A Technology Evaulation Comparison

13
Jennifer S. Lewis AET530 University of Phoenix Online

Transcript of A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Page 1: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Jennifer S. LewisAET530

University of Phoenix Online

Page 2: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Integrating technology into a training plan requires more than simple research. Rather implementation of technology requires in-depth research based on an unbiased rating device such as the Sections T-Chart used herein.

Using an unbiased ratings instrument, assessments can be made on various levels including user needs, technology difficulty, costs, etc.

Ultimately, successful technology implementation depends on how the technology is integrated which is the role of the instructor in crafting an effective instructional strategy for effectively using the selected technology’s robust features.

Page 3: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Users of thin clients have exhibited extensive issues relative to navigating from one terminal server session to another.

Users are unable to distinguish their organization’s terminal server session from that of another organization.

User inability to identify location has decreased productivity as users have inadvertently closed their original terminal server due to being unable to return to it without starting the process from the beginning.

Page 4: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Location: Nonprofit User Technology background: limited Performance Gap Identified: Using

Sysaid, an interactive helpdesk software, issues relative to the use of the thin clients to move from the thin client desktop to both the organization’s terminal server (CAMTS) to the Department of Social Services terminal server (DSSTS).

Learning Styles: There are both visual and kinesthetic learners based on past training requests and responses to training survey.

Page 5: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Current Method

S E C T I O N S

Interactive White Board

Low tech users. Need processes broken down.

Tested & reliable.

Total cost: $1,499Indiv. cost: $74.95 (for 20 Cost per individual: $24.98 per year for 3 years

visual and kinesthetic needs. Cooperative approach.

Instant, visual. low level difficulty.

More buyt-in to spending on technology.

Since 1990s

Reactive. Fosters creatviity. A

Screen Capture

Need to focus and see process.

Live-action, engages.

Total Cost: $520 for 20Indiv. cost:$26.00 (if purchase 20 copies)Cost over time: $26.00/3 years= $8.67/yr

Learning need_ visualBehavioral instructional approach.

Easy to use. No interaction, just display.

Change issues related to moving from Powerpoint.

More than a decade old.

Thin Clients Need hands on ability to understand process.

Understanding through action.

Total Cost for 20 users: $5380.00 Individual cost:$269.00 Cost per individual over time: $89.67 per yr for three years

Visual and kinesthetic learning.Experiential approach.

Interaction with thin client is high but use is easy.

Cost prohibitions.

Around since 70’s.

No content making time. User creates content while engaging in activity.

Page 6: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Costs: $1,500 total or $74.95 per 20 users (Smartech, 2006).

Advantages: provides a way of visually having the students diagram the process themselves in a self-directed manner in order to access the terminal server or view the screen while the computer attached to the screen is in a terminal server session

Limitations: too much data results in onscreen gibberish; and potential for disruptions (Hinett, n.d., ¶2) the board does not guarantee interaction, despite assumptions to the contrary (Tanner, Kennewell, Jones & Beauchamp, 2005).

Page 7: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Objective: To teach trainees to navigate between terminal servers.

Experiential Instructional Strategy: Using the screen capture feature, let trainees see how the instructor navigates between terminal servers.

Interactive Instructional Strategy: Using the drawing implement, Stop screen capture to highlight different aspects of each desktop.

Page 8: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Costs: $520 for 20 users, which is equivalent to $26 per user and $8.67 per year for a three year period (Screencast, n.d. ).

Advantages: ability for trainees to see exactly how a specific process works

Limitations: there is no doubt that having some technical knowledge about screen capture technologies can help you in making better demo movies” (Screencast, n.d., ¶5).

Page 9: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Objective: To have trainees reach the a better understanding how to navigate between terminal servers.

Experiential Instructional Strategy: instructor films the process of navigating from the desktop to the local terminal server and to the Department of Social Services terminal server.

Objective: To show users how to identify which terminal server they are accessing at any given time.

Interactive Instructional Strategy: Instructor shows short movies which highlight the differences between the desktop and the two terminal server sessions

Page 10: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Costs: $5380 which is equivalent to per user cost of $269 or $89.67 per year for three years (Newegg, 2009).

Advantages: able to engage in the actual process of navigating through the terminal servers thereby engaging all learners, especially those kinesthetic learners

Limitations: the inability of the thin client to work well without the terminal server as it resource due to its hardware limitation.

Page 11: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Objective: To reach the objective of successfully navigating the terminal servers

Instructional Strategy: The thin client will provide an experiential, kinesthetic experience for users to navigate between terminal servers.

Page 12: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Selecting appropriate technology is a process which requires research and an unbiased measurement instrument to steer the instructor to important implementation considerations.

Once the instructor has filled out such an instrument, they must also consider what instructional objective and which instructional strategy they could potentially select in designing the training.

Based on such a comprehensive process, the instructor can better predict how effective the technology could potentially be integrated.

Page 13: A Technology Evaulation Comparison

Hinett, R. (n.d.). What are the advantages and disadvantages? Retrieved on January 17, 2009, from http://www.newman.ac.uk/students_websites/~r.hinett/intwhiteboard3.htm

NewEgg. (2009). HP t5530 thin client VIA Eden 800 MHz DDR 128MB servers – retail. Retrieved on January 12, 2009, from http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16859105381&nm_mc=OTC-Froogle&cm_mmc=OTC-Froogle-_-Server+-+Systems-_-Hewlett-Packard-_-59105381.

Screencast. (n.d.). Introduction to screen casting. Retrieved on January 18, 2009, from http://www.screencast.be/&qsrc=2869.

Smarttech. (2006). Quick reference. Retrieved on January 12, 2009, from http://downloads.smarttech.com/media/services/quickreferences/pdf/english/smartboardtools.pdf

Tanner, H., Kennewell, S., Jones, S., & Beauchamp, G. (2005). Interactive whole class teaching and interactive white boards. Retrieved on January 19, 2009, from http://www.merga.net.au/documents/RP832005.pdf.