Summaries.2.12.coursehero - Summaries: 2/12/08 Design:...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Summaries: 2/12/08 formative evaluation: obtain data to make instruction more efficient & effective; summative evaluation: determine effectiveness of instruction once delivered; three phases for formative: 1. one-to-one 2. small group 3. field trial; design formative eval: 1. anchor in instructional strategy 2. create matrix listing components of strategy on one side, major questions on other 3. five Qs (material appropriate for learning outcome, adequate instruction on subordinate skills/skills sequence & cluster logically, materials clear & readily understood by representative members of target group, motivational value, managed efficiently) 4. 2 rows at bottom (who most suited to evaluate, how gather info); types of data: test, comments/notes, attitude questionnaire or debriefing comments, time required to complete parts, reactions of SME, reaction of manager/supervisor to learner; one-to-one eval: 1. criteria (clarity, impact, feasibility) 2. select learner (above average, average, below average) 3. collect data (clarity: message, links, procedures; impact on learner: personally relevant, accomplishable, interesting & satisfying; feasibility: influence of maturity, independence, motivation, operate or easily learn to operate specialized equipment, comfortable, cost is reasonable); procedures: ask for reaction to learning material, hallmarks (establish rapport, interactive process), know how interaction will take place; assessments & questionnaires: review to see why made responses, check observability of each of the elements, clarity of paraphrase, efficiency of sequence, evaluate reliability of judgment or scoring strategy; learning time: how long it takes to complete instruction; data interpretation: summarized & focused, don’t overgeneralize; outcomes: 1. contain appropriate vocabulary, language complexity, examples, & illustrations 2. yield reasonable learner attitude & achievement or revisions to do so 3. appear feasible w/ learners, resources, setting; small group eval: 2 purposes (measure change effectiveness after 1 to 1, whether learners can use instruction w/o interaction w/ instructor); criteria & data: score on pretests & posttests, feasibility measured by learning time, costs, attitudes; selecting learners: subgroups have mix of ability, language, familiar/unfamiliar w/ procedure, young/inexperienced; procedures: ask for feedback as deliver materials as intended to be used in final form; assessments: attitude questionnaire, in-depth debriefing, identify strengths & weaknesses; data
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/08/2008 for the course ADE 6286 taught by Professor Wollard during the Spring '08 term at FIU.

Page1 / 3

Summaries.2.12.coursehero - Summaries: 2/12/08 Design:...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online