Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Jennifer Strickland, PhD,

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Jennifer Strickland, PhD,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Jennifer Strickland, PhD,
Quality Matters Jennifer Strickland, PhD,

2 Quality Matters Quality Matters Overview and Principles
The Quality Matters Rubric Quality Matters as a Component of Quality Assurance Feedback and Input

3 What is it anyway? Quality Matters (QM) is a faculty-centered, peer review process designed to certify the quality of online and hybrid courses and online components A faculty-driven, collaborative peer review process Committed to continuous quality improvement Based in national standards of best practice, the research literature and instructional design principles Designed to promote student learning and success More than 110 institutions 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

4 Course Meets Quality Expectations
Quality Matters Quality Matters Course Peer Review Process Faculty Course Developers Institutions National Standards & Research Literature Course Rubric Faculty Reviewers Training Peer Course Review Course Meets Quality Expectations Course Revision Feedback Instructional Designers DCCCD - April 20, 2006

5 QM Certified Peer Reviewers
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 Chair Peer reviewer (external) Peer reviewer (SME)

6 700+ faculty trained to review online courses using the rubric
individuals from 158 different institutions in 28 states More than 2,500 faculty and instructional design staff participated in Quality Matters workshops Quality Assurance

7 The Rubric is the Core of Quality Matters
40 specific elements across 8 broad areas (general standards) of course quality Detailed annotations and examples of good practice for all 40 standards org/FIPSE.htm

8 Key components must align
Course 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 Key components must align

9 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

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

11 Common Areas for Improvement (2006-2007, based on 95 reviews)
Area Identified % Purpose explained for ea. course element (IV.3) 32% Navigational instructions (I.1) 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%

12 Maricopa Quality Matters
Maricopa/MCLI is the statewide consortium lead Ten QM Maricopa Colleges Other online Course Evaluation Resources 67 faculty members, instructional designers and technologists are certified peer reviewers College-Based Steering Team

13 Alignment with Accrediting Best Practices
Best Practices Principles* Quality Matters Principles That education is best experienced within a community of learning where competent professionals are actively and cooperatively involved with creating, providing, and improving the instructional program; QM is a peer review process involving faculty, instructional designers and other support staff in a cooperative effort to continuously improve online instruction. That learning is dynamic and interactive, regardless of the setting in which it occurs; QM treats interactivity and active learning as a critical component of every online course. That instructional programs leading to degrees having integrity are organized around substantive and coherent curricula which define expected learning outcomes; QM treats the alignment of expected learning outcomes with the contents, activities and assessments as a critical element in every online course. That institutions accept the obligation to address student needs related to, and to provide the resources necessary for, their academic success; QM expects every online course to address student access to the academic, technical, and student support services essential to student success. That institutions are responsible for the education provided in their name; Adoption of QM standards reflects institutional commitment to online instructional quality, wherever an institution has endorsed the rubric standards. That institutions undertake the assessment and improvement of their quality, giving particular emphasis to student learning; The QM standards are based on research and best practices to enhance student learning in online environments. Adoption of the QM review process is a clear demonstration of institutional or programmatic commitment to assessment and continuous improvement. That institutions voluntarily subject themselves to peer review. QM is essentially a peer review process involving both internal and external peers in the evaluation of courses. *“Best Practices for Electronically Offered Degree and Certificate Programs” adopted in 2001 by CHEA and 8 regional accreditation bodies.

14 Impact on Faculty Support
Nationally, 89% of respondents 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.

15 QM is about course design
Not teaching; QM is about peer review Not evaluation QM is about improving Student Success online Through effective and consistent course design

Download ppt "Jennifer Strickland, PhD,"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google