1 / 45

Quality Matters Overview

Topics Covered. Quality Matters, from a Multi-Institutional Project to a National Movement Quality Matters PrinciplesThe Quality Matters RubricCampus Impact of Implementing QMCampus Choices in Implementing QMQuality Matters as a Component of Quality AssuranceQ

jenski
Download Presentation

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 Ron Legon Executive Director The Quality Matters™ Program And Provost Emeritus, Univesity of Baltimore

    2. Topics Covered Quality Matters, from a Multi-Institutional Project to a National Movement Quality Matters Principles The Quality Matters Rubric Campus Impact of Implementing QM Campus Choices in Implementing QM Quality Matters as a Component of Quality Assurance Q & A

    3. Quality Matters Was Launched by MarylandOnline Statewide consortium dedicated to support of distance learning in Maryland Partners: 14 community colleges, 5 senior institutions Goals Provide statewide leadership in distance education Maintain a Web gateway for online higher education in Maryland Collaborate on Faculty training Facilitate online course and program sharing Goals 3 and 4 led to the creation of Quality Matters

    4. “Quality Matters: Inter-Institutional Quality Assurance in Online Learning” Grantor: FIPSE Grant period: 9/03 – 8/06 Award: $509,177 www.qualitymatters.org

    5. Original Scope of the Project Collaborate among 19 MarylandOnline schools to develop and test standards Engage limited involvement of non-MOL institutions Make presentations on QM progress at regional and national conferences Develop a sustainable quality assurance process in Maryland Create a replicable process for institutions and consortia beyond Maryland

    6. 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

    7. Quality Matters Present and Future Grant ended in August 2006 MOL decided to continue Quality Matters as a self-supporting activity in order to Maintain the integrity of the rubric & process Guarantee QM’s availability to MOL schools Continue momentum of nationwide adoption Participate in the further evolution and enhancement of online education standards Today, Quality Matters is not-for-profit subscription service with rapidly growing participation

    8. During the First 18 Months of Independent Operation More than 110 institutions have subscribed to Quality Matters More than 2,500 faculty and instructional design staff participated in Quality Matters workshops The QM Program received the Sloan Consortium’s 2007 Faculty Development Award

    10. Subscribers and Other Institutions* Using QM American Public University System, West Virginia Baker College California U. of Pennsylvania Capella University Chippewa Valley Technical Col. Dallas Telecollege Consortium Gateway Technical College, WI Kentucky QM Consortium – KVC, Louisville, Morehead State, Western Kentucky Louisiana Board of Regents and 20 campuses Maryland Online Consortium (15 community colleges & 4 universities) Metropolitan CC – Kansas City Minnesota Colleges and Universities Online (pending) Oachita Technical College, Arkansas Ohio Learning Network (pending) Oregon Distance Learning Consortium (14 campuses) Park University, Missouri Penn State University World Campus Pennsylvania Virtual Community College Consortium -- Bucks & Northampton Texas Tech University Texas Women’s University Tulsa CC, Oklahoma Sloan Consortium* (partnership) UNC -- Charlotte* University of Illinois Global Campus University of Maine System University of Pittsburgh (pending) University of Wisconsin – Whitewater & Stout Valencia CC -- Florida Wyoming Distance Learning Consortium (4 campuses)

    11. Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.

    12. Underlying Principles of QM The QM toolset and process are: a faculty-driven, peer review process, and a collaborative process among faculty peers committed to continuous quality improvement based in national standards of best practice, the research literature and instructional design principles, and designed to promote student learning Courses do not have to be “perfect” but QM aims at better than just “good enough.”

    14. A Collaborative Process Faculty course developer works with peer review team Rubric standards serve as the basis for dialog and sharing of experience, expertise and know-how Common goal is to improve online learning

    15. The Peer Reviewers Peer Reviewers receive full-day training to learn How to interpret the standards (with examples and annotations) How to evaluate a course (hands-on with sample course) Reviews are conducted by teams of three peer reviewers

    16. Alignment with Accrediting Best Practices

    17. 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

    18. What this process 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)

    19. Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.

    20. The Rubric is the Core of Quality Matters Consisting of: 8 key areas (general standards) of course quality 40 specific review standards Including 14 essential standards and detailed annotations and examples of good practice for all 40 standards

    21. Alignment 5 of the 8 general standards should align: Course Overview and Introduction Learning Objectives Assessment and Measurement Resources and Materials Learner Interaction Course Technology Learner Support ADA Compliance

    22. Some Essential Standards A statement introduces the student to the course and the structure of the student learning Navigational instructions make the organization of the course easy to understand. Learning activities foster interaction: instructor-student content-student student-student (if appropriate) Clear standards are set for instructor response and availability

    23. Essential Standards that Relate to Alignment Learning Objectives should describe measurable outcomes Module/unit learning objectives should describe outcomes that are measurable and consistent with course learning objectives Instructional materials should support the learning objectives and are of sufficient depth Course assessments should measure the achievement of the learning objectives

    24. Other Essential Standards Assessment strategies should provide feedback to the student Grading policy should be transparent and easy for the student to understand Implemented tools & media should support learning objectives and integrate with texts and lesson assignments The course acknowledges the importance of ADA compliance

    25. Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.

    26. Overall Course Review Results Upon initial review: 53% meet expectations 22% do not meet expectations - missing at least one essential 3-point element(s) 25% do not meet expectations - missing at least one essential 3 point element(s) and a minimum of 68 points

    27. Impact on Faculty Developer 89% of respondents (n=47) would recommend the QM review process to others 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. It provides a look into potential student problems areas for course completion. Many elements that might contribute to a student withdrawing can be eliminated.

    28. Impact of Review on Courses Survey of faculty whose course was reviewed indicates that … 91% of respondents (n=47) made changes in the course as a result of the review 89% of respondents (n=47) felt that the quality of course design improved as a result of the review

    29. Timing & Basis for Course Revisions Survey of faculty whose course was reviewed indicates that respondents (n=47) revised their course … during training because they recognized an immediate need (38%) prior to the review, using the QM rubric as a basis for the changes (38%) following the review to accommodate the reviewers’ comments and meet QM standards (54%) following the review to go beyond, even though their course met QM standards (31%)

    30. Common Themes Course reviews reveal common areas for course improvement: Elements that are missing in 20% or more of the courses reviewed These are potential targets for faculty training special attention in the initial course development phase:

    31. Common Areas for Improvement 2006-2007 (based on 95 reviews) Purpose explained for ea. course element (IV.3) 32% Navigational instructions (I.1) 32% Links to academic support, student services, tutorials/resources (VII.2-VII.4) 32-33% Technology/skills/pre-req.knowledge stated (I.6) 35% Clear standards for instructor availability (V.3) 37% Alternatives to auditory/visual content (VIII.2) 39% Instructions to students on meeting learning objectives (II.4) 40% Self-check/practice with quick feedback (III.5) 42% Learning objectives at module/unit level (II.2) 45%

    32. Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.

    33. Principal Value of QM The Quality Matters process provides a basis for campus dialog among faculty and instructional development staff on best practices in online instruction Commitment to Quality Matters helps to build a campus culture dedicated to the continuous improvement of online learning

    34. Course Review Options

    35. Training Options Peer Reviewer Training (PRT) Individual vs. Group Training Online or on-site Other Workshops Building online/hybrid courses based on QM standards (BYOC) May be run by QM trainers or internal staff Improving existing online/hybrid courses by applying the QM standards (IYOC) May be run by QM trainers or internal staff Also available online

    36. Institutional Policy Issues The institution needs to consider: Who will lead a QM project and where will it report? Will QM reviews be mandatory or optional? Will all courses be reviewed or only some? If a selection, how will these be chosen? How will internal reviewers be compensated? Will there be rewards or incentives for faculty course developers to submit their courses?

    37. Expanded Uses of the Quality Matters Rubric Examples of expanded use of the QM Rubric: Internal review processes (already noted) Broader online education quality assurance programs Guidelines for online course development Checklist for improvement of existing online courses Faculty development/training programs Institutional distance learning policies An element in regional and professional accreditation

    38. Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.

    39. Components of Online Quality Assurance Faculty evaluation Evaluation of research and publications Internal External Review of syllabi and teaching portfolios Classroom visitation

    40. Components of Online Quality Assurance Measurement of student learning outcomes Retention data Grade analysis Performance in sequential courses Graduation data

    41. Components of Online Quality Assurance Student satisfaction Student course evaluations Retention data Exit and pre-commencement interviews

    42. Components of Online Quality Assurance Other Components Evaluation of support services for online students Evaluation of technology and technical support Evaluation of availability and adequacy of training for students and faculty in the use of online tools

    43. Quality Matters’ Role in QA QM looks at course design The harnessing of technology to deliver instruction and promote student learning As the North Central Assn. Study Group said: “The accreditation process should not be about just ‘inputs’ and/or ‘outcomes’. We should also be focusing on teaching and learning activities or processes as a third area for assessment and improvement, and the appropriate uses of technology are one element within this area of assessment.” (Teaching & Learning Process & Technology, March 2002) Quality Matters is not the complete answer to quality assurance for online education, but it can be a critical component

    44. Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.Marker: The following slides highlight important elements in the Peer Course Review Process.

    45. Thank you! Ron Legon rlegon@qualitymatters.org Tel: (312) 208 - 7557

More Related