Deliverable 4.4 - INSEAD CALT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

AtGentive IST-4-027529-STP - Attentive Agents for Collaborative Learners• Colette is really friendly• Colette is very helpful• I think Colette likes me• Colette is very annoying• I understand all the headings on the ICDT platform• I like the look of the ICDT platform• If I make a mistake when using the ICDT platform it is easy to correct it• Instructions on the screen about how to use the ICDT platform are reallyhelpful• I fully understood the description of the ICDT platform that was given at theLidköping meeting• I could quickly find someone appropriate to ask questions about the ICDTplatform• My questions were answered easily• I really enjoy using the ICDT platform• I am having to spend too much time learning how to use the ICDT platform6543210Agent friendlyAgent helpfulAgent likes meAgent annoyingUnderstand headingsLike ICDT lookCorrecting mistakesScreen instructsLidköpingQuestionsAnswersEnjoyedTime learningFigure 26 - Answers to AtGentNet questionnaire (this and preceding two figures)A Mann-Whitney test was conducted to determine which results were statisticallysignificant 11 (see Table 17). This shows four statements where the Experimental andControl groups significantly differ. In each case, the Experimental group gave a higherscore of agreement than the Control. (For example, participants in the Experimentalgroup were more in agreement that they always received good grades at school than theControl group.) The three statements that have a significant difference are:• At school I always received good grades• I fully understand how to use the ICDT platform• I understand all the headings on the ICDT platform11 Significance referred to is at the 0.05 level. Exact significance is quoted to compensate for thesmall sample size (Control, n=6, Experimental, n=5). 2-tailed test is quoted as visual inspection ofthe data does not give a clear direction of differencesDel <strong>4.4</strong>: AtGentive Final Evaluation Report page 66
AtGentive IST-4-027529-STP - Attentive Agents for Collaborative LearnersAt school Ialways receivedgood gradesI fully understandhow to use theICDT platformI understand all theheadings on theICDT platformMann-Whitney U 3.500 4.000 3.500Wilcoxon W 24.500 25.000 24.500Z -2.180 -2.056 -2.213Exact Sig. (2-tailed) 0.037 0.048 0.035Table 17 - Mann-Whitney test results for AtGentNet questionnaire. To save space, onlysignificant results are shown4.3.1.3. InterviewsTelephone interviews were conducted with an opportunity sample of users (chosen ashaving shown interest in the course and thus assumed more likely to be willing to beinterviewed). It was possible to conduct interviews with six students – four from theExperimental group and two from the Control group.A semi-structured interview format was used. The starting point was the Key Indicators,with one question per indicator. The interviewers then used their judgement to encouragethe interviewee to elaborate on any specific comments that may be of particularrelevance. The initial questions were as follows:• Key Indicator: Performanceo How has the ICDT platform supported you in the ITM-concept?• Key Indicator: Satisfactiono How satisfied are you with the ICDT platform?o Encourage them to describe the good and bad points of the system.• Key Indicator: Learning (What have they learned?)o What would you say that the ICDT platform contributed to the ITMCourse from the learning point of view?• Key Indicator: Collaborationo How did you find the two collaboration initiatives from Albert Angehrn?(Reflections on the EIS simulation 12 (June 2007) and the Eagle Racingsimulation 13 .)o If they did not participate in the EIS-simulation then try to find out whynotPerformancePerformance and satisfaction were the areas most mentioned by the interviewees. Allinterviewees gave ease of accessing documents as the main feature that boosted their12 A simulated six-month process of persuading managers in a corporation to adopt an ExecutiveInformation System13 A simulated set of business dilemmas in which the fictional Eagle Racing company attempts tofind sponsors for their motor racing team (see Section 2.2.7)Del <strong>4.4</strong>: AtGentive Final Evaluation Report page 67
Page 1 and 2:
ATGENTIVEIST-4-027529-STPDELIVERABL
Page 3 and 4:
AtGentive IST-4-027529-STP - Attent
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23: May 2007AtGentive IST-4-027529-STP
Page 24 and 25: AtGentive IST-4-027529-STP - Attent
Page 60 and 61: CollaborationAtGentive IST-4-027529
Page 88 and 89: DescriptionAtGentive IST-4-027529-S
Page 90 and 91: Integratability:AtGentive IST-4-027
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
The effects of a computer agent’s
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
4. ResultsAtGentive IST-4-027529-ST
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Additional pedagogical investigatio
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208:
show all

Deliverable 4.4 - INSEAD CALT

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?