Development of a Multimedia Learning Tool for a Computer-Aided Design Course D. B. Wittenborn Department of Computer Graphics Technology Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906 ABSTRACT - Studies have shown that it is beneficial for instructors to employ a variety of teaching methods to satisfy different learning styles and situations. One of these methods involves the use of active learning strategies to foster student participation. This paper will focus on how educational learning games can be an effective way to teach students, while adding an enjoyable and relaxed atmosphere to the classroom. This paper will review the learning game integrated into a Computer-Integrated Manufacturing Technology (CIMT) course at Purdue University. This particular learning game used a PowerPoint template based on the popular television game show Who Wants to be a Millionaire. This paper includes a summary of how the game was developed, possible improvements of the game for future use, and the benefits associated with this learning game. I. Introduction Engineering graphic educators have used a variety of very creative activities in the classroom to help make learning more meaningful and enjoyable for students. Recent activities include project-centered education (Barr, Krueger, Aanstoos, Horan, & Moore, 2002), interactive three-dimensional (3D) animation (Kovak, 2002), dynamic modeling assignments (Wiebe, Branoff, & Hartman, 2003), reverse engineering activities (Branoff, Hartman, & Wiebe, 2002), and Lego group projects (Branoff, Hartman, & Wiebe, 2003; Kelley, Brattain, & Lucas, 2003). Activities should not only be enjoyable, but they must address the objectives of the curriculum and prepare students for the future. Furthermore, these activities can be beneficial to students by providing them an alternative way to learn. In the field of computer graphics it is reasonable to assume that many of the students will be visual and spatial learners. In other words, when learning new information it may be easier for them to retain and transfer that information if they are able to see it in a graphical format, rather than as plain text in a book (Mayer, 2001). With this in mind an interactive learning game including words, pictures, and sounds was developed to help students review for the final exam in CIMT 311, Computer-Aided Design for Manufacturing; a 300-level constraint-based modeling course at Purdue University during the Spring semester of 2004. In most university courses students are either given a text-based study guide or a verbal listing of topics to help them prepare for exams. The goal of this activity was to give students a new way to prepare for exams, a way that would include multimedia instructional design. Multimedia learning includes the use of both words and pictures in the delivery of instructional content (Mayer, 2001). The case for multimedia rests in the premise that learners can better understand an explanation when it is presented in words and pictures than when it is presented in words alone. Therefore, by using multiple forms of media, students are more likely to retain and transfer the information. 98
II. Development of the Original Template This particular learning game uses a PowerPoint template originally created by Mark E. Damon in 2000. The template is based on the popular television game show Who Wants to be a Millionaire. The idea behind the creation of this template is that it will be easy for anyone to use. While the file is intended to be basic enough for first time PowerPoint users to understand, it may be beneficial if the user is already familiar with the program to some extent. Figure 1. Title slide of the original template file. The Original Template File The original template file can be found online at http://www.hillsborough.k12.nj.us/edlinkspowerpoint.ht m. There, Mark Damon offers the Who Wants to be a Millionaire template file for free download, along with three other PowerPoint game templates. The file to download is a *.zip file that includes the PowerPoint template, music clips to accompany the presentation, and a text file that serves as an instructional manual for getting started. After unzipping the *.zip file and opening the PowerPoint file, the user will notice that there are 36 slides already created. If you are unfamiliar with the game show, the purpose of this program is to answer questions correctly to work your way up the dollar values to reach $1,000,000. The first three slides include a title screen, a credits screen and an introductory animation effect, respectively (see Figure 1). Before the game can be played however, the user must type in relevant questions and answers into the template. This will involve inserting 15 multiple-choice questions, each with four possible answers, into the appropriate question slides. Each of the 15 questions will be placed on a slide which represents a dollar amount that can be won in the game. The green polygon on each question slide is to then be moved by dragging it over the correct answer (see Figure 2). Once you move it over the correct answer, you will then need to right click on the green shape and click "Order" and "Move backward". After you do this once, hold down the CTRL key and the press the "up" or down arrows until the shape is moved directly behind the correct answer (so the answer is visible). If you hit CTRL+ up or down too many times, hit CTRL+Z to undo. Figure 2. A sample question slide from the original template file. 99
When the game has been set up and is ready to play, students will proceed through the game sequentially. There are graphics on each question slide for three lifelines: 50-50, phone-a-friend, and ask the audience. However, at this point, you cannot eliminate two answers for the 50-50, nor can you cross out lifelines once they are used. Otherwise, play it just as you would on the game show. As the students continue to answer questions correctly, they will move on to the next question which is worth a higher dollar amount. If all 15 questions can be answered correctly, the student or students playing will have won the game. III. Revisions made for CIMT 311 In order to create an interactive computer graphics review session, the PowerPoint template was modified to include questions and answers relevant to the CIMT 311 course at Purdue. This was done so that students would be provided with an alternative way to review for the final exam. Rather that studying black and white text, the goal was to promote higher rates of retention and transfer by providing the information in a multimedia format. Furthermore, the goal was that an entertaining atmosphere would motivate the students to focus on the game and get them excited about learning. In regards to using this game for CIMT 311, many changes and additions were incorporated to the original PowerPoint template file. The CIMT 311 class contained 30 students, so the plan was to break them into five groups of six students. In order to determine which group would win the chance to play the game, a Faster Finger PowerPoint file was created, which is also consistent with the game show. This file contained a slide asking teams to list answers to a given question as quickly as possible (see Figure 3). The team that raised their hand first would have their answers reviewed and if correct, they would be the first team to try and answers all 15 questions in the game correctly. Figure 3. An example Fastest Finger question. With the Fastest Finger question established. The next step was to develop a set of 15 review questions ranging in difficulty from easy to hard. The easiest question would be inserted first into the slide for the $100 question. The most difficult question would be inserted last into the slide worth $1 million. For each question a review question along with three incorrect answers and one correct answer were typed into the appropriate slides (See Figure 4). Figure 4. An example slide after the question and answers have been added. When playing the game with the students in the classroom, the professor served as the host of the game. 100
He controlled the movement of the slides from one to the next. If the 50-50 lifeline was used, the host would eliminate two incorrect answers by verbally informing the team competing which two to take away. For the phone-a-friend lifeline, the competing team was allowed to ask any other student in the classroom, who was not on their own team, what they thought should be the correct answer. For the ask the audience lifeline, all students were asked to raise their hand for the answer they believed should be correct. Since the lifelines could not be marked out in the game, the host drew pictures on the board in the front of the room and marked then out after a team had exercised the use of that lifeline. This kept teams from trying to use the same lifeline twice. For the initial use of this game as a review session for CIMT 311, three complete fastest finger and question and answer files were created. The approximate time for inserting 15 question and answers into the main game file and creating a corresponding fastest finger question was approximately one hour. Therefore the time required to construct three different sets of questions and answers was just over three hours. This was done so that after one team either completed the round or lost due to an incorrect answer being given, the remaining teams could compete again to have the next try. During a 50-minute lecture session all three rounds were played in about 40 minutes, but not all questions were seen in each round. This was due to an incorrect answer being given before reaching the final question. Therefore, the remaining questions were gone over with the class as a whole so that all review topics were exposed to the students. IV. Possible Improvements While the initial implementation of this game went very well, improvements were attempted at a later time to try and make the game even closer to the original. Attempted improvements included the addition of working lifelines inside of the PowerPoint file. Due to the nature of PowerPoint however, this became a difficult task. The original temple file for the game uses a sequential order when moving on to the next slide. This cannot be done however when working lifelines are included. New slides have to be created for each of the possible lifelines, as well as slides that include the combination of both the current lifeline being used, as well as any lifelines that may have already been used previously. In these circumstances, since PowerPoint does not facilitate the use of a button that can be turned on and off during a presentation, a new slide must be created for each possible scenario. For example, if the contestant chooses to use the 50-50 lifeline on question one, they must then be taken to a slide that crosses out the 50-50 lifeline and then removes two of the incorrect answers. Then, the contestant must have the possibility to answer the question, or to choose one of the two remaining lifelines. For example, in Figure 5, after using the 50-50 lifeline, the contestant has chosen to use the ask the audience lifeline. Figure 5. A sample question after revisions were made to include lifelines. For this question the 50-50 lifeline has already been used and the contestant has chosen to use the ask the audience lifeline as well. 101
Another improvement that was attempted was the addition of narration for the phone-a-friend lifeline. With this add-on, when the contestant chooses the phone-a-friend lifeline, they will not only be able to read the clue given on the screen, but will also hear a narration of that text simultaneously. The goal of this addition was to offer the student various ways to absorb the information, in hopes that multiple forms of media will improve their ability to retain and transfer the information. One final improvement to the original game was the addition of a link that offers an explanation to the answer. The advantage to this is that if the game is provided to the students to take home after the in-class review session, they will be given instant feedback as to why the actual answer is correct (see Figure 6). This will hopefully, encourage students to understand the reason behind why certain answers are correct, rather than merely memorizing the information. However, if students are comfortable with their knowledge of the correct answer, a link has been provided to move on to the next question, rather than reading the explanation. V. Conclusion After creating and implementing this multimedia learning tool for the Computer-Aided Design for Manufacturing course at Purdue University, the most important thing noticed was its effectivenss. Many of the students remarked how enjoyable and beneficial the game was as opposed to traditional review methods. Secondly, it should be noted that this particular learning game could easily be expanded and adapted to meet the needs of instructors of many different courses. With the original blank template available for free download, teachers of any course can easily insert their own questions and answers relevant to their class with very little trouble. Finally, it is important to note that not only is this idea great for computer graphics students because of their visual nature, but it can be valuable to students from all disciplines. Because of the use of different forms of media within the instructional design, students are more likely to retain and transfer the information for future use. VI. References Barr, R. E., Krueger, T. J., Aanstoos, T. A., Horan, J., & Moore, J. (2002). Industry-sponsored design projects for freshmen engineering graphics students. Paper presented at the 57th Midyear Meeting of the Engineering Design Graphics Division of the Ameican Society for Engineering Education, Indianapolis, Indiana. Branoff, T. J., Hartman, N. W., & Wiebe, E. N. (2002). Applications of dynamic modeling in introductory engineering graphics classes. Paper presented at the 57th Midyear Meeting of the Engineering Design Graphics Division of the American Society for Engineering Education, Indianapolis, Indiana. Figure 6. An example slide showing the correct answer, along with links for an explanation of the answer or to move on to the next question. Branoff, T. J., Hartman, N. W., & Wiebe, E. N. (2003). Constraint-based, solid-modeling: What do the employers want our students to know? The Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 67(1), 6-11. 102
Kelley, D. S., Brattain, F., & Lucas, D. (2003). The Utilization of Virtual Lego Blocks within a Group Design Project. Paper presented at the 58th Annual Engineering Design Graphics Midyear Meeting, Scottsdale, AZ. Kovak, K. (2002). Leveraging product visualization with interactive 3D animation. Paper presented at the 57th Midyear Meeting of the Engineering Design Graphics Division of the American Society for Engineering Education, Indianapolis, IN. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia Learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Wiebe, E. N., Branoff, T. J., & Hartman, N. W. (2003). Teaching geometry through dynamic modeling in introductory engineering graphics. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 67(2), 12-20. 103