Technology in Interpretation

Results: Desktop Publishing Focus Group  

Home

Results of Desktop Publishing Module Focus Groups  

The various categories that were developed from the transcripts can be broadly divided into two main sections.  First, many of the categories related to some sort of positive feedback about the technology training, which encourages similar incorporation into future courses.  Second, the other categories were suggestions for improvement, representing ideas for changing the training to enhance the student’s learning experience.  Based on the criteria set above, the most important positive feedback and suggestion categories will be listed with recommendations for the technology training.  The number of related participant responses follows each category.

Back to Menu

Desktop Publishing Module: Positive Feedback

1.  Students liked the overall interpretive lab training experience and found it helpful for real-world applications (14 comments): 

The most discussed category in the desktop publishing focus groups was a general appreciation of the training.  Despite some frustration, students not only enjoyed the lab experience, but also found the skills to be beneficial for their future.  A few students contrasted this experience with more negative computer training experiences.  Others acknowledged the large amount of information and skills they learned.  All were in general agreement that the desktop publishing module was a positive experience.  A few comments will highlight some of the main points.

I’ve always had troubles with computers, and these [sessions] just amazed me.  Going through the labs made me really excited about going into this field.  I guess I never realized how much creativity you get to put into it.  The labs were so well put together that even I could understand it, because I was really nervous about the computer aspects.

I really liked how much I learned.  I think that it’s probably the most applicable lab I’ve had so far.  Applicable to everything: other classes, my jobs, anything I’m going to need to do…

 I’m just thinking about those of us who took [Introduction to Soil and Water Resources] here and had to do the GIS thing and I’m just comparing.  Like, I don’t remember anything of how to do ArcView or GIS with their tutorials, nothing at all.  And I know I can do [desktop publishing] now with the tutorials and how it was taught.   

It was fun.  Sometimes frustrating.  Always fun, even sometimes when it was frustrating.

            Overall, the students both enjoyed and respected the skills they learned from the desktop publishing module.  When asked if these training sessions should be incorporated into future interpretation courses, the students unanimously agreed that they should.  The training is deemed as important not only by the instructors, but also by the students themselves. 

2.  The tutorials were specific and enhanced learning (12 responses): 

Like the digital presentation module, students in the desktop publishing focus group frequently responded positively to the step-by-step tutorials.  Although these guides were written in less detail than the PowerPoint tutorials, the students still believed that they were essential components of their learning.  Students commented on the tutorials’ ease of use, the specific detailed instructions, the ability to learn on their own, and having something to refer back to in the future.  The following are select comments that illustrate this category.

I liked how you could basically pick up the direction sheet here and learn everything yourself.  It was really easy for me to get into the program.  It was good reference too when I forgot what to do.

I liked how much effort you put into [the tutorials], because it’s so specific that it’s easy to follow.  The directions are well written.

The tutorials we went through as a group I think were excellent.  You put them is such easy-to-learn formats, going right through all the basics.

Apart from the numerous positive comments, one student did identify the more general nature of these tutorials as being a barrier to learning.

Although I do have one complaint.  A couple of these guides were hard to follow because they weren’t as specific as the ones last semester [PowerPoint tutorials].

            Like the PowerPoint training, the tutorials for the desktop publishing module seem to be effective tools for teaching.  Overall, students like the step-by-step instructions and benefit from their use.  Due to the encouraging comments from both focus groups sessions, tutorials should definitely be incorporated into future technology training in the interpretive courses.  Current tutorials should be revised based on student comments and suggestions.  In addition, new tutorials should be written when newer versions of software are purchased or when different pieces of equipment are added to the training.

3.  Students believed that an instructor-led lab was essential to teach the more complex programs (7 responses): 

Another concept important to the study was whether the combination of tutorials and personal instruction was effective for teaching desktop publishing skills.  Could this training module have been taught without a personal instructor, like the take-home tutorial methods of the digital presentation module?  All of the participants agreed that an instructor-led lab was an essential component of their learning.  Many referred to the fact that the page layout and graphic editing programs were more complex than PowerPoint.  Others responded that it was important to have someone there to answer questions.  A few comments will provide more insight.

I personally liked that you were around and that you went through it like that, because I thought that these were a lot harder than the PowerPoint ones.  Not the tutorials, but the technology itself was harder to understand how to do.

I enjoyed having the labs for this.  I think they were helpful.  For this, there were so many different options that you had that you needed to be shown what they were.  Having someone there to answer questions when you were at the screen instead of trying to e-mail.  

I thought Quark and Photoshop were much more technical than PowerPoint, so I thought it was good that you took us through that.

            Like the PowerPoint training, students overall agreed that the selected instruction method was appropriate and effective for their learning.  Due to the number and complexities of the programs, a personal instructor was necessary for teaching desktop publishing skills.  An instructor-led lab session should be an integral part of future interpretive courses. 

4.  Students generally feel comfortable using the skills they learned, but lack confidence (7 responses):

            When asked how comfortable the students felt using skills they had learned in the desktop publishing module, the majority of students responded positively.  However, the general feeling of the group as revealed through comments and discussion was much less confident than the PowerPoint focus groups.  A few responded that they were truly comfortable with the skills and willing to use them after graduation.  As one student commented:

I would be comfortable with it.  Not only is it a comfort thing, these labs kind of fanned the flames.  I can make [interpretive products] look a lot better and it’s not that hard to do. 

            More students, however, were less sure of their comfort level using desktop publishing skills.  The following comments reveal a certain lack of confidence among the participants.

I’d feel pretty comfortable, I think.  I know the programs enough where I can make the box and put the text in and pictures.  It would just be more of an art of fine-tuning.

I also feel comfortable enough where I could definitely put something together.  It might take me some time.  I feel comfortable enough where I could have a nice product.

I’d have to bring the tutorials along.  To be honest, I couldn’t do half of the stuff without the tutorials.  …I have to refer back to my tutorials constantly.  But I feel like I’m definitely more prepared than I thought I would have been. 

            The comfort level of students was one of the core concepts that the researcher attempted to identify.  Regardless of the specific skills and knowledge they gained, if students are comfortable participating in these modules, they will be more likely to succeed using technology in their careers after graduation.  The more students use and become familiar with computers, the easier it will be for them to learn new programs and equipment in the future.  Overall, students that participated in the desktop publishing module are comfortable using skills on a very basic level, but are much less confident than students who participated in the PowerPoint training.

            Many factors might contribute to this lack of confidence.  First, whereas the digital presentation module focused on a single program, the desktop publishing module covered four rather complicated programs.  The time and sessions devoted to each program may not have been sufficient to boost confidence levels.  As revealed in the next section, there was very little reinforcement of skills, which may have significantly decreased retention.  Finally, students were simply not required to practice their desktop publishing skills after each session beyond a single assignment.

            To increase confidence levels in the future, more time should be spent on each program in the lab.  During the study, only QuarkXpress had more than one training session devoted to it.  At least two or three sessions per program are needed to effectively train students.  The sessions should build upon skills taught in previous sessions to encourage reinforcement.  Although the tutorials are effective teaching methods, they also have a major downfall; in some cases, the tutorials become a substitute for learning the skills.  Tutorials should still be integrated into the training, but students must be encouraged to practice skills without the instruction guides.  As students encounter new programs and equipment, the specifically written tutorials will be useless if students do not have the general technology skills they need to be effective.

Return to Menu

Desktop Publishing Module: Suggestions

1.  It was difficult for students to find time to come to Schmeeckle Reserve and complete their assignments (26 responses):

            During the desktop publishing module, the interpretation computer lab was open to students during the normal visitor center hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.  The visitor center itself is located about two miles from campus.  One of the major challenges identified by the focus group participants was simply the physical act of getting to the computer lab.  Many students reported scheduling conflicts with the normal lab hours.  Whereas the students’ days were scheduled solid with classes and work, their evenings were set aside for homework when the lab was not open.  Other students without transportation discussed the significant time periods required for walking to the labs.   The following comments illustrate this important challenge.

A lot of times I felt it was a real hassle to come over here.  I found that a real big hassle.

I always had to walk and I have class late every day.  So I would have to get up super early in the morning if I wanted to get here.

The only thing I didn’t like on some of the programs like Quark, I actually had to come to Schmeeckle to work on it.  That kind of irritated me a little bit.  I had to come all the way to Schmeeckle to work on the assignment.

My frustration was having to work on stuff between 8 and 5.  I do all my homework at night.  Having that [training module assignments] be part of my homework, I had to try to schedule that into my school day and workday and not into my homework time.

            To overcome this limitation, the students discussed a few alternatives that might improve the situation.  First, most of the participants agreed that the Schmeeckle Reserve computer lab should be open for extended hours, perhaps even just a two-hour time slot in the evening.  These additional hours would alleviate some of the scheduling conflicts but require more time from Schmeeckle employees.  The following comments describe the recommendation.

            It would have been nice if it could have been open even to 7 [p.m.].

            7-9 [p.m.] would be awesome.  Meetings and stuff get done around 7-8. 

And that’s not necessarily something you have to do every day [extended lab hours].  That might entail another personal to be here.  Even if it were three days a week, that would be so much more helpful

If you are looking at extending the hours, you could probably consider hiring someone who already took the class.

            Other participants would like the option of completing assignments and projects on campus.  Certain software programs, like QuarkXpress and Adobe Photoshop, have been purchased specifically for the Schmeeckle Reserve computer lab and are rarely available in other University labs.  As some students stated:

It would be nice if there was a lab in the CNR that has the exact same stuff as here.

If there’s a way to have similar programs in other labs on campus, that may solve some of the problems and you many not need to expand hours necessarily.

            The instructors have very little control over which software programs or pieces of equipment are available in other computer labs on campus.  One of the major benefits of having a technology lab in the Schmeeckle Reserve Visitor Center is that the instructors have complete control over programs and equipment installed on the computers.  By having a small centralized lab, the instructors can make sure that technology is up-to-date and functioning correctly within the budget constraints of the program.  This would be much more difficult to accomplish in a larger computer lab on campus, which is open to all university students. 

            A more appropriate solution to the problem is extending the hours of the Schmeeckle Reserve lab, as many students suggested.  The major limitation to this solution is the cost involved with hiring an employee to keep the building open for extended hours.  Interpretation students could be provided with a key and security pass code to the visitor center, but the training involved with using the security system and the potential security issues make this option undesirable.  To maintain security and fit into the budget while still providing for student needs, the extended hours of the lab must be limited.  The lab should be open for extended hours during those time periods when an assignment or project is due for the interpretive courses.  This should eliminate many of the students’ time issues by providing a place to work during the evening.  During off-times, the lab will be open between the normal visitor center hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

2.  Students would like more computers available in the lab for hands-on learning (16 responses):

            The second most discussed challenge was the inadequate number of computers in the lab.  As described in the recommendations of Objective #3, the size of the middle room in the basement is one of the major limitations.  During the desktop publishing module, 6 computers were available for student learning.  However, only three of those were higher-end computers appropriate for page layout and graphic editing.  Though the lower-end computers worked, they physically slowed down the training sessions.  Since 8 or 9 students were scheduled for each lab session, 2 to 3 students were always required to share a computer with someone else.  Students who were sharing were encouraged to switch places throughout the training session, but the lack of hands-on experience was a source of concern.

            This concern was confirmed through the focus groups.  Many students responded that the number of computers was inadequate in the interpretation lab.  Some were frustrated during busy periods when they were forced to wait for an open computer or scanner.  Others reported that the hands-on use of computers was essential for learning, and that watching someone else was not effective.  The following comments demonstrate these issues in more detail.

One thing that might be important is to make sure you limit the class size so each person can be on a computer doing it hands-on.  That’s a factor in how much you’ll remember doing it.  If you’re just sitting and watching, you can follow along but you won’t remember it as well.

I do [think there should be more computers], because I am a hands-on learner, so I have to be that person that’s doing everything.

The major seems like its getting more popular, so you might have trouble with lab space and the number of computers, too.

The only thing that bothered me besides having to come to Schmeeckle all the time, is when I would come to Schmeeckle outside of the actual lab, and there were a lot of people working.  I guess maybe there aren’t enough computers, or something has to be done with scheduling.

            As was recommended in Objective #3, more computers need to be included in the lab.  Currently, five high-speed computers and two lower-end computers are available for student use.  The lower-end computers should be replaced with faster models, and at least one more computer should be purchased for a table in the northeast corner of the middle room.  Nine computers would then be available for the training modules, which would allow every student in the lab group to work on a computer.  Obviously, lab group sizes must be kept small for individualized hands-on training.  If future interpretation class sizes are increased, the class may have to be divided into three or even four lab sections. 

            To resolve the crowding issues encountered when an assignment or project is due, a few students recommended a scheduling system.  Students in each lab section would be given a specific time to come in and complete their projects. 

3.  Microsoft Publisher should not be taught as a 50-minute lecture (11 responses):

            The Microsoft Publisher lecture was another important challenge identified by focus group participants.  For the benefit of both 1-credit and 2-credit students in the Signs, Trails, and Waysides course, Microsoft Publisher was taught in a 50-minute lecture session.  An outline of the lecture was given to students before class for note-taking, which has been included in Appendix B.  Every student in class was required to create an interpretive poster using Microsoft Publisher.  Overall, students felt that the lecture was an ineffective teaching method.  They did not acquire or understand the presented skills.  Many felt that a more specific tutorial and lab session would have been much more helpful.  The following comments again shed light on this issue.

I didn’t really care for [the Microsoft Publisher lecture].  Because I didn’t think it was very effective.  It’s hard to teach stuff like that in a lecture format.  And I think that’s why I didn’t like my poster.  We were told we had to do it in Publisher.

I didn’t think that one [Microsoft Publisher lecture] was helpful at all.  That was one of the most difficult ones that I had a hard time with.  The steps weren’t as defined and was hard to follow.

I didn’t enjoy having the Microsoft Publisher thing in class instead of lab.  Because I don’t have a long attention span about that stuff.  When we got it done, I didn’t even know what Microsoft Publisher was, so we should have just had a tutorial for that.  Especially since that’s what our poster was done on.

            In the future, Microsoft Publisher should definitely not be taught in a lecture format.  Like other page layout and graphic editing programs, a specific step-by-step tutorial should be written for Publisher.  In addition, for the best learning experience, the program should be taught in a lab setting where students have hands-on access to computers, and an instructor guides the progress and answers questions.  This lab session should be provided to both 1-credit and 2-credit students. 

4.  Students would prefer to have more lab sessions to reinforce the training and teach more skills (10 responses):

            Students also believed that more lab sessions would increase their retention and use of desktop publishing skills.  This ties into the fact that students generally feel comfortable using the skills they learned, but lack confidence (see #4 under positive feedback).  Again, the desktop publishing module taught four separate programs and various pieces of equipment.  Two sessions focused on QuarkXpress, but only a single session was devoted to each of the other programs.  Students expressed the desire to learn more skills and to review the skills they had previously acquired.  Comments included:

I would have liked a few more [lab sessions].  It would have been nice to have a review.  When I go down to work on a computer now, I have to get all of these things [tutorials] out and go through it again.  I just have not retained a lot of that.

I definitely always have the tutorials to look back to, but I almost needed more reinforcement of ideas.  Maybe just more labs.  We definitely want to be able to do really interesting things if we are going to be making panels.

I would like to have had more of them, not necessarily to review, but to learn [more] features of the programs. 

I think once a week is a good amount of time, but I think that there could be more weeks of it [the lab sessions] then.  Because there were some things that I would have liked the full class period for you to explain. 

Overall, students agreed that more lab sessions should be provided to teach and review skills.  The desktop publishing lab sessions did not provide adequate reinforcement of skills.  More time should be committed to each program and piece of equipment.  The lab sessions should build off of one another, similar to the PowerPoint tutorials.  A more integrated and comprehensive desktop publishing training will enhance the learning opportunities for students in the future.

5.  Most students prefer to have the lab times set before they sign up for class (9 responses):

            During the second semester of the 2001-2002 school year, a lab session was not scheduled in the UWSP timetable for the Signs, Trails, and Waysides or the Environmental Publications courses.  Instead, the labs were scheduled during the first week of classes.  This resulted in conflicts with work schedules and a pressure-filled discussion to find an hour-and-a-half time block when the students were free.  Ultimately, the group was divided in half based on the time they could meet for lab.  Most students agreed that the lab should be scheduled before classes begin, so work and other conflicts can be dealt with in advance.  According to one student:

I thought that was really frustrating in the beginning of the year when we had to wait to come to class to find out when we have lab.  That to me was the dumbest thing.  There are so many people that have jobs, and I need to know the schedule.  It took longer than it should have.  I think it can be done when we sign up for classes.

To ease the scheduling in the future, the technology labs should be included in the timetables.  Dividing the lab into two or three sessions would hopefully provide enough options for students signing up for classes. 

6.  Students want to learn how to create brochures and pamphlets (8 responses).

            One of the more insightful suggestions from the focus groups was to incorporate the creation of brochures and pamphlets into the training.  The researcher completely overlooked these basic skills when developing the desktop training modules.  Yet, the vast majority of students who end up in the interpretive field will be required to create some sort of brochure for their site.  Students identified the importance of these skills, strongly suggesting that they be taught in future sessions.

I think brochures would be very helpful, because anywhere we go for a job, they always want brochures and people always use brochures.  It’s a lot different than making a sign panel.

The poster was fun to make, but it was something that we were definitely all capable of and we didn’t need to prove it.  I had a few job interviews and every single person asked me if I knew how to make a pamphlet.

            Brochures and pamphlets definitely should be incorporated into future desktop publishing training.  These skills would help a student be a more successful interpreter after graduation.   After the basic page layout and graphic editing training, a lab session should be taught that is devoted just to creating brochures.  This would help students acquire the unique formatting skills they need to develop a successful brochure, while allowing them to review previous skills.

Return to Menu

Desktop Publishing Module: Subjective Skills Development Analysis

            Before each focus group, participants were encouraged to fill out a “Skills Development Questionnaire.”  For each particular piece of software and hardware, students indicated their perceived skill level before participating in the technology training and after participating in the training.  The skill level was based on a 10-point interval scale, with 1 indicating no skill at all and 10 indicating a mastery of the technology.  Since students subjectively interpret what each level between 1 and 10 represents, comparisons between absolute skill levels will not be useful (two students with the exact same skills, for instance, would still likely choose different skill levels).  However, the difference between the before-training and after-training skill levels yields some interesting information.  This represents subjectively on a scale from 1 to 10 how much a participant believes his or her skills improved from the technology training.  Table 4 includes the averaged results of the desktop publishing training module.   

Table 4:  Results of Desktop Publishing Skills Development Questionnaire

With page layout software, which included programs such as QuarkXpress and Microsoft Publisher, students believed that they had improved their skills by on average 5.5 ranking points.  With graphic editing software, like Paint Shop Pro and Adobe Photoshop, students believed their skills had improved by an average of 5 ranking points.  Both of these categories represented a subjective gain in skills of at least half of the entire continuum.  Skills using scanners and digital cameras, which were not emphasized to a great degree in the modules, still improved by a subjective 4 ranking points. 

Return to Menu

Methods

For More Information, contact: