Report_Card July 2016
•
0 likes•37 views
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions, comparing the organization's performance to its own internal benchmarks. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmarks. The report recommends identifying any question categories below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans. It also suggests scheduling regular distribution of the report to communicate results.
Report
Share
Report
Share
Download to read offline
![Report Card
Run By: Carrie Williams (cwilliams@nhsocal.com) MTM Tool: Report Card
Date Run: Aug 2, 2016 From Saved Query: No
MTM Benchmark Only my company
Report Card a summary of learning performance by survey question category and by survey question
All Question
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=99] 8.47
MTM Benchmark [n=101] 8.26
Instructor
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=99] 8.47
MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.47
Report Card Instructor a summary of learning performance by survey question category and by survey question
Instructor
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=99] 8.47
MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.47
Instructor overall
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=99] 8.45
MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.45
Participants were encouraged to take part in class discussions.
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=99] 8.54
MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.54
The instructor provided realworld experiences and examples.
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=99] 8.35
MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.35
The instructor was knowledgeable about the subject.
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=98] 8.54
MTM Benchmark [n=98] 8.54
The instructor''s presentation skills were adequate.
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=99] 8.47
MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.47
Report Recommendations
Interpreting the Report
Below are tips to help you understand the information in the report. For additional information, please click the Help tab above the
report.
Shows the overall scores by question category and questions selected for training provided by the organization.
Report allows you to compare the organization's performance against internal or external benchmarks (represented by a orange
bar).
Report may be customized using filters for comparison of specific attributes such as courseware, question category, etc.
Recommended Actions
Below are recommended next steps to take after reviewing the information in this report. Additionally, you'll find links to
automatically run complementary reports for drillingdown further into the data or analyzing the information in another way.
Determine which question categories fall below the benchmark and drill down by utilizing the breakout by question or by using the
reports below to determine what may be causing the score to determine what corrective action to take. For example, if job impact
is low for specific courses, perhaps the right people aren't attending the training or the material delivered is not intended to impact
performance.
Filtering the report to one instructor or one set of courses will allow the report to be used in performance reviews. Because the
questions are also displayed, the potential areas where instructors or courses perform high or low can be identified and a
- 1 / 2 -](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/c686b759-2a21-4460-bc76-576a52a7f880-160802110400/85/Report_Card-July-2016-1-320.jpg)
Recommended
Report_Card August 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys given after training sessions. It provides average scores for questions about the instructor and instructor performance, comparing the organization's scores to its own internal benchmarks. Scores for the organization were consistently higher than the benchmarks. The report recommends determining which question categories scored below benchmarks, using additional reports to identify potential causes, and scheduling regular report distribution to instructors and course managers for development and improvement purposes.
Report_Card July to November
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on categories like instructor, course content, and specific questions. It shows the average ratings for a company compared to its internal benchmarks across various metrics. The report finds the company performed equal to or slightly above the benchmarks on instructor ratings and recommends analyzing metrics below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement, like using lower-rated questions to guide instructor development plans.
Report_Card 1st Qtr 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for questions grouped by category, and compares the ratings to an internal benchmark. Ratings for the instructor category and individual questions about the instructor's knowledge, examples provided, and presentation skills were at or above the benchmark. The report recommends identifying categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card November 2015
This report summarizes learning performance survey results for an organization. It shows average scores out of 9 for different survey questions and categories, such as the instructor, and compares the scores to the organization's internal benchmarks. The scores were generally high, averaging around 8.4 out of 9, which met or exceeded the benchmarks. The report recommends analyzing categories that score below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement and using the detailed feedback to enhance learning effectiveness.
1000 report
This report card summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor. It shows the average ratings for the instructor and categories like class discussions and real-world examples, all of which were 8.4 or higher on a 9-point scale. The instructor ratings matched the internal benchmark averages. The report recommends determining which categories, if any, fall below benchmarks and using filters to identify strengths or areas for improvement by individual instructors or courses.
Report_Card May 2016
This report summarizes learning performance survey results for an instructor-led training. It shows average scores for questions about the instructor and course content, comparing the organization's results to its internal benchmarks. Scores were generally high, ranging from 8.57 to 8.69 out of 9. The report recommends identifying areas scoring below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card July 2015 to January 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions, comparing the organization's results to its own benchmark. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmark across all questions. The report recommends identifying areas below the benchmark to determine how to improve and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card1
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average scores for questions in different categories, comparing the organization's performance to its own internal benchmarks. Scores were generally high, averaging around 8.3 out of 9, but some categories like real-world examples were slightly below the benchmark. It recommends analyzing categories below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement, and using filters to guide instructor or course reviews and development plans.
Recommended
Report_Card August 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys given after training sessions. It provides average scores for questions about the instructor and instructor performance, comparing the organization's scores to its own internal benchmarks. Scores for the organization were consistently higher than the benchmarks. The report recommends determining which question categories scored below benchmarks, using additional reports to identify potential causes, and scheduling regular report distribution to instructors and course managers for development and improvement purposes.
Report_Card July to November
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on categories like instructor, course content, and specific questions. It shows the average ratings for a company compared to its internal benchmarks across various metrics. The report finds the company performed equal to or slightly above the benchmarks on instructor ratings and recommends analyzing metrics below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement, like using lower-rated questions to guide instructor development plans.
Report_Card 1st Qtr 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for questions grouped by category, and compares the ratings to an internal benchmark. Ratings for the instructor category and individual questions about the instructor's knowledge, examples provided, and presentation skills were at or above the benchmark. The report recommends identifying categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card November 2015
This report summarizes learning performance survey results for an organization. It shows average scores out of 9 for different survey questions and categories, such as the instructor, and compares the scores to the organization's internal benchmarks. The scores were generally high, averaging around 8.4 out of 9, which met or exceeded the benchmarks. The report recommends analyzing categories that score below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement and using the detailed feedback to enhance learning effectiveness.
1000 report
This report card summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor. It shows the average ratings for the instructor and categories like class discussions and real-world examples, all of which were 8.4 or higher on a 9-point scale. The instructor ratings matched the internal benchmark averages. The report recommends determining which categories, if any, fall below benchmarks and using filters to identify strengths or areas for improvement by individual instructors or courses.
Report_Card May 2016
This report summarizes learning performance survey results for an instructor-led training. It shows average scores for questions about the instructor and course content, comparing the organization's results to its internal benchmarks. Scores were generally high, ranging from 8.57 to 8.69 out of 9. The report recommends identifying areas scoring below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card July 2015 to January 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions, comparing the organization's results to its own benchmark. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmark across all questions. The report recommends identifying areas below the benchmark to determine how to improve and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card1
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average scores for questions in different categories, comparing the organization's performance to its own internal benchmarks. Scores were generally high, averaging around 8.3 out of 9, but some categories like real-world examples were slightly below the benchmark. It recommends analyzing categories below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement, and using filters to guide instructor or course reviews and development plans.
Report_Card 945
This report card summarizes learning performance data from surveys on various questions about an instructor and course. It shows the average ratings for different questions, categories, and an overall instructor rating, and compares the results to an internal benchmark. The ratings were generally high, averaging around 8.4-8.5 on a 9-point scale, but some questions like real-world examples and instructor presentation skills were slightly below the benchmark. It recommends analyzing questions that scored lower to identify areas for improvement and using the report for instructor reviews and development.
Report_Card 9 2016
This report card summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and course compared to the organization's internal benchmarks. Ratings were on a scale of 1 to 9, with 9 being the highest. Across all questions, the average rating was 8.33 compared to the benchmark of 8.13. For questions specific to the instructor, the average rating was 8.33, matching the internal benchmark. The report recommends identifying categories that scored below benchmarks and using additional reports to determine how to improve weak areas.
Report_Card
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on question categories and individual questions. It shows average scores for an instructor training provided to 49 participants, comparing the scores to the organization's internal benchmarks. The instructor received high scores above the benchmarks in encouraging participation, providing real-world examples, knowledge of the subject, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying categories below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card October 2015
The report summarizes learning performance data from student surveys for a training provided by the company. It shows average ratings for questions and categories like the instructor, compared to the company's internal benchmark. Most categories received an average rating of 8.3-8.5 out of 9, meeting or exceeding the benchmark. The report recommends identifying any categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve training quality and better meet learning goals.
Report_Card June 2016
This report card summarizes learning performance data by survey question category and individual questions for a training provided by the organization. It shows the average scores for each category and question compared to an internal benchmark. Scores for the instructor category and overall instructor rating were slightly higher than the benchmark. The report recommends analyzing categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans. It also suggests scheduling regular report distribution and reviewing other related reports for further analysis.
Report_Card September
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey given to 94 participants following a class. It shows average ratings and benchmark comparisons for questions related to the instructor and the overall learning experience. Ratings for the instructor and most question categories exceeded the internal benchmark. The report provides recommendations to identify areas below benchmarks and use the detailed data to guide instructor and course improvements.
Report_Card March 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about instructors and course material. It shows average ratings for an organization compared to its internal benchmarks across various metrics. Ratings for the organization were above the benchmark averages for instructor knowledge, presentation skills, encouragement of discussion, and use of real-world examples. The report recommends identifying areas below benchmarks and using filters to guide instructor or course improvements.
Report_Card December 2015
The report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions compared to the organization's internal benchmarks. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmarks on questions about encouraging discussion, providing real-world examples, knowledge, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying areas below benchmarks and using filters to guide instructor or course improvements.
Report_Card
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on questions about instructors and course material. It shows average scores out of 9 for different question categories and individual questions, comparing results to an internal benchmark. Scores were above the benchmark for all categories. Recommendations include identifying lower scoring categories and drilling down to determine how to improve weak areas, using filters to analyze specific instructors or courses, and regularly sharing the report to communicate results.
Report_Card July to December 2015
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on question categories and individual questions. It shows the average scores for an organization compared to its internal benchmarks across several metrics related to instructors. The instructor received high marks above the benchmarks in areas like knowledge, presentation skills, and providing real-world examples. The report recommends identifying categories below benchmarks and using filters to guide performance reviews and course redesigns.
Flow chart redesign
Beginning of the school year, the document outlines introducing expectations and talk moves to students. It then evaluates students' use of talk moves with non-academic and new mathematical content. Students take paper/pencil and online tests to check understanding of new content. Collaborative groups are formed for conversation before a performance measurement and review of talk moves. The process is repeated for new mathematical content and includes challenge problems and online assessments similar to SBAC exams.
Ratios and proportions
This document contains practice problems on ratios and proportions involving students, faculty, field goals and attempts. It asks for solutions to the ratio problems and feedback on the assignment through questions about what was liked, what could be improved, how a blog could be useful in geometry class, and what other tools or resources would be interesting to use in the class.
Randomized Assignment Generator for Brightspace
The presentation introduces a randomized assignment generator tool developed by Virtual High School (VHS) to address issues of academic integrity as student enrollment increased. The generator utilizes the randomized folders feature in the quizzing tool to create unique assignments for each student by drawing from a bank of questions. The presentation provides instructions on setting up assessments using the generator by configuring properties, restrictions, assessments, submission views, and table of contents. It was found to initially reduce instances of academic integrity but a more robust solution was later needed as enrollments continued growing.
Caa2013 9 10-july2013
The document summarizes a pilot study analyzing 115 question items from an online export controls training. Various techniques were used to analyze the data, including exploratory data analysis, principle component analysis, and clustering analysis. The analysis identified questions with deficiencies or anomalies, indicating issues with question design. It was found that exploratory data analysis helped highlight both strong and weak question items, identifying areas for improvement. Recommendations include developing a visual dashboard to monitor question performance, applying validation rules to the authoring tool, and taking a more systematic approach to question design and alignment with learning objectives.
Module 4 lesson 26
This document provides instruction on solving one-step equations using addition and subtraction. It introduces using tape diagrams to represent and solve equations visually before demonstrating algebraic methods. Students work through examples of solving various one-step equations algebraically and checking their solutions. The lesson aims to help students competently solve one-step equations by relating equations to diagrams and checking that their solutions make the original equations true.
Report(1)
The document summarizes a report on an electronics engineering course from 2012-2013. It provides details on the number of lectures held, units covered, and students enrolled for each semester. It analyzes the results from steps taken the previous semester to improve scores, such as presentations, counseling, English language help, and practice questions. Finally, it outlines additional steps planned for the next semester, like more frequent class tests and increased student motivation.
Using GradeMark to engage students in the feedback process
The document discusses a project at Newcastle University to improve feedback and engage students in the marking process using GradeMark. The project aimed to 1) involve students in writing marking criteria, 2) engage students with criteria before submitting assignments, and 3) provide feedback linked directly to criteria using GradeMark. Feedback from students found the electronic feedback easier to understand and more specific. The approach was then expanded across the university and disseminated more widely. Benefits included more detailed feedback for students and markers. Questions remain around further engaging students and managing challenges of staff and student adoption.
Cl pricing 01_orientation class_412
This document provides an overview and schedule for an orientation class on pricing theory and practices. It outlines that the class will introduce fundamental pricing concepts and skills, discuss how pricing fits within the marketing mix, and help students develop the ability to set profitable prices. It also notes the class will include 35 lectures, assignments, tests, and presentations that will be completed both individually and through teamwork, with student performance evaluated based on attendance, test scores, assignment work, and presentations.
SLTCC2017 Lecture Capture: The good, the bad and the ugly (Tosin Lagoke)
SLTCC2017 Lecture Capture: The good, the bad and the ugly (Tosin Lagoke)Solent Learning and Teaching Institute
Lecture capture technology allows for recording of lecture sessions using software. A study examined perceptions of lecture capture from multiple stakeholders including lecturers, students, and learning technologists. Surveys found that overall, lecture capture was perceived to be efficient, cost effective, and a success. However, there were mixed views on whether it enhanced interactivity. Duration of lecture capture use positively correlated with perceived efficiency but negatively correlated with perceived failure. Perceived cost also positively correlated with perceived failure. The research is ongoing and will include interviews with additional stakeholders like university management and software developers.A&F session - PhD students
The document describes a workshop activity aimed at encouraging reflection and creativity in assessment and feedback practices. The workshop uses cards with best practices in assessment and feedback and has participants work in groups to develop an assessment and feedback strategy for a Master's dissertation module by selecting cards and ideas, tailoring them to their objective of improving standards, engagement, methods, peer feedback, or collaborative learning. Participants then briefly present their group's proposed strategy.
Report_Card July 2015 (1)
The report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor. It shows the average ratings for the instructor and participant responses to individual questions, comparing the results to an internal benchmark. Overall ratings for the instructor were high, averaging 8.38-8.39 out of 9, matching the benchmark. Participant responses were also positive for encouraging discussion, providing real-world examples, instructor knowledge, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying any categories below the benchmark and using additional reports to analyze ratings and feedback to help improve instructor or course performance.
B2B Report
This survey evaluated an entrepreneurship training program called Boots to Business. 110 instructors completed the survey. The survey found:
1) Module 1 was considered the most comfortably taught, while Modules 4 and 5 needed the most improvement.
2) The course objective about understanding business resources was rated highest, while evaluating feasibility tools was rated lowest.
3) Most workshops used 4+ instructors to provide diverse perspectives, but had limited time for preparation.
4) Technology issues and low attendance frequently caused workshop cancellations. The findings suggest reviewing Modules 4-5 and addressing technology and attendance challenges.
More Related Content
What's hot
Report_Card 945
This report card summarizes learning performance data from surveys on various questions about an instructor and course. It shows the average ratings for different questions, categories, and an overall instructor rating, and compares the results to an internal benchmark. The ratings were generally high, averaging around 8.4-8.5 on a 9-point scale, but some questions like real-world examples and instructor presentation skills were slightly below the benchmark. It recommends analyzing questions that scored lower to identify areas for improvement and using the report for instructor reviews and development.
Report_Card 9 2016
This report card summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and course compared to the organization's internal benchmarks. Ratings were on a scale of 1 to 9, with 9 being the highest. Across all questions, the average rating was 8.33 compared to the benchmark of 8.13. For questions specific to the instructor, the average rating was 8.33, matching the internal benchmark. The report recommends identifying categories that scored below benchmarks and using additional reports to determine how to improve weak areas.
Report_Card
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on question categories and individual questions. It shows average scores for an instructor training provided to 49 participants, comparing the scores to the organization's internal benchmarks. The instructor received high scores above the benchmarks in encouraging participation, providing real-world examples, knowledge of the subject, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying categories below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card October 2015
The report summarizes learning performance data from student surveys for a training provided by the company. It shows average ratings for questions and categories like the instructor, compared to the company's internal benchmark. Most categories received an average rating of 8.3-8.5 out of 9, meeting or exceeding the benchmark. The report recommends identifying any categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve training quality and better meet learning goals.
Report_Card June 2016
This report card summarizes learning performance data by survey question category and individual questions for a training provided by the organization. It shows the average scores for each category and question compared to an internal benchmark. Scores for the instructor category and overall instructor rating were slightly higher than the benchmark. The report recommends analyzing categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans. It also suggests scheduling regular report distribution and reviewing other related reports for further analysis.
Report_Card September
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey given to 94 participants following a class. It shows average ratings and benchmark comparisons for questions related to the instructor and the overall learning experience. Ratings for the instructor and most question categories exceeded the internal benchmark. The report provides recommendations to identify areas below benchmarks and use the detailed data to guide instructor and course improvements.
Report_Card March 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about instructors and course material. It shows average ratings for an organization compared to its internal benchmarks across various metrics. Ratings for the organization were above the benchmark averages for instructor knowledge, presentation skills, encouragement of discussion, and use of real-world examples. The report recommends identifying areas below benchmarks and using filters to guide instructor or course improvements.
Report_Card December 2015
The report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions compared to the organization's internal benchmarks. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmarks on questions about encouraging discussion, providing real-world examples, knowledge, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying areas below benchmarks and using filters to guide instructor or course improvements.
Report_Card
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on questions about instructors and course material. It shows average scores out of 9 for different question categories and individual questions, comparing results to an internal benchmark. Scores were above the benchmark for all categories. Recommendations include identifying lower scoring categories and drilling down to determine how to improve weak areas, using filters to analyze specific instructors or courses, and regularly sharing the report to communicate results.
Report_Card July to December 2015
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on question categories and individual questions. It shows the average scores for an organization compared to its internal benchmarks across several metrics related to instructors. The instructor received high marks above the benchmarks in areas like knowledge, presentation skills, and providing real-world examples. The report recommends identifying categories below benchmarks and using filters to guide performance reviews and course redesigns.
Flow chart redesign
Beginning of the school year, the document outlines introducing expectations and talk moves to students. It then evaluates students' use of talk moves with non-academic and new mathematical content. Students take paper/pencil and online tests to check understanding of new content. Collaborative groups are formed for conversation before a performance measurement and review of talk moves. The process is repeated for new mathematical content and includes challenge problems and online assessments similar to SBAC exams.
Ratios and proportions
This document contains practice problems on ratios and proportions involving students, faculty, field goals and attempts. It asks for solutions to the ratio problems and feedback on the assignment through questions about what was liked, what could be improved, how a blog could be useful in geometry class, and what other tools or resources would be interesting to use in the class.
Randomized Assignment Generator for Brightspace
The presentation introduces a randomized assignment generator tool developed by Virtual High School (VHS) to address issues of academic integrity as student enrollment increased. The generator utilizes the randomized folders feature in the quizzing tool to create unique assignments for each student by drawing from a bank of questions. The presentation provides instructions on setting up assessments using the generator by configuring properties, restrictions, assessments, submission views, and table of contents. It was found to initially reduce instances of academic integrity but a more robust solution was later needed as enrollments continued growing.
Caa2013 9 10-july2013
The document summarizes a pilot study analyzing 115 question items from an online export controls training. Various techniques were used to analyze the data, including exploratory data analysis, principle component analysis, and clustering analysis. The analysis identified questions with deficiencies or anomalies, indicating issues with question design. It was found that exploratory data analysis helped highlight both strong and weak question items, identifying areas for improvement. Recommendations include developing a visual dashboard to monitor question performance, applying validation rules to the authoring tool, and taking a more systematic approach to question design and alignment with learning objectives.
Module 4 lesson 26
This document provides instruction on solving one-step equations using addition and subtraction. It introduces using tape diagrams to represent and solve equations visually before demonstrating algebraic methods. Students work through examples of solving various one-step equations algebraically and checking their solutions. The lesson aims to help students competently solve one-step equations by relating equations to diagrams and checking that their solutions make the original equations true.
Report(1)
The document summarizes a report on an electronics engineering course from 2012-2013. It provides details on the number of lectures held, units covered, and students enrolled for each semester. It analyzes the results from steps taken the previous semester to improve scores, such as presentations, counseling, English language help, and practice questions. Finally, it outlines additional steps planned for the next semester, like more frequent class tests and increased student motivation.
Using GradeMark to engage students in the feedback process
The document discusses a project at Newcastle University to improve feedback and engage students in the marking process using GradeMark. The project aimed to 1) involve students in writing marking criteria, 2) engage students with criteria before submitting assignments, and 3) provide feedback linked directly to criteria using GradeMark. Feedback from students found the electronic feedback easier to understand and more specific. The approach was then expanded across the university and disseminated more widely. Benefits included more detailed feedback for students and markers. Questions remain around further engaging students and managing challenges of staff and student adoption.
Cl pricing 01_orientation class_412
This document provides an overview and schedule for an orientation class on pricing theory and practices. It outlines that the class will introduce fundamental pricing concepts and skills, discuss how pricing fits within the marketing mix, and help students develop the ability to set profitable prices. It also notes the class will include 35 lectures, assignments, tests, and presentations that will be completed both individually and through teamwork, with student performance evaluated based on attendance, test scores, assignment work, and presentations.
SLTCC2017 Lecture Capture: The good, the bad and the ugly (Tosin Lagoke)
SLTCC2017 Lecture Capture: The good, the bad and the ugly (Tosin Lagoke)Solent Learning and Teaching Institute
Lecture capture technology allows for recording of lecture sessions using software. A study examined perceptions of lecture capture from multiple stakeholders including lecturers, students, and learning technologists. Surveys found that overall, lecture capture was perceived to be efficient, cost effective, and a success. However, there were mixed views on whether it enhanced interactivity. Duration of lecture capture use positively correlated with perceived efficiency but negatively correlated with perceived failure. Perceived cost also positively correlated with perceived failure. The research is ongoing and will include interviews with additional stakeholders like university management and software developers.A&F session - PhD students
The document describes a workshop activity aimed at encouraging reflection and creativity in assessment and feedback practices. The workshop uses cards with best practices in assessment and feedback and has participants work in groups to develop an assessment and feedback strategy for a Master's dissertation module by selecting cards and ideas, tailoring them to their objective of improving standards, engagement, methods, peer feedback, or collaborative learning. Participants then briefly present their group's proposed strategy.
What's hot (20)
Using GradeMark to engage students in the feedback process
Using GradeMark to engage students in the feedback process
SLTCC2017 Lecture Capture: The good, the bad and the ugly (Tosin Lagoke)
SLTCC2017 Lecture Capture: The good, the bad and the ugly (Tosin Lagoke)
Similar to Report_Card July 2016
Report_Card July 2015 (1)
The report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor. It shows the average ratings for the instructor and participant responses to individual questions, comparing the results to an internal benchmark. Overall ratings for the instructor were high, averaging 8.38-8.39 out of 9, matching the benchmark. Participant responses were also positive for encouraging discussion, providing real-world examples, instructor knowledge, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying any categories below the benchmark and using additional reports to analyze ratings and feedback to help improve instructor or course performance.
B2B Report
This survey evaluated an entrepreneurship training program called Boots to Business. 110 instructors completed the survey. The survey found:
1) Module 1 was considered the most comfortably taught, while Modules 4 and 5 needed the most improvement.
2) The course objective about understanding business resources was rated highest, while evaluating feasibility tools was rated lowest.
3) Most workshops used 4+ instructors to provide diverse perspectives, but had limited time for preparation.
4) Technology issues and low attendance frequently caused workshop cancellations. The findings suggest reviewing Modules 4-5 and addressing technology and attendance challenges.
TESTA Interactive Masterclass
This document summarizes an interactive masterclass on the TESTA (Transforming the Experience of Students Through Assessment) programme approach. The masterclass discusses the rationale for taking a programme approach to assessment, including addressing modular problems, curriculum problems, and student alienation. Methods discussed include conducting a TESTA programme audit and using an Assessment Experience Questionnaire and student focus groups to gather data. Key themes covered are high summative assessment loads, disconnected feedback between assignments, and student confusion about assessment goals and standards. Strategies presented to improve assessment include increasing formative assessment, providing more dialogic feedback, and helping students internalize assessment criteria.
Framework for LEARNING ORGANIZATION, Multinational Company Study Example
In my masters thesis I tried to develop a simple, generic, easily manageable approach to introducing Learning Organization environment in an organization
Employee Training & Development Ch 06
This document discusses training evaluation and outlines the key steps in the evaluation process. It explains that evaluation is important to demonstrate the benefits of training investments and identify ways to improve programs. There are different types of outcomes that can be evaluated, including reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Various evaluation designs are discussed along with their strengths and weaknesses. Return on investment and other methods for analyzing the costs and benefits of training are also covered. The goal of evaluation is to determine training effectiveness and provide data to help organizations improve training programs.
Transform Your Learning Results with Data from Measurable Instructional Design
Transform Your Learning Results with Data from Measurable Instructional DesignTraining Industry Conference & Expo
The practice of measuring training and calculating ROI has been a part of learning for many years, yet few are able to realize a practical application and show the change in business due to learning. This session highlights how Allscripts implemented a measurement and evaluation program. You will discover the many changes made within the organization due to its implementation. The session follows Allscripts’ journey through the decision to implement, the changes made to the roles within the learning organization, and the shift in the relationship between the learning department and the business. Measuing Learning.pptx
This document discusses measuring learning and provides techniques for doing so. It suggests measuring participants, coaches, course designers, coordinators, organizers, and technical support. Participants and coaches can measure themselves, while coaches, external assessors, and machines can also measure. Learning outcomes, coaching techniques, quality of material, course structure, and coach performance should be measured. Measurement is used to monitor progress, assess performance, create learning plans, identify weaknesses, and redesign training. Online tools mentioned for measurement include Google Forms, Socrative, Slido, Mentimeter, Kahoot, and rubrics. Challenges of measurement include validity, reliability, washback, and practicability.
Kirkpatric
Kirkpatrick developed a four-level model for evaluating training programs: (1) reaction, (2) learning, (3) behavior, and (4) results. The model provides a framework for assessing outcomes at each level to determine a training's effectiveness and identify ways to improve future trainings. Two case studies show how Intel and St. Luke's Hospital have applied the Kirkpatrick model in their evaluation processes, with Intel working backwards from level four and St. Luke's conducting statistical analysis of behavioral changes. The model offers a flexible approach to evaluation that can be tailored to different organizational needs.
Training Needs Analysis
Training needs analysis depicts the systematic process of conducting a training needs analysis in the organization.
tsonlinemodule9 (1).pptx
This document provides an overview of Module 9 of an online TeamSTEPPS coaching workshop. It outlines the objectives of the module which are to teach participants how to coach colleagues in TeamSTEPPS. It describes the key aspects of coaching including modeling behaviors, providing feedback, setting goals, and allowing opportunities to practice. It includes self-assessment exercises to help participants identify their strengths and weaknesses as coaches. Finally, it discusses how to implement a coaching plan including identifying and preparing coaches, as well as gaining support from organizational leadership.
Cognitive Apprenticeship in Accounting Education
This presentation reports the preliminary results of the first implementation of the redesigned course, ACCT19064 Auditing and Professional Practice. The implementation was carried out in Term 1 2008 involving 630 students studying in FLEX mode and at regional and international campuses at CQUniversity Australia. Initial findings on the strengths and weaknesses of integrating the cognitive apprenticeship model in accounting education will be discussed. Results suggest that this model of learning has made significant positive impacts to the quality of student learning experience, and also highlighted certain challenges in facilitating this particular approach to learning and teaching. Overall, there is evidence to suggest that our attempts to increase the value placed on teaching and quality of student learning outcomes have yielded encouraging results for both the student cohorts and teaching staff.
Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model.ppt
The document provides an overview of Donald Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. It describes each level and gives examples of how to measure impact at each level. It also presents two case studies, including how Intel applied the four levels both forwards and backwards in evaluating its training programs, and how St. Luke's Hospital used statistical analysis to evaluate the impact of an outdoor training program across all four levels over time.
Reflexive learning, socio-cognitive conflict and peer- assessment to improve ...
This document discusses a new approach called NP-Q (Notes as Peer-assessed Questions) to improve feedback quality in online self-assessment tests. NP-Q allows students to submit answers in phases, receive peer feedback, and have their contributions peer-assessed. Only the highest rated contributions are selected as feedback. An experiment found high student participation rates in writing explanations and peer assessment. NP-Q shows potential to efficiently generate qualitative, student-provided feedback at scale. Future work includes handling faulty peer reviews and open-ended questions.
Chapter 6, Training Evaluation
This chapter discusses the importance of evaluating training programs and the process of planning and implementing effective training evaluations. There are several reasons to evaluate training, including demonstrating the measurable benefits of training investments and identifying ways to improve programs. Effective evaluations assess outcomes related to learning, transfer of skills to the job, and business results. Different evaluation designs have strengths and weaknesses depending on factors like whether comparisons are made to untreated groups. Calculating return on investment and conducting utility analysis can help determine the financial benefits of training programs.
YouTestMe Starter Presentation
This presentation's purpose is to get you acquainted with the concept of YouTestMe Starter - new software mainly oriented towards various testing purposes. Feel free to check out our other products - www.youtestme.com. Contact us at info@youtestme.com for more information.
Models of Evaluation in Educational Technology
The document discusses different models for evaluating educational technology:
1. Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Model measures reaction, learning, behavior change, and results. It is the best known model.
2. Bates' ACTIONS Model evaluates access, costs, teaching/learning fit, interactivity, organization, novelty, and speed of different technologies.
3. The EITIMI Model considers elements, instructional design, and impact in a three-step evaluation of technologies.
Increasing business success with TPI NEXT and PointZERO
Rik Marselis presented how TPI NEXT and PointZERO can contribute to increasing the business success of an organization by improving the testing process as well as the IT process as a whole.
Prior to this presentation Rik, together with Geoff Thompson, presented about "Why would you want to improve your test process" (also uploaded on slideshare).
This presentation was given at a conference for the test experts of the Siemens group.
MBA760 Chapter 06
This document discusses training evaluation and outlines the key aspects of evaluating training programs. It covers:
1) The importance of evaluating training programs to demonstrate benefits and improve programs. Evaluation involves measuring outcomes like reactions, learning, behavior, and results.
2) Different evaluation designs for measuring outcomes, including their strengths and weaknesses. The most rigorous is the Solomon four-group design which controls for threats to validity.
3) Calculating return on investment (ROI) by determining costs and quantifying benefits, though this is difficult for some types of training. ROI and other metrics help show the business impact of training.
Brown Bag on Quality Matters
The document discusses Quality Matters (QM), a peer review process for online course design based on a rubric and research-backed standards. The QM rubric has 8 general standards addressing course overview, objectives, assessment, resources, interaction, technology, and accessibility. Reviewers initially score each standard individually then reach a team score. For a course to meet QM expectations it must achieve "yes" on essential standards and score a minimum of 72 out of 85 points. The goal of QM is to evaluate courses and ensure critical elements like objectives, interactions, and assessments are properly aligned to support learning outcomes.
YouTestMe Starter User Presentation
In the world of today, testing has become a necessary process in numerous aspects – YouTestMe Starter automates and diversifies it, while saving a lot of time. Our main goal is to enable the attainment of practical knowledge to everyone involved in the testing process, both individuals and groups.
Similar to Report_Card July 2016 (20)
Framework for LEARNING ORGANIZATION, Multinational Company Study Example
Framework for LEARNING ORGANIZATION, Multinational Company Study Example
Transform Your Learning Results with Data from Measurable Instructional Design
Transform Your Learning Results with Data from Measurable Instructional Design
Reflexive learning, socio-cognitive conflict and peer- assessment to improve ...
Reflexive learning, socio-cognitive conflict and peer- assessment to improve ...
Increasing business success with TPI NEXT and PointZERO
Increasing business success with TPI NEXT and PointZERO
More from Carrie E. Williams
Understanding Your Customer dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course called "Understanding Your Customer" from the U.S. Small Business Administration on December 20, 2016. The certificate recognizes her completion of the course aimed at helping small business owners better understand their customers. The course is offered by the SBA Office of Entrepreneurial Development as part of their training resources for small businesses.
Taking Your High Tech Product to Market dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course called "Taking Your High-Tech Product to Market" through the U.S. Small Business Administration on December 19, 2016. The certificate recognizes her completion of the course to help entrepreneurs learn how to take high-tech products to market. It encourages continued learning as a valuable asset.
Young Entrepreneurs dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course from the U.S. Small Business Administration called "Young Entrepreneurs: An Essential Guide to Starting Your Own Business" on December 19, 2016. The course provided guidance for starting a small business.
Encore Entrepreneurs Introduction to Starting Your Own Business dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course called "Encore Entrepreneurs, An Introduction to Starting Your Own Business" through the U.S. Small Business Administration on December 19, 2016. The certificate recognizes her completion of the course aimed at providing an introduction to starting a small business.
How to Win Federal Contracts dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course called "How To Win Federal Contracts" through the U.S. Small Business Administration on December 18, 2016. The course taught her how to pursue and win federal contracts. The SBA aims to provide small businesses with resources through online training courses.
Stratregic Planning dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course in strategic planning for small businesses offered by the U.S. Small Business Administration on December 17, 2016. The certificate recognizes her completion of the course, which aimed to provide small business owners with strategic planning resources from the SBA.
Mentor Protege Program Certificate of Completion
The SBA Mentor-Protégé Program connects small businesses with federal contractors to provide training and experience. It allows mentors to receive bonus points on future government contracts and credit subcontracts to protégés towards contracting goals. The program aims to strengthen small businesses by helping them develop the skills needed to compete for federal and commercial contracts.
Transcripts.oxps
This document is a digital transcript for Carrie Elizabeth Williams that details her Microsoft Office certifications. It shows that she has passed certification exams in Microsoft Office Access 2013, Excel 2010 and 2013, Outlook 2010 and 2013, PowerPoint 2007, 2010 and 2013, Word 2007, 2010, and 2013 including the Word 2013 Expert exams. The transcript provides the names of the testing centers and dates she passed each of the 14 exams. It also describes Certiport as the provider that tracks and authenticates over 12,000 certification exams administered worldwide.
CompTIA CTT+ Classroom Trainer certificate
This document contains Carrie Elizabeth Williams' CompTIA certification information including her certificate code and verification URL. It provides her name, certificate number, date of issuance, and credentials needed to validate her CompTIA certification online.
Ranking_Learning_Providers 1 2016 to 10 2016
This document provides a summary of the ranking of New Horizons - Southern California as a learning provider based on evaluations from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016. It shows that New Horizons ranked 1795 out of 4457 total learning providers based on 27,703 evaluations, with an average score of 8.72 out of 9. The document also provides recommendations on interpreting the report and recommended next steps for analysis.
MS_Learning_Transcript
This document contains certification information for Carrie E Williams including her contact information and a list of her active and past Microsoft certifications such as Microsoft Office Master Specialist, Microsoft Office Expert in Word 2013, and Microsoft Office Specialist in Access 2013. It provides the certification numbers, versions, and achievement dates for each certification. It also lists the Microsoft certification exams she has completed successfully, along with the exam IDs, descriptions, and dates completed.
COURSEEXCEL2010PlainandSimple
The document outlines an Excel 2010 course that will cover basic Excel functions and principles over 15 chapters across 6 days of instruction. Topics include getting started with Excel, building workbooks, formatting cells and worksheets, using formulas and functions, sorting and filtering data, creating charts, adding graphics, sharing data with other programs, and using Excel in a group environment. The course aims to teach students how to apply Excel skills to everyday work and life. Attendance is required and students may be dismissed for excessive absences.
AARP Foundation Finances 50+ Part 1_FINAL_LLOs
This document is a 3-part workshop from AARP on personal finances for those over 50. Part 1 focuses on understanding net worth by calculating assets and liabilities, setting financial goals, and creating a budget to balance monthly expenses. Key lessons include learning how financial decisions impact one's life, setting realistic goals, and using a budget to prioritize spending and savings to work towards ones goals. The next steps recommended developing an action plan, seeking help from money mentors, and reviewing additional resources.
Office Operations Curriculum 2010
This document provides an overview of courses available in the Microsoft Office 2010 curriculum. It describes courses that teach basic skills for Word 2010, Windows 7, Excel 2010, Outlook 2010 and provide certification in digital literacy. It also describes Total Testing software that allows employers to assess candidate qualifications and an Axzo Press ILT series that includes basic, intermediate and advanced courses for Word 2010 to develop proficiency. Pre-tests for Word 2010 from GMETRIX are also included.
Digital Literacy Objectives
The document outlines the course topics and objectives for a Digital Literacy Standard Curriculum. It covers 6 courses: Computer Basics, The Internet and World Wide Web, Productivity Programs, Computer Security and Privacy, and Digital Lifestyles. Each course contains multiple lessons that teach basic computer and technology concepts, skills, and career opportunities related to digital literacy. The curriculum aims to provide students with a foundational understanding of computers, software, online safety, and using digital tools and media.
Objective Domain for Word 2010 Core Test Schedule
The document outlines a 4-day training schedule for Word 2010 basics, intermediate, and advanced exercises. Day one covers basics like managing documents, navigation, formatting, and inserting pictures. Day two focuses on tables, headers/footers, spelling and autocorrect. Day three covers intermediate skills such as page setup, templates, and comments. The final day instructs advanced functions including mail merge, backgrounds, and sharing documents. An objective test schedule is also provided, mapping learning objectives to specific exercises and documents.
COURSEWORD2010PlainandSimple
This document provides information about a Word 2010 training course offered by New Hope Enterprises Inc. It includes the instructor and director contact information, course description, attendance policy, required text, course objectives, and tentative 5-day course outline. The attendance policy states that students may be dropped from the course if they have two unexcused absences or are tardy three times. The course objectives are to present basic principles of Word 2010 and its application to daily life and work.
More from Carrie E. Williams (19)
Taking Your High Tech Product to Market dsp_certificate
Taking Your High Tech Product to Market dsp_certificate
Encore Entrepreneurs Introduction to Starting Your Own Business dsp_certificate
Encore Entrepreneurs Introduction to Starting Your Own Business dsp_certificate
Report_Card July 2016
- 1. Report Card Run By: Carrie Williams (cwilliams@nhsocal.com) MTM Tool: Report Card Date Run: Aug 2, 2016 From Saved Query: No MTM Benchmark Only my company Report Card a summary of learning performance by survey question category and by survey question All Question |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=99] 8.47 MTM Benchmark [n=101] 8.26 Instructor |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=99] 8.47 MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.47 Report Card Instructor a summary of learning performance by survey question category and by survey question Instructor |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=99] 8.47 MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.47 Instructor overall |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=99] 8.45 MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.45 Participants were encouraged to take part in class discussions. |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=99] 8.54 MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.54 The instructor provided realworld experiences and examples. |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=99] 8.35 MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.35 The instructor was knowledgeable about the subject. |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=98] 8.54 MTM Benchmark [n=98] 8.54 The instructor''s presentation skills were adequate. |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=99] 8.47 MTM Benchmark [n=99] 8.47 Report Recommendations Interpreting the Report Below are tips to help you understand the information in the report. For additional information, please click the Help tab above the report. Shows the overall scores by question category and questions selected for training provided by the organization. Report allows you to compare the organization's performance against internal or external benchmarks (represented by a orange bar). Report may be customized using filters for comparison of specific attributes such as courseware, question category, etc. Recommended Actions Below are recommended next steps to take after reviewing the information in this report. Additionally, you'll find links to automatically run complementary reports for drillingdown further into the data or analyzing the information in another way. Determine which question categories fall below the benchmark and drill down by utilizing the breakout by question or by using the reports below to determine what may be causing the score to determine what corrective action to take. For example, if job impact is low for specific courses, perhaps the right people aren't attending the training or the material delivered is not intended to impact performance. Filtering the report to one instructor or one set of courses will allow the report to be used in performance reviews. Because the questions are also displayed, the potential areas where instructors or courses perform high or low can be identified and a - 1 / 2 -