3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Evaluation of Interoperability of Adaptive Hypermedia Systems: testing the MOT to WHURLE conversion in a classroom setting Alexandra Cristea 1, Craig Stewart 2, Tim Brailsford 2 and Paul Cristea Information System Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Computing Science, Technical University Eindhoven 2 - School of Computer Science and IT, University of Nottingham 3 - Digital Signal Processing Laboratory, Politehnica University of Bucharest

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Outline Introduction MOT WHURLE MOT2WHURLE conversion Student Evaluation –Hypotheses –Results Conclusion

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Introduction Creation of adaptive hypermedia content: –Extremely time intensive –Complex –Platform lockdown –Lack of standard tools

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Introduction Ideal creation of adaptive hypermedia content: –Automated (this will aid with the time and complexity factors) –Interoperable (conversion, common language) –Standardised

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Introduction Our answer: –Develop a series of tools that will allow for interoperability between different systems –We use MOT as an authoring system to author materials for: AHA! (an AEH) WHURLE (an AEH) Blackboard (a non-adaptive commercial system, uses a pre-adapted methodology)

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Introduction Here we present an evaluation of the authoring process using MOT and WHURLE A class of 31 students were introduced to this new authoring paradigm

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology MOT My Online Teacher Based on the LAOS framework Is a generic AEH delivery system Also a powerful and simple authoring system –Web-form, therefore a non-technical author can easily use it –Very flexible, as it is easy to extend

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology MOT Domain Maps

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology MOT Goal and Constraint Maps –AND/OR –Weights –Labels

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology WHURLE An adaptive XML learning environment Basic content building block: Chunk Structure applied using Lesson Plans

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology MOT2WHURLE Currently a command line environment Conceptually maps the MOT Goal & Constraints map structure to the WHURLE Lesson Plan –A MOT Concept = WHURLE chunks(s) It does this using the MOT weights and labels.

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology MOT2WHURLE

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology MOT2WHURLE These rules are used to determine which MOT attributes are to be aggregated into WHURLE chunks. –35 = visual –75 = verbal –0 = common

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology MOT2WHURLE

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Student Evaluation A class of 31 students in the 4th year of study for a technical Masters degree at the University of Bucharest, Romania All subjected to a week long intensive course on AH Ideal representation for non-AH expert authors. After initial lectures, they were given the following task:

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Student Evaluation 1.Create 2-3 MOT Domain Concept Maps, with approximately 5-10 concepts on the learning.dsp.pub.ro/mot/ MOT server 2.The attributes of each concept were: title; keywords; introduction; text; conclusion and figure. With limits placed on the type and amount of content in each one (this was done so as that each group would not spend their limited time creating a vast corpus of information). 3.Create a single MOT Lesson (Goal & Constraints Map) using their Concepts maps. 4.Alter the lesson so that the weights and labels of each concept agreed with those described in the second Table previously. 5.Run the mot2whurle conversion program and copy the files to WHURLE.

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Student Evaluation 6.Check that the WHURLE XML files are well-formed. 7.Run and login to WHURLE to check that the lesson matches their design and make any necessary changes. 8.Finally at the end of the week, each student was asked to complete a series of questionnaires: three generic SUS (System Usability Scale) questionnaires, one for each system (MOT, mot2whurle and WHURLE) and a single specific questionnaire designed to determine their level of knowledge about each system, as well as to gather non- statistical information.

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Evaluation hypotheses The hypotheses that we wished to examine were: 1.The systems (MOT, mot2whurle, WHURLE) are simple and intuitive to use, with a minimum amount of explanation. 2.The students understood the theoretical background (Adaptive Hypermedia, LAOS, Adaptive Strategies) of these systems. 3.The students understood the connection between LAOS and MOT. 4.The students used MOT purely for authoring adaptive hypermedia, and perceived it as such. 5.The students used WHURLE solely for delivering adaptive hypermedia, and perceived it as such. 6.Students consider automatic conversion between one-to- many or many-to-many adaptive hypermedia systems useful.

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Evaluation Results SUS scores: –MOT 75%

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Evaluation Results WHURLE 66.6%

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Evaluation Results MOT2WHURLE 60.7%

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Evaluation Results Hypothesis 1: –Overall SUS scores: MOT:75%±15% WHURLE:66.6%±19.1% MOT2WHURLE: 60.7%±19% –NB: SUS scores are comparative

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Evaluation Results Hypotheses 2-5 extracted from questionnaires. Hypothesis 2: [The students understood the theoretical background (Adaptive Hypermedia, LAOS, Adaptive Strategies) of these systems.] –70% ±24% Hypothesis 3: [The students understood the theoretical background (Adaptive Hypermedia, LAOS, Adaptive Strategies) of these systems.] –70% ±21.7% Indicates that students on average understood the theoretical background after an intensive introduction. However the wide SD indicates a great range of abilities.

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Evaluation Results Hypothesis 4: [The students used MOT purely for authoring adaptive hypermedia, and perceived it as such.] –25 students out of 29 (86%) selecting MOT to be an adaptive hypermedia authoring system –Indicates that students understand the benefits of using MOT as an authoring system.

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Evaluation Results Hypothesis 5: [The students used WHURLE solely for delivering adaptive hypermedia, and perceived it as such.] –21 students out of 29 (72%) selecting WHURLE as an adaptive hypermedia delivery system –Indicates that students understand the benefits of using WHURLE as a delivery system.

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Evaluation Results Hypothesis 6: [Students consider automatic conversion between one-to-many or many-to-many adaptive hypermedia systems useful.] –4.57 (out of 5) approval rating. –Indicates that students understand the benefits of the paradigm shift that we are proposing. I.E. away from a one-to-one paradigm.

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Conclusion There has been one previous attempt to convert content between systems: AHA! & Interbook. This is the first (that we are aware of) to empirically test the actual authoring and conversion process between two systems.

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Conclusion The responses from this study have validated our efforts to: –Create a powerful & flexible authoring environment –Create an interoperable methodology –Use a single authoring environment to deliver content to other AEH delivery systems

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Conclusion Major disadvantages: –The majority of which concerned the lack of polish for the MOT2WHURLE conversion program. –This does not invalidate our methodology but does indicate that additional work needs to be done.

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Conclusion It appears that a write once, use often authoring methodology is desired by authors. MOT is a simple to use, yet flexible authoring system. Conceptual mapping between MOT and other authoring systems demonstrates the feasibility of such and approach

3 rd A3EH workshop at 12 th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, 2005 TU/ e eindhoven university of technology Questions … ?