PowerPoint Presentation

Building the Design Framework
and User Interface for an EPSS

Pamela Taylor Northrup, Ph.D.
University of West Florida
11000 University Parkway
Pensacola, FL 32514
850/474-3255
pnorthru@uwf.edu

Paper submitted to the 1999 annual conference of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Houston, TX

EPSS technology, though a relatively new concept, is beginning to be embraced by organizations as a solution to performance problems, serving as a vehicle for learning new knowledge, skills, and abilities; information conveyance; and ongoing support. Early definitions of EPSS were focused on individual performance through the use of technology (Hudzina, Rowley, & Wager, 1997; Raybould, 1995). Gery (1991) and Raybould (1990) suggest that "EPSS is an electronic system that provides integrated access to information, advice, learning experiences, and tools to help someone perform a task with the minimum of support by other people." Stevens and Stevens (1996) consider EPSS as a system of support tools designed to assist users with workplace performance. The early focus of EPSS was on the individual performer of a task.

Raybould (1995) suggests a new definition of EPSS, encompassing a more systems-oriented view with organization performance being precedent over individual user performance. "An EPSS is the electronic infrastructure that captures, stores, and distributes individual and corporate knowledge assets throughout an organization, to enable individuals to achieve required levels of performance in the fastest possible time and with a minimum of support from other people."

Regardless of the emerging focus of the system, EPSS tools provide assistance in learning and performing a task. Kavat (1997) suggests four primary benefits of EPSS to include (1) enhanced productivity; (2) reduced training costs; (3) increased worker autonomy; and (4) increased quality due to uniform work practices. EPSS approaches promote the concept of learning by doing, situated in real-world environments, rather than by being taught in a training classroom. Developing electronic support for everyday performance is a primary goal of EPSS (Sherry & Wilson, 1996). Law (1994) suggests that EPSS provides "cognitive training wheels" that can be removed or ignored when users are confident of their abilities to perform tasks without guidance.

Currently the literature on EPSS is "a mile wide and only a few inches deep yet, EPSS have all of the ingredients of a Renaissance Technology" (Hudzina, Rowles, & Wager, 1997). The following will discuss considerations for building the design framework and the user interface; both are critical elements of an EPSS.

Using traditional instructional systems models would be difficult when designing an EPSS primarily because the overall purpose of EPSS is somewhat different from the purpose of designing instruction. Instructional design is the process of designing and developing instruction to achieve specific learning outcomes (Dick & Carey, 1992; Gagne, Briggs & Wager, 1996); where EPSS is more focused on producing task performance. Although each phase in a traditional instructional systems model is addressed (ADDIE), the outcomes of each are somewhat different. STEPS, an EPSS for PreK-12 instructional planning (Northrup & Pilcher, 1997), was designed using a variety of models including rapid prototyping (Jones, Li, & Merrill, 1992); prototyping (Tripp & Bichelmeyer, 1990); and Layers of Necessity (Tessmer & Wedman, 1990). The concept of iterative design (Witt & Wager, 1994) and concurrent evaluation (Northrup, 1995) permeated the process.

It is suggested that an initial analysis be conducted by asking: Who does this serve? What tasks must be performed? What tools will performers require to perform tasks? In what type of environment will users work to perform the tasks? Initial goals can be established, however, the objectives will emerge throughout the process (Witt & Wager, 1994).

Stevens and Stevens (1996) define an interface as "a contact surface between two systems which dictates the nature of interaction between those systems." Interface may refer to the input interface (the input devices) or the screen interface (the look and feel of the screen). The (screen) user interface is a key to successful utilization and must be tested and revised throughout the entire process of building an EPSS. First and foremost, an EPSS should be designed for easy access of all users. Currently, many EPSS tools are being developed and disseminated using the World Wide Web. While others are continuing to be designed using authoring and programming tools for dissemination on CD-ROM; networks; or individual workstations. Regardless of the dissemination strategy, access is a key ingredient.

Once access is gained, the user must be able to navigate through the EPSS with relative ease in a manner that parallels the performers mental model. Consideration for the look and feel of the task structure itself, along with the tools required to complete the task must be in a logical place for the performers use. Many use a metaphor to build a logical framework. The metaphor attaches meaning to the task and the performer.

The screen design itself should maintain consistent visual design elements throughout the entire EPSS. Balance, harmony, and unity are stressed. The design should be simple; free of extraneous information; and free of unnecessary graphics, animations, or video.

The functionality of the entire EPSS should be the focal point of all interface design decisions made with the overall task performance in the forefront. Each function of the EPSS must be considered and a determination must be made as to how to navigate from function to function in a flexible manner.

Determining the navigation for a flexible EPSS can be somewhat complex. Consider using a common button bar with links to major functions within the EPSS. The button bar can serve as the link between functions. Any task within the EPSS should be no more than three clicks away.

Scaffolding is characterized as a process used to allow unprepared learners to view an expert performance of the task. Scaffolding is intended to be used to assist learners in performing new or unfamiliar tasks (Laffey, Tupper, Musser, & Wedman, 1998). Law (1994) labels this as cognitive training wheels that can be removed or ignored when performers are confident and able to perform tasks without guidance.

In conclusion, EPSS design is a subset of performance technology with a somewhat different focus than traditional instructional systems design. Gery (1991) considers EPSS as "providing whatever is necessary to generate performance and learning at the point of need" (p. 34). Instructional systems design has as its’ primary focus the achievement of learning outcomes. Guidelines for designing and developing EPSS parallel traditional instructional systems in some ways and can use the ADDIE model as a construct; however, more emerging models of iterative design including rapid prototyping, prototyping, and Layers of Necessity are considered. Regarding the user interface, consistent screen design; navigation; use of metaphors; and the integration of scaffolds will promote ease of use and overall task performance.

Dick, W. and Carey, L. (1996). The systematic design of instruction. New York: Harper-Collins Publisher

Gagne, R. M., Briggs, L. J, & Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructional design. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

Gery, G. (1991). Electronic performance support systems. Boston, MA: Weingarten Publications.

Hudzina, M., Rowley, K., & Wager, W. (1997). Electronic performance support technology: Defining the domain. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 10(1), 199-211.

Jones, M. K., Li, Z., & Merrill, M. D. (1992). Rapid prototyping in automated instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(4), 95-100.

Karat, J. (1997). Evolving the scope of user-centered design. Communications of the ACM, 40(7), 33-38.

Laffey, J. (1997). Dynamism in electronic performance support systems. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 10(1), 183-198.

Laffey, J., Tupper, T., Musser, D., & Wedman, J. (1998). A computer-mediated support system for project-based learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(1), 73-86.

Northrup, P. T. (1995). Concurrent formative evaluation: Guidelines and implications for multimedia designers. Educational Technology, 35(6), 24-31.

Northrup, P. T. & Pilcher, J. (1998). STEPS: An EPSS tool for instructional planning. Proceedings from the annual conference of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, St. Louis.

Raybould (1990). Solving human performance problems with computers. A case study: Building an electronic performance support system. Performance and Instruction. Washington, D.C.: National Society for Performance and Instruction.

Raybould (1995). Performance support engineering: An emerging development methodology for enabling organizational learning. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32(1), 65-69.

Sherry, L. & Wilson, B. (1996). Supporting human performance across disciplines: A converging of roles and tools. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 9(4), 19-36.

Stevens, G. H. & Stevens, E. F. (1995). Designing electronic performance support tools: Improving workplace performance with hypertext, hypermedia, and multimedia. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

Tessmer, M & Wedman, J. F. (1990) A layers-of-necessity instructional development model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(2), 77-85

Tripp, S. D. & Bichelmeyer, B. (1990). Rapid prototyping: An alternative instructional design strategy. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 31-44.

Witt, C. & Wager, W (1994). A comparison of instructional systems design and electronic performance support systems design. Educational Technology, 34(6), 20-24.