Título
DESIGNING A RUBRIC FOR EVALUATING PERSONAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
Materia
info:eurepo/classification/Personal learning environments,rubric,assessment,Evaluation,Internet,web2,learning
info:eu-repo/classification/cti/4
Autor
JOSE MANUEL MEZA CANO
MARIO ERNESTO MORALES RUIZ
ROSA DEL CARMEN FLORES MACIAS
Fuente
EDICIÓN 2015 International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation ICERI.
Editor
International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation ICERI.
Fecha
2015-12
Derechos
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Formato
application/pdf
Idioma
eng
Tipo
info:eu-repo/semantics/conferencePaper
Cobertura
MX
Audiencia
generalPublic
Resumen
Personal Learning Environment (PLE) is the set of tools, information sources, connections and activities that each person uses assiduously to learn. There are some elements to be considered in order to make a better explanation about what a PLE is, although they are not the same elements in every definition, here we’re presenting those elements common to all definitions reviewed in the literature: Learning mediated by interaction; Active role of learner; Multiplicity of content; Diversity activities; Accessibility and ubiquity of web tools; and Ownership of web tools.
This difference of elements has also generated different ways of assess a PLE, therefore this study aims to unify theory and best practices of expert judges. In order to design a rubric for evaluating a Personal Learning Environment, five interviews with experts PLE users were made it, the elements mentioned before were considered in the interviews. Participants were selected because of their use of Internet tools, frequency of use and related to everyday work activities through internet, which in every case was at high level of use and expertise. Semi-structured protocol of interview was used and supported by audio recording.
We interviewed each expert in their workplace following the format of semi-structured interviews in which they were asked to show how they used Internet tools for learning purpose. Each of them was detailing the tools and their use. Interviews were transcript. From the content analysis categories and evaluation criteria were created, and the rubric items were designed.
Content Validity Ratio (CVR) was obtained, four judges has been participated evaluating each of the items in the rubric, considering if the item in their opinion was: 1) Useful 2) Useful but not essential; or 3) it is not necessary.
The Content Validity Index (CVI) was calculated by averaging the scores resulting from all criteria in the section. Finally 13 criteria were considered to be part of the rubric.
The procedure proved to be robust to build and validate this instrument that will help evaluate a PLE and then to determine a level of development objectively for these environments, which can give rise to other quantitative analysis, as correlations and linear regressions.
It was important to consider that studies show differences in the design of the learning situation, which can vary in relation to the way of using the PLE and, therefore, how to evaluate their use. Another aspect in the design of the rubric was trying to find out how each student create their own PLE, because this creation is unique for each student, but at least to propose a common starting point to assess this kind of internet environment for learning.
This difference of elements has also generated different ways of assess a PLE, therefore this study aims to unify theory and best practices of expert judges. In order to design a rubric for evaluating a Personal Learning Environment, five interviews with experts PLE users were made it, the elements mentioned before were considered in the interviews. Participants were selected because of their use of Internet tools, frequency of use and related to everyday work activities through internet, which in every case was at high level of use and expertise. Semi-structured protocol of interview was used and supported by audio recording.
We interviewed each expert in their workplace following the format of semi-structured interviews in which they were asked to show how they used Internet tools for learning purpose. Each of them was detailing the tools and their use. Interviews were transcript. From the content analysis categories and evaluation criteria were created, and the rubric items were designed.
Content Validity Ratio (CVR) was obtained, four judges has been participated evaluating each of the items in the rubric, considering if the item in their opinion was: 1) Useful 2) Useful but not essential; or 3) it is not necessary.
The Content Validity Index (CVI) was calculated by averaging the scores resulting from all criteria in the section. Finally 13 criteria were considered to be part of the rubric.
The procedure proved to be robust to build and validate this instrument that will help evaluate a PLE and then to determine a level of development objectively for these environments, which can give rise to other quantitative analysis, as correlations and linear regressions.
It was important to consider that studies show differences in the design of the learning situation, which can vary in relation to the way of using the PLE and, therefore, how to evaluate their use. Another aspect in the design of the rubric was trying to find out how each student create their own PLE, because this creation is unique for each student, but at least to propose a common starting point to assess this kind of internet environment for learning.