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
Thursday, July 2, 2009
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.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Weeks five and six: Evaluation methods
To recap, as I do not have an online course at present, I will be conducting a Needs Analysis to evaluate the idea of creating online software training for the staff at MIT, ie Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint and other web-based programmes that we use at MIT. I intend using Blackboard, as this is the learning platform used at MIT. I want to ensure that the learning modules that are developed do meet the needs of our learners, and this will be a big part of the Needs Analysis, finding out from the learners, what their needs are - how they best learn. From informal discussions that I have had with staff, it appears that there is definite interest and different users would use this in different ways. So my initial thoughts are to provide for different needs and learning styles by providing a variety of learning strategies. But let's not jump the gun.... hopefully the Needs Analysis will confirm my thinking.
As noted in my prior post, have decided to use the Multiple Methods Evaluation model (triangulation and bracketing), which will give me the flexibility and variety to be able to evaluate the many different aspects and also the diverse needs of the learners (Hogarty, 2008).
The paradigm that seems to fit well with this evaluation model and eLearning, is the Eclectic-Mixed Methods-Pragmatic Paradigm discussed in Reeves' Educational Paradigms article (1996).
The Guidelines that I have chosen to work with in this evaluation project are:
SD3 From Guidelines Wiki
Do students gain knowledge relevant to employment and/or current thinking in their field?What I want to evaluate here, is that my learners (the staff at MIT) have an appropriate computing skill set to be able to carry out their job effectively.
ST1 From GuidelinesWiki
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 opportunities for learning and meet the needs of the learners.
Have been reading Chapter 6 "Conducting a Needs Analysis" from Interactive Learning Systems - Reeves, Thomas & Heldberg (2003). Reeves et al says "The overall purpose of needs assessment is to provide information to guide decisions about aligning an interactive learning system with important needs of specific audiences". This seems to fit well with what I am trying to achieve.
Of particular interest was a "Checklist for Evaluating an Elearning Program or Courseware" which looks at the Content and the Instructional Design of the course. This will be a useful guide when I am looking at developing elearning modules.
Kaufman, Rojas & Mayer (1993) state that "The bottom line of the value of needs assessment is that it should provide the data needed to support the next level of design decisions so that the project moves forward to prototyping and formative evaluation activities". Sounds good to me!
Kaufman, R.A., Rojas, A.M., & Mayer (1993). Needs Assessment: A user's guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Reeves, T. & Hedberg, J. (2003). Interactive Learning Systems Evaluation. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey
As noted in my prior post, have decided to use the Multiple Methods Evaluation model (triangulation and bracketing), which will give me the flexibility and variety to be able to evaluate the many different aspects and also the diverse needs of the learners (Hogarty, 2008).
The paradigm that seems to fit well with this evaluation model and eLearning, is the Eclectic-Mixed Methods-Pragmatic Paradigm discussed in Reeves' Educational Paradigms article (1996).
The Guidelines that I have chosen to work with in this evaluation project are:
SD3 From Guidelines Wiki
Do students gain knowledge relevant to employment and/or current thinking in their field?What I want to evaluate here, is that my learners (the staff at MIT) have an appropriate computing skill set to be able to carry out their job effectively.
ST1 From GuidelinesWiki
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 opportunities for learning and meet the needs of the learners.
Have been reading Chapter 6 "Conducting a Needs Analysis" from Interactive Learning Systems - Reeves, Thomas & Heldberg (2003). Reeves et al says "The overall purpose of needs assessment is to provide information to guide decisions about aligning an interactive learning system with important needs of specific audiences". This seems to fit well with what I am trying to achieve.
Of particular interest was a "Checklist for Evaluating an Elearning Program or Courseware" which looks at the Content and the Instructional Design of the course. This will be a useful guide when I am looking at developing elearning modules.
Kaufman, Rojas & Mayer (1993) state that "The bottom line of the value of needs assessment is that it should provide the data needed to support the next level of design decisions so that the project moves forward to prototyping and formative evaluation activities". Sounds good to me!
The types of evaluation I intend to use are:
- Interviews
- Questionnaires
- Focus groups
- Checklists
References:
Hegarty, Bronwyn (2008), Types of Evaluation Models, downloaded from http://wikieducator.org/images/b/b6/Types_of_Evaluation_Models08.pdf
Kaufman, R.A., Rojas, A.M., & Mayer (1993). Needs Assessment: A user's guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Reeves, T. & Hedberg, J. (2003). Interactive Learning Systems Evaluation. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
