Jtelss2011 evaluation


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Jtelss2011 evaluation

  1. 1. Evaluation results
  2. 2. JTEL Summer School 2011: Participation 64 PhD applications 19 countries represented 1 42 PhD participants by institutions 3 participating 2 1 14 PhD participants from previous summer in the summer 2 or winter schools school 2 12 2 22 nationalities 36 men 2 8 8 represented by 29 womenUSA 1 1 PhD students 3 2 3 2 23 Lecturers and 2 Organisers 2 5 4 2
  3. 3. Nikos Manouselis Milos Kravcik (Greek Research & Marie Joubert (RWTH Aachen Martin Wolpers Technology Network) (University of Bristol) University) (Fraunhofer FIT) Joris Klerkx Ambjörn Naeve(Katholieke Universiteit Leuven) (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) Michael Derntl Fridolin Wild Sandy El Helou (RWTH Aachen University ) (Open University) (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) Denis Gillet Tomaz Klobucar (Ecole Polytechnique Margit Hofer Ralf Klamma Katherine Maillet (Institut Jozef Stefan) Fédérale de Lausanne) (Zentrum fur Soziale Innovation) (RWTH Aachen (Institut Telecom) University)
  4. 4. Nikos Palavitsinis (Greek Research & Marcela Porta Maren Scheffel Technology Network) (Institut Telecom) (Fraunhofer FIT) Peter Kraker (Know-Center) Maria Perifanou(University of Athens) Martin Sillaots Zinayida Petrushyna (Talinn University) (RWTH Aachen University)
  5. 5. Great success for JTEL Summer School 2011 Schedule and workshop topics well predefined. participants were great! great location great location great location great location“I have attended 3 JTEL SSs now (2009, 2010,2011), and 2011 was by far the best”. The Good I am very satisfied. appropriate summer weather Very good organization. Selection of Topics was Good reflections good, was Nearly perfectThey have my respect and gratitude. Well organized!
  6. 6. Gender Distribution among men and women answering the evaluation questionnaire was nearly 50-50.
  7. 7. Domain of study Computer Science and Pedagogy each represent a third of the participants. Only %18 of the participants identify themselves as researchers in TEL. Among disciplines represented in “Other”: Psychology and the participation of other disciplines that are currently implementing TEL, like medicine.
  8. 8. What was your role at the JTEL summer School? 85% of the participants were PhD students (a total of 35 attendants).
  9. 9. How did you heard about JTEL Summer School? “Other”: additional newsletters.
  10. 10. How would you rate the JTEL Summer School as awhole with respect to the professional and learning opportunities available to you? The Summer School was a great success in terms of lectures and workshop content. Excellent = 5 Poor = 1
  11. 11. How relevant was the event for your research?
  12. 12. In terms of your learning, whichaspects were most beneficial for you?
  13. 13. In terms of other professional benefits, what did you gain?
  14. 14. Please add anything else you would like to tell us interms of what you gained from attending the school. There were two predominant answers to this question: 1. Students would like to have more PhD guided sessions (how to write, investigate, how to publish, etc.) 2. They will like to acquire more TEL technical knowledge (definitions, fields, and theory).
  15. 15. Did you Twitter during the Summer School? Reason to twitter: - To see what participants thought of the school and to follow up on the links contained within the tweets. - To share and record learned information. - For the first time. - For fun . - Announcing current events, post results of group work - To extend the exuberance of JTEL beyond the walls of the Hotel. - To connect with the other attendances. To discuss questions related to the sessions. - Networking and discussion. Comment on workshops and sessions. - Backchannel conversation during sessions. - For participating in one workshop and lecture. - Sharing information, keep my colleagues on track.
  16. 16. What other digital tools have you used during the Summer School to support your participation? Other tools include: - Diigo - Wordle - Flashmeeting - Twitter - Flickr Reasons for using the tool: - I search in libraries and read in blogs instead of tweets. - I use SN to keep contacts. - I am trying to explore how to use virtual worlds in research. - Quick file sharing distribution, - Conduction about workshops and widget development. - For sharing projects knowledge. - Publishing photos, - To look for JTEL news, to receive information from tutors and others.
  17. 17. Do you plan to participate in post JTEL Summer School activities like follow-up meetings? Students are eager to continue their collaboration but are not all aware of the possibilities.
  18. 18. In what way do you plan to formalise networkingrelationships that you have developed at the summer school? Perhaps we could encourage participants to include an acknowledgement to the JTEL Summer School the their publications which were enriched by the event. It could contribute to promoting the event among the research community.
  19. 19. For those students who have participated in a previous JTEL, could you give us some indicators about how the Summer School has had an impact on your PhD or other research work that you are involved in?
  20. 20. Are you planning to attend Summer School 2012? Financial issues are a concern among the students. Many students will come only if they find sponsoring. Participation in the summer school also depends on the dates.
  21. 21. Did you have a scholarship to attend Summer School 2011?
  22. 22. Would your university or organization have financed your participation?
  23. 23. Did you develop any mentoringrelationships ate the Summer School? Almost half the students developed a mentoring relationship.
  24. 24. What are your suggestions andrecommendations for Summer School 2012?
  25. 25. What are your suggestions and recommendations for Summer School 2012: Topics Students are eager to have more training in: • Research methodologies and PhD training, • Specific technologies which enhance learning: mobile, HCI, social media, PLE, adaptive hypermedia, etc., • Education sciences: learning theories, how technology enhances learning, • Interdisciplinary research.
  26. 26. What are your suggestions and recommendations for Summer School 2012: Activities/Organization Groups of Work 9% Breaks Several participants Research 23% offered to organize activities 11% workshops and lectures and to participate in the student committee. Several attendants Positive mentioned that the week comment full of activities and can 17% be tiring. Other 23% Hands on Workshops 17%
  27. 27. What are your suggestions and recommendations for Summer School 2012: Location Most of the comments were positive. Participants made suggestions for Summer School 2012, among the most frequent suggestions: Portugal (22%), followed by Croatia (11%). Negative comments about the venue: the hotel was too big, the tourists were distractive, the WiFi connection could be improved.
  28. 28. What are your suggestions and recommendations for Summer School 2012: Participants Specific names include: - Jon Pron - Alec Couros - Scott Wilson - Gary Hayes - Alec Couros - Steve Wheela