Online Peer Review of e-Learning Programmes
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Online Peer Review of e-Learning Programmes

on

  • 793 views

The presentation considers (a) general principles of peer-review, (b) remote peer-review of e-learning programmes. ...

The presentation considers (a) general principles of peer-review, (b) remote peer-review of e-learning programmes.
The presentation was created for an ITC/ILO training on the ecbcheck (http://ecbcheck.efquel.org) quality label, at its campus in Torino, 28.09.2012

Statistics

Views

Total Views
793
Views on SlideShare
677
Embed Views
116

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0

1 Embed 116

http://openecbcheck.wikispaces.com 116

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-ShareAlike License

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

Online Peer Review of e-Learning Programmes Online Peer Review of e-Learning Programmes Presentation Transcript

  • Online Peer-Review ... of e-learning programmes ECB-Check Training Anthony F. Camilleri ITC/ILO Turin – 28.09.2012www.efquel.org
  • What‘s in a Name? Audit Expert-Review Objective Subjective Precise standards Broad guidelines Verifies account of client Interprets account of client Requires detailed knowledge of Requires detailed knowledge of the administrative procedures subject area concerned standards-based reviewwww.efquel.org
  • Who is a peer?• an expert in the field• an expert in what field?• e-learning!• what is e-learning?www.efquel.org
  • Features of an Expert-Peer familiar with best-practice experience incourse design and delivery natural communicator sense of mission comparative perspectivewww.efquel.org
  • Inter-subjectivity • different subjective perceptions, taken from different viewpoints, give an objective view of reality • the quality basis of an external review • requires consensus consensus is not a diplomatic nicety but an essential pre-requisite of qualitywww.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the institutionCommunication starts with self-assessment! • This is not a one-way exercise! – Has the institution given enough information to allow a successful review? – What don‘t you understand, and who can answer your questions? • Be active in schedule-designwww.efquel.org
  • Conducting a Review Familiarise yourself with the standards1. Understand which standard covers which area (sometimes they can overlap).2. Understand their relation to each other.3. Make sure you have a vision of successful and non- successful completion of each standard – based on comparative experiencewww.efquel.org
  • Inspect the Course „Most Quality Managers are Magicians―Look Herewww.efquel.org don‘t look here!
  • Inspect the Course• Log onto the LMS• Look through every part of the course: – Lessons – Help-pages – Tests – Forums / support pages – Interactive material – What else?www.efquel.org
  • Fill in your Forms• Your forms are a letter to the agency COMMUNICATE!www.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the agency „I dont know anything about art, but I know what I like― Gelett Burgesswww.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the agency „I dont know anything about the standards, but I know quality when I see it― Unnamed reviewerwww.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the agencyStandards of Proof• Some credible evidence• Preponderance of evidence• Clear and convincing evidence• Beyond reasonable doubtwww.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the agencyIn your Report• Be yourselfBad: The institution showed....Good: The review team saw / found /observed....www.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the agencyIn your Report• Be specificGood: The institution showed....Better: The review team found multiple andconsistent examples ofwww.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the agencyIn your Report• Say what you knowBad: The institution lied....Good: The review team foundinconsistencies between evidence (x) andinterview (y)www.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the agencyIn your Report• Give your opinion (where relevant)Bad: The institution is... / or NOTHINGGood: We suspect, It seems likely that,Given the evidence available, etc...www.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the agencyIn your Report• Give your reasoningBad: There is no quality.Good: When we consider (X), (Y) and (Z),we find it impossible to say there is qualitywww.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the agencyIn your Report• Be CLEARBad: The structure of the LMS is in need ofimprovement.Good: The LMS barely functions – it is litteredwith wrong links, the help-function is unusableand most sections still need to be populatedwww.efquel.org
  • Communicating with the agencyIn your Report• Link Effect with CauseBad: Quality systems are in place, but thereis no evidence of iterative improvement.Good: Quality systems are not effective, dueto lack of iterative improvement procedures.www.efquel.org
  • One last thing Remember that Quality Labels should act as Quality-Enhancers not only transparency toolsoffer a path towards quality improvementwww.efquel.org
  • Hvala! Thank-you for your attention Questions? Anthony F. Camilleri (anthony@kic-malta.com) Presentation available from: http://www.slideshare.net/anthonycamilleri/Released under a Creative Commons Under the following conditions:Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 Slovenia License Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (butYou are free: not in any way that suggests that they endorse• to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit you or your use of the work). the work Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build• to Remix — to adapt the work upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one. www.efquel.org