NZATD Education Trust Awards elearning Award Guidelines for Entrants

Transcription

1 NZATD Educatin Trust Awards elearning Award Guidelines fr Entrants Fcus f Award NZATD intrduced this award t recgnise excellence in the design and implementatin f elearning initiatives within rganisatins. The key fcus f the award is t find examples f best practice, where the elearning slutin is best suited t the envirnment in which it is delivered and is an integral part f meeting rganisatinal utcmes. The winning entry may cme frm individuals r teams, and will need t be: An elearning prject r prgramme designed t address a specific rganisatinal need that achieved the desired utcme during the tw years immediately prir t the submissin date fr entry An elearning prgramme implemented fr the first time during the tw years immediately prir t the submissin date fr entry, which is cntributing twards the rganisatin s desired utcmes and is intended t be cntinued as part f business as usual in the future A specific elearning interventin that significantly raised the prfile f learning and develping in the rganisatin and had a ntable impact n individual and/r rganisatinal perfrmance and prcesses. Key Date Entries must be received by n later than 5pm n Mnday 1 September 2014.

2 The Judging Prcess All entries will need t meet a set f baseline criteria befre they can be cnsidered fr ranking against ther entries. Baseline criteria refer t thse criteria that all entries must meet befre they can be cnsidered as finalists in any categry. Once adherence t base line criteria is cnfirmed, these criteria will nt be used t differentiate between submissins. Where an entry is missing any f the base line criteria, a representative f the Judging Panel will cntact the entrant t advise them f any actins required t meet the criteria, prviding the entry was submitted prir t the submissin deadline. Assessment against baseline criteria will be dne n a meet/des nt meet basis. All entries meeting baseline criteria will then be assessed accrding t a predefined set f evaluatin criteria t enable differentiatin between all eligible entries. This will be dne using a weighted grading scale using the fllwing prcess: A mark frm 1 (lw) t 10 (high) will be applied by three judges independently, using the stated assessment criteria. The judges will then meet t discuss entries further and at this stage, withut knwledge f the ther marks, may refine their individual marks. Each judge s final mark in each categry will be aggregated and then weighted, using the weightings indicated alngside the criteria. The marks in all categries will be added tgether t determine the verall grading. In the event f a tie, the judges reserve the right t deliberate further t determine an utright winner. The judges reserve the right nt t award in this categry if n entries achieve a final assessment rating f at least 70%.

3 Baseline Criteria - elearning Award Criteria Explanatin Meets Criteria Y/N? Timing f entry Timing f initiative Lcatin f initiative The award has been received within the stipulated entry perid. The dates fr entry will be publicised. The clsing date is the date by which all entries must be received at the awards address. Entries shuld be received by 5pm n the clsing date. In rare circumstances, extensins may be given. This will be cnsidered the exceptin rather than the rule. The panel has the right nt t cnsider any late entries at their sle discretin. Applicatins fr extensins must be received prir t the clsing date and nly ne extensin per entry will be permitted. The initiative being submitted has been undertaken within the past tw years. One f the fllwing must apply t the tw years immediately preceding the submissin date: Intrductin and implementatin f the elearning initiative fr a sufficient time t allw fr a meaningful evaluatin f that initiative, r Cmpletin f an elearning initiative with its subsequent evaluatin, where the initiative was riginally implemented nt mre than three years ag. The initiative being submitted must meet ne r mre f the fllwing criteria: Initiated either in whle r in part in New Zealand Initiated by a New Zealand citizen/resident/rganisatin verseas Initiated in a New Zealand registered cmpany/rganisatin Initiated in a New Zealand divisin f an verseas cmpany/rganisatin prir t being initiated in any verseas divisin.

4 Criteria Explanatin Meets Criteria Y/N? Prvisin f infrmatin The entry must include a cmpleted and signed applicatin frm signed by the entrant and submitted as per the prcess described n the applicatin frm. It shuld include: An utline f: the cntext fr the elearning initiative the rganisatinal aims and planned utcmes fr the initiative the scpe f the initiative a summary f the initiative, including, but nt limited t: - an utline f the initiative and what was invlved - wh was invlved and hw the initiative was delivered - what and hw resurces were used - hw the initiative was received. Evaluatins cmpleted including, but nt limited t: the perceptins f learners and end users the change in behaviur resulting frm the initiative the value t the rganisatin, in whatever terms the rganisatin finds meaningful, e.g: - financial - ecnmic - scial - cmmunity, etc. An verall summary f utcmes and why the initiative is cnsidered wrthy f an award. Please nte: Jint entries are permitted. Where an rganisatin emplys external parties t assist in the develpment f an initiative, this shuld be stated. If a jint submissin is nt being presented but tw r mre parties were invlved, please identify thse parts f the initiative that were designed/undertaken by parties wh are nt included in this entry.

5 Criteria Explanatin Meets Criteria Y/N? Evidence t supprt entry Evidence is required t enable judges t fairly evaluate entries. Judges all sign a cnfidentiality agreement and agree nt t disclse infrmatin beynd the evaluatin panel withut permissin. Any evidence that is withheld frm the judges due t cnfidentiality (r ther) cncerns cannt be cnsidered during the evaluatin. Examples f suitable evidence may include, but are nt necessarily limited t: The business case and submissins t management Dcumentatin relating t planning and rganising Cpies f resurces, such as participant wrkbks, CDs, psters, custm-made resurces etc. Examples f cmmunicatins Prgress reprts t management Evidence f changes t rganisatinal and individual measures, e.g. prductivity Frms and templates used fr assessment and evaluatin Letters f supprt frm thse: impacted by the initiative spnsring the initiative delivering the initiative Cpies f the cllated evaluatins, e.g. an evaluatin reprt Any ther dcumentatin r examples that supprt the entry.

6 Criteria Explanatin Meets Criteria Y/N? Referees Referees shuld include peple that have direct knwledge f the initiative undertaken. These may be, but are nt limited t: Spnsrs f the initiative Participants in the initiative Managers f participants in the initiative Managers f thse invlved in delivering the initiative. Peple impacted by the initiative, e.g Custmers Vendrs The public, etc. Ideally referees cvering a range f the abve shuld be included, chsen fr their ability t cmment knwledgeably n the initiative frm their wn perspective. Fr each referee please prvide the fllwing infrmatin: Name Jb rle Preferred telephne number Alternative cntact phne number Preferred address Categry f referee as per the abve list in this page (e.g. spnsr, participant etc.) Preferred time t be cntacted.

7 Criteria Explanatin Meets Criteria Y/N? Referees (cntinued) Referees may be apprached t help verify the infrmatin supplied with in the entry. They shuld be willing and able t cnfirm assertins and achievement within the entry by: having and apprpriate level f knwledge abut initiative understanding the rganisatinal requirements and utcmes having a general knwledge f best practice within the learning and develpment area relevant t the initiative, and/r witnessing real change as a result f the initiative. Judges will lk fr the value the referee places n the wrk f the practitiner, e.g. Their pinin n the quality f the initiative Examples f hw the initiative has helped them Willingness t keep emplying/wrking with/re-engage the services f the practitiners respnsible fr the initiative. Please Nte: It is the intentin f judges t cntact referees f shrt-listed entrants. Prvisin f referee cntact details will be cnsidered agreement fr the panel t cntact them. Entrants are strngly advised t gain permissin frm their referees and ntify them that they may be cntacted prir t submitting their entry. Referees wh are unavailable t be cntacted shuld nt be included. Cnsideratin f a referee will be discunted if, after reasnable attempts have been made, he/she cannt be reached.

8 Evaluatin Criteria - elearning Award Criteria Factrs taken int accunt Weight Scpe f initiative Relatinship and relevance f the initiative t the learning and develpment field. Scale f the initiative, relative t the rganisatin. Ability f the initiative t impact rganisatinal perfrmance and prcesses. 10% Planning The way in which the business case clearly identifies a need r pprtunity and demnstrates cnsidered judgement in the selectin f an initiative that will achieve psitive utcmes fr the rganisatin. 25% Relatinship f the initiative t rganisatinal utcmes and rganisatinal perfrmance measures. Quality f the plan including: The purpse Participant utcme(s) Organisatinal utcmes Participant respnsibilities The different rles f thse invlved in the initiative and hw these rles interrelate The cmmunicatin plan The prcess fllwed t intrduce and cnslidate the initiative Any equipment / resurces / technlgy used Any written material required / available Summary f planned assessment and evaluatin.

9 Criteria Factrs taken int accunt Weight The initiative The suitability f the elearning initiative t meet planned individual and rganisatinal utcmes. 35% The elearning initiative is fit fr purpse. The elearning initiative cmplements ther learning and develpment strategies. The interventin demnstrates initiative in the way it blends new resurces and /r ideas t meet the required rganisatinal cntext. The implementatin f the elearning initiative, relative t the resurce available: makes effective use f available resurces t deliver the interventin prvides sufficient training and supprt t thse tasked with implementing the interventin t fster success selects the apprpriate technlgies t meet the need within the cnstraints f the rganisatin. Mechanisms are established t ensure that the elearning initiative and related learning is sustained, e.g.: Preparatin f the rganisatin fr the intrductin f the initiative Transitin prcesses shw hw the initiative and / r utcmes arising frm the initiative are (r will be) integrated int business as usual. Wrkplace supprt prvided fr participants. Feedback channels established fr cntinuus imprvement. Managerial supprt demnstrated fr the initiative, etc.

10 Criteria Factrs taken int accunt Weight Assessment and Evaluatin The quality f assessment and evaluatin including: the range f techniques emplyed the suitability f techniques emplyed relative t their intended purpse the crrect applicatin f techniques the measures used. Hw feedback was used t refine the initiative during implementatin, if relevant. Evaluatin f the benefits t the individual, including: the perceptin f participants tward the initiative demnstrated change f behaviur / attitude / knwledge and / r indicatrs f persnal develpment. Evaluatin f the benefits t the rganisatin will be cnsidered acrss a range f dimensins, which may include, but are nt limited t: cst/benefit analysis the value t the rganisatin, in whatever terms the rganisatin finds meaningful, e.g.: - financial - ecnmic - scial - cmmunity, etc. Cntributin t defined utcmes as demnstrated in changes t individual and rganisatinal measures, e.g. prductivity. lessns learned frm the initiative and hw these will cntribute t future planning. Nte: Evaluatins at higher levels i.e. rganisatinal impact and ROI will carry mre weight than thse at lwer levels. 30%