Global J. of Engng. Educ., Vol.I,
No.2 Printed in Australia |
Copyright 1997 UICEE
|
||
| |||
Colonel Daniel M. Litynski Colonel William D. Lane Major Curt A. Carver Jr
United States Military Academy West Point, New York, 10996, United States of America |
|||
|
|
||
|
|||
|
|
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A review of the developmental history of multimedia, or more specifically hypermedia, reveals the remarkable growth of these phenomena over the relatively short period of the last quarter century. Inextricably woven together in this history is the parallel development of hardware and software that complement each other and directly contribute to the rapid growth of hypermedia.
It could be argued that the phenomenon began in 1972 with the advent of the interactive video game Pong [1]. The video game boom of the 1970s led to the creation of Atari and Nintendo game machines, but these were supplanted by the growth of the personal computer with the introduction of the Apple computer in 1978 and the IBM personal computer with Microsoft DOS in 1981.
Perhaps it was the fear of PAC-Man devouring our very existence that drove the game market into the full computer domain. The Macintosh computer introduced in 1982 became the forerunner of the true interactive multimedia computer with tools and applications for the computer user. Shortly thereafter the Intel 386 provided the computing power to support the growing need through the 1980s for virtual reality applications and video animation. While computing power was growing, so was the need to store ever larger amounts of programme information, resulting in larger hard disk drives and the compact disk (CD) in the mid 1980s. The introduction of the Windows interface allowed easier interaction for DOS-based users. The introduction of the first electronic encyclopedia on a disk in 1986 by Grolier Inc, and the first truly multimedia ready machine, the Commodore Amiga with its bouncing 3-D ball, reduced PAC-Man to history and marked the beginning of presentation graphics and sound. During this time, Harvard Graphics first introduced a graphical presentation package. The end of the 80s saw CD-ROM technology mature and the infusion of recorded sound through the sound blaster card that provided digitally recorded musical instruments. The 1990s commenced with full multimedia just over the horizon.
The explosion of multimedia in the final decade of the century began with Grolier’s multimedia encyclopedia that provided text, sound, and images. Windows provided a suitable platform for developmental tools like Autodesk 3-D graphics and Adobe Photoshop. The multimedia explosion emerged full force with the development of the World Wide Web via the Internet in the early 1990s. An avalanche of developments followed - such as sound compression and picture compression (MPEG, JPEG) standards to overcome bandwidth limitations, and Quicktime for movies. The world opened to a new common language of electronic interaction. The Mosaic web browser in 1993 and Netscape in 1995 made hypermedia exchange a simple point and click action. During this time, interactive games became more sophisticated with the introduction and shareware distribution of the Doom engine; the simple bouncing pong with a ping noise was now replaced by laser weapons, active animation and sound effects of Cyberdemons.
The recent advent of Windows 95 and Windows NT operating systems on Pentium microprocessors has helped make the World Wide Web an electronic interconnection of users who are ready to interact with Java applets on machines worldwide. This electronic media exchange is the foundation for new technological tools for education. Our challenge is to harness the untapped benefits in this revolution of world wide interconnectivity in the Information Age.
At the United States Military Academy (USMA) at West Point we have entered the Information Age with a full commitment to producing graduates who know and appreciate its value and are able to capitalise on their ability to use electronic media. Hypermedia is, at its core, an information management tool. Hypertext documents contain links that allow the user to move through a textual document nonlinearly. Multimedia combines the use of two or more means of information display, including text, sound, graphics, or video. Hypermedia is then the linking of multiple media sources in a dynamic interface.
Our entry into the Information Age began many years ago with a commitment to providing a computer-based infrastructure that supports the cadet population, faculty and staff. The result is an intranet at the Academy that provides access and interconnection for each cadet in their rooms, and faculty member at their desks. This internal local area network provides electronic mail, file transfer and other bulletin board services; it recently expanded to provide Internet service to the World Wide Web for all students and faculty.
The entry of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science into the domain of multimedia began in the early 90s on several fronts. The department was the initiator of the proposal for an advanced technology classroom in 1991. This developed into an institution-wide programme designed to provide a forum for research into advanced instructional techniques using many multimedia assets [2]. This was one part of our continuing effort to develop effective teaching methods and equipment. Another project began in 1994 to design a hypertext, and later multimedia, based version of the US Army’s fundamental document, Field Manual 100-5, titled Operations. This initiated a programme that has itself grown with the speed of the WWW.
The success of the hypertext field-manual project gave impetus to expansion into multimedia presentations in an advanced technology environment and eventually to hypermedia through linked interconnection to other media applications. The result was a successful effort to convert an entire introductory course, CS383, Computer Systems, to a hypermedia format [3][4]. Several cadet projects were simultaneously initiated to investigate and create hypermedia based entities for the development of hypermedia tools.
The software tools needed for the development, co-ordination, and presentation of hypermedia courseware are already being developed at an explosive rate. The challenge for educators is to use the rapidly expanding capabilities in the learning environment. At West Point, several distributed, interactive, student-centred learning tools have already been developed or are under development [5-8].
The Promise and Practice of WWW-Based Hypermedia
The use of hypermedia based on the World Wide Web has the potential for interconnecting related courseware from different courses or different institutions in ways that were previously impossible. This provides for the explicit development of threads of learning within an institution independently of departmental boundaries, and potentially for seamless integration of course material across institutional boundaries. This is a fundamental and powerful change in how students may learn. Previously, students completed a series of what may have been loosely coupled courses that comprised their undergraduate education. Linking of the material and synthesis of knowledge from these different courses was left to the student.
Students often do not recognise all of the links between courses in a curriculum. Some curricula could be likened to construction of an educational (undergraduate) platform on pillars (courses). If those in charge of constructing the pillars (professors) do not communicate often with each other and the students, the students responsible for constructing the platform are left to their own devices and may find pillars of different and incompatible colours, shapes and sizes. With hyperdisciplinary courseware the interconnections between courses can be made explicit in the form of links, and co-ordinated so that departmental or institutional boundaries are transparent to the student. The student neither knows nor cares which department is providing information; she or he is simply trying to solve a problem that requires informational resources being provided over the WWW. For example, instead of learning cross products in math and then relearning it again in a slightly different format in physics, chemistry or electrical engineering, students may learn cross products in any domain depending on the application. The hypermedia mathematics course would have links to other, perhaps advanced, courses that use cross products, enabling students to clearly see where they would use cross products elsewhere. Other hypermedia courses in turn would have links to the first course in case their students needed to refresh their knowledge of cross products. Instructors in all disciplines that use cross products could see in detail how other courses use cross products as well. Institutional administrators and deans can identify and reinforce threads of learning to provide a consistent and integrated curriculum. There will still be pillars with different colours, shapes and sizes, but now the architects can see what the other pillar builders are producing, and the students can more easily see how the pillars work together to support a platform. WWW-based hypermedia, with the development of the proper tools, could facilitate the development, co-ordination, and presentation of course material across departmental boundaries.
While the promise of hyperdisciplinary courseware is extraordinary, the technical and political problems are considerable and a great deal of work remains to be done. The tools mentioned above facilitate the development and presentation of hyperdisciplinary courseware, but additional tools are necessary to support the coordination and development of linked hyperdisciplinary courseware. Should this co-ordination be done at the course level, lesson level or lesson objective level? Should it be centralised through deans, departments or decentralised at the instructor level? What mechanism will be used to provide persistent uniform resource locations (PURLs) so that, as courses migrate within a department, courseware links from other courses remain accurate? Furthermore, no large-scale hyperdisciplinary courseware management tools have yet been developed, although the initial co-ordination between departments at USMA has been made and has led to a National Science Foundation proposal to study the problem. Co-ordination between the United States Military Academy, Virginia Polytechnic and State University (Virginia Tech) and the University of Wales is also underway to extend the concepts of hyperdisciplinary courseware to different institutions and measure the effectiveness of hypermedia-based courseware.
In addition to the technical difficulties associated with the development of hyperdisciplinary courses, many political barriers remain. Hyperdisciplinary courseware has the potential to clearly and explicitly display threads of education between different departments. This may or may not be desired. Course boundaries are weakened as interconnected courseware treats courses as informational resources in an integrated educational system. This may weaken the flexibility and discretion of course directors and instructors and strengthen the power of department heads and administrators. Individual professors may have less opportunity to independently develop their own courses without external input, or to teach the same course that they have taught for the last twenty years. Interrelationships between different courses should become clearer and, perhaps more importantly, interrelationships that were thought to exist between courses, and do not, may also become clear. Courses that previously had been considered vital to a curriculum may not be and instead may be viewed as isolated pillars of knowledge that are never revisited during undergraduate or graduate education. Instructors who are resistant to change, oversight, or the tremendous amount of work required to create hyperdisciplinary courseware, may claim academic freedom, lack of proof that hypermedia courseware will improve learning, or a variety of reasons to stop or slow the development of hyperdisciplinary courseware. These barriers might be significant and not easily overcome.
The promise of hyperdisciplinary courseware is clear. It is possible to have interdisciplinary, tightly co-ordinated, explicitly linked curricula, with seamless sharing of vast amounts of information between courses within a university or among institutions. The potential for synergy and enhanced learning is great. The technical and political problems that must be overcome are likewise significant.
Distributed, interactive, student-centred learning
WWW-based hypermedia courseware offers the potential of distributed, interactive, student-centred learning. Most current WWW-based hypermedia courseware focuses on the presentation of information and nothing more. Future hypermedia systems increasingly will add interactive modules, intelligent tutorial systems and adaptive systems. These will support the student in making real choices of how they learn and how they adapt to the learning style, knowledge needs, or knowledge level of the student. Such systems can be implemented using Common Gateway Interface Forms (CGI), JAVA or JAVA Script. Unlike current textbooks that provide a single treatment of a subject, future hypermedia textbooks will automatically adjust the presentation and navigation of material to the needs, strengths and weaknesses of the student. Each student will receive their own virtual textbook adapted to their needs. In the ideal hypermedia system, students receive their own computer-based tutor that responds appropriately to their individual needs.
Tailoring of the presentation and navigation though hypermedia courseware will significantly enhance the pedagogical value of hypermedia courseware. Current textbooks and simple multimedia or hypermedia systems focus on the static presentation of information in the former and the incorporation of multiple forms of media in the latter. By instead changing the presentation of information to meet the needs of individual students, material that is best suited to their immediate learning requirements is put forth in a logical order and then adapted based on individually demonstrated learning styles. Material that is not understood can be revisited, additional remedial tutorials added, or more advanced material introduced if the student already understands the current material. By providing adaptive navigation, students can receive additional feedback on what information they understand, how they should proceed through the material based on their knowledge, learning style, preference or other characteristics. As with adaptive presentation there are no comparable systems with current textbooks and simple multimedia and hypermedia systems.
Student-centred learning fundamentally shifts the balance between learning inside and outside the classroom. With hypermedia courseware, students have access to far greater informational resources and can prepare in a more elaborate fashion [9-15]. Material traditionally covered in class can be introduced, at least at the lower levels in Bloom’s Taxonomy, outside the classroom. What was not understood during classroom meetings is available in greater detail outside of formal class; there the student controls the pace and content of instruction. Instructors can revise material covered in class, knowing that students have dynamic access to hypermedia courseware. Instruction in the classroom can focus more on the underlying concepts and less on the regurgitation of raw facts. This can lead to a fundamental shift in how lessons are taught and how students prepare for class [16]. Learning basic course material, while always the student’s responsibility, becomes more student-centred and less focused on the instructor.
A good example is the Computer Systems course, CS383, at the United States Military Academy, which has shifted from a lecture-based course to one that emphasises student-centred learning in the classroom. The details have been reported previously, and the course home page is shown in Figure 1 [17]. While there are still lecture-based classes, more than half of the classes are twenty minutes of lecture followed by thirty-minute graded, co-operative exercises. These culminate in group presentations of solutions to the class, or several individual student presentations (7 minutes each) on topics of interest. As reported in Seger, students learn 25% of what they read, 40% of what they read and hear, and 90% of what they do [18]. By having the students teach themselves and work together in groups, it is believed that students assume more responsibility for their learning and are more likely to study together outside the classroom where most learning takes place. Student-centred learning places the responsibility for learning squarely where it belongs: on the student. Hypermedia facilitates student-centred learning by enhancing the informational resources available to the student and providing interactive software that allows students to make choices and see the results of those choices.
At West Point our active efforts to pursue hypermedia applications include the following: the HTML Course Creator [19], the HTML Glossary Tool, the Adaptive Student Response System [20], the Course Digital Library [21], and the Adaptive Hypermedia Interface [22]. These are examples of tools developed to support the integration of hyperdisciplinary courseware. The HTML Course Creator (see Figure 2) provides a point and click interface for the rapid development of hypermedia courses. Courseware development using the HTML Course Creator requires no knowledge of HTML and provides a consistent and easy to use tool specifically designed for courseware development. For similar projects see GETMAS [23], HM-Card [24], Hypercourseware [25], Hypertactics [26], ISAAC [27], MALL [28], Metaplant [29], NEAT [30][31], and Nestor [32]. The HTML Glossary Tool recursively searches through course hypertext and adds glossary term pop-up definitions from a common dictionary. Multiple dictionaries can be applied to the same hypertext. This facilitates the development, maintenance and sharing of course dictionaries across course boundaries. The Adaptive Student Response System provides an on-line testing tool that adapts the difficulty of the question based on how the student has answered previous questions. If the student answers correctly, the student gets harder questions, while the student receives easier questions if they answer incorrectly. Both instructors and students receive feedback on student performance using the system. The course digital library allows for the paperless submission and grading of student papers and presentations [33]. It also supports a digital library of previous student submissions. Students can search and use these previous student submissions to build their papers and presentations. Finally, the adaptive hypermedia interface adapts the interface of the course according to the learning style of the individual student [34]. Each student gets a different interface to the course based on their own preferred learning style.
The CS383 Virtual Computer shown in Figure 3 is a simulation and tutorial package that allows students to build a virtual computer and use hypermedia and video-based tutorials on the components of the computer [35]. Three different versions of the system (Visual Basic, JAVA and JAVA Script-based) have been developed to address different learning styles and operating system architectures. There are seventeen different components of the virtual computer that can be configured, and there are over 110 different options between the different components. There is also a series of tutorials associated with the components that are either hypermedia or video-based and were generated as student projects. Taken together, the Virtual Computer allows students to explore the relationships between different computer components, incrementally build a virtual computer, or model their current computer system.
Additional interactive learning modules based on JAVA, JAVA Script or CGI, rapidly being developed around the world, will be useful for educational purposes and for all other similar applications that have WWW access. These distributed, interactive hypermedia modules all require significant programming skill to develop, which limits the number of faculty that can do so. As programming environments mature to ease the development of these modules, more will be produced.
WWW-based hypermedia courseware offers the promise of distributed, interactive, student-centred learning. Students will have greater flexibility and control to study when and where they desire. The courseware will be interactive, adaptive and responsive to the pedagogical needs of the students. Classroom instruction can be transformed from primarily lecture-based to predominantly student-centred. Students balance learning and retain more by interactive doing and reading. Coupled with hyperdisciplinary courseware, the methodology of student learning may fundamentally change.
The Problems of World Wide Web Based Hypermedia
The infrastructure requirements of interactive, student-centred WWW-based hypermedia courseware are extensive. To be hypermedia, the courseware should include hypertext, graphics, movies, animation and audio components where appropriate, as well as an intelligent tutoring and adaptive presentation and navigation system. Assuming that the network provides sufficient bandwidth to simulate at least a double-speed CD-ROM drive in terms of performance, and assuming only one in every four users are active on the network at any time, each 10 Mbps Ethernet segment has a maximum population of approximately thirty users [36]. Providing this capability for students in their dormitory rooms is expensive yet critical to the implementation of hypermedia courseware. Fast Ethernet, FDDI or ATM to the desktop may be needed in the near future to match the explosion in courseware development. The network system must be responsive to the user to achieve distributed, interactive software, which is the true value of hypermedia.
Significant hardware investment is necessary in addition to the network requirements. To support student-centred learning, students must have access to the hypermedia in the classroom, in their rooms and other convenient locations throughout the campus, such as the library. These points must have multimedia computers capable of reliably providing access to the hypermedia course material. Such hardware infrastructure cost is both significant and recurring. If each student is to have their individual computer, a nominal freshmen class of 2,500 students, purchasing a typical multimedia computer of US$3,000, would make an annual expenditure of US$7.5 million dollars. This is a substantial capital investment for institutions or for the students who would bear the costs.
There is an additional significant cost associated with maintaining the network and hardware infrastructure necessary to support hypermedia. Computer support personnel requirements for a 10,000 user network are minimally twenty for network administration and fifty for hardware. While some of this support structure can be provided by students, the nucleus must be highly trained, highly motivated and relatively highly paid computer support professionals.
As with other re-engineering projects, the conversion of existing course material and the creation of new course material based on the WWW requires a tremendous investment in time. Some estimates for the creation of interactive hypermedia courseware reach 200 hours of development for each hour of interactive, hypermedia courseware [37]. The development of a forty-hour interactive, hypermedia course, by this estimate, would require approximately 8,000 hours of development time. Simple hypermedia courseware for information distribution would require significantly less, but the pedagogical value of the courseware would likewise be reduced. This large time investment represents a significant cost associated with hypermedia for pedagogical uses.
Hypermedia courseware development can seriously detract from the research efforts of faculty, depending on their interests. Many institutions do not consider hypermedia courseware development research for tenure purposes, and the opportunity costs associated with courseware development are then more significant for junior faculty. Those seeking tenure must continue research in their field, and time may not be available for both.
The WWW is in its infancy, but is expanding quickly. The tools for development of HTML courses are rapidly evolving. A popular, new format is three-dimensional presentations using the Virtual Reality Markup Language (VRML). Many tools are not commercially available and must be developed by faculty to meet their specific courseware needs. This significantly slows advanced courseware development. As tools mature, the costs associated with hypermedia courseware development should decrease. Until that time, courseware developers must continue to create their own tools, and the cost associated with this effort will remain significant.
Resistance to hypermedia course development will persist until the time required to generate hypermedia courseware is significantly reduced; the perceived benefits of hypermedia are proven and are comparatively greater than the perceived cost; and hypermedia courseware development is considered as a component in tenure decisions.
Hypermedia courseware developers must learn relatively new and rapidly evolving standards. Items considered state-of-the-art two years ago are already outdated as HTML is two versions removed. VRML, Shockwave, Quicktime VR, JAVA, JAVA Script, more than seventy plug-ins for WWW browsers, and tens, if not hundreds, of HTML editors have been released. There is no such thing as final courseware in this rapidly evolving domain. Faculty members involved with hypermedia courseware development face constant revision and expenditure of time to maintain and improve their courseware as new tools and techniques become available. As with other large software programmes, the cost associated with the courseware maintenance is significant.
There is considerable confusion within organisations as to how to develop standards for courseware or a consistent interface between multiple courses within a single department due to the flexibility and novelty of HTML. Few universities have established standards for course directory structure, interface design, or policies for interconnecting courseware across departmental boundaries. Retrofitting courses to facilitate sharing of information seamlessly will be expensive. As a result, the integration of different courses with diverse interfaces is extremely difficult despite the tremendous advantages of hyper-disciplinary courseware.
Students must dramatically change how they prepare for class in courses that provide extensive hypermedia courseware. Students in traditional courses typically only have their textbook, course notes, and whatever information they can find in the library or on the Internet. Learning new information has often been a guided, passive activity where the student reads and reflects on course material that has been orchestrated by the instructor. Hypermedia courseware can dramatically change this by providing multiple sources of information that may or may not be relevant in a consistent course structure. The courseware can be interactive and the student given choices for class preparation with different outcomes based on the paths that they take through material. This has the potential to significantly improve student learning, but requires a shift in student preparation methods. Faculty must also plan accordingly.
How a student prepares for class is fundamental to effectiveness. Experience at the United States Military Academy suggests that this transition from an efficient passive to active learner requires 10-20 lessons of exposure to the hypermedia courseware before the students are proficient and comfortable using it. While approximately 75% of the students make this transition, some 25% of the students have great difficulty [38]. This widens the gap between best and worst students. The best, with access to greater informational resources, prepare for class better and learn more effectively and efficiently; the worst students do not, and become confused about what resources they should use and either study poorly or not at all. Additional hypermedia resources, such as the Adaptive Hypermedia Interface, have been developed to help those students who become organisationally confused, by providing a structured approach into the hypermedia courseware. While the effectiveness of this approach has yet to be validated, initial results suggest that providing a guided path through the course material, based on learning styles, dramatically reduces the number of students who become organisationally confused. Several approaches using co-operative exercises and real-time gaming quizzes also appear to be effective [39][40].
Training students to use hypermedia courseware is required due to its novelty. Most will require an orientation and, depending on its complexity, perhaps several lessons of instruction to be aware of the functionality provided. This training requires valuable classroom time and reduces the amount that can be dedicated to the course subject matter.
Learning to use hypermedia courseware requires a paradigm shift by the student. This transition requires time for the student, time in the classroom to acquaint the students with the hypermedia courseware, and will result in a widening of the gap between the best and worst students. Motivating and guiding poor students to prepare properly is an age-old problem that technology may only exacerbate as students have access to greater informational resources. While the first two issues will diminish over time, the gap between the best and worst students will probably remain and new techniques will be needed to enhance the performance of the worst students as much as the performance of the best students.
The issues of system security and access control remain core problems that must be addressed by system administrators of hypermedia tool sets. A web site requires software and hardware security to insure system integrity so data corruption cannot take place from outside sources. This is extremely important for system administrators, but difficult to insure with worldwide access available to users.
It is now rare for a system to protect the intellectual value of software on the web. This issue spans the activities of a web site, but may be particularly important for contributors of information to a web site if they wish to protect their personal and professional interests. This can be difficult for publicly available material placed on a web site.
Hypermedia has evolved over a quarter century from limited interactive videos to the potential for massive information retrieval and manipulation. The promise for educational enhancement through curriculum integration, multiple learning methodologies and information retrieval is great. Current practice generally focuses on information acquisition. Adaptation of presentation methods to the style of the learner is being pursued at West Point and efforts are underway to integrate knowledge through links across course and disciplinary boundaries. Several tools have been created and improvement in learning among certain categories of students is apparent. Many problems need to be addressed and solved before the full potential of WWW-based hypermedia is realised. The cost of infrastructure and personnel resources can be great; there is a need for good value-added (cost/benefit) analysis to validate the worth of the methodology. The lack of standards can lead to wasted expenditure of resources if a technology becomes obsolete or dead-ended. The rapid pace of technology can force large expenditures to maintain applications and tools. Security and intellectual property rights issues are a continuing concern. The medium holds great promise despite these concerns. Vision and direction are needed to make use of this emerging solution looking for problems to solve.
1. Calica, B. and Newson, G., When did you get multimedia? NewMedia, 6, 1 , 48-52 (1996).
2. Caffrey, F. and Carver, C.A., Integrating advanced technologies into an undergraduate curriculum. Proc. of 1994 Frontiers in Education Conf., San Jose, USA, 274-278 (1994).
3. Carver, C.A. and Biehler, M.A., Incorporating multimedia and hypertext documents in an undergraduate curriculum. Proc. of 1994 Frontiers in Education Conf., San Jose, USA, 87-92 (1994).
4. Carver, C.A. and Gregory, J.E., Networked hyper-media in undergraduate curriculum, Proc. of 1995 ED-MEDIA Conf. on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Graz, Austria, 139-144 (1995).
5. Carver, C.A., Large-Scale, Hypermedia-based, course legacy systems. Proc. of ED-TELECOM 1996 World Conf. on Educational Telecommunications, Boston, USA, 354 (1996).
6. Carver, C.A. and Ring, B., World wide web virtual computer: reaching the active, global student. Proc. of 1996 Frontiers in Education Conf., Salt Lake City, USA, 1014-1017 (1996).
7. Carver, C.A., Ressler, E.K. and Biehler, M.A., Low-cost, deliverable student response systems. J. of Information System Education, 73-78 (1995).
8. Carver, C.A., Howard, R.A., and Lavelle, E., Enhancing student learning by incorporating learning styles into adaptive hypermedia. Proc. of 1996 ED-MEDIA World Conf. on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Boston, USA, 118-123 (1996).
9. Beumont, I. and Brusilousky, P., Adaptive educational hypermedia. Proc. of 1995 ED-MEDIA Conf. on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Graz, Austria, 93-98 (1995).
10. Hekmatpour, A., An adaptive presentation model for hypermedia information systems. J. of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 4, 2/3, 211-238 (1995).
11. Boyle, C. and Encarnacion, A.O., MetaDoc: an adaptive hypertext reading system. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 4, 1-19 (1994).
12. Brusilousky, P. and Pesin, L., ISIS-Tutor: An adaptive hypertext learning environment. Japanese-CIS Symposium in Knowledge-based Software Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, 83-87 (1994).
13. Beumont, I., User modeling in the interactive anatomy tutoring system. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 4, 21-45 (1994).
14. Brusilousky, P., Intelligent Tutor, Environment and manual for introductory programming. Educational and Training Technology International, 29, 1, 26-34 (1995).
15. Fischer, G. M., Reeves, T. B. and Rieman, J., Minimalist explanations in knowledge-based systems. 23rd Annual Hawaii Inter. Conf. on System Sciences, Kalua-Kona, USA, 309-317 (1990).
16. Carver, C. A. and Howard, R.A., An assessment of networked multimedia and hypermedia. Proc. of 1995 Frontiers in Education Conf., Atlanta, GA, 2c5.17- 2c5.21 (1995).
17. Carver, ibid.
18. Seger, E.R., The new standard for education. The J. of Multimedia Computing, 1-1, 51-52 (1990).
19. Carver, C.A. and Ray, C.A., Automating hypermedia course creation and maintenance with the HTML course creator. Proc. of First World Conf. of the Web Society, San Francisco, USA, CDROM: WEBNET96.TM, file:///ll/html/218.htm (1996).
20. Carver, Ressler and Biehler, ibid.
21. Carver, ibid.
22. Carver, Howard, and Lavelle, ibid.
23. Wong, Wing-Kwong, Tak-Wai Chan, Yao-Sheng Cheng, and Shih-Shen Penh, A multimedia authoring system for building intelligent learning systems. Proc. of ED-MEDIA 96: World Conf. of Educational Hypermedia and Multimedia, Boston, USA, 708-713 (1996).
24. Mayrhofer, V., Scherbakov, N. and Andrews, K., HM-Card: a new approach to courseware production. Proc. of ED-MEDIA 96: World Conf. of Educational Hypermedia and Multimedia, Boston, USA, 433-438 (1996).
25. Siviter, D. and Brown, K., Hypercourseware. Computers in Education, 18, 163-170 (1992).
26. Mulhauser, M., Hypermedia and navigation as a basis for authoring/learning environments. Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 1, 51-64 (1992).
27. McAleese, R. and Ching, L., An instructional design advisor for computer-based learning: ISAAC. Proc. of EDMEDIA 93: World Conf. on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 68-75 (1993).
28. Tanaka, K., Iga, S. and Yasumura, M., The development and the evaluation of the multimedia assisted language learning environment: MALL. Proc. of ED-MEDIA 96: World Conf. of Educational Hypermedia and Multimedia, Boston, USA, 661-666 (1996).
29. Hedberg, J., Harper, B., Wright, R. and Farr,G., An authoring metaphor to match constructivist theory. Proc. of ED-MEDIA 96: World Conf. of Educational Hypermedia and Multimedia. Boston, USA, 776 (1996).
30. Mayer, S., Muldner, T. and Unger, C., NEAT: an integrated authoring environment based upon toolbook. Proc. of EDMEDIA 93: World Conf. on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 332-339 (1993).
31. Muldner, T., Muldner, K. and van Veen, C. M., The design and evolution of an authoring environment and its applications. Proc. of ED-MEDIA 96: World Conf. of Educational Hypermedia and Multimedia, Boston, USA. 503-508 (1996).
32. Jonassen, D. H. and Harris, D., Analyzing and selecting instructional strategies and tactics. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 4 (1996).
33. Carver, ibid.
34. Carver, Howard, and Lavelle, ibid.
35. Carver and Ring, ibid.
36. Carver, C.A. and Howard, R.A., Delivering networked multimedia and hypertext documents across a campus area network. Proc. of ASEE National Conf., Anaheim, USA, 916-922 (1995).
37. Marshall, I.M., Samson, W.B., Dugard, P.I., Castell, A.M., and Smith, N.M., If you can’t measure it you can’t manage it! A framework for measuring multimedia courseware development. Proc. of ED-MEDIA 95 World Conf. on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Graz, Austria, 424-429 (1995)
38. Carver, C.A., Howard, R.A., and Lane, W.D., A methodology for active student-controlled learning: motivating our weakest students. Proc. of the ACM Computer Science Education Symposium, 195-199 (1996).
39. Carver, C.A. and Gregory, J., Enhancing cooperative learning through game-based software. Proc. of the Assoc. for Applied Interactive Multimedia Conf.,Charleston, SC (1996).
40. Carver, C.A., Howard, R.A., and Lane, W.D., Reaching the weakest students through active student-controlled learning. Liberal Education, 82, 24-29 (1996).
Colonel
Daniel M. Litynski
Colonel
William D. Lane
Major
Curt A. Carver Jr