Uploaded on

Spice evaluation: first results of the general evaluation

Spice evaluation: first results of the general evaluation

More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
498
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • The evaluation consisted of 4 questionnaires for students and 4 for teachers: specific/general, pre/post General questionnaires are always the same per student/ teacher Specific questionnaires are the same for the teachers, but different for each GP for the students (created by the teachers)  Designed with the help of the teachers T imeline: February – May General QU: at the very beginning, before any implementation – and post – at the very end after all implementations Specific QU: before and after each implementation Minimum number of forms expected
  • The evaluation consisted of 4 questionnaires for students and 4 for teachers: specific/general, pre/post General questionnaires are always the same per student/ teacher Specific questionnaires are the same for the teachers, but different for each GP for the students (created by the teachers)  Designed with the help of the teachers T imeline: February – May General QU: at the very beginning, before any implementation – and post – at the very end after all implementations Specific QU: before and after each implementation Minimum number of forms expected
  • The evaluation consisted of 4 questionnaires for students and 4 for teachers: specific/general, pre/post General questionnaires are always the same per student/ teacher Specific questionnaires are the same for the teachers, but different for each GP for the students (created by the teachers)  Designed with the help of the teachers T imeline: February – May General QU: at the very beginning, before any implementation – and post – at the very end after all implementations Specific QU: before and after each implementation Minimum number of forms expected
  • Number of teachers Number of students: slightly more boys than girls, numbers in the post decreased --| normal drop outs, sicknesses, and disqualification of SLO cstudents.
  • 16 diff edu systems from 15 countries
  • What we can see here is that the students are more or less equally interested in all the subjects. This proofs that this evaluation has been carried out with kids who are not biased (for example with kids who are specially interested in Science)
  • 16 diff edu systems from 15 countries
  • 24 teachers initially, but finally 41 participated Already use inquiry based learning as they use hands on...important especially for science teaching
  • What we can see here is that the students are more or less equally interested in all the subjects. This proofs that this evaluation has been carried out with kids who are not biased (for example with kids who are specially interested in Science)
  • We wanted to know the time the students and teachers spend in front of the computer per day... As expected students use comp more than teachers T: most T use it between 1-2 h but tendency to use it less down to less than 30 min Shows that teachers are used to using computers, but inquiry based doesn’t mean ICT S: Students use the computer slightly more than the teachers: over 60% use it more than 2 hours per day
  • Diff between different countries...general comparison within countries not onlz general
  • Similarity can be notices  correlation between the attitude and interest a teacher shows and the attitudeand interest of a studnet We can see the influence of teachers in students
  • Reasons for such a low success: The time between when the students filled in the pre and the post questionnaire was to short  effect on their motivation will only be visible after a certain period of time Teachers who implemented the GP were not that familiar with it yet (as it was not their GP) and therefore if they do it more often the quality and effect might also increase?!
  • 24 GPs in diff lang and different topics

Transcript

  • 1. First results of the General Evaluation BARBARA SCHWARZENBACHER, EUROPEAN SCHOOLNET Spice is funded with support from the European Commission. This presentation reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
  • 2. STRUCTURE
    • Methodology
    • Profile of teachers and students who participated
    • Main results of general evaluation
    • Conclusion
    • Next steps
  • 3. METHODOLOGY
    • Difference between types of questionnaires
    • General:
      • General questions to find out the profile of the teacher and students:
          • the teaching habits
          • favourite subjects
          • computer literacy
          • learner type
          • Motivation and interest in Science and ICT
    • Specific:
          • Designed by the teachers (= creators of GP)  inquiry based learning
          • Questions to test the knowledge of the students in the specific topic
  • 4. METHODOLOGY
    • Evaluation
    • 4 questionnaires
      • General PRE / POST
      • Specific PRE / POST
    • In total 54 questionnaires
    • Implementation February – May
    • More participants due to teacher collaboration
  • 5. PORTRAIT OF STUDENTS PRE - questionnaires POST –questionnaires TOTAL numbers 2010 students 1871 students Girls 46 % 44% Boys 54% 56% Age 12 : 360 pax 13 : 282 pax 14 : 551 pax 15 : 667 pax 16+ : 150 pax 12 : 232 pax 13 : 242 pax 14 : 512 pax 15 : 655 pax 16+ : 230 pax
  • 6. PORTRAIT OF STUDENTS
      • Students per country
  • 7. PROFILE OF STUDENTS
    • Interest in subjects
  • 8. PORTRAIT OF STUDENTS 8 - All 7 - Visual+Tactile 6 - Auditory+Tactile 5 - Visual+Auditory 4 - Don't know 3 - Tactile 2 - Auditory 1 - Visual Learner types – self-evaluation of students
  • 9. PROFILE OF TEACHERS
    • 24 teachers initially, but finally 41 participated
    • Learner types they cater for:
  • 10. PROFILE OF TEACHERS
    • Experience with Inquiry-based learning
  • 11. RESULTS OF GENERAL EVALUATION
    • Use of computers per day
    • Teachers Students
  • 12. RESULTS OF GENERAL EVALUATION
    • Students: Use of computers per day / per country
  • 13. RESULTS OF GENERAL EVALUATION
      • Computer literacy
      • Teachers Students
  • 14. RESULTS OF GENERAL EVALUATION
    • Success of Initiatives according to the teachers
  • 15. RESULTS OF GENERAL EVALUATION PRE POST 6) These lessons helped me to understand what scientific methods are and to develop my ability to use them 8) Made it easier for me to understand the work of scientists 9) Caused me and my fellow students to debate about scientific issues (and social issues such as ecology)
  • 16. NEXT STEPS
    • Evaluation of specific questionnaires
    • Things that we are looking at:
      •  Criteria that make up a Good Practice
      • Travel well criteria (language, curriculum, methods...)
      •  Recommendations