Teaching, resources, references

Wide Angle Tasmania

wide angle tasmania

From the site "Wide Angle Tasmania's aim is to create an inspired and inspiring community that nurtures emerging talent in film and video production in metropolitan and regional Tasmania."

gear hire, rentals suported by Screen Tas and AFC.

Educational Software Acquisition Programs (ESAP)

Educational Software Acquisition Programs (ESAP)

From the site: "The Educational Software Acquisition Programs (ESAP) has been established to provide quality educational software to schools, libraries and TAFEs at reduced prices."

Video Blogging

ANT | Not TV - an Mac OS X application that makes reading video blogging really easy.

Web conference

Talking Communities Web Conferencing Solutions - another solution for web support/conferencing the cost is only $20 US per month.

lab.3000 Digital Design Biennale

I visited the lab.3000 Digital Design Biennale at the Melbourne Museum as part of another trip to Melbourne, it wasn’t quite what I expected from an event called a Design Biennale. I expected a showcase of the best designs from Victoria instead it was a survey show of work from Victorian design schools, plus some showcasing of good work by designers and artists. It’s great to see the focus in the Design Biennale not being on current designers but on future designers, the people that are going to be making a difference into the future. The education institutions are where the seeds are planted and future networks developed, design schools are like the foundations of the design industry.

I’m not a fan of design exhibitions; possibly because I don’t see design objects as having a strong role in gallery. What was great about this show was the way in which it brought together different threads of the digital design community. What I’m not so sure about was the design of the exhibitions space, the circular space worked well to bring together the different threads, the spiral display boards across the ceiling was a great idea but they are hard to read. What were disappointing were the actual display stations, some housed interactive work, and some housed non-interactive work. What was frustrating from my point of view was the fact the interactive works looked the same as the non-interactive display stations to me this is a bit of way finding design gone wrong.

As a design educator it was great to see work from currents students in Victoria and it was personally great to be able to feel confident that the quality of work that our students produce is comparable. But question started to form in my head. Maybe the best way to talk about this question is to think about the project I spent the most time with. This was Eco Sense by Benjamin Statkus from the RMIT University School of Architecture. The proposal was for a building on the St Kilda pier that had displays linked to underwater cameras situated around Port Philip Bay. I was interested in this project because of the linkages to my own PhD work and because what was shown at the exhibitions wasn’t just the final outcome of the project, it also included the design notes and rationale etc. At the same time as finding the project an interesting idea I wonder if it could be achieved. The project is a great idea, but it’s only an idea it wasn’t applied and in many ways lacked the dialogue that good design should have between a problem, audience, design and the logistics of getting the project done. But at the same time this is extremely difficult to achieve in a student project, and hard to design into a teaching program especially in an area like building design. What these unapplied projects do allow is a freedom for the students to explore ideas, but does it prepare them for real design problems? Maybe this observation also comes from a person that finds it easy to develop ideas, but is not also great a realising those projects.

http://www.lab.3000.com.au/biennale/biennale/biennale.jsp

The Works

The RMIT Communication Design area runs a similar program to what I've been running in second year, their program is branded "The Works" and it's selected honours students. It could be good to meet with and talk about how it works next time I'm in Melbourne. Just reading it reminds me how important it is for design projects to have focused outcomes and clear project objectives.

RMIT - The Works

Creating Digital Video clips for teaching purposes

Digital Video - Homepage

This could be great resource to direct teachers towards !!!

Learning Design for Scripting for Designers

Introduction

This paper outlines the instructional design rationale for an optional short course for multimedia design students in how to develop multimedia scripts in the software program Flash MX 2004. The students will be assessed against the Australian national competency standards CUFMEM02A Author a multimedia product and ICPMM15DA Develop a multimedia script. This will be at the Australian Qualifications Framework Diploma level.

The course will be a standalone online course that face-to-face students can take as an optional course and it will also be offered as a fully online course.

Prerequisites for the course will be skills in using Flash MX 2004 and proof of this will be via samples of past work.

This paper includes links to planning tools and example content that have been developed during the project. 

Background to the project

This project has been chosen because it is an area that I have previously had difficulties in teaching. This has been for a number of reasons including:

1. Design and creativity, and the writing of complex scripts require different styles of thinking. The development of multimedia scripts is primarily an analytical and mathematical thinking process, which doesn’t come naturally to many visual thinkers.
2. The last time I taught this content I chose an approach to totally re-use existing material, eg online tutorials and book chapters. Most of this material is not aimed at visual thinkers, and didn’t help students to make the transition to types of thinking they needed. 
3. Most of the software training the students are involved in is based around behavioural learning processes in the early stages of the course. The development of scripts is more a process of building within a set of parameters than a process of following procedures. Students have found this shift difficult.

Most of the students who will undertake this course will also be involved in a face-to-face Diploma of Graphic Design (Multimedia). Students do have some flexibility within the Diploma course, but flexibility is not a current focus.  There are some negative feelings to online delivery from some of my peers; I use online eLearning tools to support some areas of the course. The idea of an optional course that is primarily delivered online will be an innovation within this context. It is important to keep in mind Minshull's comments about virtual learning environments (VLEs):

Whatever the case, the VLE has to add something to the learning experience for the student, and not just be used for the sake of it. If it doesn't offer something more than the students already get within their classes, then there is no point in them using it (Minshull 2004 p. 26)

My background is in creative studio based teaching and learning. Most of my content expertise in multimedia design has been developed via informal, project based learning.

The overall approach

There are many definitions of what instructional design is. Siemens (2002)in “Instructional Design in Elearning”outlines eight definitions. Most of these definitions share the idea that instructional design is a system for designing learning experiences that meet specific needs. Likewise there are proliferations of overall models and models of instructional phases; many of these models are aligned to learning theories. One confusion seems to be that overall instructional design models are often confused with instructional phases, eg Carroll’s (n.d.) Minimalism model can be seen as an outline of instructional experiences more than a whole instructional design model.

Theories are a means of understanding the complex nature of the world; practice is often quite different. Mergel (1998) reminds usof this. Some of the models seem to be based around one particular theory of learning eg the ADDIE model works well for an instructional design process that is based on a behaviourist approach. The approach taken here is a “real-world eclectic” approach, which combines influences from the behaviourist, cognitive and constructivist theories that Mergel (1998) outlines.

Because of my personal background in design, the Empathic Instructional Design model of:  observe, capture data, reflect and analyze, brainstorm for solutions, develop prototypes, put forward by Nichani (2002) is interesting, but it is fundamentally flawed for a number of reasons. While the process of instructional design is a design process and could have something to learn from current practice in other design fields, instructional design has its own processes and practices. I think it is important to integrate some of the processes of the empathic model in the analysis phase, but not to the literal extent Nichani (2002) proposes.

I feel part of what informs our teaching and learning design is our own experiences as learners. The teaching experience in creative disciplines is based around studio-based practice, which can be summarized as:

Its setting is the loft-like studio space in which anywhere from twelve to as many as twenty students arrange their own drawing tables, papers, books, pictures, drawings and models. In this space, students spend much of their working lives, at times talking together, but mostly engaged in private, parallel pursuits of the common design task (Lackney 1999).

The studio-based model is an example of a constructivist learning environment (Lackney 1999). This is a great model of a learning environment to foster creative skills and has recently been applied to the information technology area (Docherty et al. 2000). But no model is perfect and I personally have seen this model not work for students who:

1. Don’t have a basic knowledge of an area and don’t know where to start
2. Need strong technical skills are needed.
3. Lack self-direction skills.

Ben-Ari (1998) in his article “Constructivism in Computer Science Education” has added that one of the problems with constructivist approaches for computer programming, is that if students don’t have the right mental model before they start programming, they are not able to perfect the skills and knowledge because of the abstract nature of the area.

What most models of instructional design share is a similar overall structure to the ADDIE model of Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate (KnowledgeTech 2004). One of the problems with the ADDIE process is its linear procedural nature that it is not flexible and does not place evaluation at the core of the process.

The approach in this project is based around these stages and is best illustrated by the diagram below.

This is a process where the analysis stage is completed at the start of the project. The design, development and implementation phases become integrated and underpinned by a constant evaluation of the project. For the purpose of this paper the stages will be discussed separately.

Analysis Phase

One of the core problems with my past experiences of teaching this content was the lack of analysis. The instructional design process was based more on the selection and combination of existing resources. Clark states, “the analysis phase is the building block of a training program.” (Clark 1997) This new project has attempted to reverse past errors and places the analysis phase at the core of the process.

My approach is informed by the analysis phase of Nichani’s (2002) Empathic Instructional Design. Nichani cites Dorothy Leonard and Jeffrey Rayport’s summary of Empathic Design as:

At its foundation is observation—watching consumers use products or services. But unlike focus groups, usability laboratories, and other contexts of traditional market research, such observation is conducted in the customer's own environment—in the course of normal, everyday routines. In such a context, researchers can gain access to a host of information that is not accessible through other observation-oriented research methods (Nichani 2002).

The other half of my approach is underpinned by Shedroff (2004) because of his concentration on the development of profiles of the user/student that includes affective, contextual information. Shedroff summarises these types of profiles as

Common tools for understanding users, their goals, and how this affects solutions. They help a team create a solution, communicate it to others, create a testable prototype, and create a specification.

In this project the analysis phase has three underpinning aspects, the student analysis, the content analysis and analysis of the learning context (eg what is flexible learning in the context of this project). From this flow the course needs, upon which the learning experience can be designed.

To actually achieve this analysis I have developed a tool with a set of questions. This has been a sample of five students, including some who are current students in our program and also potential students. These questions are partly informed by some of Daigre’s(n.d.) suggestions.

Below is a summary of the outcomes from this tool.

Summary of the analysis

	Importance rating 1 - 10
Students need early success to build confidence.	8
Students need to develop problem-solving skills.	10
Students need information to be visual and presented in short chunks and focus needs to be on what they do.	8
There is a range of skill levels in the students.	7
Assessment needs to be via projects and allow students to able to integrate work projects into the course.	9
The types of thinking needed are different to what comes naturally to students in the field of multimedia.	10
The projects need to be a balance between creative and technical skills.	8
The students expect a structured technical learning environment.	7
The pacing of the course needs to allow for people who are involved in part- or full-time work.	5

Design and Development

One of the major needs was identified during the analysis phase of the project was that students need to develop different ways of thinking during the course. These types of design problems lend themselves to approaches based on constructivism. New ways of thinking cannot be transferred to students, the students need to construct these new ways of thinking for themselves. >One of the issues facing an instructional designer in this, is that much of the literature around constructivism outlines what a constructivist learning environment should do but without firm instructional phases or suggestions such as provided in models by Gagne (no date) From the theory of constructivism what develops more is a set of guidelines and goals, that Honebein (1996) outlines:

1. Provide experience with the knowledge construction process.
2. Provide experience in and appreciation of multiple perspectives.
3. Embed learning in realistic and relevant contexts.
4. Encourage ownership and voice in learning process.
5. Embed learning in social experience.
6. Encourage the use of multiple modes of representation.
7. Encourage self-awareness of the knowledge construction processes. (Honebein 1996 p.11)

Jonassen (n.d.) provides further guidelines for supporting learning through modeling, coaching, scaffolding. When designing the learning experiences, what I have attempted to do is use these guidelines as guiding principles.

The other two influences on the design and development phase are Merrill’s (2001) First Principles of Instruction and Gardner’s (1983) Theories of Multiple intelligences. Merrill’s principles are

• Learning is facilitated when learners are engaged in solving real-world problems.
• Learning is facilitated when existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge
• Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is demonstrated to the learner.
• Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is applied by the learner
• Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is integrated into the learner's world (Merrill’s 2001)

The diagram below outlines the learning environment design features based on the above discussion of principles, these features and their relationship to the theory is discussed in more detail in the following section. 

The method I have used to plan the features of the learning experience is based on Oliver’s (2001) model for learning design of three interconnecting elements of learning tasks, learning supports and learning resources. This is illustrated in the diagram below.

Oliver sees this diagram transferring into a process where the task and problems are defined and then the learning resources and learning supports are develop to support and guide students to perform those tasks. This model works well within my context of a competency based where learning is focused on students achieving predetermined competencies, related to authentic work tasks. What Oliver’s diagram doesn’t represent is how the elements translate into an actual program of instruction over time.

I have developed these features of the learning environment in a program design that includes more information about content timing and the development needs.

To start the course students are given the simplest, fully realistic task which is  an “Interactive Toolbar”, and are then guided in how to solve this problem by resources about how an expert would complete the task. What is interesting is that the completion of the task can then be broken down into further smaller steps. The next task is the Quiz that builds on the skills developed during the Interactive Toolbar task but is more complex. The tasks build in complexity until the student is able to work by themselves,  in this case on the major project. These tasks are real world problems that a multimedia designer experiences in the workplace.

This spiral like approach is based on Reigeluth’s (1999) Elaboration theory. Where a

sequence begins with the simplest version of the task that is still fairly representative of the task as a whole; then it teaches progressively more complex versions of the task until the desired level of complexity is reached, making sure that the learner is made explicitly aware of the relationships of each version to the other versions.(Reigeluth 1999 p. 442)   

The case studies have been based around an approach of demonstrating the process both conceptually and procedurally that an expert would go through. These act as a modeling approach and a form of scaffolding which Jonassen (no date) outlines.

When planning the four initial tasks there was a problem in that the task had to build on the  existing knowledge of students and the student needs to succeed early to build confidence. The case studies are direct supports that students can re-use to achieve the tasks. The danger is that there might not be a lot of learning involved. What has been added to the tasks is that the students are required to completed mind maps of the scripts they used in the tasks, which means they are constructing and representing knowledge in visual ways, which will hopeful come naturally to this student group.

As well as the examples of how an expert might complete the task, the students will be given “Visual Cheat Sheets”, about underlying concepts. One example of this is the concept map about events. Another example is the interactive activity that learners explore to understand how the Action script window works in Flash.  The choice of instructional media is informed by Carroll’s(no date)  Minimalism model for the design of instruction, where less is more and students are presented with the least amount of information needed. With Carroll’s model of documentation students are not presented with detailed instructions about how to do tasks, instead they are provided with supports for completing the task and encouraged to start learning by doing as quickly as possible. Carroll’s model can be seen as the theories of constructivism applied to computer software.

From Carroll’s model, I developed the following instructional media guidelines:

• All concepts should be presented in a visual way where possible, with text explanations as well. Eg diagram, flowcharts, mind maps, graphic organizers, active diagrams.
• Make sure concepts are provided in a context, eg with examples
• Use video/screen captures to guide students in using the software,
• Provide information in small chunks
• Make sure key processes or ideas are highlighted.
• Situate instruction around real, authentic tasks.
• Provide multiple ways for users to navigate to the content.
• Include links to additional resources online and offline for students who require more resources.

Technical guidelines

• Students should be provided with a cd-rom of the video files to address bandwidth speed issues.
• All materials should meet w3c standards.
• Internal navigation should be kept to a minimum to all for easy conversation to IMS packages.
• The only plug-in required to should be flash player version 7

The course will be structured around the following site map, and will be developed via WebCT.

There are two interrelated theories that have informed these choices of visual instructional media. These are Gardner’s (2001) theories of multiple intelligences, and VARK’s model of learning styles (Fleming 2001). Gardner outlines the theories of multiple intelligences and the VARK model are tools for understanding how the theories of multiple intelligences work in practice. From the analysis stage of this project, it was learnt that this group of students are visual thinkers and communicators. This has meant, where possible, the focus of the media has been on visual communication. The video screen recording gives strong visual representations of tasks, and the mind maps act as visual means to communicate abstract concepts.

Another need that came out of the analysis stage was that many of the students were unsure of the area of scripting. From this has developed a need for an environment where students can build confidence or as Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1998) calls it, a state of “flow”. He defines “flow” as a

state in which people are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter; the experience is so enjoyable that people will do it even at great cost, for the sheer sake of doing it. (Csikszentmihalyi 1998 p. 15)

Some of the characteristics that Csikszentmihalyi suggests help build flow in an experience are:

1. That activities have defined objectives
2. That tasks are challenging but not too challenging eg they build on current experience
3. That is there feedback on how well the objectives are being met.

In this course this translates into the four initial tasks being highly structured and building on existing knowledge, and early positive feedback is provided. Students can succeed and build confidence and skills through these tasks, then as they become confident the course becomes progressively more demanding and feedback from the facilitator is constantly provided to them about their progress.

Malcolm Knowles states (Anderson, Boud & Sampson 1996) 

Without question the single most potent tool I have come across in my more than half-century of experience with adult education is contract learning.(Anderson, Boud & Sampson 1996 p.10) 

Early in the course students will complete learning plans for the whole course and for their projects. This means students at different levels do not have to ‘relearn’ content, the experience becomes customized to their needs and wants. Students with the required knowledge and skills will only need to complete the assessment tasks to demonstrate their competence. It also means the students have ownership of the learning process.

The assessment of the learning outcomes will be via a major project and formative assessment tasks. Project based work is the format of most work in the multimedia industry and the use of projects as assessment tasks creates an authentic learning experience that the students have ownership and control over (Jonassen n.d.)

In parallel to the tasks and projects there is a social dimension to the course via the discussions and real-time coaching sessions with the facilitator. Kilpatrick & Bound (2003) found a lack of interaction with peers (other learners) and insufficient interaction with teachers were perceived as substantial barriers (Kilpatrick & Bound 2003 p.7).

This does not have to be the case; online communication tools such as discussions boards if managed correctly can be used to build strong communities of practice (Wenger n.d.). The model of discussion that will be used in the course is based upon Salmon’s (2002) concepts of “sparks” where discussions are started by the facilitator by statements or posts that the students then respond to. Not all the discussions are based around this model. There are two other important discussions included in the course design.

• The “How do you?” topic is introduced in week two. This area will allow students to post questions about problems they are having and then for other students or the facilitator to help.
• In week five there is the start of the “Guest scripter talks about how they problem solve” topic. This acts as a form of modeling. 

Part of the isolation that an online student might feel in the content is that when they have a technical problem to solve, they have no one to turn to, very literally, to help.  This is addressed by the use of screen sharing applications that allows the facilitator and student to both look at the same screen simultaneously, and use online tools such as chat.  An important part of the studio based teaching approach is one-on-one coaching with students, to explore problems and successes.    

Evaluation

Rowntree (1992) defines evaluation as "an attempt to understand what is going on, to judge its worth and perhaps make decisions about it." (Rowntree 1992)  But often our experience, as teachers, of evaluation processes is negative. My personal experiences are based on Kirkpatrick’s (Eseryel 2002) level 1 and some level 2 concepts in non-systematic situations. An example is the use of survey-based tools of student reactions at the end of courses being used often only because there is perceived to be a problem with the teacher, and these student reactions being taken into account when reemploying staff.

As I have explored more systematic models such as the CIPP model (Stufflebeam 2002) I have realized that evaluation processes are at the core of my practice. Evaluation is not an end point of a process, but is part of my reflective practice and desire for continuous improvement. The diagram that was presented previously in this project sites evaluation as the element underpinning the design, development and implementation phases. Evaluation then transforms into less of a summative phase, and into more of a central, integrated activity to the whole instructional design process.  

Within this context, this course would be new, which means it is important to understand if the course has real value for the students’ learning. Currently most teaching resources developed in this area are prepared just-in-time. The development time required for this course will probably be seen as a negative by peers and management. Evaluations are important to examine if the course have been successful in light of this.

My registered training organisation has developed a set of teaching and learning guiding principles called “The 10 Ways to a Great Learning Experience”. Many of these “ways” are similar to the “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education” (Chickering & Gamson, n.d.). These guiding principles are becoming one of the organisation’s benchmarks for learning, and are used as the base criteria for evaluation in this project.

The model that has been developed for the evaluation is based around the CIPP model of:

• Context – This means feedback will be sought from peers about the course design.
• Input - Student profiles will be taken into account.
• Process - A combined self assessment tool and change planning tool based on “10 Ways to a Great Learning Experience” will be used during the course design and for summative evaluations.
• Product – This stage will have two aspects:
• The students’ performance against the assessment criteria will be considered
• The student reactions at the end of the course and during the course by a discussion topic ‘Suggestions for the course’.

The evaluations will be complied into an issues log, which will be used as the basis for further refinement and redevelopment of the course.

Conclusion

The instructional design approach taken in this project is an eclectic approach with a strong focus on instructional methods underpinned by constructivist theories of learning. The actual succuss or failure of the project cannot be measured until the development work has been completed and the course trialled with a group of students. The approach taken in this course design is fundamentally different to the previous approach which was based on the re-use of easily available learning resources. The key factor in this change has been the careful analysis of the students, the content, and the context. This analysis has provided a framework for the design of the course that focuses on instruction that seeks ways in which students can build knowledge instead of information being transmitted to them. 

References

Anderson, G & Boud, D. & Sampson, J.  1996, Learning contracts, Koogan Page,  London

Ben-Ari, M., 1998 “Constructivism in Computer Science Education” [Online], stwww.weizmann.ac.il/g-cs/benari/articles/cons.pdf [accessed 3 September 2004]

Carroll, J. n.d., Minimalism, [Online]. http://tip.psychology.org/carroll.html [Accessed 15 August 2004].

Chickering, A.W and Gamson, Z.F. n.d., Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education [Online] Available:  http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/7princip.htm [Accessed 1st October)

Clark, D. 1997, Big Dog ISD Page, [Online]. Available: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/sat.html [Accessed 17 June 2004].

Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1998 “The flow experience and its significance for human psychology” in Csikszentmihalyi, M & Csikszentmihalyi, I. (ed) Optimal experience, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 

Daigre, Regina M. et al. (n.d.) chapter 4, Instructional analysis: Analyzing the learners, Available from URL http://www.angelfire.com/la2/learners/learners.html [Accessed 9 May 2002].

Docherty, M. Sutton, P. Brereton, M., Kaplan, S. Brown , A. 2000 The Information Environments Program – a New Design Based IT Degree [Online]

Eseryel, D. 2002 Approaches to Evaluation of Training: Theory and Practice [Online], Available:  http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_2_2002/eseryel.html [Accessed 1st October 2004]

Fleming, N.  2001 A guide to learning styles, [Online]. Available:  http://www.vark-learn.com/english/index.asp, [accessed 17 October  2004].

Gagne, R.n.d., Conditions of Learning, [Online]. http://tip.psychology.org/carroll.html [Accessed 15 August 2004].

Gardner, H. 1983 Frames of Mind, Basic Books, London.

Honebein, P. 1996, “Seven Goals for the Design of Constructivist Learning Environments”, in , Wilson B (ed). Constructivist learning environments: case studies in instructional design, Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs.   

http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~peters/papers/ docherty_sutton_brereton_kaplan_brown_ace2000.pdf [accessed 3 September 2004]

Jonassen, D. n.d.,  Design of constructivist learning environments [Online]. Available: http://tiger.coe.missouri.edu/~jonassen/courses/CLE/index.html [accessed 3 September 2004].

Kilpatrick,S. & Bound, H. 2003 Learning Online: Benefits and barriers in regional Australia, vol 1, Leabrook: NCVER

KnowledgeTech, The ADDIE instructional design model: A structured training methodology , [Online]. Available: http://www.knowledgetech.cc/Information/Methodology/ADDIE.html [19  October 2004].

Lackney, J 1999 A History of the Studio-based Learning Model [Online] Available: http://schoolstudio.engr.wisc.edu/studiobasedlearning.html [accessed 3 September 2004]

Mergel, B. 1998, Instructional Design & Learning Theory, [Online]. Available: http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/802papers/mergel/brenda.html [accessed 10 August 2004]

Merrill, M.D. 2001, First principles of instruction , [Online]. Available: http://www.id2.usu.edu/Papers/5FirstPrinciples.PDF [Accessed 15 August 2004].

Minshull G. 2004 ‘VLEs: Beyond the Fringe and into the Mainstream’, Proceedings of VLEs: Beyond The Fringe... And Into The Mainstream, FERL, Online, February 2004, http://ferl.becta.org.uk/content_files/pages/news_events/events/Online_events/VLEs%20-%20into%20the%20mainstream.pdf

Nichani, M. 2002, Empathic Instructional Design [Online]. Available: http://www.elearningpost.com/features/archives/001003.asp [accessed 8 August 2004]

Oliver, J. & Herrington, J. 2001, Teaching and learning online, Edith Cowen, Perth

Reigeluth, C.M. 1999, ‘The Elaboration Theory: Guidance for scope and sequence decisions’, in Reigeluth, C.M. (ed.), Instructional Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instruction Theory, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey

Rowntree, D. 1992, “Evaluating open learning“, in Exploring Open and Distance Learning, Kogan Page, London, pp. 203-31

Salmon, G. 2002 E-tivities: The Key to Active Online Learning, Taylor & Francis Group

Shedroff, N. 2003 New Methods for Designing Effective [Online]. Available: http://www.nathan.com/thoughts/newmethods/ [accessed 10 August 2004]

Siemens, G., 2002, Instructional Design in Elearning [Online], http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/InstructionalDesign.htm [accessed 18 October 2004]

Smith, M. K. 2002, Malcolm Knowles, informal adult education, self-direction and andragogy [Online]. Available: http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-knowl.htm [accessed 3 September 2004]

Stufflebeam, D. 2002 Cipp Evaluaton Model Checklist [Online] Available: http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/cippchecklist.htm [Accessed 1st October 2004]

Wenger, E. n.d.. Communities of practice: a brief introductionhttp://www.ewenger.com/theory/index.htm [Online] [Accessed 20 October 2004]

Mobile phone content

mobster.com.au : hear

Amnesia Group - Australian design company that has created mobile animations for disney.

Deepend's page about mood messaging inlcudes a link to launch emo's site.

Web type guide

Web Typography Style Guide » UsableType: Web Typography Guide it's ashame it doesn't have more "pictures"