Thank you, Tony
Unreliable? IMO most definitely, if the goal is to figure out *actual* use
Alas, you are probably correct in that there is no better data from
other deployments either
The data displayed relies on opinions or hearsay. Thanks to this
document, we "know" that teachers or parents or kids say about this or
that, but, as with anything coming from surveys, we have no idea if what
they say is what actually is happening.
If we ask teachers, "are you doing your job", do you think they will
answer "yes"? or "no"?
Compare the charts page 7 and 8. they are supposed to report the same
data, use of XOs in class. They do not match at all, the teacher's view
is SO much higher. Page 19, makes no sense compared to page 7, except
when we understand these are content-free teacher-speak, "fully
integrated with the program" at 32% ???
One problem with teacher-speak is that no one knows what it actually
means. Notice lines 4-5 of page 20. Turns out that "Arts Areas" is the
one that has been the least "integrated". However, it turns out that
"draw or paint" is among the highest used activities, pages 11-12. What
about the TamTams? So, what is this Arts Area supposed to mean, that
TamaTam or Pain, Photo and Video and voice recording are not enough?
Page 10 gives still different and contradictory data with the others...
Opinions are important, when you are a politician. I guess some
allowance needs exist for "perception" data.
However, I am amazed that I could not find even the slightest attempt to
gather objective data, even when some would have been SO easy. Like,
look if actually teachers are doing what they say they are doing in the
main portal - page 17 - just look at the logs! As if these appointees
had no idea that facts and opinions are not the same thing... (have they
ever had a basic class in experimental method, or the basics of
reproducible science research? In many ways I feel sorry)
IMHO, what we need is to actually have some sort of very simple built in
/something/ that will log to a server *what* activity got opened,
*when*. No need to log what machine it came out of.
Very easy to build valuable knowledge out of it.
What for?
1) if something gets used a lot, great. Maybe improve it further, as it
really is a favorite
2) something doesn't get used, let's figure out why, help it, or put it
out of its misery
Maybe Sugar is a humongous success, the data will prove it. Let's give
it an *objective* proof and certofocate.
If, as I believe, it needs a serious, *deep* re-assessment in view of
making it *useful* some day, this data will tell us better where to
look. No fair to be navigating in fog, guided by surveys!
On 01/08/2013 11:53 PM, [email protected] wrote:
do you think it were possible to somehow push into the server (and then
up to the Internet) suitably anonymous data that tells at least what
activities have been started (at least a count within a timeframe, say,
every week)?
As part of this "cloud" effort?
Reason: After all these years, we have not yet much reliable data on
whether the XO or Sugar is used or not, or what it is used for, if at all.
Hi Yama
We do have data from Ceibal
http://www.anep.edu.uy/anepdata/0000031610.pdf
Is this data unreliable? I would expect a lot of this data to be similar across
deployments. What extra data do you want to capture.
Tony
_______________________________________________
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
[email protected]
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
