The World is an Authoring System
by Steven Okonski
Originally Published in March 1996 in CBT Solutions Magazine
As Andy Rooney said,
"Have you noticed authoring systems lately? They're springing
up all over the place. There are authoring systems for graphics,
the Internet, presentations, computer-based training, kiosks,
advertising, performance support -- I could go on. Do we really
need all these authoring systems? What are people doing
with them?"
Well, actually, Andy didn't say these things. But, he might be
tempted to if he picked up a copy of almost any current computer
magazine. In fact, his questions are quite valid. With the authoring
system label being applied to most anything these days, how do
you find one for CBT? That's what this article will help you do.
The term "authoring system" came into use about fifteen
years ago to describe "a software tool that assists in the
creation of computer-based training." It took a while for
the definition to spread: during that era, I recall talking with
several people who (very logically) wanted to buy an authoring
system to help them write a book. Apparently the definition of
"word processor" also took time to spread. Even as recently
as five years ago, "authoring system" generally meant
something for CBT. Each year since then, the term has been more
broadly applied. Recently I saw Visual dBase called "a
database authoring system."
This is happening because, currently, being an authoring system
is fashionable. It's cool to be an "author." You'll
find "authoring system" in the IN column side of those
what's- in/what's-out lists. So, the spin doctors prefix an adjective,
and jump on the bandwagon: database authoring system, interactive
multimedia authoring system, home page authoring system, and our
veteran: CBT authoring system.
There are differences between all these systems. While you might
use Visual dBase to create a database, it would be a mistake
to use it for CBT (well, you probably could, but I wouldn't want
to be present during the unveiling to the client). So, how do
you locate the systems suitable for CBT? To start, many of them
are described and advertised right here. You might scan other
magazines too, but none cover this market as well as CBT Solutions.
For example, interactive multimedia (IM) authoring systems exist
aplenty. Most IM systems can handle standard user input elements
such as button clicks, key presses, and typed responses. IM systems
are often suitable for creating projects such as business presentation
slideshows, simple demo disks, or perhaps even kiosks. How do
CBT projects differ? Like IM projects, CBT projects also obtain
user input, but then they must study, scan, parse, analyze, judge,
and record it. That means a CBT-capable authoring system needs
features such as: test question generation, response judging (exact
match, spelling allowance, phonetic match, word search, anticipated
incorrect), automatic scoring, feedback, user log on and log off
with password, built- in user bookmarks (so users can resume where
they left off), user comments, multi-user network support, user
rostering and class scheduling, Computer-Managed Instruction (CMI)
data collection and analysis, and report generation. Whew!
To illustrate the importance of these features, let's study an
example of a fill-in-the-blank type question that appears in most
CBT projects. Our sample question will ask the user to enter the
name of the device that measures blood pressure. First, you, as
author, could create the screen/page/frame that displays the question
to the user. Depending on the authoring tool, you might employ
menus, icons, objects, templates, flowcharts, or whatever. Since,
in general, all authoring tools have a way to create the visual
portion of such a screen/page/frame, the specific details of how
are irrelevant for this discussion.
What's more important is how to accept the user's response,
and judge it (i.e., determine if it is correct). Now we're getting
to the part where real CBT authoring systems can distinguish themselves
from other types of authoring systems. A good CBT authoring system
will let you, as author, specify the correct answer (sphygmomanometer)
by simply typing it. There should be some kind of dialog box,
property sheet, or whatever, in which you type the correct answer.
You should not need to write any programming code whatsoever (such
as an IF...THEN statement) to handle a common CBT operation such
as this. At run time, the system should compare the user's response
with the one you typed, and automatically worry about tedious
details such as whether the user entered the response in upper-
or lower-case characters, and with/without extra blank spaces.
Several CBT authoring systems do this nicely; one that does not
is not a real CBT authoring system.
Let's make our example even more realistic. You might want to
allow the user two extra tries at answering correctly, and allow
some variance in spelling. You also want to keep score (perhaps
this is the final exam). If the user's response is wrong, but
in the ballpark (something like coagulometer or hemoglobinometer)
you want to provide custom feedback that discusses why. Finally,
in order to document the effectiveness of the training (and your
budget!), you also want to permanently record the user's response
to disk for later analysis. There are CBT authoring systems (not
many though) that can do all these things without a single byte
of programming. Oh, programming certainly has its place, but such
common CBT operations as these should be built into the system
so that your authoring productivity is maximized. Without them,
you'll be writing lots of programming code, and it's likely the
reading on your sphygmomanometer will rise!
One way many authoring systems attempt to maximize your productivity
is via templates. A template is a pre-built routine or page that
you customize. For example, a page template might consist of an
empty text area, an empty button and an empty picture container.
You would simply fill in the text, put a caption on the button,
and specify the name of the graphics file that contains the picture.
The obvious advantage is that templates can save you a lot of
time. One disadvantage is your project starts looking like the
project created by the competition down the street, and vice versa.
On the whole, templates are good, but like any good thing, they
can be abused: some authoring tools now come packaged with thousands.
Sometimes dozens of these templates are identical, except for
a minor detail such as the color of the background! Sorting through
so many templates nullifies the time savings; you might as well
create the page from scratch. Plus, templates make authoring systems
bulkier: some systems now hog more than 200 megabytes of disk
space upon installation! The cost of hard disk space is declining,
but it's not free. This is a subjective estimate: I'd say a good
maximum number of pre-packaged templates is 100; any more than
that is a negative. Perhaps the best solution is an authoring
system that lets you take any page you created previously, and
use it as the template for a new one. That gives you the best
of both worlds: the time savings of templates, plus a way to make
your project's appearance unique.
All these built-in features and templates are ways that authoring
systems attempt to minimize the amount of programming you need
to do. Lest you begin to think that all programming is evil, let
me say that some is necessary, if not downright advantageous,
in almost all CBT projects. There is no way an authoring system
developer can anticipate everything you are going to want to do
in your project. There can never be enough built-in dialog boxes
and templates and features to handle every instructional design
style. This is the problem with icon-only type authoring tools.
An authoring system without an embedded programming language is
like a computer without a keyboard: pointing and clicking with
the mouse sure is fun, at least for awhile. The ideal CBT authoring
system has built-in handling for all the common CBT operations,
and lets you insert programming code where necessary to
accomplish those special things that will make your project stand
out. Several systems allow this (you might see it advertised as
visual authoring plus available programming).
So, what do you look for in programming? Basically, the authoring
systems that offer an embedded programming language (i.e., one
built-into the system) do so in either of two flavors: proprietary
or standard. Proprietary means the authoring language is unique
to that system; standard means the language is a version of a
popular one, such as Basic or C. The advantage of a proprietary
language is that the vendor can design it from the start to match
the needs of the application. The disadvantage is that fewer people
know the language; consequently, it is tougher to locate experienced
authors, and labor costs will therefore be higher. Currently,
thanks to Microsoft Windows and Bill, Visual Basic (VB) is the
most widely used programming language. Millions employ VB proper,
or VB for Applications (embedded within Microsoft Excel
and Word). An authoring system containing a version of,
or links to, VB virtually assures a steady stream of available
help and snap-on components. Plus, Microsoft's recent announcement
of VB Script (for the Internet) means VB programming skills will
carry over to that up-and-coming environment as well.
Speaking of the Internet, care to deliver CBT over it? That will
be possible someday, but for the near future, it remains a goal
rather than a reality. The primary bottleneck is not the availability
of authoring tools, bandwidth, or, in bottom- line terms, the
speed that stuff appears on the screen. Everyone has seen a Windows-based
application that runs (crawls?) slowly. Now, imagine taking that
application, and forcing everything to be transmitted over a modem;
that's the Internet. OK, you can stop imagining now; I don't want
to trigger nightmares. The unfortunate reality is the Internet,
at present typical communication speeds, is way too slow for effective,
serious CBT. Sure, you'll see some postage stamp sized multimedia
demonstrations soon, and they do mark a starting point, but there
is a long road ahead. How long is that road? As a benchmark, let's
look at another media distribution mechanism: CD-ROMs. When did
CD-ROM drives gain wide acceptance? Perhaps 1994? When did CD-ROMs
first appear? About 10 years before that.
Does this mean we won't see real CBT on the Net for another 10
years? My guess is it won't take that long; five years might be
more realistic because of the high interest level in the Net.
Most current modems transmit at a 14.4-Kbit/second rate, and 28.8-Kbit/second
is becoming more widespread. ISDN, while an improvement, transmits
only about five times faster than that. That's the rough equivalent
of going from a 360K floppy diskette to a 1.44M diskette...nice,
but not revolutionary. The new technology that holds the most
promise is the cable modem. Cable modems that transmit at a 10-Mbit/second
rate are now available...that's about the speed of an older, corporate
LAN, and about right for serious CBT. Of course, you do need to
be wired with coax, and your cable company needs to support this
use, and... details, details!
For the next several years, you'll still need to concentrate on
delivering CBT via the computers people are currently using. Choosing
an authoring system specifically designed for CBT will reduce
your development effort and costs. Looking further down the road,
it won't be communications technology that determines the ultimate
usefulness and success of CBT on the Internet, the benefits (or
lack thereof) will. What value does the Net add to CBT? A larger
audience, perhaps. Easier accessibility and updating (after everyone
is wired). What else? When veteran CBT developers see the Internet,
they think of the PLATO system (from the University of Illinois
and Control Data Corporation). PLATO did many of the same things
being lauded on the Internet now, and it did them 20 years ago.
As someone once said, "History repeats itself because no
one listened the first time." Maybe it was Andy Rooney.
Steve's favorite PLATO game was =empire=. Contact him
at Intersystem Concepts, Inc., 410-531-9000, or intersys@insystem.com.