1. 1st December 2004 Author: Göran Karlsson, Anders Ambrén, Matteo Uggeri, Marianne Salomón Expectation and design of the experiment SIG DLAE and its focus on pedagogical issues

2. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Agenda of this last section [Pt.1: Development of the accreditation process 5 min (Göran Karlsson, Anders Ambrén [Pt.2: Development Technological facilities evaluation 5 min section 2.2 and enclosure: the table of feaures (Matteo Uggeri [Pt.3: Pilot application for accreditiation of a master program 10 min (Marianne Salomón

3. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Pt.1: Development of the accreditation process The workpackages iterative process General accreditation experience Distance- and E- learning experience 2- 3 iterations Improve knowledge in accreditation area

4. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Pt.1: Development of the accreditation process in a KTH perspective [Experience from (Development and delivery of E-learning courses at undergraduate level in engineering programs (Training the Trainers (Introduction of KTH courses at the Swedish Netuniversity

5. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Development of the accreditation process [Focus on (Support to students active learning. (Learning is a social activity Communication facilities Support to facilitate collaborative work (Additional value to student compared to on-campus training. How is the new media used? Don’t just put the old processes and content in a new box 

6. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Pt.2: Development Technological facilities evaluation [The main problem is: may the assessor be an expert of all? [As everyone knows, today there is a load of different products with similar functions and features, developed by small and big companies, institutions and also by single experts of e-learning. [In the last years, a lot of efforts have been made to compare, evaluate and judge all these different LCMS: [e.g. http://www.edutools.info/course/compare/index.jsphttp://www.edutools.info/course/compare/index.jsp [In our process we did not collect all the existing platforms, nor we took ‘the most common ones’ and compare them point by point. We already do this during our day to day work, every time we choose or develop a product for an e-learning course (see TABLE Enclosure 1 in the document).Enclosure 1 [ 

7. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Pt.2: Development of technological facilities evaluation FeaturesCharacteristicsHiMedLowNotesCertification … ……………… Didactic Scenario Our case study (i.e. KTH / Politecnico OnLine Degree) THIS IS A TOOL FOR THE ASSESSORS.

8. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Pt.2: Development of technological facilities evaluation FeaturesCharacteristicsHiMedLowNotesCertification … ……………… Didactic Scenario Our case study (i.e. KTH / Politecnico OnLine Degree) 1. We used the term ‘features’, which is the most generic. In our scheme, feature means “something that’s present or not” in a platform.[1] In the Edutools website they use the same term.[1] 3. i.e., if u are talking about the video: - when a video can be considered as good? - how can I measure this goodness? - and good for what use? Obviously, every different kind of object needs different parameters of comparison. 4. The evaluation must be relative, but relative to what? Our choose is to draw evaluation tools that put in relationship the features and their characteristic with a didactical scenario. 2. Features have some kind of characteristic that can be almost infinite to consider in every possibilities. The adopted solution is to keep only three degrees: high, medium and low.

9. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Pt.2: Development of technological facilities evaluation [The table was designed by a group of very different people: we involved: (engineers, (system administrators, (didactical experts, (teachers, (content managers, (graphic designers. [It was really interesting to see all the different approaches and points of view fighting and finding common paths and fields to mainly define what are we talking about. 

10. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Pt.2: Development of technological facilities evaluation [Therefore, we wanted somehow to enter in the assessor’s shoes. [In a case like this, the assessor needs an easy-to-use tool who can be at the same time exhaustive as it can and helpful. [Useless to say, in the e-learning world everything moves quickly, especially in the field of technologies, so nothing can be totally complete. That’s why too the table is designed to be changed and must be possible to add rows and rows… [Therefore, our next step as DLAE staff, is to make a pilot experimentation fo the process, as we already begin. 

11. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Pt.3: Pilot application for accreditiation of a master program Case Study: Distant Master Program in Sustainable Energy Engineering (DSEE)

12. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Distant Master in Sustainable Energy Engineering (DSEE) Based on the on-campus international master program at KTH Started this autumn 2 groups of students(11 in total), one in Uganda and another in Ethiopia Students have the support of the local university which helps in meeting the goals and keeping track on the students performance Same eligibility criteria as on-campus students enrolled in the master program. Additional requirements regarding internet connection and computer availability Program based on blended learning Access to KTH resources (netlibrary, computer programs used in the courses, LCMS, etc) Access to the Computerized Educational Program in Heat and Power Technology (CompEduHPT) which is used a a main tool for teaching and learning in several courses

13. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Program Outline Introduction to Energy Technology  Sustainable Power Generation 3cr 9cr Sustainable Energy Utilization  Renewable Energy Technology 9cr 6cr Energy and Management 6cr Energy and Environment  Applied Energy Technology – Project course 6cr 6cr Applied Refrigeration &  Thermal Comfort Heat Pump Technology and Indoor Climate 6cr Applied Heat and  Applied Renewable Power Technology Energy Technology 6cr 6cr Thesis Project: 30 cr Major: Sustainable Energy Utilization in the Built Environment (SEU) Thesis Project: 30 cr Major: Sustainable Power Generation (SPG) SEU major SPG major (autumn) (spring) cr=ECTS

14. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Accreditation Process

15. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Distant Master Program Accreditation Started the accreditation process of the master at KTH once the DLAE framework was ready Currently focused in the aspect of the management in relation with distant learning. Next steps: general aspects and pedagogical criteria Application General Pedagogical criteria Pedagogical design Technical Facilities Monitoring and evaluation Management in relation with distance learning Organization Human resources Physical resources

16. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Distance Learning Accreditation Process is simple and concrete Fast Standardized Clear guidelines Tables where it is clearly explained the inputs and outputs and by whom should be provided  transparency in the accreditation

17. 1st December 2004Author: Karlsson, Ambrén, Uggeri, Salomón Upcoming Master Program in Energy Engineering A new master program is scheduled to start in Autumn 2005 The program is offered in cooperation with other 5 universities in Sweden and the Swedish Netuniversity The program will be based in blended learning The courses will be given by the 6 universities partners