Transcript Course Selected:

Quality Matters:
Peer Course
Review Process
Institutions
Faculty Course
Developers
Course
Course Meets
Quality Expectations
National Standards &
Research Literature
Rubric
Faculty Reviewers
Training
Peer Course
Review
Feedback
Course
Revision
Instructional Designers
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.
Quality Matters:
Peer Course
Review Process
Institutions
Faculty Course
Developers
Course
Course Meets
Quality Expectations
National Standards &
Research Literature
Rubric
Faculty Reviewers
Training
Peer Course
Review
Feedback
Course
Revision
Instructional Designers
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.
Quality Matters:
Peer Course
Review Process
Institutions
Faculty Course
Developers
Course
Course Meets
Quality Expectations
National Standards &
Research Literature
Rubric
Faculty Reviewers
Training
Peer Course
Review
Feedback
Course
Revision
Instructional Designers
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.
Quality Matters:
Peer Course
Review Process
Institutions
Faculty Course
Developers
Course
Course Meets
Quality Expectations
National Standards &
Research Literature
Rubric
Faculty Reviewers
Training
Peer Course
Review
Feedback
Course
Revision
Instructional Designers
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.
Quality Matters:
Peer Course
Review Process
Institutions
Faculty Course
Developers
Course
Course Meets
Quality Expectations
National Standards &
Research Literature
Rubric
Faculty Reviewers
Training
Peer Course
Review
Feedback
Course
Revision
Instructional Designers
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.
Quality Matters:
Peer Course
Review Process
Institutions
Faculty Course
Developers
Course
Course Meets
Quality Expectations
National Standards &
Research Literature
Rubric
Faculty Reviewers
Training
Peer Course
Review
Feedback
Course
Revision
Instructional Designers
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.
Quality Matters:
Peer Course
Review Process
Institutions
Faculty Course
Developers
Course
Course Meets
Quality Expectations
National Standards &
Research Literature
Rubric
Faculty Reviewers
Training
Peer Course
Review
Feedback
Course
Revision
Instructional Designers
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.
Quality Matters:
Peer Course
Review Process
Institutions
Faculty Course
Developers
Course
Course Meets
Quality Expectations
National Standards &
Research Literature
Rubric
Faculty Reviewers
Training
Peer Course
Review
Feedback
Course
Revision
Instructional Designers
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.
Quality Matters:
Peer Course
Review Process
Institutions
Faculty Course
Developers
Course
Course Meets
Quality Expectations
National Standards &
Research Literature
Rubric
Faculty Reviewers
Training
Peer Course
Review
Feedback
Course
Revision
Instructional Designers
Course Review Survey Completed (online)
Master Reviewer/Team Chair, Reviewers, and Faculty Developer
complete the online survey.
Quality Matters:
Peer Course
Review Process
Institutions
Faculty Course
Developers
Course
Course Meets
Quality Expectations
National Standards &
Research Literature
Rubric
Faculty Reviewers
Training
Peer Course
Review
Feedback
Course
Revision
Instructional Designers
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.