Vilnius november 2015 meeting wp8 - user evaluation results Regione Marche Unicam

1. http://www.learnpad.eu
WP8: Demonstrators
(UniCam – Regione Marche)

2. Table of Contents
o Introduction
o Prototype Early Validation
o Next Steps
2

3. Introduction
o WP8 aims to provide feedback from the final users to the
consortium with prototype Early Validation
o Such early validation allows to ensure that end-users needs
and requirements will result being driving forces for Learn PA
project results
o The validation was made involving end-users from both the
case studies (EPBR and SUAP)
3

4. Prototype Early Validation
o In the early validation we decided to perform an assessment aiming at examining
the overall status of the platform
o Used Methodology
o The quantitative validation involved a group of end-users, who had no
knowledge of the Learn PAd platform before the validation
o Focus Group - The focus group was composed by people from Regione
Marche and UniCam that already knew about the project since they took part
to some project activities
o The platform validation involved people with different expertise considering
different scenarios
o Validation Scenarios
o The browsing Mode with recommendations
o The possibility to give feedback to the modellers
o The simulator Mode

5. Quantitative Validation
o The group was composed as following: 2 ICT experts from Regione
Marche, 3 training experts from Regione Marche; and 2 SUAP experts
o Such assessment was organized as follows
1. First the WP8 presented the state of the art of the platform
2. Then the end user navigated the available platform instance
exploring the different functionalities
3. Finally an assessment questionnaire was provided
o The questionnaire was composed by 10 questions (8 close and 2 open);
it was useful to gain feedback, for the Learn PAd project, about the
learning platform usage experience; the questionnaire was anonymous

6. Focus Group
o Such assessment was organized as follows
1. First the WP8 leader presented the state of the art of the platform
2. Then the focus group had a long discussion on the critical points
o The focus group aimed at gathering information about the following items
o Usability of the platform
o Innovative aspects in comparison with e-learning technologies
o Efficacy of the proposed learning model in relation to the end-users profile
o Multimedia solutions
o Gamification solutions
o Interactive solutions
o General layout of the interfaces and of the functionalities

7. Question 1
o In general, how much are you satisfied from the usage of the e-learning
modality which you had access to?
(Reference scale: 1=not satisfied; 5=totally satisfied)

8. Question 2
o How do you judge the effectiveness of the several functionalities made
available by the platform?
(Reference scale: 1 = not at all effective; 5 = very effective)

9. Question 3
o How do you judge the “accessibility” and the “usage experience” of the
functionalities made available by the platform?
(Reference scale: 1=hard; 5=easy)

10. Question 4
o How do you judge the “completeness” of the functionalities made available
by the platform?
(Reference scale: 1=incomplete; 5=complete)

11. Question 5
o How much effective do you think the integration of the presented learning
environments is? (Browsing, Simulation, Collaboration, Recommendation)
(Reference scale: 1=not at all integrated; 5=very integrated)

12. Question 6
o How do you evaluate the innovation degree of the proposed solution,
referring to the following elements:
(Reference scale: 1=not at all innovative; 5=very innovative)
Availability of the competence model related to
the professional profile objective of the
learning
Possibility of learning based on successful
process models
Availability of recommending functionalities
(selection of deepening contents and
personalized suggestions based on the context
and on specific demands)

13. Question 7
o How do you evaluate the utility of the proposed solution, in relation with the
following elements: (Reference scale: 1=not at all useful; 5=very useful)
Availability of the competence model related to
the professional profile objective of the
learning
Possibility of learning based on successful
process models
Availability of recommending functionalities
(selection of deepening contents and
personalized suggestions based on the context
and on specific demands)

14. Question 8
o 8. For a better platform effectiveness in terms of learning, do you think it
is necessary to have a higher presence of the following aspects?
(Reference scale: 1=not at all useful; 5=very useful referring to the learning
effectiveness)
Interactivity between learner and contents
Structuring of the wiki contents

15. Feedback from the early
validation
o The Focus Group provided several comments
o In the following link we list all of them, categorized by the
topic of the comment
o For a detailed discussion see:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wZMghpZ77Z801eu
U6FNkkL55OidY4ujjWegPQkF3MLA/edit#gid=0

16. Next Steps – D8.3
D8.3: Demonstrators Populated Learning Platform
(UNICAM) (M24)
o This deliverable will be constituted by the final delivery
of the contents for the two different scenario
o Content will be made available within the Learn PAd
platform
16
ToC : 2 December 2015
Draft : 27 December 2015
Internal Release : 10 January 2016
Candidate Release : 24 January 2016

17. THE FUTURE OF LEARNPAD
It means that we need contents …
but also a strategy or a format for
content production and contribution

18. Actions
o We plan to refine the following almost already provided models for both the cases
(SUAP and EPBR)
• Business Process model
• Case Management model
• Organizational model (to be generalized)
• Documents and Knowledge model
• Competence model (EQF Skill – Knowledge for each task)
• Business Motivation model (Learning Goal)
• KPI model
o General Description for the Learn PAd platform will be also provided
o Additional content for the recommender will be delivered
o Other simulation cases will be provided (how many? For what processes?)
Issues related the language?

19. Risks According Feedbacks
o #1 In the home page general description should be introduced. This make clear the aim of the
platform. In the main page the project description should be included as well as a description of the
learning material that is available. The learning approach should be described as well as the
learning objective.
o [UNICAM/Regione Marche] Provide a description text to present the platform and present elements
o #6 The images of the models (i.e. process, organization, competences) should be included for each
page. When multiple models are available they should be grupped in one page.
o [UNICAM] Provide images for each model
o #15 Multimedia aspects are missing. Video, animation and audio are not considered. This should be
part of the learning material at least in the recommender part. Also browsing and simulation should
be enriched with multimedia aspects.
o [MARCHE] Provide some multimedia learning materials
o #18 and #25 and #31 - At the top of the pages a general description about the content should be
introduced.
o [UNICAM] Provide a description text to present the platform and present elements;
o #42 - "SUAP aggregato" should be renamed with "sportello comprensoriale" and "SUAP Singola"
with "sportello municipale".
o [UNICAM] will provide an update version of the model