Brock Allen, PhD          Brock.Allen@SDSU.edu
                          v 619.594.5439  
                          f 619.594.6376
Professor,
Department of Educational Technology
 
Director,      
Center for Learning, Instruction, &
Performance Technologies
 
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
5500 CAMPANILE DRIVE
SAN DIEGO, CA 92182-1182
 
http://edweb.sdsu.edu/people/BSAllen

 
Printing & Downloading

 

Printing documents from this portfolio:

  1. click in the main display frame;
  2. select "print" from your browser menu/toolbar.

 

Downloadable Manuscripts

Unless otherwise indicated, these are Microsoft Word 6 files, compressed with Stuffit.

Some of these manuscripts are last version created before submission to the publisher and therefore contain factual errors and typos. Others are working drafts from our files.

Please do not cite these manuscripts and working drafts. Cite only the published works, as they are the only authoritative versions.

Allen, B. S., & Otto, R. G. (1996). Media as lived environments: the ecological psychology of educational technology. In David H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 199-225). New York: Macmillan. (ISBN 0-02-864663-0).

Medialiv.sit (144K Stuffit)

Excerpts

This chapter explores the metaphor of media as lived environments. A medium can be considered an environment to the extent that it supports both the perception of opportunities for acting and some means for acting. This ecological perspective can help us understand how media users exercise their powers of perception, mobility, and agency within the constraints imposed by particular media technologies and within the conventions established by various media cultures.

The chapter explores paradigms for linking the work of ecological psychologists with the concerns of researchers, designers, and developers who are responsible for understanding and improving the person-environment fit. It examines ways in which ecological psychology might inform the design of products and systems that are efficient in the sense that they promote wise use of human cognitive resources and humane in the sense that they enable authentic modes of being.

 

Allen, B. S., Chiero, R. T., & Hoffman, R. P. (1995). Mapping more authentic multimedia learning environments. In Brent G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design ( pp. 179-190). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. (ISBN 0-87778-290-3).

Authen.sit (80K Stuffit)

Excerpts

One of the more important problems facing the multimedia industry is how to adapt past ideas about systematic development of educational products to new technologies of design and production. Consider the remarkably robust and powerful "desktop" editing systems that are dramatically increasing the ease with which videographers can gather and manipulate moving images. Fast, flexible, low-cost, quality video challenges several assumptions that are embedded in traditional instructional development models about the need to pre-define subject matter and about the utility of elaborate specifications of message detail (flowcharts, scripts, storyboards).

The complexity and cost of early, more cumbersome, multimedia technology encouraged prudent designers and developers to adopt postures that were in some respects defensive; the hope was that pre-specifying content as early as possible would make it easier and less expensive to identify and correct design flaws. However, such "top-down" design models can drive authenticity out of media products by omitting representations of "undocumented" or implicit knowledge and by eliminating information that might support multiple interpretations (Allen, 1992). Among the potential benefits of the technical revolutions in video and multimedia is that they may enable designers to work closer to the phenomena of interest and to make greater use of strategies such as rapid prototyping and user-centered design (Shneiderman, 1992; Tognazzini, 1992; Mack; 1992) by permitting a controlled melding of subject-matter analysis, documentation, and design.

This case study summarizes our efforts to test in the crucible of quasi-commercial product development a "bottom-up" model for developing multimedia software. To accomplish this, we deliberately sought opportunities to design instruction in the context of fluid, unstructured events that contained informal educational opportunities related to language and culture. The resulting product, a multimedia visit to a "Chicano" party, was successful by several standards: it was produced at low cost (less than $30,000); has been favorably reviewed by faculty and students (Cuevas, 1993); won a Cindy Award from the Association of Visual Communicators; and is headed for commercial publication.

Allen, B. S., & Hoffman, R. P. (1993). Varied support for constructive activity in hypermedia-based learning environments. In T. M. Duffy, D. H. Jonasssen, & J. Lowyck (Eds.), Designing environments for constructive learning: NATO Advanced Studies Institute, Series F: Computer and Systems Sciences, Vol. 105, pp. 261-290. Heidelberg, FRG: Springer-Verlag. (ISBN 3-540-56452-7)

Varlev.sit (64K Stuffit)

Excerpts

Since much future learning will basically consist of interaction with large computer data bases containing a wide variety of mediated representations, a major challenge for constructivist designers will be to provide learners of varied ability and interests with means of support that are sufficient for achieving their learning goals but which do not impose unnecessary restrictions or constraints. Both hypermedia technology and the zeitgeist of its advocate community favor open, informational approaches that eschew explicit statement of learning outcomes or prescription of instructional strategies.

With developers in ever-accelerating pursuit of "user-friendly" hypermedia interfaces, there is a risk that in attempting to make navigation "seamless" or "effortless," the meaning that accompanies shifts of "place" in "hyperspace" will be lost. When buttons become bland, generic designators, one has to ask, "Why use a spatial metaphor for organization of knowledge in the first place?" If movement between information blocks is merely a matter of utility rather than meaning--of dividing up information so that it will fit on screens--then navigation gets reduced to a series of blind and uninformed leaps.

 

Allen, B. S., Kompella, J., & Hoffman, R. P. (1993). Computer-baseed curriculum mapping.. In Simonson, M. R., (Ed.), Proceedings of Selected Research Paper Presentations at the 1993 Annual Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Allen, B. S. (1994, April). A multiplicity of media: Changing paradigms for working and learning in multimedia environments. Educational Technology, 34(4), 33-34. (ERIC No. EJ481851).

Mulmedia.sit (32K Stuffit)

Excerpts

Do you use phrases such as "multimedia environment," and "computer-based learning environment" in place of older nomenclature such "computer-assisted instruction," and "audio-visual learning?" Most developers and consumers now seem to favor the "environment" label. But why? Superficially, computer interfaces have changed only slightly in the last decade: we still sit in front of a glass panel coated with phosphors bombarded by electrons. For all the talk about virtual reality, most of us still type responses at a keyboard.

Is the notion of computer "environments" merely a strategy for marketing multimedia peripherals or is it a clue that we need to expand our thinking about mediated learning? It's probably a clue: that we need to attend to old audiovisual ideas that lurk in our thinking and that we need to reexamine in particular our notion that multimedia can be designed as a flow of "messages" to be conveyed by a multiplicity of audiovisual "channels."

 

Allen, B. S. (1992). Constructive criticisms. In T. M. Duffy, D. Jonnasen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Hilsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (ISBN 0-8058-1272-5).

Constru.sit (48K Stuffit)

Excerpts

My purpose in this chapter is to broadly examine the ideas in this book against the general background of change that has overtaken instructional development during the last decade. After a year of reflection, I have come to the conclusion that I was basically a constructivist in my earlier experience as an educator and that I am returning from a long trip through what I shall refer to in this essay as "classical instructional design."

I don't regret my journey through classical methods and theories. Much of what I have learned along the way will still be useful. We are in transition; the conversations in this book are just the beginning of an inquiry. It will take a long time to test the assumptions and proposals laid out in these pages and many years to develop robust methods. I still have doubts, but it is good to be home.

SemNet® Knowledge Mapping Software

Faletti, J. (designer & implementer), Fisher, K.M., Patterson, H.A., Lipson, J.I., Allen, B.S., Logan, J.D., & Thorton, R.M. (designers). SemNet ® (Version 1.1, Macintosh computer application). San Diego: SemNet Research Group.

 

SemNet Related Downloads

SemNet® Application.sit

448K Stuffit

SemNet Examples.sit

240K Stuffit

SemNet Tools.sit

128K Stuffit

Semnet Background.sit

32K Stuffit

Applications of SemNet®

Collaborative Thinking. SemNet supports collaborative endeavors such as curriculum development by teams of professionals or building a community of learners among students. Collaboration leads to conversation which, in conjunction with the skeletal frameworks of ideas that serve as manipulable reference objects for discussion, results in clarification of understanding and consensus-building.

Diagnosing and Developing Cognitive Skills. SemNet can help individuals develop systematic thinking skills for organizing and comprehending denotative factual knowledge. Instructors can diagnose many student learning problems by examining nets they have constructed.

Learning Tool. Students use SemNet to support their own personal knowledge construction. It provides scaffolding, guides organizing and thinking strategies, and serves as an external extension of short term memory.

Personal Organizer. Individuals use SemNet to construct their family trees, keep track of their committees, and analyze topics of interest to them such as the structure of the organization in which they work.

Qualitative Research Tool. Interest in SemNet as an educational tool grows steadily (see bibliography). SemNet is also useful as a qualitative research tool. See, for example: Weitzman, Eban A. & Miles, Matthew B. (1995). Computer Programs for Qualitative Data Analysis: A Software Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. ISBN 0-8039-5537-5.

Study Notes / Professional Notes. SemNet allows individuals to organize their ideas in an interconnected framework and to share them with their students or peers, at a level of specificity not attainable in linear written or spoken language. It could be marketed as a form of Study Notes.

Teaching Tool. Instructors use SemNet to prepare their lectures, as a lecturing tool, and to provide students with detailed study notes.

Text Companion. A semantic network corresponding to a textbook can serve as a useful learning aid. A masking feature makes SemNet a valuable study tool that prompts integration of ideas. Ease of searching makes SemNet a useful reference tool &endash; you can look up an idea even when you can't remember its name, if you just know something to which it may be connected.

History of SemNet Research Group & SemNet (R) Software

The SemNet Research Group (SRG) was formed at the University of California - Davis (UCD) in 1983. The SRG consisted of two Co-Directors: Kathleen M. Fisher (then on the faculty in the Division of Biological Sciences at UCD and in the School of Education and Graduate Group in Mathematics & Science Education at UC - Berkeley, and now at SDSU); and Joseph Faletti, who had completed nine years of graduate study in computer and cognitive science at UCB and had just joined the faculty at UCD (Joe is now at SDSU and UCSD). Other members of the design team included Joe Lipson , physicist and internationally renown science educator (who was initially with WICAT or the Worldwide Institute for Computer-Aided Instruction in Utah and was subsequently with CSU-Chico); Hugh Patterson, professor of anatomy (initially with the UCD School of Medicine and now at UCSF Medical School); Robert Thornton, botanist, UCD; and Carl Spring, educational psychologist, UCD. The members of the SRG were drawn together by their common interests in using cognitive science and computer technology to improve science learning. Jack Logan (Music, SDSU) and Brockenbrough Allen (Educational Technology, SDSU) joined the SRG in 1989, strengthening the SRG in multimedia design skills. Roger Christianson (Biology, Southern Oregon State College) and James Wandersee (Biology Education, Louisiana State University) have become affiliated with SRG in recent years.

Software design began in 1983. The Group began with a study strategy favored by Thornton: putting all key ideas in a domain into a hat, pulling out any two at once, and describing the relation between them. It shifted easily from there to semantic network theory, which models the way in which the human mind stores denotative factual information in long term. The goal was to bring the power of well-established cognitive theory to the aid of students engaged in learning the semantically complex domain of biology. Since it was being designed to help students master complex content areas, the application had to be fast, intuitive, and easy to use; a significant learning curve for the software would be an intolerable added burden for the student. Each design decision was guided by two concerns: Is this the best thing for the student? Is this consistent with cognitive theory and learning theory?

Software development began in 1986 on one of the first MacPlus computers. SemNet was introduced into the classroom in 1987 and about sixty faculty located around the world were invited to beta test the software. Also in 1987, SemNet received third prize in Apple's 'Wheels of the Mind' national software contest. Many new features were added to the SemNet application on the basis of needs identified by users in classrooms ranging from elementary school to graduate school, in corporations such as Bank of America, and in governmental entities such as the European Common Market. The SRG began marketing the software in 1989. In 1995, the marketing effort was terminated and the software is now being disseminated via the World Wide Web (http://apple.sdsu.edu/People/SemNet.html).

What the Research Shows. Although initially designed to support biology learning, SemNet proved to be a general purpose application suitable for organizing knowledge about many different domains. Nets have been constructed in such languages as Japanese, Spanish, French, and German as well as English. Research has shown that: students enjoy using SemNet; SemNet helps students shift from rote to meaningful learning; after using SemNet, students become more discriminating learners in their other courses, focusing on main ideas and the links between ideas; students using SemNet often acquire deeper understanding of ideas than others; group construction of nets increases student dialog, negotiation and understanding while decreasing the instructor's grading burden; instructor-generated nets provide valuable study tools in large lecture courses; reviewing nets allows instructors to identify & easily remediate a variety of learning problems; and SemNet can be a valuable qualitative research tool.