Suhonen, J., & Sutinen, E. (2006). FODEM: developing digital learning environments in widely dispersed learning
communities. Educational Technology & Society, 9 (3), 43-55.
FODEM: developing digital learning environments in widely dispersed
learning communities
Jarkko Suhonen and Erkki Sutinen
Department of Computer Science, University of Joensuu, Finland, P.O.BOX 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland
jarkko.suhonen@cs.joensuu.fi
erkki.sutinen@cs.joensuu.fi
ABSTRACT
FODEM (FOrmative DEvelopment Method) is a design method for developing digital learning
environments for widely dispersed learning communities. These are communities in which the geographical
distribution and density of learners is low when compared to the kind of learning communities in which
there is a high distribution and density of learners (such as those that exist in urban areas where courses are
developed and taken by hundreds or thousands of learners who are simultaneously present in the area).
Since only limited resources can be allocated for the design of a digital learning environment for widely
dispersed learning communities, it is necessary to use what limited funds are available to obtain valid
feedback from stakeholders and to utilize such feedback in an optimal way. In terms of the FODEM model,
the design process consists of asynchronous development threads with three interrelated components: (1)
needs analysis, (2) implementation, and (3) formative evaluation. In needs analysis, both theory and
practice are used to define specifications for the environment. In implementation, fast prototyping in
authentic learning settings is emphasized. Finally, formative evaluation is used to evaluate the use of the
environment within the thread. FODEM has been applied to develop ViSCoS (Virtual Studies of Computer
Science) online studies and LEAP (LEArning Process companion) digital learning too in the rural regions
of Finland where the population is geographically widely dispersedly.
Keywords
Design Methods, Digital Learning Environments, Online Learning, Formative Evaluation
Introduction
Digital learning environments (DLEs) are technical solutions for supporting learning, teaching and studying
activities (Suhonen, 2005). A digital learning environment can be educational software, a digital learning tool, an
online study program or a learning resource. A digital learning environment may thus consist of a combination
of different technical solutions. A DLE may thus be used as the basis for an e-learning program (Anohina, 2005).
The development of effective DLEs is not an easy task. The challenge when developing DLEs for us to use
technology ingeniously and creatively to solve problems and meet the needs that arise in various technological,
educational and cultural contexts (Kähkönen et al., 2003). The best design methods are those that help designers
to develop innovative and effective solutions by clearly depicting the most important procedures and aspects of
the development process (Design-Based Research Collective, 2003).
A widely dispersed learning community refers to a student population that is thinly distributed over a relatively
large geographical region or throughout a long period of time. Since widely dispersed learning communities like
this are restricted by cultural, geographical or temporal factors, they tend to be relatively small in number. A
widely dispersed learning community might, for instance, consist of 30 students who live in an area with a radius
of 200 kilometers and who are learning Java programming. Such characteristics have two consequences: firstly,
a thinly distributed community needs outstandingly accessible DLEs because the students live too far away from
one another to offer or receive assistance, and, secondly, not even the sum of fees collected from such a small
number of students can finance excellent DLEs of the kind we are contemplating. Such difficulties have given
rise to in poorly designed ad hoc DLEs. Table 1 presents typical differences between widely dispersed and dense
learning communities. The United Kingdom Open University (UKOU) is an example of a dense learning
community where the student numbers are reasonably high. For instance, the UKOU offers a full range of
degrees and it has over 200,000 students. According to Castro et al. (2001) and Bork and Gunnarsdottir (2001),
the UKOU has a full-scale preparation system for the courses. Several years and millions of euros are invested to
make high quality learning products to be used over several years. The evaluations and course improvements are
often conducted to the final version of a DLE.
This paper explains how we applied a FODEM (FOrmative DEvelopment Method) to create effective DLEs for
the Finnish context which is well known for its widely dispersed learning communities. Apart from meeting the
needs of a widely dispersed learning community, FODEM has to prove itself as a practicable DLE design
method. Whatever method is used, it has to be responsive to the diversity of learners’ needs and situations, to
ISSN 1436-4522 (online) and 1176-3647 (print). © International Forum of Educational Technology & Society (IFETS). The authors and the forum jointly retain the
copyright of the articles. Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies
are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by
others than IFETS must be honoured. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists, requires prior
specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from the editors at kinshuk@ieee.org.
43
whatever technologies are available, and to the cultural idiosyncrasies of the learning context (Soloway et al.,
1996). The lack of unified theories for functional specifications of DLEs can make the design situation
unpredictable (Moonen, 2002). Such uncertainty gives, for instance, rise to the need for a formative design
process. This is especially applicable when the whole design situation is new, and the requirements and
expectations of the developed environment can easily change during development (Fallman, 2003).
Understanding the core problems and needs of learners is a crucial aspect of the development process.
Design costs per
course
Number of students
Design team
Development time
Primary use of
technology
Production
Feasible DLEs
Table 1. Features of widely dispersed and dense learning communities
Sparse
Dense
Not more than US$10,000
100,000US$ or more
Fewer than 100
From several hundred up to
thousands
10-20 specialists
A few people with multi-disciplinary skills and
several responsibilities
2-4 person months
Information processing
1-2 years
Information delivery
Tailor-made
Multipurpose digital learning tools
Mass production
Re-usable learning objects
In this paper we describe how we applied FODEM to two DLE development scenarios – ViSCoS and LEAP.
ViSCoS is an online study program for first-year university-level courses in computer science. The ViSCoS
curriculum consists of three main areas: the preliminaries of ICT, the basics of programming with Java, and an
introduction to computer science (Sutinen & Torvinen, 2001). ViSCoS first began to be developed in 2000.
Between 2000 and 2005, a total of 109 high school students completed the program. LEAP is a digital learning
tool that was developed in response to challenges that arose during the ViSCoS Programming Project course
(Suhonen & Sutinen, 2004). The main functions of LEAP are a digital learning portfolio and creative problem
solving support (Suhonen, 2005).
Formative development method – FODEM
Thread as a core structure
The most basic concept in FODEM is that a thread represents an identified developmental theme within a DLE
development process. Such a theme represents a particularly important area or need that has to be addressed if a
learning process and its outcomes are to be improved by a DLE. An example of a thread is the design process of
a crucial component in a system of DLEs – such as a visualization tool in a programming course. We use the
term thread rather than stage or phase because FODEM development process consists of several parallel and
simultaneous asynchronous threads. The thread structure differentiates the FODEM method from, say, many
general software design methods which proceeds linearly, stage by stage (Whitten et al., 2004).
Threads in a development process can be asynchronous or they can progress independently of one another.
Thread structures are used because they represent the most important aspects of the development process. In
spite of this, threads do not necessarily reflect all aspects of a development process. Because resources for design
and implementation of a widely dispersed learning community context are limited, it is better to focus on the
most important features (which are threads) and undertake quality work with them rather than create a flat
learning environment which in which one cannot penetrate too deeply into any given area because it would be at
the cost of other areas. The developers of FODEM were inspired in this regard by jagged study zones which are
a cross between open learning environments and intelligent tutoring systems (Gerdt et al., 2002).
A thread has three interdependent, dialectic components: needs analysis (NA), implementation (I) and formative
evaluation (FE), and it can include several instances of such components. Each thread has a certain development
theme which aligns the goals of a thread and relates the components to one another. The line (left thread in
Figure 1) shows an indefinite interaction among components. One of the main principles of FODEM is to
gradually develop the DLE on the basis of the feedback received from the stakeholders (students, teachers,
administrative staff and designers alike). It is important to note that more threads can be added into the process
on the basis of feedback received. In the beginning, there might only be one thread and a need to implement the
44
first version of a digital learning environment as quickly as possible. As a formative design method FODEM
emphasizes research-orientation throughout the entire lifecycle of a DLE. Various thread types can also be
identified. In a cycle of development thread type, the components within a thread have an iterative dependency.
With a cycle of development thread, one can, for instance, represent how a certain development theme
progresses clearly in linear or spiral form. This means that typically a cycle of development thread includes
several instances of components. Figure 1 illustrates how two threads might work together in a development
process. The thread on the left illustrates a cycle of a development thread.
First designs of
courses
NA
I
Single course
NA
Focus on a
special case
FE
I
FE
Figure 1. Two threads in a development process
FODEM components
In a needs analysis, designers identify the needs and pedagogical objectives of the DLE and the consequent
requirements of a design context. A needs analysis includes the definition of the main concepts, roles and desired
goals of the environment in terms of the thread’s theme. In the early stages of development, the most urgent
tasks are given the highest priority. The definition of pedagogical objectives can be grounded on both theory and
practice. Learning theories, for example, can be a useful resource for suggesting various approaches and ideas to
the designer. But design solutions may also be the product of human innovation and ingenuity, particularly in
circumstances where no relevant theories exist. The requirements of the design context may also be constructed
from extrapolating from experiences of successful practical developments in similar situations in the past. Needs
analysis may also include an analysis of formative evaluations in other threads.
Tasks
Methods
Outcomes
Challenges
Table 2. Summary of the FODEM components
NA
I
Identify the design solutions and
Implement design solutions as
main concepts (Kerne, 2002).
quickly as possible so that
experiments with learners can
take place as soon as possible
(Soloway et al., 1996).
Analysis of contextual factors,
Fast prototyping, sketching,
learning theories, and practical
experimenting (Bahn &
experiences. Literature reviews.
Nauman, 1997).
Evaluation of experiences from
other threads.
Pedagogical and technical design
An environment that is usable
principles and solutions
in authentic learning settings
To incorporate and combine the
design ideas from different origins
in an effective and meaningful way
(Abdelraheem, 2003)
To expose the environment to
users at the right moment.
FE
Identify viable features
by evaluating.
Use of environmental
and experiential analysis,
content analysis.
Information about the
functions of the
environments in future
development
To go beyond the
structure of the design
(Kommers, 2004)
The implementation component is used to implement the design solutions identified in needs analysis. One of the
applied implementation methods is fast prototyping. This is used to test design ideas at an early stage for
information about which design solutions are viable and which are unsuccessful. This can be achieved through
45
constructive feedback elicited from stakeholders. The developed environment must be developed to a level of
maturity where its core functionalities are operating satisfactorily. While usability need not be fully refined, the
attention of learners may be constantly distracted to secondary issues if there are too many usability problems. In
the worst case scenario, learners might not even realize the main functions of the environment. If learners are
exposed too late to the development process, major changes to the core functionality of the environment will be
costly and complex to implement. Furthermore, learner participation in the implementation process (through
making suggestions and proposing developmental ideas) also benefits the learners themselves.
The third component is formative evaluation by means of which users’ experiences of the developed
environment are evaluated. In FODEM, multiple data sources and pluralistic research methods ensure the
production of a comprehensive, rich and layered overall picture. Activity logs, databases, and browsing histories
can be used to evaluate learners’ usage of the environment. As part of FE, developers can also interpret users’
personal opinions, experiences and perceptions of the environment by using (most typically) interviews and
questionnaires for to elicit data. Designers need insight, sensitivity and creative empathy to identify those often
implicit or hidden viewpoints, attitudes and emotions that users have but sometimes cannot or will not reveal. An
evaluation can also focus on obtaining practical design ideas from users themselves. Research results can
indicate new problems or design ideas for future development. Table 2 summarizes the tasks, methods, outcomes
and challenges of FODEM components.
Dependencies: interdependent structure of threads
Dependencies in FODEM are used to represent the interdependent structure of threads, the interaction among
components and the critical relationships among components in different threads. A dependency is represented
pictorially by an arrow showing the direction of the interaction. A dependency between threads and single
components can be one-directional or bi-directional (a bi-directional dependency represents a mutual
dependence between two components or threads). The name of a dependency shows the nature and meaning of
the interaction. A thread dependency shows that a whole thread is initiated by another thread. Figure 2 illustrates
a possible FODEM scenario. The dependency between Threads 1 and 2 illustrates how Thread 1 created a need
for the re-design of the environment’s technical architecture (a thread dependency). The arrow from Thread 3 to
Thread 2 illustrates that the implementation component in Thread 2 is dependent on the needs analysis
component in Thread 3.
Figure 2. A possible FODEM scenario
In principle, many layers of threads can exist. When a development process is extensive, a thread may be divided
into a set of sub-threads. Should a sub-thread become too large, it may be reconstituted into a separate
development process. The dependencies in multi-layered threads exist among thread layers and sister subthreads. Figure 3 visualizes an example of a multi-layered thread structure.
Methods that are similar to FODEM
FODEM has been inspired by general software development and educational technology design models. The
System Development Life Cycle (SDLC) and Context Design (CD) originate from the software development
tradition while Instructional Design (ID) and Design Research (DR) are used specifically in educational
technology. Common to all of these approaches are specification (S), implementation (I) and evaluation (E)
46
phases. The specification phase is used to determine the needs, requirements and expectations for the solutions.
In the implementation phases, the solution is implemented. Finally, the evaluation phase is used to analyze
implementation. Table 3 shows how the different ideas (marked in bold) from similar methods relate to FODEM.
Figure 3. Multi-layered thread structure
Table 3. Characteristics of FODEM’s sister methods in the specification (S), implementation (I), and evaluation
(E) phases
SDLC
CD
ID
DR
S De-contextualized
Learner-centered
User needs
Practical knowledge
requirements
design
I Iterative through
SDLC methods
Sketching for
Embedded in use
prototyping, sequential
presenting the design
versions, structured
ideas to users
approaches
E Summative, phased
Stories of experience,
Based on theoretical
Experimenting,
actual observations
development
reflection, formative models of human behavior
evaluation
SDLC models are often based on structured approaches (Whitten et al., 2004). The development of any software
is thought to take place in a series of phases (Löwgren, 1995). In traditional methods, evaluation is often
conducted on the final product. In newer SDLC models, the development process follows an iterative, spiral
model in which design ideas are tested in the early stages of development. In CD models, the emphasis is on
problems that relate to particular user concerns such as, for example, how to recognize the needs of users
(Löwgren, 1995). The focus in ID models falls more on the pedagogical side of the development process
(Moallem, 2001). Contemporary ID models, for example, stress learner-centered approaches, reflection and
formative development (McKenna & Laycock, 2004; Moonen, 2002). DR includes a series of approaches that
issue in technological designs and practices for learning and teaching (Barab & Squire, 2004). The emphasis
there is on testing systems in authentic settings. The development of an environment is blended with a strong
theoretical emphasis on human behavior. If one compares it with similar methods, the uniqueness of FODEM
consists of the way in which it models the parallel, but interdependent and asynchronous units of the DLE
development – units that we call threads.
FODEM in action
FODEM in ViSCoS development
ViSCoS (Virtual Studies of Computer Science) is an online study program offered by the Department of
Computer Science, University of Joensuu (ViSCoS, 2005). ViSCoS students study first-year university-level
47
Computer Science courses by means of the Web. The curriculum consists of three main parts: the preliminaries
of Information and Communication Technology (ICT), basics of programming with Java, and an introduction to
Computer Science (Torvinen, 2004). The development of ViSCoS began in 2000, and the first students
commenced studies that same year. One hundred and nine (109) students had completed the program by the end
of 2004. While ViSCoS studies were initially offered only to high school students between the ages of 16 and 18
who lived in the rural areas of Eastern Finland, subsequent collaboration between the Department of Computer
Science and the Continuing Education Centre at the University of Joensuu made it possible for this course to be
taken by anyone in Finland. Table 4 summarizes the content of ViSCoS courses.
Table 4. ViSCoS courses
Course
Introduction to Information and
Communication Technology
(ICT) and Computing
Programming I
Programming II
Hardware, Computer
Architecture and Operating
Systems
Programming Project
Introduction to the Ethics of
Computing
Design of Algorithms
Research Fields in Computer
Science
Content
Computer hardware components, computer programs and operating systems, data
communications and local area networks, network services and digital
communication, controlling the risks of information technology. Practical skills
needed for using word processing and spreadsheet applications, basics of Unix,
introduction to HTML.
Algorithmic thinking. Basic structures of programming with Java.
Introduction to object-oriented programming (objects, classes, inheritance)
An overview of architecture of computers, parsers, system software, and
databases
Software design, implementation, testing and documenting
General principles of the ethics of computing.
Introduction to basic issues in computer science; algorithms, computation, and
data structures.
Introduction to a selection of research fields in Computer Science
There are five threads in ViSCoS development: first designs, loop of improvements, new technical solutions to
support learners, ViSCoS Mobile, and English version. We implemented and ran the first versions of the courses
in the first designs thread in 2000 and 2001. The design of ViSCoS is based on the CANDLE scheme (Torvinen,
2004), the primary goal of which is to get courses up and running as quickly as possible. We went out of our way
to rework these initial courses so that they reflected the needs and interests of the kind of young high school
students who would take the course. Once they had been modified and adjusted, the course examples and
assignments were more topical and reflective of the everyday concerns and interests of this target group. While
these first courses were running, we collected feedback from all the stakeholders. Our main research efforts were
dedicated to identifying and understanding the reasons why students encountered difficulties in the ViSCoS
program (Meisalo et al., 2003). In pursuit of our aim of achieving a clear understanding of how students
experienced the courses, we made use of questionnaires, interviews, log files, analyses of examination and
submitted exercises and assignments, and analyses of student and tutor feedback to elicit the required
information. First evaluations indicated that it was the programming courses that caused students the greatest
difficulties since the highest drop-out rates had occurred there. The Programming Project course in particular
was evidently a difficult one for students.
In the second thread – loop of improvements – we addressed these problems by improving the programming
courses in whatever was we could (Torvinen, 2004). We made changes, for example, on the basis of feedback
from Thread 1 to the course structures and learning materials. One such change required us to merge two courses
into one. After careful consideration of the student feedback we received, we then also modified the curriculum
so that students could give more of their attention to the more demanding topics and so that they would have
more time for Programming I (we increased the duration of the course from 10 to 12 weeks). We also created
optional exercises, new examples and assignments, as well as interactive animations, to illuminate what we by
then knew were the most difficult student topics (arrays, loops, and methods). Several studies within the loop of
improvements also investigated the reasons why students were electing to drop out of the ViSCoS program.
(This loop of improvements thread has been active since 2001, and research efforts to investigate the drop-out
phenomenon are still continuing.)
Our aim in the third thread, new technical solutions to support learners, was to develop and introduce new
technical solutions that would enhance ViSCoS studies. We introduced the first of these new solutions in 2002.
48
Four sub-threads can be identified: the LEAP digital learning tool, the ethical argumentation tool called Ethicsar,
the Jeliot program visualization tool, and data mining techniques. LEAP is a tool for helping students to manage
their programming projects in the Programming Project course. Details of LEAP development are presented in
the next section. Ethicsar is a web-based tool for argumentation and evaluation of ethical issues and questions
(Jetsu et al., 2004). Jeliot permits novice programmers to visualize their own Java code (Moreno et al., 2004).
The development of data mining techniques focused specifically on processing data related to the course
assignments. Our ultimate aim here was to create intelligent support for learners by means of instructional
intervention (Hämäläinen et al., 2006). Dependency between ViSCoS and the technological solutions is bidirectional (Figure 4). The introduction of these improved technologies has meant that students now receive
better and more comprehensive support. The two most recent threads are ViSCoS Mobile and the English
version. ViSCoS Mobile was created so that students would be able to use a mobile device to study their ViSCoS
courses (Laine et al., 2005). Because this is a relatively new concept, only the first procedures in the needs
analysis component are currently being implemented. An English version thread has also been created so that the
ViSCoS courses can be offered to English-speaking students. The first English-medium learning materials were
implemented in the courses Introduction to ICT and Computing, Programming I, Introduction to Ethics of
Computing and Research Fields of Computer Science in September and December of 2005. Table 5 summarizes
how the ViSCoS program was developed, while Figure 4 depicts the process graphically.
Table 5. ViSCoS development (Th = Thread)
NA
I
Prioritization of the tasks,
Running the first
identifying the contextual
versions of the courses
factors of the high school
students
Th
1
Theme
First designs
2
Loop of
improvements
Identification of the most
difficult aspects of the courses
3
New technical
solutions
created to
support
learners
ViSCoS
Mobile
Needs identified while running
the first versions of the course.
Practical experiences.
Content adaptation of course
materials. Programming with a
mobile device. Student
support activities in a mobile
device (eg. Mobile Blog)
–
–
English
version
Analysis of the current Finnish
versions
Implementation of the
English version.
Improvements included
in the Finnish version.
–
4
5
Improvement of the
program on the basis of
feedback received from
learners
Development of
Ethicsar, Jeliot, LEAP,
and data mining
FE
Feedback obtained from
all stakeholders through
direct questions,
interviews, content
analysis.
Drop-out phenomenon,
questions, interviews,
analysis of exercises
The evaluation of the
implemented solutions
from many different
points of view
FODEM in the development of LEAP
Figure 4 shows ViSCoS development at a higher level of abstraction. Details may be examined by zooming into
a particular thread. The LEAP digital learning tool development, for instance, can be divided into a set of subthreads. LEAP application has two main functions. These are digital learning portfolio and creative problemsolving support (Suhonen & Sutinen, 2004). Three sub-threads can be identified: the first prototype, re-design of
the technical implementation, and a mobile adaptation extension.
We based the first prototype in Thread 1 on the needs that we had identified in the ViSCoS Programming Project
course. Some kind of tutorial mechanism was needed to help students to manage their projects in a creative way.
This tool was also inspired by digital learning portfolio, creative problem-solving support and provocative agent
concepts (Suhonen, 2005). But we did not restrict the implementation of LEAP to the Programming Project
course. Our purpose was rather to implement a generic gadget that could be used in several different settings.
The formative evaluation component in the first thread included two studies on use of the tool in authentic
learning settings. In the first study, we used the tool in the Problem Solving contact teaching course at the
49
University of Joensuu (we used the digital learning portfolio functionality in this study). In the second study, we
used the tool in the ViSCoS Programming Project course. This study allowed us to test the LEAP tool in its
original design context (we used both the digital learning portfolio and creative problem-solving support
functionalities of the tool). In both studies we used a dual evaluation scheme. These two parts dealt with the
analysis of how students were using the tool (use analysis) and the analysis of students’ opinions about the tool
(experience analysis). We investigated usage by analyzing the content of students’ contributions with LEAP, and
elicited learners’ reflective impressions and opinions from interviews.
The first designs
Loop of improvements
NA
NA
ogramming
Focus on pr
FE
I
FE
Programmin
e
ng
ha
ex
c
ata
t, d
me
n
ve
pro
NA
NA
NA
Im
Etchic
s
NA
I
Data mining
NA
In
I
FE
English version
tio
ra
g
te
n,
em
ov
r
p
im
ts
en
FE
FE
LEAP
pta
tio
n
I
Jeliot
da
Ethicsar
FE
nt
a
I
NA
I
nte
FE
Co
I
rse
C
ew
,n
ts
l
su g e
r e an
h
h
rc xc
ea a e
s
re at
re s, d
a
p ea
om id
g Project Cou
of Com
puting
Cours
e
I
FE
ViSCoS Mobile
Figure 4. Development of ViSCoS
In the second thread, re-design of the technical architecture, we modified LEAP in terms of the findings of the
two studies within the first thread. In that thread we identified problems by means of the usability of the tool.
Our main finding was that LEAP was complicated to use and that it required simplification. We added no new
features within the second thread, but merely refined existing features. We also re-implemented the technical
architecture of the tool because of requirements posed by the third thread. We then conducted a third study
within the second thread in the ViSCoS Programming Project course, and evaluated it with an evaluation scheme
that was similar to the approach that we had used in our earlier studies. Our main finding was that LEAP should
be customized for the context of the course since students were of the opinion that the tool was not relevant
(Suhonen, 2005).
Thread 3, a mobile adaptation extension, is still in the concept design phase (Kinshuk et al., 2004). Although we
had decided that we should begin to implement the mobile adaptation after the core functions of LEAP had
become sufficiently mature, the needs analysis for the technical implementation of the mobile adaptation
extension affected the implementation in the second thread. The mobile adaptation extension will certainly
influence the ViSCoS Mobile thread at the higher level.
Figure 5 visualizes the development of LEAP. It shows the interaction among the three threads. Table 6 shows
the details of the LEAP development process.
50
Th
1
Table 6. Summary of the LEAP development
NA
I
Pedagogical and technical design; First designs
digital learning portfolio and
creative problem-solving support
Theme
First prototype
2
Re-design of the
technical architecture
Ideas and knowledge from the
first thread. Requirements from
the mobile adaptation extension
thread.
XML-based
implementation
3
Mobile adaptation
extension
Concept design of mobile
adaptation extension
–
The first
prototype
Re-design of the technical
architecture
NA
NA
FE
Two studies;
Programming
Project and
Problem Solving
courses
A study in the
ViSCoS
Programming
Project course.
Comparison with
previous studies.
–
Mobile adaptation
extension
Requirements
and needs
NA
Experiences
I
FE1
I
FE
I
FE
FE2
Comparison, changes to
the evaluation scheme
Figure 5. Visualization of the LEAP development
Woven Stories-based environment to support FODEM
The multithreaded structure of FODEM allows us to specify a corresponding visual environment to support the
design process. The first sketch for a FODEM design environment prototype has been implemented. The
prototype is built on a client-server web-based application called Woven Stories (WS) (Gerdt et al., 2001;
Nuutinen et al., 2004). The prototype can be used to manage the threads, components and dependencies in a
development process. A designer can add, remove and edit threads to represent the main aspects of the
development process. Information can be added to each component in a thread. Although the current version of
the prototype allows the inclusion of web links to the components, users cannot add documents to the
environment. Dependencies can be created between threads and components. The client-server implementation
enables a number of users to work with the same design process from remote locations. The prototype also
includes a chat facility which allows designers to interact while they work with the environment. Figure 6 shows
the FODEM design environment prototype.
The next challenge in the design environment development was to improve the preliminary prototype that would
enable more meaningful support for the designers. The first new feature would have to be the addition of
arbitrary documents to components in threads. Designers could, for example, add requirements documents,
articles and review results to a needs analysis component. The environment would also need to include basic
functionalities for document management. The design environment would also need a zooming functionality that
would help designers to grasp the development process at various levels. The environment should also
automatically construct different visualizations of the development process by, for example, presenting the
process in a time-based view, or by separating the most important threads (as defined by the designers) from
other threads.
A comprehensive design environment would also include built-in procedures that would facilitate working with
components. A formative evaluation component, for instance, could include a list of possible evaluation
methods, and the designers could get some information about their applicability in different situations. This kind
51
of service would help designers to decide which evaluation methods would be most suitable for a given
development phase (Reeves & Hedberg, 2003). Tacit knowledge about different aspects of the development
process could also be stored in the environment. Finally, such a web-based environment would help designers to
work collaboratively with one another, to exchange ideas and information about problems in different threads,
and ultimately to undertake collaborative management of the development process.
Figure 6. FODEM design environment
The possibilities that FODEM opens up for a novel DLE design tool (such as the one described above) is yet
another indication of the effectiveness and feasibility of the FODEM approach. The inherently parallel structure
of FODEM allows the designers to manage a complex but need-based process for the development of effective
DLEs.
Conclusions
In this paper we introduced the FODEM method for developing digital learning environments in the context of
widely dispersed learning communities. We also used ViSCoS and LEAP development cases in a Finnish
educational context to show how the method works. The ViSCoS program has now been running for five years
and has been proven to be sustainable. ViSCoS provides a flexible solution for studying first-year computer
science courses over the net. But the development of LEAP is still in its early stages. Three prototyping
experiences have in the interim revealed both some positive and negative features in LEAP.
The two cases have shown how FODEM can be used to develop different types of digital learning environments.
FODEM provides tools to conceptualize the most important aspects of a development process with thread,
component and dependency structures (Suhonen, 2005). FODEM includes tools that can capture the dynamics of
a development process and that can be used to model various representations of the FODEM development
process from different perspectives. FODEM also supports the integration of different development processes: a
thread within a development process can be a part of another development process. An important aspect of
FODEM is its emphasis on the utilization of all feedback from the users of the developed digital learning
environment. Case studies, interviews, user observations and contextual analysis methods are among the
appropriate evaluation techniques that developers utilize gradually to improve the environment.
52
The unique features of FODEM are evident from three features of the development of DLEs for widely dispersed
learning communities. Firstly, development costs should be low. Both ViSCoS and LEAP have been developed
with reasonably low investments (approximately US$10,000 per course). Secondly, needs analysis and research
orientation in FODEM can be used to create contextualized and appropriate DLEs. When we developed ViSCoS,
for example, we used a number of methods to fit the course arrangements and digital learning materials to the
students’ needs. Finally, the development process should follow a simple, yet structured, design method.
FODEM models the development process with parallel, interrelated threads. The formative evaluation
component ensures that the development process is both rigorous and focused.
One of FODEM’s best -known characteristics is how well it adapts to the context of everyday school life and
youth culture. Far too frequently, development methods (and hence the DLEs) were far too heavily loaded or
rich in technical features. This might account for the fact that ICT has in the past been widely underutilized in
several educational contexts. FODEM – in contrast to the proliferating approach of comprehensive design
methodologies – emphasizes simplicity. At the same time, FODEM’s inherently parallel approach which
represents and reflects the dynamic nature of most educational contexts, gives due weight to the complexity of
learning and teaching needs. Unlike rapid prototyping, FODEM does not reduce the simultaneous needs that are
identified in real school contexts into a sequential design process. FODEM therefore copes better with the
uncertainty that is characteristic of real life, a common expectation of ICT in other areas of society as well.
Because FODEM treats the individual needs of heterogeneous student communities with appropriate
seriousness, it is an affordable alternative to design information-delivery-oriented DLEs for dense communities
which take into account individual needs through adaptive technologies or re-usable learning objects.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Teemu Laine for implementing the FODEM design environment prototype on the basis of the
Woven Stories application. We also thank Roger Loveday for his work on revising the text.
References
Abdelraheem, A. Y. (2003). Computerized learning environments: Problems, design challenges and future
promises. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 2 (2), 1-9.
Anohina, A. (2005). Analysis of the terminology used in the field of virtual learning. Journal of Educational
Technology & Society, 8 (3), 91-102.
Bahn, D. L., & Naumann, J. D. (1997). Evolution versus construction: Distinguishing user review of software
prototypes from conventional review of software specifications. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on
Computer Personnel Research (SIGCPR’97), New York: ACM Press, 240-245.
Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the
Learning Sciences, 13 (1), 1-14.
Bork, A., & Gunnarsdottir, S. (2001). Tutorial Distance Learning: Rebuilding Our Educational System, New
York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Castro, M., López-Rey, A., Pérez-Molina, C.M., Colmenar, A., de Mora, C., Yeves, J., Carpio, J. Peire, J.,
Daniel, J.S. (2001). Examples of distance learning project in the European Community. IEEE Transactions on
Education, 44 (4), 406-410.
Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational
inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32 (1), 5-8.
Fallman, D. (2003). Design-oriented human-computer interaction. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2003), New York: ACM Press, 225-232.
Gerdt, P., Kommers, P., Looi, C.-K., & Sutinen, E. (2001). Woven Stories as a cognitive tool. Lecture Notes in
Computer Science, 2117, 233-247.
53
Gerdt, P., Kurhila, J., Meisalo, V., Suhonen, J., & Sutinen, E. (2002). Rambling through the wilds: A concept of
Jagged Study Zones. In Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia &
Telecommunications (ED-MEDIA2002), Norfolk: AACE, 596-601.
Hämäläinen, W., Laine, T. H., & Sutinen, E. (2006, forthcoming). Data mining in personalizing distance
education courses. In Romero, C. & Ventura, S. (Ed.), Data Mining in E-learning. WitPress.
Jetsu, I., Meisalo, V., Myller, N., & Sutinen, E. (2004). Ethical argumentation with Ethicsar. In Proceedings of
the IADIS International Conference on Web Based Communities (WBC2004), Lisbon, Portugal: IADIS, 255-261.
Kerne, A. (2002). Concept-context-design: A creative model for the development of interactivity. In Proceedings
of the 4th Conference on Creativity & Cognition (C&C’02), New York: ACM Press, 192-199.
Kinshuk, Suhonen, J., & Sutinen, E. (2004). Mobile adaptation extension of a digital learning tool. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE2004), Altona & Melbourne,
Australia: Common Ground Publishing and RMIT University, 1581-1590.
Kommers, P. (2004). Concepts in the world of the mind. In Kommers, P. A. M. (Ed.), Conceptual Support
Systems for Learning - Imagining the Unknown, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press, 3-30.
Kähkönen, E., Bonnano, P., Duveskog, M., Faggiano, E., Kampf, C., Lahtinen, S.-P., Nuutinen, M., Polsani, P.,
Rossano, V., & Tedre, M. (2003). Approaches and methodologies for a culturally contextualized educational
technology. In Kähkönen, E. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Educational Technology
in Cultural Context, Joensuu, Finland: University of Joensuu, 5-10.
Laine, T., Myller, N., & Suhonen, J. (2005). ViSCoS Mobile: Learning Computer Science on the Road.
Accepted for publication. In Proceedings of the 5th Annual Baltic Sea Conference on Computer Science
Education, November 17-20, Koli, Finland.
Löwgren, J. (1995). Applying design methodology to software development. In Proceedings of the Conference
on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods & Techniques, New York: ACM Press, 87-94.
McKenna, P., & Laycock, B. (2004). Constructivist or instructivist: Pedagogical concepts practically applied to a
computer learning environment. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in
Computer Science Education (ITiCSE2004), New York: ACM Press, 166-170.
Meisalo, V., Sutinen, E., & Torvinen, S. (2003). How to improve a virtual programming course. In Proceedings
of the 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE2002), November 6-9, Boston, MA. USA.
Moallem, M. (2001). Applying constructivist and objectivist learning theories in the design of a web-based
course: Implications for practice. Educational Technology & Society, 4 (3), 113-125.
Moonen, J. (2002). Design methodology. In Adelsberger, A. A., Collins, B. & Pawlowski, V. (Eds.), Handbook
on Information Technologies for Education and Training, Springer-Verlag, 153-180.
Moreno, A., Myller, N., Sutinen, E., & Ben-Ari, M. (2004). Visualizing programs with Jeliot 3. In Proceedings
of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, New York: ACM Press, 373-376.
Nuutinen, J., Sutinen, E., Liinamaa, K., & Vanharanta, H. (2004). Woven Stories as a tool for corporate strategy
planning. In Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference on Web Based Communities (WBC2004),
Lisbon, Portugal: IADIS, 438-441.
Reeves, T. C., & Hedberg, J. G. (2003). Interactive Learning Systems Evaluation, Engelwood Cliffs, New
Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
Soloway, E., Jackson S. L., Klein, J., Quintana, C., Reed, J., Spitulnik, J., Stratford, S. J., Struder, S., Eng, J., &
Scala, N. (1996). Learning theory in practice: Case studies of learner-centered design. In Proceedings of the
Computer Human-Interaction Conference (CHI'96), New York: ACM Press, 189-196.
54
Suhonen, J. (2005). A Formative Development Method for Digital Learning Environments in Sparse Learning
Communities, Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of Joensuu, Finland,
Retrieved April 6, 2006 from http://joypub.joensuu.fi/publications/dissertations/suhonen_learning/suhonen.pdf.
Suhonen, J., & Sutinen, E. (2004). Formative development model in action - case of a digital learning tool. In
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2004), Los
Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, 720-722.
Sutinen, E., & Torvinen, S. (2001). The Candle scheme for creating an on-line computer science program –
experiences and vision. Informatics in Education, 2, 93-102.
Torvinen, S. (2004). Aspects of the Evaluation and Improvement Process in an Online Programming Course –
Case: the ViSCoS Program, Licentiate Thesis. Department of Computer Science, University of Joensuu, Finland,
Retrieved April 6, 2006 from ftp://cs.joensuu.fi/pub/PhLic/2004_PhLic_Torvinen_Sirpa.pdf.
ViSCoS (2005). Virtual Studies
http://cs.joensuu.fi/viscos/?lang=eng.
of
Computer
Science,
Retrieved
April
6,
2006,
from
Whitten, J. L., Bentley, L. D., & Dittman, K. C. (2004). Systems Analysis and Design Methods (6th Ed.),
McGraw-Hill.
55