When you look at the following image, you may not know what it means or what will happen when it is clicked.
.When two images are put together in the following way, you may have a better basis to guess what they mean (but with uncertainty)
When the 'Back' and 'Next' labels are added, the meaning of the two images becomes much clearer. These two labels provide perceptual information for knowing the affordances of the images.
Now, look at the following figure, and think about the relationship between perceptual information and affordances.
Look at the following picture, think about why the gate numbers are listed as such rather than simply 'A1...A8'.
Making the affordances more perceivable
Can you tell the affordances of the following designs?
The affordances of these symbols (or designs) are not that clear. How can we make the affordances of a designed object more perceivable or clearer to users? In addition to use textual information like 'Back' and 'Next', the user-interface design is also important. Now have a look at the following types of recycle bins, and decide which one has the best design from the perspective of affordance.
Click here to jump to top.
19 Comments
Li Huimin
1/31/2018 01:52:23 am
Based on Norman's distinction between real and perceived affordances, it is important for the designers to get to know the users, to understand what the user perceives. Consistency between designed affordance and perceived affordance is critical for effectivity of the affordances. Conversely, inconsistencies will more than likely lead to inaccurate predictions and errors as a direct result.
Reply
R Vishunu
2/3/2018 11:32:26 am
Hi Huimin, I totally agree with your point about inconsistency. For example, during a task activity, students through the interpretation of key texts (such as course outlines and assignment specifications) are intended to unravel what is required of them in a given situation. If these are not consistent with what you have described might lead to severe complications of "inaccurate predictions and errors."
Reply
R Vishunu
2/3/2018 11:23:07 am
Design features of an affordance play a huge role in a learning environment. For example, having a school website (Moodle), the perceived affordance would be the based on the indirect communication with the object in the digital interface. If the object is not designed appropriately and fails to communicate the intended affordance clearly, this will lead students to be aggravated as they would not be able to interact with that specific object during the stipulated timeframe for the class activities which would result in a failure of a planned learning outcome.
Reply
Carian Tham
2/3/2018 06:28:25 pm
I do agree that it is important to make the designed objects / tools perceivable to users and that "in addition to using textual information like 'Back' and 'Next', the user-interface design is also important."
Reply
Chu Wen Shen
2/5/2018 07:27:27 am
The example of the cartoon image of the girl facing left and right, to denote “Back” and “Next” on a website leads me to ponder on the issue of communication and affordance.
Reply
Demi
2/5/2018 12:02:20 pm
Hi Wen Shen,
Reply
Patricia Sin
2/5/2018 09:59:53 am
As mentioned in the readings, affordances are not just perceived by sight, but by a combination of senses such as touching, hearing and smelling. In light of ICT tools, I think it is particularly important to make the affordances more perceivable to our pupils. This is because technology is not something that can be concretely perceived through all the five senses. Therefore, many ICT tools have to ensure that their affordances are more perceivable by metaphorical icons or descriptions of usage. However even with such icons, young children still may not have enough exposure or life experience to perceive the affordances of a tool, regardless of actual or perceived affordance. For example, the actual affordance of Powerpoint is to create presentations, but to a primary one pupil who has no concept or experience of presenting, much less using it, he/she definitely could not appreciate the benefits and convenience that Powerpoint can bring. Even if the icons and descriptions are sufficient from the designer’s point of view, it is still not instinctive to young children. This is where the teacher comes in to create meaning out of these tools for the pupils to perceive as useful cognitive tools, at a level that is relatable to them. Sometimes, we may even need to wonder if our pupils are really cognitively ready to process the affordances of every single ICT tools and should only choose the ones that are most suited to them.
Reply
Demi
2/5/2018 11:07:12 am
1.Every tool has its own affordance, depending on from which angle we view this tool. Actual affordances are independent of perceptions, “they exist whether the perceiver cares about it or not” (Gibson,1979). Furthermore, not everyone knows every actual affordance of the tool. For example, I use Excel primarily for restoring and organizing data; however, there are other functions serving for statistical purposes or calculation that I have never used or not even aware of. On the other hand, perceived affordance resides in the relationship between the object and the perceiver. For example, my gaming keyboard mainly functions as a tool for me to type in; however, the colourful lighting could be viewed as a perceived affordance for me as I see it as a decor on my desk.
Reply
Demi
2/5/2018 11:09:24 am
Reply
Pamela Low
2/6/2018 05:43:47 pm
Indeed, ICT tools have been widely used by educators in their teaching especially when it comes to engaging students’ interest towards the way the content is being presented. In addition, there are the emergence of new ICT tools as the shift on ICT changes from an isolated peripheral use and innovation to becoming mainstream in terms of core learning, teaching, research and administrative functions of institutions. However the challenges here that I see is 1. How can teachers translate all these information into knowledge for the students? (Effectiveness) 2. Could new ICT tools emerging from the market potentially provide a new form of pedagogy?
Reply
Kasni
2/4/2019 08:08:25 pm
The topic on affordance provides a in depth continuation on the purpose of using ICT as a cognitive tool in teaching and learning. The topic on affordance presents an opportunity to uncover two different perspective of the purpose of the ICT tool between the teacher and students. This means that the ICT tool may have been intended to be use by the creator for specific purpose. It may not be intended to be use as a tool for learning. However, It is the way teachers can use it to support teaching and learning that can promote collaborative learning and cognitive development which makes it an effective mindtool. In this way, the opportunity to use it effectively can be further enhanced to promote motivation among users. An example that was shared during the lesson was the use of facebook. Facebook is intentionally use as a social networking tool. However, educators can leverage on this app and use it as a mindtool by using its collaborative feature to get students to comment on certain concepts and topics to be discussed. At the same time, data collected can be reviewed and analysed and presented in a concept map format. This is great for learning.
Reply
seah Lee chean
2/4/2019 10:28:53 pm
It is interesting to analyse ICT in terms of its affordances, something that has not crossed my mind. After reviewing the type of affordances vs the perceptual information, it is interesting to see the relatedness between both, although each are both ends of the pole. It is no doubt that technology continues to play a pivotal role in our lives, but the way we harness and perceive technology will determine the type of affordances in the users’ eyes.
Reply
Duan Jingjing
2/5/2019 11:55:02 pm
When we introduce an ICT tool with its perceived affordances to the students to use to learn, we Teachers need to be very cautious to adapt the perceptual information the students have when explore the same tool. If the perceived affordances of a tool are unseen from the students, it may lead confusion, and will spend too much time on fingering out the usage of the tool and the connection to learn. Therefore, the design of affordances need to be clear, and the level of the cognition of the affordances of the tool need to be at ground level, clear, basic, straightforwar and farmilliar as well. Then, students could concentrate on learning more easily.
Reply
Christina Peh
2/6/2019 12:01:06 pm
I’m still a little confused about the definition of hidden and false affordances so I went online and googled for answers.
Reply
Duan Jingjing
2/7/2019 10:37:08 pm
I agree with your definition of the hidden and false affordances.
Reply
Tammy Ng
2/8/2019 11:49:25 am
Hey Christina, thanks for sharing a clearer definition of hidden affordance and perceived affordance. I was also slightly confused with the idea of 'hidden affordance' and 'false affordance'. I think these concepts are not clearly distinguished in real life. Designers create an ICT with a basic user interface with basic functions. As time goes along they start to add more functions as per the feedback of their users and they could also remove or enhance distractors that produce false affordances, making the user experience or more seamless one. For example, Facebook used to be a simple networking tool to share a person's life experiences. However, as more businesses started to use the tool to market their products(hidden affordance), Facebook created an algorithm to allow businesses to pay for a set of marketing tools according to the marketing budget that they have. (Became an actual affordance) Facebook also started to enhance their security system as many users felt that their privacy is being infringed upon by ill-intentioned users. Security used to be a hidden affordance, users think that their private information is safely guarded against abusers. However, upon improvement, security became an actual affordance.
Reply
Tammy Ng
2/8/2019 11:23:08 am
The perceived affordances of an ICT tool can be different in different cultural contexts. This made me think about the difficulties I had when I switched from using the Windows to the Macintosh system. Simple tools like 'close windows' or 'open an alternate tab' is difficult to execute as different systems have a different spatial distribution of all these tools. When I am using ICT tools in my classroom, I see the need to set the cultural context of the tools right before diving into the learning content itself. I think it is also necessary to set boundaries and to let the students know our intentions of using the ICT tools so that the perceived affordances of the tool in the teachers' and the students' perspectives can be the same to produce a more seamless learning experience.
Reply
Jih Heong
2/8/2019 11:50:14 am
Tammy, I agree with you. For any new gadgets/tools that we are first exposed to or when we first introduced to the learners, it will take us some time to get use to the system. Our learners might be tech savvy, but we must always bear in mind that for some of the platform that we choose, it might still be new to them. Therefore, we need to provide some scaffolding for them and to set the context and boundaries for the learners. We do not want to increase the cognitive load on the learner while trying to get them to use the tool that we have chosen.
Reply
Jih Heong
2/8/2019 11:23:22 am
There could be multiple representations for the same affordance. i.e. identical affordance being presented by different signs or symbols. Different symbols to represent the gender sign for toilets; different dustbin designs. It is important for us and our learner to be familiar with the tools that we deployed and be comfortable with their affordances. The perceived affordance of the cognitive tools that we choose, to help reduce the cognitive load on our learner, should be consistent with the actual affordance of the tools. When introducing new cognitive tools in our lessons, we might need to spend some to introduce the features/ affordance of the said tools. Lesson might need to be scaffold to ensure that our learner pick up the skills of using the tools. We do not want to increase the cognitive load on our learner as they might now need to struggle with the tools as they try to complete the task given.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |