What does 'impact' mean in the evaluation of learning technology?

Oliver, M. and Harvey, J. (2002) What does 'impact' mean in the evaluation of learning technology? Educational Technology and Society, 5 (3). pp. 18-26. ISSN 14364522 (ISSN)

[img] Text
Olvier and Harvey 2002.pdf

Download (51kB)
Official URL: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0...

Abstract

Whilst many projects in Higher Education are expected to demonstrate their impact, quite what this requirement means is often left unspecified. This paper draws on the experiences of the EFFECTS project in an attempt to illuminate this issue. The EFFECTS evaluation framework is used to structure this discussion, which explores the complexities associated with identifying impact in terms of student learning, changes in practice for academics, changes within an organisation and national development. Common themes arising from these areas are then identified. Importantly, while practical issues are considered, the purpose of this discussion is not to 'solve' this complexity - instead, its purpose is to recognise it, and to consider the implications for evaluators of working in such settings.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: Cited By :15; Export Date: 23 February 2015; Correspondence Address: University College LondonUnited Kingdom; email: martin.oliver@ucl.ac.uk; References: Anderson, C., Day, K., Haywood, J., Land, R., Macleod, H., Mapping the Territory: Issues in evaluating large-scale learning technology initiatives (2000) Educational Technology & Society, 3 (4). , http://ifets.massey.ac.nz/periodical/vol_4_2000/anderson.html; Barnett, R., (1994) The Limits of Competence: Knowledge, Higher Education and Society, , Buckinghamshire: OU Press; Borum, F., Hansen, H., The local construction and enactment of standards for research evaluation: The case of the Copenhagen Business School (2000) Evaluation, 6 (3), pp. 281-299; Bourdieu, P., (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice (2001 Edition), , translated by R. Nice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Crook, C., The Zone of Proximal Development: Implications for Evaluation (1991) Computers and Education, 17 (1), pp. 81-91; Freire, P., (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed (20 th Anniversary Edition, 2000), , New York: Continuum Publishing; Harvey, J., Oliver, M., (2001) EFFECTS External Evaluation, , Unpublished project document; Henkel, M., (2000) Academic Identities and Policy Change in Higher Education, , London: Jessica Kingsley; Hughes, G., Exploring the Availability of Student Scientist Identities within Curriculum Discourse: An anti-essentialist approach to gender-inclusive science (2001) Gender and Education, 13 (3), pp. 275-290; The Institute for Higher Education Policy (1999) What's the Difference? A Review of Contemporary Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Learning in Higher Education, , http://www.ihep.com, Institutional report; Jones, C., Evaluating a collaborative online learning environment (1998) Active Learning, 9, pp. 31-35; Jones, C., Asensio, M., Goodyear, P., Networked learning in higher education: Practitioners' perspectives (2000) ALT-J, 8 (2), pp. 18-28; Kirschner, D., Whitson, J., (1997) Situated Cognition: Social, Semiotic and Psychological Perspectives, , New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; Mays, N., Pope, C., Quality in Qualitative Health Research (2000) Qualitative Research in Health Care, pp. 89-102. , Mays, N. & Pope, C. (Eds.) London: MBJ Publishing; McMahon, A., The development of professional intuition (2000) The Intuitive Practitioner: On the Value of Not Always Knowing What One Is Doing, pp. 137-148. , Atkinson, T. & Claxton, G. (Eds.) Buckingham: Open University Press; McNaught, C., Kennedy, P., Staff development at RMIT: Bottom-up work serviced by top-down investment and policy (2000) ALT-J, 8 (1), pp. 4-18; Mochrie, R., A Diet of Carrots: Autonomy in Learning Mathematics for Economics (1998) Evaluation Studies, , http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/ltdi/evalstudies/escarrots.pdf, Mogey, N. (Ed.) Edinburgh: Learning Technology Dissemination Initiative; Oliver, M., An introduction to the evaluation of learning technology (2000) Educational Technology & Society, 3 (4), pp. 20-30; Oliver, M., Conole, G., The evaluation of Learning Technology - An overview (1998) Innovation in the Evaluation of Learning Technology, pp. 5-22. , Oliver, M. (Ed.) London: University of North London; Oliver, M., Conole, G., Phelps, J., Maier, P., Wilkinson, D., Bailey, P., (1998) The EFFECTS Evaluation Framework: A Transferable Model for Collaborative Projects, , EFFECTS report no. 1, University of North London; Patton, M., (1997) Utlization-focused Evaluation, , London: Sage; Potter, J., Wetherell, M., (1987) Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour, , London: Sage; Skinner, B., Are theories of learning necessary? (1950) Psychological Review, 57, pp. 193-216; Stewart, D., Reinterpreting the Learning Organisation (2001) The Learning Organization, 8 (4), pp. 141-152; Vygotsky, L.S., (1962) Thought and Language, , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Uncontrolled Keywords: Evaluation; Impact; Learning; Learning technology; Organisational change; Staff development
Depositing User: National Forum
Date Deposited: 06 Dec 2015 07:59
Last Modified: 10 Dec 2015 20:04
URI: http://eprints.teachingandlearning.ie/id/eprint/3464

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year