Victoriano Pimentel Rivas received a course evaluation report for his Elementary Spanish II course from Logan Michels of the Office of Institutional Research, Planning and Assessment at Minnesota State University, Mankato. The 12 student evaluations gave the course and instructor overwhelmingly positive reviews, with average ratings above 4.5 out of 5 for most categories. Student comments praised the instructor's enthusiasm, feedback, and use of class time to ensure students learned. A few students suggested providing more opportunities to practice conversational Spanish.
Increasing Student Success with Pre-enrollment and Self-registration Prep Cou...D2L Barry
Presenter: Dave Kell, New Brunswick Community College
At Holland College in Charlottetown, PEI on May 31, 2019.
D2L Connection: Atlantic Provinces is your opportunity to connect with peers and D2L staff, exchange product feedback, share effective practices, and network with other Learning Professionals.
Increasing Student Success with Pre-enrollment and Self-registration Prep Cou...D2L Barry
Presenter: Dave Kell, New Brunswick Community College
At Holland College in Charlottetown, PEI on May 31, 2019.
D2L Connection: Atlantic Provinces is your opportunity to connect with peers and D2L staff, exchange product feedback, share effective practices, and network with other Learning Professionals.
Diagnosis means the careful and extensive observation
In Medicine : Diagnosis refers to careful and extensive observation of the patient under controlled conditions
In Education : Diagnosis refers to the process of determining the nature and causes of the educational difficulties.
Diagnostic Testing may be defined as testing or evaluation programme carried out by a teacher for diagnosing the nature and extent of the learning difficulties and behavioural problems of an individual student or group of students alongwith the inherent causes for chalking out suitable remedial programmes aimed to help them in getting rid of their difficulties and problems.
Three Phases:
Planning Phase
Construction Phase
Final try out (Administration and interpretation)
1. Planning Phase involves
Identifying the areas of weakness or learning difficulties,
Isolating a unit, sub-unit or concept for diagnosing in depth,
Content Analysis,
Determining the pre-requisite behaviour, Determining the expected behavior outcomes,
Deciding about the nature of the items of the test
2. Construction Phase involves
Planning and preparation of the test items (Preliminary Draft),
Writing and editing of the test items, Try out of the preliminary draft ,Item analysis, Formulation of the final form of the test (Final Draft)
3. Final Try Out (Administration and Interpretation) : The following points need to be kept in view:
The first task of the teacher is to win the confidence of the students and reassure them that test is to help them in the improvement of their learning rather than for declaring pass or fail.
It should be administered in a released environment.
Students should be seated comfortably.
Students should be asked not to consult each other while taking the test.
If any student is not able to follow something, he should be allowed to seek clarification from the teacher.
The teacher may ensure that the students taking the test attempt all questions.
Time schedule should not be enforced strictly, if any
If any student takes a little more time, he should be allowed to do so.
Error analysis
Error analysis stands for the analysis of the errors committed by the students with a purpose to
To diagnose their weaknesses and learning difficulties
To frame a suitable remedial programme
Do your stakeholders want to see evidence of the program's impact?
By knowing what works in your learning portfolio, you can repeat successes and eliminate ineffective programs. This method is based on the work of Donald L. Kirkpatrick, Dr J. Phillips, Robert Brinkerhoff and Josh Bersin.
"Credible, data-driven and actionable reporting of your training impact and talent programs are critical for making right investment decisions."
www.greenbookslearning.com
22 January 2018 HEFCE open event “Using data to increase learning gains and t...Bart Rienties
With the Teaching Excellence Framework being implemented across England, a lot of higher education institutions have started to ask questions about what it means to be “excellent” in teaching. In particular, with the rich and complex data that all educational institutions gather that could potentially capture learning gains, what do we actually know about our students’ learning journeys? What kinds of data could be used to infer whether our students are actually making affective (e.g., motivation), behavioural (e.g., engagement), and/or cognitive learning gains? Please join us on 22 January 2018 in lovely Milton Keynes at a free OU- and HEFCE-supported event on Using data to increase learning gains and teaching excellence.
14.00-15.00 Measuring learning gains with (psychometric) questionnaires
Dr Sonia Ilie, Prof Jan Vermunt, Prof Anna Vignoles (University of Cambridge, UK): Learning gain: from concept to measurement
Dr Fabio Arico (University of East Anglia): Learning Gain and Confidence Gain Through Peer-instruction: the role of pedagogical design
Dr Paul Mcdermott & Dr Robert Jenkins (University of East Anglia): A Methodology that Makes Self-Assessment an Implicit Part of the Answering Process
15.00-15.45 Measuring employability learning gains
Dr Heike Behle (University of Warwick): Measuring employability gain in Higher Education. A case study using R2 Strengths
Fiona Cobb, Dr Bob Gilworth, David Winter (University of London): Careers Registration Learning Gain project
THE ROI DILEMMA: MEASURING RESULTS OF YOUR LEARNING PROGRAMSHuman Capital Media
Significant resources are being allocated to training and development across most organizations, but many companies still find themselves unsure of results. The return on investment formula is a financial calculation, but learning is a human behavior and needs a human calculation. L&D can’t prove ROI using the same methods other parts of the business do. So how can L&D professionals prove investments in employee development actually produce results?
In this webcast Karen Hebert-Maccaro, Chief Content Officer at O’Reilly will:
Explain why ROI needs to be redefined for learning initiatives and the narrative shifted from causation to correlation.
Discuss how to correlate learner engagement with other important organization metrics to tell an important story about the value of L&D investments.
Show you how to leverage Kirkpatrick’s model of assessment and create a targeted strategy around level three and four assessments.
Provide guidance on how to talk with your business leaders and other stakeholders about learning and argue “table stakes not sweepstakes”.
Rubric Detail A rubric lists grading criteria that instruct.docxrobert345678
Rubric Detail
A rubric lists grading criteria that instructors use to evaluate student work. Your instructor linked a rubric to this item and made it available to you. Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Content
https%3A%2F%2Fkeiseruniversity.blackboard.com%2Fwebapps%2Frubric%2FWEB-INF%2Fjsp%2Fcourse%2FrubricGradingPopup.jsp%3Fmode%3Dgrid%26isPopup%3Dtrue%26rubricCount%3D1%26prefix%3D_7714706_1%26course_id%3D_411476_1%26maxValue%3D100.0%26rubricId%3D_345993_1%26viewOnly%3Dtrue%26displayGrades%3Dfalse%26type%3Dgrading%26rubricAssoId%3D_605243_1
Name: Week 7 Video Presentation
Description: Up to 10% deduction may be implemented for not following APA style standards (e.g., references and in-text citations).
Grid ViewList View
Poor
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Introduction
Points:
Points Range:
0 (0.00%) - 10.35 (10.35%)
One of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. Student describes significance of the problem, researcher's hypothesis, and rough background of literature.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
10.5 (10.50%) - 11.85 (11.85%)
Two of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis what to expect. Student describes significance of the problem, researcher's hypothesis, and rough background of literature.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
12 (12.00%) - 13.35 (13.35%)
Three of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
13.5 (13.50%) - 15 (15.00%)
All of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis
Feedback:
Methods.
Diagnosis means the careful and extensive observation
In Medicine : Diagnosis refers to careful and extensive observation of the patient under controlled conditions
In Education : Diagnosis refers to the process of determining the nature and causes of the educational difficulties.
Diagnostic Testing may be defined as testing or evaluation programme carried out by a teacher for diagnosing the nature and extent of the learning difficulties and behavioural problems of an individual student or group of students alongwith the inherent causes for chalking out suitable remedial programmes aimed to help them in getting rid of their difficulties and problems.
Three Phases:
Planning Phase
Construction Phase
Final try out (Administration and interpretation)
1. Planning Phase involves
Identifying the areas of weakness or learning difficulties,
Isolating a unit, sub-unit or concept for diagnosing in depth,
Content Analysis,
Determining the pre-requisite behaviour, Determining the expected behavior outcomes,
Deciding about the nature of the items of the test
2. Construction Phase involves
Planning and preparation of the test items (Preliminary Draft),
Writing and editing of the test items, Try out of the preliminary draft ,Item analysis, Formulation of the final form of the test (Final Draft)
3. Final Try Out (Administration and Interpretation) : The following points need to be kept in view:
The first task of the teacher is to win the confidence of the students and reassure them that test is to help them in the improvement of their learning rather than for declaring pass or fail.
It should be administered in a released environment.
Students should be seated comfortably.
Students should be asked not to consult each other while taking the test.
If any student is not able to follow something, he should be allowed to seek clarification from the teacher.
The teacher may ensure that the students taking the test attempt all questions.
Time schedule should not be enforced strictly, if any
If any student takes a little more time, he should be allowed to do so.
Error analysis
Error analysis stands for the analysis of the errors committed by the students with a purpose to
To diagnose their weaknesses and learning difficulties
To frame a suitable remedial programme
Do your stakeholders want to see evidence of the program's impact?
By knowing what works in your learning portfolio, you can repeat successes and eliminate ineffective programs. This method is based on the work of Donald L. Kirkpatrick, Dr J. Phillips, Robert Brinkerhoff and Josh Bersin.
"Credible, data-driven and actionable reporting of your training impact and talent programs are critical for making right investment decisions."
www.greenbookslearning.com
22 January 2018 HEFCE open event “Using data to increase learning gains and t...Bart Rienties
With the Teaching Excellence Framework being implemented across England, a lot of higher education institutions have started to ask questions about what it means to be “excellent” in teaching. In particular, with the rich and complex data that all educational institutions gather that could potentially capture learning gains, what do we actually know about our students’ learning journeys? What kinds of data could be used to infer whether our students are actually making affective (e.g., motivation), behavioural (e.g., engagement), and/or cognitive learning gains? Please join us on 22 January 2018 in lovely Milton Keynes at a free OU- and HEFCE-supported event on Using data to increase learning gains and teaching excellence.
14.00-15.00 Measuring learning gains with (psychometric) questionnaires
Dr Sonia Ilie, Prof Jan Vermunt, Prof Anna Vignoles (University of Cambridge, UK): Learning gain: from concept to measurement
Dr Fabio Arico (University of East Anglia): Learning Gain and Confidence Gain Through Peer-instruction: the role of pedagogical design
Dr Paul Mcdermott & Dr Robert Jenkins (University of East Anglia): A Methodology that Makes Self-Assessment an Implicit Part of the Answering Process
15.00-15.45 Measuring employability learning gains
Dr Heike Behle (University of Warwick): Measuring employability gain in Higher Education. A case study using R2 Strengths
Fiona Cobb, Dr Bob Gilworth, David Winter (University of London): Careers Registration Learning Gain project
THE ROI DILEMMA: MEASURING RESULTS OF YOUR LEARNING PROGRAMSHuman Capital Media
Significant resources are being allocated to training and development across most organizations, but many companies still find themselves unsure of results. The return on investment formula is a financial calculation, but learning is a human behavior and needs a human calculation. L&D can’t prove ROI using the same methods other parts of the business do. So how can L&D professionals prove investments in employee development actually produce results?
In this webcast Karen Hebert-Maccaro, Chief Content Officer at O’Reilly will:
Explain why ROI needs to be redefined for learning initiatives and the narrative shifted from causation to correlation.
Discuss how to correlate learner engagement with other important organization metrics to tell an important story about the value of L&D investments.
Show you how to leverage Kirkpatrick’s model of assessment and create a targeted strategy around level three and four assessments.
Provide guidance on how to talk with your business leaders and other stakeholders about learning and argue “table stakes not sweepstakes”.
Rubric Detail A rubric lists grading criteria that instruct.docxrobert345678
Rubric Detail
A rubric lists grading criteria that instructors use to evaluate student work. Your instructor linked a rubric to this item and made it available to you. Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Content
https%3A%2F%2Fkeiseruniversity.blackboard.com%2Fwebapps%2Frubric%2FWEB-INF%2Fjsp%2Fcourse%2FrubricGradingPopup.jsp%3Fmode%3Dgrid%26isPopup%3Dtrue%26rubricCount%3D1%26prefix%3D_7714706_1%26course_id%3D_411476_1%26maxValue%3D100.0%26rubricId%3D_345993_1%26viewOnly%3Dtrue%26displayGrades%3Dfalse%26type%3Dgrading%26rubricAssoId%3D_605243_1
Name: Week 7 Video Presentation
Description: Up to 10% deduction may be implemented for not following APA style standards (e.g., references and in-text citations).
Grid ViewList View
Poor
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Introduction
Points:
Points Range:
0 (0.00%) - 10.35 (10.35%)
One of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. Student describes significance of the problem, researcher's hypothesis, and rough background of literature.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
10.5 (10.50%) - 11.85 (11.85%)
Two of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis what to expect. Student describes significance of the problem, researcher's hypothesis, and rough background of literature.
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
12 (12.00%) - 13.35 (13.35%)
Three of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis
Feedback:
Points:
Points Range:
13.5 (13.50%) - 15 (15.00%)
All of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis
Feedback:
Methods.
1. Victoriano Pimentel Rivas (as private and confidential)
Course Evaluation Report
Victoriano Pimentel Rivas,
In the attachment you will find the evaluation results for your course evaluation, Elementary Spanish II.
The legend indicator is followed by the individual average values of the scaled questions.
Student comments are included following the summary statistics.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact Logan Michels of the Office of Institutional
Research, Planning and Assessment at Minnesota State University, Mankato.
Warmest regards,
Logan Michels
2. Victoriano Pimentel Rivas, Elementary Spanish II
12/29/2015 Class Climate evaluation Page 1
Victoriano Pimentel Rivas
Fall 2015 20163-001020
No. of responses = 12
Overall indicatorsOverall indicators
1. Section 1: To provide a general evaluation,
please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5
high...1 low)
-+ av.=4.8
dev.=0.4
1 2 3 4 5
Survey ResultsSurvey Results
Legend
Question text Right poleLeft pole
n=No. of responses
av.=Mean
dev.=Std. Dev.
ab.=Abstention
25%
1
0%
2
50%
3
0%
4
25%
5
Relative Frequencies of answers Std. Dev. Mean
Scale Histogram
1. Section 1: To provide a general evaluation, please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 low)1. Section 1: To provide a general evaluation, please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 low)
The course as a whole1.1)
51
n=12
av.=4.3
dev.=0.8
0%
1
0%
2
16.7%
3
41.7%
4
41.7%
5
The instructor's contribution to the course1.2)
51
n=12
av.=4.8
dev.=0.5
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
25%
4
75%
5
Use of class time1.3)
51
n=12
av.=5
dev.=0
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
0%
4
100%
5
Instructor's interest in whether students learned1.4)
51
n=12
av.=4.9
dev.=0.3
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
8.3%
4
91.7%
5
Amount you learned in the course1.5)
51
n=12
av.=4.7
dev.=0.5
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
33.3%
4
66.7%
5
Evaluative and grading techniques (tests, papers,
projects, etc.)
1.6)
51
n=12
av.=4.8
dev.=0.5
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
25%
4
75%
5
Clarity of student responsibilities and
requirements
1.7)
51
n=12
av.=4.9
dev.=0.3
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
8.3%
4
91.7%
5
3. Victoriano Pimentel Rivas, Elementary Spanish II
12/29/2015 Class Climate evaluation Page 2
2. Section 2: To provide feedback to the instructor, please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 Low)2. Section 2: To provide feedback to the instructor, please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 Low)
Opportunity for practicing what was learned2.1)
51
n=12
av.=4.8
dev.=0.5
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
25%
4
75%
5
Sequential development of skills2.2)
51
n=12
av.=4.7
dev.=0.5
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
33.3%
4
66.7%
5
Explanations of underlying rationales for new
techniques or skills
2.3)
51
n=12
av.=4.5
dev.=0.5
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
50%
4
50%
5
Demonstrations of expected skills2.4)
51
n=12
av.=4.6
dev.=0.5
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
41.7%
4
58.3%
5
Student confidence in instructor's knowledge2.5)
51
n=12
av.=4.8
dev.=0.6
0%
1
0%
2
8.3%
3
8.3%
4
83.3%
5
Recognitions of student progress by instructor2.6)
51
n=12
av.=4.8
dev.=0.5
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
25%
4
75%
5
Freedom allowed to develop own skills and ideas2.7)
51
n=12
av.=4.8
dev.=0.4
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
16.7%
4
83.3%
5
Tailoring of instructions to varying student skill
levels
2.8)
51
n=12
av.=4.8
dev.=0.5
0%
1
0%
2
0%
3
25%
4
75%
5
3. Section 3: Background information3. Section 3: Background information
Would you recommend this course?3.1)
n=12
no 0%
majors only 16.7%
anyone interested 83.3%
Is this course...3.2)
n=12
in your major 16.7%
not in major but required for program 8.3%
an elective 33.3%
other 41.7%
4. Victoriano Pimentel Rivas, Elementary Spanish II
12/29/2015 Class Climate evaluation Page 3
Class...3.3)
n=12
Fr 41.7%
So 16.7%
Jr 16.7%
Sr 16.7%
Grad 0%
Other 8.3%
What grade do you expect to receive?3.4)
n=11
A 27.3%
B 27.3%
C 45.5%
D 0%
P 0%
F/NC 0%
5. Victoriano Pimentel Rivas, Elementary Spanish II
12/29/2015 Class Climate evaluation Page 4
Profile
Subunit: Department of World Languages and Cultures
Name of the instructor: Victoriano Pimentel Rivas
Name of the course:
(Name of the survey)
Elementary Spanish II
Values used in the profile line: Mean
1. Section 1: To provide a general evaluation, please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 low)1. Section 1: To provide a general evaluation, please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 low)
1.1) The course as a whole 1 5
n=12 av.=4.3 md=4.0 dev.=0.8
1.2) The instructor's contribution to the course 1 5
n=12 av.=4.8 md=5.0 dev.=0.5
1.3) Use of class time 1 5
n=12 av.=5.0 md=5.0 dev.=0.0
1.4) Instructor's interest in whether students learned 1 5
n=12 av.=4.9 md=5.0 dev.=0.3
1.5) Amount you learned in the course 1 5
n=12 av.=4.7 md=5.0 dev.=0.5
1.6) Evaluative and grading techniques (tests,
papers, projects, etc.)
1 5
n=12 av.=4.8 md=5.0 dev.=0.5
1.7) Clarity of student responsibilities and
requirements
1 5
n=12 av.=4.9 md=5.0 dev.=0.3
2. Section 2: To provide feedback to the instructor, please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 Low)2. Section 2: To provide feedback to the instructor, please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 Low)
2.1) Opportunity for practicing what was learned 1 5
n=12 av.=4.8 md=5.0 dev.=0.5
2.2) Sequential development of skills 1 5
n=12 av.=4.7 md=5.0 dev.=0.5
2.3) Explanations of underlying rationales for new
techniques or skills
1 5
n=12 av.=4.5 md=4.5 dev.=0.5
2.4) Demonstrations of expected skills 1 5
n=12 av.=4.6 md=5.0 dev.=0.5
2.5) Student confidence in instructor's knowledge 1 5
n=12 av.=4.8 md=5.0 dev.=0.6
2.6) Recognitions of student progress by instructor 1 5
n=12 av.=4.8 md=5.0 dev.=0.5
2.7) Freedom allowed to develop own skills and
ideas
1 5
n=12 av.=4.8 md=5.0 dev.=0.4
2.8) Tailoring of instructions to varying student skill
levels
1 5
n=12 av.=4.8 md=5.0 dev.=0.5
6. Victoriano Pimentel Rivas, Elementary Spanish II
12/29/2015 Class Climate evaluation Page 5
Comments ReportComments Report
4. Please Comment on the Following Items:4. Please Comment on the Following Items:
What are the major strengths and weaknesses of the instructor?4.1)
8. Victoriano Pimentel Rivas, Elementary Spanish II
12/29/2015 Class Climate evaluation Page 7
What aspects of this course were most beneficial to you?4.2)