There is an expectation that university teachers have a good understanding of the value of educational technologies in learning and teaching as well as be able to incorporate them effectively into their teaching (Carter et al, 2011, Higher Education Academy, 2011; Sharples et al, 2016). However, according to key literature (Conole, 2004; Kennedy et al, 2011; Laurillard, 2007; Selwyn, 2007; Walker et al, 2016) the extent to which educational technologies have impacted on teaching and learning practices is considered to be minimal. While universities have invested heavily in educational technologies for teaching purposes, institutional virtual learning environments are predominately being used as a vehicle for information transmission and document repository (Armellini et al, 2012; Walker et al, 2016). The research I report here investigated the thinking and conceptions behind how Bryn, a university teacher, used educational technologies to optimise the quality of his students’ learning. I also report on the thinking and decision making behind how 15 of his students used educational technologies to optimise the quality of their university learning. The analysis of the data collected suggests that there is an evolution occurring in how university teaching staff are thoughtfully integrating educational technology into programmes and satisfying the majority of students with this development. It was also identified that influences of educational technology on student learning are mediated by students’ disposition towards learning and the task and social contexts of their learning. It is recommended that those students who are pioneer users of educational technology and ahead of the university teacher’s curve be incorporated into the planning and evaluating of experiences of learning and teaching in educational technology-mediated classroom contexts and be appointed as learning coaches to those students who are somewhat bewildered and frustrated by educational technology use.

Previous research has found that programmers spend a significant fraction of their time navigating between different source code locations and that much of that time is spent returning to previously viewed code. Other work has identified the ability to juxtapose arbitrary pieces of code as cognitively important. However, modern IDEs have inherited a user interface design in which, usually, only one source file is displayed at a time, with the result that users must switch back and forth from one file to another. Taking advantage of the increasing availability of large displays, we propose a new interaction paradigm in which an IDE presents parts of multiple source files side by side, using the Mylyn degree-of-interest function to dynamically allocate screen space to them on the basis of degree-of-interest to the current development task. We demonstrate the feasibility of this paradigm with a prototype implementation built on the Eclipse IDE and note that it was used by the author over a period of months in the development of the prototype itself. Additionally, we present two case studies which quantify the potential reduction in navigation and demonstrate the simplicity of the approach and its ability to capture complete concerns on screen. These case studies suggest that the approach has the potential to reduce the time that programmers spend navigating by as much as 50%.

Previous research has found that programmers spend a significant fraction of their time navigating between different source code locations and that much of that time is spent returning to previously viewed code. Other work has identified the ability to juxtapose arbitrary pieces of code as cognitively important. However, modern IDEs have inherited a user interface design in which, usually, only one source file is displayed at a time, with the result that users must switch back and forth from one file to another. Taking advantage of the increasing availability of large displays, we propose a new interaction paradigm in which an IDE presents parts of multiple source files side by side, using the Mylyn degree-of-interest function to dynamically allocate screen space to them on the basis of degree-of-interest to the current development task. We demonstrate the feasibility of this paradigm with a prototype implementation built on the Eclipse IDE and note that it was used by the author over a period of months in the development of the prototype itself. Additionally, we present two case studies which quantify the potential reduction in navigation and demonstrate the simplicity of the approach and its ability to capture complete concerns on screen. These case studies suggest that the approach has the potential to reduce the time that programmers spend navigating by as much as 50%.

Previous research has found that programmers spend a significant fraction of their time navigating between different source code locations and that much of that time is spent returning to previously viewed code. Other work has identified the ability to juxtapose arbitrary pieces of code as cognitively important. However, modern IDEs have inherited a user interface design in which, usually, only one source file is displayed at a time, with the result that users must switch back and forth from one file to another. Taking advantage of the increasing availability of large displays, we propose a new interaction paradigm in which an IDE presents parts of multiple source files side by side, using the Mylyn degree-of-interest function to dynamically allocate screen space to them on the basis of degree-of-interest to the current development task. We demonstrate the feasibility of this paradigm with a prototype implementation built on the Eclipse IDE and note that it was used by the author over a period of months in the development of the prototype itself. Additionally, we present two case studies which quantify the potential reduction in navigation and demonstrate the simplicity of the approach and its ability to capture complete concerns on screen. These case studies suggest that the approach has the potential to reduce the time that programmers spend navigating by as much as 50%. / Science, Faculty of / Computer Science, Department of / Graduate