Transcript Name of presentation - Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Evaluating
a Blended Course of
Methodology of
Social Research II
Michela Freddano
University of Genova (Italy)
Overview
• Evaluandum
• Study
– Problem
– Hypothesis
– Methodology
• Findings
• Conclusions
Evaluandum
• Advanced Course
of Methodology of
Social Research
• Faculty of
Educational
Science
• University of
Genova
• 40-hours Course
• Blended from the
A.A. 2008/2009
http://cds1630.aulaweb.unige.it/course/view.php?id=17
Problem
In training courses, the use of
blended learning tools
introduces changes that can be
considered as strenghts or
weaknesses by participants.
Hyphotesis
Implementation
of Technological
Resources
New Course
Edition
Redesign
BLENDED
LEARNING
Student
Involvement
Improves:
Reflective
Evaluation
Communication
between
Students, Teacher
and Tutor
The Study
• Case Study
• Formative Evaluation (Scriven 1967)
in itinere
• Quantitative Analysis
– Aulaweb Participation and Activities Reports
• Qualitative Analysis
– Forums and Chats
– Evaluation Activities
– Communicative Processes (Hesseling 1966)
Findings
1. Definition of Training Goals
2. Online Participation
3. Strenghts and Weaknesses of
Collaborative Learning:
– Working Groups
– Tools
4. Training Course Redesign
Online participation
• 77 logged students
• 46 of them attended at least one time.
Working Groups
600
565
Frequencies
500
400
300
294
200
194
219
148
100
0
29
17
15
10
9
7
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
NO GROUP
99
75
45
1
ALFA
110
250
186
121
54
2
METODOLO
152
139
97
68
54
3
4
SAVOIR
VERITA’
Work teams
65
5
VEKKIETTI
6
OUT
7
Collaborative Learning Tools
Towards the Next Edition
(A.A. 2009/2010)
• using the Strenghts and the
Weaknesses expressed by
Participants
• for a new Learning Environment
Design
Contents
Activities and tools
A.A. 2008/2009
A.A. 2009/2010
1. Plenary
Activity
Defining training
course aims
- 1 general forum
Defining final
examination criteria
- FTF evaluative
brainstorming
- 1 general forum
2. Working
Groups
Creation of Working Groups
- 1 general visible forum
3. Group Works Reflective Journal
1 separated invisible forum per group
1 separated invisible chat per group
4. Evaluation
(in itinere)
Benchmarking
Institutional Analysis
Evaluation Report
 3 separated visible
forum per group
Evaluation Report
 1 separated visible wiki
per group
1 semistructured
individual interview
1 chat per group
Towards a Shared Model of
Final Evaluation
• Individuating and sharing six criteria of
final examination
• Using tools both face to face (evaluative
brainstorming) and online (forum)
• Towards more equilibrate relationships
between students and teacher
• VS perceived power of the teacher
• Developing mutual learning;
• Sharing responsibility;
• Motivating students to involvement.
Comparing Online Participation
% no group
% group
23.38
18.75
76.62
81.25
2008/2009 2009/2010
Participant Distribution
A.A. 2008/2009
A.A. 2009/2010
Student Considerations
Strenghts
• Shared bibliography
• Better student tutor
and teacher
communication than
that of the traditional
training course
• Developed knowledge
and skills
Weaknesses
• Traditional and/or
common tools of
communication
(meetings, telephone,
Facebook and Skype)
are better than that of
Moodle platform
• for doing peer
complex tasks
• Lack of time for peer
tasks
Conclusion
• Opportunity to realize plenary and peer
learning environments
• And to have learning processes monitored
• But no all logged students become involved
• The online participants are usually people
who attend face to face activities
• The next purpose is to individuate new
strategies to involve people who really are
not able to attend face to face activities.
Thank you!
Michela Freddano
[email protected]