Listening to Teachers’ Needs: Human-centred Design for Mobile Technologies in Higher Education

28.03.2018Renée Schulz, PhD Defense 1
Listening to Teachers’ Needs:
Human-centred Design for Mobile
Technologies in Higher Education
PhD Defense – Renée Schulz
21st March 2018
University of Agder
Grimstad, Norway
renee.schulz@uia.no

Agenda
Introduction and Problem Description
Research Methodology
Use Case Description
The Dynamic Learning Task Concept
DynQ System Development
Summary: Main Contributions, Limitations & Future Directions

Info slide
Set of icons to display:
• (Main) methods used in the content shown on a slide
• Addressed research questions on a slide
• Corresponding paper(s)
• Icons explained in the next section
GProgress bar by sections:
(light grey)

Introduction and Problem Description

Introduction
• Potential to support learning/ teaching approaches
• Potential to support the creation of innovative pedagogical approaches
• Complex relation between content, pedagogy and technology
528.03.2018
• Rapid development of technology (mobile
& wearable)
• Rapid changes in technology not reflected
in education settings
• UiA’s strategy includes future-oriented
learning and teaching
• Strong connection and influence between
learning materials, tools and quality of
teaching and learning
Renée Schulz, PhD Defense

Introduction: The Teacher‘s View
• Technology is used and usage increases in higher
education
• Teachers are important stakeholders alongside students
• Teachers play an important role in technology integration
28.03.2018 6
• Research on teacher training on how to use technology in
teaching exists
• Limited research on how to develop such technologies
• More research on teachers‘ needs is needed
• Why do teachers choose to integrate one tool, but not
another?
• Usefulness of available tools varies

Introduction: Tasks
• What motivates teachers?
 If their teaching approaches are supported
 To see the students engaged in the learning content
• There is not much technology that supports pedagogical
approaches
• Learning tasks are used in many different ways, in
different settings, locations and with different intentions
28.03.2018 7
How can this important teaching approach including learning-task
processes be digitally supported in a manner that also incorporates the
potential of more recent technological developments?

The Problem Space
28.03.2018 8Renée Schulz, PhD Defense

Research Hypothesis
Teachers frequently integrate learning tasks into their teaching, but they lack
sufficient digital technology support for this central teaching approach.
28.03.2018 9
• Teaching approaches that include learning tasks are frequently used
• Technology exists, but does not always support the teachers’ approaches

Research Questions
RQ1) Which processes are needed to design a usable digital ICT solution that
supports teachers in their teaching processes?
1a) How can the HCD be used to address teachers’ needs in depth?
1b) How can recent technology be integrated as useful and
supportive teaching technology?
1c) How to motivate teachers to integrate recent digital
technology into their teaching processes?

Research Questions
2a) Which concepts are needed to support tasks in a digital technology
solution?
• 2a) part 1 Which task structures need to be analyzed and integrated into a digital solution?
• 2a) part 2 Which task processes can be supported?
2b) How to design engaging and motivating learning tasks?
2c) What can be learned from challenging courses that do not follow the
typical classroom setting about how to design learning task processes?
RQ 2) How can learning tasks be supported through digital technology?

Research Ethics
• NSD - Norwegian Centre for Research Data has given clearance for this research
• Ethics in this project are concerned with user involvement (due to the HCD) in multiple countries, mainly
Norway and Uganda,
• and the use of gamification:
• ethical considerations because of game elements in an educational context,
• and the role of the teacher in gamified environments.
C

Methodology
The following slides mainly address RQ1.
RQ1) Which processes are needed to design a usable digital ICT solution that supports
teachers in their teaching processes?
RQ1 is answered through it’s 3 sub-questions.
1a) 1b) 1c)

Methodology: Used Process  Human-centred Design
C

C
RQ 1a) How can the HCD be used to
address teachers’ needs in depth?
[DIN EN ISO 9241-210: 2010.]

C
• Mixed-methods approach: Combination of qualitative and
quantitative methods
• Gathering of teachers’ needs
• Analysis of requirements
• Teachers were involved in every iteration
• Especially the field research enabled deeper understanding of the
teaching context

Used Methods within the HCD
HCD Process
 Literature Review
 Questionnaires
 Interviews
 Field Research
 Focus Group

Papers according to HCD Phases and Iterations

Methodology: HCD with added game analysis

Why this use case?
• Teacher have to be willing to cooperate
• Course has to run at least yearly (for minimum 2 rounds of testing)
[Note: these markers are indicators, in some cases it might be different.]

Use Case: Course Structure
G

G

Teacher

Use Case: Snowboard „How to slide“

G
• 6 parallel groups
• Beginner & advanced of each discipline
• Alpine Skiing, Telemark Skiing, Snowboard
• Planned and spontaneous tasks
• With a re-occuring structure

The Dynamic Learning Task Concept

Why Learning Tasks? The connection to the teacher.
• How can we support teachers? What motivates them to use technology?
• How to design a tool that motivates teachers to use it?
• Many factors contribute to teachers‘ motivation [Paper A, B]
• Central: interaction with the students & seeing them solve tasks/problems [Paper D]
• Analysed supportable teaching processes:
1. learning task creation,
2. distribution and
3. feedback
BA

The Underlying Concept from a Teacher‘s Perspective
D

The following slides.... RQ2
The following slides mainly address RQ2.
RQ 2) How can learning tasks be supported through digital technology?
RQ2 is answered through it’s 3 sub-questions.
2a) 2b) 2c)

Towards a Concept: Problem Analysis and Solution Analysis

Educational Task Analysis “Assignments”
Structure (analysed from diverse teaching fields)
• Task title,
• Overview, short description,
• Long or complete description,
• Resources (links, books, pages, papers, material, equipment. . . ),
• People connected to a task (if necessary),
• Location (if necessary: laboratory, classroom, outdoors, etc.),
• Time for task completion (if needed),
• Level of difficulty (alpine specific: level of terrain difficulty), and
• Rewards for completion (optional: credits, grade percentages, etc.).
D

Educational Task Analysis “Assignments”
Processes
• Teacher creates tasks (beforehand, spontanously)
• Teacher adapts tasks based on a variety of circumstances
• Teacher distributes tasks
• Students receive task(s)
• Students carry out task(s)
• (Teacher observes and interacts with students, interferes with tasks)
• (Students get direct feedack from the teacher)
• Students hand-in the task results
• Teacher evaluates the task results
• Teacher adapts tasks if necessary
D

Zone of Proximal Development
• Tasks have to be within the ZPD
• Boredom vs anxiety
• Assisted vs unassisted
• Teacher/ peers as more capable other
• Tools can help to be the more capable other
Lev Vygotsky (1896 – 1934)
[Picture source: Wikipedia]
Educational Task Analysis “Known Concepts”: ZPD

Educational Task Analysis “Known Concepts”: ZPD + Flow
ZPD and Flow
• Flow: optimal experience
• Tasks should allow students to stay in
their flow zone
• Flow usually happens unassisted
• Through quick guidance within the ZPD
•  fallback into the flow zone
Lev Vygotsky (ZPD) &
Mihály Csíkszentmihályi (Flow Theory)

Educational Task Analysis: Case of Alpine Skiing
G[G. Harman, Den alpine lærevei - Alpin
skiteknikk (In Norwegian).
Gransherad: HarmanSki., 2010.]

[M. Hervey, Alpine Technical
Manual - Skiing and Teaching
Skills, Second
Edition. Professional Ski
Instructors of America,
American Snowsports
Education Association
Education Foundation,
Lakewood, Colorado, 2007.]

Game Task Analysis “Quests”
• Games use tasks successfully
• Even boring tasks seem to work in games
• Many games feature complex, personalized tasks which cannot only be solved in one way.
• How do games reach this level of interesting tasks and how are they structured; and how
do they work?
E

Game Task Structure Analysis (17 Games)

Game Task Processes Analysis Example
[World of Warcraft: Warlords of Draenor]

Combined Structure from Learning Tasks and Game Tasks
• From both insights (learning tasks and game tasks)
• The structure for tasks in the DynQ core concept was
outlined as:
• Trigger(s)/Dependencies
• Sensor Logging
• Feedback
• The structure supports the needed processes for task
creation, distribution, and feedback

The Dynamic Questing (DynQ) Concept

Prototype Development: UI and Affordances
D

Prototyoe Development: Change of UI and Affordances
28.03.2018Renée Schulz 49

Prototype Testing in Hemsedal 1
G

Prototyoe Development: Change of UI and Affordances
28.03.2018Renée Schulz 51

Situated Prototype Simulation (Testing 2 in Hemsedal)
G

Prototype 3 Database Proof of Concept (firebase)

Application Architecture

System Architecture Overview of DynQ
G

• Concept testing – focus group (teachers from a sports faculty)
• Understanding the concept took time
• Challenging to come up with task dependencies
• But quite positive about future possibilities to use such a system
• Eager to come up with their own use case tasks
Concept „Challenge“ with different teachers
F

Main Contributions, Limitations and Future Directions

Contribution RQ1
• Following the HCD
• Combining qualitative and quantitative methods from an interdisciplinary field
• Teachers’ needs must be gathered
• Requirements must be analyzed
• The real problems, language, structures and processes must be understood
• It is possible to use other approaches such as:
• Participartory design
• Co-creation with users
• Design-led approaches vs. research-led approaches
Contribution RQ1 a)

Contribution RQ1
• Technology gets integrated when:
• Perceived as useful and supportive
• Addresses the real teachers’ needs
• Technology is accepted
• Adds value to the teaching process
• Technology is supportive in this case when:
• It can sense the user’s context
• It can support the teaching approach
• It doesn’t get in the way on teacher or student’s side
Contribution RQ1 b)

Contribution RQ1
• Teachers are motivated if technology engages and motivates students
• Improves teacher-student interaction
• Makes teachers aware of students progress while engaging with the learning content
• Let teachers be part of the learning experience
• If the technology adds value to the learning/ teaching experience
Contribution RQ1 c)

Contribution RQ2
• Learning task structures and processes
• Relevant theories such as: ZPD and Flow theory
• Including in depth analysis of learning tasks in the use case of alpine sports
• Game task structures and processes
• Including known principles of gamification
• Combined into the Dynamic Questing Concept (DynQ)
Contribution RQ2 a)

Contribution RQ2
• Game task structures and processes
• Including known principles of gamification
• Motivation through addressing intrinsic motivation of teachers – how to teach better
• Contextualized, personalized teaching/learning support
• Enhancing intrinsic and extrinsic motivation factors
Contribution RQ2 b)

Contribution RQ2
• Because of the match between available sensor technology and dependencies to decide on tasks such
as: location, speed, acceleration
• In depth user testing could be supported by a functional prototype
• Leading to more in-depth results
• Which can be beneficial for a generalization
• And could not have been found without this match
Contribution RQ2 c)

Limitations
• Time and resource limitations (3 years PhD project)
• Field Research and User Testing limited because of that time frame (courses normally only run once
a year)
• It could only be focused on one side: in this case the teachers [due to the lack of such focus; it was
found especially important]
• Extreme environment use case: temperatures affected technology and user testing possibilities
• Very specific use case: it was made sure that teachers from other fields were involved in early and in
final stages
Contribution RQ2 c)

Future Work
The main areas of constructive future work are identified as:
• Full implementation
• Task dependencies visualization and creation process
• Usability and user experience improvement
• Expanding into other teaching fields
Contribution RQ2 c)

Thank you for your attention.

Summary Slide
Following the HCD, mixed-methods, context analysis;
A use case was very important for in depth analysis
Perceived as useful and supportive, add value to learning/teaching
Address the Teachers’ needs!
Improved student-teacher interaction, engages students in learning
Learning and Game Task Analysis of Structures and Processes
Lessons Learned from Games as well as motivation through context fitting technology
usage
In depth analysis because of available sensor technology & concrete
user testing

References for this Presentation
• Some icons are made by: Freepik from www.flaticon.com
(light-bulb-idea, river-trail)
• G. Harman, Den alpine lærevei - Alpin skiteknikk (In Norwegian). Gransherad: HarmanSki., 2010.
• M. Hervey, Alpine Technical Manual - Skiing and Teaching Skills, Second Edition. Professional Ski Instructors of America, American
Snowsports Education Association Education Foundation, Lakewood, Colorado, 2007.
• L. Vygotsky, “Zone of proximal development,” Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes, vol. 5291, p. 157, 1987.
• M. Csikszentmihalyi, “Flow: The psychology of optimal performance,” NY: Cambridge UniversityPress, vol. 40, 1990.
• World of Warcraft: Warlords of Draenor,” Blizzard Entertainment, 2014, [Last visited 2018-03-07]. [Online]. Available:
http://eu.battle.net/wow/de/warlords-of-draenor/
• DIN EN ISO 9241-210: 2010. Ergonomics of human system interaction-Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems,”
International Standardization Organization (ISO), Switzerland, Standard.
• The complete list of references can be found in the dissertation.

Additional Resouces
• List of Papers
• Alternative Framework
• High-Level Context additional resources
28.03.2018Renée Schulz, PhD Defense, ICT Department 69

Additional Resouces: List of Papers

Information Systems Research Framework (Knowledge Base)
Alan R. Hevner, Salvatore T. March, Jinsoo Park, and Sudha Ram. 2004. Design science in information systems
research. MIS Q. 28, 1 (March 2004), 75-105.

Added High-Level Context Information

Situated Prototype Simulation GIF version (Testing 2 in Hemsedal)
G

Listening to Teachers’ Needs: Human-centred Design for Mobile Technologies in Higher Education

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie Listening to Teachers’ Needs: Human-centred Design for Mobile Technologies in Higher Education

Ähnlich wie Listening to Teachers’ Needs: Human-centred Design for Mobile Technologies in Higher Education (20)

Mehr von Renée Schulz

Mehr von Renée Schulz (16)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Listening to Teachers’ Needs: Human-centred Design for Mobile Technologies in Higher Education