Views
7 months ago

Advances in E-learning-Experiences and Methodologies

Designing an Online Assessment in E-Learning at the outcome level. This triangulation of data clearly provides the multilevel, outcomes-based measurements critical for not just accreditation but, even more importantly, continuous improvement and advancement of student learning (formative assessment). If the object for evaluation is the learning process, we must establish a psychological reference frame from where we can plan this assessment process. An interesting approach is that made by Mishra (2002) exposing the contribution of the three psychological theories which have had more impact on the design and the institutional practice in the online learning environments (behaviourism, cognitive psychology, and constructivism). In respect to the learning assessment indicators (information to gather), when the conception of learning is undertaken from the perspective of constructivist psychology, we should consider when collecting information for an evaluation, different fields of knowledge. In this sense, in accordance with the training program aims and according to the course level and characteristics, the learning information can refer to three large fields: conceptual (knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and valuation), skills or abilities, and attitudes. In this study we will suggest that the information gathering strategies offer online training platforms which are more suited to the types of content to be evaluated. Learning evaluation indicators should be linked to the goals one is trying to evaluate, which in the case where no other type of criteria or referent exists, this goal becomes one (O’Donovan, Price, & Rust, 2004). As an example, we have associated dimensions to be evaluated in the student with indicators or more suitable procedures. People involved and assessment Agents In this section we refer to whom the people involved in the assessment process of students are who can provide us with information about the acquisition level of the contents explained. Linked to the concepts of evaluation we have been analysing, another typology appears, according to the agent carrying out the evaluation: self-evaluation and hetero-evaluation. In the case of learning, the student can evaluate the effort made better than anyone else, as well as the difficulties and satisfaction caused by the learning. These cases of self-evaluation processes are more adequately approached if we are in situations of formative evaluation. On the other hand, processes of summative evaluation require systems of hetero-evaluation, or assessment by other agents to complement the former. Table 1. Constructivist tasks vs. Web tools (Mishra, 2002, p. 494) Constructivist tasks Establishment of personal and group objectives/goals Discuss and debate ideas and receive feedback Seek and collect information Organizing information in a coherent framework Integrate different external information to internal conceptions Generate/construct new information Manipulate external information and variables Understanding real world phenomenon Web tools E-mails, discussion groups, note pads E-mails, discussion groups, voice-chat Web page, search engines, digital drop, boxes, book marking Software to analyze data, prepare labels, charts and concept maps Note taking, annotations, and so forth. HTML, editors, Web page creation tools, word processors, and so forth. Simulation and animation on the Web Streaming media technology for audio and video 0

Designing an Online Assessment in E-Learning Table 2. Learning evaluation dimensions and indicators Dimensions Acquisition of conceptual contents Acquisition of procedural contents (skills, etc.) Indicators - Correct answers in open answer objective tests and so forth. - Production of work , tasks, projects, and so forth, via online. - Production of work via online, projects, group assignments, wikis, portfolios, and so forth. Acquisition of attitudes - Forms, online questionnaires, chats, discussion forums, and so forth. We understand that in distance learning, addressed to adults seeking a certain qualification, the criterial, summative, hetero type of evaluation would be the most suitable for certifying that they have satisfactorily achieved the objectives formulated in the educational process and that they fit the profile of the course. However, the online system of learning, based on the new information and communication technologies, is going to favour or foster formative evaluation systems, based on self-evaluation with objective marking systems that will help the students to situate themselves in the level of learning achieved and lead the process back to higher levels of performance. Information gathering techniques for e-Assessment in e-Learning The following step in a methodological process valid to assess the learning in e-learning environments is to select the information gathering technique suitable for each learning objective. For this purpose, learning management systems (LMS) offer us different alternatives. Each tool comes with advantages and disadvantages that we are explaining below. One of the computer applications most used in student evaluation is the software for the designing of objective tests (closed answer) with the possibility of self-correction (Ashton et al., 2006, experience of SCROLLA project in Scotland). This does not mean that the Internet does not offer other resources of high pedagogical value, although the use of the technology may not be simple. In this section, we shall briefly describe different procedures for evaluating the level of competence acquired by the student and which can be used on the Internet. In the following chart, we give a general classification of them, together with the potential use of the technology. The use of different evaluation strategies through the Internet mainly depends on the type of learning we wish to evaluate and how we wish to use the evaluation. If the objective is merely summative, and the level of learning relates to knowledge acquired, we shall deduce that the most suitable way will be the use of objective tests. On the other hand, if we are seeking to evaluate with a formative purpose, in a context of constructivist learning, which allows motivation to be included as an important factor, we shall have to resort to some system of self-evaluation, with the necessary immediate feedback. Within all these evaluation strategies we observed two categories, those procedures that are now normally used in attendance teaching (traditional tests) and another group of tests that are lately being incorporated to evaluation (alternative tests). It seems evident that certain technological resources incorporated to the use of computers open up new possibilities for these new approaches to the recording of information. This is obvious in the case of the portfolios strategy, now incorporated to many educational software packages and whose use is beginning to show a greater commitment of the students in self-evaluation and self-learning (Klenowski, 2002). Electronic mail, data bases, and discussion lists, for their part, make it possible to store and exchange the students’ work in its process and in its products, 0

  • Page 2 and 3:

    Advances in E-Learning: Experiences

  • Page 4 and 5:

    Table of Contents Preface .........

  • Page 6 and 7:

    Chapter XIV Open Source LMS Customi

  • Page 8 and 9:

    Chapter III Philosophical and Epist

  • Page 10 and 11:

    of constructive and cooperative met

  • Page 12 and 13:

    Chapter XIV Open Source LMS Customi

  • Page 14 and 15:

    contents, learning contexts, proces

  • Page 16 and 17:

    xv these organizations do not get a

  • Page 18 and 19:

    xvii QuALIty In e-LeArnIng Before t

  • Page 20 and 21:

    allow that the teachers in training

  • Page 22 and 23:

    xxi ISO. (1986). Quality-Vocabulary

  • Page 24 and 25:

    Chapter I RAPAD: A Reflective and P

  • Page 26 and 27:

    RAPAD in fields such as law, engine

  • Page 28 and 29:

    RAPAD mystery to the new student. B

  • Page 30 and 31:

    RAPAD example, whereas Laurillard h

  • Page 32 and 33:

    RAPAD Ontologically, systems philos

  • Page 34 and 35:

    RAPAD information related processes

  • Page 36 and 37:

    RAPAD methods and techniques accord

  • Page 38 and 39:

    RAPAD 2. An introduction to learnin

  • Page 40 and 41:

    RAPAD then asked to reflect on and

  • Page 42 and 43:

    RAPAD Figure 4. A rich picture to h

  • Page 44 and 45:

    RAPAD Again using techniques from t

  • Page 46 and 47:

    RAPAD university preparation course

  • Page 48 and 49:

    RAPAD The third interface is at the

  • Page 50 and 51:

    RAPAD Knight, P.T., & Trowler, P. (

  • Page 52 and 53:

    RAPAD AddItIonAL reAdIngs Goodyear,

  • Page 54 and 55:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning t

  • Page 56 and 57:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning (

  • Page 58 and 59:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning s

  • Page 60 and 61:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning r

  • Page 62 and 63:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning o

  • Page 64 and 65:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning n

  • Page 66 and 67:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning M

  • Page 68 and 69:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning W

  • Page 70 and 71:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 72 and 73:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 74 and 75:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 76 and 77:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 78 and 79:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 80 and 81:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 82 and 83:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 84 and 85:

    Chapter IV E-Mentoring: An Extended

  • Page 86 and 87:

    E-Mentoring However, what is unders

  • Page 88 and 89:

    E-Mentoring baugh, & Williams, 2004

  • Page 90 and 91:

    E-Mentoring Table 2. Contact. Diffe

  • Page 92 and 93:

    E-Mentoring Table 10. Ethical impli

  • Page 94 and 95:

    E-Mentoring Table 15. Technology st

  • Page 96 and 97:

    E-Mentoring Table 21. Coaching. Bes

  • Page 98 and 99:

    E-Mentoring Table 27. Moment. Best

  • Page 100 and 101:

    E-Mentoring Moreover, existing rese

  • Page 102 and 103:

    E-Mentoring Kasprisin, C. A., Singl

  • Page 104 and 105:

    E-Mentoring Ensher, E. A., Heun, C.

  • Page 106 and 107:

    Chapter V Training Teachers for E-L

  • Page 108 and 109:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning FL

  • Page 110 and 111:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning ne

  • Page 112 and 113:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning A

  • Page 114 and 115:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning yo

  • Page 116 and 117:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning Di

  • Page 118 and 119:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning ht

  • Page 120 and 121:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 122 and 123:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 124 and 125:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 126 and 127:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 128 and 129:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 130 and 131:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 132 and 133:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 134 and 135:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 136 and 137:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 138 and 139:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 140 and 141:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 142 and 143:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 144 and 145:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 146 and 147:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 148 and 149:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 150 and 151:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 152 and 153:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 154 and 155:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 156 and 157:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 158 and 159:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 160 and 161:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 162 and 163:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 164 and 165:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 166 and 167:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 168 and 169:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 170 and 171:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 172 and 173:

    Chapter IX AI Techniques for Monito

  • Page 174 and 175:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 176 and 177:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 178 and 179:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 180 and 181:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 182 and 183:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 184 and 185:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 186 and 187:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 188 and 189:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 190 and 191:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 192 and 193:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 194 and 195:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 196 and 197:

    Chapter X Knowledge Discovery from

  • Page 198 and 199:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 200 and 201:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 202 and 203:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 204 and 205:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 206 and 207:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 208 and 209:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 210 and 211:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 212 and 213:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 214 and 215:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 216 and 217:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 218 and 219:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 220 and 221:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 222 and 223:

    Chapter XI Swarm-Based Techniques i

  • Page 224 and 225:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 226 and 227:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 228 and 229:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 230 and 231:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 232 and 233:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 234 and 235:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 236 and 237:

    Chapter XII E-Learning 2.0: The Lea

  • Page 238 and 239:

    E-Learning 2.0 Table 1. Different s

  • Page 240 and 241:

    E-Learning 2.0 Figure 1. Difference

  • Page 242 and 243:

    E-Learning 2.0 where the blog is al

  • Page 244 and 245:

    E-Learning 2.0 process. Along this

  • Page 246 and 247:

    E-Learning 2.0 forth, and, of cours

  • Page 248 and 249:

    E-Learning 2.0 Finally, it is impor

  • Page 250 and 251:

    E-Learning 2.0 never be a hotchpotc

  • Page 252 and 253:

    E-Learning 2.0 McPherson, K. (2006)

  • Page 254 and 255:

    E-Learning 2.0 Rosen, A. (2006). Te

  • Page 256 and 257:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 258 and 259:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 260 and 261:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 262 and 263:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 264 and 265:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 266 and 267:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 268 and 269:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 270 and 271:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 272 and 273:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 274 and 275:

    Open Source LMS Customization Intro

  • Page 276 and 277:

    Open Source LMS Customization or ev

  • Page 278 and 279: Open Source LMS Customization compa
  • Page 280 and 281: Open Source LMS Customization Figur
  • Page 282 and 283: Open Source LMS Customization Figur
  • Page 284 and 285: Open Source LMS Customization Figur
  • Page 286 and 287: Open Source LMS Customization Haina
  • Page 288 and 289: Evaluation and Effective Learning p
  • Page 290 and 291: Evaluation and Effective Learning r
  • Page 292 and 293: Evaluation and Effective Learning t
  • Page 294 and 295: Evaluation and Effective Learning p
  • Page 296 and 297: Evaluation and Effective Learning m
  • Page 298 and 299: Evaluation and Effective Learning c
  • Page 300 and 301: Evaluation and Effective Learning H
  • Page 302 and 303: Chapter XVI Formative Online Assess
  • Page 304 and 305: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 306 and 307: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 308 and 309: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 310 and 311: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 312 and 313: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 314 and 315: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 316 and 317: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 318 and 319: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 320 and 321: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 322 and 323: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 324 and 325: 0 Chapter XVII Designing an Online
  • Page 326 and 327: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 330 and 331: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 332 and 333: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 334 and 335: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 336 and 337: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 338 and 339: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 340 and 341: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 342 and 343: Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator
  • Page 344 and 345: Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator
  • Page 346 and 347: Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator
  • Page 348 and 349: Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator
  • Page 350 and 351: Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator
  • Page 352 and 353: Chapter XIX E-QUAL: A Proposal to M
  • Page 354 and 355: E-QUAL is proposed to evaluate the
  • Page 356 and 357: E-QUAL provide competent, service-o
  • Page 358 and 359: E-QUAL 2004; Scalan, 2003) and qual
  • Page 360 and 361: E-QUAL benchmarks address technolog
  • Page 362 and 363: E-QUAL E-learning added two differe
  • Page 364 and 365: E-QUAL Table 6. Application of the
  • Page 366 and 367: E-QUAL Future trends The future of
  • Page 368 and 369: E-QUAL (EQO) co-located to the 4 th
  • Page 370 and 371: E-QUAL SMEs: An analysis of e-learn
  • Page 372 and 373: E-QUAL Meyer, K. A. (2002). Quality
  • Page 374 and 375: Compilation of References Argyris,
  • Page 376 and 377: Compilation of References Biggs, J.
  • Page 378 and 379:

    Compilation of References Cabero, J

  • Page 380 and 381:

    Compilation of References Comezaña

  • Page 382 and 383:

    Compilation of References Downes, S

  • Page 384 and 385:

    Compilation of References Fandos, M

  • Page 386 and 387:

    Compilation of References national

  • Page 388 and 389:

    Compilation of References Hudson, B

  • Page 390 and 391:

    Compilation of References Harbour.

  • Page 392 and 393:

    Compilation of References Little, J

  • Page 394 and 395:

    Compilation of References Metros, S

  • Page 396 and 397:

    Compilation of References ONeill, K

  • Page 398 and 399:

    Compilation of References Preece, J

  • Page 400 and 401:

    Compilation of References Sadler, D

  • Page 402 and 403:

    Compilation of References Shin, N.,

  • Page 404 and 405:

    Compilation of References tional Co

  • Page 406 and 407:

    Compilation of References Vermetten

  • Page 408 and 409:

    Compilation of References Yu, F. Y.

  • Page 410 and 411:

    About the Contributors Juan Pablo d

  • Page 412 and 413:

    About the Contributors part: “An

  • Page 414 and 415:

    About the Contributors María D. R-

  • Page 416 and 417:

    About the Contributors Applications

  • Page 418 and 419:

    Index e-learning tools, automated p

  • Page 420:

    Socrates 55 Sophists 55 student-foc

Organizational Change Management Methodology
DIRECTOR OF UCL CENTRE FOR ADVANCEMENT OF LEARNING AND TEACHING ...
Overview of ISU Learning Communities
Global Learn - Association for the Advancement of Computing in ...
October 2012 Volume 15 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...
Advancing Equity through More and Better STEM Learning
Cross-Cultural Considerations in Promoting Advance Care Planning ...
UC Advanced Customer Presentation 23rd April09 - Ash Telecom
STUDENT CENTERED TEACHING & LEARNING PLATFORM
STUDENT CENTERED TEACHING & LEARNING PLATFORM
STUDENT CENTERED TEACHING & LEARNING PLATFORM
Advanced Programme and Invitation to Register - IWA
Social Media for Pharma - May 14 - 16, 2013 - Advanced Learning ...
An international journal for collaborative / work integrated learning
Community learning and action for sustainable living ... - WWF UK
[+][PDF] TOP TREND Data Mining in E-Learning (Advances in Management Information) [DOWNLOAD]
Volume 19 • Number 3 • 2003 - the Marine Advanced Technology ...
Identifying Children who are Learning English As An Additional ...
Learning Across Sites: New tools, infrastructures and practices - Earli
Pedagogical Choices Make Large Classes Feel Small
Pedagogical Choices Make Large Classes Feel Small
Gaining Ground: - National Institute for Learning Outcomes ...
From Denial to Acceptance: - National Institute for Learning ...
Regional Accreditation and Student Learning Outcomes - National ...
Learning Outcomes Assessment in Community Colleges - National ...
2012 Report - Connected Educators
Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching Volume 5 - National ...
Therapeutic Patient Education
Collaboration in Jackson County - Illinois Public Health Association
Developing an Effective Outreach Strategy Communicating a ...