Presentation on theme: "1 Needs Analysis “Analysed opportunities and constraints in using C&IT” i.e. analysed the needs or requirements Put simply, the goal is to describe the."— Presentation transcript:
1 Needs Analysis “Analysed opportunities and constraints in using C&IT” i.e. analysed the needs or requirements Put simply, the goal is to describe the gap between where the students are and where we want them to be, before we can design the bridge they can cross.
2 Sources of needs analysis (more of later?) u Learning technology integration e.g. Stoner, Laurillard, Conole & Oliver u Instructional design e.g. Gagné, Shuell u Curriculum design e.g. Taba u Action research e.g. Kemmis & McTaggart u Training needs analysis e.g. Peterson u Learning needs analysis u Systems analysis for software development e.g. Yourdon
3 A needs analysis Tasks – some or all of 1.Review the current course, if any 2.Analyze the stakeholders especially students 3.Analyze the subject domain 4.Analyze the learning outcomes 5.Analyze the teaching/learning activities 6.Analyze the constraints and resources 7.Analyze the evaluation methods needed
4 Stakeholder analysis u Who are they? Who cares? u What will they want from the intervention? u Are we prepared to give it them? They include u The tutor, programme assessment u Students u Colleagues u The department u The QA office, the QAA u ‘The university’
5 The students u What relevant knowledge and skills? u How varied are they in knowledge and learning styles? u How well can they learn? What study skills? u What motivation and interests, attitudes to teaching/learning methods? u What obstacles to their learning, such as anxiety, colour blindness, lack of concentration, computer access?
6 The subject domain u In commercial training needs analysis only task performance counts u In higher education emphasis is on the knowledge underpinning performance, and generic cognitive skills u We may need to represent the knowledge domain, the context of learning activities and outcomes u So we might use knowledge elicitation and knowledge representation techniques
7 Knowledge elicitation u Informal interviews with experts. This reveals their view of the domain. u Observation of actual performance of expertise done in a natural context. u Verbal protocols in an assessment situation. A protocol provides a framework for capturing the knowledge in a skilled performance.
8 Knowledge represented as … living things mammals animals humans dogs female humans Julia movement respiration growth plants movement have not have ako isa ako = class is A Kind Of isa = individual Is A orchids ako Danny whippets ako isa Semantic net
9 Pyramid of learning outcomes to be able to to be able to to be able to to be able to to be able to to be able to to be able to to be able to to be able to to be able to to be able to to be able to Pre-requisites to be able to to be able to to be able to to be able to
10 TLAs: traditional u Acquisition – reading, lectures u Practice - exercises, problems u Discussion – seminars, tutorials u Discovery – field trips, practicals u Assessment – essays, exams
11 TLAs Laurillard’s teaching strategy Four aspects of TLAs u Discursive discussion of goals and conceptions u Adaptive students relate feedback on their work to their conceptions u Interactive acting to achieve a goal and receive feedback u Reflective reflect on their actions in the light of conceptions
12 TLAs: Laurillard’s Conversational Framework In more detail, 12 activities of which 10 are: u Receiving information u Describing own conceptions (verbally, writing..) u Correcting misconceptions from feedback u Re-describing improved conceptions u Performing tasks u Receiving feedback on tasks u Improving performance of tasks u Reflecting on performance to improve conceptions u Reflecting on conceptions to improve performance
13 concrete experience abstract conceptualization reflective observationactive experimentation four stages of learning from experience: TLAs: Kolb’s cycle
14 TLAs: Robert Gagné The nine instructional events Use LT to support 1. Gain attention 2. Tell learners the learning objective 3. Stimulate recall 4. Present the stimulus, content 5. Provide guidance, relevance, organization 6. Elicit the learning by demonstrating it 7. Provide feedback on performance 8. Assess performance, give feedback and reinforcement 9. Enhance retention and transfer to other contexts
15 TLAs: Shuell’s Learning Functions 1. Expectations must be set 2. Motivation must be gained and maintained 3. Prior knowledge needs activation 4. Draw attention to important items 5. Encoding: help remembering, give personal meaning with diagrams, examples 6. Comparisons: encourage with diagrams, charts, questions
16 Shuell’s Learning Functions - 2 7. Hypothesis generation, encourage thinking of alternative actions 8. Repetition: guided practice or reflection, multiple examples or perspectives 9. Relevant feedback and correction 10. Evaluation of feedback as basis of next activity 11. Monitoring - check for understanding 12. Integration: provide ways to combine, integrate, synthesize, with graphics, multimedia
17 Constraints & resources u Learning technology availability u When: deadlines, time available u Who is available to do what u How tools and resources available u Other costs
18 Summative evaluation, what will count as success? (from Kirkpatrick, four ripples) 1. What happened in use? Did learners, teachers use it? Like it? 2. Were learning outcomes achieved? Was student performance improved? 3. Were the outcomes transferable to real situations? 4. What were the wider effects? On students, staff departments, institution… The evaluation in outline
19 Criticisms of needs analysis u The unit of analysis is too small. Decomposition emphasizes elements but not their integration or application - does not encourage constructivist learning, synthesis, generic skills. u Hierarchies of objectives (or content) are too simple for the richer interrelations of real domains. u Instructional strategies can become just the integration of small items of learning. u …?
20 References 1 Bostock S.J. 1996 A critical review of Laurillard’s classification of educational media Journal of Instructional Science 24,71-88 Gagné R M and Medsker K L, The conditions of learning: training applications 1996, Harcourt Brace Harmon, P. and King, D. 1985 Representing knowledge New York: Wiley Kirkpatrick D L Evaluating Training Programs Kemmis S & McTaggart R 1988 (eds) The Action Research Planner 3 rd ed. Deakin University Press Laurillard D. Rethinking University Education, 1994 Routledge and second edition 2002 Marshall, I.M., Samson, W.B., Dugard, P.I. & Scott, WA Predicting the development effort of multimedia courseware Information and Software Technology 1994 36 (5) 251-258 Oliver, M. and Conole, G. 1998 A pedagogical framework for embedding C&IT into the curriculum ALT-J 6 (2)
21 References 2 Pederson, K. Expert systems programming: practical techniques for rule-based systems 1989 London: John Wiley Peterson, R. 1992 Training needs analysis in the workplace London: Kogan Page Shuell, T. 1992, Designing Instructional Computing Systems for Meaningful Learning, in P. Winne & M.Jones (eds) Adaptive Learning Environments: foundations and Frontiers, New York: Springer Verlag Stoner G. A conceptual framework for the integration of learning technology, chapter 3 in Implementing Learning Technology, LTDI, Heriot-Watt 1996 http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/ltdi/implementing-it/implt.pdf http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/ltdi/implementing-it/implt.pdf Taba H. 1971 The functions of a conceptual framework for curriculum design 134-152 in R. Hooper (ed.) The Curriculum: context, design and development Open University Press
22 Learning technology frameworks e.g. Stoner, LTDI u Analysis and evaluation yDetermine course objectives yCollect data on students, course, resources, policy yEvaluate extant system yIdentify potential courses of action u Selection of Learning Technologies yGenerate alternative solutions yEvaluate alternative against course objectives yChoose the technology and mode of use
23 Action research Cycles (spirals) of interventions each consisting of u Plan u Act u Observe u Reflect Relevant for 3 reasons u It is in the EFFECTS documentation and background u Participant projects are action research (loosely) u In Keele workshop on learning technology project planning, lifecycles
24 Traditional curriculum design e.g. Taba 1971 u Learning objectives what is the purpose? u Content what is the subject? u Methods* what are the learning experiences? u Evaluation* how are results (student performances) to be assessed? * Teaching/ Learning activities might involve IT
25 Training needs analysis 1. Identify task-specific performance objectives. 2. Identify the gap between actual and desired performance? 3. Is it a training problem? 4. Analyze the knowledge, skills, & attitudes needed for the performance, to bridge the gap. 5. Identify constraints e.g. time, equipment Maybe suitable for computer based instruction
26 Learning needs analysis u In education as opposed to training, emphasis is on the knowledge underpinning performance, not just the observable task performance u Analysis involves subject knowledge acquisition and representation u Related to methods used in knowledge engineering e.g. developing expert systems Maybe suitable for developing hypermedia
27 Systems analysis (E Yourdon Modern Structured Analysis 1989) u Inputs are yinitial project charter yuser policy and yconstraints u Modelling processes develop this into a clear specification yStatement of purpose u This feeds into ythe design activity, ycost/benefit report and yacceptance test specification (evaluation)
28 Time dependency u Initiation u Analysis of requirements, review of solutions, selection u Design u Implementation u Evaluation progress forward, look ahead, revisions
29 The evaluation in outline Maybe, formative evaluation as part of the development e.g. u Quality review using checklists for content and usability u By experts or peers, walkthroughs u Pilot tests u Observations of use, automatic logging …
30 Maier and Warren 2000 Section 3.3.1 Planning resource based environments u Learner model - academic needs, expectations, IT skills, variety u Pedagogical model - values and philosophy, learning outcomes, how to achieve them, how to assess u Domain model - level & content, learning outcomes, cross references, resources needed u Implementation model - select technology to deliver u Evaluation model - how to evaluate