1 / 34

Signs of L earning

A program theory based evaluation. Signs of L earning. Peter Brodersen National C enter of Designs for Learning University College Lillebælt, DK. Two assumptions. Action  effect It is possible to trace causality and correlation. Changing pattern 

ozzy
Télécharger la présentation

Signs of L earning

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A program theory based evaluation Signs of Learning Peter Brodersen National Center of Designs for Learning University College Lillebælt, DK

  2. Twoassumptions Action  effect It is possible to trace causality and correlation Changing pattern  You must carry out different key-activities at the same time

  3. Presentation 1. Signs of Learning: Concept and conclusion 2. Program theory 3. Adapting the model 4. Results 5. Benefits and difficultiesusingmethod

  4. Causality and correlation

  5. Scenario-basedpreparation: confident/non-confident students Structure Multimodality scaffolding Attention - Participation - Self-reliance

  6. Students motivation and learning outcomes In 5th and 6th grades

  7. Two periods Course: Developingteacherskills Implementation: - Scenariobasedprep. - Structure - Multimodality - Scaffolding

  8. Scenariobasedpreparation Betterunderstandingof the non-confident students motivation Conclusions Structure, multimodality and scaffolding + influencethe students attention, participation and self-reliance

  9. Program TheoryEvaluation is a theoryabout ”whatworks for whom under whichcircumstances?”

  10. The program theory Teachers preparation Motivation Learning outcome Scaffolding Structure Multimodality Attention Participation Self-reliance

  11. Results Program theoryimplemented

  12. Results Program just partlyimplemented

  13. Benefitsusingmethod Context: Close to context Learning: Strenghten formative evaluation Genericqualities: Families of mechanisms generic knowledge

  14. Moderators Moderators(+/-): Meaning excitement copingexpectations confidence social contact etc. LEARNING CONTEXT Structure, multimodality, scaffolding

  15. Further studies? Scenariobasedpreparationconcerning non-confident students according to - Technical challenges - Cognitivechallenges - Emotionalchallenges

  16. Difficultiesusingmethod • Abstractions: A Complicated model takes time to delelope program theory with teachers and otherpractioners • Reduction: Danger in reducingcomplicatedmatters to simple manuals • Time-consuming: Findinggenericqualities, families of mechanism, documentation • Expensive

  17. Results Understanding students motivation Intervention teachers understand non-confident students' motivation significantly better than the control teachers do Intervention teachers are significantly better at understanding non-confident students assessed their own skills and persistence than control teachers do

  18. Criteriasfor a good P-theory • Actions and effectsin the same context b. Putativeeffectafter the action c. Good reasons to suspect a link between action and effect d. Empiricalevidence, signs of learning

  19. Regarding the planning tendency Not proactive analysis of the academic difficulties, students can get tendency To a limited extent redidaktisering in relation to nonconfidentstudents: Just do less of the same thing Tencency Extended use of multimodality

  20. Regardingteacherpresentation • visibility • multimodality • pre-understanding • Interaction between commonsense and technical terms • Activation of exploratory behavior • Task formulation: Coherent meaning between teacher presentations and learning material

  21. Regardingexercises and guidance (1) • Clear organization and clear task formulation gives momentum! • ? The quality of self-instructional learning material depends of the teachers scenario consciousness • ? Nonconfident student pupils coping expectations are related to lack of differentiation

  22. Regarding exercises and guidance (2) Tendency, motivation Nonconficentstudents express greater motivation than you would think: Just attend and belong to matters of motivation Tendency participation Nonconfident students involvement is enhanced and maintained when they are with safer students

  23. Cecilies,coping in the lesson : Copingalone With students With teacher Maybe C Not Coping Time Presentation Workshop Workshop Coping

  24. Mettes kommentar • Egentlig er det ikke forskellen i  gennemsnittet, der testes signifikant forskellig. • Det er i stedet den procentvise andel af hhv. differens 0, differens 1 osv. • Derfor er søjlediagrammerne (på slide 10 og 11 i den producerede powerpoint til lærerne) mere retvisende. • Man tester om de to fordelinger er ens, hvilket man næsten med øjekast kan se, at de ikke er. Man kan også se, at interventionslærernes fordeling tenderer mod mindre differenser. (Ovenstående har naturligvis som virkning, at gennemsnittet for TPL er lavere end kontrolgruppen, men at fordelingerne er forskellige er meget tydeligere og mere revisende i forhold til den udførte test. ) • Jeg ville personligt selv bruge  søjlediagrammerne på slide 10 og 11 i den producerede powerpoint til lærerne. Jeg kan godt lave dem om, så der ikke står TPL, men forsøgsgruppe eller interventionsgruppe.

  25. Fordele ved virkningsevaluering (1) • kontekstnær , både af gennemførelse og af forventninger • styrker formativ evaluering • kriteriearbejde = udvikling i fagmiljøer • komplekse kausalitetsforklaringer på komplekse spørgsmål • bred kildeanvendelse med inddragelse af mange kilder

  26. Fordele ved virkningsevaluering (2) • lokal og global anvendelsesværdi • bedre end best practice • opsamle viden fra flere virkningsevalueringer • konstruktiv dialog mellem forskellige aktører • læringsgevinst: afklaring af forventninger, antagelse, viden og ikke-viden • instrumentel nytteværdi: forbedring

  27. Vanskeligheder ved virkningsevaluering (1) • politiske og organisatoriske interesser er ikke nødvendigvis teoriudvikling • målforventninger kan føre til uklarhed og interessekonflikter • modstand mod at komme i under lup • modstand pga kausalitetsprincippet: Man kan godt fange fuglen, men ikke dens flugt!

  28. Vanskeligheder ved virkningsevaluering (2) • Tidskrævende • Kompleks model – kompliceret at arbejde med • Flowchartet kan irritere folk kan ’vokse’ til uoverskuelighed pga. kompleks forståelse af indsats i kontekst • Svært målbare forhold (kausalitet) • Balance i forhold til overførbarhed • opfølgning og anvendelse

  29. Results Program theoryimplemented

  30. Families of mechanisms Moderators +/- Meaning Excitement Copingexpectations Social contact etc CONTEKST Structure Multimodality Scaffolding Mechanisms(M) Outcome (O) Attention Participation Self-reliance

More Related