Unit 6 - Courseroom Discussions

Unit 6 - Courseroom Discussions

Main Topic: Unit VI Courseroom Commentary on Interface Design as Architecture, and Multimedia Standards and Events in Web Design

Created by:
Leanne C Boyd on 15-May-00 through 21-May-00 at various times

For: Unit 6 Assignments

Unit 6 Assignments

Commentary in Courseroom Discussions
Unit VI Great Multimedia-Virtual Sites for Review

From ED722 Courseroom, assignments by Bev Enns:

Preview these Multimedia Sites
The sites presented below have been selected from the listserv of QuickTime News, February 18, 2000, Volume 2 Issue 2. You may have to download plugins to view these presentations. The download time and loading time for many of these presentations may exceed the time you have allowed for your study this week. Plan other activities during the download times to make efficient use of your time. Yet, I encourage you to view as many of these presentations as possible to become acquainted with the most recent advancements in multimedia presentations for education.

1. Using QuickTime to Teach History
The Florida Center for Instructional Technology, College of Education, uses the power of the Internet as a central communications resource to instruct people about one of the darkest chapters in human history. In A Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust, visitors are given an overview of the people and events of the Holocaust, including QuickTime panoramas of historical sites:
http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/resource/VR.htm
Visit the home page for an overview of the guide:
http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/default.htm

2. An Event 2,000 Years in the Making
Panographers, a long-lived lot, take pleasure in expanses. A Wrinkle in Time is a web site designed to celebrate--in QuickTime VR--a specific moment in time: the first 24 hours of the year 2000. Come visit the Wrinkle in Time web site and enjoy 360-degree panoramic views from such exotic locales as the black-sand beach at LaPalma in the Canary Islands, Mt. Kosciusko in New South Wales, Australia, Worcestershire Beacon in the Malvern Hills of England, Lanikai Beach, on Kailua, Hawaii, and many more:
http://www.hotspots.hawaii.com/wrinkleintime/rabster2.html

3. Doing Something About the Weather
Dr. Alistair B. Fraser may not be able to control it, but he can certainly help his students come to a better understanding of the weather. He does so by bringing together two technologies--QuickTime and the Internet--that make for a rich, highly instructive multimedia experience that reaches out to students wherever they happen to be.
http://www.apple.com/education/hed/aua0101s/meteor/

Created by:

Leanne C Boyd on 18-May-00 at 5:16 am

Comment:
Although both IE and Netscape CLAIM to have successfully installed the QuickTime plugin, I have been unable to play any of these movies. In fact, the error messages in IE claim that the fault is with the web site, and to contact the site for instructions on how to play the items.

This is my opinion. We've installed RealPlayer and given it permission to be the default MM player. We've installed WinAmp and given IT permission to be the default audio player. We then (this is the collective "we," as in, all of us who go happily along, downloading new software, with no knowledge of what it's doing to the innards of our PCs) go ahead and install some MP3 player and give it some kind of permission. And the latest in CosmoPlayer so we can view REAL VR stuff (this QuickTime just ain't the real thing!) and set a new permission.

I am now to a point where this Dell has so many permissions registered in the Registry, I fear that reformatting the hard drive might be the only solution. Meanwhile, the survival of the fittest may lie in the strength of the programming for the installer of any given software. So far, RealPlayer seems to take the cake. They appear to have a solid foundation for placing all the components in the proper places, and the icon shows up in the system tray daily and like clockwork. They update via the software, remind me when I forget, and so far, have provided the most ease-of-use in this genre. I gave up on QuickTime years ago. It worked fine on my Mac, end of story.

So, my review is limited to this comment: This stuff is NOT ready for in-class use, let alone Prime Time.

Commentary in Courseroom Discussions
Unit VI Web Designer as Architect

Created by:

Leanne C Boyd on 18-May-00 at 6:25 am

Comment:
Ship navigator, Pony Express Rider, Mixer of the Paint Pots

Uh-uh. I firmly believe that we are NOT the designers of the standards of ONLINE offerings -- unless we also are the ones using the exact tools of the Internet, and participating in the structure of the science and hard evidence of the Internet. W3C is a creator of standards. Macromedia is a creator of standards. Several legal, technical, and governmental entities are creating standards, or hoping to. Engineers in high technical places are creating standards. Architects of informational systems are creating standards. NetLibrary is creating standards (:-) and you and I????

We are the Mixer of the Paint Pots. We listen to all of the above, and we use what we agree with and what we understand, and we try to apply it to educational "standards" that were created before our time. We simply have had a brief opportunity to make those standards our own, and hopefully change them just enough to make a difference in the lives of our own students.

We are the Pony Express Rider. We have the news, and we ride the horse until it drops, and then we hop on the next horse. All the while, we are bearers of the news.

We are Navigators for the Ship. We hopefully have read the manual to run the ship. We read incoming messages, watch the stars, and hope for no iceburgs. We do NOT know the jobs of the people who built the ship, or the stewards or the men who stoke the fires to make the steam that runs the ship that Jack (Jill) built. Hopefully we are good enough managers and caretakers, that the ship plows forward in a timely manner.

Mostly, the things we "build" are RE-iterations of things that the real architects of the Internet have created. Unless we have taken it upon ourselves to learn the magic words of the Web (all in HTML and higher order languages), then I think it is a misnomer to call ourselves architects. We can only, in Instructional Design, lay claim to our own knowledge and specific skills ... which have to do with learning ... which has to do with human, flesh and blood, emotional characteristics.

This, then, denies that we can ever come up with immovable standards. The layout and design of a tremendous learning site for Teacher A, 8th grade science ... will have little to do with the considerations for an online environment for Teacher B, Master's level Biology.

Bev said it: Is the site you've provided, USABLE???

All over the Job Sites, and in the Career sections, you see multi-level job descriptions for web DESIGNER, web DEVELOPER, web ARCHITECT, web ENGINEER, and the all-encompassing, WEB MANAGER -- "we want to pay one person, one salary, and he/she must know the experience of a minimum of SIX web people."

The very second that any entity claims to lay a standard for the Internet, many other solutions and/or questions raise their heads. This is why it has taken so long for even the languages of the Web to settle into some kind of accord. This is why some things run on Explorer but won't work in Netscape. If the big boys cannot agree, then we should be aware that what we create today most likely will NOT be accepted as a standard, EVER. It may work really well today, and maybe for the next decade ... but it is because we have used our intuitive nature and MOLDED an idea to fit a very specific group ... our own small group of students or whomever. Quite probably, it won't be effective across the board, and probably not even for a majority.

I can, you can, only set standards for yourself, within the parameters of your own circle. There are certain things that work in any design effort. These have to do with the things we've studied ... yet even these, by major names in the field (starting with the authors of our very texts) ... are discussed and argued amongst themselves.

I think the first description of a standard is that is kind of like a RULE. And the first nature of a rule is that it is meant to be broken. Or we would be designing our courses on the cave wall.

Countless thousands of rules have been broken in the history of the construction of the Internet. Who would ever have imagined we would have this fluid, endless, almost with a life of its own, super-carrier of information, available at our fingertips? It seems awesome to the point of ridiculous that we would even attempt to claim something as a STANDARD, when tomorrow's technology might just make it a laughingstock, or at least a dinosaur.

Other than these observations, I think that we must seriously consider all of our actions in putting together a learning environment. Either by design (pun intended) or perhaps by great accident, perhaps just ONE thing that comes as a brilliant idea in the middle of the night, just might become a technique that will reach thousands. I still won't go so far as to say it will become a STANDARD, but it might become a core factor for usability, and be accepted as very good web design. If it makes it to the W3C and goes through months or years of "rank and file" inspection, testing, and acceptance by X% of worldwide users, then and only then can we say it has become a standard. Until, of course, HTML goes to version 5.0, 6.0 or beyond.

Why do we always have to put things in a box?

Once something has been distilled far enough to put it in shrink-wrap, what do we have? Dry, dehydrated ... stuff. The Internet is fluid. Moving. Living. The second we succeed in satisfying ourselves that we have set a standard, rest assured that the life has gone out of it.

Did Stephen King set standards in literature? Then, why is Chaucer still popular in given circles? Did the artists, scientists, and philosophers of the Era of the Golden Triangle ever think in terms of the broken parts and pieces of Picasso? Whose "standards" were correct?

Can we even apply the terms, "standard" or "correct."

Why do we always have to put things in a box?

If there is one catch-phrase that is totally Internet-Age, totally on-cue, and totally "anti-standards," it is the phrase: "Thinking outside the box."

We must think usability, and proceed from there. Because of the rapidity of technology advances, we must accept that our views of today may be drastically altered tomorrow. While we lay on our backs, painting our own small chapel ceilings today ... we must be ready to create tomorrow's lessons in holographs. Success will NOT lie in worrying about setting or following standards, but in being able to make what will work RIGHT NOW for those who've come into our circle of care.

Unit VI - News as Multimedia

From ED722 Courseroom, assignments by Bev Enns:

The most appropriate sites to use for our analysis and evaluation for this unit are the major news web sites because they can afford or choose to afford a multimedia presentation. These were selected because the interactive multimedia are very obvious in the interface design and are very appealing to users. What is the information architecture of these web sites that will invite the user to come back or click and go away? What are some of the more sophisticated issues of interface design used on these sites that we have not yet addressed in our discussion?

http://www.abcnews.com
http://www.cnn.com

Created by:

Leanne C Boyd on 20-May-00 at 11:44 pm

Comment:
After spending quite a bit of time on both of these sites, I could only shake my head with the knowledge of why I don't use sites like this. Here's my opinion: When you want multimedia, it usually is a topic-specific necessity or desire. When you want news, you'd like to be able to scope the headlines, go to where interests you, read it quickly, and lay it aside. I don't think either of these sites really is a good "metaphor" for a newspaper. Most newspapers take less time to absorb more things, in a more timely manner.

I admit to avoiding both! I was very put off by the long downloads, as well as the need for plugins, etc. If these sites would stick to more of a newspaper format, rather than trying to emulate television, I think more people would use them. For me, there are several web sites that I use, that carry the more traditional "headline news" and are a quick click to things that I'm interested in. Usually, one graphic/photo accompanies the story, which is fine. The Internet is vast, and if these two sites would just supply links to internal or external sites that have the details, it would be more persuasive to me ... that way, I could stick to the story and check back to the heavy multimedia later, if I needed to.

The other thing that disturbed me greatly, as, like I say, I tend to stay away from news sites like these ... is an intense upgrade in the junky stuff that inhabits all the rest of the Internet. The flashy and poor use of movement and color REALLY put me off. It was very distracting, and I believe, cheapened the look and feel of the site. News for the sake of news would be much more enhanced with the simple use of graphics. After all, these are COLOR photos that are so easily inserted -- and they still are more efficient in the download arena, than multimedia. Can we watch northern New Mexico burn in a still picture, for far less download time, than watching it burn, lick by lick of flame? Etc.

By the way, many of the news sites that I do frequent, often have links to special things provided by CNN, ABC, and many others. I find these more useful, as they've been pre-observed and commented on ... and I am able to make a more intelligent choice for IF I want to view it at all. These sites, such as iWon, ZDnet, and even like Sierra Club or even MSN ... are portals, not news sites. But I feel that MORE care is taken by the second-in-line "vendors" of the news. News stations should stick to televised news, until which time the movies can be projected, and received more effortlessly on the part of their USERS. Until then, I feel that true multimedia and the Internet are still star-crossed lovers!

Created by:

Leanne C Boyd on 19-May-00 at 5:24 am

Comment:
I've been in the print and publishing worlds for most of my adult life/career, and graphics/fine arts. One of the nicest things about the digital counterpart is that there is no chemical buildup in the body. On the day I "met a Mac" I had to quit making fun of my geek friends, and set about becoming one. What a terrific art tool. You don't lick brushes while analyzing your work. You don't wipe the stuff on jeans that eventually walk by themselves. You don't inhale gallons of solvent in art studio or print shop.

I was very glad to lay it aside. I miss it, but I don't, if that makes sense. The one thing I value most in this world, is the slick and luscious feel of a beautifully illustrated book ... mostly children's books. THAT will never be well-represented in the digital world, no matter how hard they try. (netLibrary included, and you should hear the descriptions of the handheld eBook device that is in the works!)

Never fear, we shall never totally leave the paper-based world!! I base this observation on the fact that my desk/workstation, I swear, is held together by stickie notes.

Comment from fellow student:
I agree with you about Real.com. Their products have become the defacto standard because they integrate so much functionality into the same install and the download procedure is significantly less complicated than Quicktime. The video performance for all of these things is only marginal however so the dust hasn't settled yet.

There are also big concerns with the ethics employed at Real.com. Everytime I launch the REALPlayer to view a video, it sends a message to REAL.com. I don't know what it says but I if this was my office computer, this could be a serious issue.

I'm puzzeled however. There must be such a huge volume of data collected that managing this database must be a significant effort in itself. And then what do they do with this data? It's not really an effort that leads to useful information, we know people use the product, why do they care what for? Is there some other information that interests them?

Created by:

Leanne C Boyd on 19-May-00 at 5:38 am

Comment:
They claim, I seem to remember, that the info is simply the version of the software ... so that they can harangue you with messages to upgrade, etc. But, they also offered a way to turn this off, which I did. Actually, though, I think that one of the neato components of the Real suite, is that they can then "send" the upgrade and it can be installed without the user doing a thing, or even quitting the browser. Seems that Macromedia's Flash plugin does the same thing, but you have to "go there," to do it.

I really like Real.com's products. I recently did a survey for them and was awarded with a non-demo, REAL REAL software ... but then had to deal with the upgrade email ads! Oh well, always the payoff.

I find Real's technology very exciting. I recently signed up with an online "voice mail" service. The phone messages are in the .ra format. You can go there to listen, or you can have them sent to your email box. For some messages, it's a nifty way of being able to save the audio file for eternity. I can see where this may come in very useful. For instance, my recent mess with USWest's phone service going out, for 8 days .... somehow, it messed up my voice mail (the reason for seeking an online service). Some messages I had stored there, 100 days at a time per their default, were over a year old. They were messages from my daughters that meant a lot. I kept meaning to pick up an inexpensive "bug" device from like RadioShack, to be able to record and keep them. USWorst wiped them out. Now, if they'd been in the .ra format to begin with, they wouldn't have gone to digital heaven.

I agree that Real's database must be gargantuan.

Let's talk!! Write to:
WebSpinner@refuge-earth.org
( that's me — Leanne! )

Search this Web Site:

We made recent changes on:
All art, graphics, HTML and other coding, and navigational and interface design are © 1984 - 2000 Leanne C. Boyd