1. Course Selected Institutions decide to examine an online or hybrid course as part of a peer review. Since institutions make a significant investment in time, resources, and funds during a course review, QM suggest s reviewing mature courses to maximize this investment. The QM Rubric can also be effectively used to review or guide a course under development. Triggers for subsequent reviews include: a) Faculty request; b) More than 3 years since original review; c) New textbook or instructor; d) Professional or accreditation review pending.

2. Instructor Worksheet Completed (online) The Instructor Worksheet is the voice of the course instructor and introduces the peer review team to his/her course philosophy, organization, technologies, and concerns.

3. Master Reviewer/Team Chair Selects Review Team QM or the managing institution appoints a Master Reviewer (MR) who serves at the team chair. The MR then selects the review team from a data base of trained, experienced online faculty. The team chair is responsible for organizing all communication between members of the review team, including the course developer, and for keeping the review team on track.

4. Pre-Review Discussion The pre-review conference call between all members of the review team and course developer is the best way to set expectations, coordinate, and communicate. The team agrees on the schedule for the review and learns how to access the course to be reviewed.

5. Individual Reviewers Complete Reviews (online) Individual reviewers use the web-based rubric/review tool to make decisions whether this course meets standards at the 85+% level. All 17 essential standards must be met, and a score of at least 72 out of 85 possible points must be attained. Scoring is by majority rule … 2 or more reviewers must independently agree that a standard has been met.

6. Post-review Team Discussion The post-review conference between the review team members is necessary if a course does not meet expectations. These discussions are conducted electronically.

7. Final Review Report Submitted Once each peer reviewer completes his/her review and the team has met for a discussion, the report is submitted to QM, the course developer, or to the institution. The report is a rich compilation of comments and suggestions from the peer review team.

8. Course Revised (if 85% standard not met) The faculty member works independently or with an instructional designer to make the recommended changes. The Master Reviewer/Team Chair, faculty instructor, and the instructional designer (if one was used) review the changes and determine if the course now meets the standards.

9. Course Review Survey Completed (online) Master Reviewer/Team Chair, Reviewers, and Faculty Developer complete the online survey.

10. Course Meets Expectations and is Recognized by QM Courses that meet the quality standards are awarded QM recognition, including the use of the QM logo, citation on the QM web site, and tracking in the QM databases.