| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | == Preamble ==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Teachers, students, and engineers worldwide are testing and improving Sugar. With your help—telling us what problems and suggestions you have—we can create a better learning experience for all children.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | == Consent ==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Survey on Instructional strategies using “Sugar” learning platform
| |
| − |
| |
| − | You are being asked to participate in a research study conducted by Walter Bender from the Media Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.). The purpose of the study is to get feedback from teachers who have been using the Sugar learning platform—the software that runs on the OLPC-XO-1 laptop. You were selected as a potential participant in this study because you have been using Sugar as part of Project Ceibal in Uruguay. You should read the information below before deciding whether or not to participate in the survey.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * Your participation in this survey is voluntary. We expect that the survey will take about 15 minutes, however you have the right not to answer any question and to stop participating in the survey at any time and for any reason.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * You will not be compensated for participating in this survey.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * The information you tell us will remain anonymous and confidential. Only aggregate results will be published.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Please contact Walter Bender (walter -AT- media.mit.edu) with any questions or concerns.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | If you feel you have been treated unfairly, or you have questions regarding your rights as a research subject, you may contact the Chairman of the Committee on the Use of Humans as Experimental Subjects, M.I.T., Room E25-143b, 77 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139, phone 1-617-253-6787.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | == Issues ==
| |
| − | The primary purpose of the survey is to help Sugarlabs prioritise resources amongst already identified issues and to identify any further needs. It is also an opportunity to gather success stories. Survey results would ideally be translatable into actionable items.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Identified issues include:
| |
| − |
| |
| − | The balance between self-directed project-based learning and more traditional or didactic learning. Should resources be directed at generating lesson plans, e-books and instructional materials or towards enriching Activities which offer self-directed problem solving? Are some of these learning styles better supported by other teaching materials eg. chalk board, paper books?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Should the teachers adapt to Sugar or Sugar to the teachers? What obstacles hinder appreciation of the two perspectives and movement together?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Can some materials be better supplied server side in a non-sugar specific way, requiring only a compatible browser? What then should Browse support? Flash, Java, tabbed browsing, auto-complete?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | How can the Journal best meet the target of “low entry high ceiling” easy for beginners but no roadblocks for more experienced users? If there has to be a trade off, what are the relative importances of each.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | What is the importance of sharing? What are the different sharing mechanisms? Activity sharing, blogs, wikis, upload areas, private/public? How do kids get the most benefit? Share viewing or authorship rights? Share the whole Activity or objects within the activity?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Show source, editing and re-purposing. How realistic is it that students tinker with their Sugar software? How important? What are the benefits? What are the obstacles? How can easy pathways and bridges be supplied?
| |
| − |
| |
| | ==Survey on Instructional strategies using “Sugar” learning platform== | | ==Survey on Instructional strategies using “Sugar” learning platform== |
| | | | |