Picture of server farm and IT infrastructure

Where technology & law meet: Open Access research on data security & its regulation ...

Strathprints makes available Open Access scholarly outputs exploring both the technical aspects of computer security, but also the regulation of existing or emerging technologies. A research specialism of the Department of Computer & Information Sciences (CIS) is computer security. Researchers explore issues surrounding web intrusion detection techniques, malware characteristics, textual steganography and trusted systems. Digital forensics and cyber crime are also a focus.

Meanwhile, the School of Law and its Centre for Internet Law & Policy undertake studies on Internet governance. An important component of this work is consideration of privacy and data protection questions and the increasing focus on cybercrime and 'cyberterrorism'.

Explore the Open Access research by CIS on computer security or the School of Law's work on law, technology and regulation. Or explore all of Strathclyde's Open Access research...

Towards effective practitioner evaluation: an exploration of issues relating to skills, motivation and evidence

Harvey, Jen and Oliver, Martin and Smith, Janice (2002) Towards effective practitioner evaluation: an exploration of issues relating to skills, motivation and evidence. Journal of Educational Technology Society, 5 (3). pp. 3-10. ISSN 1176-3647

[img] Microsoft Word (strathprints003275.doc)
strathprints003275.doc

Download (84kB)

Abstract

Although academics are increasingly expected to undertake studies of their practice, particularly where this involves the use of learning technology, experience to date suggests that meeting this expectation has proved difficult. This paper attempts to explain this difficulty. After reviewing literature that provides a rationale for practitioner evaluation, the experiences of three projects (EFFECTS, ASTER and SoURCE) which attempted to draw on this process are described. Three main areas of difficulty are discussed: the skills and motivations of the academics involved, and the kinds of evidence (and its analysis) that 'count' for a given evaluation. This discussion leads to the identification of a number of problems that inhibit practitioner evaluation, including ambiguity in the nature and purpose of evaluation, and a general feeling that the function of evaluation has already been served through existing quality mechanisms. Finally, the possible implications are considered of some or all of the steps in the evaluation process being undertaken by an evaluator working alongside the academic.