Seda post its surveys vs focus groups vs ngt
Download as DOCX, PDF0 likes383 views
The document summarizes the results of a workshop on evaluation techniques for teaching. The top five challenges identified were: 1) Evaluating the impact of educational development work, 2) Getting staff to attend sessions, 3) Recognizing the value of teaching within institutions, 4) Engaging staff who need the most development, and 5) Being pulled in too many directions. The document also compares the advantages and disadvantages of using nominal group techniques, surveys, and focus groups to evaluate teaching.
![SEDA workshop results
(Workshop by TundeVarga-Atkins on Evaluation techniques of teaching,
15th Nov 2012, SEDA Conference, Aston Business School, Birmingham)
Top five challenges:
We explored the question: What is one key challenge in your role as educational developer? We
didn't have much time to do a proper session and discussion of the issues, so this below is a glimpse
at the potential issues, in prioritised order: The top five voted items were:
1. Evaluating impact of what we do (13 points).
2. Getting staff to attend sessions (10 points)
3. Value of teaching within institution (8 points)
4. Engaging staff who most need developing (7 points)
5. Pulled in too many directions by staff and managers (6 points).
Also featured: [see below image]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/sedapostitssurveysvsfocusgroupsvsngt-121116050552-phpapp01/85/Seda-post-its-surveys-vs-focus-groups-vs-ngt-1-320.jpg)
Seda post its surveys vs focus groups vs ngt
- 1. SEDA workshop results (Workshop by TundeVarga-Atkins on Evaluation techniques of teaching, 15th Nov 2012, SEDA Conference, Aston Business School, Birmingham) Top five challenges: We explored the question: What is one key challenge in your role as educational developer? We didn't have much time to do a proper session and discussion of the issues, so this below is a glimpse at the potential issues, in prioritised order: The top five voted items were: 1. Evaluating impact of what we do (13 points). 2. Getting staff to attend sessions (10 points) 3. Value of teaching within institution (8 points) 4. Engaging staff who most need developing (7 points) 5. Pulled in too many directions by staff and managers (6 points). Also featured: [see below image]
- 2. Also featured key challenges: 6. Support for new academics in first few weeks of teaching. To re-shape the relationship between teachers and students. (5 points) 7. Uncertainty over future. (4 points) 8. Workload + staff/student timetable Helping academic staff see the value of development. (3 points) 9. Accreditation of teaching staff at all institutions Lack of confidence in sharing. (0 point)
- 3. A comparison of focus groups, surveys and Nominal Group Technique Advantages of the Nominal Group Technique Logical process. Gives an 'authority' to the student voice. Learn about learning process. Students could do for themselves. Stimulates thinking, greater opportunity to discuss ideas. Avoids dominant voice. Disadvantages of the Nominal Group Technique Tendency to 'smooth' the debate? Generates very picky debate. Time consuming? Wording of question could skew the outcome. ? Expensive process How to choose sample? Bias? How to analyse the data. Nominal Group Technique vs surveys Positive about NGT Speed?? Gets dialogue started. Deeper issues emerge. Opportunity for clarification. Fun. Skills required. Negative: ambiguity of questions. Can serve a basis for a survey. Positive about surveys More contact. Logistics of NGT, needs synchronous contact. Easier access – surveys. Validation and use. Reliability. Easier analysis.
- 4. Larger sampler size. Use of technology - poor response rate? Nominal Group Technique vs focus groups NGT offers: Space for individual thinking/reflection. Focus and control with participants. Outcome/product - yields immediate tangible outcome. Data more acceptable to certain groups. Empowers all participants. Perhaps requires less skill to facilitate. Focus groups: More exploratory in initial stage. Allows for more individual direction. Can be dominated by one or two individuals (not if facilitated properly!). Don't get 'quantitative' data. Can be too directed. Allows for more in- depth exploration.