Quality In Computer Supported Collaborative eLearning by Lambropoulos Romero

Download Quality In Computer Supported Collaborative eLearning by Lambropoulos Romero

Post on 30-Jun-2015

558 views

Category:

Education

1 download

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Quality In Computer Supported Collaborative eLearning by Lambropoulos & Romero in Madrid at the Quality eLearning Workshop coordinated by Dr. Margarida Romero http://www.expoelearning.com/

TRANSCRIPT

<ul><li> 1. Quality Assurance in Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Environments Euro-CAT Ergonomic Evaluation Dr. Niki Lambropoulos* Dr. Margarida Romero</li></ul> <p> 2. </p> <ul><li>What is Quality? </li></ul> <ul><li>Utility, usability, acceptability </li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Case study : Toll staff training(learning situation + ergonomic criteria) </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li>CSCL ergonimic evaluation </li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Case study : Euro-CAT Ergonomic Evaluation </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li>5 quality criteria </li></ul> <p>Quality Assurance in Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Environments Agenda 3. What is quality? 4. </p> <ul><li>Fit of purpose </li></ul> <ul><li>Bergman and Klefsj (1994):</li></ul> <ul><li> The quality of a product (article or service)is its ability to satisfy</li></ul> <ul><li>the needs and expectations of the customers </li></ul> <ul><li>European Foundation for Quality in eLearning (EFQUEL) </li></ul> <p> 5. 1.Utility, usability, acceptability Case study : Toll staff training(learning situation + ergonomic criteria) 6. Tooll staff training needs </p> <ul><li>USA Toll Tariffs: </li></ul> <ul><li>No training is necessary, even children can became toll staff ! </li></ul> <ul><li>European Toll Tariffs: </li></ul> <ul><li>Intensive training needs to achieve 2 main learning objectives </li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Vehicle category identification </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Angry management </li></ul></li></ul> <p> 7. Where and when can a toll worker could follow an elearning course? During the work hours? During the coffee break? At home? 8. As if the learning situation were not enough complex.... we will consider the usability criteriaIs the courseuseful ?Is the courseeasy to use ? mmmh, if the course is notuseful, compatible to my workplace and out of the work life, reliable and my colleagues dont like the course,will Iaccept the course ? 9. </p> <ul><li>As if the learning situation was not complex enough.... we will consider the ergonomics criteria </li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>UTILITY </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>USABILITY</li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>ACCESSIBILITY </li></ul></li></ul> <p> 10. As if the learning situation were not enough complex.... we will consider the usability criteria</p> <ul><li>UTILITY </li></ul> <ul><li>Relevance and efficacy (Tricot, 2007) for the performance in academic settings or the workplace </li></ul> <p>Is the courseuseful ? 11. As if the learning situation were not enough complex.... we will consider the usability criteriaIs the courseeasy to use ? </p> <ul><li>USABILITY </li></ul> <ul><li>Computer Learning Environmentseasy to learn andeasy to use(Preece et al, 1994) </li></ul> <p> 12. As if the learning situation were not enough complex.... we will consider the usability criteria</p> <ul><li>ACCEPTABILITY </li></ul> <ul><li>Not only consider the usefulness and usability, but also robustness, cost and reliability of ICT applications </li></ul> <p> mmmh, if the course is notuseful, compatible to my workplace and out of the work life, reliable and my colleagues dont like the course,will Iaccept the course ? 13. As if the learning situation were not enough complex.... we will consider the usability criteria</p> <ul><li>SOCIAL ACCEPTABILITY </li></ul> <ul><li>Not only consider the usefulness and usability, but also robustness, cost and reliability of ICT applications </li></ul> <p>Joel says the course is nuts; for me, is quite boring, and you? No, Joel is nuts, the course is just not enough challenging and interactive [Joel] The course dont work in my computer I needed to use my son computer to follow the course 14. Nielsens Taxonomy of System Acceptability 15. Toll staff training Case study Conclusions </p> <ul><li>In addition to pedagogical criteria we need to consider the utility, usability and (social) acceptability criteria</li></ul> <ul><li>All these criteria need to be considered for a successful elearning course </li></ul> <p> 16. 2. CSCL ergonomic evaluation Case study: Euro-CAT Ergonomic Evaluation 17. HCI-Ed in 7 Steps </p> <ul><li>Context &amp; Learning Values - Hypothesis </li></ul> <ul><li>(Iterative) Design Requirements</li></ul> <ul><li>Evaluation with user groups/experts </li></ul> <ul><li>Development </li></ul> <ul><li>Evaluation with user groups </li></ul> <ul><li>Re-Design &amp; Development </li></ul> <ul><li>Study &amp; Research - Tool Release</li></ul> <p>1CH 2DR 3E 4D 5E 6D 7RTR 18. Research Problem </p> <ul><li><ul><li>Distributed learning teams in team-based learning situations aim to achieve organisational convergence.</li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>However, there are collaboration problems due to mediated distance &amp; time flexibility. </li></ul></li></ul> <p>1CH 2DR 3E 4D 5E 6D 7RTR 19. </p> <ul><li>Key CSCeL concept: Collaboration Awareness </li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Students difficulties </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Group Awareness </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Time convergence </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li>Learners Intentions (learning goals): Task Convergence </li></ul> <ul><li>Users operations (actions/tasks): Pedagogical Usability</li></ul> <p>Step1a: Context &amp; Learning Values 1C H 2DR 3E 4D 5E 6D 7RTR 20. Collaboration Awareness </p> <ul><li><ul><li>Students difficulties:In addition to f2f Collaborative Learning difficulties, CSCeL situation adds Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) and ILE difficulties(Kirschner, 2009) </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Group Awareness:understanding of the activities of others, which provides context for your own activity(Dourish &amp; Bellotti, 1992) </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Group time awareness:Distributed learning students need to develop an awareness of their team-mates temporal patterns in order to regulate the Time-on-Task efficiently in the collective level(Romero, 2010) </li></ul></li></ul> <p>Being Human 1C H 2DR 3E 4D 5E 6D 7RTR 21. </p> <ul><li><ul><li>3C Model:</li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>C ommunication,</li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>C oordination &amp; knowledge </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>C onvergence(Ellis et al, 1991) </li></ul></li></ul> <p>How? 1C H 2DR 3E 4D 5E 6D 7RTR 22. </p> <ul><li>If group awareness is a prerequisite for convergence then increase of group awareness will result in increase of organisational convergence and thus, collaboration awareness. </li></ul> <p>Step1b: Hypothesis 1C H2DR 3E 4D 5E 6D 7RTR 23. </p> <ul><li>Euro-CAT </li></ul> <ul><li>C ollaborationA warenessT ool</li></ul> <ul><li>Task-independent </li></ul> <ul><li>Supports 3C via</li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Mirroring capabilities </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Awareness cues </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li>Does not replace other 3C tools </li></ul> <p>Step2: (Iterative) Design - Requirements 1CH 2DR3E 4D 5E 6D 7RTR 24. Step2:(Iterative) Design - Requirements The design can be defined as an individual and collective activity, finalized by a project to develop a physical and symbolic artefact.The artefact is rarely well defined in this step. 1CH 2DR3E 4D 5E 6D 7RTR 25. Key Concepts for Design Users Now 1CH 2DR3E 4D 5E 6D 7RTR Group Progress Scheduling Trail tracking Awareness Cues 26. Euro-CAT Screenshot 1CH 2DR3E 4D 5E 6D 7RTR 27. Step3:User/Expert Evaluation @ this workshop </p> <ul><li>Euro-CAT Ergonomic Evaluation</li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Pedagogical Utility/Usability/Accessibility Questionnaire &amp; System Usability Scale (SUS) </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Experts/users evaluation </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Think aloud protocol </li></ul></li></ul> <p>1CH 2DR 3E4D 5E 6D 7RTR 28. Results 1a/3: Questionnaire 29. Results 1b/3 Questionnaire EuroCAT Ergonomics Mean Std. Deviation Walk up Usability4.4000 .54772 Ease of Use 4.0000 .70711 Functionality Integration3.6000 .54772 Learnability4.2000 .44721 Interface Attractiveness2.4000 1.14018 Originality3.6000 1.51658 Collaboration3.0000 .70711 Navigation 4.8000 .44721 Task Regulation3.8000 1.48324 Message Legibility4.0000 1.22474 Observe Availabilities4.2000 .83666 Facilitate Group Work3.2000 .83666 Overall Satisfaction 3.8000 .83666 Overall Enjoyability3.6000 1.14018 Overall Usability3.0000 .70711 Overall Score 3.706/5.00 30. Results 3a/3 31. Results 3b/3 32. Results 3c/3 33. Solutions 34. </p> <ul><li>Ask the e-tutors/e-learners for solutions! </li></ul> <ul><li>Direct fit between educational task and the method chosen to pursue it </li></ul> <ul><li>Iterative Design</li></ul> <ul><li><ul><li>Engaging different user/expert groups </li></ul></li></ul> <ul><li>Next step: Evaluation in context </li></ul> <p>Conclusions &amp; Insights 35. </p> <ul><li>Utility </li></ul> <ul><li>Usability </li></ul> <ul><li>Acceptability </li></ul> <ul><li>Learner/user-centred design (HCI-Ed) </li></ul> <ul><li>Adaptive eLearning:</li></ul> <ul><li>- Diverse Teaching/Learning Styles </li></ul> <ul><li>- Learning Alone/Learning Together </li></ul> <ul><li>- Learning anywhere/anytime </li></ul> <p>5 criterios de calidad en E-learningErgonomics 36. Thank you! Questions? Dr. Niki Lambropoulos [email_address] Dr. Margarida Romero [email_address]</p>