Mentioned in all the posts before, there are three levels of interactivity: object, linear and hierarchal. These levels describe the amount of interaction one person has with a system. “Interaction is intrinsic to successful, effective instructional practice as well as individual discovery” (Sims, 1997) As Rod Sims mentions here, interactivity can be seen as an art because it requires skills which include an understanding the learner, and the appreciation of the engineers who created the software.
According to Crawford, (1990:104) he argues that “a good program establishes an interaction circuit through which the user and computer are apparently in continuous communication.” It is this dialogue that we strive to pursue, almost like circuit of understanding. An example of this is from 1994, when the Australian Government provided 84 million dollars to invest in multimedia CD projects. There were certain guidelines to be met in order to enhance the users engagement. These products were to incorporate a “level of interactivity … sufficiently complex to provide for the use of the title in a variety of contexts. Interactivity being taken to mean objectives in using the title, the users’ active participation in navigation and opportunities provided for creative involvement” (Department of Communication and the Arts, 1995:3). This expectation of interactivity must involve navigational components as well as a high form of user engagement.