Online curricular materials and activities could reduce the logistical and economic costs of assembling expert panels. Criteria for judging quality could be shared and debated, and judgments of quality could be deliberated in multiple electronic arenas. Judgments could be directly linked to the artifact being judged, with confirming and dissenting commentary attached … The evaluation process could become more open to standard-setting groups, such as subject matter experts … Panelists could conduct online interviews with developers. Because expert critics need not be physically convened, the frequency of reviews could be increased and the composition of review teams could be improved – for example by involving more scientists and experts.
Predictor: Kozma, Robert
Prediction, in context:In 1995, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Educational Technology commissioned a series of white papers on various issues related to networking technologies. The department convened the authors for a workshop in November 1995 to discuss the implications. The following statement is taken from one of the white papers, “Issues and Needs in Evaluating the Educational Impact of the National Information Infrastructure,” by Robert Kozma and Edys Quellmalz of the Center for Technology and Learning at SRI International. They write:”Current approaches for judging the quality of educational curricula and conducting program evaluations rely, in part, on laborious forms of document analysis and review by panels of experts. Online curricular materials and activities could reduce the logistical and economic costs of assembling expert panels. Criteria for judging quality could be shared and debated, and judgments of quality could be deliberated in multiple electronic arenas. Judgments could be directly linked to the artifact being judged, with confirming and dissenting commentary attached. As a result, the evaluation process could become more open to standard-setting groups, such as subject matter experts. In addition to inspecting curricular artifacts, panelists could conduct online interviews with developers. Because expert critics need not be physically convened, the frequency of reviews could be increased and the composition of review teams could be improved – for example by involving more scientists and experts.”
Date of prediction: January 1, 1995
Topic of prediction: Getting, Sharing Information
Subtopic: E-learning
Name of publication: The Future of Networking Technologies for Learning
Title, headline, chapter name: Issues and Needs in Evaluating the Educational Impact of the National Information Infrastructure
Quote Type: Direct quote
Page number or URL of document at time of study:
http://www.ed.gov/Technology/Futures/
This data was logged into the Elon/Pew Predictions Database by: Anderson, Janna Quitney