Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Toward a Definition of Learning Experience Design

  • Original research
  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Various theories and models have implicitly discussed the role of interaction when using learning technologies. Indeed, interaction is described as being important as it relates to technology adoption, cognitive load, and usability. While each of these perspectives describe elements of interaction, they fail to comprehensively detail how educators should design for both usability and learning with an interface. To address this gap, this work-in-progress study seeks to describe the broader interaction when using learning technology, which we define as learning experience design. Using grounded theory and related eye-tracking data, we asked participants to engage in a cognitive think-aloud as they utilized an adaptive tutoring system. When triangulated, the researchers identified the following broad constructs: interaction with the learning environment and interaction with the learning space. The former includes the following codes: customization, expectation of content placement, functionality of component parts, interface terms aligned with existing mental models, and navigation. Alternatively, the interaction with the learning space included the following: engagement with the modality of content, dynamic interaction, perceived value of technology feature to support learning, and scaffolding. Implications for both theory and practice are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdullah, F., Ward, R., & Ahmed, E. (2016). Investigating the influence of the most commonly used external variables of TAM on students’ perceived ease of use (PEOU) and perceived usefulness (PU) of e-portfolios. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akayuure, P., & Apawu, J. (2015). Examining mathematical task and pedagogical usability of web contents authored by prospective mathematics teachers. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 1(2), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.69649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Althunibat, A. (2015). Determining the factors influencing students’ intention to use m-learning in Jordan higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 65–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ariasi, N., & Mason, L. (2011). Uncovering the effect of text structure in learning from a science text: An eye-tracking study. Instructional Science, 39(5), 581–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baki, R., Birgoren, B., & Aktepe, A. (2018). A meta analysis of factors affecting perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in the adoption of E-Learning systems. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 19(4), 4–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakki, A., Oubahssi, L., George, S., & Cherkaoui, C. (2020). A model and tool to support pedagogical scenario building for connectivist MOOC. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09444-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardzell, J. (2011). Interaction criticism: An introduction to the practice. Interacting with Computers, 23(6), 604–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çakiroğlu, Ü., & Aksoy, D. A. (2017). Exploring extraneous cognitive load in an instructional process via the web conferencing system. Behaviour & Information Technology, 36(7), 713–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carey, K. L., & Stefaniak, J. E. (2018). An exploration of the utility of digital badging in higher education settings. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(5), 1211–1229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (1996). The search for meanings-grounded theory. In J. Smith, R. Harre, & L. Van Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking methods in psychology. California: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, C.-H., Pasquini, L. A., & Koh, C. E. (2013). Web-based learning management system considerations for higher education. Learning and Performance Quarterly, 1(4), 24–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chyung, S. Y., & Vachon, M. (2013). An investigation of the profiles of satisfying and dissatisfying factors in e-learning. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 117–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2011). Controversies in mixed methods research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 269–284). SAGE.

  • Davids, M. R., Chikte, U. M. E., & Halperin, M. L. (2014). Effect of improving the usability of an e-learning resource: A randomized trial. Advances in Physiology Education, 38(2), 155–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Leeuw, R., de Soet, A., van der Horst, S., Walsh, K., Westerman, M., & Scheele, F. (2019). How we evaluate postgraduate medical E-learning: Systematic review. JMIR Medical Education, 5(1), e13128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1616–1641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dzikovska, M., Steinhauser, N., Farrow, E., Moore, J., & Campbell, G. (2014). BEETLE II: Deep natural language understanding and automatic feedback generation for intelligent tutoring in basic electricity and electronics. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 24(3), 284–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-014-0017-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elbabour, F., Alhadreti, O., & Mayhew, P. (2017). Eye tracking in retrospective think-aloud usability testing: Is there added value? The Journal of Usability Studies, 12(3), 95–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eltahir, M. E., Al-Qatawneh, S., Al-Ramahi, N., & Alsalhi, N. (2019). The perspective of students and faculty members on the efficiency and usability of e-learning courses at Ajman University: A case study. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(3), 388–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (vol. 426). The MIT Press Protocol analysis.

  • Ertmer, P., Stepich, D. A., York, C. S., Stickman, A., Wu, X. L., Zurek, S., & Goktas, Y. (2008). How instructional design experts use knowledge and experience to solve ill-structured problems. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 21(1), 17–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, M., Shi, S., & Truong, K. N. (2020). Practices and challenges of using think-aloud protocols in industry: An international survey. Journal of Usability Studies, 15(2), 85–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, L. E., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2012). Epistemic cognition when students read multiple documents containing conflicting scientific evidence: A think-aloud study. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garofalo, S. G., & Farenga, S. J. (2019). Cognition and spatial concept formation: Comparing non-digital and digital instruction using three-dimensional models in science. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-019-09425-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C. (2020). Emotions are the experiential glue of learning environments in the 21st century. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.05.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C. (2016). Conversations with AutoTutor help students learn. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(1), 124–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0086-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Greiff, S., Stadler, M., & Shubeck, K. T. (2019). Collaboration in the 21st Century: The theory, assessment, and teaching of collaborative problem solving. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Hu, X., Nye, B. D., VanLehn, K., Kumar, R., Heffernan, C., et al. (2018). ElectronixTutor: An intelligent tutoring system with multiple learning resources for electronics. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0110-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, C. M., Parsons, P., Toombs, A. L., Rasche, N., & Vorvoreanu, M. (2020). Designing an aesthetic learner experience: UX, instructional design, and design pedagogy. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 11(1), 41–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadjerrouit, S. (2010). A conceptual framework for using and evaluating web-based learning resources in school education. Journal of Information Technology Education, 9, 53–79. https://doi.org/10.28945/1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadjerrouit, S. (2012). Investigating technical and pedagogical usability issues of collaborative learning with wikis. Informatics in Education, 11(1), 45–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hampton, A. J., & Graesser, A. C. (2019). Foundational principles and design of a hybrid tutor. In R. A. Sottilare & J. Schwarz (Eds.), Adaptive Instructional Systems. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22341-0_8.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hariguna, T., & Akmal, A. (2019). Assessing students’ continuance intention in using multimedia online learning. Telkomnika, 17(1), 187–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollender, N., Hofmann, C., Deneke, M., & Schmitz, B. (2010). Integrating cognitive load theory and concepts of human–computer interaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1278–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, C.-L., & Chen, M.-C. (2018). How does gamification improve user experience? An empirical investigation on the antecedences and consequences of user experience and its mediating role. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 132, 118–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarodzka, H., Balslev, T., Holmqvist, K., Nyström, M., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Eika, B. (2012). Conveying clinical reasoning based on visual observation via eye-movement modelling examples. Instructional Science, 40(5), 813–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., Carr, C., & Yueh, H.-P. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43(2), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02818172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joo, Y. J., Park, S., & Shin, E. K. (2017). Students’ expectation, satisfaction, and continuance intention to use digital textbooks. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2018). Activity theory as a framework for human-technology interaction research. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 25(1), 3–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenttälä, V., Rousi, R., & Kankaanranta, M. (2017). Towards the learning experience technology usability framework. In T. Kidd & L. R. Morris (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Instructional Systems and Educational Technology. Philadelphia: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, M., Emory, J., & Choppella, V. (2018). Usability analysis of virtual labs. In: 2018 IEEE 18th international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT), Mumbai, India. pp. 238–240. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2018.00061.

  • Madrid, R., Van Oostendorp, H., & Puerta Melguizo, M. C. (2009). The effects of the number of links and navigation support on cognitive load and learning with hypertext: The mediating role of reading order. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 66–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattis, K. V. (2015). Flipped classroom versus traditional textbook instruction: assessing accuracy and mental effort at different levels of mathematical complexity. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 20(2), 231–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millis, K., Forsyth, C., Wallace, P., Graesser, A. C., & Timmins, G. (2017). The impact of game-like features on learning from an intelligent tutoring system. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 22(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moos, D. C., & Bonde, C. (2016). Flipping the Classroom: Embedding self-regulated learning prompts in videos. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 21(2), 225–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, J., & Loranger, H. (2006). Prioritizing web usability (1st ed.). Berkeley: New Riders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nokelainen, P. (2006). An empirical assessment of pedagogical usability criteria for digital learning materials with elementary school students. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 9(2), 178–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, E., Daday, J., & McDaniel, K. (2018). Assessing intrinsic and extraneous cognitive complexity of e-textbook learning. Interacting with Computers, 30(2), 150–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oviatt, S. (2006). Human-centered design meets cognitive load theory: Designing interfaces that help people think. MM ’06 Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM international conference on multimedia: Santa Barbara, CA. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/1180639.1180831.

  • Revythi, A., & Tselios, N. (2019). Extension of technology acceptance model by using system usability scale to assess behavioral intention to use e-learning. Education and Information Technologies, 24(4), 2341–2355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09869-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saadé, R., & Bahli, B. (2005). The impact of cognitive absorption on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in on-line learning: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 42(2), 317–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.12.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, M., Fisher, A. P., Sensenbaugh, J., Ling, B., Rietta, C., Babcock, L., et al. (2020). User experience (re) design and evaluation of a self-guided, mobile health app for adolescents with mild traumatic brain injury. Journal of Formative Design in Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-019-00038-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, M., & Tawfik, A. (2018). Using analytics to transform a problem-based case library: An educational design research approach. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, N. L., Chin, J., & Craig, S. D. (2019). Learner control aids learning from instructional videos with a virtual human. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-019-09417-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, M., & Vibert, C. (2019). Re-examining the relationship between ease of use and usefulness for the net generation. Education and Information Technologies, 24(5), 3205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09916-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shield, L., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2006). Are language learning websites special? Towards a research agenda for discipline-specific usability. Journal of Educational Multimedia & Hypermedia, 15(3), 349–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuijfzand, B. G., van der Schaaf, M. F., Kirschner, F. C., Ravesloot, C. J., van der Gijp, A., & Vincken, K. L. (2016). Medical students’ cognitive load in volumetric image interpretation: Insights from human-computer interaction and eye movements. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 394–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stull, A. T., Barrett, T., & Hegarty, M. (2013). Usability of concrete and virtual models in chemistry instruction. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2546–2556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, J. A. (2020). Assessing the effectiveness of the use of mobile technology in a collegiate course: A case study in M-learning. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25(2), 389–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tawfik, A. A., Gill, A., Hogan, M., York, C. S., & Keene, C. W. (2019). How novices use expert case libraries for problem solving. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 24(1), 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tri-Agif, I., Noorhidawati, A., & Ghalebandi, S. G. (2016). Continuance intention of using e-book among higher education students. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 21(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol21no1.2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sluijsmans, D. M. A. (2009). Toward a synthesis of cognitive load theory, four-component instructional design, and self-directed learning. Educational Psychology Review, 21(1), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9092-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanLehn, K., Chung, G., Grover, S., Madni, A., & Wetzel, J. (2016). Learning science by constructing models: Can Dragoon increase learning without increasing the time required? International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(4), 1033–1068. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0093-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verkijika, S. F. (2019). Digital textbooks are useful but not everyone wants them: The role of technostress. Computers & Education, 140, 103591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, L. Y. K., Lew, S. L., Lau, S. H., & Leow, M. C. (2019). Usability factors predicting continuance of intention to use cloud e-learning application. Heliyon, 5(6), e01788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Q., Yang, S., Liu, M., Cao, Z., & Ma, Q. (2014). An eye-tracking study of website complexity from cognitive load perspective. Decision Support Systems, 62, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2014.02.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46(1), 71–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff, C. E., Jarodzka, H., van den Bogert, N., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2016). Teacher vision: Expert and novice teachers’ perception of problematic classroom management scenes. Instructional Science, 44(3), 243–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Memphis, Ball Hall (Office: 421D), 3798 Walker Ave, Memphis, TN, 38111, USA

    Andrew A. Tawfik

  2. University of Memphis, Ball Hall (Office: 320), 3798 Walker Ave, Memphis, TN, 38111, USA

    Jessica Gatewood & Jaclyn J. Gish-Lieberman

  3. FedEx Institute of Technology, University of Memphis, 365 Innovation Dr (Rm 410), Memphis, TN, 38152, USA

    Andrew J. Hampton

Authors
  1. Andrew A. Tawfik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jessica Gatewood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jaclyn J. Gish-Lieberman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrew J. Hampton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew A. Tawfik.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tawfik, A.A., Gatewood, J., Gish-Lieberman, J.J. et al. Toward a Definition of Learning Experience Design. Tech Know Learn 27, 309–334 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09482-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09482-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation