Collaboration in CanvasPatricia Gates, Yanwen Guo, Amy Maxwell, & Elena Winzeler

Agenda

● Introducing Canvas● Conception and Research Phase● Design Process● High-fidelity Prototype Demonstration● Design Cases & User Feedback● Conclusion● Q&A

2

Collaboration in Higher Education

● Web 2.0 tools enable students to connect virtually and collaborate○ Threaded discussion boards, Google Docs, chat,

video conferencing, task managers, etc.● Learning Management Systems (LMS) allow instructors

to organize class materials and assignments○ Canvas (used by UT), Blackboard, Desire2Learn, etc.

3

Weaknesses of Canvas: Groups

4

Lacks tools students need

Confusingly similar to course pages

Weaknesses of Canvas: Discussions

5

Threaded discussions difficult to sift through

Hides connections between ideas

Conception and Research Phase

6

Product Research● learning management systems● threaded discussion forums● resource sharing and collaboration tools

User Research● Instructor Interview● Student Survey● Instructor Survey

Goals

Product Research

What improves participation outcomes?● autonomy - quantity and

quality of participation● connectedness - quality of

contributions and pro-social behaviors

● meaning - outcomes in participation, quality, and student experience

7

Learning management systems

Popular collaboration tools

Student Survey

o discussion forum not satisfyingo commonly use outside tools for

group-work

● Most requested featureso tools for synchronous

collaborationo co-authoring of documentso file sharingo tool tips

● Experiences with Canvas and collaboration

8

Instructor Interview and Survey

● Experiences with Canvas○ discussion forum organization not easy to follow○ existing groups feature inadequate

● Most Requested Features○ file sharing by students

○ analytics of discussion board activity

● Top Priorities○ greater ability to monitor activity and respond to students’ needs○ meaningful discussions and student experiences

9

Project Conception● Redesign of the current collaboration tools offered by

Canvas

● Our redesign will better address the needs of students, professors, and teaching assistants○ Richer interaction among students○ More convenient to use than current collaboration tools

10

Design Requirements & Features

11

better organized discussions

conversation themes and threads easily visible

project management made easier

file sharing by students facilitated

topic-based discussion board

thematic labels - #tagtext-focused reply - “quote”

comprehensive group management + workflow tool

analytics of discussion board activity

monitor group project process

individual and class activity reporting

group monitoring tools

file sharing integrated into groups pages

Design Process

12

paper-basedstudent view-list features for students

paper-basedsolve the problems got from user testteacher view-design features for teachers

fixed the problem found in user test 3

5 students2 TAs

Low-fi 1 User Test 1 Low-fi 2 High-fi 1 High-fi 2User Test 2 User Test 3

6 students2 TAs2 Instructors

fixed problems in low-fi 2make a more interactive demo with axure

make two videos

7 students1 Instructor

High-fidelity Prototype Demonstration

13

Discussion Forum Groups Pages

Design Cases: Editor

14

Streamlined publishing process

Word limit unpopular

Chunking process a

hassle

Low-fi 1 High-fi 1

Design Cases: Workflow Tool

15

Not helpful for task management

Low-fi 1 Low-fi 2

High-fi 2 High-fi 1

More details about tasks

Stage and task status shown

Design Cases: Popular Tags

16

Low-fi 1 Low-fi 2

confusing

High-fi 2

positive feedback

Student Feedback

17

“I think tags would be useful for me. I always want to find people who wrote about similar topics, and tags makes that easy to do.”

“I like the tag. It just gives a new way to read posts and it’s more convenient.”

“I think I will use quote to reply others, but I don’t think I will use tags as much. I am too lazy to do more than is required by the teacher.”

“I like the workflow, because it help me keep track of what I have to do in the whole project process. But I also hope the instructor will create the stages and tasks so I won’t have to.”

Instructor Feedback

18

“Please develop this so I can use it next semester!”

Concluding Thoughts

● Challengeso product involves extended, complex interactions

with “expert” userso multiple stakeholders with different needs

● Takeawayso investment in product and user research pays offo core design principles provide guidance at every

step of the process

19

20

Questions?

21

Thank you!

22

Appendix

Background

● Collaborative learning has been proven more effective than independent and competitive learning (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1998; Qin, Johnson & Johnson, 1995; Slavin, 1991).

● Constructivism-based pedagogies center the locus for learning in the individual. Knowledge is generated by the learner through experience and interaction with the content and with others, not transmitted by the teacher.

● Knowledge-building communities have as their primary goal knowledge creation.

23

Problems in Current System● The current educational model - even in higher ed. - places a heavy

responsibility on teachers to be the gatekeepers of knowledge, while students wait to passively receive enlightenment.

● Videos of cats go viral, while rarely do students engage with material related to their classes outside of assigned readings. Even more rarely do their share what they find with their peers.

● Learning management systems already exist as a platform for student-professor and student-student communication. However, these interactions are limited and often depend on the professor’s initiative in integrating the tool into the course.

24

Low-Fidelity Prototype 1 (Student View only)

● Discussion Boardso meaning-based organization → topical Boardso user-generated semantic links → Tagso reply to statements rather than people → Quoting

● Groupso extended, text-based conversations → Discussionso sharing documents → Fileso time-sensitive messages → Announcementso project management → Workflow

User Testing Round 1

● Subjectso 5 studentso 2 TAs

● Protocolo Introductiono Scenario-based taskso Targeted questions at key decision pointso Open-ended questions at the end

User Testing Round 1 Results● Discussion Board

o ‘Themes’ unclearo ‘New Post’ button difficult to find

● Editoro ‘#’ symbol desiredo word limit unpopularo more space desired

● Groupso Workflow page unclearo management of Files and Google Docs unclearo Conversations tool desired to be accessible at all times

Low-Fidelity Prototype 2 (Student View)

● Discussion Boardo ‘Themes’ changed to ‘Popular Tags’ and made only visible on

Discussions homepageo ‘New Post’ button moved

● Editoro ‘#’ symbol added

● Groupso Single group homepage modified to increase clarityo Workflow and Files pages modifiedo Conversations tool made accessible on all pages

Low-Fidelity Prototype 2 (Teacher View)● Discussion Board

o Student Activity page → data on individual activity, including boards visited, posts read, and posts authored

o Class Activity page → network visualization of class activity according to posts read and responses (Quoting)

● Groupso Group homepage → data on activity within the group over time

displayed in a line graph (activity based on the number of posts to the group discussion board and number of visits to the group page

o Individual Group homepages → data on activity within the group over time will be displayed with a larger version of the line graph, along with a breakdown of activity (overall activity and activity over the previous week)

User Testing Round 2

● Subjectso 6 students and 1 TA so faro 2 students, 1 TA, and 2 teachers scheduled for this week

● Protocolo Students

Tasks targeted to unresolved questions and changes madeo Teachers/TAs

Student View Teacher View