I would like to respond to a portion of your posed question: "Must we engage the learner using multimedia? If not, why not? Finally, what medium ( video, graphics, sound, etc.) is the most important." 

I think one of the most important facts presented in our early readings is on page 4: "Multimedia will help to spread the Information Age to millions of people who have not yet used a computer." I agree totally with that statement, and it is part of the reason why I went from traditional print and publishing, to electronic and desktop publishing (1986) and then into multimedia (1994) and authoring (1995). Now, in 1997 and 1998, I've made a larger commitment to this arena, as I truly believe that most commerce, education, personal issues, and just about any of life's "genres" will take place on the Internet, or be dependent on the 'net in one or many ways. 

Now. Here is where I disagree with this statement. So far, we see huge strides in the government recognizing the need for large-scale computerization in our schools. The sales of personal PCs are very high in the US and other non-3rd-world countries. It is easy to see which faction of humanity is receiving the benefits of computerization, with other countries falling behind, from levels that range in depth from extremely severe, to they are teetering on 'getting there.' My work at Lucent Technologies has proven to me that computers and high-level communications devices are present in at least 90+ countries. How widespread that is, to the people, I do not know. But, the technology is there. I would surmise that in many countries, there is still a definite lack of access to the computers needed in order to access the Internet. Therefore, it is my feeling that global computerization is probably still a thing worried about by many: a system of class ... who gets it, who does not? 

I see this as perhaps the biggest barrier in this arena, as we are not dealing with the wishes of persons in any country, who always have thirsted after more knowledge. We are dealing with many governments that still hold to ideal of squelching that kind of knowledge among the masses. 

Therefore (you knew it was coming): 

It is my opinion that the text is somewhat wrong in its very initial definition of "multimedia." I disagree that it takes all four components of text, graphics, audio and video, to make it "multi-medic." The prefix "multi" speaks to me of "more than one." I think in our world of HYPERtext,for instance, just the addition of the ability to go from one reading, to a complementary reading, is quite....MULTIMEDIC. It involves another dimension than just the printed word. 

For those of us who were online in the earliest days of the WWW and widespread broadcast of the Internet, very likely it was through the auspices of the most well-known service provider. Ah yes, AOL was good for something. Not that they were very good at it, but at least it provided those of us destined to live in the ether, a way to 'be the leader of the pack.'  

I WAS INSTANTLY HOOKED. 

What did that early environment offer? Well, it amounted to text, hypertext (links) and graphics. Early AOL (or anyone) did NOT have the things we have today. In fact, just keeping the line alive was a real project!! 

*IMHO, until access to the huge array of choices we have on the 'net, which grows almost alarmingly, by the second -- is available to everyone, or at least most of everyone around the world -- I truly believe that the most important elements in multimedia remain: text, hypertext, and graphics. I love all this other stuff. I have leaped into it for several years, in university, in my work. But, it just doesn't play a huge part in the AVERAGE person's experience, around the world. I think that marvelous experiences may be had with these 3 less-intense elements (although I think hypertext is the STRONGEST of all the multimedia elements, and the MOST, MOST important!) 

All of us in the early days will attest to the fascination of the linked 'hotword,' and the new worlds it exposed. If it was paired with excellent graphics, the experience was even better. We all lived anxiously from one (was it 2500-baud???) moment to the next, growling fiercely at how long it took to download a shareware at AOL's $4.95 per hour rate. What a distance we have come. 

Yet, in our own Nova experience, what do we find we are doing? Again, let me say, I've got 25+ years in illustration, graphics, and designing for some well-known entities. I LOVE multimedia, and that's where I work, study and play, whenever possible. But, when it comes down to the learning mode??? Leanne is stopping the download of graphics, audio and video, in order to gain quick access to:  

TEXT: the initial information on the page, and...

HYPERTEXT: the links that will take me where I can get the info I seek.

Read "The Next Generation - Toward Superlanguage" by Pierre Levy, if you want a real eye-opener. It's at: http://www.uiah.fi/bookshop/isea_proc/nextgen/01.html 

.... the essential ability to make this a linked globe remains in the speed and efficiency of the delivery of the knowledge the Internet contains. 

Blatantly, I say that we must engage the learner at the point at which he/she is ready. That does not necessarily mean multimedia in its grandest sense. It DOES mean making required information available. We MUST find ways to make access an equitable entity, for all, everywhere. When everyone has equal access, then we can make rapid progress in all other necessary areas for enrichening the experience. We must first deal with the teacher in rural Colorado. Louisiana, Wyoming. The teacher in dark areass of big cities. The teacher, or just the avid learner, in the forests and the steppes, and in the cities where governmental eyes would stop this activity in its tracks. 

We all deal with such a pretty view of this, within our homes, and within our program at Nova. The realities of what this massive container of knowledge really IS, escapes most of us. We don't see the "Internet Ghetto" anymore than we see or understand the global ghetto. We deal with the unseeable, the untouchable, the un-understandable. We would like to give this incomprehensible thing to the world. I find it fascinating, how many are dedicated to taking this MULTIMEDIC entity to the world. Yet, at least for me, the only understanding of the thing comes in small bits and portions, as I go about my work and studies. And, that's probably as it should be. The Internet, itself, is the greatest example of a "Team Project." 

Elements of multimedia have helped me understand those small portions a little bit better. But, the essence of that knowledge has nothing to do with multimedia ... at least for me. I think we are also dealing with the differences in personalities. Those of us who were born to be "life-long learners," will definitely respond to all-things-Internet, whether they are presented with one, two, three or four elements of multimedia. The initial QUEST is what is important. The division of types of learners will undoubtedly be found worldwide, as this all progresses. 

Meanwhile, I will continue with my multimedia studies, as they are .... plain FUN. 

And better than fireworks. (ask my dog, poor thing.) 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

* in my humble opinion, which is 'net-talk, for the 1.5 of you who weren't familiar with that little acronym....