Proof of Concept activity shows, that not only ASD-pupils are unique – so are ASD-teachers!

Better late than never!

In the middle of a busy June(to be exact: June 8th) I planned, arranged and carried through a Paper prototype test with three teachers from Egebakken as a HANDS Proof of Concept activity. Unfortunately have I not had time to analyse the data from the experiment, but I have a strong personal need to tell about the immediate results from the experiment.

I believe, that my working hours will be dedicated to writing the HANDS proposal.

The main conclusions of the test are in the bottom of this post.

The motivation for this Proof of Concept activities was a need to prove – theoretically – the benefit of the HANDS concept.

The experiment setup was:

• Nice and for the testteachers familiar surroundings – in a classroom at Egebakken
• Three teachers who each was given 3 real world pedagogical problems, which they had to consider thinking aloud one after the other. All teachers were from Egebakken: Susan Gulstad, Kristian Wolling and Søren Madsen.
• They could solve the problem by taking or sketching solutions.
• I was testleader asking them positive yes questions and possibly suggesting to them computertools to be a part of the solution.
• Each realworld problem case was elaborated in approximately 15 minutes.
• The datacollection methods were videorecording of the whole test and written a report.
  Special thanks to Anne-Katrine Kjaer Christensen and Julie Leth Jespersen, students at Aalborg University, Institute of Communication.

The immediate impression of the test was overwhelming. Very. While the test took place, Anne-Katrine, Julie and I was overwhelmed by knowledge, considerations, interesting perspectives and much, much more. This made it nice to end the session so that I did not get any more new information, even though that I knew, I had to continue and get as many data out of the experiment as possible.

The test in other words was well functioning. The real world problems were relevant and the teachers were more than willing to think-aloud. They did not by themselves suggest solutions the problem by using Pdas.

Main test conclusion are

• Teachers are different. The three teachers did not have the same methodology to solve the same problems.
• They were open towards solution with pdas, but they did not suggest it themselves.

• Internal motivation of the pupil was always considered.

• They referred to a common set of methods, which they wanted to apply in different situations.

• One method – Simple Safe Success – seems very valuable to put into a pda.

The fact that the three teachers seemed to have differentways of elaborating a real world problem seems troublesome. Unique teachers’ hers personalities. Uak! But they had several things in common the most valuable, they had methods in common. Most profound was the use of SSS, Simple Safe Success’. A method which can easily be formalized and turned into a computerprogram.

In general methods are formalizations of everyday pedagogical work and these methods should be integrated into the pda.

If I had time to analyze the video and testreport several other very interesting testresults will appear.

The HANDS project aims to integrate the teachers' professional intuition and this experiment was the first study in the field.

An interestering and valuable experiment.