Informational Webinar: Quality Online Learning and Teaching                (QOLT)Brett Christie, Ph.D., CSU Academic Techn...
BEST USE OF THE WEBINAR•    If you haven’t done so already, enter your     name, campus, and role in the chat box.•    QOL...
AGENDA•    Introductions & Acknowledgments (5 minutes)      •    Brett Christie, CSU Faculty Development Liaison, QOLT Pro...
QOLT PURPOSE•    Create a useful evaluation tool that can help faculty     (re)develop quality hybrid/online courses.•    ...
MODELS EXAMINED•  Rubric for Online Instruction: Designed to assist development and  evaluation of online courses while pr...
X
XX
RESULTING QOLT EVALUATION INSTRUMENT1.    Course Overview and Introduction (8)2.    Assessment and Evaluation of Student L...
•  Participants should not enter into lightly•  Participation time estimated at 1+ hour•  Course evaluation, not simple su...
QOLT SCORING PER OBJECTIVEThere is also an open-ended box per section for descriptive.
Section 1. Course Overview and Introduction Instructor gives a thorough description of the course, as well as introducing ...
1.B. ‘COURSE DESCRIPTION’ BASELINE§ There should be specific meaning to the course,section, instructor, and students, not...
1.B. ‘COURSE DESCRIPTION’ EXEMPLARY
1.3 ‘INSTRUCTOR INFORMATION’ EXEMPLARY
1.D. ‘ONLINE ETIQUETTE’ SAMPLE§ Do not dominate any discussion.§ Do not use offensive language.§ Never make fun of some...
1.F. ‘TECHNICAL COMPETENCIES’ SAMPLE§ Connect to the Web using a web browser.§ Navigate around the Web and use search en...
=20
SECTION 1, RUBRIC:“COURSE OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION”
SECTION 2:  ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING Student Evaluation and Assessment refers to the     process used to gather evid...
Objectives                                                          Example2.a All Student Learning Objectives/Outcomes (S...
Objectives                                                       Example2.a All Student Learning Objectives/Outcomes (SLOs...
Graphically Representing SLOs (hidden)
Graphically Representing SLOs          (expanded)
Sample Online Assignment Rubrics•    Online Discussions•    Student/Group Wikis•    Student Blogs•    Twitter•    PowerPoi...
Section 3.     Instructional Materials and         Resources UtilizedThe instructor has carefully selected a varietyof mat...
Objectives                                       Example3.a Instructor provides students with adequate   Instructor includ...
Section 4.  Student Interaction and Community            (Course Design)Addresses how the instructors provide opportunitie...
Section 5. Facilitation and Instruction           (Course Delivery)Instructor facilitates the course and communicates     ...
Section 6.Technology for Teaching and Learning Instructor utilizes technology to effectively deliver    course content, en...
Section 7.Learner Support and ResourcesLearner Support and Resources refers to  program, academic, and/or technical    res...
SECTION 8  ACCESSIBILITY AND UNIVERSAL DESIGNThe course utilizes principles of accessibility anduniversal design that are ...
Students with DisabilitiesUpon identifying themselves to the instructor andthe university, students with disabilities will...
Universal Design Statement“As your instructor, I feel I have a responsibility to doeverything within reason to actively su...
Section 9    Course Summary and Wrap-up  The course gives students an opportunity to   summarize the semester, and establi...
Questions Regarding Faculty Instrument and Process?
Gathering Student Ratings•    Online evaluations due December 15, 2012•    Minimal demographic information•    Confidentia...
Purpose of Student Ratings1.  Identify any gaps between instructor’s    perception and actual student experience.2.  Make ...
Student	  ratings	  from	  the	  Quality	  Online	  Learning	  and	   Teaching	  (QOLT)	  survey	  	                  Dora...
The	  course	             Physics	  220A	  –	  Classical	  Mechanics	                Calculus-­‐based	  	  (Engineers)	   ...
Sample	  Results:	  Instructional	  Materials	  and	  Resources	  The	  instructor	  uses	  a	  variety	  of	             ...
Sample	  Results:	  	  Students	  Interaction	  and	  Community	                                          	  At	  the	  be...
Sample	  Results:	  	  Overall	  Satisfaction	  Please	  rate	  your	  overall	  course	         Would	  you	  recommend	 ...
Summary	  Survey	  results:	  •  Nice	  breakdown	  of	  the	  different	  elements	  of	  the	     course	  –	  helps	  me...
XX
AFTER JANUARY 20•    Each Campus Coordinator is given their data     set within 1 week•    They take 3 weeks to review the...
QOLT REVIEW PANEL (2011-2012)
Recognition Process, After March 15•    All faculty who submit a full self-evaluation receive a     letter of participatio...
Featuring Your QOLT Faculty
Further information on QOLT, CFP, and Evaluation Instrumentsqolt.ecatalst.orgContact Brett Christieqolt@cdl.edu707.486.6519
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Quality Online Learning & Teaching
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Quality Online Learning & Teaching

758 views
607 views

Published on

Slides for a 1-hour informational webinar on Quality Online Learning and Teaching (QOLT) given across the California State University system.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
758
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
76
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Quality Online Learning & Teaching

  1. 1. Informational Webinar: Quality Online Learning and Teaching (QOLT)Brett Christie, Ph.D., CSU Academic Technology Services Li Wang, Ph.D., CSU Northridge Dora Preminger, Ph.D., CSU Northridge
  2. 2. BEST USE OF THE WEBINAR•  If you haven’t done so already, enter your name, campus, and role in the chat box.•  QOLT will be described in as much detail with as much clarity as possible. Visuals are included and all information is available at the QOLT site.•  Feel free to enter comments/questions into the chat box. We will screen those and address all possible.•  Should questions arise after the session, contact Brett Christie (qolt@cdl.edu).•  Session is being recorded for review or referral at QOLT site.
  3. 3. AGENDA•  Introductions & Acknowledgments (5 minutes) •  Brett Christie, CSU Faculty Development Liaison, QOLT Program Director •  Li Wang, CSUN Instructional Designer, Quality Matters, Research Colleague, QOLT Associate •  Kathy Fernandes & John Whitmer, CSU LMSS leadership•  Overview of QOLT (10 minutes) •  How we got here •  Purpose; Brief review of 2011-2012 pilot •  2012-2013 Project timeline•  A closer look at the QOLT instrument and process (20 minutes) •  Instructor Self-review •  Student Report •  Campus Coordinator review/verification role•  Discussion (20 minutes)•  Closure and feedback (5 minutes)
  4. 4. QOLT PURPOSE•  Create a useful evaluation tool that can help faculty (re)develop quality hybrid/online courses.•  Identify exemplary practices for teaching and learning through hybrid/online courses.•  Inform faculty development activities and programs related to hybrid/online teaching.•  Recognize faculty, programs, and campuses that are creating quality online courses. And, share!
  5. 5. MODELS EXAMINED•  Rubric for Online Instruction: Designed to assist development and evaluation of online courses while promoting dialog about the nature of student learning.•  Quality Matters: Faculty-centered, peer-review process designed to certify quality of hybrid/online courses.•  Quality Online Course Initiative: Course rubric and evaluation system developed in Illinois to improve online accountability.•  Course Review Toolkit:An instrument and a system, developed at CSU Northridge, for informing and assessing Face-to-Face, Hybrid, and Online, teaching and learning.•  Online Course Evaluation Program: Developed by the Monterey Institute for Technology and Education, OCEP is a criteria-based evaluation tool to assess and compare the quality of online courses.•  eLearning Best Practices Rubric @ Sacramento State•  Various research and publications on effective teaching, learning, design, assessment, syllabi, etc.
  6. 6. X
  7. 7. XX
  8. 8. RESULTING QOLT EVALUATION INSTRUMENT1.  Course Overview and Introduction (8)2.  Assessment and Evaluation of Student Learning (6)3.  Instructional Materials and Resources Utilized (6)4.  Student Interaction and Community (8)5.  Facilitation and Instruction (8)6.  Technology for Teaching and Learning (6)7.  Learner Support and Resources (3)8.  Accessibility and Universal Design (4)9.  Course Summary and Wrap-up (3)
  9. 9. •  Participants should not enter into lightly•  Participation time estimated at 1+ hour•  Course evaluation, not simple survey•  Process is about analysis and reflection•  Pay-off is informed course redesign•  Validation of teaching effectiveness effort
  10. 10. QOLT SCORING PER OBJECTIVEThere is also an open-ended box per section for descriptive.
  11. 11. Section 1. Course Overview and Introduction Instructor gives a thorough description of the course, as well as introducing students to the course protocol and expectations.
  12. 12. 1.B. ‘COURSE DESCRIPTION’ BASELINE§ There should be specific meaning to the course,section, instructor, and students, not just theminimal course description that appears in thecatalog."Directed conversation in Spanish for elementary-levelstudents. Includes individual and class assignments inlaboratory. May be repeated for credit. Admission byconsent of instructor."
  13. 13. 1.B. ‘COURSE DESCRIPTION’ EXEMPLARY
  14. 14. 1.3 ‘INSTRUCTOR INFORMATION’ EXEMPLARY
  15. 15. 1.D. ‘ONLINE ETIQUETTE’ SAMPLE§ Do not dominate any discussion.§ Do not use offensive language.§ Never make fun of someone’s ability to read or write.§ Use simple English.§ Use correct spelling and grammar.§ Share tips with other students.§ Keep an “open-mind” and be willing to express even your minorityopinion.§ Be aware of the University’s Academic Honesty Policy.§ Think before you push the “Send” button.§ Do not hesitate to ask for feedback.§ When in doubt, always check with your instructor for clarification.Mintu-Wimsatt, A. (2010). Netiquette: Make it part of your syllabus. Journal of Online Learning andTeaching, 6(1),
  16. 16. 1.F. ‘TECHNICAL COMPETENCIES’ SAMPLE§ Connect to the Web using a web browser.§ Navigate around the Web and use search engines.§ Send and receive e-mail with attachments.§ Basic word processing, including cutting and pasting.§ Open, save, and manage files.§ Organize folders and files (create, name, rename, move).§ Compress files and folders.*Depends on course level and proportion of online mode
  17. 17. =20
  18. 18. SECTION 1, RUBRIC:“COURSE OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION”
  19. 19. SECTION 2: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING Student Evaluation and Assessment refers to the process used to gather evidence of the achievement of the Student Learning Objectives/Outcomes (SLOs). We strongly recommend that instructors contactthe Office of Academic Assessment (or similar) for assistance and information about this section.
  20. 20. Objectives Example2.a All Student Learning Objectives/Outcomes (SLOs) are If the mandated course level objectives are not measurable, thenspecific, well-defined, and measureable. module level objectives should be measurable and support course level objectives.2.b The grading policy is clearly stated for the course and Instructor provides late submission policy and scale, weights ofindividual assignments. respective assignments, and the corresponding letter grade if scores are accumulated at the end.2.c The learning activities (including the assignments and Instructors explain how learning activities such as assignments,ungraded activities) promote the achievement of the SLOs. discussions contribute to the achievement of the stated SLOs.2.d The assessment instruments selected are sequenced, There are multiple ways to demonstrate mastery-e.g., project, paper,varied, and appropriate to the student work being assessed. tests. One is built upon the other tool.2.e Throughout the semester Instructor provides multiple Activities may include but not limited to blogs for reflection, peeropportunities to give feedback on students learning (strengths review, practice test and draft of term paper, module summary.and weaknesses) and to “self-check” students learning/progress.2.f Throughout the semester, instructor provides multiple Instructor may consider the use of surveys, discussion forums, oropportunities to solicit feedback from their students about their item analyses to collect feedback or attitudinal data (that goeslearning and on the course for the improvement of the course. beyond student learning outcomes) on the effectiveness or difficulty of the resources and activities (e.g., “Muddiest Point”), or item analysis of test questions in order to improve the course in the future.
  21. 21. Objectives Example2.a All Student Learning Objectives/Outcomes (SLOs) are If the mandated course level objectives are not measurable, thenspecific, well-defined, and measureable. module level objectives should be measurable and support course level objectives.2.b The grading policy is clearly stated for the course and Instructor provides late submission policy and scale, weights ofindividual assignments. respective assignments, and the corresponding letter grade if scores are accumulated at the end.2.c The learning activities (including the assignments and Instructors explain how learning activities such as assignments,ungraded activities) promote the achievement of the SLOs. discussions contribute to the achievement of the stated SLOs.2.d The assessment instruments selected are sequenced, There are multiple ways to demonstrate mastery-e.g., project,varied, and appropriate to the student work being assessed. paper, tests. One is built upon the other tool.2.e Throughout the semester Instructor provides multiple Activities may include but not limited to blogs for reflection, peeropportunities to give feedback on students learning (strengths review, practice test and draft of term paper, module summary.and weaknesses) and to “self-check” students learning/progress.2.f Throughout the semester, instructor provides multiple Instructor may consider the use of surveys, discussion forums, oropportunities to solicit feedback from their students about item analyses to collect feedback or attitudinal data (that goestheir learning and on the course for the improvement of the beyond student learning outcomes) on the effectiveness orcourse. difficulty of the resources and activities (e.g., “Muddiest Point”), or item analysis of test questions in order to improve the course in the future.
  22. 22. Graphically Representing SLOs (hidden)
  23. 23. Graphically Representing SLOs (expanded)
  24. 24. Sample Online Assignment Rubrics•  Online Discussions•  Student/Group Wikis•  Student Blogs•  Twitter•  PowerPoint or Enhanced PodCast•  ePortfolio•  Video Production http://tinyurl.com/7vbvag2
  25. 25. Section 3. Instructional Materials and Resources UtilizedThe instructor has carefully selected a varietyof materials and material formats to represent course content and enable students to meet relevant learning outcomes.
  26. 26. Objectives Example3.a Instructor provides students with adequate Instructor includes instruction in the syllabus or elsewhere in the course astime and notice to acquire course materials. to acquire course materials including textbooks, and other types of external resources.3.b Syllabus lists whether textbooks and Instructor separates the materials and labels them as either required ormaterials are required or recommended. recommended.3.c Instructor articulates the purpose of all For required and recommended materials, there are brief statements as tomaterials as to how they are related to the the value/purpose in meeting student learning objectives/outcome(s). Ifcourse and module learning objectives. external links/websites are used, the links should be self-evident or a short description of the specific link needs to be provided instead of posting a general link for students to explore.3.d When possible, instructor provides s Course materials include both the Open Educational Resources (e.g.options in terms of how students acquire MERLOT) and external materialscourse materials, including Open EducationalResources (e.g., MERLOT).3.e There is a variety of instructional material Materials types include PowerPoint, videos, text. Multiple perspectivestypes and perspectives, while not overly relying refer to different opinions from scholars in the field.on one content type such as text.3.f All resources and materials used in the These resources and materials include text, images, tables, videos, audio,course are appropriately cited. and website.
  27. 27. Section 4. Student Interaction and Community (Course Design)Addresses how the instructors provide opportunities for students to interact with the content, peers, instructors and the LMS and promote students to become active learners and build the online community.
  28. 28. Section 5. Facilitation and Instruction (Course Delivery)Instructor facilitates the course and communicates with students frequently and engages them to be active learners. Instructor actions reinforce the development of a sense of community among course participants.
  29. 29. Section 6.Technology for Teaching and Learning Instructor utilizes technology to effectively deliver course content, engage students in learningactivities (individual, student-to-student, instructor-to-student) and for students to express themselves or demonstrate learning.
  30. 30. Section 7.Learner Support and ResourcesLearner Support and Resources refers to program, academic, and/or technical resources available to learners.
  31. 31. SECTION 8 ACCESSIBILITY AND UNIVERSAL DESIGNThe course utilizes principles of accessibility anduniversal design that are critical to some learners, as well as offering benefits to all learners. We strongly recommend that instructors contact the Universal Design Center (or similar) for assistance and information about this section.
  32. 32. Students with DisabilitiesUpon identifying themselves to the instructor andthe university, students with disabilities willreceive reasonable accommodation for learningand evaluation. For more information, contactServices to Students with Disabilities in Building,Room (x4232).
  33. 33. Universal Design Statement“As your instructor, I feel I have a responsibility to doeverything within reason to actively support a wide rangeof learning styles and abilities. As such, I have appliedthe principles of Universal Design for Learning to thiscourse. Feel free to discuss your progress in the coursewith me at any time. In addition, if you require anaccommodation, submit your verified accommodationsform to me during the first two weeks of the course.”
  34. 34. Section 9 Course Summary and Wrap-up The course gives students an opportunity to summarize the semester, and establish the connection with other courses, and preparesstudents to start the next phase of their journey.
  35. 35. Questions Regarding Faculty Instrument and Process?
  36. 36. Gathering Student Ratings•  Online evaluations due December 15, 2012•  Minimal demographic information•  Confidential (coordinator and instructor only)•  Ratings submitted directly to QOLT Central•  Process will be streamlined via Likert items o  Optional open-ended at end of each section•  Results used toward determining most exemplary per campus and across system.
  37. 37. Purpose of Student Ratings1.  Identify any gaps between instructor’s perception and actual student experience.2.  Make changes to courses based on evidence3.  Use the data to receive administrative support to teach online or hybrid
  38. 38. Student  ratings  from  the  Quality  Online  Learning  and   Teaching  (QOLT)  survey     Dora  Preminger   Dept.  Physics  &  Astronomy   •   Li  Wang   Faculty  Technology  Center   •   California  State  University  Northridge  
  39. 39. The  course   Physics  220A  –  Classical  Mechanics   Calculus-­‐based    (Engineers)     Why  use  the  QOLT  survey?  •  New  hybrid  format                  Is  the  course  well-­‐designed?   (Survey  makes  QOLT  rubric  •  Is  it  viable?   concrete)   Perceptions  of  students  •  Improve  for  future?   Weak/missing    elements?  
  40. 40. Sample  Results:  Instructional  Materials  and  Resources  The  instructor  uses  a  variety  of   All  materials  are  meaningful  to  me  as  instruc9onal  material  types  and  presents   to  how  they  are  related  to  helping  me  mul9ple  perspec9ves,  while  not  overly   achieve  the  course  learning  goals  and  relying  on  one  content  type  such  as  text.     objec9ves.  Some  Student  comments:  •  There  are  way  too  many  course  materials  for  this  course...more  so  than  the  non-­‐hybrid   counterpart  which  would  already  have  been  borderline  too  expensive.  •  The  Ac9ve  physics  assignments  are  very  confusing.  I  was  not  able  to  understand  how  to   properly  use  it  9ll  the  instructor  told  me  that  should  use  the  different  browser  to  use  it   properly.  
  41. 41. Sample  Results:    Students  Interaction  and  Community    At  the  beginning  of  the  course,  GeBng   I  find  the  naviga9on  throughout  the  online  to  know  other  course  par9cipants   components  of  the  course  is  reasonable,  gave  me  a  sense  of  belonging  in  the   intui9ve  and  straighEorward.  course.  The  learning  ac9vi9es  encourage  me  to  interact  with  the  instructor,  my  peers,  and  the  course  content  frequently.  
  42. 42. Sample  Results:    Overall  Satisfaction  Please  rate  your  overall  course   Would  you  recommend  this  course  learning  experience.   to  your  friend?   Least………………….Most  sa9sfied   No……………………….Yes,  definitely!  
  43. 43. Summary  Survey  results:  •  Nice  breakdown  of  the  different  elements  of  the   course  –  helps  me  see  how  I  am  fiBng  them   together  (or  not!)  •  Easy,  quick  view  of  statistics  •  Hear  student  voices  •  View  of  overall  student  experience  •  Pinpoint  areas  for  course  improvement      
  44. 44. XX
  45. 45. AFTER JANUARY 20•  Each Campus Coordinator is given their data set within 1 week•  They take 3 weeks to review the self-evaluations and respective student rating•  With permission, may use sysadmin course access•  They rank-order Top 5 and submit with their comments to QOLT Review Panel via survey•  QOLT Review Panel begins with #1 from each campus as CSU “Top 15.” Reviews #2s next to see if any elevate. Followed by #3s, etc. Top 20 result.•  Review panel "triangulates" between faculty, student, and coordinator data.
  46. 46. QOLT REVIEW PANEL (2011-2012)
  47. 47. Recognition Process, After March 15•  All faculty who submit a full self-evaluation receive a letter of participation from Campus Coordinator (draft provided to Campus Coordinator)•  Top 5 designated from each campus receive an additional letter of recognition from CSU ATS.•  Top 20 systemwide receive additional letter of recognition from CSU ATS and are featured at website and via QOLT dissemination (e.g., ITL newsletter; spring webinar; CATS)
  48. 48. Featuring Your QOLT Faculty
  49. 49. Further information on QOLT, CFP, and Evaluation Instrumentsqolt.ecatalst.orgContact Brett Christieqolt@cdl.edu707.486.6519

×