Transcript Streaming Online Course Review

[email protected]
[email protected]
Dakota State University
Quality Assurance

Standards to guide instructors in
designing and developing online courses.
Quality Assurance

Standards to guide peer reviewers to
evaluate online courses and suggest
improvement.
Standards





Course navigation.
Class communication.
Specification of learning objectives.
Alignment between learning objectives,
learning activities, and assessment
measures.
Appropriate use of media, resources
and technology tools.
Review Background (1)


Since 2006, South Dakota EUC (Electronic
University Consortium) adopted Quality
Matters standards.
In the system level, 3% of the online
courses are randomly selected each
semester for quality assurance reviews.
Review Background (2)


At the university level, all newly developed
or redesigned courses are reviewed after
they are taught for one semester.
All online courses are assigned a future
three-year review date based on the date
of initial or last review.
Review Roles
instructor
Coordinator
Peer
Reviewers
Instructional
Designer
Review Roles



Each online course is reviewed by two
faculty members, in communication with
the course instructor.
An instructor may need to serve as a
reviewer of courses taught by other
instructors.
Instructional designer coordinates the
process and writes a review report.
Review Procedures






Select courses.
Self review.
Alert the coordinator and reviewers when
self review is complete.
Peer review.
Reviewer feedback to the coordinator and
instructor.
Course instructor responds and makes
improvement.
Review Process
Issues




Rubric cumbersome to use.
Delay in sending feedback.
Difficulty for coordination, data analysis,
and reporting.
Time-consuming and inefficient.
Solution: A Web Portal
coordinator
A web portal
instructors
reviewers
Our Solution

Database support
 User login information and access logs.
 Review standards and related
annotations and examples.
 Review input, both self review and peer
review.
 Review status, in progress or completed.
Our Solution (continued)

Consistency: Same rubric for self review,
peer review, and coordinator reference.

Immediacy: Update instantly reflected for
all users.

Convenience: Annotations and examples
as links for each standard.

Coordinator can monitor the reviewer
process in real time.
Instructor’s Interface


Sees a list of courses to be self reviewed.
Can complete a self review in multiple
sessions.

View links of Start, Edit and View.

View links of reviewers’ feedback.
Instructor’s Review Process

Select Yes or No.

View the annotations and examples.

Review points can be automatically calculated.

Submits a self review, sending an e-mail
notification to coordinator and the assigned
reviewers.
Reviewers’ Interface

A list of courses to be reviewed.

Links to self reviews available.


Can complete a review in multiple
sessions.
View links of Start, Edit and View.
Reviewers’ Review Process

Select Yes or No.

View the annotations and examples.

Review points can be automatically
calculated.

Upon review submission, an e-mail
alert sent to both coordinator and
instructor.
Coordinator’s Interface



View a list of all courses, instructors,
reviewers, system reviewed courses
with progress marks indicating.
Can check self reviews and review
progress or completed.
can re-open a course to allow resubmitting of a self review or review.
Benefits (1)



Cleaner and scalable interface for the
rubric. Annotations and examples hidden
by default and available at a click.
Instructors and reviewers can save a
partially completed self review or review
and return later to continue.
Self review makes the instructor more self
conscious of course design and quality
assurance.
Benefits (2)



When a self review or review is completed,
relevant persons will be automatically
notified by e-mail.
Much easier for the coordinator to
monitor the review progress, and facilitate
communication between instructor and
peer reviewers.
Communication between instructor and
peer reviewers is beneficial to both sides
in their own teaching.
Benefits (3)


Much easier for the coordinator to collect
review data and get the review findings.
The findings help us how to define our
trainings in course design and
improvement.
Lesson Learned
Instructional designers offer help to
instructors before, during and after self
review.
 Self review should start early.
 Instructors provide notes in self reviews to
guide reviewers.
 Just-in-time improvement encouraged.
 Share best practices.

Upgrade Plan
Integration with additional instructional
design and faculty support resources.
 Integration with distance student services
and online tutoring.
