The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
Interactive Case Study Experiences Applied to the Managed Learning Environment Jim Gallagher, Napier University - U.K.
Abstract Experience in building interactive multimedia case studies has been examined and the lessons from this have been applied to the more extensive creation of a Managed Learning Environment, based on WebCT. WebCT serves three distinct groups: student, lecturer and institution. However, a problem arises when the institution, in terms of its administration, fails to see beneath the surface of the innovative application. If for example, it views the inherent communication tools as control mechanism it will minimise application benefits rather than maximise them. Experience obtained from building interactive multimedia applications and from data obtained from two years of MBA classes highlighted the intrinsic difficulties and requirements demanded from such a construct. Unless supported, lecturers will only comply with administration to the minimum acceptable level. It became apparent that support of the lecturer had to be nurtured if successful applications were to be developed. All too often it is assumed that computers are replacements for lecturers. That the system can substitute for the lecturer. The reality is that WebCT augments and enriches the learning process but in itself is dependent on the lecturer for its efficacy. Furthermore, the promise of cost efficiencies associated with computer based delivery are likely to prove more illusory than real.
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
About the Author Jim Gallagher, Napier University - U.K. Director of the Centre for Case Study Research and Development at Napier University. Teaching Fellow Jim teaches primarily on Strategic Management and International Business courses on Napier's Post Graduate MBA and Msc programmes and is actively involved in developing new teaching methods for these courses. He is a Executive Director of the European Case Clearing House (ECCH) and consulting editor for Limelight Publishing (Web Cases). His paper-based cases have won a number of awards from both the ECCH and the European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD). He is a judge for Scottish Enterprise's Scottish Case Writing Competition and he produced cases for use on the Advanced Management Programme Scotland (AMPs). His cases are also published in a number of text books. His interests and research activities lie in the research, development and production of interactive, multimedia case studies and teaching-packages. He has published widely through international conference in these areas and is currently involved in developing interactive diagnostic tools for use with self learning packages.
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
Interactive Case Study Experiences Applied to the Managed Learning Environment Many universities are adapting their course communication, delivery and control mechanisms to portals such as WebCT, a managed learning environment (MLE), in an attempt to respond to market demand and to gain economies of scale and scope. However, with MLE the devil truly is in the detail. Success may only be achieved if the specificity of demand from each of the key underpinning elements of the MLE are addressed and associated costs and revenues are harmonised realistically. It is however, a hard fact of life that advancement requires money. Computers, highspeed DSL, modems, Internet connections, content materials – none of these come free. As a financial burden they fall primarily on the shoulders of the institution. The genesis for this study was founded in the desire to build an interactive case study, which would more effectively engage the students and thus enhance their learning, a fairly innocuous idea. Unfortunately, it grew legs and has not yet stopped running. Paper based case studies with all their limitations seemed an ideal medium for exploring the potential for applying new technology to an old problem – how do you create and hold the interest and attention of the student whilst creating in the student the desire to explore and expand his own knowledge base? Interactive case studies, which would add to students' understanding and enjoyment of their academic studies, seemed to be a possible solution. Traditionally, on MBA courses, the paper based case study method would be used as the vehicle to develop student learning and understanding as the case study facilitates the marriage of theory and practice. Having a guest speaker from the case company to address the class would often augment this. The objective then, when developing an interactive case study, was to structure it so that it addressed crucial areas of:
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
Figure 1
-
Level
(undergraduate;
postgraduate;
post-experience
etc.)
- complexity (stage of the course it is intended for - introduction or final examination
case.)
- currency (what is the shelf life of a case - one year or five years?) - target group ( accountants; general business students or behaviourists etc.) - Focus (financial analysis, leadership, sales analysis, marketing strategy etc.) - Outcomes ( what is to be achieved by using the case - academic; social; etc.?) Figure 1. shows the traditional case study method, which is then enhanced by the addition of multimedia techniques. These techniques appear to offer a tremendous potential for, not only achieving the objectives of case development but augmenting them. Consequently, surveying and interviewing the MBA student body undertook examination and evaluation of the potential of this new application. Student questionnaire responses (taken over a two year period) indicated that the application of multimedia techniques with their inherent flexibility, appeared to offer the best potential for ameliorating some of the problems associated with the use of
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
case studies e.g. not all students learn at the same rate, nor do they start from the same educational base - in the area of business policy in particular, they are likely to come from a range of disciplines, nor are all students as ready to contribute to class discussion.
The Student Controlled Environment For students, the important feature of the interactive case study was the capacity to control the pace and direction of learning. The system, as it began to emerge, aimed to test all students whilst allowing each student to progress at his/her own pace. It aimed to promote incremental development of problem solving skills and increase the effectiveness of learning. Students should learn (partly by doing) to organise their own work patterns and determine the means to overcome the difficulties associated with solving complex, unstructured problems. The mere adaptation from paper to text on screen would not achieve these. However, where it would be fair to say that the multimedia case study attempts to use computers to do what cannot be done either on the printed page or with blackboard and chalk. It must also be said that there can be little substitute for the symbiotic development of ideas and solutions generated by students in a lecturer led, class based, case discussion. There is no definitive solution to any given case study. There are though, a number of routes to a number of possible solutions. The interactive case has the advantage that it can more effectively present to the student what the case study company actually did and the rationale that lay behind its decisions whilst still allowing the student to explore other options. Traditionally, students are confronted by the strictures of a predetermined teaching programme, which is usually followed sequentially. In interactive multimedia applications they can choose the areas on which they wish to concentrate and review theory and its practical applications in a less stressful environment.
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
From Case Study to Course Module Writing the paper based case study is one thing taking it to an interactive, multimedia application is quite another. A good case study has to be sexy. It has to have a hook with which to grab the reader. The same can be said of multimedia applications but all too often this is where they fall down. To put it simply: “[Multimedia applications are] like sex. When all is said and done more is said than done.” Although the above mis-quotes Heller, it allows, nevertheless, an insight into the current status in the development and production of multimedia applications. Simply put, sex sells! Sex grabs the imagination! It offers the allure of hidden promises and unfulfilled desires! However, when sex or, more properly, sexiness is applied as the vehicle for promoting and selling multimedia applications it inevitably falls short in delivering its promises. It fails to achieve the consummation of the marriage between platform and content. It often fails, once used, to fire the soul. It fails to maintain a lasting relationship with the user. What the user ends up with, more often than not, is multimedia applications dressed to kill, all ‘glitz' and no content. If multimedia applications are to deliver their promise then content rather than platform must be the primary driving force. It must fully address the end user's needs and wants. It must provide substance. Figure 2 shows the interactive case study and its component parts. Direct links to the underlying theory are incorporated into the system. This allows the student to either check the answer or reprise the theory base. Essentially, the student builds solutions to fit the complexity of the area under examination accessing directly into the script, lexicons and diagnostic tools. In the same way truly interactive tutorial material is designed in which students receive feedback on answers, which incorporate explanations for errors and directions for
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
remedial work.
Issue 1 – October 2004
There is also considerable scope for 'what if' modelling and
competitive decision- making. The Interactive Multimedia Case Study Flow Chart
Figure 2
From the flow chart it can be seen that the key elements to be built are: case study
video, scripting
script
video, sound, graphic design, animation, virtual reality interface, hypertext links
lexicon
video, dictionaries of theory, tutorials, self assessment
solution
video, applied theories, system interrogation
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Diagnostics
Issue 1 – October 2004
applied learning by competing against other industry competitors
At first sight it appears to be a very small step from building an interactive case study to adapting the constituent parts and lessons learnt to the creation of an operational course module. Essentially the bulk of the work had been done when the lexicons and diagnostic tools were constructed. However, the coalitions of interests, which constitute a course curriculum, present another aspect, which has to be catered for.
An Apparent Coalition of Interests Developing the interactive case study meant addressing the content tools in figure 3. However, a simple catchall such as ‘content lesson' does not do justice to the problems confronted when developing an MLE. Being informed by the institution that it had decided to deliver its programmes through the portal of WebCT elicited from the lecturer a mixed response. On the one hand there was the outward show of support for such a new and promising innovative, delivery platform. On the other, there was the façade, which masked the fear associated with change. Change, which is focused, delineated, and well implemented, attracts support. However, change, ill construed, may only result in lip service from those who have to run with it. Like many other innovations, the danger is that change requires a coalition of people in organisations to support it. The bedrock upon which WebCT rests is depicted in Figure 3 and comprises four elements:
Communication
Tools,
Content
Tools,
Evaluation
Tools,
and
Administration. In essence this caters for a coalition of three user groups: the lecturer, the student and the institution, each of whom has both a shared agenda and a unique one.
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
Figure 3 ( adapted from Columbia State Community College : Faculty Instructional Training Center
On the face of it, WebCT comprises a network of elements each of which has specific attributes (See Figure 4 ). These elements however, should be viewed both separately in their static form and in conjunction where their fusion is greater than the sum of their parts. However, expectations, of what WebCT can provide differ for each user groups
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
Figure 4
PowerPointed To Death For the lecturer the instruction was given that lecture notes should be loaded on to WebCT and where possible PowerPoint slides should be used. To this end PowerPoint templates were provided for the lecturers to use. Unfortunately, having surveyed the last two years' MBA classes it became apparent that the students were PowerPointed to death. Bullet points are fine but they need to be explained and the nuances and linkages drawn out. The conscientious lecturer does this but it is all too easy to rely on the slide to provide the educational input rather than the more © 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
demanding discursive interchange within a classroom. Tufte (2003) rails against PowerPoint for diluting the sensible transfer of ideas between presenter and audience. Likewise, being advised to include tests and quizzes where possible is a fatuous instruction. Again, having surveyed and field-tested these elements with MBA classes it was apparent that what the students sought was not simply a test with yes/no answers. Rather, they sought fully interactive testing which scored them; provided answers; and linked back to appropriate theory. Moreover, they wanted these in a variety of styles e.g. multiple choice, essay analysis, crosswords etc. and they wanted them both, timed, and timeless as well as printable.
The Administration and the Learning Curve For the lecturer climbing the learning curve of multimedia interactivity meant a substantial time investment in mastering software applications such as Dreamweaver (web page construction), Fireworks (graphics), Flash (movies) and Javascript (tests, quizzes, crosswords, drag and drop). The institution provided the lecturer with one and a half hours training on WebCT but less on the tools necessary for developing the desired prerequisite of interactivity and its embedded accessibility. Figures 2 and 4 provide the bones of the structure. In the case of the institution structure tended to mean communication systems, information systems, and control systems whereby they instructed what was to be done such as, lecturers would put their notes on WebCT or, students like quizzes so these should also be incorporated. However, they did not say how to do these. It would seem that having the broad-brush idea was enough. The fine detail was to be supplied by the lecturers. Elements such as e-mail contact, chat rooms, discussion or bulletin boards, surveys etc. can be well supported by the administration and their technical support system. This is an area, which must work effectively. There is nothing more debilitating to the new innovative application than falling at the first hurdle if users are unable to access the system. The system must therefore be robust. It must also be easy to navigate which means the architecture must be clear and unambiguous (See figure 5).
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
If the innovative application is to work then who is the driver becomes a crucial question? Should the Administration and its technical support with its desire for flexible delivery of its courses and cost and control efficiencies hold sway or should the lecturer be the driving force? The contention here is that Administration must respond to the changing dynamics of its market place and therefore, rightly controls the delivery system. But the other elements of, learning, content, and process lies more succinctly within the realm of the lecturer. Clearly, not all lecturers will be willing or capable of developing the skills and techniques necessary to bring to fruition an application that achieves the outcomes of their modules or courses and be tailored to student usage, which allows learning (its time and sequence) to be controlled by the user - the student. In this instance Administration should rightly set minimum standards and provide templates of what should as a minimum be expected. However, these should not be written in stone. They should not become the end they should be the start. Flexibility and creativity can be too easily stifled by the strictures of an emergent bureaucracy set on controlling all aspects of the nascent application.
Interactive Constructs Developing interactive materials requires more than simply transferring notes onto a delivery platform. If this approach is taken then we run the risk of merely creating a superannuated encyclopaedia. We run the risk of focusing on the singer not the song. Computers do not teach lecturers do. Figure 5 gives some idea of the potential relationships between the content, process, system and learning
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
Figure 5
The System: should be robust, easily navigated, simple to control and fully interactive. It should facilitate the transfer of knowledge without requiring the user to develop computing software skills. The Process: The process elements may be viewed as either soft or hard. The soft elements are those, which the user should have some control over e.g. the pace of learning, the route which best suits his/her needs and the ability to accommodate the individual’s own self learning style. The hard process elements acknowledge the requirements to produce problem based learning processes, user understanding of the process dynamics, and the process interface when developing applied theory. In reality it is probably the case that the hard elements far outweigh the soft ones, which may in reality be more perceived than real. Content: should be layered one level on top of another. User progression from one layer to the next, to some extent will be dictated by a combination of both the soft and hard process elements for example, a user may decide that his/her knowledge base is © 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
sufficient enough in a given area that work in this area can safely be omitted. In this instance he/she has made the decision not the system. However, at a later stage the system testing will assess whether he/she has the knowledge and understanding to adequately ignore this section and on the basis of this recommend appropriate action. This can either be done by the system setting tutorial assessment on that area alone, before progression is sought, or later when random tutorial selections are made. In any event, the system will assess content understanding. Learning: is predicated on the system having the appropriate pedagogical input, which is both flexible and adaptable. It should underpin the system content and should be adapted to user participation. Time: is often forgotten in the development of CAL applications. Time is needed by the user to learn the system, its navigation, its processes, and its interface. Understanding the impact of time is crucial in construction phase of these applications. For example, it is unlikely to be appropriate to simply take the sequence of learning, as indicated by a curriculum and superimpose the curriculum content on to a CD ROM. The implication may be that the applications’ design is reversed from what is currently the norm. The apparent trend of building an application because we have a platform – WebCT - would be subsumed by the necessity of providing quality content geared to satisfying the end users' needs.
The key, therefore, to the development and application of MLE is an emphasis on quality, but quality not just in the delivery platform and structure but also in content and outcomes. All too often the subject content is undemanding, inexpertly explained and apparently without a clear concept of learning outcomes. In these cases multimedia applications may be seen simply as a means of adding ‘glitz' to a teaching programme through the creation of a more colourful and animated delivery system. If, on the other hand, the aim is to increase user knowledge and understanding then the quality of the content is crucial. Where there is an emphasis on content quality, manipulation of multimedia elements can achieve the integration of different content
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
components more effectively than is possible on the printed page. This marriage of content elements should be a major target in the process development of multimedia applications. New applications could, therefore, be examined in the cold light of acceptable pedagogical and user interface dimensions (Reeves and Harmon 1995) e.g. Pedagogical
User Interface
epistemology
ease of use
underlying psychology
navigation
experiential value
screen design
value of errors etc.
media integration
If these dimensions were applied as criteria against which to measure user satisfaction or effectiveness then they would allow some measure of success or failure for multimedia applications to emerge. The development of thorough conceptual understanding also involves a series of learning phases (G.J. MacFarlane 1995) preparing to tackle the relevant material, acquiring the necessary information, relating it to previous knowledge, transforming it through establishing organisational frameworks within which to interpret it, and so developing personal understanding (CSUP Report 1992). If this process is to work effectively, teaching -however it is delivered- must be designed to support these phases of learning. The required support can be described in terms of necessary teaching functions, which to some extent parallel, but also overlap, the phases of learning. These functions include: orientating
-setting
the
motivating
-
presenting
- introducing new knowledge within a clear, supportive structure
clarifying
- explaining with examples and providing remedial support
pointing
scene up
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
and
relevance,
explaining evoking
and
what
is
sustaining
required interest
The Internet Business Review
elaborating
-
introducing
Issue 1 – October 2004
additional
material
to
develop
more
detailed
knowledge consolidating - providing opportunities to develop and test personal understanding and confirming - ensuring the adequacy of the knowledge and understanding reached. The lecturer sets the outcomes for his course or module. In doing this he is aware of student needs. More and more students for example, have part time employment so the multimedia application must be capable of being exercised when the student has the time. This means that the learning element must be flexible, adaptive and participative in that it fits the individual needs of the student. Furthermore, the content upon which this learning is based must be capable of building on itself so the student has the choice at what level he will enter. This may be ascertained by accessing the testing and assessment elements. The simple task of developing a flashcard (crib card) system would be relatively easy in card or paper format or for that even transferred to slides. The intellectual process is bedded in defining the terms and definitions used. These in turn are based on the direction the lecture material has taken. However, developing an interactive flashcard system, which could be used on WebCT, proved more demanding. It required the same academic subject input but in addition a good understanding of the javascript which would create the interactivity as well as the ability to allow a print out of the terms and definitions. This latter was demanded by the students. Finally, the process itself can be viewed as both soft and hard. In terms of the soft the student dictates the pace of learning, the route he takes in the system and the style of learning he will adopt. On the other hand the lecturer dictates the reality by constructing the hard elements where theory is used in anger and where problems are not simply answered by yes/no answers. If the necessary support systems are not provided for the lecturer then few will display the goodwill or commitment to expanding the learning environment. The result will be an application, which operates at the minimum of its potential rather than it's maximum. It is unlikely to be successful if lecturers don't understand what they can do with it. It will be a system that controls rather than teaches.
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
Conclusion Change is inevitable and the pressures from a more demanding technological based, student body requires radical change from the education suppliers. In essence WebCT attempts to pass over the sequence of learning to the user supported by communication tools which free learning from the confines of the classroom. But, without guided experience success in terms of learning is far from assured (Zimmerman 1989). For the administration the MLE holds the promise of more efficient use of resources at a time when demand for its products is growing but competition is fierce. However, this efficiency objective may be more illusory than real. Customers respond to value and quality. If the product is merely ‘glitz’ then there will be few repeat purchases and reputation and revenue will suffer. The solution may be to educate the educators. Invest in training, develop the skill bases of the lecturers and take a holistic approach rather than an efficiency/financial one. In the end, the true value of designing a MLE is to preserve the immediacy of the academic discourse while facilitating its transformation into accessible media (Bennet et al 2003). Administration should aim to maximise potential not minimise it. WebCT is an investment in the future and as such its full capability should be sought. It will not replace the lecturer. It will not even be a substitute for a good lecturer. Nor will it necessarily lead to cost efficiencies. It may simply have a different function. A function geared to facilitating a richer learning environment. An environment moreover, that should lead to a higher teaching quality and a deeper learning experience.
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
The Internet Business Review
Issue 1 – October 2004
Bibliography Bennett, S., Hewitt, J., Kraithman, D. & Britton, C. (2003), ‘Making Chalk and Talk Accessible', Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Universal usability ( Vancouver, Canada ), ACM Press, New York CSUP Report 1992 CSUP Report (1992) Teaching and Learning in an Expanding Higher Education System, Committee of Scottish University Principals Working Party (Obtainable from COSHEP, St Andrew House, 141 West Nile Street, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.) Gallagher, J.G., Stevenson, D.P., & Fordyce, E. (2003) Evaluation of the routes, methods, and applications associated with the development of remote Marketing and Corporate Strategy interactive learning applications for CD Rom and World Wide Web. Proceedings of the Applied Business Research Conference, Acapulco MacFarlane, G.J., (1995) Future Patterns of Teaching And Learning Heriot-Watt University Edinburgh Scotland, UK. Reeves and Harmon (1995) Sorel Reisman, Multimedia Computing, Preparing for the 21 Century. Idea Group Publishing Harrisburg, USA Tufte, E.R. (2003) The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint, Graphics Press LLC, heshire, Connecticut
© 2004 The Internet Business Review
