team ed final presentation
TRANSCRIPT
Collaboration in CanvasPatricia Gates, Yanwen Guo, Amy Maxwell, & Elena Winzeler
Agenda
● Introducing Canvas● Conception and Research Phase● Design Process● High-fidelity Prototype Demonstration● Design Cases & User Feedback● Conclusion● Q&A
2
Collaboration in Higher Education
● Web 2.0 tools enable students to connect virtually and collaborate○ Threaded discussion boards, Google Docs, chat,
video conferencing, task managers, etc.● Learning Management Systems (LMS) allow instructors
to organize class materials and assignments○ Canvas (used by UT), Blackboard, Desire2Learn, etc.
3
Weaknesses of Canvas: Groups
4
Lacks tools students need
Confusingly similar to course pages
Weaknesses of Canvas: Discussions
5
Threaded discussions difficult to sift through
Hides connections between ideas
Conception and Research Phase
6
Product Research● learning management systems● threaded discussion forums● resource sharing and collaboration tools
User Research● Instructor Interview● Student Survey● Instructor Survey
Goals
Product Research
What improves participation outcomes?● autonomy - quantity and
quality of participation● connectedness - quality of
contributions and pro-social behaviors
● meaning - outcomes in participation, quality, and student experience
7
Learning management systems
Popular collaboration tools
Student Survey
o discussion forum not satisfyingo commonly use outside tools for
group-work
● Most requested featureso tools for synchronous
collaborationo co-authoring of documentso file sharingo tool tips
● Experiences with Canvas and collaboration
8
Instructor Interview and Survey
● Experiences with Canvas○ discussion forum organization not easy to follow○ existing groups feature inadequate
● Most Requested Features○ file sharing by students
○ analytics of discussion board activity
● Top Priorities○ greater ability to monitor activity and respond to students’ needs○ meaningful discussions and student experiences
9
Project Conception● Redesign of the current collaboration tools offered by
Canvas
● Our redesign will better address the needs of students, professors, and teaching assistants○ Richer interaction among students○ More convenient to use than current collaboration tools
10
Design Requirements & Features
11
better organized discussions
conversation themes and threads easily visible
project management made easier
file sharing by students facilitated
topic-based discussion board
thematic labels - #tagtext-focused reply - “quote”
comprehensive group management + workflow tool
analytics of discussion board activity
monitor group project process
individual and class activity reporting
group monitoring tools
file sharing integrated into groups pages
Design Process
12
paper-basedstudent view-list features for students
paper-basedsolve the problems got from user testteacher view-design features for teachers
fixed the problem found in user test 3
5 students2 TAs
Low-fi 1 User Test 1 Low-fi 2 High-fi 1 High-fi 2User Test 2 User Test 3
6 students2 TAs2 Instructors
fixed problems in low-fi 2make a more interactive demo with axure
make two videos
7 students1 Instructor
High-fidelity Prototype Demonstration
13
Discussion Forum Groups Pages
Design Cases: Editor
14
Streamlined publishing process
Word limit unpopular
Chunking process a
hassle
Low-fi 1 High-fi 1
Design Cases: Workflow Tool
15
Not helpful for task management
Low-fi 1 Low-fi 2
High-fi 2 High-fi 1
More details about tasks
Stage and task status shown
Design Cases: Popular Tags
16
Low-fi 1 Low-fi 2
confusing
High-fi 2
positive feedback
Student Feedback
17
“I think tags would be useful for me. I always want to find people who wrote about similar topics, and tags makes that easy to do.”
“I like the tag. It just gives a new way to read posts and it’s more convenient.”
“I think I will use quote to reply others, but I don’t think I will use tags as much. I am too lazy to do more than is required by the teacher.”
“I like the workflow, because it help me keep track of what I have to do in the whole project process. But I also hope the instructor will create the stages and tasks so I won’t have to.”
Instructor Feedback
18
“Please develop this so I can use it next semester!”
Concluding Thoughts
● Challengeso product involves extended, complex interactions
with “expert” userso multiple stakeholders with different needs
● Takeawayso investment in product and user research pays offo core design principles provide guidance at every
step of the process
19
20
Questions?
21
Thank you!
22
Appendix
Background
● Collaborative learning has been proven more effective than independent and competitive learning (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1998; Qin, Johnson & Johnson, 1995; Slavin, 1991).
● Constructivism-based pedagogies center the locus for learning in the individual. Knowledge is generated by the learner through experience and interaction with the content and with others, not transmitted by the teacher.
● Knowledge-building communities have as their primary goal knowledge creation.
23
Problems in Current System● The current educational model - even in higher ed. - places a heavy
responsibility on teachers to be the gatekeepers of knowledge, while students wait to passively receive enlightenment.
● Videos of cats go viral, while rarely do students engage with material related to their classes outside of assigned readings. Even more rarely do their share what they find with their peers.
● Learning management systems already exist as a platform for student-professor and student-student communication. However, these interactions are limited and often depend on the professor’s initiative in integrating the tool into the course.
24
Low-Fidelity Prototype 1 (Student View only)
● Discussion Boardso meaning-based organization → topical Boardso user-generated semantic links → Tagso reply to statements rather than people → Quoting
● Groupso extended, text-based conversations → Discussionso sharing documents → Fileso time-sensitive messages → Announcementso project management → Workflow
User Testing Round 1
● Subjectso 5 studentso 2 TAs
● Protocolo Introductiono Scenario-based taskso Targeted questions at key decision pointso Open-ended questions at the end
User Testing Round 1 Results● Discussion Board
o ‘Themes’ unclearo ‘New Post’ button difficult to find
● Editoro ‘#’ symbol desiredo word limit unpopularo more space desired
● Groupso Workflow page unclearo management of Files and Google Docs unclearo Conversations tool desired to be accessible at all times
Low-Fidelity Prototype 2 (Student View)
● Discussion Boardo ‘Themes’ changed to ‘Popular Tags’ and made only visible on
Discussions homepageo ‘New Post’ button moved
● Editoro ‘#’ symbol added
● Groupso Single group homepage modified to increase clarityo Workflow and Files pages modifiedo Conversations tool made accessible on all pages
Low-Fidelity Prototype 2 (Teacher View)● Discussion Board
o Student Activity page → data on individual activity, including boards visited, posts read, and posts authored
o Class Activity page → network visualization of class activity according to posts read and responses (Quoting)
● Groupso Group homepage → data on activity within the group over time
displayed in a line graph (activity based on the number of posts to the group discussion board and number of visits to the group page
o Individual Group homepages → data on activity within the group over time will be displayed with a larger version of the line graph, along with a breakdown of activity (overall activity and activity over the previous week)
User Testing Round 2
● Subjectso 6 students and 1 TA so faro 2 students, 1 TA, and 2 teachers scheduled for this week
● Protocolo Students
Tasks targeted to unresolved questions and changes madeo Teachers/TAs
Student View Teacher View