排序方式： 共有8条查询结果，搜索用时 812 毫秒
1
1.
CARMEL McNAUGHT 《European Journal of Engineering Education》1999,24(1):23-34
Comprehensive evaluation is often ignored in much of the development of computer-facilitated learning materials. We need to understand what learning difficulties students have, offer them experiences which allow them w construct coherent and useful mental constructs, and then find out whether we are successful. Formative evaluation involves considering how students perceive elements such as navigation, visual material, formats used for questions, etc. This process of information interchange between developers/teachers and students can provide valuable insights into how students approach learning. Summative evaluation focuses more on whether students can demonstrate attainment of certain learning objectives. Both formative and summative evaluations are needed. In this paper qualitative methods of evaluation will be emphasized. Some evaluation questions are posed in the paper and suitable evaluation strategies which can assist in answering these questions are suggested, such as expert reviews, usability testing, instructional modelling, observations, individual and group interviews, questionnaires, performance measures, and computer logging of student work. Evaluation data from three innovative science projects will be described in the paper. 相似文献
2.
3.
MICHAEL CARMEL 《Health information and libraries journal》1986,3(1):28-34
相似文献
4.
5.
6.
7.
ERRAN CARMEL 《The Information Society》2013,29(1):125-142
United States-based companies continue to dominate the global market in packaged software. Although many have predicted this U.S. dominance will wane, particularly as a result of competitive threats from Japan, and more recently from low-wage, developing nations, erosion has yet to be significant. The United States benefits from nine factors that sustain its advantage in this industry: skilled labor, favorable capital conditions, sophisticated customers, close association with hardware vendors, a competitive marketplace, geographic concentrations, first-mover advantage, a strong intellectual property regime, and English as the software lingua franca. Industry-specific strengths and weaknesses vis-a-vis Europe, Japan, and other nations are also discussed. In addition to these nine better known U.S. competitive advantages, two culturally linked assertions are presented that have received scant attention vis-a-vis competitive analysis. First, the industrial evolution of software development is at an immature stage-still a cottage industry practiced by craftsmen in a cultural milieu of artisans-and thus does not track other global high-technology trends. Second, packaged software is part of the copyright industry (e.g., film and music) in which United States-based firms have a sustained advantage. While manufacturing capabilities are significant for technology industries, culturally related factors, such as creativity, are more important for copyright industries. The U.S. ''culture of software,'' which helps explain U.S. hegemony, is introduced and discussed. The three elements of this culture are the culture of individuals as manifested by the individualistic computer hacker; the entrepreneurial culture and its risk-taking ethos; and the software development culture with its embrace of ad hoc, innovation-driven development as opposed to routinized, production-driven development. 相似文献
8.
1