Why Do We Evaluate Instruction?

Evaluation is an integral part in the instructional design process. The purpose of evaluation post instruction is to allow for feedback for improvement. Forming and utilizing an effective evaluation approach allows for continuous improvement in training system quality. Evaluations are set in place to help determine the value of the learning program. By using assessment and validation tools, data is provided to help in the evaluative process. Overall, the purposes of the evaluation level of ADDIE is as follows:

1. Feedback

2. Control

3. Research

4. Intervention

5. Power Games

Feedback revolves around how one linked the learning materials and course content to the objectives set forth at the beginning.

Control and Research are the processes of making connections with real world aspects with the material you learned from the training program.

Intervention is when the results from the evaluative process influence change in the course program or its delivery.

Lastly, power games, which are not always prevalent, are an area of manipulation. This is a part of evaluation where the results are skewed to react with organizational politics.

The steps to evaluation include:

1. plan the evaluation

2. determine the evaluation design

3. develop the instruments

4. collect data

5. analyze the data

6. report the findings

While evaluation seems overarching as one principle, there are three types of evaluation. Formative evaluation, Summative evaluation and confirmative evaluation.

Formative evaluation is where there is continuous evaluation throughout the content. One example would be to have checkpoints throughout a training program that change the course of the learner based on responses provided to questions.

Summative evaluation is a knowledge understanding check at the end of a training program that evaluates the learner. Think of the prefix of the word, sum-, and being a total understanding. One example of summative would be a test at the end of a training course to check for understanding.

Lastly, Confirmative is when a period of time lapses between the end of a training program and when the evaluation is taken. An example is when the learner is retested 6 months after the training to check that learning has occurred and was retained from the course work.

Watch this YouTube video for further understanding of Evaluation types.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBoI0wBo4vw

Questions:

1. When was a time that you had to evaluate instruction and how did you do so?

2. How would you apply the 3 types of evaluation to your Instructional Design Project?

3. What is your feeling on Power Games? Do you think evaluation measurements should be changed based on organizational politics?

4. Evaluation has to do with Kirkpatrick's 4 Levels including Reaction, Learning, Behavior, and Results. Which levels match with the types of evaluation(formative, summative, confirmative)?

References

Bramley, P. & Newby, A. C. (1984). The Evaluation Of Training Part I: Clarifying The Concept. Journal of European

& Industrial Training, 8,6, 10-16.

Foxon, M. (1989). Evaluation of training and development programs: A review of the literature. Australian Journal of

Educational Technology, 5(2), 89-104. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet5/foxon.html

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/sat6.html

http://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/530/

Integrating New Technologies

This Rethinking Learning video from the MacArthur Foundation presents several thought-provoking comments on getting 21st-century students out of the 20th-century classroom, and some innovative examples of technology integration in education.

We are all familiar with the annual Horizon Report, "designed to identify and describe emerging technologies likely to have an impact on learning, teaching, and creative inquiry in higher education." In this report, key trends and technologies are profiled in terms of project time-to-adoption, ranging from one to five years. So, as educational technologists, the question isn't what new technologies are coming, or even necessarily when they will become mainstream, but how we should integrate these new technologies to best serve teaching and learning.

The constant proliferation of new tech options affords learners a never-ending opportunity to interact with peers, instructors, and course content in novel and engaging ways. At the same time, the pace of technological innovation is so rapid that it is longer possible for instructors to maintain real-time awareness of the latest options and to thoughtfully, creatively, and successfully apply them to educational contexts. And that's okay. In the words of instructional technologist Andrew Marcinek, "Educators should not pace education at the same pace at which technology moves. It is far too fast, and too sudden." Surveying the technology environment, understanding the educational context, and meeting learner and instructor needs at their current level of ability remains key when investigating a potential educational technology solution.

For reflection:

1. In terms of new technology integration in the classroom, what is your experience, either as instructor or student? 
2. Have you ever been required to use a "tech solution" that didn't match your needs? What happened? 
3. As discussed in the MacArthur Foundation video, how can we more actively link informal, technology-rich learning outside of school with formal learning inside school?

                                                              References

Boss, S. (2011, Sep. 7). Technology Integration: What Experts Say. Retrieved March 22, 2013 at
http://www.edutopia.org/technology-integration-experts

Edutopia staff. (2007, Nov. 5). Why Do We Need Technology Integration? Retrieved March 22, 2013 at http://www.edutopia.org/technology-integration-guide-importance

Johnson, L., Adams, S., and Cummins, M. (2012). The NMC Horizon Report: 2012 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media  Consortium. Retrieved March 22, 2013 at
http://www.nmc.org/publications/horizon-report-2012-higher-ed-edition

MacArthur Foundation. (2010). Rethinking Learning: The 21st Century Learner. [web video]. Retrieved March 22, 2013 at http://www.nmc.org/publications/horizon-report-2012-higher-ed-edition

ADP Prototype

https://sites.google.com/site/adpinstructionaldesignproject/

VMRC Prototypes

Below is the link to our prototype for the Power Tools and Fire Safety training modules for the Virginia Mennonite Retirement Community:

http://firesafetyandpowertoolstraining.weebly.com/


Alex Lee Jones, Sarah Peachey, and Shana Ryman

LFCC Math Tutorials- Alicia, Tara, Katie

Here is our prototype for LFCC Math Center project.  Our project is for creating math tutorials for students to review before taking a math placement test. We are still working on our quizzes and supplemental material for our client.  Please review and leave your comments!

Lord Fairfax Community College Academic Center for Excellence Math Tutoring Videos

Tara Cassidy, Alicia Grasso, Katie Horst  

March 14th, 2013

Module 1.1: Fractions: Defining the Basics

Objectives:
LFCC students taking Module 1.1 will be able to apply basic math concepts to fractions. After completing module 1.1, the learner will be able to

• Define fractions and mixed numbers
• Identify the parts of a fraction
• Recognize when a fraction is in simplest form
• Discriminate between a proper and improper fraction
• Recognize the difference between dividing by zero and dividing into zero.

The proposed module is a streaming video tutorial that will prepare LFCC students to successfully apply college math concepts without a calculator when they take the math placement test. The core content in lesson 1.1 is basic college math vocabulary and concepts: fractions in simplest form, proper and improper fractions; mixed numbers; division by zero; division into zero.

The abstract math information will be paced for the novice learner and made concrete by presentation in video format, incorporating a student resource person (LFCC Math Consultant Mr. Jeremiah Dyke) into to video,offering a text transcription of Mr. Dyke’s instruction, and a supplemental glossary of math terms to accompany the video tutorial.

*	Screen shot from video that introduces LFCC Math Consultant, Mr. Jeremiah Dyke

After each math concept is introduced and verbally explained by Mr. Dyke while he visually represents the concepts on his whiteboard, the video will pause and present the learner with an embedded quiz question to check for comprehension. This approach will enable comfortable self-pacing and avoid overloading the novice by breaking the larger set of introductory concepts and vocabulary into smaller, more manageable pieces of information.

*	Screenshot of the student view of Mr. Dyke’s visual representation of a concept

The learner  will not proceed through the tutorial without correctly answering the assessment questions for each concept, in order as presented, for a given module. Learning will be measured by a comparison of pre-module and post-module scores on a basic fraction vocabulary quiz. Learners will not advance to the next module until the post- module score equals 100% correct.

Self Check: 0 --   =  ? 1 a.   1 b.   0 c.   0.1	Representation of an embedded quiz question for module 1.1
Self Check: 12        --     6                                                 What is the numerator in this fraction?                                           a.   12 b.   6 c.   2	Representation of an embedded quiz question for module 1.1

The tutorial and self-check quiz questions will be self-paced in order to accommodate LFCC students with widely-varying levels of math ability who wish to effectively prepare for the math placement test. Learners can engage the tutorial either as a simple refresher or as a first exposure to these math concepts, accessing this online module at any time and moving through the tutorial at his or her own comfort level.

Materials Needed For this Module:

• A computer or web-enabled mobile device
• Reliable Internet connection
• Headphones (if completing the module in a public space)

Amanda, James and Kelly Prototype

You can find out prototype materials at http://ahrd610.weebly.com. There you will find two images (a slide and a clipboard). To download the storyboard of our training program, click on the slide, and to download the follow-up quiz, click on the clipboard. 

Our prototype does not yet include videos and benchmark quizzes that we plan to incorporate into our training program later on to make it more concrete. Please give us feedback on the materials provided so we can improve!

Chad, Lauren, Kanita Prototype

We will be using Storyline to create our prototype, this is a rough draft with a powerpoint of the flow of 1 of 3 trainings. The other two training courses, not listed, include a setting up and how to use blackboard course as well as a course about what is required for online faculty.

What Core content will you include in your lesson?

The core content includes:

1.     Facts about LFCC

2.     HR logistics

3.     Email set-up

4.     Syllabus creation

5.     Understanding how to use blackboard

6.     Expectations of online faculty

How will you assess learning?

The course assessments will very from a series of practice scenarios, proper writing techniques and process assessments. Furthermore, when the faculty properly completes what is required of them without error, it will show understanding and retention of skills knowledge. There will be an assessment in accordance to policies.

How will you make the information concrete?

For the information about the campus, a short video and activity will make the information concrete, HR logistics will be done in the course, setting up an email will walk you through how to do with a link that allows you to go and do it directly after. In terms of syllabus building and knowing what is to be included, there will be an activity to chose the incorrect syllabus.

How will you control the step size?

We will break steps down accordingly and make sure they are learned before moving forward, steps will be grouped accordingly to topic area.

How will you handle pacing?

This is self-paced learning. The learner can start and stop the training program as they please. The course will build upon itself and not progress until the mini assessments throughout the course has been met. We do not want to go through the entire course without proper retention at a fast pace and have to repeat the course.

How will you address cognitive load?

With activities and check-points, we will help to ease cognitive load as well as the presence of employee process aids that can be printed.

What format will you use?

We will use online training modules that are self-paced and taken by individuals

This is a rough draft of what the course look and feel will consist of using the branding guidelines provided by LFCC.

Qualtrics Modules Prototype

How can we motivate learners? Sam Dowell and James Goldberg

We started talking about motivation in class last night, and I wanted to use this blog to present several abstract ways of thinking about motivation that renowned theorists are making cases for. There is no right and wrong way to motivate learners, just different ways that are either more or less effective. The goal is to stimulate your minds and give you some new concepts to consider.

Daniel Pink has an interesting theory about motivation that rejects the traditional perception of extrinsic rewards if there is a divergent thinking involved. Evidence of this is shown in his candlestick problem. Instead, Pink claims that motivation is driven for autonomy, purpose, and mastery. For those who haven't read his book drive, or would like to brush up on the content, I have attached a link to a ted talk of him on motivation. He's a really good speaker, and listening to him helped me gain a better understanding. 

The following youtube video has been created by Sir Ken Robinson who advocates changing education paradigms to improve motivation.

He claims that our current school system is to standardized and that in turn stunts students motivation. Two quick points he made that I would like to point out is that we are trying to motivate our kids more and more through medication (adderall, ritalin, etc.) This factory made motivation turns what should be aesthetic learning into anaesthetic learning. This defeats the whole purpose of divergent learning. Robinson also claims that schools are too standardized and that in turn stifles divergent learning form occurring. Our educational system is to factory based, where students are grouped by age which is not a very good indicator of learning ability. Everyone is taught the same thing and there is normally only one correct answer. He claims that the key to motivate learners is to allow them to think divergently and break away from the standardized norms of education.

I came across one last video that is very short but provides an interesting concept that I found to be true in my specific case. Derek Severs claims that if you keep goals to yourself, you are more likely to achieve them. Conversely, if you tell your friends your goals, they are less likely to happen. At first this concept sounds like bologna but after thinking back on it, I found that when I told my friends about different short term goals I was trying to achieve, I normally didn't end up achieving them. Take a look at this video so that you can discuss your opinion on it in the critical thinking section below: 

Critical Thinking:

I have provided you with a couple different "left-field" theories so to speak that have research studies backing each of them up to a point. I have come up with a couple questions below that are based on the blog posting and are geared to help establish your perception feeling on each one.

1. Give an example of how you could incorporate a candlestick type problem into learning, and then explain if you think just having a problem like that in place is enough to motivate and engage the learners, or if you think there is a lot more to it.

2. Do you think the structure and standardization of todays school system has a big impact on motivation. What changes can you think of to improve this?

3. Do you agree or disagree Severs concept. If YES, how so you think an individual goal differs from the goals in the mission, vision, goals, values section of your company? Would you change the way your companies goals were presented at all? If NO, why not?