Norm!

Ok, so I really enjoy seeing in researched technical terms what I have been saying all along...If you are stressd out and overworked you will be so focused on accomplishing the task a hand, which is late, that you will be unable to determine systemwide changes that would fix not only the problem at hand but stop them from occuring in the first place.

Our president at the college lives by the rule, "If it ain't broke, break it." That's all well and good, but when everything is broken by someone else who has no idea what is going on with students, you get so busy fixing the stupid stuff the administration breaks that you don't have a chance to fix what the students need fixed.

In figure 1.1 Norman talks about the reflective, bhavioral, and visceral levels of processing. He points out that the reflective and visceral levels are not directly connected. Could this be why you know better than to do something, but before you can stop yourself with thought, you have reacted and done it?

A - another piece of paper, please

Nathan Shedroff’s article made me realize something I haven’t been able to put my finger on for some time. I like the cognitive model. I understand it. Not just on a conceptual level, but I get it. It is something I can relate to really understand how it feels to understand things from that model of learning. I get the step-by-stepness of it. I realize that wasn’t a technical term. Shedroff says that the cognitive model is the “artful setting of context that allows people to know what to expect, what to do, what they can do, and even, to some extent, how to do it.” (http://www.nathan.com/thoughts/recipe/info.html) I learn best when the steps are laid out. I never follow the steps, but when I get lost I NEED to know where to look. I NEED to have a resource that has all of the information ordered nicely, searchable, clear, not with bad links.

I guess I had always thought I wasn’t a thinker along these terms. Since I never follow the steps it must not be ‘my’ model. But it is my model. I learn by finding something I can’t do and then reading the instructions. I like the ones that tell me: this is what’s going to happen, this is what’s happening, this is what happened. Like the 5 paragraph essays you had to write in high school, one paragraph telling people what you’re going to tell them, three paragraphs telling people, one paragraph telling them what you told them. It may seem old standby-ish (again not a technical term), but it works.

The amazing depth and breadth of my knowledge!

As a late post for Plass and Salisbury
Once again, what I already knew was explained to me in a way that made me say “Aha, that is what I’ve experienced too!” Many a time I have gotten half way through something and broadened or narrowed my goals to incorporate what can or cannot be handled by whatever system I am operating in as explained in the living system models. You can story board and plan all you want, but until you begin to actually create and work in a new environment you cannot accurately know the limits of your abilities within the time constraints.
I have often had to learn new things in order to meet a goal that I thought I would be able to do with my current knowledge. This goes along with the comment that “the design of the system’s own capabilities and features will result in its change and growth.” (p.5) This, I have found, is particularly true when dealing with a new skill. For example, I can mail merge to print like nobody’s business, but each time I mail merge to email, I learn something new. I can only imagine that as I work more and more on my final project I will more and more learn what I can and cannot do with my current skills and what new things I can learn in the time I have. My eyes may be too big for my abilities, or too small. Who knows? But I can’t wait to find out!

I used 'goodness gracious' in a sentence!!

I like the Mayer and Moreno article when I finally got into it, but goodness gracious oh my how they overlook cognitive load in the written format. Why do authors, or maybe it is their editors, insist on putting tables and figures where it is most difficult to make the connections with the written words. For example, Table 2 is not within the heading that it relates to, it is within the heading after it. For those of with ADD, and if we are going to work for a screen reader we should work for all disabilities, it is distracting to have to skip a section – it makes it difficult to concentrate on the end of the section it should be in as well as the first part of the second.

The other problem I had getting into the reading was at the end of the first paragraph under the heading ‘The Case of Cognitive Overload’ it says: …”meaningful learning often requires substantial cognitive processing using a cognitive system that has sever limits on cognitive processing.” If the first time the reader is introduced to these topics is in this paper, a sentence like this causes SEVERE cognitive overload through just one of the cognitive systems: visual.

The information presented was useful, and although I understood the concept behind the studies before I read the article, I understand in a different and more concrete way the causes and fixes of cognitive overload. I also liked their explanation at the end of the second paragraph in the same heading about how a learner may select only some information when the material is fast paced and unfamiliar. I know that I do that when I am reading quickly and there are a lot of unfamiliar words, I see the shape of the word and move on. This works minimally until I come across a different name with the same shape. Then I am screwed.

Curiouser and curiouser

So far, the most interest tidbit I have read is from the Webdesign From Scratch page. It brought to my attention the difference between the user’s goals and the website’s goals. Many a time I have looked at a website and had absolutely no use for what was actually on the site, what I really needed is some obscure bit of information. It all has to do with perspective – where are you coming from?

On page 134 of the longer readings there is an aside about “Talking in Class.” I really enjoyed reading it because it showed that different societies expect different things. As a result, an outsider may see one thing when what is really going on is another. It also has to do with perspective. From the perspective of the principal, not talking in class is out of the ordinary while from the perspective of an Inuit, not talking in class is expected. Much like the principal, I grew up in a society where talking in class was discouraged by the teacher, but if you didn’t talk in class there must have been something wrong with you. I always talked in class so they decided I must be of above average intelligence. Did I do well in classes in special classes (for above average students) because I was smart or because I received the special attention? From the perspective of those advocating specialized classes I would have done well because I received special attention. From the perspective of those who advocate single classroom settings I did well because I was smart.

If I design a webpage to educate people on how to avoid common mistakes when completing a specific form, will they do better because of the special attention or will they do better because the people who seek out my page are of the kind who are more likely to follow the instructions the first time anyway? Will I really be helping anyone or only helping the ‘smart be smart’?

Link?

I get so excited when I complete something in this class that I feel like swearing. Just thought I's share. Maybe a little too much sharing...
swear-worthy page

I looked upon the words and understood them

I read the readings, as often occurs in the course of my schooling, and understood them, which doesn't always occur. I enjoyed both a great deal. As an aside to any future writers out there, I enjoy reading things which teach me new things and I leave knowing that I learned something, but it is something that I understand so clearly that it feels like it something that is so inherently clear that I must have known it all along. In contrast, reading many pages to have the blatantly obvious pointed out to you is quite annoying; as is reading something that is so profound in one sitting that you don't really understand it until 5 books, 3 years and 2 scorpion bowls later.

Moving on. I really enjoyed the Lynch and Horton chapters. I am in financial aid and I cannot tell you how much of the online FAFSA application does not comply with the simple and clear suggestions in these chapters.

The first rule that the on line FAFSA breaks is in the section on 'chunking' information. The authors call on you to you to recognize that most readers will not do well with long pages that require a reader to remember what is off screen. Many times a student or parent thinks that they have completed their FAFSA and have not. Step 6 of 9 of the on line FAFSA is a summary page of what takes an average person filling out the FAFSA for the first time 20-30 minutes to complete. The answers to 90 or so questions are listed. At the top of the page are the 'next' and 'print this page' buttons. However the top of the page instructs the student/parent to read through and verify that the information is correct. When you get to the bottom of the screen there are no instructions reminding the student/parent to go back to the top of the screen and move onto 'next'. If you print out the summary it is 4 pages long. Too long when you are reading through it to remember that you must go to the next button. Another next button should be at the bottom of the screen.

The rest of the online FAFSA is one, two, or three questions per page. The pages are short, quick and easy. When the student gets to step 6 of 9 they are thrown off because the online FAFSA breaks another of Lynch and Horton's rules: Keep the same basic structure for all pages. The step 6 of 9 summary page lacks the blue header or side bar that has been with the student throughout their application.

I always knew this was where student/parent's got lost, but I could never explain what was going on. Now I have vaguely technical terms to describe the confusion caused by the ever interesting step 6 of 9.

The treatise in the Norman article about how someday he will have a computer pocket calendar that is also an address book, expense record keeper and works wirelessly to transmit this information to another computer was really interesting in that now it is called a Blackberry.

I took issue, however, with his comment on page 193 that "if the sill was easily automated, it wasn't essential." Automation does not make an action by a person unnecessary, it merely makes it easy for the person to move onto the next step. For example, a calculator. Easily and correctly making calculations over and over again will allow for the rebuilding of buildings, roads, and important natural areas devastated by hurricanes. The calculations are extremely essential. They are a vital part of the effort that will include many other computers to do more quickly and accurately what humans need or want done.

I am learning...ish

I changed the title of my blog, the address of my blog and updated a wiki. Oh the joy of learning and doing new things!!