I am preparing for the negotiation of my evaluation plan with Bronwyn. I have been avidly reading other posts and some of the feedback and comments being posted. I have revisited my own evaluation plan so that I can form a better question.
The question I have now formed is "How can an existing hotel management paper be re-developed using elearning methods which will best meet the needs of the target audience and lecturers?"
The outcome of the evaluation plan should give me clarity of the chosen elearning guidelines. At this stage, further to Bronwyn's comments on other blogs, I now need to have a set of sub questions.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Week 7 - Negotiate evaluation plan
Time to put back on my learning hat after a very busy Easter with family from overseas! and the past couple of days attending a two day conference for all staff at Otago Polytechnic. (Bronwyn was the conference organiser!) There were four strands to the conference: Teaching and Learning, Effective use of Technology, Self Care and Sustainability with a wide range of key note speakers, panel discussions, workshops, lectures and other hands-on activities. I have come away reflecting on many aspects of my own teaching and learning. I have learnt new skills, especially through attending a workshop on Camtasia, I am very keen to put this new found skill into practice. Maybe even for my presentation later in this paper – watch this space.
I have reflected on my last blog where I considered my evaluation plan. Here is a little more detail of where I see my project heading.
Area of teaching: I am currently involved in teaching on the Bachelor of Applied management degree in the area of Hotel Management at both second and third year level. These papers are currently only available face to face; however, there is a strong mandate for papers to be more ‘flexible’ in their delivery, whether this is fully on-line or some form of ‘blended’ delivery.
Purpose of evaluation plan: A needs assessment will be carried out to establish suitable eLearning options when teaching hotel management. I have revisited the eLearning guidelines, which are a wonderful tool and revised my chosen guidelines to: TD1 - Is the use of e-learning appropriate to the intended learning outcome?
TO10 - Is good elearning practice available to staff in a way they can adopt and adapt in their own work?
Framework: The evaluation plan will be based on a needs assessment which Rossett (1995, as cited in Reeves & Hedberg, 2003) explains is a way to gather information to assist professionals in making recommendations about how to solve a problem or introduce new technology. By carrying out a needs assessment it will enable the research to evaluate the viability of the project and explore a variety of possibilities. As part of this evaluation, I will make use of the evaluation framework, called the 'eclectic-mixed methods-pragmatic paradigm' (EMMPP) as it will allow for a more flexible approach to the research. This framework also recongnises that multiple perspectives are necessary to “triangulate information and conclusions regarding complex phenomena” (Reeves & Hedberg, 2003, p. 35)
Data Collection:
By choosing the EMMPP it will allow for a wider scope of data collection. The first method will be to review the organisations strategic information on flexible and elearning as this will form a good basis of my research and will give direction for my interview questions. Secondly, I will interview two experts within the organisation. Thirdly, it is important to have information from the students; however, due to time limitations for this particular project, I will only carry out the first two at this stage of the project.
I now look forward to negotiating this plan with Bronwyn, when we catch up next week. I also welcome comments from others.
Reference
Reeves, T. C., & Hedberg, J. C. (2003). Interactive Learning Systems Evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
I have reflected on my last blog where I considered my evaluation plan. Here is a little more detail of where I see my project heading.
Area of teaching: I am currently involved in teaching on the Bachelor of Applied management degree in the area of Hotel Management at both second and third year level. These papers are currently only available face to face; however, there is a strong mandate for papers to be more ‘flexible’ in their delivery, whether this is fully on-line or some form of ‘blended’ delivery.
Purpose of evaluation plan: A needs assessment will be carried out to establish suitable eLearning options when teaching hotel management. I have revisited the eLearning guidelines, which are a wonderful tool and revised my chosen guidelines to: TD1 - Is the use of e-learning appropriate to the intended learning outcome?
TO10 - Is good elearning practice available to staff in a way they can adopt and adapt in their own work?
Framework: The evaluation plan will be based on a needs assessment which Rossett (1995, as cited in Reeves & Hedberg, 2003) explains is a way to gather information to assist professionals in making recommendations about how to solve a problem or introduce new technology. By carrying out a needs assessment it will enable the research to evaluate the viability of the project and explore a variety of possibilities. As part of this evaluation, I will make use of the evaluation framework, called the 'eclectic-mixed methods-pragmatic paradigm' (EMMPP) as it will allow for a more flexible approach to the research. This framework also recongnises that multiple perspectives are necessary to “triangulate information and conclusions regarding complex phenomena” (Reeves & Hedberg, 2003, p. 35)
Data Collection:
By choosing the EMMPP it will allow for a wider scope of data collection. The first method will be to review the organisations strategic information on flexible and elearning as this will form a good basis of my research and will give direction for my interview questions. Secondly, I will interview two experts within the organisation. Thirdly, it is important to have information from the students; however, due to time limitations for this particular project, I will only carry out the first two at this stage of the project.
I now look forward to negotiating this plan with Bronwyn, when we catch up next week. I also welcome comments from others.
Reference
Reeves, T. C., & Hedberg, J. C. (2003). Interactive Learning Systems Evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Weeks 5 & 6
Over these two weeks we have been asked to look at different evaluation models, presented by Professor Tom Reeves. As I only teach F2F I have been struggling with the getting my head around the whole evaluation concept. After last nights class meeting, I think things have suddenly become clearer and I can see a way forward, great when everything starts to click.
The outline of my project is that I will carry out a needs assessment (or needs analysis, front end analysis) on a third year paper I teach as part of the Hotel major of the Bachelor of Applied Management degree. As lecturers, we have been asked to consider delivering these Level 7 papers more 'flexibly', however, that does not mean at this stage that they have to be totally online. Students at present can access powerpoint slides, readings and link via Blackboard.
The first stage and way of introduction and background to the project will be a review of some of the information that we have been given as lecturers, this will form the basis to conduct a needs assessment, which will evaluate the viability of putting the course online, the opportunity to engage with students in what they want and also discuss with experts in the field on eLearning.
I have suggested in my previous post that I will use the eclectic-mixed methods pragmatic approach and I still believe that it will work well in this context.
I have revisited the eLearning guidelines, which are a wonderful tool and revised my chosen guidelines to:
TD1 - Is the use of e-learning appropriate to the intended learning outcome? - this will be crucial to answer to ensure that the proposed eLearning fits with the learning outcomes of the paper.
ST1 - Do you have a way to identify needs and respond to them - if I am to move towards more a more flexible delivery approach, I want a better understanding from the outset of what students would like from this type of delivery, I believe that it is crucial to ensure connectivity between the students, their learning and lecturer.
Although, limited to only two guidelines, I would also like to consider the following guideline:
TO10 - Is good elearning practice available to staff in a way they can adopt and adapt in their own work? - in some ways, that is the reason that I have enrolled onto to this course, as I want to learn and understand some of the issues with elearning.
I have also started to consider the adoption of multiple methods evaluation (Mark and Shortland, 1987 as cited in Reeves & Hedberg, 2003) as an appropriate model, I believe that this will ensure that the final product will work well and through surveys (or focus groups - undecided after last nights discussion what will work best and considering the credibility of student answers ) of students, interviews with an elearning expert (and maybe further discussion with staff outside of my school area) and review of strategic plan documentation. This triangulation should give a reasonable indication and support for the outcomes and success of adopting flexible options to a F2F course.
I am still trying to find/digest some articles that fit with my project, so will post that part when I have that information. I welcome your comments and feedback.
Reference
Reeves, T. C., & Hedberg, J. C. (2003). Interactive Learning Systems Evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
The outline of my project is that I will carry out a needs assessment (or needs analysis, front end analysis) on a third year paper I teach as part of the Hotel major of the Bachelor of Applied Management degree. As lecturers, we have been asked to consider delivering these Level 7 papers more 'flexibly', however, that does not mean at this stage that they have to be totally online. Students at present can access powerpoint slides, readings and link via Blackboard.
The first stage and way of introduction and background to the project will be a review of some of the information that we have been given as lecturers, this will form the basis to conduct a needs assessment, which will evaluate the viability of putting the course online, the opportunity to engage with students in what they want and also discuss with experts in the field on eLearning.
I have suggested in my previous post that I will use the eclectic-mixed methods pragmatic approach and I still believe that it will work well in this context.
I have revisited the eLearning guidelines, which are a wonderful tool and revised my chosen guidelines to:
TD1 - Is the use of e-learning appropriate to the intended learning outcome? - this will be crucial to answer to ensure that the proposed eLearning fits with the learning outcomes of the paper.
ST1 - Do you have a way to identify needs and respond to them - if I am to move towards more a more flexible delivery approach, I want a better understanding from the outset of what students would like from this type of delivery, I believe that it is crucial to ensure connectivity between the students, their learning and lecturer.
Although, limited to only two guidelines, I would also like to consider the following guideline:
TO10 - Is good elearning practice available to staff in a way they can adopt and adapt in their own work? - in some ways, that is the reason that I have enrolled onto to this course, as I want to learn and understand some of the issues with elearning.
I have also started to consider the adoption of multiple methods evaluation (Mark and Shortland, 1987 as cited in Reeves & Hedberg, 2003) as an appropriate model, I believe that this will ensure that the final product will work well and through surveys (or focus groups - undecided after last nights discussion what will work best and considering the credibility of student answers ) of students, interviews with an elearning expert (and maybe further discussion with staff outside of my school area) and review of strategic plan documentation. This triangulation should give a reasonable indication and support for the outcomes and success of adopting flexible options to a F2F course.
I am still trying to find/digest some articles that fit with my project, so will post that part when I have that information. I welcome your comments and feedback.
Reference
Reeves, T. C., & Hedberg, J. C. (2003). Interactive Learning Systems Evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)