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

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

1st December 2004 Author: 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


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


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


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


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.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).

[


Pt.2: Development of technological facilities evaluation

Features Characteristics Hi Med Low Notes Certification

…

… … … … … …

Didactic Scenario

Our case study (i.e. KTH / Politecnico

OnLine Degree)

THIS IS A TOOL FOR THE ASSESSORS.



Features Characteristics Hi Med Low Notes Certification

…

… … … … … …

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.

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.



[ 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.



[ 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.


Pt.3: Pilot application for accreditiation of a master program

Case Study: Distant Master Program in Sustainable Energy Engineering (DSEE)


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


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 ComfortHeat Pump Technology and Indoor Climate

6cr 6cr

Applied Heat and Applied RenewablePower Technology Energy Technology 6cr 6cr

Thesis Project: 30 crMajor: Sustainable Energy Utilization in the Built Environment (SEU)

Thesis Project: 30 crMajor: Sustainable PowerGeneration (SPG)

SEU major SPG major

(autumn)

(spring)

cr=ECTS


Accreditation Process


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 Management in relation with distance learning

Organization

Human resources

Physical resources

Pedagogical design

Technical Facilities

Monitoring and evaluation


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

CODE NAME PROVIDER REQUIREMENT CONFIDENTIAL DELIVERY A3301 Policies for learning and

content materials Applicant Recommendable Yes Postal,

Email A3310 Policies for Security and

Students’ Information Protection

Applicant Recommendable Yes Postal, EMail

F3301 Resources Availability Form

AB Mandatory Yes Postal, EMail

F3310 Resources Security Form


R3301 Availability of Resources Report


R3310 Security of Resources Report



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

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

Documents

learning courses

evaluation tools

e learning experience

elearning course

accreditation areapt

different approaches

different people

different lcms