Introduction to project- Clare Madge

Structure of presentation

1. Welcome

2. Background to the project

3. Tour of the site

4. The project process

5. Evaluation

1. Welcome

• Us!• Where is your institution/affiliation located?• Which of these discipline areas best describes

you? (education, sociology, geography, non-academic, IT, other)

• Have you used online methods in your research?• Which aspect of online methods are you most

interested in?• Have you ever taught/trained in online research

methods?

2. Project background

• Programme: ESRC Research Methods Programme (Phase 2)

• Period of project: April 04 to July 06• Total amount of award from ESRC: After

indexation: £100,360.59 (1st round)• The project team:

-Clare Madge (Geog) -Henrietta O Connor (CLMS)-Jane Wellens (Educational Developer)-Rob Shaw (Learning Technologist)-Tristram Hooley (PG Training Coordinator)-Julia Meek (Evaluation Consultant)

Project aims1. To produce and evaluate a high-quality

online portal to provide training in online research methods;

2. To act as a self-supporting online resource focusing on web-based questionnaires, virtual synchronous and asynchronous interviews;

3. To draw on successful good practice case studies, cover ethical issues of online research, provide resource links and technical guidance.

Achieved…?

• Critical view• External evaluators• Social Science Information Gateway/AoIR•To be determined? Usage and quality research.

Server log files • 3-week period (3 Apr - 24 Apr)

• Requests for pages = 6,503

• Average requests for pages per day = 313

• Distinct hosts served = 1,819

• From 54 countriesUK, USA Higher Education, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Portugal, Slovenia, Israel, India, Non Profit Making Organisations, Malaysia, Netherlands, Italy, France, Poland, Turkey, Estonia, Cyprus, Germany, Ireland, Russia, USA Government, Belgium, Singapore, South Africa, United Arab Emirates, Uganda, Oman, Finland, USA Military, Switzerland, Egypt, Zimbabwe, Romania, Trinidad and Tobago, Jordan, Spain, Argentina, Philippines, Kenya, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Sweden, Zambia, Tanzania, Chile, Thailand, Japan, Austria, Brazil, Denmark, Indonesia, Norway, Mexico, Taiwan, Czech Republic,

3. Tour of the site: Key sectionsSite link

ModulesModule index

Type of content

• Methodological complexity• Case studies• Learning activities• Resources• Referencing systems• Print version

4. Project process

• The process or methodology made apparent;• The social production of this technical artefact

made transparent;• A reflexive process to team working;• A variety of FTF and virtual means of group

communication used;• Dissemination/final site release.

5. Evaluation: Problems with online resources

• Expensive;• Rarely used;• Difficult to use;• Inflexible – rarely meet our exact needs;• Frequently out of date;• Anxiety about the reliability of the information;• Frequently poorly referenced.

Addressing These Problems Through Evaluation

Graphic design/look • Group feedback • Usability evaluation

Usability • Heuristic (expert) evaluation

• Watching sample users (cognitive walkthrough)

Flexibility • Classroom evaluation

Academic content • Academic peer review

Development and Evaluation

Projectidea

Project group

evaluation

Expert evaluation

Usability studies

User feedback

Design

Classroomtesting

AcademicPeer

Review

CompleteProject

Designing Evaluation• Ask the experts – speak to an evaluation

consultant;

• Evaluate early and often;

• Use a range of evaluation techniques;

• Try to evaluate with a range of different users who are drawn from your target audiences;

• Act on your evaluation – redraft, redesign and re-evaluate.

www.geog.le.ac.uk/orm

onlinerm@le.ac.uk