Youenn Leborgne's Library tagged evaluation →  View Popular

Notions:
e-learning, evaluation, framework, reaction, learning, performance

Kirpatrick's four-level evaluation framework:
1. Reaction level: what participants think of the training
2. Learning level: what participants have learned
3. Performance level: to what extent the participants change their behaviour on the job
4. Organization level: monitors the organisational improvement

The evaluation requires a clear plan describing the goal, the object and the criteria
It's also important to specify the evaluation goal, design and arrangements (management and organisational issues)

** A very detailed example is used **

In addition to a detailed elaboration of the framework, it's advisable to take into account general aspects such as authenticity, exploration, scale, time requirements, objectivity required and focus

The approach proposed by Kirpatrick is partial and has to be revised conceptually to be applicable, particularly in e-learning environments today:
- the main problem with the evaluation of satisfaction is the atheoretical approach
- the effect of a course on learning cannot be measured by a simple test just after completion of the course but should be measured in an authentic situation
- it is very difficult to measure the transfer of learning on work behaviours
- the same applies to the measure of the impact on organisations (in terms of results, etc.)

Because a four-level evaluation is quite demanding, it's not wise to perform one for every learning event but only for the implementation of a new media or course type (otherwise, the cost of the evaluation may exceed that of the e-learning initiative itself).
As a minimum, the authors recommend performing an evaluation at the reaction level every time the e-learning event takes place.
Finally, evaluation has to be based on a well-considered theoretical model

www.elearning-reviews.org/...3-jochems-integrated-elearning - Preview

e-learning ECDEL_MSc evaluation research feedback design

Notions:
evaluation, course feedback, research methods, colleagues, students, external, peer

Looks at broadly based approaches that can be tailored to specific contexts and needs

Kinds of feedback which are sought depends on both motives and focus
These considerations are influential in determining not only *how* and *from whom* feedback is to be sought be also *when* it is to be elicited - a dimension that's often overlooked

Sources of feedback, each of which has its strengths and weaknesses:
- students
- teaching colleagues and professional peers
- self-generated
- incidental

The more sources feedback draws on, the more robust

It's also important to consider the methods of feedback (see also Hounsell et al 1997)

Questionnaires are very useful but can generate 'fatigue' and happily, there are alternative approaches, including 'instant' questionnaires, 'one-minute' papers, proformas, focus groups, student panels, structured group discussions, discussion boards.

Techniques used for gathering feedback from colleagues can be adapted for self-generated feedback

Teachers are in a unique position to analyse data gathered but equally crucial is the need to acknowledge that it can benefit from the involvement of others

In many situations, there is no ideal or obvious response to feedback, but rather, an array of options from which a choice has to be made. Sometimes, we may benefit:
- consulting with colleagues because of resource implications
- further probing to pinpoint more precisely the nature of concerns expressed
- getting students' views on the various options under considerations

www.routledgeeducation.com/...er-Education-isbn9780415434645 - Preview

e-learning ECDEL_MSc evaluation research peer feedback design

Notions:
evaluation, course feedback, research methods, colleagues, students, external, peer

** A must read **

Draw from several sources and methods (so as to avoid 'questionnaire fatigue' for example) of feedback, depending on its aim, focus, constraints, etc.

1. Course team colleagues:

- course team interaction
- previewing

2. Students

** Many forms of feedback collection are examined and examples of such tools are given **

- structured discussion
- the pyramid approach
- nominal group technique (NGT)
- student panels
- post-it displays
- email comments and variants
- staff-student consultative committees
- assignment, placement and project logs
- conventional questionnaires
- pro formas
- on-line questionnaires
- one-minute questionnaires

3. External academic colleagues and and professional or industrial peers:

- comment on course materials
- external examiners and assessors
- quality assessment and accreditation

4. Incidental feedback

eric.ed.gov/...detailmini.jsp - Preview

e-learning ECDEL_MSc evaluation research peer feedback design

www.thinkvitamin.com/...re-the-success-of-your-web-app - Preview

design evaluation

www.simpleentrepreneur.com/...ur-un-blog-15-google-analytics - Preview

web evaluation tool

www.xiti.com - Preview

website evaluation

www.pompage.net/...evaluer-accessibilite-site-2 - Preview

accessibility evaluation