Building Design Treasure Hunt feedback

Building Design Treasure Hunt feedback

Class Focus Group, Wednesday, ‎24 ‎May ‎2011, ‏‎9.30am (one week after trial)

Ignoring all the issues on the day, what do you think of the concept in principle?

• · Waste a lot of petrol going around to all the houses, has to be a car involved. Besides that, great idea because seeing stuff straight up front. Get idea of texture of house that wouldn’t get off photo.
• · Would be better if lot of it situated on one street that has variety of house styles
• · Privacy perspective: issues with students turning up outside houses in a group? Residents would be a bit freaked out? (Teacher: used to it? We do this already)
• · Could be centred around a few streets or a block. Areas where could walk from one to the other
• · Do it in a warmer season? (Facilitator: project had to be completed by June; no choice this time!)
• · Using our own phones a bit difficult. Could there be a supply of phones that are already charged? (Facilitator: logistics of project: sudden doubling of group numbers led to phones running out). After 3 hours of using, phone power runs out for some, need to use it for rest of the day.
• · People used various phones, had varying speeds of downloading and responding etc

How could it be done better?

• · Need to double check that things are in the right spots (teacher: Google lied to me about some locations) (facilitator: lesson is that anything involving geography, have to go there in person beforehand, next time should do it together so get tech and subject knowledge at same time, we can’t assume knowledge of other)
• · Do it on bike? (some disagreement in group; how to carry all the stuff?)
• · Have options such as ABCD, not just A and B; most of answers were A so were just selecting first one (facilitator: was technical slip, have adjusted system for next time)

What are benefits with doing this with phones and GPS, assuming everything is working fine (or just as good on paper with photocopied map)?

• · With paper, can check and have details, server crashing etc won’t be problem
• · If no tech issues, phone/GPS is easier. Can just touch option, don’t have to spend time writing down answers.
• · Would have been easier to incorporate GPS into next address (don’t have to search yourself for address, does it automatically on phone, tells you how to get there, rather than having to get Melways out)
• · In today’s society, technological stuff is so much more used than paper. (Facilitator: feel more comfortable with phone and piece of paper? Answer from one student: yes)

If you just had a list on paper to circle without having to write anything down, would that have made it easier than using the phone or as easy?

• · With paper, will still be same order for everyone. With phone, can randomise, more challenging, be harder than everyone having same order. (Can swap notes; find each other).

Did people use own phones with Google Maps to find their way around? If so, did it work?

• · I used GPS device in car
• · Would have been nice to go backwards - once put answer into device, that’s it, couldn’t change it, couldn’t go backwards
• · Yes/no buttons – easy to press wrong ones. Buttons too close together, can touch other one by mistake.
• · You needed a group in car (more than two): one person to hold the textbook, one person to have phone, one to have GPS, one to drive

Would you have liked it to be a competition?

• · Would have been good, but can’t do it in a car
• · Walking would have been good as a competition – challenging, funny. Only have 10-15 questions, reduce number of styles (facilitator: yes, one thing we’ve learned is that it was probably too long, and took longer than we thought to get to places and get answers)

Any other thoughts?

• · Use the GPS to help get around.
• · Let us choose next location to go to – there were times you would have to go back from street no. 50 to no. 40 (facilitator: if design was such that you didn’t have to go back and forth, would that solve this? Student: probably)
• · Even tell us how many we’ve got left to go, which one we’re up to.
• · Yes, be nice to know how we’re going, even to have score up in the corner. Or a progress bar.
• · There was one point where the address was on a corner and we got it wrong because house was on opposite corner. Maybe choose houses where numbers are in view so it’s not so confusing. (mentioned another example of confusion with house numbers)
• · Need to have address and quiz options with right question on the same page. ). Address used to disappear once went to question option screen. (facilitator: has been fixed)
• · Instead of style of house specifically, could ask about different elements of styles, such as roof elements. (teacher: could be quite challenging, love to be able to identify things straight up, but suspect would take a longer)

If were walking, would having text book with you be a challenge, juggle phones, books etc?

• · In groups, would work.

We were wondering if to do this in groups or individually

• · Too hard as individuals. Can’t hold everything.
• · And individually there’s nothing to challenge you to learn (teacher: they learn from each other).

What’s an ideal group number if walking?

• · Four or so. Could always have six. But then would be more arguing so takes longer.
• · And if driving would need to take two cars.
• · Three wouldn’t work if driving if have GPS separate from question phone and text book. Someone to hold book, someone to direct driver to address, someone to drive, someone to relate questions.

Teacher: idea of app for text book. What do people think?

• · General consensus it’s a good idea.

Project facilitator note:

· Need to note: unexpected/unforseen combining of two groups on same day due to sudden timetabling changes. This doubled student numbers, caused issues with availability of phones and server loads, hence crashing of server. Hence also caused significant delays for groups – staggered starts meant some groups didn’t leave till 4pm. We were lucky that these students were very mature and patient. Lesson: try to make sure there are no surprises on the tech front caused by sudden changes at the program end.

Construction simulation trial 2011: student interview results

The Unity version of the construction set of exercises is up and running and Mark has completed his paper workbook that goes along with it.

So this week we tried it out on two student groups. Went pretty well - here are the results of interviews with 19 construction pre-apps immediately after completing the simulation task series. Undertaken in groups of 1 to 4. All were male, aged 16 - 18.

Of 19 interviewed:

Experience with computers? 14
Consider yourself a gamer? 8
Do you use computers for:
- social networking: 17
- consuming media (eg video): 12
- playing games: 4

Had experience with construction work sites? 16
Helped to set up a work site before? 5

Expectations before starting course:
none/don't know: 16
fun because it's a game: 2
sounded interesting because was different: 1

Did you enjoy it? 19
Comments: 'better than writing up'

Do you feel more confident:
- going into a construction workplace? 16
Comments: 'you know what's there...hazards and that'/'not really'
- picking out OH&S hazards? 18
Comment: 'has made them easier to identify'
- setting up a work site? 18
- filling in a Safe Work Method Statement? 9
Comments: 'have already done this'/'our teacher has done it for us'/'same as what I already knew'
- reading building plans and documents? 18
Comment: 'same...knew this already'

Would you like to do other forms of learning in this way? 14
Comments: 'prefer something more hands on'/'it's good because it's hands on'

Next steps with construction project/moving to Unity

Met this morning with Dale and Daniel from VU Construction. Important points to note:

- following the dev team's successful trial in Unity on Monday we will be moving from OpenSim to Unity for the construction and subsequent projects. All trade development from here to be undertaken under the umbrella of 'Tradesim': http://www.tradesim.com.au/. Looking to work with Mark O'Rourke on his games stuff in Unity in future. There are a number of pros and cons with Unity but it looks overwhelmingly positive in the final analysis, especially easier deployment on the ground (web browser-based delivery, also works with USB 1&2 as no need to have on-board web server on data stick as per OpenSim). Dale is compiling full list of pros and cons.

- PushLMS will be transformed from a standalone product to a plugin for Moodle.

- Unity version of construction world will be ready for this year's construction trial. Dale met with Mark (teacher) yesterday to finalise in-world details and to revise delivery plans. A few small changes - the 'points' system will change to money...sts can earn or lose money. Brings element of competition into doing the exercise.

- we will trial 1-2 groups (of 12-15 sts each) in last week of term before holidays (September 26 - 30). if this works out smoothly, will deliver on wider scale to other groups in first week back (October 10 - 14). Possibility of us not being involved in second delivery - hands off, may just run by itself so only construction teachers needed hopefully.

- discussed wider distribution and promotion of Tradesim. Will be based on partnership with Oztron, which ownd Tradesim. Managed by WERC. We will invite other institutions' trades programs to be involved and will work out licensing model to keep it sustainable.

Snapshot of builds for Tradesim from Tung

Some of our builds for the new Tradesim world.

Download the construction simulator

PLEASE NOTE - THIS PROJECT IS NOW OUTDATED.  VISIT WHITECARDGAME.COM.AU TO DOWNLOAD OUR LATEST OH&S GAME FOR FREE.

Here is a downloadable version of our construction sim.

To get this working;

1. Download and unzip the opensim files. This is the world.
2. Download and install the Imprudence viewer. This is the software you use to look at the world.
3. In the opensim>bin directory, run the file Opensim.32bitlaunch.exe. Let this load for a couple of minutes until the console window stops moving.
4. Load the Imprudence viewer. Log in using the username 'test user.' Leave the password field blank. Set the Grid to 'localhost.'
5. You should now be in the Isle of VU.

Music venue treasure hunt trial

Music venue treasure hunt trial

Yesterday two of us met with students from the Victoria University VET music performance program for the music mobile trial. This treasure hunt took the students on a tour of Melbourne music venues in the CBD, ranging from the Palace in Bourke St to the Cherry Bar in ACDC Lane.

This trial did not use GPS because of the difficulty of getting GPS to work well in the CBD. Instead the screens gave students directions to the next venue on the phone (and we also gave them a photocopy of the map below). Once arriving at the venue, the system asked the students between 2-4 questions per venue, and also asked them to take a photo of the venue. At the end, the system presented the group with a pie chart showing the percentage of right and wrong questions. There were no time delays for getting questions wrong - we were conscious of not turning this into a race given the potential dangers of the CBD streets.

Originally we had planned to undertake OH&S and PA/technical audits inside the venues, but then the music staff realised that this would have taken a lot of advance planning to organise, given that many venues are closed during the day (and also given that the program manager was on leave during the prep time and the rest of the staff were stretched for time). Instead, they created questions to be answered from the street outside the venue. Our team then tested the questions the day before and further honed them - this was a good move because quite a few questions still could not be answered by students in their original form (eg 'does the venue have an in-house piano?'

On the day we all met at the Arts Centre. There were 12 students present - three groups of four each. After some instructions from us, the students were given their paper based maps (as seen below) and devices preloaded with the login page. (they chose two iPads and one iPhone...these are maybe seen as sexier? More motivating? More familiar?). They were very keen to get started.

Students were then asked to enter their student IDs but told they could also use their names. We soon discovered the system had not been designed to handle spaces between names. The issue was quickly bypassed by using first names or concatenating both names, and then we were off.

The system was configured so that every group started with the Arts Centre questions (they had been given a tour prior to meeting us). After this initial question set, each group was assigned to a different circuit around the city to minimise the likelihood of groups turning up the venues in a mass, swapping notes, students tagging along uninvolved etc. The venues were arranged in an approximate loop (see map), with groups starting at different points on that loop.

The groups then set out on their journeys. The two of us selected a group each to tag along with and we shot some footage of students answering questions along the way using Flip cameras. One of the groups was temporarily stalled due to connection issues which we would find out later were to haunt them through the entire course of the journey.

One of us comments: the first location was an easy one since we were already there, we simply needed to take the elevator down stairs and snap a photo of the stage door before we could proceed with the next questions. The group of students whose party I had joined were very eager to take photos of one and other which I found rather humorous to say the least. It was great to see them so excited about doing an assignment and having FUN!

The students received instant feedback on how they were doing and were eager to answer questions correctly. Questions were either yes/no (see above) or multiple choice (see below)

At the end, students received a chart of results:

One of us comments: The feeling I received from the students was that they really enjoyed participating in the trial. They liked using the technology and found it a great way to discover venues in Melbourne that were tucked away and would have otherwise gone unexplored.

The other of us comments: Similarly, students were motivated by the technology and by the location-based treasure hunt idea. As performance students many said they found it useful to encounter potential workplaces that they hadn't known existed. Group dynamics in a group of 4 worked well, with students keen to discuss potential answers. They cared about getting the right answers, and were keen to see their score at the end (note - the group that had technical difficulties stuck around afterwards when we met up to complete the trial questions - without having gone to all the venues - so they could find out their score). The negatives expressed by the group were that some questions could have been a little more challenging and relevant (they also mentioned that they would have liked to have seen inside the venues), the course was long (two hours of solid walking) and some interface elements could be improved (options being too close together leading to the wrong one being pressed...this was on the iPad... and no back button).

The group with technical issues had the iPhone. They were troubled by connection issues that haunted them the entire leg of the journey. This shows that the iPads are more effective in such locations, possibly due to larger antennas and receptors (this was also the case with the GPS for the last trial). One of us briefly tested the Android phone and this was worst of all.

The system is designed to continue from where the connection drops off, but for this group it kept restarting the assessment from the beginning. We think that this is due to one or more students entering their names differently (even one character) to the original logins, so that the system didn't recognise this as continuing the previous session. Surprisingly these students were extremely keen to stay back and finish the assessment to find out what all the answers were.

In summary:

- engagement levels were high due to the technology and the location-based treasure hunt elements

- discovery element of venues was stated as being useful for their careers

- questions need to be meaningful and tested thoroughly. If not, it's frustrating.

- we need to make sure everyone types in the same thing every time when resuming sessions (maybe stick to student ids next time?, not names?)

- iPads work better than iPhones and much better than Android phones for constant connectivity in the CBD. They're also better in a group because everyone can see the screen and debate/compare notes

Students, where are you for our second trial?

After deciding it wasn't the best option to go 'cold calling' on students in the VU Footscray library to take part in our library treasure hunt trial, we thought we'd find a class of first year students from that campus.

So we emailed three colleagues in Education - no response.

So after testing and refining the questions created by the student rovers, we coordinated with a Student Support person for a group of seven students to do the exercise. We bought them two movie tickets each, as suggested by the Student Support person.

And then we waited at the appointed place at 1pm today...and waited. No students - and the support person didn't know where they were either (he had emailed them the day before with confirmation, directions and my mobile number)

Argh.

We later found out that this student support person was in transition and this was his last day on that job. So possibly some issues there. In the meantime, we'll need to find some more students, and write off today.

This, however, has reinforced our finding that working with other program areas can be difficult, that there are other things going on in their areas and their focus may be elsewhere. And perhaps that movie tickets aren't such a strong incentive these days (we had been thinking of an iPod Shuffle as a prize)

Mobile Geo Location Tutorial

Newport Trial

Today we performed the first full scale trail of the mobile geo location quiz. Two groups of students had be brought together to perform the online assessment. We provided two iPads, two iPhone 3Gs and 2 Samsung Galaxy Ss for student’s to use. Students were also encouraged to use their own devices provided they were equipped with GPS and WebKit/HTML5 compatible web browsers. A group of students soon emerged iPhones in hand. A number of students also had BlackBerrys which we were surprised to find appeared to have a WebKit based web browser and rendered the application as beautifully as Safari or the Android Browser.

The students were given the URL to enter into their phones and then organised into groups. Everything appeared to be working and we concluded it was safe to send all the students out at once. The production team then returned to the command centre we had erected in the conference room where we prepared to watch the students’ progress via the tracking application. A number of lines had started forming on the map when we received our first phone call. It appeared that a group of students had run into a problem with one of the iPads displaying a blank page. Dale and I went outside to meet with this group to help troubleshoot the problem when we began receiving similar reports from other students.

Upon returning to the command centre we became aware that the server we were hosting both the application and the database on had been brought to its knees by the traffic being generated by the devices. While the downloads from all the devices were not excessive, the tracking code was uploading coordinates to the server every few seconds from over 10 devices. This was likely the cause for the server crashing. While we waited for the students to return to base we attempted to migrate the application to another server, this would have worked had the database not still been on the server which had been brought down. While the students waited patiently we restarted the server and waited for it to come back up.

Taking on-board the lessons from the first attempt we decided to stagger the next set of tests and send out one group at a time limiting them to one device per group to minimise server load. This approach appeared to work and the server remained active for the remainder of the tests. One of our team members who went out with the first group to document the test reported back that the application was placing the correct answer at the top of each multiple choice. This bug was something new that hadn’t been encountered during any of our previous testing and has been resolved by randomising the order of the questions each time they are loaded. The test took over an hour and a half to complete due to the number of locations, 20 in all and the students needing to stop an analyse each location to assess the correct response. The number of questions could have been reduced as there was one style that was repeated and some questions which could have been removed.

Due to the length of the test and the reliance the 3G and GPS which are two of the most battery intensive components on a phone aside from the screen, the battery depleted for one of the groups. Luckily they had a spare BlackBerry from which they could log back in and resume the test. It would have been good to provide the students with in car chargers to mitigate the chances the running out of power.

Some of the students commented that they could have done just as well with a paper based assessment and map of the circuit. This has led us to ponder the advantages of the platforms we have employed. Besides the integrated nature of the app, tracking and instant reporting it does appear that the test could have been conducted as successfully with an analogue paper based model. Another option could have been a desk based assessment using Google Street View or similar service.

First trial today: Building Design in Williamstown

Today we undertook our first trial with Advanced Diploma of Building Design students at Newport campus. This was a GPS-based activity, where students braved the blustery weather in groups and car-pooled to a series of 20 buildings around Williamstown, where they had to choose the building style. When they got to within GPS range of the location (accuracy varied according to the device type), the PushLMS system sent a question with 3-5 multiple choice answers to the group's device. Once answered, the system sent a new site address to the group.

So, did it work?

Well, yes...and no as well. A number of factors came into play today, which I will explain shortly. Some we had control over, and some we didn't. What follows is the story of what happened today.

The tech guys got to Newport at 8.15am to do a last test of the GPS tracking and system in general. All good, notwithstanding the fact that we had only just got hold of iPads and iPhones to bolster the range of devices we were testing.

We had arranged to meet the students at 9.15am in the Newport foyer - ostensibly 15 or so students who would form groups of three and to whom we would give a device each. But when we got there, twice as many students were waiting - another teacher had fallen sick, so the decision had been made (unbeknownst to us) to combine the planned class with another we had originally planned to test with too, but for which the timing hadn't worked out.

Some students had their own iPhones so we set them up on the system - in the end we only used four of our devices, even though there were now eight or nine groups of three to five students.

Students were quite excited and some were keen to get into it. But they were patient too as we had to spend some time sorting out the bedlam of phones, groups and student logins with the unexpectedly large number of students.

So off the groups went. I went 'embedded' in a car with one group. We turned up at the first address listed on the device, with 30A as the house number. But the number wasn't to be found, and the house the GPS was pointing to said 28. All the groups were then trying to figure out where 30A was (it was indeed meant to be no 28). Apparently this was due to variations in official records of house numbers supplied by staff to our team. The lesson here is that, although our team had tested locations' GPS tracking the week before, we had not done such real-life testing of locations together with the Building Design staff. This would have picked up the discrepancy.

Then the system abruptly decided to stop working - our PushLMS server had crashed. Students were wandering around the street trying to get the GPS to generate the multiple choice options. A few frantic phone calls to base and we decided to herd everyone back to the campus while the team tried to solve the problem (which ended up being server overloading as two or three students per group had tried to access the system). The lesson: we need to do more server load testing. Although we had tested for 3-4 devices at once, we were not prepared for such a big group, and especially not for multiple students logging in with their own devices too.

Once back at campus, the students took a break while the team got the server up again. We prepared a hard copy version of the questions just in case (which really we should have done in advance as a Plan B). Once up, the team decided to release groups to the site one at a time in a staggered manner to not overload the server. This worked, but lengthened the time to undertake the activity and also meant that some groups were waiting for quite a while before they were able to do the activity.

So off I went again, this time with the first group to go. Here's what I observed 'on the road':

- the activity basically worked very well. Students were actively discussing building styles and referring to the text book as they parked near each building to get the list of question options on their device.

- it took longer than expected. The group I was with took over 90 minutes to do 12 of the 20 questions (until one stuent had to leave to pick up her child)

- there was some confusion about directions on how to get to the next site. Ideally we should have included a paper map with sites marked rather then relying on Google Maps on students' mobiles.

- there appeared to be some glitches in our system such as (in our group's case) the correct answer appearing on the top of the list for most questions. Also one or two questions seemed wrong or impossible to answer (again, which a joint staff-tech test would have uncovered), which threw the students somewhat. A student also suggested that an 'undo' button and ability to go back to check addresses would have been useful.

- students were unsure and anxious about whether or not they were being assessed on their responses to the questions (this was also compounded by the glitches listed above). It seems this was maybe not made clear to them in advance. Apparently attendance was compulsory to pass, but beyond that nobody seemed to know what was or wasn't being assessed.

- at least two students using their own phones ran out of power during the exercise


The big lesson

The big lesson, though, appears to be our assumption of the centrality of mobiles and GPS to this activity. Students pointed out that perhaps a list of sites and questions on paper plus a photocopied Melways map would have worked just as well, and maybe better (ability to plan, no crashes etc). This is strangely ironic because it was the mobile capability of PushLMS that led to this activity being devised in the first place!

Our assumption had been that the GPS-generated questions and the 'treasure hunt' element (not knowing in advance where the next site would be) would be engaging for students. Indeed, they may have been, given their enthusiasm at the outset and their keenness to play with the GPS capability of the system (its reading of distance in metres from sites). But although (being a thankfully good-natured group) they seemed to still retain their enthusiasm after the initial server crash and the waiting around, it is possible to see how anticipation can easily lead to disengagement if the technology isn't working as it should. Most of the 10 or so students I spoke to afterwards suggested that paper would have been easier and better.

Which makes the entire mobile-GPS proposition possibly redundant, even though the activity was praised by all students as worthwhile for their learning. In retrospect this seems quite obvious. But that's looking back, in keeping with what Fisschoff (1975) calls ‘creeping determinism’; the sense that solutions can seem obvious or even inevitable in retrospect, summarised by Malcolm Gladwell (2003) as “What is clear in hindsight is rarely clear before the fact.”

So. we've learned a lot today, including:

- don't get seduced by the technology. Sometimes simpler options will do the job as well or better (we usually know that, but it got us this time!) In this case, there was no time trial involved or competition, so no real benefit to using mobiles except for the gee-whizzery of having a question appear when at a location and perhaps collating results and student locations on the fly (as opposed to the library trial, which will involve holding back questions on the mobiles for a minute when previous questions are answered incorrectly)

- Apple devices read HTML5-based GPS much better. The tablets are by far the best, possibly due to their size and therefore antenna size

- our project assumption (for pragmatic resourcing reasons) about focusing on the tech stuff and letting program areas develop and supply content is blatantly wrong and doesn't work. These projects need to be developed and tested hand-in-hand with subject areas throughout the devt phase. It's very hard for VET teachers who are constantly pushed for time - projects like this are just one more extra activity to fit in. As a result (and we've found this with all the areas we've worked with) activities tend to not be fully thought through and checked carefully, despite teachers' enthusiasm and best intentions.

iPad Surprise

Yesterday Stefan surprised us with two iPad’s he managed to acquire from Victoria University for use in this project. We were incredibly grateful to be able to make use of them as we now have enough devices for tomorrow’s final test.

The devices needed SIM cards before we could test them and today Stefan came around to the office to pick up the new SIM cards with me. Within a few minutes the SIMs were activated and we were up and running. Stefan dashed off to pick up two more iPhones for tomorrows test leaving me to test our shiny new devices.

Now the team are not known for being big fans of Apple products and we didn’t think too much of the iPads at first. That was until I got them out onto the street to find out what their made of. I was instantly blow away by the lightning speed with which the device found and connected to a satellite, it was literally seconds as opposed to the minute or two we would sometimes wait for the mobiles to connect. I dismissed this performance as being a result of a hot start, Apple being the company they are was probably already tracking the device from the instant we turned it on.

I was now walking towards the first location when I received the next big shock. While the mobile devices updated the location between 10 and 30 seconds apart the iPad was updating every second! The GPS reception didn’t drop out even once and the distance remained consistent all the way to the destination. When I got there I was able to get to within a meter of the coordinates. I guess all that extra space came in handy and Apple decided to put a real GPS antenna inside the device. While I’m no more impressed by the device over all, the GPS performance was second to none, the best I have seen to date.

No Turning Back

To help prevent against cheating or accidental button pressing during the assessments we have had to disable AJAX support on the JQuery Mobile framework. This feature is designed to pre-load the next page and slide it into view with a lovely JavaScript animation. Unfortunately this caching of pages proves a hindrance when creating a quiz with an aim of preventing the user from going back after receiving the result of their answer or accidentally refreshing the page.

We wanted the user to be able resume the assessment in the event that they do accidentally press back, reload the page or the device/application crashes. While disabling AJAX was the first step towards this goal, we discovered yet another form of caching native to most modern mobile browsers which is not currently being used by their desktop counterparts. This caching means that when a user does press back rather than reloading the previous page it simply moves back to it as though they never left without running through the code or reloading scripts. Since this form of caching cannot be disabled under any of the mobile web browsers, this has meant our resuming redirection script cannot be triggered simply on page load but must also be activated by pressing a button, so while refreshing will redirect the user back to the question they were up to, if they go back they must proceed before they are redirected.

While it was a little tricky to implement and has exposed a number of shortcomings of the mobile web platform, our workarounds appear to be working well and will provide a safeguard against this form of cheating or accidental button pressing.

Multi Device Trail

Today Dale and I took the Samsung out for a tour of Williamstown. The GPS tracking was quite smooth and we didn't encounter any problems.

We soon discovered that the order the questions had been provided in did not generate a circuit track but rather had us zig zagging back and forth between Williamstown and Newport.

We were sure to enable the tracking application before we left the office but discovered upon our return that when switching between the Mobile Geo location Application and the Google Maps application, the tracking data would stop being transmitted.

We have now been left to consider the best approach for mapping, the current options include an analogue paper based map, Google Maps/Latitude or an integrated map built into the application mitigating the need to minimise the browser.

We had the distinct pleasure of demoing the application to Howard from Flexible learning who was sporting a new Motorola Android device and a lovely red sweater. In configuring his device for the journey we learned that setting your default web browser to Opera can make using the application rather difficult as Opera takes over regardless of the web browser the address was entered from. Since the Opera browser lacks support for the JQuery Mobile framework we have utilised we were unable to use his device.

Below is a screenshot of the built in tracking which helps to illustrate our adventure. The Sony Xperia demonstrated a near perfect line tracing our journey from location to location. The Motorola running Opera traced a faint line outside our office before disappearing from the game altogether. The strangest of all was the line traced by the Samsung Galaxy which continuously defaulted to an obscure point in the distance every time it lost the satellite reception signal.

We also found once again that metal roofs interfere with the GPS signal, some phone faring better than others. The Samsung’s response can be seen above. This resulted in interesting jumps in suggested distance from the location as we drew closer. The Sony had a steady decline updating every few seconds, the Samsung lagging behind and surprising us with spikes of hundreds of meters.