Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Plane Research Data 23-6-2011
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Plane Research Data 23-6-2011

175

Published on

PLANE (Pathways for Learning Anywhere Anytime - A Network for Educators) Data informing the project & Evaluation strategy …

PLANE (Pathways for Learning Anywhere Anytime - A Network for Educators) Data informing the project & Evaluation strategy

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
175
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
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

Transcript

  • 1. PLANEPathways for Learning Anywhere Anytime - A Network for Educators
    Data informing the project
    and
    Evaluation strategy
  • 2. Data from the DER 2010 baseline survey
    DECNSW secondary school teacher responses
  • 3. On average, how frequently do you use a computer to perform the following:
    TrA Q-11a. Research and develop lesson plans and curriculum design.
  • 4. TrA Q-11b. Develop instructional materials (e.g. using Word to create handouts, assessments, etc.).
  • 5. TrA Q-11c. Use PowerPoint in classroom instruction (e.g. present a new concept to students).
  • 6. TrA Q-11d. Create and/or maintain website(s) as part of one or more of your classes.
  • 7. TrA Q-11e.Communicate with peers and/or students (e.g. email, forums, etc.).
  • 8. TrA Q-11f. Participate in online discussion forums and interact with other educators.
  • 9. TrA Q-11g. Share your teaching resources online for other educators to access and use.
  • 10. TrA Q-11i. Post examples of your students’ work online to share.
  • 11. TrA Q-11j. Use online simulation site use equipment that you do not otherwise have access to.
  • 12. TrA Q-15a. I can individualise my curriculum to fit student needs better when using a computer.
  • 13. TrA Q-15d. I can create instructional materials that assist in meeting course outcomes at a higher standard when using a computers.
  • 14. Other
    The majority of teachers felt technology was important for their work (TrA Q-13a , 95.6% Agree or Strongly Agreed)
    and that it was important for students to work with computers (TrA Q-13b, 94.5% Agreed or Strongly Agreed)
    30% of teachers indicated that they felt using computers in their work was important even though they did not have a personal interest in using computers.
  • 15. Fun and importance
    Teacher perceptions of ICT being ‘fun’ and teacher  curriculum area were strong indicators of their ICT use in teaching.
    Teachers indicating that ICT was ‘fun’ were more likely to report using technology in their teaching more frequently.
    They were also more likely to use ICT in their teaching than if they felt it was ‘important’ for their work
  • 16. They were more likely to feel confident using the laptops if they felt ICT was fun, than if they only felt it was important
    Those indicating that ICT was fun to use, were also more likely to believe their practice was becoming more student-centred with use of the laptops   
    Implications – PL should exploit/encourage the “fun” side of technology
  • 17. Pedagogy
    69.5% of teachers felt their lesson planning was more student-centred when they plan to use computers in their teaching (TrAQ-15g)
    BUT only 48.2% of teachers reported feeling their teaching had become more student-centred as a result of using computers (TrA Q-15h).
  • 18. Most teachers Agreed or Strongly Agreed that:
    computers made it easier to individualise curriculum
    they were able to diversify their curriculum in every lesson or at least half over the course of a week
    they could present topics in greater depth
    Only slightly more than half of the teachers Agreed or Strongly Agreed that students’ work was more creative when using computers and that students were more organized
    Most teachers Disagreed or Strongly Disagreed that students’ writing improved when using computers
  • 19. Case Studies
    If teachers did not use technology in their classes, students were likely to continue to use paper-based methods in these classes (e.g. keeping books, writing first drafts on paper, etc.)
    In one school, students felt teachers were using technology for themselves (e.g. Maths teacher with IWB) rather than for students (School #3)
    Teachers did not identify their pedagogy changing, at this point  particularly evident in Mathematics teachers
  • 20. Teachers felt they needed more content specific training for integrating the laptops. Expectations seemed to fall to the department, rather than the school, to provide training
    Schools with established IT committees seemed to have felt more prepared for the Rollouts, while the other schools felt “rushed”
  • 21. PLANE data
    From focus groups, survey etc.
  • 22. Leader Focus Groups
  • 23.
  • 24. Teacher Focus Groups
  • 25.
  • 26. Pre-Service Teacher Focus Group
  • 27. Gaming and pre-Service Teachers (n=17, 10 female, 7 male)
    Are you a Gamer?
  • 28. On average how many hours a week would you spend playing games altogether?
  • 29. What kind of device(s) do you use to play games?
    
  • 30. What kinds of games do you like to play?
    iPhone scrabble, word games bubble bash 2 trial puzzle games Sports, Strategy, Racing word puzzles, sudokulogic games/ multiplayer games Role playing games or scrabble None Chess
    Why do you like playing the games you have mentioned?
    It's creative and I enjoy playing with my wife; nothing to do on the train; a break from reading; they challenge me intellectually; I play and coach soccer so I enjoy soccer games; I've always loved cars ...
  • 31. Do you prefer to play alone, or with others?
  • 32. Logging into PLANE
    Do you have an account with one or more of the following: Facebook, Twitter, Gmail, Live or Yahoo!
    Yes 95.71%
    No 4.29%
    Have you ever logged in to a third party website using one or more of the following: Facebook, Twitter, Gmail, Live or Yahoo!
    Yes 76.56%
    No 23.44%
    Would you be happy to log in to PLANE using one of the following: Facebook, Twitter, Gmail, Live or Yahoo!
    Yes 80.88%
    19.12%
  • 33. Evaluation of PLANE
    Draft Request for Quotationsfor
    Research Services for the Evaluation
  • 34. Primary research question: How well does the PLANE project address its objectives?
    The evaluation is being carried out to determine whether the PLANE project:
    Meets its objectives in the three key result areas:
    Improving the capability of pre‐service teachers
    Enhancing the capacity of in‐service tea
    Driving innovation through leadership
  • 35. Primary research question: How well doesWhat is the potential of the PLANE project address it’stomeet the ICTIF objectives?
    The evaluation is being carried out to determine whetherthe potential of the PLANE project to:
    Meets its objectives in the three key result areas:
    Improving the capability of pre‐service teachers
    Enhancing the capacity of in‐service tea
    Driving innovation through leadership
  • 36. 2. Shows potential to have wider applicability and scalability to achieve systematic change.
    3. Is capable of being sustained beyond the project’s period of funding.
    4. Demonstrates links to national school education reform agendas or other national initiatives (where applicable).
    5. Demonstrates the use of emerging technologies for improving digital pedagogy.
    6. Is innovative.
    7. Engages teachers across all sectors.
    8. Effectively utilises web 2.0/social media tools for collaboration, contribution and networking.
  • 37. Other related questions will be important to consider, including – but not limited to:
    9. The effectiveness of the delivery platform for the range of learning experiences:
    9.1 The 21st century immersive learning environment, including
    9.1.1 bandwidth or technical issues
    9.1.2 teachers attitudes to learning in an immersive world environment
    9.2 The online rich multi-media environment.
    10. The appropriateness and effectiveness of each learning experience in meeting its objectives.
  • 38. 11. The impact of PLANE on the innovative use of ICT in pedagogy
    12. The effectiveness of the evaluation (self-assessment) tools developed.
    13. The appeal and use of the tracking feature designed for teachers for self-reflection and accreditation purposes.
    14. The risks to sustainability of successful initiatives within PLANE and how they might they be mitigated

×