Changes between Version 18 and Version 19 of Evaluation
- Timestamp:
- 05/09/06 09:36:14 (7 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
Evaluation
v18 v19 3 3 [[PageOutline]] 4 4 5 = Phoebe Evaluation Plan 25/08/06 = 6 (Subject to ongoing revision) 5 = Phoebe Evaluation Plan = 6 Document history: 7 8 * Initial version: 10/08/06 9 * Revised in light of meeting with Glenaffric: 25/08/06 10 * Additional revisions in light of Glenaffric evaluation report: 05/09/06 7 11 8 12 == Aims of project (recap) == … … 23 27 [wiki:PractitionerInvolvement Back] [wiki:Evaluation Top] 24 28 25 == Key themes to explore in the evaluation==26 (As identified at meeting with Glenaffric 11/08/06) 27 * Encouraging practitioners to think about their practice in a structured way. 28 * Exploring the community dimension of using learning design, with recommendations for the sustainability of learning designs as a community artefact 29 == Research questions == 30 1. Is Phoebe, as an embodiment of the concept outlined above, a tool that practitioners in post-compulsory education find usable, helpful and relevant to their needs, whether they are a) beginning or experienced teachers and b) looking to use technology in their teaching for the first time or are familiar with e-learning but are looking for new ideas re technology and pedagogy? Specifically does it:[[BR]] 31 a) Encourage practitioners to think about their practice in a structured way?[[BR]] 32 b) Support the community dimension of using learning design and make it possible to sustain learning designs as community artefacts? 29 33 30 == Research questions ==31 1. Is Phoebe, as an embodiment of the concept outlined above, a tool that practitioners in post-compulsory education find usable, helpful and relevant to their needs, whether they are a) beginning or experienced teachers and b) looking to use technology in their teaching for the first time or are familiar with e-learning but are looking for new ideas re technology and pedagogy?32 34 1. Can one tool address all sectors of post-16 education, or are separate tools required for, say ACL, WBL, FE versus HE? (reasons: different nature of planning in the sectors; differences in terminology and linguistic style) 35 1. To what extent can practitioners can relate to the concept of an abstract learning design, or does a design require contextualisation and specific content to be meaningful? 33 36 1. Is Phoebe suitable as a tool for teacher education and/or a tool for supporting everyday practice? 34 37 1. What additional features and functionality are required to turn Phoebe from a PoC prototype into a tool for general use?
