Quality Matters
66 views
Skip to first unread message
Shannon Riggs
Jun 28, 2011, 11:13:18 AM6/28/11
to eduMOOC
Just starting out on my first MOOC adventure ... I'm wondering if
there are others involved in eduMOOC who are interested in the Quality
Matters program.
http://www.qmprogram.org/new-website-welcome-page
This is one thread of the larger MOOC conversation I'll be interested
in following.
there are others involved in eduMOOC who are interested in the Quality
Matters program.
http://www.qmprogram.org/new-website-welcome-page
This is one thread of the larger MOOC conversation I'll be interested
in following.
Apostolos K.
Jun 28, 2011, 11:43:59 AM6/28/11
to eduMOOC
Having just completed a QM workshop a month or so ago I'd be
interested in seeing how MOOC design can be QM certified - given its
massive and open nature and the "tension" between the structured and
semi (or un-)structured preferences of MOOC participants
On Jun 28, 11:13 am, Shannon Riggs <shannon.ri...@oregonstate.edu>
wrote:
interested in seeing how MOOC design can be QM certified - given its
massive and open nature and the "tension" between the structured and
semi (or un-)structured preferences of MOOC participants
On Jun 28, 11:13 am, Shannon Riggs <shannon.ri...@oregonstate.edu>
wrote:
Ed.Queen
Jun 28, 2011, 12:03:32 PM6/28/11
to eduMOOC
Our institution relies heavily on the QM program. All of the
instructional design staff (myself included) have been certified as QM
reviewers. I think one of the ironic things about the QM rubric is
that it is established on sound instructional design research and
practices but (at least the when I took the reviewer workshop last
fall) instructional designers are not allowed to participate as
reviewers in the review process.
instructional design staff (myself included) have been certified as QM
reviewers. I think one of the ironic things about the QM rubric is
that it is established on sound instructional design research and
practices but (at least the when I took the reviewer workshop last
fall) instructional designers are not allowed to participate as
reviewers in the review process.
Barb Perlewitz
Jun 28, 2011, 12:15:19 PM6/28/11
to eduMOOC
This may have changed. I just finished the applying the rubric and
peer review certification last month and our instructional designer is
able to get the peer review certification.
To answer Shannon's post, this open course is not going to meet the QM
standards, but that leads one to question whether all of the essential
standards need to be met to be a well designed online course where
learning takes place.
The training through QM was very eye opening and well worth the time
spent. I learned a lot and it has definitely helped to improve how I
design a course following a prescribed set of standards, but it would
not be the vehicle to evaluate an open course like this.
peer review certification last month and our instructional designer is
able to get the peer review certification.
To answer Shannon's post, this open course is not going to meet the QM
standards, but that leads one to question whether all of the essential
standards need to be met to be a well designed online course where
learning takes place.
The training through QM was very eye opening and well worth the time
spent. I learned a lot and it has definitely helped to improve how I
design a course following a prescribed set of standards, but it would
not be the vehicle to evaluate an open course like this.
Apostolos K.
Jun 28, 2011, 1:04:55 PM6/28/11
to eduMOOC
That is a bummer indeed.
I am an instructional designer and want to be a QM certified reviewer
but I can't because I don't teach.
Oh well...
I am an instructional designer and want to be a QM certified reviewer
but I can't because I don't teach.
Oh well...
Steven Crawford
Jun 28, 2011, 2:19:36 PM6/28/11
to eduMOOC
I would love to have a QM conversation here. I was just looking for
the right time to start one :-)
I have been involved with QM for three years now and I also serve as
ASU's Institutional Representative and as a Licensed QM Trainer. At
ASU we have spent a lot of time putting together the things that
faculty need to be able to have their course meet expectations. Since
the question about this course meeting expectations has come up, here
is what I see as areas for improvements:
Course Overview & Introduction: I think it is safe to say that when
you jump into this course, it can be a bit daunting. This area of the
course could be better organized, but there are some great resources
on the front page. Moving a lot of the introductory material into a
"Welcome & Start Here" area would be a good starting point.
Accessibility: I have not seen a statement on how one would receive
accommodations if they were requested (or even how to request them).
Since this is an open and public course who would be responsible for
this? (the facilitators?) But what could be done in the meantime is
provide a statement and on how accessible the tools being used are
(Does Google have an accessibility statement?) and providing closed
captioning for produced YouTube videos.
Learning Objectives: I am sure that they exist somewhere, but have
they been shared with the participants. And of course are they
measurable and specific enough? Then the question would be are the
resource and materials in alignment with them? Since there are not any
assessments (unless I missed something) I am not sure how this would
be looked at by a peer review team.
Just a couple of thoughts, if the faculty course developers wanted to
pursue this, they could and the goal is for all courses to meet
expectations. QM is NOT a pass/fail evaluation, but a continuous
quality improvement process.
-- Steven
On Jun 28, 8:13 am, Shannon Riggs <shannon.ri...@oregonstate.edu>
wrote:
the right time to start one :-)
I have been involved with QM for three years now and I also serve as
ASU's Institutional Representative and as a Licensed QM Trainer. At
ASU we have spent a lot of time putting together the things that
faculty need to be able to have their course meet expectations. Since
the question about this course meeting expectations has come up, here
is what I see as areas for improvements:
Course Overview & Introduction: I think it is safe to say that when
you jump into this course, it can be a bit daunting. This area of the
course could be better organized, but there are some great resources
on the front page. Moving a lot of the introductory material into a
"Welcome & Start Here" area would be a good starting point.
Accessibility: I have not seen a statement on how one would receive
accommodations if they were requested (or even how to request them).
Since this is an open and public course who would be responsible for
this? (the facilitators?) But what could be done in the meantime is
provide a statement and on how accessible the tools being used are
(Does Google have an accessibility statement?) and providing closed
captioning for produced YouTube videos.
Learning Objectives: I am sure that they exist somewhere, but have
they been shared with the participants. And of course are they
measurable and specific enough? Then the question would be are the
resource and materials in alignment with them? Since there are not any
assessments (unless I missed something) I am not sure how this would
be looked at by a peer review team.
Just a couple of thoughts, if the faculty course developers wanted to
pursue this, they could and the goal is for all courses to meet
expectations. QM is NOT a pass/fail evaluation, but a continuous
quality improvement process.
-- Steven
On Jun 28, 8:13 am, Shannon Riggs <shannon.ri...@oregonstate.edu>
wrote:
Steven Crawford
Jun 28, 2011, 2:23:14 PM6/28/11
to eduMOOC
You have a very important role!
Originally I was in the same boat as you Apostolos. I took the Peer
Review Certification course anyway. I gained a better perspective on
what needs to be done during the course development cycle and then I
took part in informal reviews.
There are two types of reviews possible. We all know about the formal
peer review from QM; however, many institutions have an informal
process would allow non-teaching IDs to participate in the review
process.
--Steven
Originally I was in the same boat as you Apostolos. I took the Peer
Review Certification course anyway. I gained a better perspective on
what needs to be done during the course development cycle and then I
took part in informal reviews.
There are two types of reviews possible. We all know about the formal
peer review from QM; however, many institutions have an informal
process would allow non-teaching IDs to participate in the review
process.
--Steven
Paul
Jun 28, 2011, 5:40:35 PM6/28/11
to eduMOOC
Steven, just to add to your informative post - there is a discussion
about Learning Objectives for MOOC here:
http://groups.google.com/group/edumooc/browse_thread/thread/4598a7826903fd82
about Learning Objectives for MOOC here:
http://groups.google.com/group/edumooc/browse_thread/thread/4598a7826903fd82
JJ Johnson
Jun 28, 2011, 7:07:23 PM6/28/11
to eduMOOC
Apostolos,
If there is any way you can help teach a course, it may count towards
prerequisites for QM. It never hurts to ask!
--jj--
If there is any way you can help teach a course, it may count towards
prerequisites for QM. It never hurts to ask!
--jj--
JJ Johnson
Jun 28, 2011, 7:15:42 PM6/28/11
to eduMOOC
Hi Shannon,
Great start to the discussion. Like Steven, I am an Institutional
Representative for our program, and have recently become a QM Master
Reviewer. I participate as parrt of the QM team for our District and
lead a Quality Assurance team for my program.
I'm interested in the overall discussion of course quality. I believe
our MOOC would have difficulty meeting several of the QM essential
standards. But, what is the overall goal of the MOOC and our
learning?
We need to remember that QM is but one of the (in my view) supporting
legs of the milks stool of overall quality in online courses. There
has to be more than a design philosophy behind a successful course.
I'll start to expand this discussion by adding that instructor
competence and ability is important, as is student learning.
Anyone else?
--jj--
Vanessa Vaile
Jun 29, 2011, 1:24:37 AM6/29/11
to edu...@googlegroups.com
Good points all - useful observations to keep in mind since whatever is missing, we will need to cobble up for ourselves. "Packing for a MOOC" and "survivors tips" would be nice additions to Dave Cormier's videos. How to MOOC is a new area, still under development - in Beta.
john stampe
Jun 29, 2011, 2:13:32 AM6/29/11
to eduMOOC
I was unfamiliar with the QM program before this thread. So I went to
the website and browsed around. I see that the rubric used is not
openly available. I would consider this to not be appropriate for
courses designed around OER.
John
the website and browsed around. I see that the rubric used is not
openly available. I would consider this to not be appropriate for
courses designed around OER.
John
Apostolos K.
Jun 29, 2011, 9:52:08 AM6/29/11
to eduMOOC
Hi John
Here is a link to the rubric (it's open, but I too had a hard time
finding it initially): http://www.qmprogram.org/rubric
Here is a link to the rubric (it's open, but I too had a hard time
finding it initially): http://www.qmprogram.org/rubric
Apostolos K.
Jun 29, 2011, 9:56:50 AM6/29/11
to eduMOOC
Thanks for the tip!
I have been given guest lecturer spots in the past year in certain
modules, perhaps I can expand that role to help out throughout the
semester :-)
With a little luck, I may be teaching a course next year which I will
be designing. Having the QM rubric on hand (and having finished a
Sloan-C workshop on QM), I'll design my curse to be QM compliant :-)
I have been given guest lecturer spots in the past year in certain
modules, perhaps I can expand that role to help out throughout the
semester :-)
With a little luck, I may be teaching a course next year which I will
be designing. Having the QM rubric on hand (and having finished a
Sloan-C workshop on QM), I'll design my curse to be QM compliant :-)
Apostolos K.
Jun 29, 2011, 9:56:58 AM6/29/11
to eduMOOC
A general "success tips for a MOOC participant" would be a good idea
and something that would satisfy, I think, the "course overview and
introduction" part of the QM rubric.
In a previous MOOC (it may have been mobiMOOC) I think there was a
discussion on how to be successful in a MOOC - that was helpful for
new MOOC participants. This type of discussion (and perhaps intro
videos and documents) should make a staple for future MOOCs.
and something that would satisfy, I think, the "course overview and
introduction" part of the QM rubric.
In a previous MOOC (it may have been mobiMOOC) I think there was a
discussion on how to be successful in a MOOC - that was helpful for
new MOOC participants. This type of discussion (and perhaps intro
videos and documents) should make a staple for future MOOCs.
Shannon Riggs
Jun 29, 2011, 10:45:05 AM6/29/11
to eduMOOC
Thanks for the interesting discussion so far, all! I hadn't thought of
applying the QM rubric to the MOOC -- what an interesting idea.
I was wondering if others are involved in using the QM program at
their institutions, and if so, in which ways. I am a certified master
reviewer and am hoping to complete the "train the trainer"
certification this year. It's always helpful to hear how other
institutions are using QM.
I'm really intrigued by the idea of applying the rubric in a MOOC. I
will have to think on this some more!
Shannon
applying the QM rubric to the MOOC -- what an interesting idea.
I was wondering if others are involved in using the QM program at
their institutions, and if so, in which ways. I am a certified master
reviewer and am hoping to complete the "train the trainer"
certification this year. It's always helpful to hear how other
institutions are using QM.
I'm really intrigued by the idea of applying the rubric in a MOOC. I
will have to think on this some more!
Shannon
ksw...@uis.edu
Jun 29, 2011, 5:10:28 PM6/29/11
to eduMOOC
My fully online teacher leadership program is using QM reviews as the
starting point for a design-based approach to improving both the
design and implementation of our core courses. For a preliminary
paper on our efforts see:
http://ui-springfield.academia.edu/KarenSwan/Papers/539166/Linking_online_course_design_and_implementation_to_Learning_outcomes_A_design_experiment
On Jun 29, 9:45 am, Shannon Riggs <shannon.ri...@oregonstate.edu>
wrote:
starting point for a design-based approach to improving both the
design and implementation of our core courses. For a preliminary
paper on our efforts see:
http://ui-springfield.academia.edu/KarenSwan/Papers/539166/Linking_online_course_design_and_implementation_to_Learning_outcomes_A_design_experiment
On Jun 29, 9:45 am, Shannon Riggs <shannon.ri...@oregonstate.edu>
wrote:
Shannon Riggs
Jun 29, 2011, 7:07:59 PM6/29/11
to eduMOOC
Thanks for sharing this report! Interesting to see how you are
expanding the design-focus of QM to address implementation. My
understanding of QM is that it specifically does not address course
content or facilitation; however, once you start making design
choices, of course there are significant ripple effects in the content
and facilitation.
I notice your report mentions writing style.I found that very
interesting. I would love to see the QM rubric come to include basic
standards for technical writing, standards that would yield measurable
results, but which would not be prescriptive in terms of content or
facilitation. I think this would fit within QM's current approach,
which I think is otherwise quite thorough and effective.
Thanks for sharing your work,
Shannon
expanding the design-focus of QM to address implementation. My
understanding of QM is that it specifically does not address course
content or facilitation; however, once you start making design
choices, of course there are significant ripple effects in the content
and facilitation.
I notice your report mentions writing style.I found that very
interesting. I would love to see the QM rubric come to include basic
standards for technical writing, standards that would yield measurable
results, but which would not be prescriptive in terms of content or
facilitation. I think this would fit within QM's current approach,
which I think is otherwise quite thorough and effective.
Thanks for sharing your work,
Shannon
Kathy Tally
Jun 30, 2011, 9:42:57 AM6/30/11
to eduMOOC
Ah, Quality Matters! I am at the University of Kansas Medical Center
and we adopted the 40 standard QM rubric in January of 2010. I have
Trainer and Master Reviewer certifications and have delivered annual
workshops to our faculty for the last 2 years. It is an amazing tool
to guide course design and to help faculty align their courses to meet
best practice standards in teaching and learning and instructional
design.
We now have our entire UG Nursing program in redesign following the
standards and faculty have openly collaborated to agree on some
uniformities to help students navigate all courses, online, hybrid and
f2f with a web component. Unit level objectives a now listed for every
week or unit and clearly identified with each learning activity. I
could go on and on.
Kathy
On Jun 28, 10:13 am, Shannon Riggs <shannon.ri...@oregonstate.edu>
wrote:
and we adopted the 40 standard QM rubric in January of 2010. I have
Trainer and Master Reviewer certifications and have delivered annual
workshops to our faculty for the last 2 years. It is an amazing tool
to guide course design and to help faculty align their courses to meet
best practice standards in teaching and learning and instructional
design.
We now have our entire UG Nursing program in redesign following the
standards and faculty have openly collaborated to agree on some
uniformities to help students navigate all courses, online, hybrid and
f2f with a web component. Unit level objectives a now listed for every
week or unit and clearly identified with each learning activity. I
could go on and on.
Kathy
On Jun 28, 10:13 am, Shannon Riggs <shannon.ri...@oregonstate.edu>
wrote:
Kathy Tally
Jun 30, 2011, 9:54:22 AM6/30/11
to eduMOOC
Barb makes a good point and I would agree that this course would not
meet QM standards even though learning will take place, but not
because it is an open course. I believe it could meet QM standards.
After informally and formally reviewing several dozen courses, I would
say that poor design not only interfers with learning, but lack of
alignment results in learning that does not meet course goals,
standards or outcomes.
Thanks Barb!
Kathy
> > > in following.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
meet QM standards even though learning will take place, but not
because it is an open course. I believe it could meet QM standards.
After informally and formally reviewing several dozen courses, I would
say that poor design not only interfers with learning, but lack of
alignment results in learning that does not meet course goals,
standards or outcomes.
Thanks Barb!
Kathy
>
> - Show quoted text -
Kathy Tally
Jun 30, 2011, 9:55:44 AM6/30/11
to eduMOOC
I believe you could complete the training, which would be very
beneficial but you may not be able to serve on a QM peer review team.
I would definitely inquire. It is worth the time and effort.
Kathy
beneficial but you may not be able to serve on a QM peer review team.
I would definitely inquire. It is worth the time and effort.
Kathy
Kathy Tally
Jun 30, 2011, 10:04:37 AM6/30/11
to eduMOOC
I believe that link will provide you with the 17 essential standards
only. The 40 standards and annotations are provided with an
subscription to QM. I hope this is helpful.
Kathy
> > On Jun 29, 6:15 am, JJ Johnson <jj.johnso...@gmail.com> wrote:- Hide quoted text -
only. The 40 standards and annotations are provided with an
subscription to QM. I hope this is helpful.
Kathy
Shannon Riggs
Jun 30, 2011, 12:01:56 PM6/30/11
to eduMOOC
Kathy,
How have you managed to "sell" the unit level objectives? In my
experience, that's the hardest part of the rubric to convince course
developers to adopt.
I created an alignment worksheet that helps track alignment between
course outcomes, unit objectives, assignments and assessments to help
in developing and reviewing courses -- If you're interested in this
tool, you can check it out here:
https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1lKESvYiaF4WAsgBOsTeAvOuSu0cITPry-QSnmXapox0
Shannon
How have you managed to "sell" the unit level objectives? In my
experience, that's the hardest part of the rubric to convince course
developers to adopt.
I created an alignment worksheet that helps track alignment between
course outcomes, unit objectives, assignments and assessments to help
in developing and reviewing courses -- If you're interested in this
tool, you can check it out here:
https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1lKESvYiaF4WAsgBOsTeAvOuSu0cITPry-QSnmXapox0
Shannon
Lisa Kidder
Jun 30, 2011, 3:15:51 PM6/30/11
to eduMOOC
I'm scheduled for the first training next month. ISU has been
exploring the QM program and finally subscribed. I'm looking forward
to helping implement QM at ISU. Having listened to others - the buy
in happens slowly.
Any suggestions for a University just starting out? Things you wished
you had done?
Thanks for the resources!
Lisa
exploring the QM program and finally subscribed. I'm looking forward
to helping implement QM at ISU. Having listened to others - the buy
in happens slowly.
Any suggestions for a University just starting out? Things you wished
you had done?
Thanks for the resources!
Lisa
Barb Perlewitz
Jul 1, 2011, 8:38:33 AM7/1/11
to eduMOOC
I would agree with Kathy. Concordia University Nebraska is new to QM
and we began the process by having all of our program directors and
department chairs take the applying the rubric and peer review
training. Not everyone was enthusiastic about it, but in the end there
were some very valuable lessons that were learned that applied not
only to online course design, but were also applicable to ftf
instruction.
The QM rubric is a great resource whether courses apply for QM
certification or not. One should keep in mind QM has nothing to do
with content delivery, just course design.
Once one has completed the training, institutions have several options
for course review. One of those options is to have trained in-house
staff review courses but not receive the QM certification (which is
something you pay for). Certainly, this would be beneficial in
assisting departments to align their curriculum and provide a
framework of course design for both new and experienced instructors.
QM is a process that will take years for institutions to fully
achieve, perhaps one department or course at a time. It is a process
though that puts everyone on the same page; expectations are laid out
and the rationale for the essential elements is clear and backed by
research. It is not a papermill factory where each QM course will look
the same.
I have found that QM training has also helped me grow professionally
as I look at how other individuals and institutions design courses,
providing a plethora of ideas and different ways of doing things, that
alone I would have never thought of.
I would strongly suggest taking the peer review training, if nothing
else for your own benefit and the benefit of your institution.
and we began the process by having all of our program directors and
department chairs take the applying the rubric and peer review
training. Not everyone was enthusiastic about it, but in the end there
were some very valuable lessons that were learned that applied not
only to online course design, but were also applicable to ftf
instruction.
The QM rubric is a great resource whether courses apply for QM
certification or not. One should keep in mind QM has nothing to do
with content delivery, just course design.
Once one has completed the training, institutions have several options
for course review. One of those options is to have trained in-house
staff review courses but not receive the QM certification (which is
something you pay for). Certainly, this would be beneficial in
assisting departments to align their curriculum and provide a
framework of course design for both new and experienced instructors.
QM is a process that will take years for institutions to fully
achieve, perhaps one department or course at a time. It is a process
though that puts everyone on the same page; expectations are laid out
and the rationale for the essential elements is clear and backed by
research. It is not a papermill factory where each QM course will look
the same.
I have found that QM training has also helped me grow professionally
as I look at how other individuals and institutions design courses,
providing a plethora of ideas and different ways of doing things, that
alone I would have never thought of.
I would strongly suggest taking the peer review training, if nothing
else for your own benefit and the benefit of your institution.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages