WP8: Demonstrators (UniCam – Regione Marche)

Table of Contents Introduction Prototype Early Validation Next Steps First of all I will introduce what we have been doing for this Workpackage, then I will explain which is the Quality Assessment Strategy we developed, then I will continue introducing Understandability and its importance for us. I will go deeply into the contribution we provided and I will show you the application of the BP Modeling Guidelines we defined, on the SUAP case study. Finally some remarks and few words on the next steps.

Introduction WP8 aims to provide feedback from the final users to the consortium with prototype Early Validation Such early validation allows to ensure that end-users needs and requirements will result being driving forces for Learn PA project results The validation was made involving end-users from both the case studies (EPBR and SUAP)

Prototype Early Validation In the early validation we decided to perform an assessment aiming at examining the overall status of the platform Used Methodology The quantitative validation involved a group of end-users, who had no knowledge of the Learn PAd platform before the validation Focus Group - The focus group was composed by people from Regione Marche and UniCam that already knew about the project since they took part to some project activities The platform validation involved people with different expertise considering different scenarios Validation Scenarios The browsing Mode with recommendations The possibility to give feedback to the modellers The simulator Mode

Quantitative Validation The group was composed as following: 2 ICT experts from Regione Marche, 3 training experts from Regione Marche; and 2 SUAP experts Such assessment was organized as follows First the WP8 presented the state of the art of the platform Then the end user navigated the available platform instance exploring the different functionalities Finally an assessment questionnaire was provided The questionnaire was composed by 10 questions (8 close and 2 open); it was useful to gain feedback, for the Learn PAd project, about the learning platform usage experience; the questionnaire was anonymous

Focus Group Such assessment was organized as follows First the WP8 leader presented the state of the art of the platform Then the focus group had a long discussion on the critical points The focus group aimed at gathering information about the following items Usability of the platform Innovative aspects in comparison with e-learning technologies Efficacy of the proposed learning model in relation to the end-users profile Multimedia solutions Gamification solutions Interactive solutions General layout of the interfaces and of the functionalities

Question 1 In general, how much are you satisfied from the usage of the e-learning modality which you had access to? (Reference scale: 1=not satisfied; 5=totally satisfied)

Question 2 How do you judge the effectiveness of the several functionalities made available by the platform? (Reference scale: 1 = not at all effective; 5 = very effective)

Question 3 How do you judge the “accessibility” and the “usage experience” of the functionalities made available by the platform? (Reference scale: 1=hard; 5=easy)

Question 4 How do you judge the “completeness” of the functionalities made available by the platform? (Reference scale: 1=incomplete; 5=complete)

Question 5 How much effective do you think the integration of the presented learning environments is? (Browsing, Simulation, Collaboration, Recommendation) (Reference scale: 1=not at all integrated; 5=very integrated)

Question 6 How do you evaluate the innovation degree of the proposed solution, referring to the following elements: (Reference scale: 1=not at all innovative; 5=very innovative) Possibility of learning based on successful process models Availability of the competence model related to the professional profile objective of the learning Availability of recommending functionalities (selection of deepening contents and personalized suggestions based on the context and on specific demands)

Question 7 How do you evaluate the utility of the proposed solution, in relation with the following elements: (Reference scale: 1=not at all useful; 5=very useful) Possibility of learning based on successful process models Availability of the competence model related to the professional profile objective of the learning Availability of recommending functionalities (selection of deepening contents and personalized suggestions based on the context and on specific demands)

Question 8 8. For a better platform effectiveness in terms of learning, do you think it is necessary to have a higher presence of the following aspects? (Reference scale: 1=not at all useful; 5=very useful referring to the learning effectiveness) Structuring of the wiki contents Interactivity between learner and contents

Feedback from the early validation The Focus Group provided several comments In the following link we list all of them, categorized by the topic of the comment For a detailed discussion see: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wZMghpZ77Z801eu U6FNkkL55OidY4ujjWegPQkF3MLA/edit#gid=0

Next Steps – D8.3 D8.3: Demonstrators Populated Learning Platform (UNICAM) (M24) This deliverable will be constituted by the final delivery of the contents for the two different scenario Content will be made available within the Learn PAd platform ToC : 2 December 2015  Draft : 27 December 2015  Internal Release : 10 January 2016  Candidate Release : 24 January 2016  But actually Giorgio Andrea and Damiano are already working on a prototype available on github. And of course we plan to validate the identified guidelines according to the Learn PAd validation strategies.

… THE FUTURE OF LEARNPAD It means that we need contents … but also a strategy or a format for content production and contribution

Issues related the language? Actions We plan to refine the following almost already provided models for both the cases (SUAP and EPBR) Business Process model Case Management model Organizational model (to be generalized) Documents and Knowledge model Competence model (EQF Skill – Knowledge for each task) Business Motivation model (Learning Goal) KPI model General Description for the Learn PAd platform will be also provided Additional content for the recommender will be delivered Other simulation cases will be provided (how many? For what processes?) Issues related the language?

Risks According Feedbacks #1 In the home page general description should be introduced. This make clear the aim of the platform. In the main page the project description should be included as well as a description of the learning material that is available. The learning approach should be described as well as the learning objective. [UNICAM/Regione Marche] Provide a description text to present the platform and present elements #6 The images of the models (i.e. process, organization, competences) should be included for each page. When multiple models are available they should be grupped in one page. [UNICAM] Provide images for each model #15 Multimedia aspects are missing. Video, animation and audio are not considered. This should be part of the learning material at least in the recommender part. Also browsing and simulation should be enriched with multimedia aspects. [MARCHE] Provide some multimedia learning materials #18 and #25 and #31 - At the top of the pages a general description about the content should be introduced. [UNICAM] Provide a description text to present the platform and present elements; #42 - "SUAP aggregato" should be renamed with "sportello comprensoriale" and "SUAP Singola" with "sportello municipale". [UNICAM] will provide an update version of the model

Question and Answers con Andrea Sergiacomi