27.06.2013
•
Views
Objectives More efficient and faster preparation and transmission of data for analysis by the different roles involved in administration, management and quality assurance. 6. Conclusion and next steps Tim Cappelli Evaluation Impact The exams data was sent from the base hospital to MEO on the day of each OSCE exam. It was sent electronically over a secure link rather than as bundles of paper forms, reducing the time, cost and security of data transmission back to the centre. Because the data is already in electronic format, the data can be easily collated and assimilated into existing systems for analysis and distribution. Having business rules in the software that instantly flag incorrect forms or missing data before the examiners leave the site reduces the number of errors and facilitates the QA of the process. The pilot of the digital pens was evaluated and reported on to the Senior Management Team of the School together with a set of recommendations for large-scale roll out across all the base hospital. The recommendations were: Clarification of the data requirements of the Medical Exams Office (MEO). Demonstration of the process of using the pens to MEO staff. Assessment of the value of providing timely feedback to students: Another pilot, similar to the first, should be run. This time the results from the pens, including the textual feedback, should be passed directly to the students once the data has been collated, checked and approved for distribution. Test the viability and reliability of the mobile phone upload. Exploration of vendor support: Although Ubysis provided adequate support and advice prior to, and during, the pilot, it would be prudent to seek assurances that this level of support will continue in any future Training of Base administration staff in downloading and checking the pen’s content. Training of OSCE examiners: Some examiners expressed concerns over lack of training to provide appropriate feedback. The first two points were particularly important as there had been a great deal of resistance to the introduction of the technology from the MEO. This was partly due to a lack of communication and resulting misunderstanding of the technology and partly due to concerns about the technology making certain roles redundant. The result was that despite the pilot, MEO staff were still opposed to the technology and promoted the view the pilot had been unsuccessful. This ‘dis-information’ rapidly became the prevailing view and work was required to assure the concerns of the MEO staff. This demonstrates the importance of embracing all stakeholders at the start of any technology change. At present, the SMT are reviewing the results of the pilot, together with other initiatives in student feedback, to determine the most appropriate way forward. A final decision will be based on available resources and the views of staff and students. Acknowledgements Thanks to Dr’s Hilary Dexter and Lucie Byrne-Davies from the Manchester Medical School for their work on the student evaluation that informs much of this study. References Buzzetto-More, A. and Alade, J.A. (2006) “Best Practices in e-Assessment”, Journal of Information Technology Education, Vol 5, pp 251-269. Gibbs, G. (2010) Dimensions of Quality, The Higher Education Academy, http://search3.openobjects.com/kb5/hea/evidencenet/resource.page?record=12nH2AFIYcc [accessed 12 August 2011] Harden, R and Gleeson F (1979) “Assessment of clinical competence using an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE)”, Medical Education, Vol 13, No.1, pp39-54. Love, T and Cooper, T (2004) “Designing online information systems for portfolio-based assessment: Design criteria and heuristics”, Journal of Information Technology Education, Vol 3, pp65-81. 98
Tim Cappelli http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.77.6803&rep=rep1&type=pdf [accessed 15 August 2011] Nicol, D. & Macfalane-Dick, D. (2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. published in Studies Higher Education 2006, Vol 31(2), pp99-218. http://tltt.strath.ac.uk/REAP/public/Resources/DN_SHE_Final.pdf [accessed 12 August 2011] Ridgway, J. and McCusker, S. and Pead, D. (2007) ’Literature review of e-assessment.’, [online]. Futurelab, Bristol http://dro.dur.ac.uk/1929/1/Ridgway_Literature.pdf?DDD29+ded0kmt [accessed 15 August 2011] 99
-
Page 1 and 2:
Proceedings of the 10 th European C
-
Page 3 and 4:
Contents Paper Title Author(s) Page
-
Page 5 and 6:
Paper Title Author(s) Page No. A Qu
-
Page 7 and 8:
The Project Mobile Game Based Learn
-
Page 9 and 10:
Extreme Scaffolding in the Teaching
-
Page 11 and 12:
Malaysia); Tuomo Kakkonen (Universi
-
Page 13 and 14:
Preface These Proceedings represent
-
Page 15 and 16:
Mini Track Chairs Dr Antonios Andre
-
Page 17 and 18:
Cornélia Castro is a PhD student i
-
Page 19 and 20:
Manuel Frutos-Perez is the Leader o
-
Page 21 and 22:
David Mathew works at the Centre fo
-
Page 23 and 24:
Research interests include the inve
-
Page 25:
Novita Yulianti is a PhD student at
-
Page 28 and 29:
Samuel Adu Gyamfi et al. the develo
-
Page 30 and 31:
Samuel Adu Gyamfi et al. completion
-
Page 32 and 33:
Samuel Adu Gyamfi et al. interactio
-
Page 34 and 35:
Survey of Teachers’ use of Comput
-
Page 36 and 37:
Babatunde Alabi Alege and Stephen O
-
Page 38 and 39:
Babatunde Alabi Alege and Stephen O
-
Page 40 and 41:
Babatunde Alabi Alege and Stephen O
-
Page 42 and 43:
Issues and Challenges in Implementi
-
Page 44 and 45:
Hussein Al-Yaseen et al. 2000/2001
-
Page 46 and 47:
Hussein Al-Yaseen et al. phase invo
-
Page 48 and 49:
Hussein Al-Yaseen et al. Berthold,
-
Page 50 and 51:
Antonios Andreatos Figure 1: Estima
-
Page 52 and 53:
Antonios Andreatos exchange applied
-
Page 54 and 55:
Antonios Andreatos knowledge space,
-
Page 56 and 57:
Figure 5: Video metadata from YouTu
-
Page 58 and 59:
Antonios Andreatos The organisatio
-
Page 60 and 61:
Constructing a Survey Instrument fo
-
Page 62 and 63:
Jonathan Barkand The teacher demon
-
Page 64 and 65:
Jonathan Barkand Indicator 2.3: Has
-
Page 66 and 67:
References Jonathan Barkand Allen,
-
Page 68 and 69:
2. Pedagogical agents Orlando Belo
-
Page 70 and 71:
Orlando Belo Type (Tp), the refere
-
Page 72 and 73:
3.3 The agent’s architecture Orla
-
Page 74 and 75:
Some Reflections on the Evaluation
-
Page 76 and 77:
Nabil Ben Abdallah and Françoise P
-
Page 78 and 79:
Nabil Ben Abdallah and Françoise P
-
Page 80 and 81:
Nabil Ben Abdallah and Françoise P
-
Page 82 and 83:
Designing A New Curriculum: Finding
-
Page 84 and 85:
Andrea Benn For this new course, it
-
Page 86 and 87:
Andrea Benn Technology is already i
-
Page 88 and 89:
Andrea Benn To bring about the co-o
-
Page 90 and 91:
Latefa Bin Fryan and Lampros Stergi
-
Page 92 and 93:
Latefa Bin Fryan and Lampros Stergi
-
Page 94 and 95:
Faculty development Online course
-
Page 96 and 97:
Latefa Bin Fryan and Lampros Stergi
-
Page 98 and 99:
Latefa Bin Fryan and Lampros Stergi
-
Page 100 and 101:
Alice Bird being reviewed under the
-
Page 102 and 103:
Alice Bird Developing the process m
-
Page 104 and 105:
Alice Bird Reflecting on the feasib
-
Page 106 and 107:
3.3 Early stage implementation Alic
-
Page 108 and 109:
Enhancement of e-Testing Possibilit
-
Page 110 and 111:
Martin Cápay et al. of Likert scal
-
Page 112 and 113:
Martin Cápay et al. Figure 3 Proce
-
Page 114 and 115:
Martin Cápay et al. Figure 4: An e
-
Page 116 and 117:
Martin Cápay et al. On the other h
-
Page 118 and 119:
Tim Cappelli demand from students t
-
Page 120 and 121:
Tim Cappelli at a time and increasi
-
Page 122 and 123:
Tim Cappelli forms were processed a
-
Page 126 and 127:
Digital Educational Resources Repos
-
Page 128 and 129:
Cornélia Castro et al. Economic:
-
Page 130 and 131:
Cornélia Castro et al. Dimension E
-
Page 132 and 133:
Cornélia Castro et al. feedback on
-
Page 134 and 135:
Cornélia Castro et al. EdReNe (200
-
Page 136 and 137:
Ivana Cechova et al. The influence
-
Page 138 and 139:
4. Methodology Ivana Cechova et al.
-
Page 140 and 141:
Ivana Cechova et al. Although this
-
Page 142 and 143:
8. Conclusion Ivana Cechova et al.
-
Page 144 and 145:
Yin Ha Vivian Chan et al. What is s
-
Page 146 and 147:
Yin Ha Vivian Chan et al. as a viab
-
Page 148 and 149:
Yin Ha Vivian Chan et al. the ILC h
-
Page 150 and 151:
The Development and Application of
-
Page 152 and 153:
Serdar Çiftci and Mehmet Akif Ocak
-
Page 154 and 155:
4.3 Data collection Serdar Çiftci
-
Page 156 and 157:
Serdar Çiftci and Mehmet Akif Ocak
-
Page 158 and 159:
Table 8: Students’ responses to q
-
Page 160 and 161:
An Exploratory Comparative Study of
-
Page 162 and 163:
Marija Cubric et al. Web 2.0 tools
-
Page 164 and 165:
Marija Cubric et al. Despite all th
-
Page 166 and 167:
Marija Cubric et al. Staff profile
-
Page 168 and 169:
Marija Cubric et al. In case 3.2, a
-
Page 170 and 171:
Marija Cubric et al. Sorcinelli, M.
-
Page 172 and 173:
Figure 1: Adaptive eLearning system
-
Page 174 and 175:
Blanka Czeczotková et al. knowledg
-
Page 176 and 177:
Blanka Czeczotková et al. Figure 2
-
Page 178 and 179:
Changing Academics, Changing Curric
-
Page 180 and 181:
Christine Davies 2.2.4 Seminars CEL
-
Page 182 and 183:
Web Conferencing for us, by us and
-
Page 184 and 185:
Mark de Groot, paper (Elluminate 20
-
Page 186 and 187:
Mark de Groot, requested. The targe
-
Page 188 and 189:
Mark de Groot, members of the group
-
Page 190 and 191:
6.1 The quick wins Mark de Groot, S
-
Page 192 and 193:
Tools for Evaluating Students’ Wo
-
Page 194 and 195:
Jana Dlouhá et al. course was dist
-
Page 196 and 197:
2.4 Feedback - student perceptions
-
Page 198 and 199:
Jana Dlouhá et al. virtual learnin
-
Page 200 and 201:
3. Discussion Jana Dlouhá et al. Q
-
Page 202 and 203:
Jana Dlouhá et al. Sadler, R.D. (2
-
Page 204 and 205:
Jon Dron et al. Social networking i
-
Page 206 and 207:
Jon Dron et al. However, it is also
-
Page 208 and 209:
Jon Dron et al. further in enabling
-
Page 210 and 211:
4.3 Differentiated friends Jon Dron
-
Page 212 and 213:
Experimental Assessment of Virtual
-
Page 214 and 215:
Michaela Drozdová et al. to the or
-
Page 216 and 217:
Michaela Drozdová et al. Figure 1:
-
Page 218 and 219:
Figure 4: Decision tree for visual
-
Page 220 and 221:
Michaela Drozdová et al. very few
-
Page 222 and 223:
Glenn Duckworth Other studies have
-
Page 224 and 225:
Glenn Duckworth merely skim read th
-
Page 226 and 227:
8. Finance resources Glenn Duckwort
-
Page 228 and 229:
Glenn Duckworth was seen as being v
-
Page 230 and 231:
Francisco Perlas Dumanig et al. Stu
-
Page 232 and 233:
Francisco Perlas Dumanig et al. in
-
Page 234 and 235:
Francisco Perlas Dumanig et al. 3.6
-
Page 236 and 237:
Do you see What I see? - Understand
-
Page 238 and 239:
2.2 Deuteranopia Colin Egan et al.
-
Page 240 and 241:
Colin Egan et al. Figure 5: HCBE's
-
Page 242 and 243:
Figure 8a: Normal vision LogicWorks
-
Page 244 and 245:
Researching in the Open: How a Netw
-
Page 246 and 247:
Antonella Esposito previous edition
-
Page 248 and 249:
Antonella Esposito However, beyond
-
Page 250 and 251:
Antonella Esposito Moreno, M. A., F
-
Page 252 and 253:
Gert Faustmann with an evaluation o
-
Page 254 and 255:
Gert Faustmann come from the same s
-
Page 256 and 257:
Gert Faustmann Figure 5: UML class
-
Page 258 and 259:
Gert Faustmann The learner her/him
-
Page 260 and 261:
Gert Faustmann (i.e. who has to pro
-
Page 262 and 263:
Ana Mª Fernández-Pampillón et al
-
Page 264 and 265:
Ana Mª Fernández-Pampillón et al
-
Page 266 and 267:
Ana Mª Fernández-Pampillón et al
-
Page 268 and 269:
Ana Mª Fernández-Pampillón et al
-
Page 270 and 271:
Ana Mª Fernández-Pampillón et al
-
Page 272 and 273:
Cognitive Communication 2.0 in the
-
Page 274 and 275:
Sérgio André Ferreira et al. and
-
Page 276 and 277:
Sérgio André Ferreira et al. is p
-
Page 278 and 279:
Sérgio André Ferreira et al. Look
-
Page 280 and 281:
Sérgio André Ferreira et al. In F
-
Page 282 and 283:
To What Extent Does a Digital Audio
-
Page 284 and 285:
Rachel Fitzgerald consideration of
-
Page 286 and 287:
Rachel Fitzgerald understand, altho
-
Page 288 and 289:
Rachel Fitzgerald Although this is
-
Page 290 and 291:
Rachel Fitzgerald “The survey was
-
Page 292 and 293:
Messages of Support: Using Mobile T
-
Page 294 and 295:
Julia Fotheringham and Emily Alder
-
Page 296 and 297:
Julia Fotheringham and Emily Alder
-
Page 298 and 299:
Table 6: Results for reflective cyc
-
Page 300 and 301:
Blended Learning at the Alpen-Adria
-
Page 302 and 303:
Gabriele Frankl and Sofie Bitter to
-
Page 304 and 305:
Figure 4 Moodle usage among the AAU
-
Page 306 and 307:
Gabriele Frankl and Sofie Bitter No
-
Page 308 and 309:
Gabriele Frankl and Sofie Bitter wh
-
Page 310 and 311:
Evaluating the use of Social Networ
-
Page 312 and 313:
Elaine Garcia et al. The process by
-
Page 314 and 315:
4.3 Data analysis Elaine Garcia et
-
Page 316 and 317:
Elaine Garcia et al. issues of priv
-
Page 318 and 319:
8. Conclusions and recommendations
-
Page 320 and 321:
Elaine Garcia et al. Nabi, A. (2011
-
Page 322 and 323:
Danny Glick and Roni Aviram univers
-
Page 324 and 325:
Danny Glick and Roni Aviram most im
-
Page 326 and 327:
Danny Glick and Roni Aviram opinion
-
Page 328 and 329:
Danny Glick and Roni Aviram Bernard
-
Page 330 and 331:
Andrea Gorra and Ollie Jones to hel
-
Page 332 and 333:
Andrea Gorra and Ollie Jones Howeve
-
Page 334 and 335:
Andrea Gorra and Ollie Jones Figure
-
Page 336 and 337:
Andrea Gorra and Ollie Jones Studen
-
Page 338 and 339:
Rose Heaney and Megan Anne Arroll A
-
Page 340 and 341:
Rose Heaney and Megan Anne Arroll l
-
Page 342 and 343:
Rose Heaney and Megan Anne Arroll
-
Page 344 and 345:
Rose Heaney and Megan Anne Arroll J
-
Page 346 and 347:
Amanda Jefferies learning was furth
-
Page 348 and 349:
Amanda Jefferies way in which the o
-
Page 350 and 351:
Amanda Jefferies their teaching mat
-
Page 352 and 353:
A Methodology for Incorporating Usa
-
Page 354 and 355:
Anne Jelfs and Chetz Colwell To try
-
Page 356 and 357:
Anne Jelfs and Chetz Colwell We wor
-
Page 358 and 359:
The Virtual Learning Environment -
-
Page 360 and 361:
John Jessel 2.1 An outline framewor
-
Page 362 and 363:
John Jessel teachers who agreed to
-
Page 364 and 365:
John Jessel ‘“reduce the clicks
-
Page 366 and 367:
Mutlimodal Teaching Through ICT Edu
-
Page 368 and 369:
Paraskevi Kanari and Georgios Potam
-
Page 370 and 371:
Paraskevi Kanari and Georgios Potam
-
Page 372 and 373:
Rosario Kane-Iturrioz Regarding lan
-
Page 374 and 375:
Rosario Kane-Iturrioz Figure 2: Exa
-
Page 376 and 377:
Rosario Kane-Iturrioz Tests very us
-
Page 378 and 379:
Rosario Kane-Iturrioz When compared
-
Page 380 and 381:
Rosario Kane-Iturrioz Although the
-
Page 382 and 383:
Jana Kapounova et al. eLearning is
-
Page 384 and 385:
Jana Kapounova et al. Each dimensio
-
Page 386 and 387:
Jana Kapounova et al. project, conn
-
Page 388 and 389:
Acknowledgments Jana Kapounova et a
-
Page 390 and 391:
Andrea Kelz skills and competences
-
Page 392 and 393:
Andrea Kelz web-based activities in
-
Page 394 and 395:
Andrea Kelz system. Most other univ
-
Page 396 and 397:
Open Courses: The Next big Thing in
-
Page 398 and 399:
Kaido Kikkas et al. However, in the
-
Page 400 and 401:
Kaido Kikkas et al. generation of w
-
Page 402 and 403:
Kaido Kikkas et al. Occasional gue
-
Page 404 and 405:
John Knight and Rebecca Rochon guid
-
Page 406 and 407:
Evaluation of Quality of Learning S
-
Page 408 and 409:
Eugenijus Kurilovas et al. Essalmi
-
Page 410 and 411:
Eugenijus Kurilovas et al. (LOs), l
-
Page 412 and 413:
Eugenijus Kurilovas et al. Then hie
-
Page 414 and 415:
Eugenijus Kurilovas et al. If we lo
-
Page 416 and 417:
Models of eLearning: The Developmen
-
Page 418 and 419:
Stella Lee et al. Converging (AC a
-
Page 420 and 421:
Stella Lee et al. knowledge. Meta k
-
Page 422 and 423:
Stella Lee et al. Figure 3: Home pa
-
Page 424 and 425:
Stella Lee et al. Azevedo, R., Crom
-
Page 426 and 427:
Jake Leith et al. opportunities ble
-
Page 428 and 429:
Jake Leith et al. Data was collecte
-
Page 430 and 431:
Jake Leith et al. their informal sk
-
Page 432 and 433:
Jake Leith et al. For the summative
-
Page 434 and 435:
Sophisticated Usability Evaluation
-
Page 436 and 437:
Stephanie Linek and Klaus Tochterma
-
Page 438 and 439:
Stephanie Linek and Klaus Tochterma
-
Page 440 and 441:
Stephanie Linek and Klaus Tochterma
-
Page 442 and 443:
Social Networks, eLearning and Inte
-
Page 444 and 445:
Birgy Lorenz et al. 135 students p
-
Page 446 and 447:
Birgy Lorenz et al. The experts' st
-
Page 448 and 449:
Birgy Lorenz et al. Akdeniz, Y. (19
-
Page 450 and 451:
Arno Louw programmes, and within th
-
Page 452 and 453:
Arno Louw It should be clearly stat
-
Page 454 and 455:
Arno Louw somewhat an unwritten con
-
Page 456 and 457:
Arno Louw Lecturers assume that le
-
Page 458 and 459:
A treasure hunt has to be done to f
-
Page 460 and 461:
How to Represent a Frog That can be
-
Page 462 and 463:
Robert Lucas Occasionally we will a
-
Page 464 and 465:
Robert Lucas Note the need to creat
-
Page 466 and 467:
Robert Lucas Figure 5: A model of a
-
Page 468 and 469:
Learning by Wandering: Towards a Fr
-
Page 470 and 471:
Marie Martin and Michaela Noakes wa
-
Page 472 and 473:
Marie Martin and Michaela Noakes Th
-
Page 474 and 475:
Marie Martin and Michaela Noakes is
-
Page 476 and 477:
Linda Martin et al. across the sect
-
Page 478 and 479:
Linda Martin et al. confidence. Alt
-
Page 480 and 481:
8. Conclusion Linda Martin et al. T
-
Page 482 and 483:
Personalized e-Feedback and ICT Mar
-
Page 484 and 485:
Maria-Jesus Martinez-Argüelles et
-
Page 486 and 487:
Source: Own elaboration from survey
-
Page 488 and 489:
Maria-Jesus Martinez-Argüelles et
-
Page 490 and 491:
Maria-Jesus Martinez-Argüelles et
-
Page 492 and 493:
1.1 Semantic dimension Maria-Jesús
-
Page 494 and 495:
2. Methodology Maria-Jesús Martín
-
Page 496 and 497:
Maria-Jesús Martínez-Argüelles e
-
Page 498 and 499:
Maria-Jesús Martínez-Argüelles e
-
Page 500 and 501:
David Mathew members of staff frigh
-
Page 502 and 503:
David Mathew disclose this informat
-
Page 504 and 505:
David Mathew baboon smells the wate
-
Page 506 and 507:
Peter Mikulecky framing learning, p
-
Page 508 and 509:
Peter Mikulecky inhabitants or work
-
Page 510 and 511:
Acknowledgements Peter Mikulecky Th
-
Page 512 and 513:
Karen Hughes Miller and Linda Leake
-
Page 514 and 515:
Karen Hughes Miller and Linda Leake
-
Page 516 and 517:
Karen Hughes Miller and Linda Leake
-
Page 518 and 519:
An Analysis of Collaborative Learni
-
Page 520 and 521:
2.3 Flexible and accessible learnin
-
Page 522 and 523:
3.1 Definition of case study Peter
-
Page 524 and 525:
Peter Mkhize et al. Basically, soci
-
Page 526 and 527:
Peter Mkhize et al. you’ve got yo
-
Page 528 and 529:
Ideas for Using Critical Incidents
-
Page 530 and 531:
Jonathan Moizer and Jonathan Lean I
-
Page 532 and 533:
Jonathan Moizer and Jonathan Lean o
-
Page 534:
Jonathan Moizer and Jonathan Lean M