You have been working your way through a number of different topics, exploring a variety of ICTs and designing your own resource or package. If you haven’t already now is a good time to evaluate your instructional design package. If you haven’t yet completed it or even started it you can do a formative evaluation of the idea of the stage you are at. For this e-tivity I invite you to look at the resource or package you are designing and evaluate it using Kirkpatrick’s training evaluation model as described by Dick (2007). Dick_2007(1).pdf
Evaluate your instructional design resource or package using Kirkpatrick’s training evaluation model. Your evaluation should help you to make modifications to your package. Post some of your evaluation to your blog and invite comments from your peers.
My resource is a collection of virtual maths tasks relating to the Data, Measurement, Space and Geometry strands of the NSW Maths Syllabus to be completed in-world using Sim-on-a-Stick, a standalone virtual world on a USB.
Kirkpatrick’s Four Level Model of Evaluation:
Level 1: Reaction
Reactions to this resource would be gathered formatively through questioning and observation during and after the individual lessons. The nature of this resource is that it is quite open ended and the student can move from one task to another freely. They initially would complete a similar maths task/question with teacher instruction in the real-world to check understanding of the mathematical concepts as completing the same task in-world demands more problem solving and higher order thinking which can lead to frustration and disengagement with the resource.
Level 2: Learning
This resource is unique in that it asks for both understanding and conceptualising of mathematical concepts but also is developing skills with interaction of tools within a virtual world. The resource is developed with the underlying notion that the actual mathematical task is secondary to developing spatial awareness and problem solving skills with in a virtual world environment. I will delve into this further with my justification assignment.
I pre-tested two classes of year 3 students before building this resource and each task was created specifically from the data gained from the test results. I also added components as a result of informal discussions with the students.
Level 3: Behaviour
This would not be the one approach to teaching a specific maths concept obviously but rather a tool to enrich a maths program and engage the learner in a maths activity that would be challenging yet ‘fun’ . Combining this and other maths strategies, ongoing diagnostic testing and yearly pre and post testing would confirm whether utilising virtual world technology to enhance maths instruction is a viable strategy. I would also be looking at repercussions in other areas of the curriculum that can be connected to its use.
Level 4: Results
Ultimately it is results that always drive instruction strategies. The objective must be clear as to what you want the student to learn and how you are going to get them there. Constant reflection and re-evaluation of learning tools is critical and for some students this resource will probably be worthless. It is always necessary to differentiate as all students deserve the right to succeed in their learning. Only formative and summative assessment will highlight the success or failure of this resource.