1 / 39

“ Quality ” in ADEC Strategic Plan

“ Quality ” in ADEC Strategic Plan. Land grant . . . a large and deep reservoir of expertise and quality subject matter. ADEC will develop high- quality distance education programs. quality distance learning. increase . . . quality of distance learning programs, products.

aletta
Download Presentation

“ Quality ” in ADEC Strategic Plan

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” in ADEC Strategic Plan • Land grant . . . a large and deep reservoir of expertise and quality subject matter. • ADEC will develop high-quality distance education programs. • quality distance learning. • increase . . . quality of distance learning programs, products. • Quality standards . . . will be developed. • ADEC will raise the distance education bar on quality. • ADEC will develop a world class reputation for quality academic courses. Will ADEC catalyze professional societies to develop refereed peer review of educational products?

  2. National Refereed Peer Review of Educational Products • Develop rigorous, refereed peer review system for educational products used in classroom, Extension, distant education and lifelong learning to ensure accuracy, quality, and scholarship. Products might include information modules (chunks), chunks linked to form lectures or fact sheets, lectures linked to form courses or manuals . . .

  3. National Refereed Peer Review of Educational Products • Develop refereed peer review system for educational products, regardless of media. • Develop specific review guidelines for Web published educational products. The capabilities of the Web promote collaboration and specialization among educators. The 24-hour access to just in time information promotes inquiry-driven education.

  4. National Refereed Peer Review of Educational Products • Affirmation of importance to ADEC. • Affirmation of feasibility and priority. • State action needed to advance the subject. • Cultivate buy-in from ADEC leadership and participants. • Specific next steps required and who is responsible. • Suggested time table.

  5. HortBase Mission: • Provide 24-hour access to concise horticultural information in ‘chunks’. • A ‘chunk’ will contain concise information needed to answer a specific question or topic. • The question-answer ‘chunk’ will enable the user to quickly find specific, concise information, and enable the author to quickly make revisions within that URL ‘chunk’ without the necessity of changing all links in other ASHS HortBase documents linked to that multiple-use chunk. • Chunks may be linked together (sequenced) by educators to produce a manual, information sheet, course handout, study assignment, etc. • ASHS HortBase information resources are peer reviewed and up-to-date.

  6. With HortBase, information retrieval and education is "inquiry-driven" by the interested learner. With quality HortBase instructional information readily available on the Web, the total quality of K-12, post-high school education and lifelong learning will be enhanced. HortBase is for the interested learner.

  7. Four Sets of Author-Reviewer Guidelines: The individual “chunks” of crop /commodity /subject information are peer-reviewed for: 1) Metadata information for library management, search, and retrieval tailored to the HortBase search engine. 2) Style and communication. 3) Horticultural content.4) Educational criteria. The educational program resources (sequenced, reviewed chunks) are peer-reviewed using a fourth set of guidelines.

  8. HortBase's unique characteristic is the dynamic pool of ASHS members who will be volunteer authors and reviewers and users of HortBase. ASHS members will be the continuous infrastructure to sustain HortBase and to ensure its evolution and renewal.

  9. Three innovative concepts in HortBase: 1. Nation-wide distribution of the workload and costs involved in creation, review/revision, and distribution of the electronic information will result in ability to do more than can be done independently by the individual faculty and individual states. 2. Three-dimensional team-creation of the HortBase electronic information files - a subject author, a communications specialist and an information science faculty working together to outline and create the file. 3. National Peer Review - HortBase includes national ASHS peer review of synthesized educational information; the information is peer reviewed and in form for storage, search and retrieval through public access when placed on the HortBase Web.

  10. The university, state, geographical and national boundaries can be transcended in forming virtual production and review teams - ”Dream Teams" - the best team for each specific information project.

  11. -Refereed peer reviewed information products used in classroom, Extension, the work place and lifelong learning . . . meets the inquirers’ need for validated information . . . meets the authors’ need for scholarly achievement.

  12. Framework for Maturing the Peer Review Process http://taste.merlot.org/mature.html

  13. Gamble, K. & Raney, B. (1998). Teaching Through the Web. http://teachonweb.org/teaching/teaching.html

  14. National Refereed Peer Review of Educational Products • Affirmation of importance to ADEC: Service to ADEC member institutions and their faculty. Structure to enhance ADEC Accountability (validates “ADEC Seal of Approval”). Integrates academic and Extension information programs. Facilitates lifelong learning, shared resources, learning modules, international multi-institution and multi-discipline collaboration. • Affirmation of feasibility and priority. • State action needed to advance the subject. • Cultivate buy-in from ADEC leadership and participants. • Specific next steps required and who is responsible. • Suggested time table.

  15. National Refereed Peer Review of Educational Products • Affirmation of feasibility and priority: Similar refereed review systems for research publications are of long standing in professional societies. A newsystem for educational products would be parallel in scope and acceptance. It is needed to enhance product quality, collaboration, use and economic efficiency. It would also contribute to establishing scholarship and scholarly activity of the authors. • State action needed to advance the subject. • Cultivate buy-in from ADEC leadership and participants. • Specific next steps required and who is responsible. • Suggested time table.

  16. National Refereed Peer Review of Educational Products • State action needed to advance the subject: Buy-in from ADEC. • Cultivate buy-in from ADEC leadership and participants: • Specific next steps required and who is responsible:Should collaborate with MERLOT, ASHS HortBase and others in developing and testing review guidelines and in soliciting professional societies’ management of the review system. • Suggested time table: Merlot began phase 1 of the framework for maturation of peer review in October 2000. There Intl Conf is 12-15 August 2001, Tampa. Abstracts are due 1 May. Establish task force.

  17. Framework for Maturing the Peer Review Process http://taste.merlot.org/mature.html Intl Conf 12-15 Aug 2001 October 2000

  18. “You see things, and you say, ‘Why?’ But I dream things that never were, and I say, Why not?” George Bernard Shaw

More Related