Here is a summary of my results. My v2 draft complete with Bronwyn's comments is on http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcxrtrqz_25gxbtp5fw if you are interested in viewing it.
Summary of Expert Review – Questionnaire and Focus Group discussion
Overall, the feedback was positive. On the whole, the results showed that the module was well designed and the content and resources engaged the learner and would enable learners to meet their objectives. There were a couple of minor hitches, for example, the Excel workbook didn’t fully maximise, therefore the second sheet tab with “model answers” wasn’t visible. Good to get this feedback at this stage so that it could be easily rectified.
The audio visual demonstration and the Excel interactive exercise were most helpful to learning, and it was felt that this design could be used for a variety of online learning topics. Self-paced learning was considered the best use of the learning module.
Improvements could be made to this learning module by providing more practice exercises, making instruction concise, simple, and very obvious.
It was recommended that video demonstrations be created with and without audio to allow easier access to those who may not have sound on their computers (eg if they’re doing the course from home)
Currently a hard copy of a Training Needs Analysis is used to recommend training for new staff during their induction training. Training Needs Analysis is only carried out on existing staff if requested by staff member or manager.
The focus group recommended that an online Training Needs Analysis be used in place of the hard copy of the needs analysis that was currently used. An online needs analysis would be more accessible and more effective than the current hard copy. This could easily be created in WimbaCreate and possibly placed on the intranet site and/or eMIT.For staff enquiring about or booking on computer courses, a short online pre-test could be made available.
Summary of MIT Staff Questionnaire
The majority of respondents 83% responded that online software training would increase their skill set related to using computer software. Although the majority (72%) were familiar with using a Learning Management System, 56% indicated they had no preference either way. This would require follow-up once they have been exposed to the Learning Management System.
As shown in Table 5, the majority of respondents (61%) showed a preference for self-paced learning. However, 56% respondents also showed a preference for blended learning. Given the difficulty these staff have in attending face to face classes during their work time, I assume that these staff would attend the blended learning courses outside of their normal work hours (some of these staff would not work regular Monday to Friday 9-5 hours).
Audio visual demonstrations and interactive exercises were considered the most helpful resource to their learning. Microsoft Office applications was most mentioned as the software course best suited to online training, although other applications were mentioned, such as portal training, and Adobe products.
Comments from respondents indicated that the majority were interested in the flexibility of self-paced learning – the ability to learn in their own time, where and when they wanted to.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Draft Result of evaluation
Please click on this link http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcxrtrqz_20g4hkkddv to see the draft results of my evaluation.
(Thanks Pradeep for bringing to my attention that I hadn't put this link in my blog. )
Bronwyn has now added her comments.
Would welcome any further comments.
Thanks,
Michelle
(Thanks Pradeep for bringing to my attention that I hadn't put this link in my blog. )
Bronwyn has now added her comments.
Would welcome any further comments.
Thanks,
Michelle
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Initial thoughts after evaluation
Findings from the Expert Review of the Sample Learning Unit
I think that the Expert Review was the most valuable feedback that I received. The experts (7) sampled the learning module and then completed an evaluation on Blackboard. They had a 15 minute break while I reviewed the results and then as a group we had further discussions to clarify and expand the ideas.
One aspect that was highlighted was that many people don't read instructions on the internet, or skim there way through. A couple of people rushed through the module and didn't even notice some of my activities, eg video demo! So instructions need to be kept to a minimum, and those instructions should be VERY obvious, brief and simple.
Another topic that was well discussed was the use of audio in the learning module. I thought I had prepared for this by adding text captions, but apparently if the computer doesn't have sound, then the video demo doesn't open at all. Although all MIT staff do have sounds on their computers, some may be accessing the learning model from home. Not sure if this issue is just an MIT issue, or maybe related to the software that they are using (they used Camtasia, I am using Captivate at present) Will have to check this out further.
I am quite keen to use audio in my learning module, as research shows that this does add to the learning experience, and caters for different learning styles. Also, 83% of those surveyed on my staff questionnaire preferred audio visual demonstrations. One option suggested was to create one video demo with sound and one without, then staff could select the appropriate medium. If any of you had any experience with this, would appreciate any feedback.
See results of the Expert Review of the Sample Learning Unit on http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=r19WdTxDb12ig_9iM7S931A
Another question that I brought to this focus group was "What method should be used to find out the training needs of the staff?
I currently use a hard copy of a Training Needs Analysis to recommend training for new staff during their induction training. Training Needs Analysis is only carried out on existing staff if requested by staff member or manager.
After much discussion it was agreed that an Online Training Needs Analysis would fit the bill. Could easily be created in Wimba Create and possibly placed in Intranet site, alongside Health & Safety online quizz (for new staff).
For staff booking on computer courses, a short pretest could be emailed to them when they register, to check that they are at the right level for this course, or to recommend another course - this could easily be done in Wimba Create.
Could also put TNA on Blackboard (staff could self-enrol).
MIT Staff Questionnaire
This questionnaire was completed by 18 staff consisting of FreeB Community Facilitators and Call Centre staff. There were no surprises here, the results were what I expected. The questionnaire was done in SurveyMonkey and I was really impressed with how easy it was to use and download results.
I used a 5 scale Likert questionnaire. On one question "I would need training in the use of an LMS (Blackboard) 10 out of 18 responded "Neutral" - not very helpful, left me wondering. On reflection I would choose a 4 level scale in future.
The preference was for self paced learning 61%, followed by blended delivery 56%. This was to be expected with the group of staff that I chose - they are from offsite locations or in roles where they not easily attend face to face training.
The resources that these staff thought would be most useful to their learning were audio visual demo's, and interactive exercises.
Results of survey taken by 18 MIT staff, consisting of FreeB Community Facilitators and Call Centre staff can be viewed on http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=rar-Fhxk14bjim7ebihrEAg.
MIT-wide survey
As part of a wider survey, 35 selected MIT staff (managers or their representatives across all departments)were asked if they had any interest in online software learning for themselves or their staff. 26 said "yes", 1 said "no", and 4 said "maybe/unsure"
Presentation of Data
I am thinking of presenting the data in graph format because I think that this visual is more effective than reading figures. They would be a combination of either bar charts or pie charts depending on the data.
All for now,
Michelle
I think that the Expert Review was the most valuable feedback that I received. The experts (7) sampled the learning module and then completed an evaluation on Blackboard. They had a 15 minute break while I reviewed the results and then as a group we had further discussions to clarify and expand the ideas.
One aspect that was highlighted was that many people don't read instructions on the internet, or skim there way through. A couple of people rushed through the module and didn't even notice some of my activities, eg video demo! So instructions need to be kept to a minimum, and those instructions should be VERY obvious, brief and simple.
Another topic that was well discussed was the use of audio in the learning module. I thought I had prepared for this by adding text captions, but apparently if the computer doesn't have sound, then the video demo doesn't open at all. Although all MIT staff do have sounds on their computers, some may be accessing the learning model from home. Not sure if this issue is just an MIT issue, or maybe related to the software that they are using (they used Camtasia, I am using Captivate at present) Will have to check this out further.
I am quite keen to use audio in my learning module, as research shows that this does add to the learning experience, and caters for different learning styles. Also, 83% of those surveyed on my staff questionnaire preferred audio visual demonstrations. One option suggested was to create one video demo with sound and one without, then staff could select the appropriate medium. If any of you had any experience with this, would appreciate any feedback.
See results of the Expert Review of the Sample Learning Unit on http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=r19WdTxDb12ig_9iM7S931A
Another question that I brought to this focus group was "What method should be used to find out the training needs of the staff?
I currently use a hard copy of a Training Needs Analysis to recommend training for new staff during their induction training. Training Needs Analysis is only carried out on existing staff if requested by staff member or manager.
After much discussion it was agreed that an Online Training Needs Analysis would fit the bill. Could easily be created in Wimba Create and possibly placed in Intranet site, alongside Health & Safety online quizz (for new staff).
For staff booking on computer courses, a short pretest could be emailed to them when they register, to check that they are at the right level for this course, or to recommend another course - this could easily be done in Wimba Create.
Could also put TNA on Blackboard (staff could self-enrol).
MIT Staff Questionnaire
This questionnaire was completed by 18 staff consisting of FreeB Community Facilitators and Call Centre staff. There were no surprises here, the results were what I expected. The questionnaire was done in SurveyMonkey and I was really impressed with how easy it was to use and download results.
I used a 5 scale Likert questionnaire. On one question "I would need training in the use of an LMS (Blackboard) 10 out of 18 responded "Neutral" - not very helpful, left me wondering. On reflection I would choose a 4 level scale in future.
The preference was for self paced learning 61%, followed by blended delivery 56%. This was to be expected with the group of staff that I chose - they are from offsite locations or in roles where they not easily attend face to face training.
The resources that these staff thought would be most useful to their learning were audio visual demo's, and interactive exercises.
Results of survey taken by 18 MIT staff, consisting of FreeB Community Facilitators and Call Centre staff can be viewed on http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=rar-Fhxk14bjim7ebihrEAg.
MIT-wide survey
As part of a wider survey, 35 selected MIT staff (managers or their representatives across all departments)were asked if they had any interest in online software learning for themselves or their staff. 26 said "yes", 1 said "no", and 4 said "maybe/unsure"
Presentation of Data
I am thinking of presenting the data in graph format because I think that this visual is more effective than reading figures. They would be a combination of either bar charts or pie charts depending on the data.
All for now,
Michelle
Monday, June 1, 2009
Final evaluation plan submitted
My final evaluation plan can be viewedon http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcxrtrqz_3c5cm8ff6 . This has been submitted for marking.
I have incorporated the feedback received from Bronwyn on my questionnaires, and also the feedback received from Krishan to include FreeB community facilitators, who are less able to access the face to face training that is provided for staff because of their offsite locations.
Michelle
I have incorporated the feedback received from Bronwyn on my questionnaires, and also the feedback received from Krishan to include FreeB community facilitators, who are less able to access the face to face training that is provided for staff because of their offsite locations.
Michelle
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Draft of Evaluation Plan v2
Hi everyone
V2 of my draft evaluation plan is now on google docs http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcxrtrqz_2gbxxwchq . Have discussed my first draft with Bronwyn and made amendments, but the questionnaires are new. So keen to have feedback on them, and any other general feedback.
thanks, and now will be able to get around to giving you feedback on your drafts.
bye for now
Michelle
V2 of my draft evaluation plan is now on google docs http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcxrtrqz_2gbxxwchq . Have discussed my first draft with Bronwyn and made amendments, but the questionnaires are new. So keen to have feedback on them, and any other general feedback.
thanks, and now will be able to get around to giving you feedback on your drafts.
bye for now
Michelle
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Weeks 7 and 8 - Draft of evaluation plan
Hi there,
Here is a draft of my evaluation plan. Would appreciate any feedback or suggestions.
Draft of evaluation plan
Introduction
This document describes the evaluation plan of a planned online software training course for staff at Manukau Institute of Technology (MIT). Software courses taught may include Microsoft Office applications, eg Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, Publisher, Visio, and some MIT web-based applications, eg the portal, the intranet site, etc. It will be developed mainly by the Staff Computer Trainer, who is working in conjunction with the Manager of MIT Short Courses. Together they are looking at developing online software training, the MIT Software Trainer for the staff at MIT, and the Manager of MIT Short Courses for industry training. The evaluation, which is a Needs Analysis, will be conducted in May 2009. This evaluation is concerned with the online training for MIT staff.
The Needs Analysis is based on the Eclectic-Mixed Methods-Pragmatic Paradigm, using the Mixed Methods Evaluation Model.
Background
The MIT Staff Software trainer currently runs face to face courses and one on one training on Microsoft Office applications and some MIT web-based applications. She believes that there is a need for online training to cater for those learners who:
· Cannot attend face to face courses due to timetabling constrictions;
· Prefer self-paced learning;
· Possibly to provide blended learning to complement the face to face training.
Purpose:
The purpose of this Needs Analysis is to obtain accurate information that confirms that there is, in fact, a need for this type of elearning, and to optimise the design and delivery of the course by establishing the needs of the learners in terms of content and learning styles – leading to the types of activities that will engage them.
Limitations:
One limitation could be the time involved in carrying out this evaluation, on top of normal (already heavy) workload.
Audiences
The Needs Analysis will be carried out on a cross-section of MIT staff. Experts will also be involved in the evaluation process, including the Manager – MIT Computer Short Courses; the Learning Technology Centre Manager; the Learning Technology Centre Advisor, the Software Support Manager.
Decisions:
I cannot foresee any negative outcome of this evaluation. From informal questioning, there does appear to be an interest in this elearning course, and I expect this evaluation to confirm that, and also to give constructive feedback as to the content and design of the course.
Questions:
These questions have been taken from the Elearning Guidelines for New Zealand:
SD2: Do students have any choice in terms of what they learn, the particular resources they will study and/or the learning activities they will engage in?
i. How will students like to use this elearning course? eg self-paced learning, blended delivery,
ii. What resources will best engage the learner, whilst providing for maximum learning outcomes eg audio visual demonstrations, text-based instructions, interactive activities, formative and/or summative assessments (online tests)?
iii. Which software training courses will best be suited to online training?
iv. How will I monitor what is working well and what isn’t (related to the design of the modules)?
ST1: Do you have a way to identify student needs and respond to them?
i. Are the staff at MIT interested in online software training?
ii. Of those that are interested in online software training, are they familiar with Emit (Blackboard). If yes, do they like using Blackboard; if no, how will training on the use of Blackboard be provided?
iii. What is an effective method(s) for receiving constructive feedback from the learners on their needs, eg what further online training they would like?
iv. What systems will be used to ensure that the learner is learning at an appropriate level, and relevant to the needs of their role?
Methods:
I will be using the Multiple Methods Evaluation model, which will allow me to use different methods of evaluating individual aspects (triangulation) and evaluates a range of factors within each aspect (bracketing). This method is well suited to the complexity of instructional design. (here I will insert a table which demonstrates the relationships between the Questions, and the methods used to evaluate them)
Sample:
The participants involved in this evaluation will be:
· A random selection of MIT staff (volunteers)
· Manager, Learning Technology Centre, and Learning Advisor, Learning Technology Centre
· My manager – Software Support User Manager
· Manager, MIT Computer Short Courses
· Other MIT lecturers and trainers with an interest in eLearning
Instrumentation
· A sample learning module to be prepared on Emit for testing by focus group
· A usability questionnaire to be prepared for staff who are involved in the focus group and testing of the learning module, in order to evaluate the design of the module, and what resources/activities best hold the learners focus and meet learning outcomes.
· A questionnaire to be prepared for MIT staff
Logistics:
I will be responsible for the implementation, analysis and reporting of the evaluation
Time Line
Implementation – 1 week
Analysis – 1 week
Reporting – 1 day
Budget
Captivate software for creating audio visual demonstrations - $200
My time
Appendices
A. Information sheet for participant (yet to be created)
B. Questionnaire - Usability of learning module (yet to be created)
C. Questionnaire – general questionnaire on the viability of online learning for software training (yet to be created
Here is a draft of my evaluation plan. Would appreciate any feedback or suggestions.
Draft of evaluation plan
Introduction
This document describes the evaluation plan of a planned online software training course for staff at Manukau Institute of Technology (MIT). Software courses taught may include Microsoft Office applications, eg Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, Publisher, Visio, and some MIT web-based applications, eg the portal, the intranet site, etc. It will be developed mainly by the Staff Computer Trainer, who is working in conjunction with the Manager of MIT Short Courses. Together they are looking at developing online software training, the MIT Software Trainer for the staff at MIT, and the Manager of MIT Short Courses for industry training. The evaluation, which is a Needs Analysis, will be conducted in May 2009. This evaluation is concerned with the online training for MIT staff.
The Needs Analysis is based on the Eclectic-Mixed Methods-Pragmatic Paradigm, using the Mixed Methods Evaluation Model.
Background
The MIT Staff Software trainer currently runs face to face courses and one on one training on Microsoft Office applications and some MIT web-based applications. She believes that there is a need for online training to cater for those learners who:
· Cannot attend face to face courses due to timetabling constrictions;
· Prefer self-paced learning;
· Possibly to provide blended learning to complement the face to face training.
Purpose:
The purpose of this Needs Analysis is to obtain accurate information that confirms that there is, in fact, a need for this type of elearning, and to optimise the design and delivery of the course by establishing the needs of the learners in terms of content and learning styles – leading to the types of activities that will engage them.
Limitations:
One limitation could be the time involved in carrying out this evaluation, on top of normal (already heavy) workload.
Audiences
The Needs Analysis will be carried out on a cross-section of MIT staff. Experts will also be involved in the evaluation process, including the Manager – MIT Computer Short Courses; the Learning Technology Centre Manager; the Learning Technology Centre Advisor, the Software Support Manager.
Decisions:
I cannot foresee any negative outcome of this evaluation. From informal questioning, there does appear to be an interest in this elearning course, and I expect this evaluation to confirm that, and also to give constructive feedback as to the content and design of the course.
Questions:
These questions have been taken from the Elearning Guidelines for New Zealand:
SD2: Do students have any choice in terms of what they learn, the particular resources they will study and/or the learning activities they will engage in?
i. How will students like to use this elearning course? eg self-paced learning, blended delivery,
ii. What resources will best engage the learner, whilst providing for maximum learning outcomes eg audio visual demonstrations, text-based instructions, interactive activities, formative and/or summative assessments (online tests)?
iii. Which software training courses will best be suited to online training?
iv. How will I monitor what is working well and what isn’t (related to the design of the modules)?
ST1: Do you have a way to identify student needs and respond to them?
i. Are the staff at MIT interested in online software training?
ii. Of those that are interested in online software training, are they familiar with Emit (Blackboard). If yes, do they like using Blackboard; if no, how will training on the use of Blackboard be provided?
iii. What is an effective method(s) for receiving constructive feedback from the learners on their needs, eg what further online training they would like?
iv. What systems will be used to ensure that the learner is learning at an appropriate level, and relevant to the needs of their role?
Methods:
I will be using the Multiple Methods Evaluation model, which will allow me to use different methods of evaluating individual aspects (triangulation) and evaluates a range of factors within each aspect (bracketing). This method is well suited to the complexity of instructional design. (here I will insert a table which demonstrates the relationships between the Questions, and the methods used to evaluate them)
Sample:
The participants involved in this evaluation will be:
· A random selection of MIT staff (volunteers)
· Manager, Learning Technology Centre, and Learning Advisor, Learning Technology Centre
· My manager – Software Support User Manager
· Manager, MIT Computer Short Courses
· Other MIT lecturers and trainers with an interest in eLearning
Instrumentation
· A sample learning module to be prepared on Emit for testing by focus group
· A usability questionnaire to be prepared for staff who are involved in the focus group and testing of the learning module, in order to evaluate the design of the module, and what resources/activities best hold the learners focus and meet learning outcomes.
· A questionnaire to be prepared for MIT staff
Logistics:
I will be responsible for the implementation, analysis and reporting of the evaluation
Time Line
Implementation – 1 week
Analysis – 1 week
Reporting – 1 day
Budget
Captivate software for creating audio visual demonstrations - $200
My time
Appendices
A. Information sheet for participant (yet to be created)
B. Questionnaire - Usability of learning module (yet to be created)
C. Questionnaire – general questionnaire on the viability of online learning for software training (yet to be created
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Week 7 thoughts
Adrienne Moyle's comment on my Week 5 and 6 post gave me some ideas about setting up a discussion forum for my learners to gather feedback on their experiences of the course. This could be an ongoing forum - some of the feedback given may just be user training issues, which I could respond to online, and other suggestions may be design issues that I could consider and implement if appropriate. Thanks for that Adrienne.
Have just spent time going through my "list of things to do" for Weeks 7 and 8. As a result, I have revisited the eLearning Guidelines and have decided t0 change one of the guidelines that I had selected. The one that I have chosen instead of SD3, is:
SD2: Do students have any choice in terms of what they learn, the particular resources they will study and/or the learning activities they will engage in?
From this guideline, I hope to establish from my learners their needs in terms of content and learning styles - leading to the types of activities that will engage them.
Have retained ST1 guideline:
ST1: Do you have a way to identify student needs and respond to them?
The Needs Analysis will hopefully confirm that providing online software training for the staff at MIT will improve the options for learning (catering for different learning styles) and meet the needs of the learners. What I want to establish here is that there is a need for an online learning course for software training within the MIT staff.
Thanks Bronwyn for highlighting your feedback on Catherine's blog. This was very useful, and I will work on my sub-guidelines shortly.
Found the example of the evaluation plan , and also the evaluation tools very useful. Was unable to access theEvaluation Cookbook, but will try again tomorrow.
So working on my draft plan next - any feedback would be appreciated.
Have just spent time going through my "list of things to do" for Weeks 7 and 8. As a result, I have revisited the eLearning Guidelines and have decided t0 change one of the guidelines that I had selected. The one that I have chosen instead of SD3, is:
SD2: Do students have any choice in terms of what they learn, the particular resources they will study and/or the learning activities they will engage in?
From this guideline, I hope to establish from my learners their needs in terms of content and learning styles - leading to the types of activities that will engage them.
Have retained ST1 guideline:
ST1: Do you have a way to identify student needs and respond to them?
The Needs Analysis will hopefully confirm that providing online software training for the staff at MIT will improve the options for learning (catering for different learning styles) and meet the needs of the learners. What I want to establish here is that there is a need for an online learning course for software training within the MIT staff.
Thanks Bronwyn for highlighting your feedback on Catherine's blog. This was very useful, and I will work on my sub-guidelines shortly.
Found the example of the evaluation plan , and also the evaluation tools very useful. Was unable to access theEvaluation Cookbook, but will try again tomorrow.
So working on my draft plan next - any feedback would be appreciated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
