We have lift off

It ain't soup yet, but we're getting there.

http://homepages.nyu.edu/~rmp10

The final project has a link on that page, or go to: http://homepages.nyu.edu/~rmp10/writing

Don't Forget the Instructor's Needs

When designing an online learning Web site, there is more than just the learner's needs that we should consider. In ID, your role may be just as Web site designer and developer, which means both instructor and learner are "users" of your site.

I realized this the hard way, of course. The way I have my site laid out would work if I don't have a lot of material and learner reading can be limited to one or two pages without making the font too small. But since I had a lot of content (or am expecting the instructor to have more than 1-2 pages of content), my pages ended up being very long, requiring the learner to scroll down for miles. Even if I don’t plug all that info on one page – say I break it up into several sections – there is too much clicking forward and back going on. I could have a printer format available in every lesson, but that negates in some way the objective of online learning and making the process paperless to some degree. One of the reasons Jim's wiki works very well is that I don’t have to download it and save it, and then have to root around for the file when I need it. He also came up with an URL that was easy to remember and is accessible from any computer.

To rectify my problem, I have to lay out the heading and navigation buttons up top and leave the rest of the area for content. Of course, since I already submitted my design document and story board, that means I have to redo the project. Drats!

Freehanding It!

I have some strange codes imbedded on my revamped home page.

Under Estimating Graphic Design

I always underestimate how much tedious time it takes to develop even a simple Web site with just a few static pages. I start by staring at the wall for about an hour to see if I have the vision of how the page should be laid out, what colors to choose, how the site visitor and in this case the learner will use it. I research what other Web sites look like. Maybe get a few ideas that I can combine to develop my own design. In the interest of time, and this assignment on developing CSS - which I've never done before - I've sort of thrown this together.

I now know why I never pursued learning CSS in the past. It takes too much time, and in the past I suppose I never really saw the value of creating them when I can simply drag and draw the tables and cells, plug in the graphic elements, type in the text, link up pages, etc. This mentality is drawn from doing print graphics - brochures, maagazine/newspaper layouts.

Of course, resistance is futile. The problem with freehand drawing on a Web page is that the tables all move, the text wraps depending on the browser and monitor size and resolution. CSS resolves those problems but damn, I hate using fixed table grids and cells. I feel so restricted, so bound in.

So I really, really hate how this template looks.

Attractive things and emotions

Positive emotion yields creative thinking and with creative thinking, complex problems are more easily resolved. If aesthetics stimulate postive emotions, then it stands to reason attractive things are more easily learned. However, Norman does qualify his statement because emotions triggered by visceral and affective behavior, and the reflexive nature of human systems, are sensitive to education, training and cultural settings. Thus, what is appealing to one individual could be rejected by another, regardless of functionality. It is one reason manufacturers choose to offer up an array of choices for their products. Simply "one size doesn't fit all."

I don't know if Norman's book touches on how consumer behavior affects design and functionality. If you think about it, this is perhaps one area that seems to defy logic. Manufacturers aren't alone in the endeavour to design products that are both appealing and functional. Marketers follow consumer behavior patterns very carefully and are an instrinsic part of the new product development process, often with a single purpose -- to sell. A product may be appealing and functional, purely functional, or pretty and completely useless. But if it sells, it will get manufactured, and it will hit the stores even though shelf-span may be short-lived. (Think pet rocks.)

Competition and the fierce battle for consumer attention also plays a critical role in design decisions. By offering an array of choices intended to assault the senses, products designed to scream "buy me," the manufacturer hopes to garner that all-valuable slice of marketshare.

Illogical necessity is my third observation. Apple is credited for being among the top innovators of design. Its OS clearly demonstrates superiority over Windows and is certainly more intuitive and easier for the user to learn and use. Yet, why is it the Silicon Valley computer company hasn't garnered the majority of the personal computing market? Why haven't MACS been flying out the door with the same frenzy as its iPods? If MACs are so much easier to use, why hasn't it produced the postive emotion that should attract average PC users to buy this tool, which is supposed to make their lives easier. Most people who have bought PCs running on Windows OS are those who use them at work. They did it because of a necessity borne from something totally illogical. By default, workers and professionals needed to learn how to use these tools no matter how difficult and irritatingly complex because the job required it. Windows continues to dominate the market, and continues to give its consumers a painful learning curve. And it also continues to be a necessity. If you want to land a job working in an office or business environment, you need to not just know MS Windows and Office, but have strong expertise in these systems. Never mind that MACS continue to offer even simpler to use office computing tools with compatibility across OS platforms. It's PC skills that are an employment necessity.

In the context of America having evolved into a consumer market-driven society, where choice among all aesthetically appealing products produces emotional angst because one can't make a decision, I think eventually we will turn to functionality as well as affordability as our basis for decision-making. I haven't tested or researched this observation to any great length. But it will be a fascinating area to explore.

Reading Technology Applications in Education: The AHA Moment

I am beginning to see distinct differences in the study of instructional design versus educational communication and technology. ID seems to deal much more closely with distance learning, e-learning, the Web. It's so much more technology oriented. EdTech on the other hand, focuses much more on teaching and how technology can aid learning. I only have to line up the instructional subject matters covered:

ECT:

Theories of Learning
History of ID
Cognitive Science
Etc.

ID:
LMS - WebCT, Centra, MMBreeze, Blackboard
Databases
Needs Assessment - theories models, storyboarding, focus groups, surveys
HR and Corporate Training - Train the Trainer programs
Financial Management for ID - cost estimations, analysis, budgeting

I have yet to see somebody talk about platforms for delivery, the learning management systems, recommend subscriptions to OLDaily, or encourage participation in organizations such as ASTD. ID presumes you already know about ECT. That you've mastered this knowledge either in school or on the job. In other words, you can't move on to true ID, without first mastering ECT.

Backtracking
__________

The Design Challenge: Why This Article Fails To “Teach”

Point one: Norman’s article is dated. It’s old. As a result, I many of his statements are deduced to mere observations that I think the average adult (certainly anyone who is in the tech field) can make and conclude without having to read the article. To wit, the section on “How to do things wrong” needs no further reading. All one has to do is look around and listen to conversations at a cocktail party and everybody’s a freaking expert – great at pointing out what’s wrong without any real solutions to proffer.

Point two: Observations, as a result, don’t truly address the design challenge, which is the title of his article. It certainly not the design challenges faced by today’s society – the consequential human factors such as the rise in a variety of new disabilities – carpal tunnel syndrome, rotator cuff and tendonitis ailments. The design of electronics primarily targets the GenX and Echo Boomer markets. Most boomers over the age of 50 can’t read their cell phone message without having to dig for eyeglasses. With the introduction of the World Wide Web, we have had to address the challenges of our right to privacy, something not considered at the time or development. Who would have thunk that cell phones could be used to detonate bombs?

Point three: Some statements Norman has made seemed ambiguous, and as a result, can be argued. Take the statement: “Computers have the power not only to make everyday tasks easier, but to make them enjoyable as well.” This needs to be qualified. Are we talking about personal computers? Manufacturing computers? Medical technology? I won’t disagree in large part, but it really depends on what we are talking about here and who the learners are.

Age plays a dramatic role in learning computer systems. I can’t imagine my 74-year-old father agreeing that using a personal computer has made things easier for him. Tell that to the millions who’ve become unemployable because they lack the skills and training to use a personal computer. Is it really easier for the older executive who has had a secretary for several years taking his dictation and typing up his memos to type his own email? What’s wrong with using the telephone?

Final point: Time is of the essence. It is my opinion that the point of any written form of communication is to deliver a message and that message must be communicated quickly, succinctly, with no room for misinterpretation; otherwise, its objective – which is to communicate – would have failed. So if I read something, in order for me to understand it, to grasp its meaning – to “get it” – the learning must occur, not in the second, third or fourth reading, but in the first, instantaneously, and without further explication. Without having to be an academic scholar.

On the Other Hand… User Centered Design Makes Sense

There is a logical sequence to Norman’s elaborating of the main principles of user-centered design, the implications and the suggestions he offers. Interestingly, his voice changes from scholarly writing to a more simplistic, direct and to the point style that I did not have to reread the chapter (except for purposes of writing my reaction) that it is almost hard to believe this was written by the same author.

While Norman makes sound arguments for user-centered design, there is one side thought that popped into my head as I read his suggestion: “when all else fails, standardize.” Ha! The only driving motivation to standardize is money. Microsoft has standardized office computing tasks and in so doing has monopolized the industry. That’s why Apple OS’s and Windows will never become synonymous. For that to happen, one company will have to buy out the other and kill it.

Amazing!

I checked out what everyone has done, and in one week I am amazed how much ground has been covered. It looks like nearly everyone has a grasp of how DW works and create pages -- creatively appealing ones at that. I have a lot of catching up to do.

My work thus far: http://homepages.nyu.edu/~rmp10

I'd Rather Be With Y'all But...

So Sunday was the shindig at the Club Quarters Midtown, Monday was dinner at the President's penthouse (awesome view and gorgeous apt. but I was far too tired to enjoy), tonight is the shindig at the NYTimes hqtrs, tomorrow Pres. Sexton speaks at Kimmel, Friday is the Princeton Club. It is not the whirlwind of parties you think it is, it's very hard work. I feel like I'm a finalist in "The Apprentice" with all the stress that comes with putting together a five-day event. However, instead of getting a highly paid position with Trump, I get to keep mine at NYU. :-/

So here's my design document idea anyway ... I'm going to put together a simple e-learning site to teach a writing course. It will called "Write Tight." It's about how to write more concisely but with grace and style. There will be 10 lessons (10 days total).

I tend to do things ass-backwards, which is designing the Web site first, then telling you what will be in it. So what I'm envisioning will be very rough. By the time I finish the site, it will have more or less the things I'm planning on including.

Home Page -- Welcome
Course Syllabus
Instructions

Lessons
Readings
Assignments -- identifying mistakes and editing verbose paragraphs

The Algonquin Lounge (Forum/discussion board)

The Teacher's Office (Chatroom during office hours - by appointment)

Final Exam
Rewrite three articles

About Me
My bio and photo

Contact Me
Contact info

This is probably more ambitious that I can produce in the next 2.5 weeks. We'll see.