Personal Blogs

 I recently had the pleasure of attending the PPIG 2011 workshop between 6 and 8 September.  As I might have mentioned in an earlier blog, PPIG is an abbreviation for the Psychology of Programming Interest Group.  There used to be an American equivalent which was called ESP (Empirical Studies of Programmers), but this community seem to have disappeared.  PPIG, on the other hand, is going strong.

This year it was held in the University of York computer science department.  The department had moved since I was last there, forcing me to circumnavigate the campus and arrive at a time when almost all the tea and sandwiches had disappeared.  Thomas Green gave an opening address, and then it was swiftly on to the first presentation.

Mathematics and Visual Impairments

Alistair Edwards gave a talk entitled 'new approaches for mathematics in blind students'.  Mathematics, of course, relies on visual notations.  These notations, it was argued, are an integral part of working with maths.

Alistair holds that view (or, should I say that I understand that he holds the view) that there is more to it than just using an appropriate notation, or having that notation converted into another form.  We externalise parts of our working memory by using pen and paper.  Also, the idea of cancelling (or balancing) an equation by crossing of similar teams from both sides can be viewed as a visual manipulation.

Alistair mentioned a couple of projects, one of which was called Lambda, an abbreviation for Linear Access to Mathematics for Braille Device and Audio-synthesis.  Here, the challenges began to be clear: I didn't know this but different countries have different braille notation for mathematics.  There is, of course, the issue that using an interface to a notation immediately places cognitive barriers in the way that has the potential to make things more difficult to understand.  Users, it was argued, need more direct forms of interaction when working with mathematics.

All in all, a very thought provoking introduction, and it made me wonder how Green's cognitive dimensions of notations framework might be used to analyse interactions to notational systems (such as mathematics or programming languages) by users who may have different modality preferences (i.e. auditory over visual).

New Tech

The first main session of the workshop was called New Tech.  I'll do a very quick run through of the papers from each session.  Jon Rimmer presented the shyness project, and introduced the beguiling ambient computing device called the 'subtle stone', whereby class participants can communicate their emotional state to the lecturer by a click of a juggling ball.  Jon deftly directed us to a series of interesting papers about shyness.

The following paper was closely connected.  It was entitled 'self-reporting emotional experiences in a computing lab', by Judith Good (et al).  Us programmers go through a whole spectrum of different emotions during a programming session, from delight, through to wishing to jump on our laptop (although I don't recommend this).  This is an interesting direction: emotion connects to motivation, and traditionally the PPIG community have more focussed upon the cognitive.

Chris Roast, from Sheffield Hallam University, took us on a tour of a tool that helped to create different internationalised film posters; software localisation through abstraction.

One of the papers that I most enjoyed was by Chris Martin from the University of Dundee, who took dancing robots on a road trip to a number of different schools to further explore whether a robot dance workshop can inspire interest in a technical subject such as computer programming.  Or, does using robots 'sugar coat' a difficult subject, or is there more to it than this?  By robots, imagine small buggies.

In fact, Chris's robots use the same Arduino microcontroller that is central to the TU100 Senseboard. By dance, this is an activity that has a low threshold to success, is created, transcends culture, and where performance can be valued over competition (I made notes during this bit of Chris's talk).

The two other papers in this section described how to make music with a dry marker pen, a whiteboard and a mobile phone by defining your own musical notation (which was pretty cool), and considered the challenges that users of mobile spreadsheets face.

Human and algorithmic complexity

The next presentation was a 'work in progress' paper by yours truly.  I talked about a project (that has been making very slow progress, due to a myriad of different reasons) to explore whether it is possible to link measurements of program complexity to physiological measurements that are known to indicate human cognitive load. 

The workshop participants gave me a whole number of things to think about, including the names of a number of researchers, as well as a clear message of: 'stop procrastinating, just get on with it'.  I'm certainly going to take that last piece of advice.

The following presentation was about the challenge of working with test data.  A subject that can easily cause terror to many a software developer.

Language Formalities

Wednesday yielded a change of plan.  Thomas Green ran a session entitled, 'how to design a notation'.  A programming language is, of course, a form of notation.  Thomas posed interesting questions, like, 'how might we invent a different type of musical notation?', which led onto other questions such as its level of abstraction (what each element of a notation can represent), what you might wish to do with a notation, it's overall purpose, and how you might off load to external representations.

A theme underpinning all this debate was one that is familiar to many human-computer interaction and interaction design researchers: the idea of trading one thing off against another.

Giora Alexandron then presented his paper entitled 'programming with the user in mind' which led us towards considering something called live sequence charts, which is an extension of UML sequence diagrams.  We were introduced to the Play Engine and the PlayGo IDE.

This was followed by a presentation by Ahmad Taherkhani who spoke about 'automatic algorithm recognition based on programming schemas'.  I really liked this paper, since it was a new angle on some very early psychology of programming themes.  I particularly like how Ahmad was attempting to use existing theories to engineer a solution that may not only have practical use (in terms of providing tools to help educators to understand the programming code that students write), but also the act of programming a solution has the potential to allow us to learn more about the theories that are being applied.

The final paper in this session was a work in progress paper by Khuong A Nguyen who used a human-computer interaction technique called cognitive walkthough to learn more about the NXT-G visual programming language that can be used with the Lego Mindstorms hardware.

HCI for the future

Following a tour of a HCI and accessibility lab (which resembles a small apartment), a short panel discussion took place, with Nicholas Merriam and Luke Church taking centre stage.  Nicholas's perspective was especially welcome, since he spoke about the challenge of working with low level embedded software and the role that timing visualisation tools may play when attempting to solve programming problems that seem particularly intractable.  This linked back well to the earlier discussions of notation.

Learners and language design

This session contained two papers.  The first was a paper by Ahmed Alardawi, from Sheffield Hallam, aimed to explore the effect that object-oriented programming language class structure has on the comprehension of computer programs.  What was great about this research was that it clearly made use of existing work, and partially replicated earlier studies, thus adding to evidence.  Babak Khazaei, also from Sheffield Hallam, presented an empirical study on the influence of OCL, an abbreviation for Object Constraint Language (wikipedia). 

Motivation and affect

This part of the workshop contained a single presentation, by Rein Sach, from the Department of Computing at the Open University. 

Rein's paper was entitled, 'what makes software engineers go that extra mile?'  Rein asked software engineers what it was about their work that they enjoyed.  This gave way to an interesting discussion about the perception of the nature of programming work.  Even though developers might have to battle with misbehaving operating systems and maintain servers from time to time, perhaps these activities need to be considered as work rather than nuisances that get in the way of the real task, which is doing the intrinsically rewarding and creative work of creating code.

Invited paper

Thursday kicked off with a presentation by Gerrit van der Veer, from the Open University in the Netherlands and the Free University, Amsterdam.  Gerrit's presentation was about different aspects of design, how technology might be used to gather debate surrounding the artefacts that are created during the design process through a system called CAM, meaning Co-operative Artefact Memory.  A barcode sticker could be attached to different artefacts, such as a sketch or a physical prototype.  Design groups could then use these stickers, with mobile phones, to access a shared Twitter stream that relates to each object, allowing views and ideas to be shared.

Two thoughts came to mind during Gerrit's presentation.  Firstly, I wondered the extent of similarities between design practice (in different disciplines) and what occurs within software development practices that use agile methods, such as eXtreme Programming.  Secondly, CAM reminded me of a tool called OpenDesignStudio used for an Open University design course called U101, Design Thinking.

Another part of Gerrit's presentation was all about service design (i.e. design which yields a product that is not a tangible item).  Gerrit pointed us to a number of resources, such as the Service Design Tools site, and mentioned the importance of culture, by referring to the work of Hofstede (which is studied in the M364 Interaction Design Open University course). 

Cognitive considerations

The final session of the workshop contained two presentations that related to the cognitive dimensions of notations framework, papers by Anna Bobkowska, Maria Kutar and John Muirhead.  Anna introduced a language for the processing of multimedia streams through the use of a visual language.  Maria and John's presentation explored how a cognitive dimensions questionnaire might be used by non-experts.

Miguel Monteiro went on to speak about the cognitive foundations of modularity.  Miguel referred to a programming paradigm called Aspect-oriented programming (wikipedia), a subject that I have heard of many times, but one that I have not explored in a great deal of depth.  Learning more about AOP is certainly something to do at some point.

Qualitative and Quantitative

The final presentation of the workshop was by Gordon Fletcher from the University of Salford.  Gordon's presentation was entitled 'methods and practicalities of qualitative research', but it was so much more than this.  Gordon spoke about data collection in different communities, and mentioned the concept of biographical research (which made me wonder if anyone has thought about applying this technique, perhaps with regards to exploring motivation or software related careers.

I came away with a number of messages, namely, it can be relatively easy to gather qualitative data, but figuring out what to do with it is a whole other issue.  Also, both quantitative and qualitative research can be both systematic and rigorous; these different approaches to research have a lot in common.  An interesting quote was, 'the method has to fit the researcher even more than it has to fit the research'.

Gordon's presentation gave way to a memorable debate on the use of terms.  Undoubtedly the use of language will remain a perpetual challenge when carrying out multidisciplinary research.

Themes

A number of diverse themes were evident within the PPIG '11 workshop, representing its broad membership.  There was a strong theme of computing education and pedagogy.  Programming and educational motivation was also apparent, mixed in with the use and design of visual programming languages.  This connected to the important theme of cognitive dimensions, notational systems and notational design. 

Two interesting inclusions were links to the broader subject of design, and accessibility.  Human-computer interaction and interaction design remains important theme too.  A final theme is (perhaps that isn’t as strong as in previous years) is the application of ethnographic methods to further understand the activity of programming.  It was great to hear from a broad spread of presenters who are exploring many different research areas.

This blog post represents a review of the second International Education for All conference that I was lucky enough to attend in September 09.  I originally intended to post a review earlier, but mitigating circumstances (which I hope will become clear at the end) prevented this.

Like the first conference, held in '07, this conference was also hosted at the University of Warsaw.  The '07 conference represented a finale of an EU project, a collaboration between universities and other organisations from Germany, Poland, Estonia, Croatia and others (please forgive my poor memory!), but this one was slightly different.

Below I attempt to present a brief summary of some of the sessions that I attended.  There were three parallel sessions, so I had to choose carefully.  This is then followed by what I took away in terms of the themes of the conference.

Opening Keynote

The opening keynote was by Dianne Ryndak from the University of Florida.  Dianne explored the topic of inclusion, particularly the differences between generalised and specialised education.  Dianne explained how personalised support and learning activities could be provided as a part of general learning activities.

She went on to present a powerful description of two students: one who was educated within a segregated school, the other who was educated, with the provision of additional support, through a main stream (or general education) school.  I remember her saying that 'education is a service that goes to the student, not a place where the student goes' and that education should be 'only as special as necessary'.

Although Dianne's presentation primarily related to high school education the themes she highlighted can be directly brought to bear on higher education too.  Technology can be used as a way to help with the inclusion of people with disabilities main stream education.  This said, teachers have a more important role where they need to be viewed as collaborators as well as educators.

Three dimensional solid science models for tactile teaching materials

I sometimes like to visit museums.  One of the things that frustrate me is the sight of signs that say 'please do not touch!'  This strikes me as particularly unfair when I discover sculptures in art galleries.  Given that sculptors use their haptic sense when creating an object, it seems unfair to deny visitors the possibility of using this same modality.

Yoshinori Teshima, from the Digital Manufacturing Research Centre in Japan, gave an inspiring presentation where he showed a number of different models, ranging from abstract objects (such as polyhedra) through to hugely magnified representations of microscopic creatures that can only be seen under a microscope (imagine a microscoping monster the size of your fist!)

Yoshinori briefly spoke about the manufacturing methods, which included stereolithography and 3D printing using either plaster on nylon powder.  His relief emphasised models of the earth and mars were fabulous.

It struck me that his models could be used by all students, regardless of visual abilities.  It also struck me that the ultimate use of such models within the classroom depends ultimately upon the skills and the expertise of the teacher.

Talking Tactile Tablet

I have heard about tactile tablets before.  This presentation demonstrated a product that was also included within the assistive technology exhibition that was also hosted at the conference.

I came away with two points from this presentation.  Firstly, referring to three dimensional objects using two dimensional symbols is a skill that I take for granted.  Secondly, it is now possible for educators to author their own tactile materials.  We were shown how it was possible to create a small family tree.  Audio materials were recorded using Audacity (Wikipedia), which were then associated to positions on a tablet.  Corresponding tactile representations could be produced using embossers.

Opening Linux for the Visually Impaired

This presentation primarily focused upon a screen reader called Sue (Screenreader Usability Extensions) that was developed by the Study Centre for the Visually Impaired Students (SZS) based at the University of Karlsruhe, Germany.  This presentation reminded me a little of a presentation of the Orca screen reader, made at the Aegis project dissemination event that I wrote about a couple of months ago.

One of the interesting things about Sue was that it could be connected to both a refreshable braille display (Wikipedia) (visiting this page was interesting, since it mentioned a new type of refreshable display called a rotating-wheel display) and a screen magnifier at the same time.

Although Sue could be considered to be 'yet another screen reader', having multiple versions of similar products is undeniably, in my view, a good thing.  Competition between individual products, whether it is in terms of popularity or functionality can help their development and enhancement.

Distance Education and Training Programme on Accessible Web Design

I was drawn to this presentation due to involvement in the Open University Accessible online Learning and Fundamentals of Interaction Design courses.  I was not to be disappointed.  There were some strong echoes with these current courses, but I should say the curriculum is perhaps complementary.

The course was developed as a part of a European project called Accweb with the intention of creating distance learning materials that could address a need for a professional qualification or a certificate in accessible web design. The materials comprised of eighteen units which could be delivered through the ATutor VLE, amounting to the equivalent of 60 points of study.

Key elements of the curriculum included:

• Fundamentals of web accessibility
• Guidelines and legal requirements
• Assistive technologies
• Accessible content creation (which included issue such as methodology, evaluation, rich internet application and authoring tools)
• Design and usability (themes from human-computer interaction)
• Project development

The materials do not seem to be available through this site at the moment, but I hope they will be available in time.

Helping children to play using robots: IROMEC project experience

This presentation, by Francesca Caprino, outlined the IROMEC project, which is an abbreviation of Interactive Robotic Social Mediators as Companions and a sister project called the adapted robot project.  Francesca began by describing play: what it is, what it can do and considered the effect of play deprivation on the development of children.  Robots, it was argued, can help children with physical disabilities and other impairments participate in play activities.

The robots that were described were essentially toy robots that were modified to allow them to be controlled in different ways.  Future research objectives included uncovering of new play scenarios, considering how to adapt or modify other robots and assessing the educative and therapeutic outcomes of robot assisted  play interventions and developing associated guidelines.

Studying Sciences as a Blind Person: Challenges to AT/IT

Joachim Klaus introduced us to the Centre for the Visually Impaired Students, which seemed to have similarities to the Open University Office for Students with Disabilities (more information is available through the services for disabled students portal).

After presenting an overview of the centre, Joachim presented the ICC: International Camp on Computers and Communication.  The ICC 'tries to make young blind and visually impaired students aware what technology can do for them, which computer skills they have to have, where they should put efforts to enhance their technical skills, the level of mobility as well as their social skills'.  Using and learning to use assistive technologies can be difficult.  This international camp, which is held in different countries, can help people become more skilled at using assistive technologies, thus removing substantial barriers to access.

Improving the accessibility of virtual learning environments using the EU4ALL framework

During the conference, I gave a short talk about the EU4ALL project I am working on.  The presentation focussed on an architecture that the project has been creating and how it can improve the accessibility of services that are delivered to students.  The architecture takes into consideration a number of different stakeholders, each of which has a responsibility in helping to deliver accessibility.  My slides are available on-line through the Open University Knowledge Network (presentation information).

At the same time as my presentation, my colleague Elisabeth Unterfrauner from the Centre for Social Innovation, Technology and Knowledge, Vienna, was presenting her research, the socio-economic situation of students with disabilities, also carried out within the EU4ALL project.

Fostering accessibility through Design4All education in mainstream education

Continuing the theme of EU projects, Andrea Petz gave an interesting presentation about universal design, or Design4All.  Andrea has been involved with EDeAN, and abbreviation for the European Design for All e-Accessibility Network.  EDeAN has studied how D4ALL is covered or treated in different universities across Europe and has helped to guide the development of a masters programme.

Andrea began her presentation by saying that D4ALL is not design for the average, but for the widest possible group of users and went on to talk about the principles of universal design (Wikipedia):

1. Equitable use
2. Flexibility in use
3. Accessible information
4. Tolerance for errors
5. Simple and intuitive
6. Low physical effort
7. Size and space for approach and use

Andrea pointed us towards a conference called the International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs (IICHP).

Inclusive science strategies

Greg Stefanich added two more to Andrea's list of principles, namely:

1. Build a community of learners
2. Create a positive instructional climate, i.e. one that is welcoming.

Greg also connected his talk to the theme of inclusive education by saying 'a person in a regular class room setting will have better relationships with the general public, family and be employed' and emphasised the view that inclusion of all students will have no real consequence on other students.  An important point is to spend time to get to know the needs of individuals so they can be effectively supported.

Foreign language courses for students with hearing impairments

Ewa Domagała-Zyśk talked about her experience of teaching English to hearing impaired students.  Her presentation made me reflect on my own experience of using the virtual world SecondLife (although Ewa's presentation was mostly about why teaching foreign languages is a good thing and what some of the challenges might be).

Quite some time ago, I was adventurous enough to visit a couple of 'Polish speaking' virtual bars where I tried to interact, using text, with some of the 'regulars' and found myself totally lost.  This experience showed me that this was an interesting and predominately unthreatening way to help to learn (and understand) written language. It did make me wonder whether virtual worlds (in combination with real-word assistance, of course), might be an interesting way to expose people to new languages.  The issue of whether such environments promote the creation of new dialects is, of course, a whole other issue.

Educational practices towards increasing awareness among academic teachers

Dagmara Nowak-Adamczyk (or one of her colleagues) spoke about the DARE project, a disability awareness project.  The project website states, 'The long-term objective of the project and the DARE Consortium is raising public awareness of disability and the way people with disabilities function in modern (knowledge-based) society'.  The project has produced some training materials which are currently being evaluated.

Access for science students with disabilities in an open distance learning institution in South Africa

I was particularly looking forward to this presentation since its title contained particularly interesting themes.  Eleanore Johannes, from the University of South Africa, spoke about different models of disability, introduced us to the Advocacy and Resource Centre for Students with Disabilities (ARCSWiD) office and spoke of some of the challenges that students face: funding, electricity, inaccessibility web pages and training.  She also described a qualitative research project that is exploring the experiences of science students with disabilities that is taking place over a period of three years.

No contradiction : Design4All and assistive technologies

Michaela Freudenfeld introduced the INCOBS web portal that provides information about assistive technologies that are available in Germany.  The INCOBS portal has the objective of carrying out market surveys of products and services, testing of assistive devices and workplace technologies, evaluating the accessibility of software applications and offer seminars for facilitators and advisors.

Understanding educational needs of students with psychiatric disabilities

Enid Weiner, from the Counselling and Disability Services, York University, Canada, gave an impressive hour long talk on the theme of mental health difficulties.  The subtitle of her presentation was 'making the invisible more visible'.

Enid spoke about a number of interesting related themes, such as different illnesses, the effect of medication and that some illnesses can have an episodic nature, which may cause the place of learning to be slower or take place over an extended period.  Accommodations are to be made on a case by case basis.

Enid emphasised the importance of a 'community of support' and said how important it is for educational providers not to 'get hung up' on an individual diagnosis and instead focus on individual accommodations i.e. what learners need to study.

Environmental influences on participation with disabilities: a Sri Lankan perspective

This was an interesting presentation since it presented a different perspective.  Samanmali Kularatne outlined the situation in Sri Lanka and then described a study that is aiming to explore the experiences of children with disabilities in mainstream schools.

The study adopts a qualitative approach.  Interviews are carried out in class rooms, which are then transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis.  The participants include children, teachers, parents and non-participative observers.  Themes identified included: attitudes, values and beliefs, support and relationships, products and technology, natural and built environment.

The conclusion was that inclusion is not really a reality and that there is a lack of resources.  The actions resulting from the study includes further communication with educational authorities, an awareness programme for parents and launching a project to try to initiate more inclusion.

How AT can help with learning maths for people who are print disabled

The presentation and manipulation of mathematical notation is a perennial problem.  When some mathematical expressions are translated into spoken language ambiguities can easily arise.  One proposed solution is to make use of the LaTeX (Wikipedia) language.

The challenge is not just technical.  Acceptance of technology relates to the willingness of learners to accept technological solutions and effectiveness of teachers to communicate their potential benefits.  It also relies upon educators having both the time and wiliness to understand different tools.

Considering different definitions of disability

Paweł Wdówik from the University of Warsaw Office for Persons with Disabilities spoke about the different definitions of disability and the differences that exist between primary and secondary education.  Paweł highlighted that through the medical model, if you don't have a medical model, then a disability is not likely to exist.  As a result, people who do have disabilities are likely to slip through the system.  Paweł emphasised that the views of the individual should always be fundamental.

Working towards inclusive education in Europe

Andrea Watkings from the European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education spoke about the different agency projects and mentioned the UNESCO Salamanca statement and asked the question, 'how do we change our systems so they are inclusive from the beginning?' and made the point that inclusion needs to take account of all peoples and groups.  Amanda emphasised that inclusion is a process, not a state.

Closing Keynote

The final presentation of the conference was made by Yvonne Bonner, Reggio Emilia, Italy.  Yvonne presented a range of very thought provoking images.  She asked the question, 'why work in this area?'  She answered philosophically (and, of course, I paraphrase) that by working in this area  you are considering (and hopefully challenging others to enhance) the rights of all people.  It was a great way to close the conference.

Conference themes

One of the ways that this conference differed from the previous event was that there were more distinct themes.  Whereas the previous event focused quite a lot on an EU project that had just concluded, this conference I felt was slightly more wide ranging (but this could be cause I was more attuned to what to look out for).

One of the more prominent theme were debates surrounding inclusion or exclusion, or more specifically, how to help ensure that people with additional needs could be effectively brought into mainstream education.  This theme was clearly articulated within the opening and closing keynote speeches.  There are differences between countries (and the models of disability that are applied).  Sharing understanding of definitions was certainly a subject that was considered to be important.

Another theme was the need to listen to the individual.  I recall two projects that are aiming to learn more about the experience of individuals.

Quite a few of the presentations related to on-going projects and programmes.  Ideally I would have liked to go away with a more fuller set of conference proceedings to help me remember what was said and recall the arguments that were presented.  Hopefully, as the conference series proceeds, this may be something that the organisers may consider, but hopefully without detracting from an underlying sense that delegates are happy to discuss, share and learn from each others practice.

Addendum

After the conference ended I had some free time.  It was suggested that a fun thing to do would be to go hiking in the Tatra mountains.  I had been told a lot about a town called Zakopane and how it once exerted a strong draw for artists and Bohemians, and how a special cheese was likely to be sold everywhere in the town.  I was not to be disappointed.  As well as having extraordinary mountains and restaurants, tourists walking down the main street would stumble across cheese purveyors (Wikipedia) very thirty or so metres.

My choice of words is no accident, but instead I was embroiled in one.  Rather than literally stumbling across cheese sellers, I literally stumbled down the side of a mountain and broke my arm (although I should add that the stumble was a relatively modest one of about forty or so centimetres).  Visiting the accident and emergency ward was an experience, where a sharp witted paramedic, upon hearing that I was from the UK asked, 'were you walking on the wrong side of the path?'  There were more jokes, but their charm has long since worn away!

The upshot of the accident was that I found myself temporarily disabled, my dominant arm immobilised in plaster.  It all came as a bit of a shock.  Simple tasks suddenly became trials of patience and took considerable longer, if I could figure out how do them at all.  Shoe laces became a liability and shirt buttons became almost impossible.  I had to go about cancelling events and activities that were scheduled for the time after I was to return to the UK.

Upon return to the UK, my motivation levels nose dived. I quickly recalled the universal design principles when doors became difficult to open and jars and cans a frustrating challenge. I also had entered the UK health system, but I had no real sense of who I should ask about information about things.  Whilst monolithic institutions are there to help, individuals are necessary to provide support and peace of mind.

Despite my frustrations, I still had an overwhelming desire to do stuff.  Although I wasn't able to attend a weekend meeting I was scheduled to attend, one of my colleagues from the University of Leeds helped me to participate.  Using Skype text chat, it was possible to take part in a short group discussion activity which helped to lift my mood.  This showed me what a positive impact technology can by providing effective alternative ways of communication.  It also distinctly underlined on of the conference themes: the importance (and power) of inclusion.

I think I'm on the mend now, but I understand it's going to take some time.  All in all, the trip (both to the conference, and over a part of mountain) was an interesting experience.  I've certainly learnt a few things.

A couple of weeks ago I was lucky enough to be able to attend a 'formative e-assessment' event that was hosted by the London Knowledge Lab.  The purpose of the event was to disseminate the results of a JISC project that had the same title.

If you're interested, the final project report, Scoping a Vision for Formative e-Assessment is available for download.  The slides for this event are also available, where you can also find Elluminate recordings of the presentations.

This blog post is a collection of randomly assorted comments and reflections based upon the presentations that were made throughout the day.  They are scattered in no particular order.  I offer them with the hope that they might be useful to someone!

Themes

The keynote presentation had the subtitle, 'case stories, design patterns and future scenarios'.  These words resonated strongly with me.  Being a software developer, the notion of a design pattern (wikipedia) is one that was immediately familiar.  When you open the Gang of Four text book (wikipedia) (the book that defines them), you are immediately introduced to the 'architectural roots' of the idea, which were clearly echoed in the first presention.

The idea of a pattern, especially within software engineering, is one that is powerful since it provides software developers with an immediate vocabulary that allows effective sharing of complex ideas using seemingly simple sounding abstractions.  Since assessment is something that can be described (in some sense) as a process, it was easy to understand the objective of the project and see how the principle of a pattern could be used to share ideas and facilitate communication about practice.

Other terms that jumped out at me were 'case stories' and 'scenarios'.  Without too much imagination it is possible to link these words to the world of human-computer interaction.  In HCI, the path through systems can be described in terms of use cases, and the settings in which products or systems could be used can be explored through the deployment of descriptive scenarios and the sketching of storyboards.

Conversational framework

A highlight of the day, for me, was a description of Laurillard's conversational framework.  I have heard about it before but have, so far, not had much of an opportunity to study it in great detail.  Attending a presentation about it and learning about how it can be applied makes a conceptual framework become alive.  If you have the time, I encourage you to view the presentation that accompanies this event.

I'm not yet familiar enough with the model to summarise it eloquently, but I should state that it allows you to consider the role of teachers and learners, the environment in which the teacher carries out the teaching, and the space where a learner can carry out their own work.  The model also takes into account of the conversations (and learning) that can occur between peers.

During the presentation, I noted (or paraphrased) the words: 'the more iterations through the conversational model you do, the higher the quality of the learning you will obtain'.  Expanding this slightly, you could perhaps restate this by saying, 'the more opportunities to acquire new ideas, reflect on actions and receive feedback, the more familiar a learner will become with the subject that is the focus of study'.

In some respects, I consider the conversational framework to be a 'meta model' in the sense that it can (from my understanding) take account of different pedagogical approaches, as well as different technologies.

Links to accessibility

Another 'take away' note that I made whilst listening to the presentation was, 'learning theories are not going to change, but how these are used (and applied) will change, particularly with regards to technology'.

It was at this point when I began to consider my own areas of research.  I immediately began to wonder, 'how might this model be used to improve, enhance or understand the provision of accessibility?'  One way to do this is to consider each of the boxes the arrows that are used to graphically describe the framework.  Many of the arrows (those that are not labelled as reflections) may correspond to communications (or conversations) with or between actors.  These could be viewed as important junctures where the accessibility of the learning tools or environments that could be applied need to be considered.

Returning to the issue of technology, peers, for instance, may share ideas by posting comments to discussion forums.  These comments could then be consumed by other learners (through peer learning) and potentially permit a reformulation or strengthening of understandings.

Whilst learning technologies can permit the creation of digital learning spaces, such as those available through the application of virtual learning environments, designers of educational technologies need to take account of the accessibility of such systems to ensure that they are usable for all learners.

One of my colleagues is one step ahead of me.  Cooper writes, on a recent blog post,  'Laurillard uses [her framework] to analyse the use of media in learning. However this can be further extended to analyse the accessibility of all the media used to support these different conversations.'  The model, in essence, can be used to understand not only whether a particular part of a course is accessible (the term 'course' is used loosely here), but also be used to highlight whether there are some aspects of a course that may need further consideration to ensure that is as fully inclusive at it could be.

Returning to the theme of 'scenario', one idea might be to use a series of case studies to further consider how the framework might be used to reason about the accessibility status of a course.

Connections

There may be quite a few more connections lurking underneath the terms that were presented to the audience.  One question that I asked to myself was, 'how do these formative assessment patterns relate to the idea of learning designs?' (a subject that is the focus of a number of projects, including Cloudworks, enhancements to the Compendium authoring tool, the LAMS learning activity management system and the IMS learning design specification).

A pattern could be considered as something that could be used within a part of a larger learning design.  Another thought is that perhaps individual learning designs could be mapped onto specific elements of the conversational model.  Talking in computing terms, it could represent a specific instantiation (or instance).  Looking at it from another perspective, there is also the possibility that pedagogical patterns (whether e-assessment or otherwise) may provide inspiration to those who are charged with either constructing new or using existing learning designs.

Summary

During the course of the day, the audience were directed, on a number of occasions to the project Wiki.  One of the outcomes of the project was a literature review, which can be viewed on-line.

I recall quite a bit of debate surrounding the differences between guidelines, rules and patterns.  I also see links to the notion of learning designs too.  My understanding is that, depending on what you are referring to and your personal perspective, it may be difficult to draw clear distinctions between each of these ideas.

Returning to the issue of the conversational model being useful to expose accessibility issues, I'm glad that others before me have seen the same potential connection and I am now wondering whether there are other researchers who may have gone even further in considering the ways that the framework might be applied.

In my eyes, the idea of e-assessment patterns and the notion of learning designs are concepts that can be used to communicate and share distilled best practice.  It will be interesting to continue to observe the debates surrounding these terms to see whether a common vocabulary of useful abstractions will eventually emerge.  If they already exist, please feel free to initiate a conversation.  I'm always happy to learn.

Acknowlegements

Thanks are extended to Diana Laurillard who gave permission to share the presentation slide featured in this post.

One of my colleagues volunteers for the Open University audio recording project.  The audio recording project takes course material produced by course teams and makes audio (spoken) equivalents for people with visual impairments.  Another project that is currently underway is the digital audio project which aims to potentially take advantage of advances in technology, mobile devices and international standards.

Some weeks ago, my colleague tweeted along the lines of 'it must be difficult for people with visual disabilities to learn how computer programs are written and structured' (I am heavily paraphrasing, of course!)  As soon as I read this tweet I began to think about two questions.  The first question was: how do I go about learning how a fragment of source code works? and secondly, what might be the best way to convert a function or a 'slice' of programming code into an audio representation that helps people to understand what it does and how it is structured?

Learning from source code

How do I learn how a fragment of source code works?  More often than not I view code through an integrated development environment, using it to navigate through the function (or functions) that I have to learn.  If I am faced with some code that is really puzzling I might reach for some search tools to uncover the connections between different parts of the system.

If the part of the code that I am looking at is quite small and extremely puzzling, I might go as far as grab a pen and paper and begin to sketch out some notes, taking down some of the expressions that may appear to be troubling and maybe split these apart into their constituent components.  I might even try to run the various code fragments by hand.  If I get really confused I might use the 'immediate' window of my development environment ask my computer to give me some hints about the code I am currently examining.

When trying to understand some new source code my general approach is to try to have a 'conversation' with it, asking it questions and looking at it from a number of different perspectives.  In the psychology of programming literature some researchers have written about developers using 'top down' and 'bottom up' strategies.  You might have a high level hypothesis about what something does on one hand, but on the other, sections of code might help you to understand the 'bigger picture' or the intentions behind a software system.

In essence, I think understanding software is a really hard task.  It is harder and more challenging than many people seem to imagine.  Not only do you have to understand the language that is used to describe a world, but you also have to understand the language of the world that is described.  The world of the machine and the world of the problem are intrinsically and intimately connected through what can sometimes seem an abstract collection of words and symbols.  Your task, as a developer, is to make sense of two hidden worlds.

I digress slightly... If learning about computer programming code is a hard task, then it is possible that it is likely to be harder for people with visual impairments.  I cannot imagine how difficult it must be to be presented with a small computer program or a function that has been read out to you.  Much of the 'secondary notation', such as tabbing and white space can be easily lost if there are no mechanisms to enable them to be presented through another modality.  There is also the danger that your working memory may become quickly overwhealmed with names of identifiers and unfamiliar sounding functions.

Assistive technology for everyone

The tasks of learning the fundamentals of programming and learning about a program are different, yet related.  I have heard it said that people with disabilities are given real help if technologies are created that are useful for a wide audience.  A great example of this is, for example, optical character recognition.  Whilst OCR technology can save a great deal of cost typing, it has also created tools that enable people with low vision to scan and read their post.

Bearing the notion of 'a widely applicable technology' in mind, could it be possible to create a system that creates an interactive audio description that could potentially help with the teaching of some of the concepts of computer programming for all learners?

Whenever I read code I immediately begin to translate the notion of code into my own 'internal' notation (using different types of memory, both internal and external - such as scraps of paper!) to iteratively internalise and make sense of what I am being presented with.  Perhaps equivalents of programming code could be created in a form that could be navigated.  Code it not something that you read in a linear fashon - code is something you work with.

If an interesting and useful (and interactive) audio equivalent of programming code could be created there then might be the potential that these alternative forms might be useful to all students, not only to learners who necessarily require auditory equivalents.

Development directions

There are a number of tools that could help us to create what might amount to 'interactive audio descriptions of programming code'.  The first is the idea of plan or schema theory (wikipedia) – the notion that your understanding of something is drawn from previous experience.  Some theorists from the Psychology of Programming have extended and drawn upon these ideas, positing ideas such as key lines of code such as beacons.

Another is Green's Cognitive Dimensions framework (wikipedia).  Another area to consider looking at is the interesting sub-field of Computer Science Education research.  There must be other tools, frameworks and ideas that can be drawn upon.

Have you got a sec?

Another approach that I sometimes take when trying to understand something is that I ask other more experienced people for help.  I might ask the question, 'what does this section represent?' or, 'what does this section do?'  The answers from collegues can be instrumental in helping me to understand the purpose behind fragments of programming code.

Considering browsing

I can almost imagine what could be an audio code browser that has some functionality that allows you to change between different levels of abstraction.  At one level, you may be able to navigate through sets of different functions and hear descriptions of what they are intended to do and hope to receive by way of parameters (which could be provided through comments).  On another level there may be summaries of groups of instructions, like loops, with descriptions that might sound like, 'a foreach loop that contains four other statements and a call to two functions'.  Finally, you may be able to tab into a group of statements to learn about what variables are manipulated, and how.

Of course this is all very technical stuff, and it could be stuff that has already been explored before.  If you know of similar (or related) work, please feel free to drop me a line!

Acknowledgement: random image of code by elliotcable, licenced under creative commons, discovered using Flickr.

One of the great things about Moodle (other than the number of databases it can use!) is the way that courses can be easily created and edited.  One of its best features is the edit button that can be found at the top of many pages.  Administrators and course managers can push this button and quickly add and remove functionality to redesign a course or a site within seconds.

This blog post is the first in a series of two (but might even extend to three) that aims to answer the question of: how does the Moodle block editing magic work?  To answer this question I found that it was useful to split this big question into a number of smaller questions.  These are: how are blocks presented to the user?, how are block layouts stored in the Moodle database?, and what happens when the user clicks on the edit button and makes changes to the layout of a site or a course?

There are two reasons for wanting to answer to these questions.  The first is that knowing something about this key part of Moodle might help me to understand more about its architecture which might help me in the future if I have to make any changes as a part of the EU4ALL project.  The second is pure curiosity, particularly regarding the database tables and structures - I would like to know how they work.

There are two broad approaches that I could take to answer these questions: look at things from the top down, or from the bottom up.  I could either look at how the user interfaces are created, or I could have a look at the database to see if I can find data tables that might be used to store data that is used when the Moodle user interface is created.  In the end I used a combination of top down and bottom up approaches to understand a bit of what is going on.

This post will present what I have learnt about how Moodle presents blocks.  The second post will be about what I have found out about the database and how it works (in relation to Moodle blocks) and what happens when you click on the various block editing icons.

There will be load of detail which will remain unsaid and I’ll be skipping over loads of code subtleties that I haven’t yet fully understood!  I’ll also be opinionated, so advance apologies to and Moodle developers who I might inadvertently offend.  I hope my opinions are received with positive spirit, which is the way that they are intended.

Introducing blocks

Blocks are bits of functionality which sit on either side of a Moodle site or course.  They can do loads of stuff: provide information to students about their assignment dates, and provide access to discussion forums.  When first looking at Moodleworld, I had to pause a moment to distinguish between blocks, resources and activities.  Blocks, it might be argued, are pieces of functionality that can support your learning, whilst activities and resources may be a central part of your learning (but don’t quote me on that!)



Not long after starting looking at the blocks code, I discovered a developer page on the subject.  This was useful.  I soon found out that apparently there are plans to improve the block system for the next version of Moodle.  The developers have created an interestingly phrased bug to help guide the development of the next release.  This said, all the investigations reported here relate to version 1.9+, so things may very well have moved on.

Looking at Index

Blocks can be used in at least two different ways: on the main Moodle site area (which is seen when you enter a URL which corresponds to a Moodle installation) and within individual courses.  I immediately suspect that there is some code that is common between both of them.  To make things easy for myself, I’ve decided (after a number of experiments) to look at how blocks are created for a Moodle site.

To start to figure out how things work the first place that I look at is the index.php file.  (I must confess that I actually started to try to figure out what happened when you click on the editing button, but this proved to be too tough, so I backtracked…)

So, what does the index.php file do?  I soon discover a variable called $PAGE and asked the innocuous question of ‘why are some Moodle variables in UPPERCASE and others in lowercase?’ I discover an answer in the Moodle coding guidelines.  Anything that is in uppercase appears to be global variables.  I try to find a page that describes the purpose of the different global variables, but I fail, instead uncovering a reference to session variables, leaving me wondering what the $PAGE class is all about.

Pressing on I see that there are some functions that seem to calculate the width of the left and the right hand areas where the blocks are displayed.  There is also some code that seems to generate some standard HTML for a header (showing the Moodle instance title and login info).

The index page then changes from PHP to HTML and I’m presented with a table.  This surprises me a little.  Tables shouldn’t really be used for formatting and instead should only be used to present data.  It seems that the table is used to format the different portions of the screen, dividing it unto the left hand bunch of columns, a centre part where stuff is displayed, and a right hand column. 

It appears that the code that co-ordinates the printing of the left and right blocks is very similar, with the only difference being different parameters to indicate whether things appear on the left, and things appear on the right.

The index file itself doesn’t seem to display very much, so obviously the code that creates the HTML for the different blocks is to be found in other parts of the Moodle programming.

Seeding program behaviour

To begin to explore how different blocks are created I decide to create some test data.  I add a single block to the front page of Moodle and position it at the top on the right hand side:



Knowing that I have one block that will be displayed, I can the trace through the code when the ‘create right hand side’ code is executed using my NuSphere debugger to see what is called and when.

One thing that I’m rather surprised about is how much I use the different views that my debugger offers.  It really helps me to begin learn about the structure of the codebase and the interdependencies between the different files and functions.

Trying to understand the classes

It soon becomes apparent that the developers are making use of some object-oriented programming features.  In my opinion I think this is exactly the right thing to do.  I hold the view that if you define the problem in the right way then its solution (in terms of writing the code that connects the different definitions together) can be easy, providing that you write things well (this said, I do come from a culture of Java and C# and brought up, initially, on a diet of Pascal).

After some probing around there seem to be two libraries that seem to be immediately important to know about: weblib and blocklib.  The comments at the top of weblib describes it as ‘library of all general-purpose Moodle PHP functions and constants that produce HTML output’.  Blocklib is described as, ‘all the necessary stuff to use blocks in course pages’.

In index, there is a call to a function called blocks_setup (blocks, I discover, can be pinned true, pinned both, or pinned false – block pinning is associated to lessons, something that I haven’t studied).  This function appears to call another function named   blocks_get_by_page (passing it the $PAGE global).  This function returns a data structure that contains two arrays.  One array is called l and the other is called r.  I’m assuming here that array data has been pulled from the database.

The next function that follows is called blocks_have_content. This function does quite a bit.  It takes the earlier data structure, and translates the block number (which corresponds to which block is to be displayed on the page) and converts it into a block name through a database call.  The code then uses this name to instantiate an object whose class is similar to the block name (it does this by prepending ‘block_’ to the start).

There is something to be cautious about here: there is a dependency between the contents of the database (which are added to when the Moodle database is installed) and the name of the class.  If either one of these were to change the blocks would not display properly.

The class that corresponds to the news block is named ‘block_news_items’.  This class is derived from (or inherits) another class called block_base that is defined within the file moodleblock.class.php.  A similar pattern is followed with other blocks.

Is_empty()

Following the program flow, there is a call to a function called is_empty() within blocklib.php.   This code strikes me as confusing since is_empty should only be doing one thing.  Is_empty appears to have a ‘side effect’ of storing the HTML for a block that comes from a call to get_content to a variable called ‘content’.  Functions should only do what they say they do.  Anything else risks increasing the burden of program comprehension and maintenance.

The Moodle codebase contains several versions of get_content, one for each of the different blocks that can be displayed.  The version that is called depends on which object Moodle is currently working through.  Since there is only one block, the get_content function within block_news_items is called.  It then returns some HTML that describes how the block will be presented. 

This HTML will be stored to the structure which originally described which block goes where.  If you look through the pageblocks variable, the HTML can be found by going to either the left or right array, looking in the ‘obj’ field, then going to ‘content’.  In ‘content’ you will find a further field called ‘text’ that contains the HTML that is to be displayed.

When all the HTML has been safely stored away in memory it is almost ready to be printed (or presented to a web client). 

Calls to print_container_start() and print_container_end() delineate a call to blocks_print_group.  In this function there will then be a database call to check to see if the block is visible and then a call to _print_block() is made.  This is a member function of a class, as indicated by the proceeding underscore.  The _print_block() can be found within the moodleblock.class file.  This function (if you are still following either me or the code!) makes a call to print_side_block function (which is one of those general purpose PHP functions) contained within weblib.php.

Summary and towards part 2

I guess my main summary is that to create something that is simple and easy to use can require quite a lot of complicated code.

My original objective was to try to understand the mechanisms underpinning the editing and customising of course (particularly blocks) but I have not really looked at the differences between how blocks presented within the course areas and how blocks are presented on the main site.  Learning about how things work has been an interesting exercise.  One point that I should add is that from an accessibility perspective, the use of tables for layout purposes should ideally be avoided.

What is great is that there is some object-oriented code beginning to appear within the Moodle codebase.  What is confusing (to me, at least) is the way that some data structures can be so readily changed (or added to) by PHP.  I hold the opinion that stronger data types can really help developers to understand the code that they are faced with since they constrain the actions that can be carried out to those types.  I also hold the view that data stronger typing can really help your development since you give your development tools more of an opportunity to help you (through presenting you with autocomplete or intellisense options), but these opinions probably reflect my earlier programming background and experience.

On the subject of data types, the next post in this series will be about how the Moodle database stores information about the blocks that are seen on the screen.  Hopefully this might fill the gaps of this post where the word ‘database’ is mentioned.

Acknowlegement: Picture by zoologist, from Flickr.  Licenced under creative commons.

I first discovered the notion of learning object granularity when I was tasked with creating my first learning object.  I was using an authoring tool that allowed you to describe (or tag) absolutely anything.  This was a revelation!  My tool allowed me to assign descriptions to individual photographs and sets of navigable pages that could contain any type of digital media you could imagine.  You could also assign descriptions to an entire learning object.  Not only was I struggling with how to use the fields (title, description, keywords) that I had to complete, it was also difficult to know where I should stop!

Terms of reference

There are a significant number of terms here that beg further explanation.  The idea of a learning object (wikipedia) is one that is slippery: it varies depending upon who you speak to.  I see a learning object as one or more digital resources that have the potential to provide useful information to, or serve a useful function for, a consumer.  Consumers, I argue, are both the end-users (learners), and those who might use learning objects within a course of study.

An alternative definition might be: a set of learning resources that can be used together to help a learner achieve a defined set of learning objectives.  I think I prefer this second definition.  It feels a little more precise, but there are few words that allude to how large a learning object might be.

Benefits of learning objects

One of the often cited benefits of learning objects is that they have the potential to be reused.  A digital resource could be taken from one learning situation could be reused (or repurposed) to another situation.  The benefits could include an increase in the quality of the resulting material and possible savings in terms of time and money.

Learning objects are sometimes held within mysterious instruments called repositories.  If existing materials are taken and modified, they could then be later returned to a repository and placed back into circulation for other people can use and modify, thus creating a virtuous cycle.  One problem with placing material in a repository is that if your repository contains tens of thousands of individual objects, finding what you want (to solve your particular teaching need) can become difficult (as well as tedious).

Metadata (wikipedia) has the ability to 'augment’ textual searching, potentially increasing the quality of search results.  Metadata also has the ability to offer you additional information or guidance about what an object might contain and how it might have been used, allowing you to make judgements regarding its applicability in your own teaching context.

There is a paradox: the more granular (or mutable) a learning object is, the more easily it can be reused, but the less useful it is likely to be.  The larger a learning object is, the more useful it is to an individual user (since it may attempt to satisfy a set of learning objectives), and the less likely it could be transferred or 'repurposed' to different learning and teaching contexts or situations.  Furthermore, the smaller the learning object, the more moral fibre one needs to successfully create correct (and relevant) metadata.

Repurposing

'Repurposing' is a funny word. I understand it to mean that you take something that already exists and modify it so it becomes useful for your own situation. I think repurposing is intrinsically difficult.  I don't think it's hard in the sense that it's difficult to change or manipulate different types of digital resources (providing you already have skills to use the tools to effect a change).  I think it's hard because of the inherent dependencies that exist within an object.  You have to remember to take care of all those little details. 

I consider repurposing akin to writing an essay. To write a really good essay you have to first understand the material, secondly understand the question that you are writing about, and then finally, understand who you are writing it for.  If you write an essay that consists of paragraphs which have been composed in such a way that they could be used in other essays, I sense you will end up with an essay that is somewhat unsatisfactory (and rather frustrating to read).

There is something else that can make learning object repurposing difficult.  Learning objects are often built with authoring tools.  Some tools begin with a source document and then spit out a learning object at the other end.  The resulting object may (or may not) contain the source from which it was created.  This is considered to be 'destructive' (or one way) 'authoring', where the resulting material is difficult to modify.

Even if we accept that reuse is difficult, there are other reasons why it is not readily performed.  One reason is that there is no real sense of prestige in using other people materials (but you might get some credit if you find something that is particularly spectacular!).  Essentially, employers don't pay people to re-purpose learning materials; they pay people to convey useful and often difficult ideas of learners in a way that is understandable.  There is no reward structure or incentive to reuse existing material or build material that can be easily reused.  Repurposing takes ingenuity and determination, but within the end result, much of this may be hidden.

There is a final reason why people may like to create and use their own learning resources rather than reuse the work of others.  The very act of creating a resource allows one to acquire an intimate understanding of the very subject that you are intending on teaching.  Creating digital resources is a creative act.  Learning object construction can be constructivism used to prepare for teaching.

Considering metadata granularity

The terms 'aggregate' (or 'composite') and 'atomic' objects are sometimes used when talking about learning objects.  An atomic object, quite simply, are objects  that cannot be decomposed.  An atomic object might well be an image or a sound file, whereas an aggregate object might be a content package or a SCORM object.

In my opinion, many aggregate objects should be considered and treated as atomic objects since it could be far too difficult, complex and expensive to treat them in any other way.  I hold this view since learning objects are ultimately difficult to reuse and repurpose for the reasons presented earlier, but this should not detract from the creation and use of repositories.  Repositories are useful, especially if their use is supported by organisational structures and champions.

I hold the view that metadata should match the size of a resource that it describes.  There should be metadata that describes an object in terms of overall learning objectives.  Lower-level metadata can be used to add additional information to a composite object (such as an image file) that cannot be directly gained from examining its properties or structure (such as using an algorithm to determine its type).

In essence, tagging operations for aggregate and atomic object types must be simple, economic and pragmatic.  If you need to do some tagging to add additional information to a resource (a pragmatic decision), the tagging operation should be simple, and in turn, should be cost effective.

High and low-level metadata tagging

The purpose of high level tagging, the description of high level aggregate object, should be obvious.  Consider a book.  A book has metadata that describes it so it can be found within a library with relative ease (of course, things get more complicated when we consider more complex artefacts, such as journals!).

Low-level (or lower level) metadata may correspond to descriptions of individual pages or images (I should stress at this point, my experience in this area comes from the use of software tools, rather than any substantial period of formal education!).  Why would one want to 'tag' these smaller items (especially if it costs time and money)?  One reason is to provide additional functionality

Metadata helps you to do stuff, just in the same way that storing a book title and list of authors help you to find a book within a library.  Within the EU4ALL project, metadata has the potential to allow you to say that one page (which may contain an audio file) is conceptually equivalent to another page (which contains a textual equivalent).

By describing the equivalence relationships between different resources, the users experience can be optimised to their preferences.  There is also the notion of adaptability, for example, whether a resource can be dynamically changed so it can be efficiently consumed using the device from where it was accessed (this might be a mobile device, a PC, or a PC that is using assistive technology).

Moving forwards

One of the biggest challenges within EU4ALL is to ensure that the users interface to an adaptable learning technology system is coherent, consistent and understandable.  By way of addressing accessibility concerns, all users could potentially benefit.  Learners could potentially be presented with an interface or a sign that indicates that different alternatives are available at certain points during a learning activity, should they be found to exist.  Presenting alternatives in a way that does not cause disruption to learning, yet remains flexible by permitting users to change their preferences, is a difficult task.

Creating metadata is something that is difficult and tiresome (not to mention expensive).  As a result, mistakes can be easily introduced.  Some researchers (slideshare) have been attempting to explore whether it is possible to automatically generate metadata using information about the context in which they are deployed.  In fact, it appears to be a subject of a recent research tender.  But ultimately, humans will be the final consumer of metadata, although metadata languages are intended to be used by machines.

Summary

The notion of a learning object is something that is difficult to define.  Speak to ten different people and you are likely to get ten different answers.  I hold the view that the most useful learning object is an aggregate (or composite) learning object. 

Just as the idea of a learning object can be defined in different ways, the notion of granularity can also have different definitions.  The IEEE LOM standard offers four different levels of 'aggregation', ranging from 1, which refer to 'raw media data' (or media objects), through to individual lessons (level 2), a set of lessons (i.e. a course, level 3), to finally a set of courses which could lead to a formal qualification or certificate (level 4).  I hold the opinion that metadata should match the size of a 'learning object'.  Otherwise, you might end up in a situation where you have to tag everything 'in case it might be used'.  This is likely to be expensive.

High level metadata (in my opinion) is great for storing larger objects within repositories, whereas low-level metadata can be used to describe the adaptability and similarity properties of smaller resources which opens up the possibility of delivering learning resources that match individual user needs and preferences.

Acknowledgements

Posting image: from cocoi_m, from Flick.  Thanks go to an anonymous reviewer whose comments have been very instructive, and all those on the EU4ALL project.  The opinions that are presented here are my own rather than those of the project (or the Open University).

To really understand why things are the way they are today necessitates understanding what has happened in the past. This blog post is an attempt to build up an understanding of the current state of Moodle accessibility by looking into what has happened during parts of its development. My methodology is simple: begin with internet (and Moodle forum) searches, ask a few people to see what they know, and see where it takes me!

Initial results

A quick search using Cuil took me to some Moodle developer pages and the Moodle Accessibility Specification which has the headline, 'the document specifies improvements to the accessibility of the Moodle course management system for version 1.7’' This is useful. Both the page itself and the release number can point me towards some dates. Version 1.7 of Moodle dates from November 2006 onwards (until March 2007, when version 1.8 is released).

Digging a little further in the Moodle documentation, I discover the release notes for version 1.7. This provides a huge amount of information. Release notes are very often overwhealming for the casual reader. So, to help my search, I search this page for the term 'accessibility'.

Under Moodle 1.8 release notes, the words 'the Moodle interface is now compliant with XHTML Strict 1.0 and major accessibility standards' catch my eye. This is interesting, but what does this mean? Thankfully, there is a link. I’ll try to uncover what the significance of XHTML Strict later. Let's continue with the search for discussions relating to 'major accessibility standards'.

Moodle Accessibility Page

The link found on the 1.8 release notes takes me to the Moodle Accessibility page. The page provides several groups of other links: starting points, standards, legislation, tools and resources. A couple of things jump out at me: a link to the development tracker that relates to Accessibility Compliance in Moodle 1.8, a link to Italian Accessibility Legislation Compliance, and a link to an accessibility forum (guest login required).

It looks like I might be finding some very useful stuff! So much stuff, I need to focus down on what is often very important to me: source code. Code cannot lie, but on its own, it cannot always tell you its history... Thankfully, there are other ways to understand how (and why) things have changed.

Looking at the detail

To enhance the accessibility of Moodle, the developers have created tasks within a combined bug tracker and change management system. This is something that is common to loads of other software developments. Change management systems help developers to keep track of what has changed, when and by whom. If bugs are accidentally introduced as a result of changes, keeping records can help us to understand why. A side effect of a good tracker is that it can also tell you what changes are incorporated into individual releases.

Let’s have a look at a tracker entry to see what one of them says: Indicate type of resource in the name of the resource. This is an interesting one. For screen reader users, having advance warning about the file type is useful, particularly if a link is to a resource that is handled by an application outside of the browser, such as a PDF file, for example.

It’s also interesting to see that the tracker can also contain information about debates about the development of the software and, sometimes, its requirements. Clicking on the 'change history' may sometimes present you with a file that summarises the modifications that a Moodle developer has made to several files to make the accessibility enhancement.

Higher level advice

As well as the Accessibility Specification, one of the developers has created a useful page entitled Accessibility Notes (found within the developer area). This includes an executive summary of some of the guidelines, a roadmap for further accessibility developments, pointers towards future areas of development and a link to some accessibility 'patterns' which have been derived from the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG).

Relationship to WCAG?

You often hear WCAG mentioned in relation to different levels of conformance, specifically A, AA and AAA. Whilst searching the terms Moodle and WCAG, I found myself back at the forum that I mentioned earlier which had the title, a forum to discuss 'planned conformance to standards/laws such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), Special Educational Needs and Disability Act (SENDA), Section 508 (USA)'

It should be said that there is no formal way to 'conform' to the WCAG guidelines. Whilst some of guidelines can be assessed by machine (by the use of a computer program), some sections of the guidelines require real people to determine whether or not a web page is accessible (according to the guidelines). It should be noted that even if something is accessible under one measurement, to some users, this might not be the case.

The issue of compliance is also complicated by the fact that Moodle (along with many other learning management systems) can make use of different blocks, modules or components in a range of different ways. The way that an application is use and configured can significantly influence its accessibility.

Although there is no definitive statement how Moodle adheres to the different WCAG 1.0 levels, but I have discovered a forum posting that relates to a question about the American Section 508 procurement legislation. But will there ever be a statement about WCAG? I decided to dig further by speaking to one of the contributors to the Moodle Accessibility Specification.

Whilst WCAG is great for content, it doesn’t work so well with interactive systems. The Moodle accessibility specification has been created by distilling accessibility principles and ideas from a number of different sources, WCAG as well as an organisation called IMS (see also the IMS Guidelines for Developing Accessible Learning Applications).

Future work?

It was recently announced that the latest version of the WCAG guidelines (version 2.0) will be soon released. One interesting piece of work would be to carry out an assessment of a 'vanilla' (or out of the virtual box) installation of Moodle against these new guidelines.

Strict!

Earlier on I mentioned that I might explore what is meant by the mysterious words XHTML Strict. Whilst browsing the Moodle accessibility pages, I discovered the Moodle tracker task that asked the developers to move to web pages that are 'marked up' in this way.

One part of this tracker jumps out at me, specifically: 'avoid using, within the markup language in which the page is coded, elements and attributes to define the page's presentation characteristics'. In essence, use semantic tagging on web pages as opposed to tagging that relates to the change of the visual characteristics of a display. Rather than using bold tags to indicate a heading, a developer should instead use heading tags. This way, the tags that 'add meaning' to a document can help users who have assistive technology navigate through a page more easily.

A further comment on the subject of semantic tagging is that if a developer needs to add visual formatting to a page, cascading style sheets should be used (CSS). CSS can be used to separate the structure of the content from how it appears on the users screen. A great illustration of what CSS is and what it is capable of can be found within the CSSZengarden.

There is another line within the tracker problem that was interesting: 'for all new sites, use at least version 4.01 of HTML, or preferably version 1.0 of XHTML'. What does this mean, and is there a difference between the two, and why is a difference preferred? Let’s have a look what they are in Wikipedia which contains a paragraph that explains how XHTML relates to HTML.

It seems there are little differences between the two, except that the HTML pages become well-formed XML documents. Not only can then the resulting pages be manipulated by programs that can manipulate XML (and more easily check for different types of conformance – page checking is mentioned in the tracker comments page), but by insisting that they are 'well formed' may prevent the possibility of 'ill-formed' pages confusing assistive technologies, such as screen readers.

The tracker provides more information about how XHTML relates to accessibility. WCAG states that content authors (and you could argue that a page generated by Moodle is content) should 'create documents that validate to published grammars' (checkpoint 3.2). Other useful WCAG checkpoints include guidance not to use deprecated (now obsolete or old) features, and select W3C technologies when they are available, and use the latest versions. In essence, take advantage of new technologies when they are available for use.

Summary

It seems that accessibility, as a subject, has been discussed on the Moodle forums since November 2005. Since this date, a lot of work has been carried out to improve the accessibility of Moodle, some by the Open University. Evidence of this work can be found documented within the Moodle project without too much difficulty. I hope this post has helped to show where (and how) to find information about Moodle accessibility.

Although it can be argued that no platform is totally accessible, strides have been made to make Moodle more suitable for users of assistive technology. Anyone who uses Moodle has to be aware that the accessibility of such a system does not only depend upon the programming code alone, but also how it is used, and what materials it presents to learners.

Acknowledgements are extended to those who I spoke to during preparation of this post. You know who you are!

As a part of the EU4ALL project, I have been trying to figure out how to add a new resource type. The idea is to add a resource known as an 'adaptable resource', whereby different media types are presented to the user depending on their accessibility preferences. The issue of how and where to assign or change these preferences is currently a question that has to be resolved. This post is intended as a bunch of 'notes to self' about what I have found during the last couple of days exploring and poking around the Moodle code base.

To explore the code, I've been using a couple of tools: SQLYog, which was recommended to me by an illustrious IET developer (to allow me to explore an instance of a Moodle MySQL database I have running on my home machine), and NuSphere, a PHP IDE. I did try the Zend IDE a year or so back, but abandoned it since I became rather confused!

So, how is it possible to add a new resource to Moodle? Initially, I decided to look at an existing resource, beginning with the simplest one that I could find: a simple text resource. By browsing the code base I seemed to find the rough area where the 'resource code' lives. I also browsed around the developer documentation page an unearthed a resource class template. Great!

In development, one question instantiates a tree of others. The most fundamental question is: how does this code work? I need to answer this big one to make a change. This is too big, so I split it into two other questions: (1) how can you modity a form that allows you to enter the parameters that describe an adaptable resource (currently it is to be a simple numerical value, from what I understand), and (2) how can I take the values held within a form and update them to the MySQL database? This requires an understanding of further magic code. As a note to myself, let's have a look at each of these in turn.

Entering stuff

Looking at the text resource code, there seemed to be a bit of object-oriented polymorphism going on. The name of the directory where the resource code is important too! There is a magic function called display which appears to make some further magic calls to create some data entry fields - but these calls are quite a long way away from the pure HTML that is presented in the browser window.

This is another question: how does the magic functions in display() get turned into HTML? The answer apparently lies with the application of a forms library called PERL. If I figure out how to add functions in a way that would work for this library, I can ask the user for whatever I want.

The form uses some object-oriented principles. Individual controls are added to 'the form', and then a function is executed that 'prints out' or renders each of the controls, without you having to go near to producing your own HTML.

Another interesting observation, is that the display function I have uncovered only relates to a small part of a bigger form. This is due to subclassing and polymorphism that is being used, but this is a distraction... now I have a little understanding of what is happening (thanks to the NuSphere debugger!), I'll park this question for the time being. There are other mysterious areas to explore!

Storing stuff

When a Moodle user edits a course resource, there are a couple of buttons that appear at the bottom of the screen. These are 'save and return', 'save and display' and 'cancel'. Looking at these buttons from a HCI perspective I think, 'buttons doing two different things?? surely this is a bad idea!'. But I digress.

My question is, 'what happens when the tutor (or administrator) clicks on either of the save buttons - where does the data go? Or more precisely, how does the data get saved?

Moodle seems to have a thin database layer: a set of functions that allows you to send SQL statements and receive data in response. Since the contents of the resource form is held in what can only be described as a 'big variable' (PHP has a funny approach to object-oriented programming if you've used other languages), the Moodle developers have figured out a way to transfer the contents of a form to the database, by matching on-screen fields to database fields.

This seems to work well: but on the downside is the database update code that Moodle code generates appear to be rather big, and an implicit dependency is created between the form and the database structure. Other systems that I've looked at make use of stored procedures, which has the potential to boost performance and security on one hand, but on the other restrict the database platforms that an application can be used with.

Moving forwards

Now I know (roughly) how to add extra bits to a new resource type, the next thing I have to do is figure out how to write the functions that I need. After I've done that I'll have to hook up my edits to the database, and figure out how to best display the data that I've produced. I already have some idea about how to do this since I have created a paper prototype.

But before going down that road, I think I'll continue my survey of the Moodle codebase by exploring what sections can potentially relate to adding and manipulation of user parameters and settings. I think I'll start by looking at the user profile developer pages.

Looking towards the longer term, I will also have to connect Moodle to a number of different web services. Wish me luck!