1 / 18

Jeroen Donkers & Marieke van der Schaaf

www.project-watchme.eu. Jeroen Donkers & Marieke van der Schaaf. EU-Project Watchme. W orkplace-based e- A ssessment T echnology for C ompetency-based H igher M ulti-professional E ducation. 7th Framework, ICT Call 11

ernie
Download Presentation

Jeroen Donkers & Marieke van der Schaaf

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. www.project-watchme.eu Jeroen Donkers & Marieke van der Schaaf

  2. EU-Project Watchme • Workplace-based e-Assessment Technology for Competency-based Higher Multi-professional Education. • 7th Framework, ICT Call 11 • Objective ICT-2013.8.2 Technology-enhanced learning, b) Learning analytics, educational data mining • March 2014 - April 2017 • 11 partners • 3.4 M€ costs / 2.6 M€ EU-declarable

  3. Motivation & Goal • “Continuing education at the workplace has seen increasing demand as a crucial means of acquiring the requisite professional knowledge and skills. Electronic Portfolios (e-portfolios) for workplace training provide a global view of each trainee’s progress but offer no dynamic feedback to exploit the rich learning assessment data that could be analysed to support responsive adaptation for more efficient and rewarding training.” • WATCHME effectively deploys Learning Analytics to deliver personalised learning; supporting learner empowerment, enhanced Quality-of-Experience, flexibility and mobility plus efficiency gains through workplace-based feedback and assessment.

  4. APPROACH • mobile, electronic portfolio-based system • LA and student models • tailored feedback • visualisation dashboard • empirically validated for its quality and contribution to trainees’ learning • professional environments (human medicine, veterinary medicine and teacher training)

  5. Partners • Utrecht University, NL (www.uu.nl) GENERAL LEAD • University Medical Centre Utrecht, NL (www.umcutrecht.nl) • SzentIstvan University, Hungary (www.sziu.hu) • University of Tartu, Estonia (www.ut.ee) • UniversitätsmedizinCharité Berlin, Germany (www.charite.de) • University of California San Francisco, USA (www.ucsf.edu) • Maastricht University, NL (www.maastrichtuniversity.nl) TECHNICAL LEAD • Mateum, NL (www.mateum.nl) • University of Reading, UK (www.reading.ac.uk) • Jayway, Denmark (www.jayway.com) • NetRom, Rumania/NL (www.netrom.nl) User partners Producer partners

  6. USER Partners • Utrecht University Teacher education Veterinary medicine • University Medical Centre Utrecht Medicine (Anesthesiology) • SzentIstvan University Veterinary medicine • University of Tartu Teacher education • UniversitätsmedizinCharité Berlin Medicine (Nephrology/dialysis) • University of California, San Francisco Medicine

  7. PRODUCER PARTNERS • Maastricht University, EDUC, FHML Design, technical coordination, Integration • Mateum BVEPASS development and support • University of Reading, Intelligent System Research Laboratory Student modelling • JaywayVisualization and feedback • NetRom Software SRL software development • (6. Charité: Educational game)

  8. architecture

  9. E-Portfolio

  10. Student modelling • Our context: • Many students • Online learning • Changing environment • Soft evidence (including narrative) • Need for flexible and scalable student modelling

  11. Multi-entity Belief Networks - MEBN • Probabilistic: deal with soft evidence and uncertainty • Online learning possible • Versatile: models adopt themselves to situation of the student • Scalable: shared fragments of knowledge • Semantically labelled

  12. ?

  13. Sensor data

  14. Visualization of aggregated data • Combine • Countable data (students, assessments, relations) • Information from knowledge fragments • Combine with individual student model

  15. Just in time feedback • Student model must indicate appropriateness of • Type of feedback • Content of feedback • Moment of feedback • Probabilistic

  16. Fitting all together • Interfaces between: • Assessment tools and portfolio • portfolio server and student model server • Student model server and visualisation • Student model server and feedback • Integration of visualisation and feedback in portfolio

  17. Work packages • WP1 Project management (Utrecht University) • WP2 Competency-based workplace definition with EPAs, for feedback and assessment (UMCU) • WP3 System architecture and assessment tools (Maastricht University) • WP4 Developing student models (University of Reading) • WP5 Feedback and visualization modules (JAYWAY) • WP6 Implementation and evaluation overall system (University of Tartu) • WP7 Dissemination and exploitation (Charité Berlin)

  18. PLANNING

More Related