An Empirical Investigation of Multimodal interface For E-learning Note-Taking

—This paper introduces an empirical study conducted to investigate the use and effect of multimodal metaphors in e-learning applications. This investigation involved two different interface platforms performed by forty users. The first interface platform (textual interface), based on three input modalities, namely text, graphic, and speech, was used to deliver information about note-taking. The second platform interface (multimodal interface) was based on five input modalities, including; text, graphic, speech, avatar and earcons to deliver the same information. The aim of the experiment was to measure and compare the level of usability of textual and multimodal interfaces. The usability parameters, which are efficiency, effectiveness, and users' satisfaction, were considered in the experiment. The results obtained from this investigation have shown that the multimodal e-learning interface increased the level of usability as users took significantly less time to complete the tasks, performed successfully in a higher number of tasks, and were more satisfied than when using the textual interface. Also, the results indicate that users most preferred the avatar as choice of input modality, while earcons were the second most preferred option for representing information. These input modalities could be used to improve the attractiveness of note taking which in turn will be reflected in increasing users' motivation and interest in the presented learning material.

[1]  James L. Alty,et al.  The rising pitch metaphor: an empirical study , 2005, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[2]  Stephen Brewster,et al.  Using non-speech sound to overcome information overload , 1997 .

[3]  Nigel Marlow,et al.  The role of student learning styles, gender, attitudes and perceptions on information and communication technology assisted learning , 1999, Comput. Educ..

[4]  Diane J. Hanson,et al.  E-Learning: Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital Age , 2003, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[5]  Meera Blattner,et al.  Earcons and Icons: Their Structure and Common Design Principles , 1989, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[6]  Lynette Kvasny,et al.  Defining Away the Digital Divide: A Content Analysis of Institutional Influences on Popular Representations of Technology , 2001, Realigning Research and Practice in Information Systems Development.

[7]  Andrew R. Molnar Computers in education: A brief history , 1997 .

[8]  John O'Donoghue,et al.  A Study into the Effects of eLearning on Higher Education , 2005 .

[9]  Dimitris I. Rigas,et al.  Utilising audio-visual stimuli in interactive information systems: a two domain investigation on auditory metaphors , 2002, Proceedings. International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing.

[10]  Marcus Pailing E‐learning: is it really the best thing since sliced bread? , 2002 .

[11]  Nadine Sarter,et al.  Multimodal information presentation: Design guidance and research challenges , 2006 .

[12]  Dimitrios Rigas,et al.  Experiments in using structured musical sound, synthesised speech and environmental stimuli to communicate information: is there a case for integration and synergy? , 2001, Proceedings of 2001 International Symposium on Intelligent Multimedia, Video and Speech Processing. ISIMP 2001 (IEEE Cat. No.01EX489).

[13]  Jun Hyung Jo,et al.  Ubiquitous learning environment: An adaptive teaching system using ubiquitous technology , 2004 .

[14]  Gurmak Singh,et al.  Implementing eLearning Programmes for Higher Education: A Review of the Literature , 2004, J. Inf. Technol. Educ..

[15]  S. Alexander E‐learning developments and experiences , 2001 .

[16]  A. P. Rovai Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks , 2002, Internet High. Educ..

[17]  L. Anido,et al.  Towards a Standard for Mobile E-Learning , 2006, International Conference on Networking, International Conference on Systems and International Conference on Mobile Communications and Learning Technologies (ICNICONSMCL'06).

[18]  Kathleen Gray,et al.  Directions for organisation and management of university learning: Implications from a qualitative survey ofstudent e-learning , 2005 .

[19]  G. Theonas,et al.  The Effect of Facial Expressions on Students in Virtual Educational Environments , 2007 .

[20]  Michael Cohen,et al.  Throwing, Pitching and Catching Sound: Audio Windowing Models and Modes , 1993, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[21]  Martin Mühlpfordt,et al.  Supporting discourse in a synchronous learning environment: the learning protocol approach , 2002, CSCL.

[22]  William W. Gaver,et al.  Effective sounds in complex systems: the ARKOLA simulation , 1991, CHI.

[23]  Sven Anderson,et al.  COMBINING SPEECH AND EARCONS TO ASSIST MENU NAVIGATION , 2003 .

[24]  Curtis J. Bonk,et al.  Applying collaborative and e-learning tools to military distance learning: A research framework , 2000 .