• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Quality does Matter - Implementations across TAMU System
 

Quality does Matter - Implementations across TAMU System

on

  • 77 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
77
Views on SlideShare
76
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://presentationdocs.playableitems.demobo.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

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

    Quality does Matter - Implementations across TAMU System Quality does Matter - Implementations across TAMU System Presentation Transcript

    • Quality does Matter: Challenges, Lessons Learned, and Future Directions Dr. Patricia Abrego, TAMU International Julia Allen, TAMU Texarkana Dr. Lisa Bunkowski, TAMU Central Texas Dr. Carol Henrichs, TAMU Instructional Technology Services Julie McElhany, TAMU Commerce Convened by Dr. Yakut Gazi, TAMU College of Engineering/TEES Moderated by Rene Mercer, TAMU College of Education
    • http://tx.ag/twtc-qm
    • Convener Dr. Yakut Gazi Asst. Vice Chancellor for Engineering Remote Education • QM Certified Peer Reviewer • QM Institutional Representative • Formerly Dir of DLIT at A&M Central Texas • Co-PI on TAMUCT QM Research Grant Moderator Rene Mercer Coordinator of Instructional Design, TAMU College of Education • QM Certified Peer Reviewer • QM Institutional Representative • Initial implementation of QM at TAMU at the CEHD • Doctoral research on QM
    •   Formalized plan brought forth by Distance Education Advisory Committee Implementation:  Training: APPQMR (required to teach online) and/or Teaching Online: An     Introduction to Online Delivery (TOL) if first time teaching online Course reviews: Internal review required before getting submitted to external review Incentives: $3600 stipend for development of new course; $1200 for redesign Certified Peer Reviewers: All IT are QM-certified peer reviewers (4); 7 faculty; 3 master reviewers Stage in implementation: Full implementation; “accepted practice”; shift in thinking and acceptance is happening among faculty
    •   Since August 2013, drafting implementation plan Implementation plan:  Training: Allen to become an onsite APPQMR certified trainer; initial plan to certify at least 2 faculty in each of the three colleges as peer reviewers; get them to become Master Reviewer in year 2  In-house course reviews: Internal review required before getting submitted to external review  Certified Peer Reviewers: Gauging interest  Stage in implementation: Initial stages of planning
    •     Since September 1, 2010 Received QM research grant in 2013 Received “2013 QM Making a Difference for Students Award” Implementation:  Plan was developed and included in the Institutional DE Plan – not officially submitted to QM  Training: Required QM-created APPQMR or IYOC to teach online / can substitute APPQMR taught by     Barb Altman (TAMUCT faculty and QM Certified Trainer) ; access to additional QM training is available to faculty (when requested in place of technology grants etc) Between January 2011 and February 2013, 50 faculty and 3 staff members completed 108 instances of QM training Course reviews: Informal/internal review, $1000 per course paid to faculty meeting the review standards, currently being revised; Certified reviewers: 10 (faculty and staff); Master reviewers: 2; Trainers: 2 Stage in implementation: Restructuring with more emphasis on QM during the design/development process
    •   Since September 2009 (earliest TAMUS adopter Implementation:  Training: McElhany took training; in 2011 developed and launched a pilot; QM      certification training for faculty participating in the pilot – they also help with internal reviews Team-based model of course development: internal/informal assessment of courses using QM rubric FCTT instructional design team is required to be QM-certified In-house course reviews due to the cost of formal Considering training an individual for master reviewer Stage in implementation: Informal adoption by university; used consistently by FCTT team for all new course developments and faculty requested course reviews; currently developing proposal for Provost for formal adoption in the design/redesign of all online courses
    •   Since Fall 2013 (campus-wide) Implementation:  Funding centrally provided by ITS for professional development and     course reviews. No formalized plan for campus implementation yet Training: APPQMR is offered on campus as well as short presentations Course reviews: If ITS will fund course review, APPQMR is required; plan is to include both internal and official reviews ITS has 5 certified reviewers Stage in implementation: Planning/start-up concentrating on building a pool of instructors completing APPQMR and a pool of certified peer reviewers
    • Panel Questions
    • http://tx.ag/twtc-qm