OverviewHuman Computer InteractionUsability

Korkmaz, Ali; Harwood, William S. (2004)

Web-Supported Chemistry Education: Design of an Online Tutorial for Learning Molecular Symmetry

Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 243–253

Google this publication · ScholarGoogle this publication

Keywords: Interactive Learning Environments in Chemistry (Examples)

Related Topics: Interactive Learning Environments

Review by: Reichert, Raimond (2004-07-27)

This article describes the authors’ experience in applying the ADDIE protocol to design and implement an interactive tutorial for chemistry students. The protocol serves as a model for instructional designers and subdivides the development process into five phases: Analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. Though the model is linear in its description, the process in reality is usually not. During the design phase, the authors’ focus was on identifying chemistry concepts that might particularly benefit first-year students. They decided on the subject of molecular symmetry operations. A number of applets were developed with which students could rotate and revolve molecules to become familiar with their structural details. During the implementation phase, the authors used the tutorial in a course on Inorganic Chemistry with 32 students.

Of particular interest here is the evaluation of the tutorial. The authors note that the most valuable feedback came from students of the target population. It would not help testing the tutorial with students that are already familiar with the topic. Three students of the 32 students were recruited for usability tests. These students suggested several features for improving the applets, for example, that users should be able to place a rod or a plane into the molecule. This would help them to see the results of the rotation and to more easily determine symmetries. The point here is that users can provide very valuable input for improving a piece of software.

The article is interesting in that it reports on the process of a tutorial development – and not just on the end-product – and the usability evaluation of this tutorial. As an aside one finding should also be mentioned: The students who used the tutorial found it helpful. However, most students never used the tutorial as this was not explicitly required of them. As the authors put it, if you build it, there is not guarantee that they will indeed come if there is not explicit incentive.