[Eval 08] Week 4

I have chosen the guidelines SD1 and SD8 as the guidelines I would like to focus on.

For a bit of background, I work with home based workers who have to do training as part of their professional development. They are independent contractors and therefore not on a salary which would cover study time. These two guidelines probably address two of the most significant issues we have currently.


SD1: Are students able to agree some or all of their learning goals in negotiation with teaching staff?

We have major issues with trainees starting then not completing each module. This is frustrating for both the trainers and the office. Trainers are paid upon completion of each trainee completing the module, however over the last year we have had a dozen or so who have started, then decided for whatever reason not to continue. This is also frustrating for the office as we train people because we have a need for a certain number of people to be proficient in certain areas, if the trainees drop out then we are left without the required number of people able to do the work.

Therefore the issue is, how to ensure that people complete their exercises within an acceptable timeframe? Currently, we do not negotiate with each person their own individual timeframe, however I think that this is something which needs to be put in place at the beginning of each module, with a record kept both by the trainer and the office. If the timeframe is not being adhered to, then some discussion and possible renegotiation with the trainee needs to be done. To do this will also give the trainees some clear indications of how much we expect from them and would form the basis of a study plan. The trainers would also benefit from knowing what to expect from the trainees and would be able to better balance their workload.

SD8 – how to assess the value the students give to the course? This is something that has not been done before, apart from the basic 1-5 rating schemes which, as they are emailed back to me, are probably less than truthful. I have thought long and hard about this since we had the computer conference 2 weeks ago. There is the basic problem of how do you do it in order to receive truthful, constructive feedback, and who do you ask? As in all areas of life, there are people who would never have a good word to say about anything, therefore if such a person provides damning criticism of the course, is it valid feedback? However, to exclude such a person from a feedback exercise, isn’t this also tipping the balance? I think that the method of feedback collection has to be done so that people cannot make sweeping criticisms and if they have something very negative, or positive, to say then it must be backed up with examples.

There is also the issue of actually getting people to complete the feedback in a timely fashion, or even to complete it at all. Private companies seeking feedback from their clients often offer incentives such as prize draws etc, unfortunately, we do not have that luxury.

I have looked at online survey sites such as Survey Monkey which anonymise the feedback, taking away the fear of speaking your mind. The site also provides different ways of obtaining feedback, rather than just a 1-5 rating scale. I definitely need to look at alternatives to the traditional way we collect feedback, which isn't working.