|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Center for Dental Informatics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, 3501 Terrace Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15261; hspallek{at}pitt.edu
| Abstract |
|---|
KEY WORDS: Education dental informatics user modeling intelligent tutoring systems World Wide Web
| Introduction |
|---|
This paper attempts to address this contradiction by introducing a new paradigm for technology-based education. Adaptive Hypermedia (AH) moves away from broadcast-based teacher-centered applications to individualized learner-centered education delivery systems. Application of the AH paradigm to dental education might be able to address some of the challenges we face in dental education, such as the nationwide shortage of dental faculty (Haden and Valachovic, 2003), the increasingly diverse professional and educational background of students entering dental schools, and the need to take advantage of the knowledge explosion in the biomedical sciences and apply such knowledge to public health (DePaola et al., 2002).
This paper assumes that the reader has either worked on the development of educational software or has simply used educational software as an instructor or learner.
Before suggesting a new paradigm for educational software, we will start with an analysis of the current state of learning environments and their weak points.
| Current State of Learning Environments in Dental Education |
|---|
There is a general and increasing trend toward usage of e-learning in education, which has been observed in dentistry as well. After an exhaustive search for Web-based continuing dental education (CDE) courses in 1998, Schleyer and Pham (1999) could identify only 158 courses. In 2003, just one online CDE provider, DentalxChange, offers 489 courses in 23 different categories. However, previous studies uncovered major deficiencies in existing Web-based CDE courses. For example, 30% of the courses did not indicate an author, no time of last update was shown in a majority of the courses, and the relationship between course length and credit hours varied significantly (Schleyer and Pham, 1999). Usually no formative or summative evaluations were performed, resulting in a lack of corrective feedback (Corbett et al., 1997). Dental educational software developers (and the publisher-assigned peer-reviewers!) are often satisfied with evaluations which use phrases such as "anecdotal evidence", "unstructured student feedback", and "students expressed that they liked...". These existing deficiencies allow one to conclude that online courses are prepared with less care and effort than peer-reviewed papers, whose underlying research is repeatedly scrutinized on various levels (e.g., departmental review to initiate a new line of research; review by funding agency to gain financial support; review by IRB for ethical considerations; review by journal editor for entrance into peer-review process; blind peer review for scholarly value; and review by editorial staff for style and consistency). We can only speculate about the reasons why the increased development and usage of dental online educational systems fails to translate into improved quality. One reason could be the risk for online course developers of losing content, because the lack of standards prevents the transfer of content to other environments. Another reason could be that the rewards system in higher education offers little incentive for instructors to make the substantial investment of time and effort required to develop high-quality courses. Yet another reason could be overly enthusiastic encouragement by administrators who mistakenly assume that distance education can solve some of higher educations ills. Program directors, for instance, might assume that online continuing education courses can attract thousands of dentists who are willing to pay for their CE creditsand dont even need parking (Austin, 1999; Carnevale, 1999; ONeill, 1999)! The sobering truth is that in dental online learning, no one has yet reported profits (Spallek et al., 2002).
A decade of work in the field of Web-based dental education systems and a careful review of the literature allow me to suggest the following summary of the current state of learning environments in dental education:
|
| Toward a Learner-centered Education |
|---|
AH is an emerging research direction that focuses on the design of Web-based software that adapts to the user (Brusilovsky, 2001). While education research represents 2/3 of the total body of all AH research (De Bra et al., 2002), we find many other applications, such as: information retrieval systems that take not only the query but also the users long-term interest into account (Gates et al., 1998); individualized help systems (Encarnacão and Stoev, 1999); and personalized information kiosk systems (Bullock and Goble, 1998).
Educational AH systems try to match different learning styles and levels of pre-existing knowledge to make learning more efficient and effective. Users with different learning goals may be interested in different pieces of information about a certain knowledge item. The term "knowledge item" can be substituted with "subtopic" or "little piece of information about the domain". AH systems build a model of the individual user and apply this model to the content adaptation geared toward the learners knowledge and goals. The "user model", also referred to as "mental state" of the user (De Bra and Calvi, 1998), stores some value which is an estimation of the users knowledge level about a knowledge item. For each knowledge item belonging to a domainor, in a more practical sense, belonging to an online coursesuch a user model exists and is used to adapt the teaching sequence and the presentation of the material to the user. More details about the user modeling process would exceed the scope of this paper, but can be reviewed elsewhere (Brusilovsky et al., 2003).
Now we turn to a description of what can be adapted with the help of a user model, focusing on only two examples of AH methods, adaptive presentation and curriculum sequencing (Brusilovsky, 2001).
With adaptive presentation technology, Web pages are not no longer static, but can be adaptively generated for each user. Such an adaptation could, for instance, offer a novice in the field only the basics about a certain topic without any technical jargon, while the same topic presented to an expert could include the newest research findings and advanced concepts. Only after the novice had mastered a certain knowledge level would more advanced concepts be offered about the topic.
Curriculum sequencing, also referred to as "instructional planning technology", provides the learner with the most suitable individually planned sequence of knowledge items to learn. It helps the learner to find an "optimal path" through the offered material.
We can distinguish active curriculum sequencing, which requires a stated learning goal and then builds the best individual path to achieve this goal, from passive sequencing, which starts when the learner is unable to solve a problem. Passive sequencing offers the learner a subset of available learning material, which can fill the gap in the learners knowledge. Now lets turn to the architecture of the newly developed educational AH system.
| Development of an Adaptive Hypermedia Course for Dental Education |
|---|
We identified the course "Information Retrieval for Dental Professionals" as an appropriate prototype course because we expected a wide range of potential course participants with various levels of computer literacy. We therefore predicted the full utilization of the adaptation feature, which would give us the opportunity to evaluate the system thoroughly. (Currently, the course shell is in the process of being deployed for tissue engineering courses taught at the University of Pittsburgh. This effort is supported by seed funding from the University of Pittsburgh [Innovation in Teaching Award 2003].)
Applying principles of user modeling research, we identified the characteristics of the learner that can be used as a source of the adaptation (Brusilovsky, 2001)). We knew that the successful design of a highly individualized course could be achieved only if we collected enough information about the learner (Table 2
).
|
During course enrollment, the learner provides demographic data, access rights, and privacy settings. The privacy settings, for instance, determine if the learners e-mail address is displayed when annotating the learning material. Based on the learners selected learning goal, a set of knowledge items is compiled. These sets of knowledge items are assembled by the author during course creation. Because the adaptation is determined by the systems estimation of the learners knowledge level for each knowledge item, the system compiles a pre-test whose results build part of the user model. After completion of the pre-test, the learner selects his learning style, which results in an adaptation of the presentation. Now the system compiles the individually tailored curriculum and presents the adapted course pages. The results of quizzes throughout the course update the user model in a positive or negative way, depending on whether the question was answered right or wronga process called knowledge-tracing. During course creation, the author determines the level of knowledge necessary for the learner to be eligible for the final test. Only after the learner reaches this level is the final test presented. The result of the final can be printed as a certificate including demographic information, such as address and license number, for continuing education certification.
| Technical Implementation of the System |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Authors are authenticated via username and password when entering the Web-based authoring tool, which is hosted on a Web server housed in the School of Dental Medicine (IIS version). The learning material of a course consists of all knowledge items which are entered into the system through this tool. For each knowledge item, the author enters and edits various views on the same topic, differentiated by sophistication. Later, the author enters the associated questions and examples according to the appropriate levels of difficulty. Multiple-choice and fill-in-the-blank questions include an author-defined level of difficulty used to stratify the randomized questions for the knowledge assessments.
Following Mark Weisers key idea about ubiquitous computingthat "[t]he most profound technologies are those that disappear" and "weave themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are indistinguishable from it"we purposefully structured the learning environment (from the learners perspective) to resemble a first- or second-generation Web-based course (Weiser, 1991). Applying this design philosophy eliminates the need for a time-consuming training session prior to the use of the new learning environment. The learning environment resides on the public Web server of the School of Dental Medicine under the URL http://di.dental.pitt.edu/ir/ and is open for enrollment as a 3-credit-hour continuing dental education course. Furthermore, the course is used as one element of the required freshman course "Introduction to Computing".
The learning environment exploits the emotional intelligence "embodied" in a personal tutor which guides the learner through the course. An emotionally intelligent tutor can improve user acceptance of the educational experience. Using empathy and encouragement, the tutor can help the user to relieve frustration and recover to a positive emotional state (Klein, 1999). The scope of this paper does not permit expansion on the emotional aspect of learner environments, but I would like to recognize the research findings which support the claim that humans relate to computers as social actors (Reeves and Nass, 1996).
| Evaluation |
|---|
For the alpha test, we asked experts in Web design and educational software to complete the course and provide informal feedback about their general impression, and to generate a list of all deficiencies in the areas of education, instructional design, technical implementation, design, and layout. All experts supported the use of AH for dental education, and repeatedly pointed out that the use of emotional intelligence was beneficial.
The formative evaluation is divided into two parts, a usability inspection performed by experts and an end-user testing for educational effectiveness. Following common usability engineering principles, a detailed protocol for the expert review was developed (see electronic copy of the protocol at http://di.dental.pitt.edu/expertevaluation/). The overall feedback from the experts was positive, but all of them found violations of certain usability heuristics which we addressed as they were brought to our attention. Table 3
shows the summarized feedback and how it was addressed.
|
Education research has thus far failed to suggest a standard instrument for reliable measurement of the effectiveness of an educational intervention (Donovan et al., 2000). Because we cannot measure effectiveness directly, we decided to evaluate the following aspects of the new learning environment, based on suggestions by various schools of education researchers (Clark, 2000):
Motivation and values regarding the instructional method will be correlated with users attitudes toward the media and their accomplishments in the learning environment itself.
The results of both parts of the formative evaluation will shape the further development and design of a summative evaluation.
| Conclusion |
|---|
| Challenges for Online Dental Education |
|---|
The presented project exploits AH research to move instructional technology to an individualized teaching approach. In doing so, our model addresses many of the identified challenges for online dental education. Combined with the sound application of usability engineering principles and the facilitation of peer-learner contacts as well as learner-instructor contacts, adaptive hypermedia could serve as a new paradigm for educational software.
In Seymour Paperts 1996 work, The Connected Family, he predicted that, "[i]n the learning environment of the future, every learner will be special". With the development and utilization of adaptive instructional media, we can move slowly toward this future.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
| References |
|---|
Austin E (1999). The caliber concept. University Business 2(2):2431.
Brusilovsky P (2001). Adaptive hypermedia. User Modeling and User-adapted Interaction 11(1/2):87110.
Brusilovsky P, Eklund J, Schwartz E (2002). Web-based education for all: a tool for development adaptive courseware. http://www7.scu.edu.au/programme/fullpapers/1893/com1893.htm.
Brusilovsky P, Corbett A, de Rosis F (2003). User modeling (lecture notes). In: Artificial Intelligence. Vol. 2702. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Bullock JC, Goble CA (1998). TourisT: the application of a description logic based semantic hypermedia system for tourism. HYPERTEXT 98. Proceedings of the Ninth ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia: Links, Objects, Time and SpaceStructure in Hypermedia Systems, pp. 132141. New York: ACM Press, ISBN 0-89791-972-6.
Carnevale D (1999). U of Maryland University College forms for-profit company for on-line courses. Chronicle Higher Educ 46(17).
Clark RE (1993). Media will never influence learning. http://www.usq.edu.au/material/unit/resource/clark/media.htm. Accessed 2-6-2003.
Clark RE (2000). Evaluating distance education: strategies and cautions. Q J Distance Educ 1(1).
Corbett AT, Koedinger KR, Anderson JR (1997). Intelligent tutoring systems. In: Handbook of human-computer interaction. Helander MG, Landauer TK, and Prabhu PV, editors. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science B.V., pp. 849874.
De Bra P, Calvi L (1998). AHA! An open adaptive hypermedia architecture. New Rev Hypermedia and Multimedia 4:115139.
De Bra P, Brusilovsky P, Conejo R (2002). Adaptive hypermedia and adaptive Web-based systems, AH2002. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
DePaola D, Howell H, Baker CG, Boy-Lefevre ML, Hull P, Holmstrup P, et al. (2002). Research and the dental student. Eur J Dent Educ 6(Suppl 3):4551.
Donovan SM, Bransford JD, Pellegrino JW (2000). How people learn: bridging research and practice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Encarnacão LM, Stoev SL (1999). An application-independent intelligent user support system exploiting action-sequence based user modeling. Proceedings of 7th International Conference on User Modeling. Vienna, Austria: Springer, pp. 245254.
Gates KF, Lawhead PB, Wilkins DE (1998). Toward an adaptive WWW: a case study in customized hypermedia. New Rev Multimedia and Hypermedia 4:89113.
Haden NK, Valachovic RW (2003). The ADEA-NIDCR National Research Conference on Putting Science into Practice: The Critical Role of Dental Schools. J Dent Educ 66:912917.
Klein JT (1999). Computer response to user frustration (thesis). Cambridge, MA: MIT Report No. TR480.
Martinez M, Bunderson CV (2000). Foundations for personalized Web learning environments. Asynchronous Learning Networks Magazine 4(2). ISSN 1092-7131 (http://www.aln.org/ publications/magazine/v4n2/burdenson.asp).
Nielsen J (2002). Heuristic evaluation. [Online] http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/. Accessed 8-28-2002.
ONeill JM (1999). For-profit Temple spin-off will offer online courses. The Philadelphia (PA) Inquirer, Cover.
Papert S (1996). The connected family: bridging the digital generation gap. Marietta, GA: Longstreet Press.
Phillips V (1998). Virtual classrooms, real education. Nations Business, pp. 4145.
Phipps R, Merisotis J (1999). Whats the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Institute for Higher Education Policy Report No. CSD1488 (http://www.ihep.com/Pubs/ PDF/Difference.pdf).
Presidents Information Technology Advisory Committee (2003). Report to the President: using information technology to transform the way we learn (http://www.hpcc.gov/pubs/ pitac/pitac-tl-9feb01.pdf).
Ramage TR (2003). The "no significant difference" phenomenon: a literature review. e-journal of instructional science and technology (http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/e-jist/docs/ html2002/ramage.html).
Reeves B, Nass C (1996). The media equation: how people treat computers, television, and news media like real people and places. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
Schleyer T, Pham T (1999). Online continuing dental education. J Am Dent Assoc 130:848854.
Spallek H, Pilcher E, Lee JY, Schleyer T (2002). Evaluation of Web-based dental CE-courses. J Dent Educ 66:393404.[Abstract]
Weiser M (1991). The computer for the 21st Century. Scientif Amer 265(3):6675.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| IADR Journals | Advances in Dental Research ® | Journal of Dental Research ® | Critical Reviews (1990-2004) |