china garments mansion

Sociedade Portuguesa de Inovação

Paris, September, 2005

Intitial Review Process - Highlighted 10 HEI

eLearning Programmes

InnoUniLearning – The Fostering of Innovative eLearning Strategies in Higher EducationSeptember 2005

Introduction

Data Collection

Review Process Methodology

Review Process Results

Agenda


Highlighted 25 HEI eLearning programmes

Select the highlighted 10 institutions and 3 additional institutions per Member State represented by the project partnership.

Review conducted by the Advisory Panel.

Initial Review Process (in progress)

Introduction

Phase 1 (c)

Identified HEIs contacted by partners requesting their participation with regard to the survey questionnaire.

Questionnaire responses reviewed and institutions prioritized based on the developed criteria.


Introduction

Survey Questionnaire

The Questionnaire consists of the following Sections:

Teachers

Learners

Teaching Methodology

Institution

General Comments


Introduction

Survey Questionnaire

Each Section consists of several Criteria

Teachers• Support

• Content• Technology

Learners• Learning Skills • Support

• Services• Technology

Teaching Methodology• Interactivity• Motivation• Assessment

General Comments

Institution• Self Assessment


Data Collection

Survey Conducted by Partners

Period of Data Collection: December

2004 – September 2005

Initial Mailing

Accompanied by telephone

follow-up


Returned Questionnaires

Country Sent ReceivedAustria 13 10France* 18 / 25 20

UK - Open University 15 9UK - Salford 16 11

Portugal 11 7Hungary 7 7

Total* 80/87 64

Data Collection

*The French project partner experienced a high level of interest from the French HEI eLearning community once the community became aware of the project’s objectives. This interest provided an opportunity for additional HEI eLearning programmes to be identified. For this reason the initial total number of 80 HEI eLearning programmes increased to 87.


Lessons Learned – National Experiences Encountered Challenges

Barriers to Overcome

General Comments

Data Collection

Austria

United Kingdom

France

Portugal

Hungary


Lessons Learned - Portugal

Data Collection


Selection Criteria per Country

Lessons Learned - Partners

Austria

France

United Kingdom

Hungary

Discussion


Data Collection

Encountered Challenges

Given Time Frame

Identification of competent contact persons

Barriers to Overcome

Fear to receive a “bad scoring / ranking ” result

General Comments

Some questions were not clear to the interviewed

persons and demanded further explanation

Lessons Learned – Portugal



The survey consisted of two types of questions:

Quantitative and

Qualitative questions

Evaluation



Evaluation

A number of obtainable scores was allocated to each Section

This number was broken down over the different

criteria of each section

Within the different criteria the scores were distributed

over the number of questions

Within each question the scores were allocated to the answers of the

questions

To evaluate the Quantitative and Qualitative Questions:



Example: Allocation of Scores

Evaluation

Teachers Maximum 115 Points(65 Points for Quantitative Questions and 50 Points for Qualitative Questions

• Support-Content Maximum 65 Points(35 Points for Quantitative Questions and 30 Points for Qualitative Questions

• Question 1. Maximum 15 Points• Answer 1 3,75 Points• Answer 2 3,75 Points• Answer 3 3,75 Points• Answer 4 3,75 Points• Answer 5 0 Points• Answer 6 0 Points



Evaluation

Accumulated Scores

Weighted Scores

Ranked Scores

A combination of the Above

Quantitative Questions

The Quantitative Questions were evaluated through:



Evaluation

The partner’s local knowledge / expertise

regarding

The Identified Relevance of the Answers

Within an established Spectrum (0 to 10

for Questions of Sections 1 to 4 and 0 to 15

for Section 5)

Qualitative Questions

The Qualitative Questions were evaluated through:



Teachers 100Learners 100

Teaching Methodology 100Institution 100Teachers 50

Teaching Methodology 10Institution 10

General Comments 30

500

Distribution of Scores by Section

Total

Questionnaire

Quantitative Part

Qualitative Part

Distribution of Scores

Initial Distribution




The OU suggested the following aspects to be considered:

Suggestions of the Open University (OU)

The balance between Sections

The balance within Sections

The balance within Questions & Answers

The relevance of Questions and Answers

in terms of the allocated Scores



Teachers 65Learners 120

Teaching Methodology 105Institution 60Teachers 50

Teaching Methodology 10Institution 10

General Comments 30

450


Total

Questionnaire

Quantitative Part

Qualitative Part


Distribution after Review


Presentation of the Survey Results

&

Overall Discussion on the highlighted 10 HEI

eLearning Programmes

Review Process Results


Porto - Portugal

Edificio “Les Palaces”

Rua Júlio Dinis, no. 242, 208

4050-318 Porto, PORTUGAL

Tel: 22 607 64 00

Fax: 22 609 91 64

[email protected]

TagusPark

Núcleo Central, 232

2780 - 920 Oeiras, PORTUGAL

Tel: 21 421 22 49Fax: 21 421 12 01

[email protected]

www.spi.pt

Lisbon - Portugal

Beijing – P.R.China

China Garments Mansion, No. 99, Rm. 915 Jiaoguo Rd., ChaoYang Dist., Beijing, 100020Tel: 010-65812758Fax: 010-65812758

[email protected]

California - USA2102 Business Center Drive, Suite 220EIrvine, CA 92612 USATel: +1 949 253 5702Fax: +1 949 253 5703

[email protected]

Maryland - USASuite 325 5523 Research Park Drive Baltimore, MD 21228 Tel: 443-543-5530 Fax: 443-543-5533 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

china garments mansion

Education

quantitative questions

questions of sections

number of questions

relevance of questions

intitial review process

types of questions

qualitative questions

allocated scores