Future functionality

Version 1 of ā€˜LessonPlanā€™ will be released as a full functioning platform, but due to time constraints more advanced features will be implemented in future versions.
Some of the planned features are detailed below. The extra features simplify and make more robust some of the functionality of the platform, but all said functionality is completely operational in version 1 without them.

  • Suggestion algorithm
    One of the main goals of ā€˜LessonPlanā€™ is to facilitate module selection, allowing students to make more informed choices when selecting optional modules. This is based on the premise that providing students with information apart from the limited details of the module overview pages ā€“ and especially feedback on the practical applications of the module descriptions ā€“ will allow them to have a clearer picture of the moduleā€™s learning outcomes and requirements. In the initial release of the platform this is largely based on the inferences that each student can make from the feedback, comments and discussions that other students have posted. Implementing a suggestion algorithm would offer some automation on this task: The algorithm will be able to notice patterns in module selection and relate them to satisfaction. It will then be able to offer those observations as suggestions. For example, if a student A has rated Module X and Module Y as very interesting in Semester 1, and rates Module Z as very interesting in Semester 2, there’s a probability that students that have also found Modules X and Y interesting will have an interest in Module Z as well.

 

  • Postsā€™ ratings
    As detailed in the post about Trust here, implementation of ratings for comments and discussion posts is intended in the future. This would allow users to up-vote a post that they found particularly helpful, useful or interesting. That would provide new users with an instant indication about the validity of the post, while encouraging users to post more responsibly.

 

  • Ā Flags for abusive content
    For the initial release of ā€˜LessonPlanā€™ it was decided that no active monitoring or moderation of posts was needed to keep content clean and clear. From studies of Graph Theory on Online Social Networks it has been noted that an accentuated characteristic of a network shapes the behaviour of its members. Since members of the platform will be University students, with their credentials logged into the system, it is a safe assumption that the majority of them will behave ethically, in line with the Acceptable Use policies. This then, as a network effect, constrain potentially deviant behaviour from other members. This assumption is re-enforced by what is detailed in the post about Trust: Where social capital and trust exist, members can rely on informal fairness rather than constant active monitoring and exhausting rules of provenance.
    Nevertheless, future versions of ā€˜LessonPlanā€™ can address this issue if need be. The feature will allow users to flag up abusive posts. Posts that gather a certain amount of flags, will be marked for inspection. And after a certain amount of flagged up posts, prevention policies could be set in place (for example, warnings, suspension or even deletion from the system).

User Experience

To add the value for game theory and interface design, some elements for user experience and engagements are considered when developing LessonPlan 2.0. These elements will include for example:

  1. Simplicity and speed of loading and navigation. By designing a simple landing page, the browser will load the page for the user very quickly.
  2. Use of customized and representative logo and brand for LessonPlan 2.0.
  3. Progress bar for the percentage of completion of reviews and engagement in module.
  4. Using eye-tracking technique and following F shape style [1], the main navigation for ratings, review, courses are set on the first horizontal line of F. The main contents will be on the left side on the main panel as users spend 69% of their time of the left side of a page [2]
  5. Each time a user complete a review, he/she will get a score. When scores gets to certain level, a batch will be awarded to the user.
  6. Using RSS and letting the students subscribe for fees.
  7. Search box at the start with drop down list for registered courses.

By doing so, we ensure user engagement with rich experience in LessonPlan 2.0. Some of these elements are illustrated clearly in mockup figures.

———–

[1] Nielson Jakob, ā€œF-Shaped Pattern For Reading Web Contentā€: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content/, Apr 17, 2006 [Apr. 29, 2015].

[2] Porter, Joshua, ā€œTesting the Three-Click Ruleā€: http://www.uie.com/articles/getting_confidence/, Apr 16, 2003 [Apr. 29, 2015]

Survey conducted on Module Feedback opinions and interests

In order to confirm interest in the suggested platform, as well as any inefficiencies of the outlets already out there by the University of Southampton, we have conducted an online survey.

The survey was introduced by a short text, informing the participants on what the surveyā€™s goals where, which aspects of module feedback they would be asked to give their opinions on, as well as a brief description of the suggested project and its aims.

The questions were, therefore, divided into three different parts. Questions in part one aimed to discover opinions and satisfaction about the official module feedback forms that the University provides. Users were asked to rate both its usefulness and its effectiveness on module planning. Part two was designed to discover which factors are considered when students select an optional module. Some of those factors are informed by the module feedback forms (such as Coursework style or Student satisfaction, for example), while others were additional (such as the reputation of the lecturer). Participants were given the option to include any additional factors in an ā€˜Other:ā€™ free text field. Finally part three was investigating interest in the suggested platform (ā€˜Lessonplan 2.0ā€™) and opinions on its features and ambitions.

The results of the survey re-affirmed our assumptions about the deficiencies of the current model and the need for an alternative solution. In summary, the survey highlighted that while half of the students are willing to provide feedback to the University, the majority of them would like some access to the results and does not trust that it has any significant impact on module shaping. All of the participants also agree that ā€˜Lessonplanā€™ would be a valuable addition, who could assist them in choosing optional modules, meeting the module requirements and co-ordinating better with their fellow classmates.

Continue reading

Shortcomings of feedback and student satisfaction in Higher Education

One of the projectā€™s main aims is to provide a platform for feedback on the courses, accessible to the students undertaking ā€“ or considering to undertake ā€“ studies at the University of Southampton. Even though student feedback is valued by the University as an integral part of the module assessment ā€“ currently being provided by the Module Feedback Surveys at the end of each semester ā€“ it is not, at the moment, a transparent process, meaning students do not have access to either the surveys data or their impact on module planning.

It is a hypothesis of this project that access to student feedback on the offered modules will assist current and future cohorts in having more realistic expectations out of the modules, adapting quicker and better to the expectations of teachers, improving their performance and making more informed decisions when choosing optional modules.

Continue reading