Be who you are and say what you feel because the ones who mind don't matter, and the ones who matter don't mind
Mesyuarat Jawatankuasa Pengurusan Universiti Bil. 6/2023 bertarikh 21 Mac 2023 telah bersetuju agar komponen penilaian bagi sistem LPPT dilihat semula dengan mengambil kira keperluan semasa dan penilaian berasaskan kompetensi staf. Sehubungan dengan itu, berkuat kuasa mulai tahun 2023,penggunaan sistem penilaian kualiti pengajaran iaitu Teaching Excellent System adalah dimansuhkan.
Alhamdulillah. There is a manual for ELPPT 2022.
You may refer the manual which was sent through email on 1 December 2022.
For FSSH academicians, these are the steps that you can use to complete the task
a) Make sure you complete the course file in the respective system.
b) Once you have completed the course file, go to the course file of a specific course, click View Course File (B3). You will see the list of courses that you teach for that particular semester. Make sure you click the relevant year for evaluation. Do not choose the previous year courses! (tongue in cheek remark!)
c) To view the course content, click View of a specific course (at your right side).
c) You might see a Print icon on the top middle. Click that Print icon
You will see there is a link that you can copy (Click HERE to see example)
d) Copy the link and paste in TES (URL box)
Tips: Make sure you complete the course file well. Meaning, double check if there is a missing document which you might have not uploaded yet. You can submit ONLY ONE course (they emphasize QUALITY, not QUANTITY). But if you want to submit all courses by using only one link, you can save all links in a Google Doc. Just link the Google Doc or Google (make sure the link is set as “Anyone with the link” as a viewer.
But please be aware that this does not related to programme auditing in which the auditor(s) might look at your course file randomly. So, if you only complete one course file, thus, it might jeopardize your programme to receive proper accreditation.
There is a new feature in TES (Course file). We have an option either to upload the documents as usual or you can link (copy-paste URL) the course file that you use. For example, if you use Google Drive, copy-paste the link here and make sure you make it as public – so people can see it without having difficulty.
In this picture, you might see that there is a red notification (* not compulsory). This is because I have completed the course file using the old style. I did this back in July 2022 immediately after we presented the marks. But apparently, I have to provide the link of the course file in the URL box. If not, the B3 (Yearly Validation) will be empty (not Green).
Previously, it is time-consuming to complete uploading documents at two different systems. There is no doubt about that. Who am I, though, to challenge that? I only comply grudgingly. I am aware of individuals who give up and could not be bothered to upload the materials to the appropriate systems. Occasionally, a simple hands-on uploading can be challenging if we do not know where the required documents are saved.
Normally, I would simultaneously upload course materials to TES and the faculty’s course file system. This is the “old” practice. Because I am aware with myself with selective memory, I know where the documents (files) are and so do not need to search for them later. Alhamdulillah, with the new feature, I no longer have to do that. I just need to complete my course file in one system and copy-paste the link in TES. (Refer to B5 – Link eLPPT – in yellow color)
Note: I would like to extend my gratitude towards those experts who created/upgraded the systems to make things easier for us as compared before.
Before you apply for the star rating, you need to register your project first. After the registration was approved, only then you can apply for star rating application. To register the project, there are certain things that you need to prepare (in writing). What I did is, I type the description in words or notepad and I just copy paste it in the system. It is easier this way as the system cannot idle long.
You need to write description for
a) an executive summary (300 words)
b) problem statement (300 words)
c) background (300 words)
Other than that, you need to select and fill in information on the relevant boxes such as duration, location, SDGs, objectives, milestones, output and such.
In addition, you need to upload certain documents as attachment such as report, survey (observation, questionnaire and analysis), proposal, flowchart, letter of appointment, collaboration letter, milestone and paper work.
In my case, I also uploaded participant attendance, report, survey results and letter (if you use Google Form, just download the report and save as PDF).
You can recycle the same documents for your star rating application.
Once you have filled in the boxes with * and uploaded the relevant evidence, you have to submit this registration application first, before you can apply for star rating.
Tips: Please make sure that your registration is completed and approved a few days before the final deadline for star rating application. For “last minute people”, make sure your project is approved before you complete the star rating application. You can do it within an hour (or so) if you have all the necessary information and documents at hand.
There are specific differences of criteria for different star rating. In addition, the documents or evidences needed are also different.
Star rating 1: The community has a positive orientation towards the programme. An attendance exceeds or equal to 80%. The two documents needed: 1) Attendance List and 2) Official document of community involvement consent (it could be in a form of letter or certificate of attendance or recognition).
Star rating 2: The community consider the programme relevant and needed. A formal university-community cooperation agreement exists. Stakeholders generally agree to the implementation of the programme. The two documents needed: 1) Questionnaire / Interview and 2) Letter of Collaboration. If you have attendance list, it is an optional (better to have it).
Star rating 3: The community action programme results in change in attitude/ knowledge/ skills or aspirations. Participants exhibit a change in attitude, knowledge, skills and/or aspiration. The three documents needed: 1) Survey form, 2) Interviews Transcription & analysis and 3) Video – before and during program
Star rating 4: The community programme results in a change of practice. Participants adopted the innovations that were introduced. The three documents needed: 1) Observation checklist, 2) Interviews Transcription & analysis and 3) Video – before and during program. Report is not compulsory (but once you have it, it will be rated to 5 star).
Star rating 5: The community is empowered and can independently sustain the practice that was introduced through the programme. Participants continue to practice innovations without UTM’s assistance. The four documents needed: 1) Report (contains description of event, put pictures etc. and if you have conducted survey, include the findings of the survey too in the report), 2) Observation checklist & analysis, 3) Video – before and during program and 4) news – media coverage (provide the URL link of the media coverage such as UTM news). In addition, you also need to state the impact of program and sustainability value (need to write a description about this in the report)
There are certain things that are needed for star rating that you apply in ICESYS.
Make sure you have the following (if not all, it is suggested that you have the starred documents):
a) Facility/Tools/Equipment/Machinery/System invented for the community (Write the description – PDF file)
*b) Letter of Appointment or Official document of community involvement consent
c) Letter of Cooperation (Official document of community involvement consent)
d) Letter of Intent (LOI)
e) MoU (Memorandum of Understanding)
f) MoA (Memorandum of Agreement)
g) Intellectual Property (IP) (Give the evidence of IP number etc. – PDF file)
h) Award (Upload the certificate which indicates the award that you won – PDF file)
*i) Attendance List (Make sure you take the attendance of participants during the program)
*j) Questionnaire / Interview (Survey form, Interviews Transcription & analysis) – It would be better if you prepare a formal report which contains information about observation checklist & analysis. This is needed for Star rating 4 and 5.
*k) Video – before and during program (I do not know how to combine video within a video so, I just created a video which I included pictures that I took during the program)
l) News – media coverage (This is needed for Star rating 5)
This year, I plan to submit four types of e-content: tools for communication, gamification, video-based learning, and tools for working together. This morning, I went to another E-content session, where it was confirmed that one of my E-content materials from last year was wrongly graded. I don’t get any points for it, but Dr. Nihra explained this morning (9 August 2022) how I could get points for that material on the rubric. He said, “It’s too late to tell me now because your ELPPT from last year can’t be changed.” Because of this mistake, there is no consolation mark for this year’s e-content evaluation (pun!). Just a note to whoever is doing the judging this year: Please study the rubric very carefully and thoroughly. You did wrong last year, either on purpose or by accident (tongue in cheek comment!).
We can only send in materials from five categories, and we only need to send one example from each category. For example, if you submit TWO things (like Quizziz and Kahoot!) under ONE category, like “gamification,” only ONE thing will be graded, and you will only get credit for ONE thing. This year, the TESDCP system will automatically stop you from adding new material in the same category. So, you won’t be able to add more than one of the same kind of content. So, choose the best piece of the material to submit for your e-content.
You can’t resubmit material you’ve already sent (and that has already been evaluated) unless you add to or change the content. For example, if you’ve already sent in a quiz in the “Gamification” category with 5 questions, you can send it in again if you add 5 more questions.
To experiment with the …………. (fill in the blank) of the e content evaluators, I put in a content under the category “collaboration tools.” It has a lot of things, like a class note, an article, a formative assessment, a discussion platform, etc. All of it is on ONE platform (i.e. Wakelet), which brings together different materials from other places. With just ONE platform, students can get to their class notes, take quizzes, and even talk to each other. Amazing, isn’t it?
I wonder how the evaluator(s) will assess this material . I will let you know if I get any marks for this material (tongue in cheek remark!). May Allah ease the process and bless us with the best results!
One of my colleagues asked me why I am so eager to get a bonus mark for e content. The thing is, I do not aim for the marks. But I want to know how the e content is assessed (evaluation process) because it seems there is “always a minor improvement/tweak” each year. I asked one of the _________ (fill in the blank) and this person admitted that the evaluation process is “improved” since they started to introduce e content back in 2018. The rubric might be the same but the evaluators might vary in their evaluation. Thus, it does explain the variety of marks that I got since 2019 (the first year I submitted e content materials). I asked around and I am not the only person who wonder about the __________ (fill in the blank) of evaluation even though we refer to the rubric to ensure that our e content materials comply to the evaluation criteria.
This is why when some people ask me why they got different marks every year, I would simply reply “Ask Dr Nihra“.
This year deadline for the e content submission is 30 September 2022 (Friday).
Note: If anyone wants to learn about Wakelet, you may refer to Wakelet official web.
Saya baru ada sedikit masa terluang untuk menyemak TESDCP tahun lepas (2021). Saya mendapati bahawa hasil perbincangan pelajar saya yang menggunakan nota (Prezi) yang diletakkan dalam Padlet tidak dikira sebagai bahan e-content (tiada markah diberikan). Dalam Padlet tersebut ada soalan berbentuk terbuka yang memerlukan pelajar menjawab secara naratif atau esei pendek.
Kesimpulannya, Padlet tidak lagi diterima sebagai bahan econtent. Ini adalah bercanggah dengan nota yang diberikan oleh Dr Nurbiha.
Ini adalah nota dari sesi taklimat yang diberikan oleh Dr Nurbiha (mungkin nota lama)
Apa yang saya faham ialah Padlet adalah alat seperti Youtube, Powtoon, Trello, Quizziz, Kahoot, Socrative dan sebagainya yang mana ianya digunakan dalam membina bahan pengajaran. Sebagai contoh, Powtoon, Genially, Moovly, Canva dan sebagainya adalah alat yang boleh digunakan untuk membangun, dan membina bahan pengajaran berbentuk video (sila betulkan saya sekiranya ialah ada salah konsep [misconception]).
Bagi Genially, pembina tidak perlu memuat turun video dalam bentuk MP4 dan memuat naik video ke YouTube. Bagi Powtoon, pembina bahan perlu memuat turun video dalam bentuk MP4 dan memuat naik video tersebut ke YouTube. Yang berbeza ialah apabila menggunakan Genially (versi berbayar dan dilanggan), kita diberi pautan URL yang boleh dikongsi dengan pelajar dan sekiranya pengguna awam ingin menggunakan bahan tersebut mereka boleh mendapatkan dan menggunakan bahan tersebut (cuma agak sukar sekiranya pengguna awam kurang biasa dengan Geniallymeskipun pautan tersebut adalah umum (public).
Untuk pelantar yang membolehkan pelajar berbincang dalam talian sama ada secara segerak atau tidak segerak, kita boleh menggunakan pelantar seperti Padlet, Jamboard, Wakelet, Trello dan sebagainya. Ianya lebih bersifat agak terbuka kerana ianya boleh digunakan oleh pelajar untuk menulis jawapan, pandangan atau memberi komen tertentu yang boleh dikongsi dengan rakan yang lain. Bagi keadaan bersemuka, selalunya kita menggunakan kertas mahjung untuk pelajar menulis sesuatu. Pelantar seperti Padlet dan Wakelet mempunyai ruang untuk pelajar memberikan komen terhadap pandangan atau jawapan rakan. Sekiranya ianya hanya dianggap sebagai teknologi dan bukan bahan econtent, saya agak keliru kerana ianya menjadi bahan econtent dengan apa yang ditulis dalam pelantar tersebut.
Ianya seolah sekiranya bahan pengajaran video dimuat naik di YouTube tidak diterima sebagai bahan econtent kerana menggunakan teknologi iaitu YouTube dalam pengajaran. YouTube adalah alat seperti Padlet.
Sesungguhnya saya keliru kerana dalam sesi taklimat yang diberikan oleh Dr Nihra, beliau ada menunjukkan contoh Trello yang digunakan untuk perbincangan pelajar. Beliau ada mengatakan bahawa itu menunjukkan bahan econtent yang memberikan peluang kepada pelajar untuk berinteraksi dengan rakan. Padlet saya mempunyai nota kelas, arahan dan juga ruangan untuk pelajar berinteraksi dengan bahan (nota) dan rakan. Mereka boleh berinteraksi dengan rakan melalui ruangan komen atau mereka boleh membina ruangan komen baru.
Jadi dimanakah silapnya saya sehingga Padlet tidak dikira sebagai bahan econtent? I rest my case. Adakah mungkin kerana saya silap memilih kebenaran untuk paparan sama ada umum atau peribadi? Kena melihat semula aspek ini.
Jangan kalut. Jangan panik.
Langkah-langkah: