The problems of documenting computer based instruction are surveyed. The need for two levels of documentation is outlined; one level which is concise and designed primarily to catalogue available courseware and a second level which is detailed and intended for the instructors, proctors, programmers, and operators who will work with the courseware. Three general approaches to producing documentation are considered: manual procedures, self-documenting systems, and post-hoc analysis of programs. The importance of documentation to the development of CBI is discussed.Considerable emphasis is now being placed on software documentation in the EDP community. As computers begin to become fundamental components of our educational system, we can expect to see a similar ware. Many of the concerns which apply to the documentation of computer software in general also apply to CBI programs. However, there are a number of important differences. One difference involves the documentation of user (student) activity in terms of learning outcomes or examination results. Non-instructional software is seldom concerned with keeping records about the user to the extent expected of instructional programs. Sophisticated CBI programs can involve a considerable amount of graphic displays, formatted text, special character sets, and varied response modes, as well as involving the synchronization of computer-controlled audio, slide, or video devices. Finally, instructional strategies and logics for the individualization of instruction require description which extends beyond that of the usual algorithms or methods embodied in non-instructional programs. For these reasons alone, the documentation of CBI materials poses a number of unique problems for the documentation of computer software.There are many reasons why documentation is absolutely critical to the field of CBI. The development of CBI courseware is an expensive and time consuming endeavor typically involving 50--100 hours of design and programming time for every hour of instruction delivered. Clearly, this development effort can be justified if courseware can be shared by many students at different institutions. Documentation of courseware is essential to ensure that such transfer of courseware is possible and successful. Documentation is also necessary to prevent the duplication of similar or identical courseware.Not only is documentation necessary to permit the successful transfer of courseware, it is also essential to the maintenance of a CBI project. Given the realities of changing instructors, programmers, and even computer systems, a CBI project depends upon adequate documentation for ongoing continuity and stability. Furthermore, documentation of student activity is necessary for the evaluation of the instructional effectiveness of the courseware. Thus, if CBI is to fulfill its potential as a sophisticated instructionaldesign methodology, the documentation must indicate exactly how wellthe courseware works and exactly where improvement is needed. Thedocumentation of instructional effectiveness is closely related to, but distinct from, the issue of student performance records.Insofar as documentation is important to the transfer and dissemination of CBI courseware, to the ongoing operation of CBI projects, and to the improvement of the instructional effectiveness ofCBI courseware, it seems necessary to conclude that the eventual success or failure of CBI as an educational methodology may dependin no small way on the success of the documentation of CBI programs. This article discusses the major components of the documentation problem: what is to be documented and how this documentation is to be produced.

/lp/association-for-computing-machinery/documentation-in-computer-based-instruction-9kSy1TYv1r