Fullscreen

History: aw1l 3.1 Results

Comparing version 8 with version 12

VersionFast NextLast Version

@@ -Lines: 5-33 changed to +Lines: 5-29 @@
{SHEET(id=15)}Table 2. Advantages and disadvantages detected by the teaching staff after using Wiki methodology{SHEET}
- ~~red:En alumnes de primer cicle (per exemple, Ecologia Funcional, Salut i Medi Ambient) hem detectat que:
+ In first cycle students (for example, Functional Ecology-ECOFUN, Health and Environment-SIMA), we have detected that:
- * Tenen dificultats per organitzar-se pel treball en grup.<br /> * Tenen dificultats per sintetitzar la informaci, donat que laccs a la informaci ja no s una dificultat con en poques anteriors.<br /> * Depenent de la llicenciatura, els alumnes de primer cicle aprenen ms rpid i accepten millor la nova eina que els de segon cicle.
+ * They have difficulties to organize themselves in work groups. <br />* They have difficulties to synthesize the information, since it is easier for them including information from digital sources than adapting it to their context and synthesizing the sometimes too long texts.<br />* First cycle students learn quicker and accept better the new methodology than those of the second cycle, even if this varies among degrees.
+ On the contrary, in second cycle students (for example, “Evaluation of Environmental Impact”-AIA, “Applied Ecology-UB”-EAUB, “Applied Vegetable Physiology”-FVA), we have detected that:
+ * In general, they can organize themselves much better than first cycle students and they have previous experience in working in teams (distributing work, assuming roles inside the team and taking profit more efficiently of the effort and time invested).
+ * Many of the teams have not been of new formation but the members already knew each other and had collaborated or are collaborating in other assignments or subjects of the degree
+ * They are people with resources that tend to know already how to 'move' themselves at university and use the available resources quite efficiently
+ * Depending on the details of size and type of assignment for work groups, the Wiki methodology has been little or very accepted:
+ ** In some cases, the grade of acceptance of the Wiki methodology has been very low (subject FVA) partly attributable to the fact that they are in their last year of the degree (their priority is to finish, they take many subjects in some cases, and they don't have time to learn novel methodologies, especially if they have other tools that they manage well enough, even if they lack some of the needed features for group work that Wiki technology includes)
+ ** In other cases of subjects in last course, they found positive and negative aspects (subject “Applied Ecology, Environmental Sciences, UAB” - EAUAB). In the positive part resides the facility of distance interaction among them and the fact that, at all times, there is only one “good” copy of the document. It is also positive the fact that the students manage to learn the new technology with little training and information (expressly) given by their lecturer, since their handling of the Web technologies seemed enough for this type of applications. In the negative part resides the fact that they were not too used the Web environment of work, and that the final format for the document was not Web format but paper format.
+ ** Nevertheless, in the case of “Evaluation of Environmental Impact”-AIA, of third course, the students have accepted very well the new Wiki methodology, since for the type of work that they had to do and for the big size of the work groups (15 persons), they were foreseeing that it would facilitate very much the work to them. This way, Wiki has meant a tool and methodology very well valued by students for the comments in class at the end of the course (from both those who could use it, and also from those who had to use the traditional methodology).
- Per contra, en alumnes de segon cicle (per exemple, Avaluaci d'Impacte Ambiental, Ecologia Aplicada-UB, Fisiologia Vegetal Aplicada) hem detectat que:<br /><br /> * En general, saben organitzar-se i tenen experincia prvia en el treball en equip (tenen facilitat per repartir la feina, assumir rols dins lequip i rentabilitzar lesfor).<br /> * Molts dels equips no ha estat de nova formaci sin que els membres ja es coneixien i havien collaborat o estan collaborant en altres treballs.<br /> * Sn persones amb recursos que saben moure's i utilitzen les eines que tenen a labast amb eficcia<br /> * Depn dels detalls de mida dels grups de treball i tipus de treball a fer, la nova metodologia ha estat poc o molt acceptada:<br /> o En alguns casos, el grau dacceptaci de leina ha estat molt baix (assignatura FVA) en part atribuble al fet destar a lltim any de la carrera (es troben a la recta final i la prioritat es acabar, agafen moltes assignatures i no tenen temps per invertir en novetats, sobretot tenint en conte que ja tenen unes eines que manegen amb facilitat).<br /> o En altres casos d'assignatures d'ltim curs, hi van trobar aspectes positius i negatius (Assignatura "Ecologia Aplicada - CCAA-UAB"). En la part positiva hi ha la facilitat dinteracci entre ells remotament i el que noms hi hagi en tot moment una sola cpia bona del document. Es positiu tamb el fet que els alumnes shagin espavilat tot sols amb la poca informaci que els vaig donar (expressament) per a utilitzar el Wiki. El seu maneig de la Web sembla suficient per aquest tipus daplicacions. En la part negativa destaca el fet que el format Web no s el que estaven ms acostumats ni el que els demanava jo al final.<br /> o En canvi, en el cas de l'assignatura d'Avaluaci d'Impacte Ambiental, de tercer curs, l'alumnat ha acceptat molt b la nova metodologia i tencologia Wiki (assignatura AIA), doncs pel tipus de treball que havien de fer i la mida gran de l'equip de treball (15 persones), preveien que els facilitaria molt la feina. Aix, el Wiki ha esdevingut una eina molt ben valorada pels alumnes en comentaris de classe al final de les prctiques (tant pels que el podien fer servir, com pels que havien de fer servir els mtodes tradicionals). <br /><br /><br />Entre el professorat tenim la impressi que si l'alumnat hagus pogut treballar en un entorn d'Ofimtica estndard (sigui el de Micro$oft, o el d'OpenOffice) i que funcions de forma gil i rpida, lxit hagus sigut molt ms important. Aquests entorns sn els estndard de facto, i a la gent no li costa res introduir algunes, poques, variacions sobre aquest estndard. Ara b, en la prova pilot que es va realitzar amb l'assignatura Avaluaci d'Impacte Ambiental en el curs 2003-04es va detectar que la Ofimtica Web funciona amb molta ms lentitud en l'actualitat, amb la present velocitat dels ordinadros i comunicacions (malgrat a les universitats es disposa d'ordinadors de darrera generaci i comunicaci per cable d'alta velocitat).<br />~~
+ Lecturers have the impression that if students could have work at an standard Office software environment (either Microsoft or ))OpenOffice((, for example) which could work agile and quick enough for the group work, the success had been much more important. However, the speed of using standard office documents combined with Web folders (Webdav protocol) was not good enough for students nor lecturers, after a pilot experience that was deployed at the early stages of ))UniWiki(( project, besides many other handicaps for the web office methodology use in educational scenarios with the current development of technologies (De Pedro 2005a).

!!! Students
- On the student side, there where a total of 229 surveys and 223 selfrecording tables collected of invested time (divided in methodologies and subjects in Table 3).
+ On the student side, there where a total of 229 surveys and 223 self-recording tables collected of invested time (divided in methodologies and subjects in Table 3).
- {SHEET(id=16)}Table 3. Surveys and selfrecording tables handed in, for each work methodology and subject.{SHEET}
+ {SHEET(id=16)}Table 3. Surveys and self-recording tables handed in, for each work methodology and subject.{SHEET}

A count of the extra comments voluntarily written by the students in their surveys in the blank fields is shown in Table 4, classified by type of methodology and feeling.

@@ -Lines: 59-63 changed to +Lines: 55-59 @@

__Three examples of POSITIVE comments expressed after working with the TRADITIONAL methodology__
- # ''"I have not had any problem to communicate with the members of the group since that we are together in the class and taking profit of the smae spare hours is very helpful"''
+ # ''"I have not had any problem to communicate with the members of the group since that we are together in the class and taking profit of the same spare hours is very helpful"''
# ''"I think that the meetings in person improve the work much more, they are an enrichment for the person"''
# ''"All the possible doubts that we have had, have been able to ask directly to the teacher and this is also well"''

@@ -Lines: 71-75 changed to +Lines: 67-71 @@
The methodology for writing documents collaboratively and cooperative learning based on Wiki (“__Wiki methodology__”) comprises two aspects to allow sharing information, and following changes with an always ready available copy of your merged version (or any previous version, if needed):
(1)a Wiki-like philosophy or conception of the way of working (what e called "__Wiki philosophy__", from now onwards), as well as
- (2)a Wiki-like computer technology ("__Wiki technology__", according to definition and initial prototype of Wiki de Ward Cunningham, 1995).
+ (2)a Wiki-like computer technology ("__Wiki technology__", according to definition and initial prototype of Wiki from Ward Cunningham, 1995).

The "__Wiki philosophy__" means that:

History

Legend: v=view , s=source , c=compare, d=diff
Information Version Html Action
Tue 06 de June, 2006 17:07 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.166.105 12
Current
Html v  s
Tue 06 de June, 2006 17:07 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.166.105 12 Html v  s  c  d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 16:30 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74 11 v  s  c  d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 15:13 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74 10 v  s  c  d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 16:19 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74 9 v  s  c  d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 15:13 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74 8 v  s  c  d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 15:02 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74 7 v  s  c  d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 15:02 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74 6 v  s  c  d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 11:32 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74 5 v  s  c  d
Fri 02 de June, 2006 15:08 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.177.57.188 4 v  s  c  d
Fri 02 de June, 2006 14:37 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.177.57.188 3 v  s  c  d
Fri 02 de June, 2006 12:07 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.177.57.188 2 v  s  c  d
Fri 02 de June, 2006 11:43 CEST by system from 0.0.0.0
creat des d'estructura
1 v  s  c  d

Col·laboren

ub.edu Logo UAB Logo
ourproject.org Logo Agaur Logo
Logo de l'ICE de la UB

Traduccions automàtiques