No abstract

No abstract

Many human-computer interfaces are designed with the assumption that the user must adapt to the system, that users must be trained and their behavior altered to fit a given interface. The research presented here proceeds from the alternative assumption: Novice behavior is inherently sensible, and the computer system can be made to adapt to it. Specifically, a measurably easy-to-use interface was built to accommodate the actual behavior of novice users. Novices attempted an electronic mail task using a command-line interface containing no help, no menus, no documentation, and no instruction. A hidden operator intercepted commands when necessary, creating the illusion of an interactive session. The software was repeatedly revised to recognize users' new commands; in essence, the interface was derived from user behavior. This procedure was used on 67 subjects. The first version of the software could recognize only 7 percent of all the subjects' spontaneously generated commands; the final version could recognize 76 percent of these commands. This experience contradicts the idea that user input is irrelevant to the design of command languages. Through careful observation and analysis of user behavior, a mail interface unusable by novices evolved into one that let novices do useful work within minutes.

No abstract

Changes to the governance and management of institutions of higher education (often described as 'new managerialism') and the effects this is having on the work of academics have been the subject of much discourse over the last 30 years in the pursuit of a globally appropriate model for higher education. Less attention has been afforded to discussion of new forms of institutional leadership needed to effectively respond to the associated challenges. Despite growing research into shared models of leadership, particularly distributed leadership, as a potentially appropriate approach distinct from traditional structural/positional leadership, discussion has been principally confined to normative description of the parameters that describe distributed leadership rather than rigorous critical analysis of its applicability in, and effectiveness for, higher education. Underpinning this discourse is the presumption that increased collaboration is synonymous with distributed leadership. This paper presents a more critical analysis of the experience of a distributed leadership approach used to build leadership capacity in learning and teaching in an Australian university. This example demonstrates first, that despite evidence of a relationship between distributed leadership and collaboration, there is no evidence of an inherent direct causal relationship, second, that a distributed leadership, while it may increase participation of academics in decision making, is not synonymous with democratic decision making. It is concluded that for a distributed leadership approach to be appropriate and effective, higher education institutions need to instigate action supported by formal leaders and underpinned by an action reflective approach that enables change over time.