Unified in Learning –Separated by Space

                                           Martin Rehm
                          ...
Overview

•(Methodological) Framework

•Structure

•Results

•(Possible) Next Steps

Maastricht Graduate School of Governa...
Framework

•Large international organization (IO)
•2006 & 2007 (6 months each):
    ~     400 middle- & top-management
   ...
(Methodological) Framework

                         Learning Program

    e-Learning
  Online Remedial
  Teaching Model
 ...
e-Learning
    Entry
                  5 Modules:
 Questionnaires
                  •Self-Study
                   (Lectur...
Online Discussion Groups

•“
 Learning Communities“(~ 15 part.)

•“Common identity”
 (Hung & Der-Thanq, 2001)

•“Neo-appre...
Results of the End-Evaluation




Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
2006                    2007
                                                                       (n=157)               ...
2006             2007
                                                                                      (n=157)       ...
Performance Indicators for Phase 1 in 2006 & 2007
(Averages: 1 –10)
                   10

                    9
         ...
(Possible) Next Steps

•Garrison, Anderson & Archer (2000)
    – Social Presence
    – Teaching Presence
    – Cognitive P...
Contact Details

Martin Rehm

Email
martin.rehm@governance.unimaas.nl

Internet
http://martinrehm.wordpress.com/
www.gover...
Unified in Learning –Separated by Space

                                                               Martin Rehm
      ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Unified in Learning –Separated by Space

365 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
365
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Unified in Learning –Separated by Space

  1. 1. Unified in Learning –Separated by Space Martin Rehm S-ICT 2008 Wednesday. 19th of November. 2008
  2. 2. Overview •(Methodological) Framework •Structure •Results •(Possible) Next Steps Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  3. 3. Framework •Large international organization (IO) •2006 & 2007 (6 months each): ~ 400 middle- & top-management ~ 100 offices world wide •Secure the impact of the IO •Enhancing the capacity and skills of its staff Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  4. 4. (Methodological) Framework Learning Program e-Learning Online Remedial Teaching Model Rienties, Tempelaar, Waterval, Rehm, & Gijselaers (2006) Face-to-Face Community of Practice Workshop Lave & Wenger (1991) Community of Learning Stacey, Smith & Barty (2004) Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  5. 5. e-Learning Entry 5 Modules: Questionnaires •Self-Study (Lectures & Readings) •Quizzes •Online Discussion Groups (asynchronous) •Final Assessment - 2006: summative - 2007: formative Face-to-Face Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  6. 6. Online Discussion Groups •“ Learning Communities“(~ 15 part.) •“Common identity” (Hung & Der-Thanq, 2001) •“Neo-apprenticeship style learning” (Gannon-Leary & Fontainha, 2007) Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  7. 7. Results of the End-Evaluation Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  8. 8. 2006 2007 (n=157) (n=87) t-test Domain Question Ø Ø (difference) Phase 1 of this Learning Programme was a valuable learning experience. 5,82 1,16 6,16 1,36 - The content of Phase 1 was appropriate 4,75 1,44 5,31 1,38 0,001 Experiences Phase 1 was well organized. 4,59 1,48 5,18 1,54 0,000 The allocated time was sufficient to study the subject matter. 2,41 1,31 3,58 1,88 0,000 The goals of Phase 1 were clear to me. 5,56 1,11 5,67 0,90 - The assignments/tasks stimulated me to study. 5,02 1,40 5,76 1,26 0,032 Learning Goals I am satisfied with what I learned in terms of knowledge. 5,00 1,38 5,60 1,30 - I am satisfied with what I learned in terms of insights. 5,18 1,38 5,42 1,51 - I have been encouraged to cooperate more effectively with my colleagues worldwide. 4,36 1,42 4,86 1,39 0,040 I have improved my evidence based analysis I think that at the skills. 4,77 1,37 5,34 1,16 0,027 end of Phase 1 … I am more able to cooperate with other organizations. 5,03 1,33 5,11 1,57 - I will get better results in my career. 4,76 1,39 5,30 1,39 0,014 Likert Scale: 1 (strongly disagree) –7 (strongly agree) Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  9. 9. 2006 2007 (n=157) (n=87) t-test Domain Question Ø Ø (difference) The group in which I participated functioned well. 4,10 1,41 4,59 1,76 0,009 I think I have learned more during Phase 1 through collaboration with others than I would have learned, if I had to work alone. 4,28 1,65 4,66 1,92 0,011 Group discussions The facilitators were enthusiastic about coaching our Learning Community. 4,16 1,57 4,95 1,93 0,000 I expected the facilitators to take a more active role in the learning process. 4,19 1,52 4,59 2,22 - The online assessments during Phase 1 gave me a good picture of what I still had to study. 5,10 1,46 5,64 1,33 0,003 The fundamental readings helped me to study the Other E-learning Tools content of Phase 1. na na 5,95 1,28 - The applied readings helped me to study the content of Phase 1. na na 5,93 1,11 - The amount of required literature was too much. 5,44 1,48 4,61 1,88 0,000 Please provide an overall grade for the quality of the e-Learning Phase (scale 1-10) 6,64 1,62 7,07 1,58 0,053 Please provide an overall grade for the functioning Overall grade and hours of the e-Learning Phase Team (scale 1-10) 6,27 1,79 7,11 1,97 0,001 worked On average, how many hours per week did you work on the e-Learning Phase of this Learning Programme? 8,01 5,21 8,20 6,69 - Likert Scale: 1 (strongly disagree) –7 (strongly agree) Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  10. 10. Performance Indicators for Phase 1 in 2006 & 2007 (Averages: 1 –10) 10 9 Paired-Sample t-test (PK –FG) 8 7 2006: no significant difference 6 5 2007: 2006 2007 significant increase 4 (at 0.01 level) 3 2 1 PK: Pre-Knowledge PG: Participation Grade QZ: Quizzes 0 FE: Final Exam PK PG QZ FE FG FG: Final Grade Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  11. 11. (Possible) Next Steps •Garrison, Anderson & Archer (2000) – Social Presence – Teaching Presence – Cognitive Presence •Impact of Organizational Structure –Group Dynamics – " Outcomes Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  12. 12. Contact Details Martin Rehm Email martin.rehm@governance.unimaas.nl Internet http://martinrehm.wordpress.com/ www.governance.unimaas.nl Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)
  13. 13. Unified in Learning –Separated by Space Martin Rehm S-ICT 2008 Wednesday. 19th of November. 2008 Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG)

×