patterns: "structural and behavioral features that improve the 'habituality' of something"
Alexander, C. (1977)
The author introduces us to a new 'pattern language' that he devised to represent architectural problem solving.
Each pattern has the format of picture (shows examplar of the pattern); introductory paragraph(set the context); diamonds (beginning of problem); headline (essence of problem); problem (more detailed description of pattern & problem); solution. Such format serves the purpose of presenting connection between patterns and present problem & solution that are generic enough to be applied to wide number of cases but still hold essential information for practical application. He makes an analogy to research process himself, but it is interesting how his organization of concepts are similar to typical guidelines presented in applied research such as in instructional design.
While in recent times, what with all technology that is available, we try to present symbolic information in more visual representation, he actually attempted to do the other, whereby presenting pictoral/visual information in a symbolic manner. Perhaps this is related to Peirce's conception of Icons, the likeness or the 'pictorial ideas', which he describes as containing no information. In order to present the added information (indices and symbols), Alexander chooses the most symbolic representation of mankind, textual representation.
In explaining his purpose of devising new pattern language, Alexander claims that "the languages which people have today are so brutal, and so fragmented, that most people no longer have any language to speak of at all". It is rather difficult to accept such claim since language is none other than arbitrary assignment of object(meaning) - representation that it is constantly evolving according to the community that share it. The very language that people speak 'today' might be brutal and fragmented but this is no indication that it is limiting people's ability to communicate but could also be a reflection of the contemporary culture of communication (and their needs). This fallacy is almost like a deja-vu which we saw from the sad example of unsuccessful attempts at creating a universal language.
on the metaphor of 'information architecture'
the article brings to mind the term 'IA' as used for information & interaction design, which implies that we are borrowing the rules of practice from the field of architecture. This accoutns for the fact that we are designing to promote certain behaviors (thus accounting for the interaction design) but what we are missing is the account for information design. while behavior is the 'end' for architectural design, behavior (i.e. interaction) is only the means to and 'end' in information & interaction design in that we are trying to promote certain interactions/behaviors in order for the users to arrive at certain information/knowledge. This also relates to the 'object' that is being represented with the 'pattern language' as proposed by Alexander in comparison to the 'object' (or the nature of the object) that is being represented in educational material.
on 'poetry of language'
Alexander speaks of the 'dense' nature of poetry, whereby he advocates the need for such density in the pattern language. On a similar note, Eisner speaks of representing educational research in forms of art or poetry. While the idea of poetry is so appealing with it's creativity and potential for multiple interpretations, it cautions the use of poetry exactly for that reason, specifically the notion of poetic license. What poetic or artistic license allows is exactly the researcher's worst nightmare, interpretation without any explanation on the perspective that it is grounded in.
reusable patterns/resable components/object-oriented
Saffert, D. (2007)
interface reveals designer's intentions in regards to "how people can engage with a product and how that product should respond"
Control elements have standard feedback mechanism (which is often overlooked in web designs).
latches???
widgets: building blocks for applications/devices
function of icons: can be too abstract to denote functions, and if space permits, are replaced with text.
Peirce, C. (1894)
*****************************
The experiment manipulated
- intrinsic load by displaying simulation on 1 (HC) or 2 screens (LC)
- extraneous load by using symbolic only, icon + symbolic representation; displaying controls next to or far away from representation; displaying immediate data point or all data point on the graph
The result shows that both manipulation proved effective but slightly different for learners with different level of prior knowledge as measured by general science knowledge.
LC was effective for all learners but especially high prior knowledge learners (probably disadvantaged low prior knowledge learners due to split-attention effect). The manipulation used for intrinsic load is debatable for it might seemingly appear to reduce intrinsic load, the demand still exists when all information needs to be integrated in the second simulation, in other words, the split-attention effect.
Manipulation of extraneous load helped both learner types, especially low prior knowledge learners. It is a shame, however, that three different measures of reducing extraneous load was used and we cannot readily recognize which design principle helped reduce extraneous load, limiting interpretation of the result.
Expertise reversal effect was also observed whereby low prior knowledge learners demonstrated different performance only in LC condition, high prior knowledge learners demonstrated reversal of effect in both LC and HC condition. What is interesting, is that compared to most expertise reversal effect studies that report reversal effect as measured by difference in 'instructional efficiency', this studied observed the effect from raw test score.
No comments:
Post a Comment