Professional Documents
Culture Documents
E-LEARNING COURSE ON
WASTE MANAGEMENT
Course Evaluation Report
Group E
IS 3018 E Learning & Instructional
Design
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
5.1
Accessibility ................................................................................................................................... 7
5.2
Content ......................................................................................................................................... 7
5.3
5.4
Structure ....................................................................................................................................... 8
5.5
5.6
Text ............................................................................................................................................... 9
5.7
Timing............................................................................................................................................ 9
5.8
5.9
Interactivity ................................................................................................................................. 10
5.10
Multimedia .................................................................................................................................. 10
5.11
Assessments ................................................................................................................................ 10
5.12
5.13
5.14
5.15
Discussion ........................................................................................................................................... 12
6.1 Learning Theories used .................................................................................................................... 12
6.2 Design guidelines & principles ......................................................................................................... 13
7.
1|Page
Index No
Reg Number
12020196
2012IS019
M. R. Faideena
Project
Manager,
Developer, Animator
12020082
2012IS008
Sajeeha Begum
12020374
2012IS037
Minura Jinadasa
Editor,
Narrator,
Developer
Content
12020201
2012/IS/020
M. S. M. Fathih
Developer, Graphic
Content Developer
Designer,
12020323
2012IS032
Fareed Isfan
Graphic
Designer,
Developer
Content
12020684
2012is068
Roshana Fathima
2|Page
Name
Role
Content
3|Page
outline the importance of reducing, reusing and recycling to a person who has no idea
of their importance
4|Page
5|Page
6|Page
5. Results of Evaluation
5.1 Accessibility
Accessibility refers to the ease of accessing the course. The course is hosted online and
is available free of charge for any interested party and as such, accessibility is high.
We have also followed the guidelines in IS3018 to increase this. To give a few
examples we have tried it in Firefox and Linux on Chrome as well as Firefox, Chrome,
Safari and Microsoft Internet Explorer in Windows (Chrome was on a dual core
laptop). Except for an inherent slowness of internet explorer, it worked reasonably
fast, each page loading well above the 10 second threshold that frustrates users
including in Internet Explorer.
However, it was not possible to find the course when searched by common keywords.
This is an inherent problem when using free domains, however we did attempt a level
of SEO when it didnt turn up on the first search page, although it still did not appear
in the first page.
Navigation was considered effective by all three and this was understandable
considering the site followed at all times possible, the standard web layouts and
buttons including in the content pages. All links and buttons had been tested by us
and worked well as we had tested them earlier.
5.2 Content
We understood that text and the narration seemed to contradict at 2 points when a
reader reads while listening. We reduced parts of the narration to remove this. (This
was pointed out by participant C; a fact missed by both A & B. We also adjusted the
narration speed in 2 slides which had more text so that an average reader (reading at
approx. 200 words per minute) will not get left behind during narration.
Content on slides were approved by all three as clear. The content was adjusted
several times throughout the development process to ensure there was not too much
text but also not too many slides with little amount of text that would discourage
participants due to slide numbers; by reaching a balance. The images selected were
used to complement the text consistently and this was commented by participants A
and B both on their own accord while studying examples. When queries, they
affirmed that the examples were found to be relevant by them.
7|Page
5.4 Structure
The content sequence tuned by us during preparation of course maps and story
boards. All three participants affirmed that they found the flow of the content to be
logical and well-structured with consistency across how each of the three Rs were
presented.
8|Page
The font was changed from the original design when making the revised design. We
maintained the formatting in the final revised design and this appeared appealing to
our test subjects as well.
5.6 Text
As this is a public awareness course, from inception, special attention was paid to
ensure that the sentence structures, words and ideas were simple to extent possible
without compromising the desired learning outcomes. Spelling and grammar was
tested by the team to comply with design.
We had included a significant amount of text in each slide in the first design. In order
to highlight key points as well as enhance the readability of the slides by reducing
cluttered up text. We transferred majority of the information in to the narrations.
5.7 Timing
For our participants A, B and C, the entire module took less than 2 hours (participant
C taking 1 hour 45minutes which was the longest); to the level to complete the quiz
with 80% accuracy. While C commented that he could have finished faster if required,
all three agreed that what they learnt was sufficient within the time period (also taking
in to account the fact that they were able to show sufficient recall to meet the learning
outcomes after an hour). The time allocated for module 3 in syllabus is 3 hrs.
5.9 Interactivity
Considering this should be a system that was to be used by a diverse range of
individuals, we the interactivity was not excessive but at a suitable and very standard
level and we also paid attention to the loading time and client machine/bandwidth
constraints in deciding on interactive features. Considering this, we cut back on the
special effects such as when clicking a button but maintained aesthetic appearance.
This was balanced to ensure that response did not exceed the maximum allowable 1.0
second for interactive systems although once pages were loaded, response was
practically instantaneous.
5.10
Multimedia
This was considered together with interactivity. The pages of the system contains
narrative and two videos as stated to improve the effectiveness of the learning
process. They have been evaluated by us and also affirmed by the participants A, B,
C to be useful as well as usable in systems they used while increasing attractiveness.
5.11
Assessments
Variety of the quizzes to cover the breadth was considered sufficient by the
participants. It was recommended by participant C to consider developing a method
to track the progress of multiple participants and we noted this as a future
development. Both MCQ and drag-and-drop quizzes were approved by participants.
As the course was not fully developed, being restricted to one module, the formative
evaluation of the module was, in effect, also the summative evaluation at the current
stage of development though grading facility is not provided at this stage.
5.12
This focused on availability and support of the professional, that is, the lecturer. We
could not evaluate this since it varies from person to person, however, in developing
this course, we constantly focused this to be a system that could be used fully
independent of a lecturer and this was evaluated as such a system with positive
feedback.
10 | P a g e
5.13
This was facilitated by the forum on the learning site. We tested it for functionality,
but we could not extensively test it with multiple participants and we launched the
system with current functionality.
A limitation that we are currently working to improve is the inability to add files in
postings for other participants to see.
5.14
Considering the module that we implemented, we can reasonably affirm that the
learning outcomes were met when we evaluated performance from the quizzes as well
as random questioning by us to further ensure the meeting of the objectives. The
reason for further questions were not due to insufficiency of the quiz; the quizzes were
developed for the candidate to test him/herself while in this case we needed to also
evaluate the system which was not a primary function of the quiz.
5.15
In conclusion, all three participants were satisfied with the module and also provided
some constructive feedback. We were also able to evaluate this from our questions on
their knowledge of the course.
11 | P a g e
6. Discussion
6.1 Learning Theories used
The main theory that guided us is cognitivism. We focused on how people learn using
schema where we intended to maintain a logical flow of information, giving information
in chunks that make sense. This is clearly evident when considering the consistent
manner that each slide has just the right amount of related info that can be processed and
assimilated in one or to chunks and the separating/spacing of paragraphs and points too
are expected to contribute to this, for eg, each R concept explanation slide is consistent
with the others and each R concept slide is followed by an example slide; these example
slides are all consistent. The contents list clearly outlines the course contents so that the
learner understand the flow and knows what to expect at which point ones the structure
is understood. To increase effectiveness, we have used consistent and related images with
text which is also backed up by the narration.
We have made of secondary use of constructivism to a less extent when familiarizing the
applications of concepts by using real life examples that participants directly come to
contact with so that knowledge can be created by relating the new information with the
past experience.
Social constructivism is also used
Where the quiz is concerned, in addition to the above, operant condition of behaviourism
was used by perceptually rewarding the user with sounds of approval and the colour
green with a tick as well as negative sounds/warnings (familiar due to their use in
Windows) associated with red and also inability to make the move (in drag and drop)
In effect, while cognitivism forms the base, we were guided all four theories to various
extents in developing the course
12 | P a g e
13 | P a g e
14 | P a g e
15 | P a g e