What instruments do researchers use to evaluate LXD? A systematic review study

Author:

Tawfik Andrew A.ORCID,Payne Linda,Ketter Heather,James Jedidiah

Abstract

AbstractIn contrast to traditional views of instructional design that are often focused on content development, researchers are increasingly exploring learning experience design (LXD) perspectives as a way to espouse a broader and more holistic view of learning. In addition to cognitive and affective perspectives, LXD includes perspectives on human–computer interaction that consist of usability and other interactions (ie—goal-directed user behavior). However, there is very little consensus about the quantitative instruments and surveys used by individuals to assess how learners interact with technology. This systematic review explored 627 usability studies in learning technology over the last decade in terms of the instruments (RQ1), domains (RQ2), and number of users (RQ3). Findings suggest that many usability studies rely on self-created instruments, which leads to questions about reliability and validity. Moreover, additional research suggests usability studies are largely focused within the medical and STEM domains, with very little focus on educators' perspectives (pre-service, in-service teachers). Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Funder

National Science Foundation

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference43 articles.

1. Alroobaea, R., & Mayhew, P. J. (2014). How many participants are really enough for usability studies? Science and Information Conference, 2014, 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1109/SAI.2014.6918171

2. Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A “quick and dirty” usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester, & A. L. McClelland (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189–194). Taylor & Francis.

3. Campbell, A., Craig, T., & Collier-Reed, B. (2020). A framework for using learning theories to inform “growth mindset” activities. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(1), 26–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1562118

4. Chang, Y. K., & Kuwata, J. (2020). Learning experience design: Challenges for novice designers. In M. Schmidt, A. A. Tawfik, I. Jahnke, & Y. Earnshaw (Eds.), Learner and user experience research: An introduction for the field of learning design & technology (pp. 145–163). EdTech Books.

5. Christensen, R., Hodges, C. B., & Spector, J. M. (2022). A framework for classifying replication studies in educational technologies research. Technology Knowledge and Learning, 27(4), 1021–1038. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09532-3

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3