Introducing the Analysis of the Didactic Material of a web-based training 1 - ABSTRACT Evaluation Tools  The Analysis of the Didactic Material Checklist: (38 items that evaluate: instructional objectives, adequacy of the instructional strategies, exercises, activities planning, content sequencing, and sources of information in the course).  The Table of Instructional Objectives Analysis: Such tools were developed based on Instructional Psychology Theory, on the Model of Training Impact Evaluation at Work (IMPACT — by Abbad, 1999), as well as on Mager’s writing techniques (Mager, 1961), and on Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (1972; In: Rodrigues-Jr., 1997). Improvements in the course structure should focus mainly on the interactive strategies used. In order to increase the course’s effectiveness, its design should include the use of chats, forums, and tutoring, to name a few strategies. Such alternatives eases knowledge accessibility and, as a consequence, strengthen the learning process. Another aspect that should be mentioned is the fact that effective feedback should provide learners with essential information about how much has been learned and how much needs to be revised. The feedback displayed in the course presented neither verification nor elaboration. 5 – DISCUSSION ABBAD, G. S.; BORGES-ANDRADE, J.E. Aprendizagem em Organizações Trabalho. In: ZANELLI, Jose Carlos; BORGES-ANDRADE, Jairo Eduardo; BASTOS, Antonio Virgílio Bittencourt. (Org.). Psicologia, Organizações e Trabalho no Brasil. São Paulo, 2004, v. 1, p MAGER, R. F. (1976) A Formulação de Objetivos de Ensino. Porto Alegre: Globo. MASON, B. J. E BRUNING, R (1999). Providing Feedback in Computer–Based Instruction: What the research tell us. Disponível em: retirado em 13/10/ RODRIGUES Jr., J.F. (1997) A Taxonomia dos Objetivos Instrucionais: Um Manual para o Usuário. Brasília: Edunb. The purpose of this study was to introduce the analysis of the instructional material of a web- based training program made by a technology school, in order to evaluate the adequacy of the material to the trainee’s learning process based on Instructional Psychology Theory. The objective of this analysed training was to capacitate learners to develop logical programming, without necessarily making use of a specific programming language. The results point to the need of better-developed evaluation exercises and feedback, in order to improve web-based training programs like the one analyzed in this study. By doing so, work organizations may rely on more effective learning programs to continuously enhance professionals’ capabilities, so that they do not become obsolete in the constantly changing market. The course: a brief description Named An Introduction to Logical Programming, the course was structured in nine modules by MSD Tecnologia, whose instructional objectives demanded about 60 hours from learners. The general objective was to capacitate learners to develop logical programming, without necessarily making use of a specific programming language. Such course was available both as a unit from a broader technical program, and as a separate course itself for those who were interested in that specific subject only. 6 – RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the main results of this analysis, it is suggested that instructional designs include additional information when elaborating exercises, so that learners can count on effective feedback, and, therefore, learning be more effective as well as transference of learning more likely to happen. By doing so, work organizations may rely on more effective learning programs to continuously enhance professionals’ capabilities, so that they do not become obsolete in the constantly changing market. 7 – REFERENCES Rodrigo Miranda Vanessa Brixi University of Brasília - Brazil Institute of Psychology Impacto: Research on Training and Organizatons of Work Authors: Acileide Coelho Annelise Thiele Cassio Zambelli Gardênia Abbad PRONEX Fubra 2 - INTRODUCTION Web-based training programs, as well as other distance education programs, have become one of the main helpful tools used to facilitate learning and knowledge acquisition in organizations of work. As it happens to face-to-face education, it is very crucial that distance education programs can count on reliable evaluation methods. Also, there is an increasing concern with feedback, once it is an important way to both facilitate and strengthen the learning process. If a web-based training is embedded in a context in which learners work mostly individually, appropriate feedback happens to be even more critical and necessary than it is in traditional education programs. According to Kulhavy and Stock (1989; In: Mason & Bruning, 1999), feedback is effective when it provides learners with verification and elaboration. Verification concerns simply judging whether an answer is correct or incorrect. Elaboration relates to the informative component that offers relevant tips that guide learners to the correct answer. 3 - METHOD 4 - RESULTS  High-quality navigability;  Coherent sequence of content;  Adequate use of language. As an overview, the training program was evaluated as technically adequate, concerning instructional theories: Yet, a substantial drawback was depicted, concerning the need of effective feedback on the exercise sections:  lack of interactive instructional strategies, such as chats, forums, and tutoring.  feedback indicated only the percentage of rightness in each question  lack of guidance about: - what was the correct answer; - why the learner’s choice was wrong; and - where the rationale for each answer would be found in the didactic material.Procedures There were two available versions of the didactic material: CD ROOM and printed. Instructional strategies included:  Theory along the modules and exercises at the end;  Web site with extra reading materials for download, exercises and learning evaluation. The following aspects were evaluated:  quality of instructional objectives  sequence presentation of content  adequacy of exercises  adequacy of learning evaluation  adequacy of feedback. Phase 1: In pairs, researchers followed the checklist  the modules were evaluated alternately Phase 2: the whole research team (five people) discussed the results and came to a consensus.