCI.
Murphy, F., 2004.
Introduction to user centred design
process, online url: http://infocentre.frontend.com/
infocentre/articles/introtoucd.html.
Notess, M., 2001. Usability, User Experience, and Learner
Experience, ACM eLearn Magazine, online url:
http://www.elearnmag.com.
Oztekin, A., et al, 2010. UseLearn: A novel check list and
usability evaluation method for eLearning system by
criticality metric analysis, in Int. Journal of Industrial
Ergonomics, 40 (2010), 455-469.
Penna, M.P., Stara, V., 2007. Il fallimento dell’e-learning:
perché si dovrebbe adottare l’approccio learner
centered, in Je-LKS Italian e-Learning Association
Journal, Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge
Society, Vol. 3, No. 2, 129-137.
Saberi, N., Ali Montazer, G., 2012. A New Approach for
Learners' Modeling in E-Learning Environment Using
LMSlogsAnalysis, in 6th National and 3rd Int. Conf.
of e-Learning and e-Teaching (ICELET 2012).
Shackel, S., Richardson, S., 1991. Human Factors for
Informatics Usability, Cambridge, UK, Univ. Press.
Squires, D., Preece, J., 1996. Usability and Learning:
Evaluating the Potential of Educational Software, in
Computers Education, 27(1): 15-22.
Tselios, N.K., et al, 2001. Evaluation of Distance-
Learning Environments: Impact of Usability on
Student Performance, in Int. Journal of Educational
Telecommunications, Vol. 7, No. 4, 355-378.
DevelopingInnovativee-LearningSolutions
489
