Difference between revisions of "Page 13"

Latest revision as of 14:05, 28 November 2013

[edit] siLang Evaluation Framework

The siLang evaluation framework has been inspired by the Learning Experiments technique. More precisely, case studies that embody features of the Learning Experiments methodology will be used to explore the dynamic and unfolding interactions of learning events. Case studies are the vehicle to conduct ‘learning experiments’ and to collect qualitative data that will allow us to understand cause and effects in real educational contexts. Participatory observation, interviews and debriefing activities will be also deployed to collect qualitative data.

[edit] Methodological considerations

The siLang sampling strategy can be better described as ‘purposive’ given the fact that a sample that serves specific needs has been chosen. More precisely, the sam-ple consists of groups of learners (professionals, vocational workers and higher education students) which are undertaking foreign language courses and a group of trainers that are active in delivering foreign languages courses to adults. The groups are located in the countries that participate in the consortium namely Greece, Italy, Portugal, Estonia and Norway. In order to limit criticism about the use of a ‘boosted’ sample (Cohen et al, 2007) the purposive sampling strategy was combined with the snowball sampling strategy. More precisely, trainers from the purposive sample where used as informants to identify or to put the researchers in touch with, others trainers who qualify for inclusion in the siLang evaluation activities and are willing to expose their students to the siLang learning tools. Key informants were also identified among the newly-established sample and so on.

[edit] Who will be involved?

The siLang evaluation strategy aims at generating effective feedback both internally and externally to ensure that feedback originates both by consortium partners and by representatives of stakeholders beyond the consortium. Moreover, two external experts with different backgrounds will be engaged in the external evaluation process during the second year of the project implementation period. Their combined expertise will cover methodological learning design, game-based learning design, and software engineering for educational purposes.

[edit] Combining internal and external evaluation

The combination of internal and external evaluation activities and the way evaluation activities are structured help to deal with the problem of ‘methodboundedness’ (Cohen et al, 2007). Coupled with this, in order to achieve a more holistic view on learning outcomes and targeting at cross-cultural views space triangulation is employed: as it has been already mentioned, evaluation activities are not conducted in one country but in five namely: Greece, Estonia, Italy, Norway and Portugal.

[edit] On-going Evaluation

Apart from what has mentioned so far, the activities are carried out in an on-going manner. In a way, this also allow us to adopt a holist view on learning outcomes; this is not to state that the focus in on factors of change or cognitive change but rather on documenting feedback useful for the technological and pedagogical design. More precisely, the feedback that is being generated by internal or external evaluation activities affects directly the development of the siLang tools (i.e the siLang serious game, the learning activities, the educational material and resources and the learning design). Amendments or updates in the design may activate a new cycle of internal and external evaluation activities.

The siLang evaluation framework is designed for producing well rounded feed-back from project partners, representatives of stakeholder groups, and experts with the objective of best implementing the proposal work plan.

Click here to go to the Homepage

[edit] References

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007) Research Methods in Education, 6th edition. London