Loosely based on Price and Kirkwood.....
Criteria
|
Poll Everywhere
|
Increasing
flexibility/access/reach
|
Certainly
this reaches out to students across the globe, particularly if I were running
a synchronous webinar. Language capability is useful and accessible through
different devices too. Within my own context during f2f sessions, given that
my numbers are usually no more than 12 participants I could see this possibly
being more trouble than beneficial.
|
Increasing
engagement
|
Again
it raises the participation bar, particularly when large groups are involved.
Does require use of ppt in presentations.
Given
that in my context participants can’t really hide and it is obvious if they are not participating poll
anywhere would not be of much value.
|
Improving
feedback
|
Not
sure this would be much more valuable than ‘happy sheets’ feedback…although
obviously for larger numbers it gives contemporaneous feedback which is often
hard to gauge during a webinar or lecture.
A
useful tool for meta planning at the beginning of the session to identify
personal goals.
Would
it add to a good teacher’s toolbox in an average sized classroom I would not
necessarily concur.
|
Developing
skills
|
Skills
to take part in polls would be advanced. Perhaps skills in analysing data.
|
Reinforcement
or revision
|
Yes,
as far as multiple choice allow.
When
running a two day+ programme, it would be a good way to remind participants
about previous days learning, or at end of the day a similar reinforcement.
|
Improving
assessment and feedback
|
Being
so narrow in terms of opportunities to offer information I am not sure that
this tool would enhance feedback. The ‘closed’ feedback would be based upon
the teacher/lecturer’s point of view. If ‘open feedback’ is enabled, not sure
about its practical use in a time limited session. Perhaps would help
facilitator/trainer if running a programme over a period of time.
Much of
my training focuses on skills development – Poll Everywhere seems to be more
aligned with knowledge absorption (knowledge as a commodity) rather than a
learning process.
Poll Everywhere
would probably inject a fun element to the learning and must be treated with
a light touch in terms of depth of feedback and opportunities for assessment.
|
Personal
development
|
Guess
this would be down to the types of questions. Perhaps learning about group
dynamics
|
Interaction/collaboration
|
Interaction
is high, but potentially at a very low skill level. Presumably there is an
assumption here about literacy levels. Participants with dyslexia, vision or
mobility issues might not fare so well with this tool.
|
Cost/value
for money
|
Obviously
for less than 40 participants it is of high value – being free. If using
company devices then there would be no cost to participants. Private phones,
tablets etc would cost according to personal call plans.
|
Technology
effectiveness
|
It
is effective in providing an opportunity to gain an overview of participants’
responses
|
Are
improvements necessary?
|
This
is really dependent upon learning goals, facilitators’ needs and learners’
needs.
|
Advantages
|
Fast,
quick hit, easy to implement, easy to share,
|
Disadvantages
|
Might not
add a great deal to overall learning. Feels a little gimmicky. May not be
available in onsite in-house training programmes due to rules regarding
external websites and bringing in mobile phones (Defence sites, aeronautics
and industries that are sensitive about potential industrial espionage).
Most of
the research available focuses on mandatory and HE learners, no convincing
information re: work-based training.
|
References:
Price, Linda and Kirkwood, Adrian (2011). Enhancing professional learning and teaching through technology:
a synthesis of evidence-based practice among teachers in higher education. Higher Education
Academy, York, UK.
No comments:
Post a Comment