Home Forums TOPkit Workshop 2018 Quality Control and Assurance

This topic contains 2 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  Jennifer Smith 3 months, 3 weeks ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #2064

    Ashley Salter
    Participant
    Offline
    Topics: 21
    Replies: 0

    Description:Facilitator(s):
    Amanda Major, University of Central Florida

    Abstract:
    Checklists and rubrics provide a practical resource for any institution committed to maintaining online courses or programs. Whether using checklists to devise strategy, guide operations, or assess current quality, where to begin or how to proceed can be confusing. As the next step to reviewing quality of courses or assessing online programs, for instance, participants will: -Identify their institutions current implementation of checklists or rubrics as compared to other institutions. -Discuss methods for using checklists and rubrics. -Choose among any customizable combination of rubrics and checklists resources. -Sample using or relay progress with using a checklist or rubric. -Sketch some action items for implementation and prioritize based on the context of the unique higher education institution.

    Ashley Salter
    University of Central Florida

  • #2134

    Amanda Major
    Keymaster
    Offline
    Topics: 7
    Replies: 11

    Please feel free to view the presentation materials attached. We would love to hear your thoughts about moving quality online learning forward at your institution.

    Amanda

  • #2280

    Jennifer Smith
    Participant
    Offline
    Topics: 2
    Replies: 12

    Hi Everyone,
    I mentioned UF’s "pay it forward" model of quality assurance course review at the TopKit workshop. In case you are wondering how we are coming along with that process, here’s a summary:
    The idea is that a faculty completes the course review process which requires:

    • A self review done by the course instructor
    • An Ally Accessibility report
    • Course Map (created when the course was first developed and revised to include any changes) that describes alignment between course elements
    • Student evaluations from the most recent term
    • Then the course is reviewed and ultimately receives the Quality or High Quality designation
    • Then the course instructor must complete a streamlined online workshop on how to write a good review
    • Finally, the instructor completes reviews of two other courses (checked by Teaching Excellence staff and/or department chair)
    • Then the instructor receives the Quality/High Quality badge

    I have met with many of our associate deans, so far everyone is willing to support the initiative (I still have a few left).
    There are concerns in at least one college about how to compensate faculty for doing the reviews, but most colleges think it reasonably fits into “service.”
    We are currently looking at three "magical tools" to facilitate the course review process:

    It looks as though “out of the box” Proposal Space comes closest to meeting our needs. Pevals is willing to do custom programming. PeerCeptiv may be a bit more cumbersome than the other two, but we need to do more testing.
    Our current timeline:

    • Summer 2018:
      • Work with hand-picked courses/faculty to do some tests with the new UF + QM Standards rubric.
      • Develop the streamlined reviewer training.
      • Test review tools
    • Fall 2018:
    • Pilot a review tool with select courses/programs.
    • Pilot and revise training.
  • Spring 2019:
    • Roll out review process more widely.
  • Wish us luck!

    Jennifer Smith

    2 users thanked author for this post.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.