= Practitioner-Focused Design and Evaluation =
[[PageOutline]]

In keeping with the requirement for a ''practitioner-focused'' tool, we are seeking to involve lecturers, tutors and teachers from across the spectrum of post-compulsory learning in all stages of the project. Specifically, they are fulfilling three roles:

 * Acting as [wiki:PractitionerInformants practitioner-informants] in the design process
 * "Critical friends", taking part in our evaluation of the prototype tool and its underlying concept
 * Working as partners in our [wiki:EmbeddingActivities embedding activities], when we will test the tool in initial teacher-training (ITT) and staff development/continuing professional development (CPD) settings

Some individuals may fulfil more than one role: e.g. two of our PIs are also embedding partners.

== Practitioner Informants ==

See the [wiki:PractitionerInformants Practitioner Informants] page for a record of our work with Phoebe's practitioner-informants (PIs).

[wiki:PractitionerInvolvement#PractitionerFocusedDesignandEvaluation Top]    

== Evaluation ==

=== Evaluation Plans ===

 * [wiki:Evaluation Phase 1 Evaluation Plan]
 * [wiki:EvaluationPhase2 Phase 2 Evaluation Plan]
 * [wiki:PhoebeMappingstoD4L Phoebe within the Design for Learning programme:] how we have a) mapped Phoebe to the overall aims of the JISC Design for Learning programme and a) addressed the evaluation questions put forward by Glenaffric (evaluators of the D4L programme)

=== Evaluation Reports ===
 * [http://phoebe.conted.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/attachment/wiki/UploadedFiles/Phoebe%20Evaluation%20Report%2001%20Sept%2008.pdf?format=raw Evaluation report] (Revised version: 1st September 2008)
 * [wiki:Phase1EvaluationReport Phase 1 Evaluation Report] (superseded by the main project evaluation report)

[wiki:PractitionerInvolvement#PractitionerFocusedDesignandEvaluation Top]    

== Consultation Activity with JISC Pedagogy Experts ==

We ran a consultation activity on 26/10/06 at the JISC Pedagogy Experts' meeting in Birmingham. The activity was intended to validate some of the work we had done so far, and to explore three key questions in the design of Phoebe:

 1. What components do teachers take into consideration when planning a lesson in a technology-rich environment?
 1. How do teachers identify these components? Do they recognise a given set of terms, or do they have alternative individual vocabularies?
 1. How do teachers move among these components when planning a particular lesson, and how do they characterise the relationships between components and/or clusters of components? 

[wiki:ConsultationActivity261006 Report on the consultation activity] 

[wiki:PractitionerInvolvement#PractitionerFocusedDesignandEvaluation Top]    

== Phase 1 Pedagogic Planner Review Meeting ==

This meeting, on 23/01/07, was held to elicit the perspectives of fellow members of the Design for Learning programme on the future course of both the Phoebe and 'London Knowledge Lab' pedagogic planner projects. After a short overview to the whole meeting, each project demonstrated its tool to roughly half of the participants, who asked questions and filled in review forms supplied by Glenaffric. Glenaffric then collated the responses and forwarded them to us in a [http://phoebe.conted.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/attachment/wiki/UploadedFiles/PlannerReviewDataP.doc?format=raw summary document].

See the [wiki:Phase1EvaluationReport Phase 1 evaluation report] for an analysis of the responses.

[wiki:PractitionerInvolvement#PractitionerFocusedDesignandEvaluation Top]    

== Embedding Activities ==

[wiki:EmbeddingActivities Embedding Plan] 

[wiki:PractitionerInvolvement#PractitionerFocusedDesignandEvaluation Top]