1. Pacific Research in Education University of Calgary Lara M Jongedijk Assessing the Quality of K-12 Online Content: A sample assessment rubric

2. Agenda: time planner Quick Introduction of the group Presentation of the project Background Project overview Assessment tool Reflections: results and applications Application and professional development: Break out discussion groups. Large group debrief Final comments/Questions 5 min 15 min 10 min 15 min

3. Introduction Quick Introduction of the group 30 sec overview each person: Your background in education. Level of interest (K-12, Higher Ed) Your background with assessment and DL content development/review

4. BC Provincial DL Content Review Project Overview Development of the Assessment Tool Project Results Summary: how it can be useful to you Next steps: Evolution of the Rubric Questions Agenda: Topics

5. Project Background Why the push for quality and assessment of DL programs in BC? –DL programs are growing in BC –Provincial DL Standards Document –Masses online content emerging –New DL teachers are no longer technology experts/pioneers. –Connected Learner’s Report results –Provincial drive in assessment and quality = Need for a tool to assess quality online content

6. Project Overview Provincial Content Review Process MOE DL Branch (BCEd Online) VSSProvincial SME Provincial Training seminars 3 rounds of Content review Recommended Content Lists published ERAC

7. Assessment tool Key Points Online content is not just a textbook online. Constructivist approach: focus on engagement and interactivity. DL ≠ DE The Rubric Based on BC Standards Document Criteria Current research outlining effective learning in an online environment.

8. Assessment tool The Rubric Detailed analysis of 4 key categories: 1.the technological requirements, 2.the instructional design and pedagogy, 3.learner assessment, 4.course layout (visual design). To be approved, all courses will be expected to meet or exceed the standards outlined in each of the four categories of the assessment rubric.

9. Project results Net gain: –Provincial SMEs trained –Information shared out all districts –Awareness what quality/standards “look like” –Guide new courses/content/learning objects being built. End result: –Very few pieces of content are being approved.

10. Next steps The Rubric Continued need better quality content Educate teachers: quality content. Work with vendors Differentiate rubric: LO/Content/Courses Quality + Quality = Quality content teaching program

11. Discussion Topics Break out groups: Choose 1 1.Assessment tool itself: Discuss 2.Quality and content: Discussing local situations 3.Assessment and content: Discussing local situations

12. Contacts Lara Jongedijk Project Coordinator/Trainer lmjonged@ucalgary.ca Dr Elizabeth Childs Lead Project Researcher echilds@telus.net Dr Barry Carbol Research Director bcarbol@telus.net

13. Summary Questions?