EDC&I 583
Message
Design
|
Instructor: Prof. Stephen T. Kerr |
Office: 122K Miller Hall Box 353600 |
|
Course
meets: 162 Savery Hall |
Telephone: (206) 685-7562 |
|
Wednesday, 4:30 - 6:50 p.m. |
E-mail: stkerr@u.washington.edu |
|
Office hours: Generally W 2-3:30; Th 10-N (send email to request
specific time) |
http://faculty.washington.edu/stkerr |
|
Session |
Date |
Assignment for Session |
Topic in Class |
|
1 |
1/4/12 |
--- |
Introduction--course,
participants; an overview of message design |
|
2 |
1/11 |
Ideas for projects/papers ET* 1 RW* 1, 9-12, 14 Lupton; Garfield;
Lonsdale; Wallere |
Type and typography: What makes a difference? Introduce and discuss course projects Sample presentation Positive and Negative examples‡ |
|
3 |
1/18 |
ET 2 RW 2, 8 (cards,
letterhead) Souto; Cromley et
al.e |
Text: Organizing for meaning Presentations |
|
4 |
1/25 |
ET 3 RW 3, 8 (flyers) Wiener et al.;
Koyama; Hahn |
Maps: Wayfinding
in space and on-line Review of
literature expectations Presentations |
|
5 |
2/1 |
Review of literature
due RW 4, 8
(newsletters) InfoAesthetics; Davis;
Fathulla & Basden |
Graphics – diagrams:
Telling stories visually Present reviews of
literature |
|
6 |
2/8 |
ET 4 RW 5, 8 (brochures) XKCD; Burke; Kastellec
& Leoni; Roth |
Graphics – charts,
graphs: Showing relationships visually Presentations:
Readings; redesign |
|
7 |
2/15 |
ET 5 RW 6, 8 (postcards,
ads) Timmers & van
der Wijst; Woolner et al. |
Pictures and photos: When does
realism help? Presentations |
|
8 |
2/22 |
ET 6 RW 7, 12, 8
(websites) Vis Complexity; Chen;
Iaria et al.; Zender et al. |
Visualization:
constructing meaning with animation and video Presentations |
|
9 |
2/29 |
ET 7 Bakker et al.; Higgins et al.; Ivory & Megraw; Mann & Myhill;
Mehlenbacher et al.; Tyers |
New and Critical
perspectives: Against dancing penguins
(Accessibility; research approaches; web site design; educational
implications). |
|
10 |
3/7 |
Final projects due (with abstracts for class members) |
Final project
discussion Conclusions |
* Texts: Tufte, Edward
R. (1997). Visual Explanations. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
Williams, Robin. (2008).
The Non-Designer's Design Book. 3rd Ed.
Berkeley, CA: Pearson/Peachpit Press.
eOther materials are either available on the UW Libraries
e-Reserve site, via UW libraries e-journals, or, if hard-copy only, will be distributed
in class the week prior to that in which the reading will be discussed.
‡ We will discuss
positive and negative examples, as you discover and post them, every week
1. Course Rationale and Goals
This
course deals with design principles for attractive and effective educational
and instructional "messages" – materials that support learning and
education in the broadest senses. We
will approach communication for learning as an effort to construct shared
understandings and perceptions, what some call "meaning making." This means that we need to know how our
audiences think, what assumptions they make, how they see the world, and how
that world has influenced their assumptions.
We also need to know how to present information in ways that either match
or challenge those assumptions, or provide alternate models, in order to facilitate
learning.
When
we design materials for learning, all of these factors come together in a mix
that also includes (or should include) information about graphic design, current
practice in the media arts and communication, and also research about
perception and learning. Since some of
the principles described above are aesthetic and others are empirically
derived, a further essential aspect of this course will be the attempt to achieve
an effective balance among these sources of inspiration and design.
We
will be examining how the heritage of our interaction with text and printed
materials have conditioned our ways of working with and thinking about
information. From there, we will move to
consider how this heritage and other forms of presenting information are
exemplified in approaches used in emerging digital media. While many of the principles involved are
constant from one medium to another, there are important differences; it will
therefore be critical as we proceed to distinguish what sorts of effects seem
to appear in common across environments and which do not.
The
course is in seminar format, with students actively engaged in discussion of
relevant materials, creating and presenting their own examples of materials,
reading and working in fields of individual interest, and presenting results to
classmates. At the end of the course,
you should have a keener grasp of the principles (both empirically-based and
esthetic) involved in effective message design, and you should also see more
clearly the implications of theory for preparing effective messages. I encourage you to see the course as an
opportunity to extend your own knowledge and skills in ways most significant
for you intellectually and personally.
As
we think about the approaches that are used to design instructional messages,
try to keep these perspectives at the front of your attention: (1) how is the range of materials,
documents, objects under each major heading changing
in learning environments today, and (2) what challenges or difficulties
(as well as benefits and opportunities) present themselves as we
increasingly put educational materials into digital formats?
2. Course Content and Sequence
The
substance of this course lies in the interaction among readings, class
discussions, and student projects. How
well we manage to meld these together into a coherent whole will be our
barometer for success. The task is made
more complex by the diverse backgrounds of those who typically enroll; it takes
some effort, but we have usually been able to find a way of working that’s
satisfactory for everyone! With these
caveats in mind, let us consider the requirements of the course in more detail.
3. Requirements
There
are five basic requirements for this course:
(a) Read and discuss. Do
the readings and other assignments; come to class prepared to discuss, present,
and argue; (b) Find good and bad examples: Part of our work includes paying attention to
the visual elements of your environment (work and otherwise) — watch for good
and bad examples of design; (c) Present
in class: Present a brief “re-design” of an instructional message or other item
that you choose; (d) Review the literature: Find four
articles related to your interests (and/or project/paper topic), prepare a
brief review of them, and discuss that review in class; and (e) Do a project or paper: prepare
a project or paper in which you design an instructional message or otherwise
use the principles discussed in the course.
a.
We will be using two different books for
this course: Edward Tufte’s Visual
Explanations and Robin Williams’s
The Non-Designer’s Design Book.
While these works overlap in some areas, they have distinctly different
styles and areas of emphasis. Note that
neither of the assigned texts is a traditional review of empirical studies; the
point is to expand your awareness and hopefully achieve a more complex
appreciation of what elements can contribute to good graphic design, or to at
least allow you to more ably critique design elements as you encounter them.
In addition, each week we’ll consider at
least one “traditional” research article that deals with the issues we’ll be
discussing that week. For many weeks,
I’ll indicate more than one article of interest; if you have time to look at
all the ones I list, great, but if you only have time to look at one, choose
the one that looks most interesting. These
items will be available via the UW Libraries e-Reserve site for this course (or
you can find them yourself via the UW e-Journals collection.
I assume that you will do the assigned
readings and come to class prepared to discuss them. As you read, try to evaluate the authors ‘
positions and conclusions, and come to class ready to analyze these in
detail.
(Due throughout the
quarter; 10% of final course grade)
b. Good and bad examples.
At any/various times during the quarter, post
(on the designated GoPost site) and discuss in class positive or negative
examples of educational (broadly defined) message design. Think about why you selected what you did, indicate
where you encountered the item, and suggest how your choice has broader
significance!
Post your examples (positive or negative)
on the class Go-Post designated for that purpose and be ready to comment on at
least one occasion during the quarter.
(Due throughout the
quarter; 10% of final course grade)
c. In-class presentation.
On a date you choose at the start of the
course, present in class a brief (10-15 minutes total) example of re-design
– that is, take an existing item of educational material that you have some
experience or connection with (could be a text, handout, graphic item, fragment
of animation, etc.) and show how you would re-design it to be more
effective. This is not about your
artistic skills – you don’t have to actually re-engineer a complex animation or
produce a new graph or chart! The idea
is to take something you have some familiarity with, and show how it could be
improved. The readings (for that week or
other weeks) may come into the discussion, or not, depending on what you choose
to present.
Post your presentation materials on the
class Go-Post designated fort that purpose.
Be ready to talk for about 5-10 minutes (and be sure to have projectable
examples of your materials), and then lead discussion for another 10 minutes.
(Due throughout the
quarter; 20% of final course grade)
[10% = oral
presentation; 10% = accompanying materials]
d. Literature Review.
Identify four key
research-based references on a topic of interest to you. The point here is to become familiar with
relevant journals and on-line resources, to compare the merits of different
authors’ perspectives and research methods, and to begin to become a “connoisseur”
of these kinds of materials. Depending
on your focus and direction, these may be empirical studies, reviews, or
conceptual pieces that suggest new approaches or improved practices.
Choose a subject
area or topic that is of interest to you.
The review may be related to the intended topic of your course
paper/project (see below) or not, at your discretion. In previous quarters, many students have
found that it makes sense to combine efforts and focus on one topic for both
literature review and project, but a significant minority have found that there
is a benefit to exploring more than one topic during the course. You choose!
Do a search of the
literature that describes research-based studies related to your topic. Use the many databases and tools available to
you online and via the UW Libraries: Google
Scholar, PsycINFO, JSTOR, the ACM Digital Library, individual e-journals, and
other specialized resources in particular sub-fields (for example,
human-computer interaction, computer-supported collaborative work, museum
exhibit design, DX Arts, etc.).
Select four (4) of
those studies that you believe present the best evidence or the most intriguing
results. Summarize each study in no more
than ½ page, and then indicate how the results of that study are relevant for
your work. Provide a ½ page introduction
(what you were looking for, how you structured your search, what sources you
surveyed, etc.) and a ½ page conclusion at the end (what do these studies tell
you; how do they relate to your work, etc.).
The total length should be no more than 3 pages. Each article you cite should be preceded by
the full APA citation, and your summary both summarize what the article says
and give your estimate of the value/interest of the study.
Post your review on
the class Go-Post designated for that purpose.
We’ll discuss your reviews and the articles you found most significant
in class on Feb. 1.
(Due Feb. 1; 20% of
final course grade)
e. Course
project/paper.
The course project
or paper should present and discuss the design for an educational or
instructional “message.” This could be
in the form of text, graphic materials, video, web-based materials, or some
other combination. You are not expected to produce all of the
materials proposed; rather select a small
segment of the material to demonstrate your approach to the whole. You should, however, prepare a comprehensive
description of the entire set of materials – include as appendices whatever
sketches, storyboards, outlines, scripts, screen shots, or any other
information that will help me know what you are proposing.
Most of your effort
should go into describing why you
intend to present your message in the way you have proposed, and to justifying your choices based on graphic
design principles, research, and theory (both as discussed in the course and as
otherwise investigated by you). If you
are working on a particular instructional design project as part of your job or
in connection with another course or internship, it should be possible to join
the paper with that work; see me and discuss.
FORMAT: Final projects may be either in traditional
term-paper format or in some multi-media combination. If you submit a multi-media project (web
site, CBI material, etc.), be sure that it is viewable using commonly available
hardware and software, and is not platform specific. Regardless of format, all products should at
least be accompanied by a brief paper-based description of design elements and
the rationale for their choice (including relevant references). If submitting a traditional term paper,
please see that it is printed in a 12 pt. font, double-spaced, and stapled (no
binder or cover). All papers/projects
(including brief descriptions) should be prepared in accordance with the
guidelines contained in the Publication
manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.; 2009)
or whatever set of guidelines is typical for your field.
Post your
paper/project on the class Collect It site designated for that purpose. Expected paper length: not more than 15
pages.
(Due Mar. 7; 40% of
final course grade)
4. Necessary Notices:
DUE
DATES: Having assignments ready by the
date due is an essential requirement and a basic expectation of graduate
study. Failure to observe this
requirement can have dire consequences!
Grades of “incomplete” will be given only for certifiable medical
reasons or in other extraordinary circumstances.
DISABILITY
ACCOMODATIONS: To request academic
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Disability Resources for
Students, 448 Schmitz, 206-543-8924/V, 206-543-8925/TTY, or at http://www.washington.edu/students/drs/. If you have a letter from Disability
Resources for Students indicating you have a disability which requires academic
accommodations, please show me the letter so we can discuss the accommodations
you might need in this class.
If
you have questions or concerns about disability accommodation do not hesitate
to contact me or DRS directly.
PLAGIARISM: Plagiarism, submitting someone else’s words
or ideas as your own work, is a serious academic offense. Cases of suspected plagiarism will be
referred to the Associate Dean for Academic Programs for adjudication. Possible penalties range from disciplinary
warnings to dismissal from the university.
All students are expected to demonstrate academic integrity at all
times, and to learn what constitutes plagiarism. A useful definition of plagiarism can be
found at:
http://depts.washington.edu/grading/pdf/AcademicResponsibility.pdf
A
word on the oral presentations and discussions. It is important to learn how to present ideas
clearly and briefly, and how to critique others’ presentations incisively and
positively. It is easy to criticize
someone else’s work; it is harder (and more essential) to do so in a way that
preserves that person’s self-image and dignity.
The most respected scholars are those who manage to combine helpful
suggestions for how things might be done differently with a tone that is
constructive and collegial. You should
strive to attain this kind of scholarly approach in your work here!
5. Grading
The
various requirements for the course will be weighted as follows when computing
grades:
|
Participation
in class discussions |
10% |
|
Positive/negative
design example(s) |
10% |
|
Re-design
presentation in class |
20% |
|
Literature
Review |
20% |
|
Final
project or paper |
40% |
6. Links to Course Tools
Go-Post for:
Presentations and
review of literature
Collect It for
final projects/papers
UW
Libraries e-Reserve site for this course
(Password: the name [not number] of this
course, as one word, no caps)
7. Additional Readings and Course Materials
|
For: |
Item: |
|
1/11/12 |
Look at Ellen
Lupton’s Thinking with
Type website. Examine at least one
of the topics under each of the three main headings – Letter, Text and Grid.
Do her prescriptions make sense? |
|
|
Garfield,
Simon. (2011) Just my type: A book about fonts. [Excerpt] New York: Penguin/Gotham Books. [This is just for fun; Garfield writes
about typography in a humorous and engaging way.] |
|
|
Lonsdale, Maria
dos Santos. (2007). Does typographic design of examination
materials affect performance? Information
Design Journal, 15(2), 114–138. |
|
|
Waller, Robert. (2007).
Comparing typefaces for airport signs.
Information Design Journal, 15(1), 1–15. |
|
1/18 |
Cromley, Jennifer
G., Snyder-Hogan, Lindsey E., & Luciw-Dubas, Ulana A. (2010).
Cognitive activities in complex science text and diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology,
35, 59–74. |
|
|
Souto, Virginia
Tiradentes. (2009). Decisions, ideas and text clouds. Information Design Journal, 17(3),
163–175. |
|
1/25 |
Hahn, Jim, &
Zitron, Lizz. (2011). How first-year students navigate the stacks:
Implications for improving wayfinding.
Reference & User Services Quarterly, 51(1), 28–35. |
|
|
Koyama, Keiichi. (2010).
Communication support boards: Pictorial symbols for communication
assistance. Information Design Journal,
18(1), 74–80. |
|
|
Wiener, Jan M., Büchner,
Simon J., & Hölscher, Christoph.
(2009). Taxonomy of human
wayfinding tasks: A knowledge-based approach.
Spatial Cognition & Computation, 9, 152–165, 2009. |
|
2/1 |
Look at the Information Aesthetics website – pick at
least two examples, and be ready to say why they appeal (or don’t appeal) to
you. |
|
|
Davis,
Randall. (2007, September). Magic paper: Sketch-understanding
research. Computer, 40(9), 34-41. |
|
|
Fathulla, Kamaran,
& Basden, Andrew. (2007) What is a diagram? Proceedings. IEEE 11th International
Conference on Information Visualization, 951 – 956. [Available from UW Libraries via IEEE
Xplore Digital Library] |
|
2/8 |
Check out the XKCD Money Chart – Is this a good way to
present complex information graphically?
|
|
|
Burke, Christopher. (2009).
Isotype: Representing social facts pictorially. Information Design Journal, 17(3),
211–223. |
|
|
Kastellec,
Jonathan P., & Leoni, Eduardo L.
(2007). Using graphs instead of
tables in political science. Perspectives
on Politics, 5(4), 755-771. |
|
|
Roth, Wolff-Michael,
& Hwang, SungWon. (2006). On the relation of abstract and concrete in
scientists’ graph interpretations: A case study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior,
25, 318–333 |
|
2/15 |
Timmers, Rian, &
van der Wijst, Per. (2007). Images as anti-smoking fear appeals: The
effect of emotion on the persuasion process. Information Design Journal, 15(1),
21–36. |
|
|
Woolner, Pamela, Clark,
Jill, Hall, Elaine, Tiplady, Lucy, Thomas, Ulrike, & Wall, Kate. (2010).
Pictures are necessary but not sufficient: Using a range of visual
methods to engage users about school design.
Learning Environments Research, 13, 1–22. |
|
2/22 |
Look at the Visual Complexity website –
choose at least two examples that you feel present a useful way of
visualizing complex information, and be ready to say why they appeal to you. |
|
|
Chen, Chaomei. (2010).
Information visualization. Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 2(4), 387–403. |
|
|
Iaria, Giuseppe, Palermo,
Liana, Committeri, Giorgia, & Barton, Jason J.S. (2009).
Age differences in the formation and use of cognitive maps. Behavioural Brain Research, 196, 187–191. |
|
|
Zender, Mike,
Pestian, John, & Glauser, Tracy.
(2010). Visual language system
for representing medical concepts. Information
Design Journal, 18(3), 184–197. |
|
2/29 |
Bakker, Arthur,
Hoyles, Celia, Kent, Phillip, & Noss, Richard. (2006).
Improving work processes by making the invisible visible. Journal of Education and Work, 19(4),
343–361. |
|
|
Higgins, Steve, Beauchamp,
Gary, & Miller, Dave. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3),
213–225. |
|
|
Ivory, Melody Y.,
& Megraw, Rodrick. (2005,
October). Evolution of web site design
patterns. ACM Transactions on Information
Systems, 23(4), 463–497. |
|
|
Maun, Ian, &
Myhill, Debra. (2005). Text as design, writers as designers. English in Education, 39(2), 5–21. |
|
|
Mehlenbacher,
Brad, Bennett, Leslie, Bird, Tammy, Ivey, Melonie, Lucas, Jan, Morton, Janet,
& Whitman, Lisa. (2005). Usable
e-learning: A conceptual model for evaluation and design. Proceedings of HCI International 2005: 11th
International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 4 — Theories,
Models, and Processes in HCI. Las Vegas, NV: Mira Digital P, 1-10. |
|
|
Tyers, Alex. (2008).
Performance based design. Information
Design Journal, 16(3), 202–215. |
STK 01/4/12