Adaptive Hypermedia: A New Paradigm for Educational Software

Abstract

Traditional online dental education courses follow the broadcast paradigm which centers on the teacher, not the student. This one-size-fits-all approach resembles a mass-production idea which cannot take individual learner characteristics into account. Most online course designs do not address the issue that users with different goals and knowledge may be interested in different pieces of information about a topic. Adaptive hypermedia (AH) is an emerging field in education research which investigates how computer systems can overcome this problem. AH can be applied to any course content. This learner-centered approach first considers the learning goal(s), then evaluates the user’s abilities and determines the individual learning style, to structure and tailor the curriculum most efficiently. The presented AH environment exploits various concepts of AH. The system collects data to create a model of the individual user, which is continuously refined based on test results throughout the course. The system then adapts the learning material dynamically, using active and passive curriculum sequencing and adaptive presentation.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ANSI Standards Committee on Dental Informatics (1999). Guidelines for the design of educational software. [Online] Available at http://di.dental.pitt.edu/edswstd/. Accessed 3/23/2004.

Austin E (1999). The caliber concept. University Business 2(2):24–31.

Brusilovsky P (2001). Adaptive hypermedia. User Modeling and User-adapted Interaction 11(1/2):87–110.

Brusilovsky P, Eklund J, Schwartz E (2002). Web-based education for all: a tool for development adaptive courseware. http://www7.scu.edu.au/programme/fullpapers/1893/com1893.htm.

Brusilovsky P, Corbett A, de Rosis F (2003). User modeling (lecture notes). In: Artificial Intelligence. Vol. 2702. Berlin: Springer Verlag.

Bullock JC, Goble CA (1998). TourisT: the application of a description logic based semantic hypermedia system for tourism. HYPERTEXT ’98. Proceedings of the Ninth ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia: Links, Objects, Time and Space—Structure in Hypermedia Systems, pp. 132–141. New York: ACM Press, ISBN 0-89791-972-6.

Carnevale D (1999). U of Maryland University College forms for-profit company for on-line courses. Chronicle Higher Educ 46(17).

Clark RE (1993). Media will never influence learning. http://www.usq.edu.au/material/unit/resource/clark/media.htm. Accessed 2-6-2003.

Clark RE (2000). Evaluating distance education: strategies and cautions. Q J Distance Educ 1(1).

10.

Corbett AT, Koedinger KR, Anderson JR (1997). Intelligent tutoring systems. In: Handbook of human-computer interaction. Helander MG, Landauer TK, and Prabhu PV, editors. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science B.V., pp. 849–874.

11.

De Bra P, Calvi L (1998). AHA! An open adaptive hypermedia architecture. New Rev Hypermedia and Multimedia 4:115–139.

12.

De Bra P, Brusilovsky P, Conejo R (2002). Adaptive hypermedia and adaptive Web-based systems, AH2002. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

13.

DePaola D, Howell H, Baker CG, Boy-Lefevre ML, Hull P, Holmstrup P, et al. (2002). Research and the dental student. Eur J Dent Educ 6(Suppl 3):45–51.

14.

Donovan SM, Bransford JD, Pellegrino JW (2000). How people learn: bridging research and practice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

15.

Encarnacão LM, Stoev SL (1999). An application-independent intelligent user support system exploiting action-sequence based user modeling. Proceedings of 7th International Conference on User Modeling. Vienna, Austria: Springer, pp. 245–254.

16.

Gates KF, Lawhead PB, Wilkins DE (1998). Toward an adaptive WWW: a case study in customized hypermedia. New Rev Multimedia and Hypermedia 4:89–113.

17.

Haden NK, Valachovic RW (2003). The ADEA-NIDCR National Research Conference on Putting Science into Practice: The Critical Role of Dental Schools. J Dent Educ 66:912–917.

18.

Klein JT (1999). Computer response to user frustration (thesis). Cambridge, MA: MIT Report No. TR480.

19.

Martinez M, Bunderson CV (2000). Foundations for personalized Web learning environments. Asynchronous Learning Networks Magazine 4(2). ISSN 1092-7131 (http://www.aln.org/ publications/magazine/v4n2/burdenson.asp).

20.

Nielsen J (2002). Heuristic evaluation. [Online] http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/. Accessed 8-28-2002.

21.

O’Neill JM (1999). For-profit Temple spin-off will offer online courses. The Philadelphia (PA) Inquirer, Cover.

22.

Papert S (1996). The connected family: bridging the digital generation gap. Marietta, GA: Longstreet Press.

23.

Phillips V (1998). Virtual classrooms, real education. Nation’s Business, pp. 41–45.

24.

Phipps R, Merisotis J (1999). What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Institute for Higher Education Policy Report No. CSD1488 (http://www.ihep.com/Pubs/ PDF/Difference.pdf).

25.

President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee (2003). Report to the President: using information technology to transform the way we learn (http://www.hpcc.gov/pubs/ pitac/pitac-tl-9feb01.pdf).

26.

Ramage TR (2003). The “no significant difference” phenomenon: a literature review. e-journal of instructional science and technology (http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/e-jist/docs/ html2002/ramage.html).

27.

Reeves B, Nass C (1996). The media equation: how people treat computers, television, and news media like real people and places. Stanford, CA: CSLI.

28.

Schleyer T, Pham T (1999). Online continuing dental education. J Am Dent Assoc 130:848–854.

29.

Spallek H, Pilcher E, Lee JY, Schleyer T (2002). Evaluation of Web-based dental CE-courses. J Dent Educ 66:393–404.

30.

Weiser M (1991). The computer for the 21st Century. Scientif Amer 265(3):66–75.