Improving Evaluations in Computer-Supported Learning Projects

2011 ◽  
pp. 1142-1147
Author(s):  
John B. Nash ◽  
Christoph Richter ◽  
Heidrun Allert
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environments ◽  
Formative Evaluation ◽  
Development Stage ◽  
Project Teams ◽  
Crucial Importance ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Project Staff ◽  
Effective Part ◽  
Evaluation Approaches ◽  
Learning Projects

The call for the integration of program evaluation into the development of computer-supported learning environments is ever-increasing. Pushed not only by demands from policy groups and grant makers who desire greater accountability in lean times, this trend is due also because outcomes of computer supported learning environment projects often fall short of the expectations held by the project teams. The discrepancy between the targets set by the project staff and the outcomes achieved suggests there is a need for formative evaluation approaches (vs. summative approaches) that derive information that can be used to improve a program while it is in its development stage (see Worthen, Sanders, & Fitzpatrick, 1997). And in spite of the known benefits of integrating evaluation into the project development process, we note a lack of theoretical frameworks that reflect the peculiarities of computer-supported learning projects and the ways they evolve (see Keil-Slawik, 1999). This is of crucial importance, as formative evaluation will only be an accepted and effective part of a project if it provides information useful for the project staff. The purpose of this chapter is to outline the obstacles to integrating evaluation in computer-supported learning projects and then discuss two promising approaches that can be used to address these challenges.

Improving Evaluations in Computer-Supported Learning Projects

2011 ◽  
pp. 1048-1053
Author(s):  
John B. Nash ◽  
Christoph Richter ◽  
Heidrun Allert
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environments ◽  
Formative Evaluation ◽  
Development Stage ◽  
Project Teams ◽  
Crucial Importance ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Project Staff ◽  
Effective Part ◽  
Evaluation Approaches ◽  
Learning Projects

The call for the integration of program evaluation into the development of computer-supported learning environments is ever-increasing. Pushed not only by demands from policy groups and grant makers who desire greater accountability in lean times, this trend is due also because outcomes of computer supported learning environment projects often fall short of the expectations held by the project teams. The discrepancy between the targets set by the project staff and the outcomes achieved suggests there is a need for formative evaluation approaches (vs. summative approaches) that derive information that can be used to improve a program while it is in its development stage (see Worthen, Sanders, & Fitzpatrick, 1997). And in spite of the known benefits of integrating evaluation into the project development process, we note a lack of theoretical frameworks that reflect the peculiarities of computer-supported learning projects and the ways they evolve (see Keil-Slawik, 1999). This is of crucial importance, as formative evaluation will only be an accepted and effective part of a project if it provides information useful for the project staff. The purpose of this chapter is to outline the obstacles to integrating evaluation in computer-supported learning projects and then discuss two promising approaches that can be used to address these challenges.

Evaluating Computer-Supported Learning Initiatives

2011 ◽  
pp. 3028-3034
Author(s):  
John B. Nash ◽  
Christoph Richter ◽  
Heidrun Allert
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environments ◽  
Formative Evaluation ◽  
Development Stage ◽  
Project Teams ◽  
Crucial Importance ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Project Staff ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Effective Part ◽  
Evaluation Approaches

The call for the integration of program evaluation into the development of computer-supported learning environments is ever increasing. Pushed not only by demands from policy makers and grant givers for more accountability within lean times, this trend is due also to the fact that outcomes of computer-supported learning environment projects often fall short of the expectations held by the project teams. The discrepancy between the targets set by the project staff and the outcomes achieved suggests there is a need for formative evaluation approaches (versus summative approaches) that facilitate the elicitation of information that can be used to improve a program while it is in its development stage (c.p., Worthen, Sanders & Fitzpatrick, 1997). While the call for formative evaluation as an integral part of projects that aim to develop complex socio-technical systems is widely accepted, we note a lack of theoretical frameworks that reflect the particularities of these kind of systems and the ways they evolve (c.p., Keil-Slawik, 1999). This is of crucial importance, as formative evaluation will only be an accepted and effective part of a project if it provides information useful for the project staff. Below we outline the obstacles evaluation faces with regard to projects that design computer-supported learning environments, and discuss two promising approaches that can be used in complimentary fashion.

Evaluating Computer-Supported Learning Initiatives

2005 ◽  
pp. 1125-1129
Author(s):  
John B. Nash ◽  
Cristoph Richter ◽  
Heidrun Allert
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environments ◽  
Formative Evaluation ◽  
Development Stage ◽  
Project Teams ◽  
Crucial Importance ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Project Staff ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Effective Part ◽  
Evaluation Approaches

The call for the integration of program evaluation into the development of computer-supported learning environments is ever increasing. Pushed not only by demands from policy makers and grant givers for more accountability within lean times, this trend is due also to the fact that outcomes of computer-supported learning environment projects often fall short of the expectations held by the project teams. The discrepancy between the targets set by the project staff and the outcomes achieved suggests there is a need for formative evaluation approaches (versus summative approaches) that facilitate the elicitation of information that can be used to improve a program while it is in its development stage (c.p., Worthen, Sanders & Fitzpatrick, 1997). While the call for formative evaluation as an integral part of projects that aim to develop complex socio-technical systems is widely accepted, we note a lack of theoretical frameworks that reflect the particularities of these kind of systems and the ways they evolve (c.p., Keil-Slawik, 1999). This is of crucial importance, as formative evaluation will only be an accepted and effective part of a project if it provides information useful for the project staff. Below we outline the obstacles evaluation faces with regard to projects that design computer-supported learning environments, and discuss two promising approaches that can be used in complimentary fashion.

Evaluating Computer-Supported Learning Initiatives

2011 ◽  
pp. 1454-1458
Author(s):  
John B. Nash ◽  
Christoph Richter ◽  
Heidrun Allert
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environments ◽  
Formative Evaluation ◽  
Development Stage ◽  
Project Teams ◽  
Crucial Importance ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Project Staff ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Effective Part ◽  
Evaluation Approaches

The call for the integration of program evaluation into the development of computer-supported learning environments is ever increasing. Pushed not only by demands from policy makers and grant givers for more accountability within lean times, this trend is due also to the fact that outcomes of computer- supported learning environment projects often fall short of the expectations held by the project teams. The discrepancy between the targets set by the project staff and the outcomes achieved suggests there is a need for formative evaluation approaches (versus summative approaches) that facilitate the elicitation of information that can be used to improve a program while it is in its development stage (c.p., Worthen, Sanders & Fitzpatrick, 1997). While the call for formative evaluation as an integral part of projects that aim to develop complex socio-technical systems is widely accepted, we note a lack of theoretical frameworks that reflect the particularities of these kind of systems and the ways they evolve (c.p., Keil-Slawik, 1999). This is of crucial importance, as formative evaluation will only be an accepted and effective part of a project if it provides information useful for the project staff. Below we outline the obstacles evaluation faces with regard to projects that design computer-supported learning environments, and discuss two promising approaches that can be used in complimentary fashion.

Information Systems Evaluation

2013 ◽  
pp. 333-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Si Chen ◽  
Nor Mardziah Osman ◽  
Guo Chao Alex Peng
Keyword(s):  
Information Systems ◽  
Formative Evaluation ◽  
Current System ◽  
Evaluation Research ◽  
Evaluation Methodologies ◽  
Is Implementation ◽  
Is Research ◽  
Is Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Approaches ◽  
Goals And Objectives

Due to the prevalent use of Information Systems (IS) in modern organisations, evaluation research in this field is becoming more and more important. In light of this, a set of rigorous methodologies were developed and used by IS researchers and practitioners to evaluate the increasingly complex IS implementation used. Moreover, different types of IS and different focusing perspectives of the evaluation require the selection and use of different evaluation approaches and methodologies. This chapter aims to identify, explore, investigate, and discuss the various key methodologies that can be used in IS evaluation from different perspectives, namely in nature (e.g. summative vs. formative evaluation) and in strategy (e.g. goal-based, goal-free, and criteria-based evaluation). Six case studies are also presented and discussed in this chapter to illustrate how the different IS evaluation methodologies can be applied in practices. The chapter concludes that evaluation methodologies should be selected depending on the nature of the IS and the specific goals and objectives of the evaluation. Nonetheless, it is also proposed that formative criteria-based evaluation and summative criteria-based evaluation are currently among the more widely used in IS research. The authors suggest that the combined used of one or more of these approaches can be applied at different stages of the IS life cycle in order to generate more rigorous and reliable evaluation outcomes. Moreover, results and outcomes of IS evaluation research will not just be useful in practically guiding actions to improve the current system, but can also be used to generate new knowledge and theory to be adopted by future IS research.

A Critical Theory of Adult and Community Education

2013 ◽  
pp. 141-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Brookfield
Keyword(s):  
Adult Learning ◽  
Critical Theory ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Community Education ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Unit Of Analysis ◽  
Learning Tasks ◽  
Classic Essay ◽  
Learning Projects

Critical theory is one of the most influential theoretical frameworks influencing scholarship within the field of adult and community education. This chapter outlines what constitute the chief elements of critical theory using Horkheimer’s (1937/1995) classic essay as a touchstone for this analysis. It argues for a set of adult learning tasks that are embedded in this analysis and that apply both to formal adult education settings and informal learning projects carried out in communities. Future likely trends are the extension of critical theory’s unit of analysis to include race, class, gender, disability and sexual identity, and critical analysis of digital technologies.

Drawing on Design to Improve Evaluation of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning

2004 ◽  
pp. 281-310
Author(s):  
John B. Nash ◽  
Christoph Richter ◽  
Heidrun Allert
Keyword(s):  
Social Context ◽  
Collaborative Learning ◽  
Human Computer Interaction ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Program Theory ◽  
Computer Supported Collaborative Learning ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Design Learning ◽  
Evaluative Thinking

This chapter addresses theoretical frameworks for the evaluation of computer-supported learning environments. It outlines the characteristics and obstacles this evaluation must face with regard to projects that design learning experiences, stressing the notion that human-computer interaction is imbedded in social context that is complex and dynamic. The authors examine how scenario-based design and program theory can contribute to the design and evaluation of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) and present a case study in which both approaches are applied. Based on the revealed complementary frameworks, a compelling approach is drafted that combines both of them. Our goal is to make CSCL designers more aware of the benefits of evaluative thinking in their work and to introduce two tangible approaches to evaluation that, when implemented as a design step, can strengthen CSCL initiatives.

Did We Become a Community? Multiple Methods for Identifying Community and Its Constituent Elements in Formal Online Learning Environments

2010 ◽  
pp. 1607-1625
Author(s):  
Richard A. Schwier ◽  
Ben Daniel
Keyword(s):  
Learning Communities ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Sense Of Community ◽  
Interaction Analysis ◽  
Paired Comparison ◽  
Classroom Community ◽  
Bayesian Belief Network ◽  
User Perceptions ◽  
Evaluation Approaches ◽  
Constituent Elements

To understand the nature of formal virtual learningcommunities in higher education, we are employing a variety of user-centred evaluation approaches to examinemethods for determining whether a community exists, andif it does, to isolate and understand interactions among itsconstituent elements, and ultimately to build a model offormal virtual learning communities. This chapter presents the methods we are employing to answer these seemingly simple questions, including user perceptions of community(Sense of Community Index, Classroom Community Scale), interaction analysis (density, reciprocity,) content analysis (transcript analysis, interviews, focus groups), paired-comparison analysis (Thurstone scaling) and communitymodeling techniques (Bayesian Belief Network analysis).

Generation of the 3D CAD Model of Construction Building

2011 ◽  
Vol 346 ◽  
pp. 83-89
Author(s):  
Xiao Yong Li ◽  
Zhi Gang Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Visual Representations ◽  
Project Teams ◽  
Cad Model ◽  
Dynamic Visualization ◽  
Project Staff ◽  
3D Cad ◽  
Levels Of Detail ◽  
Realistic Representation ◽  
Construction Strategies

Project teams face ever increasing pressure to deliver projects as quickly as possible. To meet these demands, contractors are faced with the need to explore various construction strategies in order to meet delivery dates, and to assure themselves as to the achievability and quality of construction building. Various visual representations of construction building, i.e. 3D CAD, can assist with these tasks of identifying effective construction program. Such visual representations aid communication amongst project staff and facilitate brain-storming, and, implemented well they can provide clear, fast, and multi-dimensional feedback to the project team. In this paper, we describe aspects of our work which is directed at formulating a dynamic visualization environment that links 3D CAD. Requirements of such an environment include quickness, treating scale, working at multiple levels of detail, dealing with design variability, and realistic representation of the work. The applicability of the system is demonstrated by applying it to various examples. The results show that the system can be effectively used for generating the 3D CAD model of construction building.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document