IDEAL Product Validation


Introduction

The purpose of validating the intellectual outputs of the IDEAL project is to check the accuracy and usefulness of the products of the project. In order to do that, a number of repetitive criteria were developed assessing the quality of the four intellectual outputs:

IO1 Context and Needs Analysis Report

IO2 Good practice guidelines

IO3 Video tutorials to support the guidelines

IO4 Online toolkit/website

Each intellectual output was then judged by three criteria by means of an electronic survey:

[if !supportLists]1) [endif]Requirements: to what extent does the intellectual output meet the (formal) requirements?

[if !supportLists]2) [endif]Accessibility: to what extent is the intellectual output easily accessible for the users?

[if !supportLists]3) [endif]Usefulness: to what extent is the intellectual output useful and practical for the teachers and trainers who want to use the materials?

Below the results of the product validation are summarized. The entire survey can be found on the IDEAL website (www.erasmusideal.com). In all, there were 41 respondents. However, not everyone answered all the questions so the total number slightly vary.

IO1 Context and Needs Analysis Report

All respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the Context and Needs Analysis Report met the formal requirements. However, one respondents mentioned that there was no link to all the resources and in the text and/or that the links didn’t work properly. Furthermore, all respondents found the report to be very useful and accessible.

IO2 Good practice guidelines

All respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the formal requirements of Good Practice Guidelines were met in this project, apart from one respondent who found some errors in the language (spelling, grammar, vocabulary, style) and/or who concluded that not all of the links worked properly. Everyone agreed that the good practice guidelines were very accessible and useful. Yet one respondent remarked that the information in a booklet was not really relevant.

IO3 Video tutorials to support the guidelines

There was slightly more disagreement on the requirements of the video tutorials to support the guidelines. Although the vast majority agreed that they had been met, a number of respondents (3 in all) disagreed with the correctness of the language and one also remarked that there was no clear structure in one or more video tutorials. One respondent found the information in the video tutorials not very accessible or current and not very useful either: in his/her opinion the contents were not very likely to enhance the teacher’s knowledge and/or competences and that the quality of the video’s was not really up to the standard. However, overall the respondents were satisfied with the usefulness and accessibility of the video tutorials.

IO4 Online toolkit/website

All collected and constructed materials were brought together in an online toolkit on the IDEAL website. Without any exception all respondents found that all formal requirements were met for this intellectual output. With the exception of one respondent who found the information not to be 100% current and who was also of the opinion that the information given did not enhance his/her knowledge and/or competences, everyone strongly agreed with the good accessibility and usefulness of the online toolkit and website.

Conclusion

Without any doubt the conclusion seems justified that the product validation of the intellectual outputs of the IDEAL-project shows that the quality of the products is certainly up to the standard set at the start of the project. All four intellectual outputs scored very high on the formal criteria, i.e. requirements, accessibility and usefulness. For further detailed information on the collected data of the product validation, please click here.

.

Featured Posts
Recent Posts
Archive
Search By Tags
Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square

© 2016 IDEAL. Proudly created with Wix.com

This Erasmus+ project has been funded with support from the European Commission. The responsibility for the information the views of the author, and the Commission shall not be liable for any use of the information contained therein.