Top Banner

of 16

Flynn_SummativeProject

Apr 07, 2018

Download

Documents

Daniel Flynn
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    1/16

    1

    Formative Report for Educational ResourcesPrepared for: ThinkHard Design Studies, LLC

    Group Members:Daniel Flynn

    Tony Hetrick

    Jennifer Hornyak

    EDTECH 505-4172

    April 19, 2011

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    2/16

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    3/16

    3

    Executive Summary

    A small team was contracted by ThinkHard Design Studies, LLC to conduct a detailed analysis

    of 29 educational websites (WBLEs). In order to analyze each website, a rubric created by

    Baya'a, Shehade, & Baya'a (2009) was distributed in electronic form to experts in the field of

    education. Both quantitative and qualitative data was collected based on the expert feedback.

    The rubric helped to evaluate each website in the following areas: usability, content, educational

    value, and vividness.

    Overall, the WBLEs were only rated as adequate with the educational value category receiving

    poor reviews. However, the contentcategory received relatively high reviews. Of the evaluated

    WBLEs, 44% contained an informational instructional style while only 9% used a drill-and-

    practice instructional style. To improve the WBLEs, it is recommended that both the usability

    and educational value aspects are modified to meet the rubric criteria.

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    4/16

    4

    Results and Interpretations

    Usability

    A majority of the WBLEs that were reviewed contained significant usability issues. The main

    issue had to do with navigation, which allows users to tell where they are, where they have been,

    and where they need to go next. Also, design and lack of enjoyment contributed to the low

    score. The below graph displays the average score of all WBLEs reviewed.

    The data showed a strong correlation between page design and navigation. When a site wasevaluated on its design, only 12.5% of the time was there a navigation score that ranked higher

    than the design score. This was also evident from the review comments. For example, a

    reviewer ofZebra Keys stated that the site is too busy. It has too many advertisements for the

    audience to navigate with flow. Another reviewer forKids Biology stated that the ads and

    extra links were constantly interfering with the instruction making it nearly impossible to process

    the navigation or efficiently gain knowledge from the text.

    Other than interfering with the navigation, the design of the WBLEs contributed to other

    usability issues. The reviewers stated that the sites were overwhelming by being too busy,

    used inappropriate or too small font size, or were lacking contrast between the text and the

    background. The lack of good design contributed to making certain sites difficult to use, despite

    good content. A reviewer ofESL Go explained that while the site provided good grammar help,

    it was poorly designed which led to confusion and a jumbled mess.

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    5/16

    5

    While the majority of the sites contained usability comments that listed problems, not all sites

    were poorly designed. For instance, a reviewer stated that The Musical Mindwas very clean

    and professional looking with no ads and nice use of color.

    To improve usability, CARP (Contrast, Alignment, Repetition, and Proximity) design principles

    should be followed. These principles are the guidelines that will enable the WBLEs to look

    clean, neat, and professional (Williams & Tollett, 2006, p. 113) and the WBLEs will better

    communicate their content and they will be more enjoyable (Williams & Tollett, 2006).

    Content

    A majority of the WBLEs that were reviewed contained significant doubt as to content

    authority. For the most part, however, the WBLEs content for relevance, sufficiency and

    appropriateness are quite relevant for users and show adequate ratings for the most part. The

    following chart shows the averages of the results of the WBLEs.

    The results showed that reviewers found most of the websites relevant in terms of content.

    However, there is a high doubt on the authority of the resources used in creating the content

    of the site. Reviews of some the WBLEs authority (Q4.2) were mentioned in the comment

    sections (Q4.6) and they included:

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    6/16

    6

    WBLE Comment

    Camera Work Tutorial The site is run by experts in their fields, (based on information of

    profiles) however, not sites or other resources are mentioned

    to back up their claims of information

    Franchise Webquest I would have given the authority a better mark if the links to

    back up information were working.

    Kids Biology There are no sources, so it is unclear where the information is

    coming from. Overall, I felt the level of information provided

    was not sufficient

    There are 43% of sites that have an excellent rating for authority of websites. However, this

    leads to an issue of inclusion of sites not based on authority in the portal page since the sites

    that dont have proper resources will likely lose credibility with potential users. Most of thereviewers did like the overall content but lacked the confidence in referencing valid sources that

    would give an authority for inclusion in the portal. This being said, reviewers believe that the

    WBLEs are relevant in their appropriateness with a strong level of difficulty and sustainability.

    For the sites that have content that is backed by proper resources, they often score high on

    relevance, sufficiency, and appropriateness. Reviewers often comment positively about the

    overall content of the site. For example, The Genius of Leonardo da Vinci site, a reviewer

    commented that the content may have been slightly excessive, but I'd rather have that than

    insufficient. These comments were frequent thought out the WBLE and show a general

    concern of how a site should be constructed with proper resources.

    Overall, content scored well, except for the amount of sites that lack proper authority (resources,

    working links to resources, dependable, etc.) that would bring credibility to the portal. One

    possible solution could be to create a second section within the portal for sites that lack proper

    resources and label it something other than primary sites.

    After analyzing the content for the various age groups, there seems to be a heavy disposition

    of sites for 4-6th grade and 7-9th grades, making up 56% of the sites. 16% of the sites were

    made for 10th-12th grade and 9% of the sites were for the 1st-3rd grade. Kindergarten ages sitesrepresented 3%, or only 1 WBLE. See the below chart for additional detail.

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    7/16

    7

    Educational Value

    Overall, reviewers found the WBLEs to have varying degrees of educational value. The rubric

    addressed each website in the areas of: instructional style, instructional setting, and instructional

    application. While some variance was found in these areas, it would be beneficial to expand the

    portal to include WBLEs that represent a wider variety of instructional styles and instructional

    settings as well as address a wider range of instructional applications.

    Instructional Styles

    The WBLEs were evaluated for the following instructional styles: Informational, Drill &

    Practice, Tutorial, Simulation, Instructional Game, and Mixed Mode which is a WBLE that

    includes a combination of one or more of the above instructional styles. According to the data,

    the majority (44%) of the sites represents WBLEs that are informational and contain little or no

    student interaction. None of the WBLEs were found to be of the simulation instructional style.

    Please see the below chart for additional information.

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    8/16

    8

    Instructional Setting

    The WBLEs were rated by the expert reviewers in terms of which setting each WBLE would be

    most effective. The majority of the sites, 53% or 17 WBLEs, in the list were rated to be most

    effective for individuals to use outside of class (at home or after school). 25% of the sites were

    found to be appropriate for a whole class instruction using a projector or large display. It would

    be beneficial to include a wider variety of WBLEs appropriate for all settings on the portal so

    that educators would be able to utilize the portal to a greater extent.

    Instructional Application

    The instructional application that was determined to be most appropriate was basic instruction

    for all learners. The graph below shows that while there are a range of instructional

    applications among the WBLEs evaluated, the majority would be most advantageous to be used

    in basic instruction. To improve the educational value of the WBLES on the list, there should be

    some consideration to including a wider variety of instructional activities.

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    9/16

    9

    Vividness

    Overall, the WBLEs ranked as adequate in the category of vividness. According to the

    rubric, vividness includes sufficient links to other pages as well as updated and current content

    and links. Current information and workable links are important for a WBLE to obtain a high

    scoring review. Expert reviewers rated the links found in the WBLEs that point to other pages as

    adequate with a mean result of 2.06 on a scale of 1 to 3, with 1 being the best ranking possible.

    In addition, experts rated the WBLEs in terms of updated content and links as adequate with a

    mean result of 2.56. It is recommended that additional sites be added to the portal which includesupdated links that point to appropriate and supplementary content, as well as sites that contain

    current content.

    Page Comparisons

    Upon comparing the sites on the two different pages, they were found to be comparable.

    Overall, there was only 2.6% separating the two pages, with page #2 performing slightly better.

    The mean result for page #1 was 1.94 and the mean result for page #2 was 1.89.

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    10/16

    10

    Site Rankings

    Highest Rankings - Most Appropriate Instructional Activities

    Among the 10 sites that were rated the highest by the expert reviewers, the most appropriate

    instructional activity is basic instruction for all learners. Below is the list of the instructional

    values from the top 10 sites:

    1. 5 WBLEs - Basic instruction for all learners

    2. 3 WBLEs - Enrichment instruction for students who will benefit from more advanced

    activities

    3. 1 WBLE - Differentiated instruction for students with varying learning styles

    4. 1 WBLE - Remedial instruction for students who did not initially grasp the concept

    Highest Rankings - Common Elements

    Among the 10 sites that were rated the highest by the expert reviewers, their common elements

    were from the categories ofusability and content. Below are their rankings in order:

    1. Enjoyment (Usability Q3.6): Multimedia and humor that are relevant, clear and

    appropriate to the subject matter

    2. Readability (Usability (Q3.7): Users can easily view contents of the web pages

    3. Relevance (Content Q4.3): Information focuses on the main topic and does not include

    irrelevant or marginal data

    4. Authority (Content Q4.2): Information relies on authentic organizations and dependable

    resources

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    11/16

    11

    Lowest Rankings - Common Elements

    Among 10 sites that were rated the lowest by the expert reviewers, their common elements were

    from the categories ofeducational value and vividness. Below are their rankings in order:

    1. Help Tools (Educational Value Q5.8): Help tools to assist users in solving problems

    2. Updating (Vividness Q6:3): Designers continuously update the information, content and

    links

    3. Communication (Educational Value Q5.5): Users are able to interact with designers of

    the WBLE and other peers

    4. Rubric (Educational Value Q5.7): Activities include rubrics to evaluate user performance

    Overall Recommendations

    In order to improve the web portal, it is recommended that the data presented in this report

    be used to provide additional WBLEs on the portal that would rank highly amongst expertsespecially in the area of educational value and usability. The rubric, provided in the appendix,

    should be used in choosing any additional sites. It may also be considered that the lowest ranking

    WBLEs be removed from the portal and replaced with higher ranking WBLEs. The chart below

    depicts the WBLE in terms of overall ranking of the WBLEs. Sites that should be considered to

    be replaced in the portal include:Kids Biology, ESL Go, ZebraKeys, and Free Drawing Lessons.

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    12/16

    12

    When choosing new WBLEs for the portal, a specific focus should be placed on the portal

    including WBLEs that are strong in the area of content so that educators will be able to use

    the WBLEs across the curriculum. Based on the data, an additional recommendation is to add

    more websites that are geared towards the Kindergarten grade level. It is also very important the

    portal includes websites that address a variety of instructional applications across many different

    educational settings. In addition, it would be beneficial to categorize the websites on portal by

    grade level, allowing the users to easily access proper content immediately.

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    13/16

    13

    References

    Baya'a, N., Shehade, H. M., & Baya'a, A. R. (2009). A rubric for evaluating Web-based learning

    environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 761763.

    Williams, R., & Tollett, J. (2006). The non-designers web book: An easy guide to creating,

    designing, and posting your own web site (3rd ed.). Peachpit Press CA.

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    14/16

    14

    Appendices

    Charts / Graphs

    Average Scores among All WBLES

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    15/16

    15

    A rubric for evaluating Web-based learning environments (Baya'a,

    Shehade, & Baya'a, 2009)

    Usability Criterion

    Purpose The purpose, benefit and importance of the WBLE should be presented

    clearly.

    Homepage The homepage should include a well-labeled, clearly defined table of

    contents.

    Navigation Users need to know where they are, where they have been and where to

    go next.

    Design Web pages have to be neat, simple and not overstuffed, and background

    should not interfere with text.

    Enjoyment Multimedia and humor are recommended, but should be relevant, clear,

    appropriate to the subject matter, and should not be heavy in a way that

    slows down the presentation of the web pages.

    Readability Users should be able to read the content of the web pages easily, by

    proper use of text, sounds and images.

    Content Criterion

    Authority Information in the WBLE should rely on authentic organizations and

    dependable resources in the field of the presented material.

    Accuracy Information should be accurate and based on factual knowledge and

    professional thinking.

    Relevance The information provided ought to focus on the main topic of the WBLE,

    and should not include irrelevant or marginal data.

    Sufficiency The amount of information in the WBLE should be sufficient but not

    excessive.

    Appropriateness The information should be presented in an appropriate method and

    suitable level of difficulty to the target users.

  • 8/4/2019 Flynn_SummativeProject

    16/16

    16

    Education Value CriterionLearning

    activities

    WBLE should provide learning activities that expose the users to new

    information and encourage them to construct new knowledge and

    educational substance.

    Activity plan Each learning activity should be accompanied with a clear and suitable

    activity plan.

    Resources The activities should include well prepared content presented in various

    ways, as well as references to additional resources on the Web.

    Communication Users should be able to interact with the designer of the WBLE andwith their peers through different communication tools (email, chat and

    forums).

    Feedback Users performance and outcome of each activity should be tracked and

    evaluated through a mechanic or human feedback.

    Rubric Each activity ought to include a rubric to evaluate the users

    performance.

    Help tools WBLE ought to include assistant tools that help the users solve

    problems (technical, contextual and didactical) that they might face inthe process of performing the activities.

    Vividness Criterion

    Links WBLE should direct users to other web pages: in other sites or in the site

    itself. These links should always be active, adequate and enriching.

    Updating WBLE designers should update the information, content and links of the

    WBLE continuously.