North Park Quality Matters Presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

North Park Quality Matters Presentation

on

  • 551 views

Presentation to SLATE Conference, Chicago, October 22, 2010

Presentation to SLATE Conference, Chicago, October 22, 2010

Statistics

Views

Total Views
551
Views on SlideShare
547
Embed Views
4

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0

1 Embed 4

http://www.slideshare.net 4

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Due to budget constraints and the continuing development of our stated policy, we have not been able to implement the last two items.
  • (open the fac dev course to show the modules. Especially mod 1 & 2.)

North Park Quality Matters Presentation North Park Quality Matters Presentation Presentation Transcript

  • Implementing QM at North Park University Online
  • What is Quality Matters? http://www.qmprogram.org/
    A quality assurance process to increase student retention, learning and satisfaction in online and hybrid courses by implementing better course design
    Faculty-centered
    Research-based
    Adopted by hundreds of higher education institutions across forty-two states, Canada, Australia and Bermuda
  • Why Subscribe to QM?
    • Required growth in online and hybrid programs
    • Fiscally responsible
    • Solid quality assurance in online and hybrid courses – research-based and widely accepted
  • Why Subscribe to QM? (con’t)
    • Accreditation’s increasing focus on assessment of student learning
    • More of a faculty review process than a process imposed by a university department
    • Networking opportunities
  • Need to Ensure Quality
    Trained 2 Office of Distributed Learning (ODL) staff to function as
    Course reviewers
    Development course facilitators
    Online and hybrid mentors
  • Need to Ensure Quality (con’t)
    Trained 2 faculty members to function as
    Review chairs
    Development course facilitators
    Online and hybrid mentors
  • North Park’s Online Development Course
    Consists of 3 Modules
    Based on ADDIE course design model (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation)
    Online format; faculty members as students
    Constant communication with faculty
    Incorporates material from QM rubric throughout
  • 3 Modules
  • QM Rubrics with tie-in to course
  • Module 3: Building course content in CMS
    Internal reviews of new online and hybrid courses
    As the last step in Module 3
    Review starts 6 weeks before start of term
    Completed by a team of 3 QM-trained reviewers
    2 ODL staff – team members
    1 faculty member – team chair
  • Module 3 (con’t)
    Internal reviews of repeat online and hybrid courses
    Faculty with 3-year-old courses will participate
    As a last step in Module 3
    Review starts 6 weeks before start of term
    Completed by a team of 3 QM-trained reviewers
    2 ODL staff – team members
    1 faculty member – team chair
  • Findings: Positives
    Encourages faculty buy-in
    Rubric is based on research
    Process is ongoing
    Criteria is standardized for reviews
    Guides development of new courses
    Outlines expectations before review
    Provides design ideas
    Supports consistency in quality
  • Findings: Positives (con’t)
    Faculty member as team review chair aids in communication
    Encourages peer-to-peer discussions
    Can provide tried-and-true ideas
  • Findings: Positives (con’t)
    Online QM rubric tool saves time
    Instructor worksheets in one accessible area
    Rubric includes annotations and space for additional notes
    All final rubrics merged at the end
    Course amendment form
    History of reviews saved online
  • Findings: Positives (con’t)
    After going through development process and internal review, courses are high quality
    Per internal peer reviewers
    Per comparison to QM managed reviews
  • Findings: Challenges
    Online QM rubric tool not always utilized by faculty
    Separate site location
    Separate login than all other university tools
    Faculty often fall back on email
  • Findings: Challenges (con’t)
    Not all courses meet standards 1st time
    Professors feel frustrated
    Repeat course creators don’t understand why past courses were fine (before QM)
    Professors don’t see that this is an ongoing process (not a pass/fail situation)
  • Findings: Challenges (con’t)
    Why courses don’t meet standards
    Repeat professors don’t always follow all steps that match to rubric
    Content in “final” course can be different than originally reviewed content submitted in the development process
    Facilitator of faculty development course and reviewers have differing opinions
  • Future Plans
    Reorganization of the development course based on
    Needs assessment
    QM team brainstorming
    Updated research on other school’s programs
    • Review of team communication
    • Wording in development course
    • Email wording
  • Future Plans
    Adding new forms of recognition
    Faculty/Staff announcements
    Special logo in course in CMS
    Others?
  • Jenny Henrikson
    jhenrikson@northpark.edu
    Sonja Strahl
    sstrahl@northpark.edu
    Email for temporary access to our Faculty Development course or with any questions
    Presentation on www.slideshare.net