1 / 43

Quality Matters Overview

Quality Matters Overview. Deborah Adair, Ph.D. Director, Quality Matters. October 14, 2008. “Quality Matters: Inter-Institutional Quality Assurance in Online Learning”.

tawnyaa
Télécharger la présentation

Quality Matters Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Quality Matters Overview Deborah Adair, Ph.D. Director, Quality Matters October 14, 2008

  2. “Quality Matters: Inter-Institutional Quality Assurance in Online Learning” • Quality Matters is a not-for-profit subscription service providing tools and training for quality assurance of online courses • Colleges and universities, both public and private, throughout the country are joining our community of practitioners www.qualitymatters.org

  3. QM Process Provides: • Institutional toolset and process to meet quality expectations: • Online course design • Student learning • Improved instruction • Assessment and feedback loops • Professional development

  4. QM as a National Standard • 270 + current subscribers (http://www.qualitymatters.org/Documents/Subscriber%20List%20for%20Publication.pdf) • 42 states represented • QM has trained 4000+ faculty and instructional design staff • Recognized by - Sloan C Excellence in Online Teaching and Learning Award -2008 USDLA Outstanding Leadership in the field of Distance Learning

  5. QM Subscribers WASHINGTON NORTH MAINE MONTANA MINNESOTA DAKOTA OREGON VT NH WISCONSIN MASS SOUTH IDAHO DAKOTA NEW YORK MICHIGAN WYOMING RI CONN PENN NEW IOWA NEBRASKA JERSEY NEVADA OHIO DELAWARE INDIANA UTAH ILLINOIS MARYLAND WV COLORADO KANSAS VIRGINIA MISSOURI KENTUCKY CALIFORNIA NORTH CAROLINA TENNESSEE ARIZONA ARKANSAS OKLAHOMA SOUTH CAROLINA NEW MEXICO MISS GEORGIA ALABAMA TEXAS LOUISIANA FLORIDA Current Subscribers Statewide Subscribers ALASKA PUERTO RICO VIRGIN ISLANDS HAWAII

  6. Principles of QM The QM toolset and process • A faculty-driven, peer review process that is… • Collaborative • Collegial • Continuous • Centered - in academic foundation • - around student learning • Courses do not have to be “perfect” but QM aims at better than just “good enough”

  7. What Quality Matters is NOT • Not about an individual instructor • (it’s about the course design) • Not about faculty evaluation • (it’s about course quality) • Not a win/lose or pass/fail test • (it’s a diagnostic tool to facilitate continuous improvement of online/hybrid courses)

  8. Goal: Make online instruction as good as it can be • Better than average; more than “good enough” • An attempt to capture what’s expected in an effective online or hybrid course at about an 85% level 85 %

  9. History of Quality Matters Winter 2008

  10. Quality Matters Was Launched by MarylandOnline • Maryland consortium for distance learning received 3-year FIPSE grant in 2003 • Motivation: Need to provide inter-institutional quality assurance for courses in consortium seat bank • Approach: Research-based, collaborative, peer-centered • Outcome: Sustainable quality assurance process embraced by institutions beyond MOL and Maryland

  11. Success of the QM Grant • Early presentations generated widespread interest • MarylandOnline began to receive recognition for QM • WCET Outstanding Work (WOW) Award, 2005 • USDLA 21st Century Best Practice Award, 2005 • Maryland Distance Learning Association (MDLA) Best Program Award, 2005. • The Sloan Consortium online workshops introduced hundreds of faculty members and staff to QM. • Peer reviewer training spread far beyond Maryland: • 700+ faculty trained to review online courses using the rubric • individuals from 158 different institutions in 28 states

  12. QM Today • Self-supporting non-profit program • subscriptions, trainings, and course reviews • Wide-spread adoption • Independent subscribers (75), consortium subscribers (67), and statewide system affiliates (136) • Program development through collaboration • User community directs program improvement • Continuous improvement of tools and services

  13. QM Basics: More than the Sum of its (3) Parts Winter 2008

  14. The Rubric

  15. The Rubric • Eight standards: • Course Overview and Introduction • Learning Objectives • Assessment and Measurement • Resources and Materials • Learner Interaction • Course Technology • Learner Support • Accessibility Key components must align.

  16. Rubric Scoring • Points are awarded for 40 specific standards based on: • the team majority, AND • the pre-assigned weighting of each standard • Specific standards have a point value of 1, 2, or 3; the total points possible in a review is 85 • If 2-3 Reviewers believe that a standard is: • met, then the full pre-assigned points are awarded • not met, then zero points are awarded

  17. To Meet Expectations… • A course must achieve: • “Yes” on all 17 of the 3-point “essential” standards • A minimum of 72 out of 85 points 72/85 = 85%

  18. The Peer Review Process

  19. Course Meets Quality Expectations Course Revision Quality Matters: Peer Course Review Process Faculty Course Developers Institutions National Standards & Research Literature Course Rubric Course continues to be offered Faculty Reviewers Training Peer Course Review Feedback Instructional Designers

  20. The Peer Reviewer • Characteristics: • Experienced online/hybrid instructor • Trained in applying the Quality Matters Standards and certified by QM • Training updated with each new edition of the rubric • Receives a small stipend for each review

  21. The Peer Review Team • Consists of: • 3 QM Certified peer reviewers • The chair is a Master Reviewer (having received additional training) • One reviewer must be a subject matter expert • At least one reviewer must external to the institution sponsoring the course

  22. What to Expect from Course Reviews • Consistency and Rigor • Professionalism and Commitment • Useful and Constructive Feedback • Positive Outcomes for Faculty

  23. Survey of faculty whose course wasreviewed indicates that … • 91% of respondents made changes in the course as a result of the review • 89% of respondents felt that the quality of course design improved as a result of the review • Sample comments: • “I was too close to see what could be improved.” • “Provides a great way to get an objective view of your course.” • “It made all of my online courses better.” • “It provides a view from a more student oriented perspective.” • “Many elements that might contribute to a student withdrawing can be eliminated.”

  24. Quality Matters Training

  25. QM Training • QM trainings support the other program components and are integral to a quality assurance effort • QM principles and the rubric standards are at the heart of all the trainings • There are two general categories of training: Faculty Development and Implementing Quality Matters

  26. Types of Trainings Faculty Development Implementing Quality matters • Applying the QM Rubric • Building Your Online Course Using the QM Rubric • Improving Your Online Course Using the QM Rubric • Design that Welcomes Your Students • Measurable Learning Objectives at the Course and Module Level • Choosing and Using Media Effectively • Peer Reviewer Certification • Master Reviewer • Train-the-Trainer • Institution Representative/ Course Review Manager

  27. Why Quality Matters? Winter 2008

  28. Multiple Uses of QM Reported Uses of QM Tools: • Guidelines for initial online course development • Quality assurance of existing courses • Ongoing faculty professional development • Institutional re-accreditation packages • Focus attention on distance learning policies & steering committees

  29. Alignment with Accrediting Best Practices *“Best Practices for Electronically Offered Degree and Certificate Programs” adopted in 2001 by CHEA and 8 regional accreditation bodies.

  30. Collaboration and Community in Distance Education • QM provides platforms to help users collaborate... • With QM in building tools that work for Distance Education • With their own institutional users to adapt QM tools to their specific institutional needs • Across the community of QM subscribers to share best practices, find new resources, and support collegial efforts to improve student learning outcomes www.qminstitute.org

  31. What’s In It For Faculty? • Improvement of online courses • External quality assurance • Review other courses and gain new ideas for own course; expand professional community • Participation useful for professional development plan and portfolio • Faculty development trainings

  32. Quality Matters Implementation Winter 2008

  33. QM’s Role in Quality Assurance • QM looks at course design • The harnessing of technology to deliver instruction and promote student learning • QM provides a process for peer-to-peer feedback for faculty in the continuous improvement of their course • Quality Matters is not the complete answer to quality assurance for online education, but it can be a critical component

  34. Campus Decisions for Quality • Governance • Who will lead a QM project and where will it report? • Engagement • How will you gain faculty commitment? • Communication, training opportunities, incentives…? • Rubric Use • For course assessment, development, maintenance? • Course Reviews • Mandatory or optional, official or informal? • Selection Criteria • Which courses in what order?

  35. Types of Course Reviews • QM-Managed Course Reviews • QM staff assigns review team and manages process • Available with a Supplemental Package, otherwise on an as-available basis • Official, Subscriber-Managed Course Reviews • Trained institution representative manages according to QM criteria • Independent Course Reviews • Schools set up own informal process

  36. Scalability in Implementing QM Managing Your Reviews Delivering Your Training (APPQMR)

  37. Implementing QM – Roles and Criteria

  38. Preparing for Course Reviews • Course is mature • Learning outcomes (course & unit) are specified • Review team has access to all elements students do • Use of QM rubric in course development • Faculty familiar with QM rubric

  39. Helpful Links • Current Subscriber List • http://www.qualitymatters.org/Documents/Subscriber List for Publication.pdf • Courses Recognized in 2008 • http://www.qualitymatters.org/Courses 2008.htm • Training Calendar • http://www.qualitymatters.org/Training.htm • Fee Schedule • http://qminstitute.org/home/Public%20Library/Fee%20Schedule/Quality%20Matters%20Fee%20Schedule%20effective%208_1_2008.pdf • QM Staff • http://www.qualitymatters.org/Contact.htm

  40. Thanks to YOU…Quality Matters! Winter 2008

  41. 2008 Post Review Interviews: The peer reviewers fulfilled their responsibilities on the review team.

  42. 2008 Post Review Interviews: The review followed the official QM course review process:

  43. 2008 Post Review Interviews: The feedback provided by the peer reviewers in the final report was constructive and useful:

More Related