Harvey Mellar Taiwan_presentation_2012_07_31


Published on

Presentation on quality assurance of e-learning and he development of the epprobate labelt

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Harvey Mellar Taiwan_presentation_2012_07_31

  1. 1. Quality assurance and qualityenhancement of eLearning in the UK, and the development of the epprobate initiative Harvey Mellar Borderless Quality‧Infinite Innovation International Conference on e-Learning Quality and Innovative Instruction Taiwan, 31 July 2012 www.ioe.ac.uk/staff/LKLB_34.html
  2. 2. epprobate www.epprobate.comwww.epprobate.com 2
  3. 3. Institute of Education, University of London www.ioe.ac.uk www.epprobate.com 3
  4. 4. London Knowledge Lab www.lkl.ac.uk www.epprobate.com 4
  5. 5. University of LondonInternational Programmes www.londoninternational.ac.uk www.epprobate.com 5
  6. 6. OutlineQuality and eLearningThe changing landscape of knowledge and learningQuality assurance in the UKQuality assurance of eLearningepprobate www.epprobate.com 6
  7. 7. QUALITY AND ELEARNING www.epprobate.com 7
  8. 8. What is quality? Exception: Quality as something exceptional, and distinctive Perfection: Quality as a consistent or flawless outcome Fitness for purpose: Quality as fulfilling a customers requirements, needs or desires Value for money: Quality as return on investment Transformation - the enhancement and empowerment of students or the development of new knowledge Harvey, L. (1995). Editorial (The Key Issues: the quality agenda) Quality in Higher Education www.epprobate.com 8
  10. 10. Corporate trainingAmerican Society for Training & Development (ASTD)What concerns does your organization have about e-learning? “Quality of programs – 31.3%” www.astd.org/Publications/Newsletters/ASTD-Links/ASTD-Links-Articles/2011/01/E-Learning-Trends-2011 www.epprobate.com 10
  11. 11. Higher Education66% of faculty say online courses are inferior orsomewhat inferior to face-to-face coursesConflicted: Faculty and Online Education, 2012 A Joint Project of The Babson Survey Research Group and Inside Higher Ed I. Elaine Allen, Jeff Seaman, with Doug Lederman Scott Jaschik http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/conflicted-faculty-and-online-education-2012 www.epprobate.com 11
  12. 12. Schools www.carnegielearning.comwww.epprobate.com 12
  13. 13. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/technology/a-classroom-software-boom-but-mixed-results-despite-the-hype.html?pagewanted=all www.epprobate.com 13
  15. 15. New demands and new suppliers Demands – Many more students involved in higher education – Demands for equitable access and retention – Increasing need to address issues of student demand and choice – Constraints on public spending result in higher fees Suppliers – Shift towards a more deregulated market – Courses offered by international providers – Increase in for-profit institutions in education – Disaggregation of services – Collaborations and partnerships www.epprobate.com 15
  16. 16. New skills www.p21.org/index.phwww.epprobate.com 16
  17. 17. Using multimodal representations http://www.mat.ucsb.edu/res_proj3.php www.epprobate.com 17
  18. 18. Developing techno-mathematical literacies Hoyles, Celia (2007) Understanding the System: Techno-Mathematical Literacies in the Workplace www.epprobate.com 18
  19. 19. Learning in the Network Society Castells, M. (2001) The Internet galaxy: reflections on the Internet, business, and society www.epprobate.com 19
  20. 20. Harnessing the Data Deluge http://www.economist.com/node/15579717?Story_ID=15579717 www.epprobate.com 20
  21. 21. LEARNING IN NEW WAYS www.epprobate.com 21
  22. 22. New (ish) technologies M-learningTangibles Serious games and immersive worlds Haptic technologies www.epprobate.com 22
  23. 23. Opening access OERs, MOOCs and MOTSOpen Educational Resources OER Massive Online Open Courses Mass Online Tutoring Systems www.epprobate.com 23
  24. 24. Learning as connecting Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources Learning may reside in non-human appliances Capacity to know is more critical than what is currently known Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning Ability to see connections (built networks) between fields, ideas, and concepts Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivist learning activities Siemens, G. (2005) Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age www.epprobate.com 24
  25. 25. Teaching as a design science “Teaching is not rocket science. It is, in fact, far more complex and demanding work than rocket science.” - Richard Elmore “Teaching is changing. It is no longer simply about passing on knowledge to the next generation. Teachers in the 21st century, in all educational sectors, have to cope with an ever-changing cultural and technological environment. Teaching is now a design science. Like other design professionals - architects, engineers, town planners, programmers – teachers have to work out creative and evidence-based ways of improving what they do.” - Diana Laurillard“Every day, teachers design and test new ways ofteaching, using learning technology to help their learners.But their discoveries remain local. By representing andcommunicating their best ideas as structuredpedagogical patterns, teachers could develop this vitalprofessional knowledge collectively” www.epprobate.com 25- Diana Laurillard
  26. 26. Pedagogical design patterns• Context – Where, when, who (all the things you can’t change)• Problem – We want to do A under condition B but are constrained by C Cookbook: ingredients,• Solution What are we trying to achieve / solve? procedure, expected outcomes Problem Solution Context When, Where, Who www.epprobate.com 26
  27. 27. QUALITY ASSURANCE IN THE UK www.epprobate.com 27
  28. 28. QA in UK Higher EducationUniversities and colleges manage the quality and standards oftheir awards by means of their own internal quality assuranceprocedures Course validation Annual monitoring Periodic course review External examiners Peer observation Student feedback – Course evaluation surveys – Focus groups – Student representation http://www.qaa.ac.uk www.epprobate.com 28
  29. 29. Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Quality Code – Standards, quality and public information Institutional review – Review team of five, including a student – Institutions submit a self-evaluation document and a student written submission – Preliminary visit - one and a half days + Review visit - three to five days – Institutional reports publicly available on the QAA website Outcomes Reports www.epprobate.com 29
  30. 30. Involvement of learners in quality assurance www.epprobate.com 30
  31. 31. From quality assurance to quality enhancementQUALITY ASSURANCE QUALITY ENHANCEMENT Inhibits frank reporting  Encourages and requires frank reporting Promotes incremental improvement of academic  Facilitates transformational change practice  Supports and manages risk Discourages risk taking taking Retrospective approaches  Prospective approaches to to quality management quality management Raban, C. (2007) „Assurance Versus Enhancement: Less Is More?‟ Journal of Further and Higher Education www.epprobate.com 31
  32. 32. QUALITY ASSURANCE OF ELEARNING www.epprobate.com 32
  33. 33. Quality Code - Section 2 www.epprobate.com 33
  34. 34. Benchmarking A group of universities set up in a benchmarking club Each completes an Institutional Review Document They jointly develop a set of criteria called good practice statements Each institution then scores its performance against the good practice statements www.epprobate.com 34
  35. 35. A research study on quality assurance of eLearning Case studies of Postgraduate courses For each case study – Collect and review all quality assurance documentation – Interview stakeholders Comparative examination of data – Map of issues not captured by the quality assurance procedures – Identification of aspects of the courses which impact on the implementation of the QA procedures www.epprobate.com 35
  37. 37. Workshop on QA/QE procedures and eLearningBased on existing researchDelivered in 15 UK universities, then in Germany, Sweden, Saudi ArabiaExamined issues, challenges and possible solutionsDilemma, should we – modify existing quality procedures, or – create new quality procedures specifically for eLearning? www.epprobate.com 37
  38. 38. QA/QE in eLearning Special Interest Group www.qe-sig.net www.epprobate.com 38
  39. 39. Toolkit http://qaqe-sig.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Toolkit_version_2011_8_11-Final-edit-DoH.pdfwww.epprobate.com 39
  40. 40. UK Quality Code for Higher Education - Learning and TeachingExample indicators An understanding of the learning process informs learning and teaching practices, which use evidence-informed approaches derived from the outcomes of research, scholarship and the evaluation of professional practices. Higher education providers assure themselves that for every student both the physical and virtual environments they provide are safe, accessible, reliable and usable and that their use is characterised by dignity, courtesy and respect. http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Newsroom/Consultations/Pages/learning-teaching.aspx www.epprobate.com 40
  41. 41. Summary: Issues for assessing quality of eLearning Development of a quality culture Use of research, scholarship and the evaluation of professional practices to inform learning and teaching practices Ensuring the currency and accuracy of content Involvement of learners Involvement of other stakeholders Use of learning analytics Internationalisation www.epprobate.com 41
  42. 42. The international quality label for eLearning coursewareEPPROBATE www.epprobate.com 42
  43. 43. ObjectivesIncrease trust in eLearningDeliver a quality label focusing on coursewareFacilitate a consensus building process about eLearning qualityEstablish an international network of reviewers and partners www.epprobate.com 43
  44. 44. The review process Self assessment document – Asks for evidence • Evaluations • Learning analytics Review panel – Pedagogic expert – Content expert – Learner – Courseware producer Panel reviews courseware in terms of the quality grid Feedback to producer www.epprobate.com 44
  45. 45. THE QUALITY GRID http://epprobate.com/index.php/en/epprobate-quality-grid www.epprobate.com 45
  46. 46. A. COURSE DESIGN1. Provision of course information, learning objectives and instructional guidance2. Constructive alignment www.epprobate.com 46
  47. 47. B. LEARNING DESIGN3. Learner needs4. Personalisation5. Instructional strategies www.epprobate.com 47
  48. 48. C. MEDIA DESIGN6. Media integration7. Interface8. Interoperability and technological standards www.epprobate.com 48
  49. 49. D. CONTENT9. Accuracy and values of content10. Intellectual property rights11. Legal compliance www.epprobate.com 49
  50. 50. epprobate - meeting the challenges Development of a quality culture Use of research, scholarship and the evaluation of professional practices to inform learning and teaching practices Ensuring the currency and accuracy of content Involvement of learners Involvement of other stakeholders Use of learning analytics Internationalisation www.epprobate.com 50
  51. 51. Referenceshttp://www.mendeley.com/groups/2338531/quality-assurance-and-quality-enhancement-of-elearning-in-the-uk/ Google short URL: goo.gl/H5lp4 www.epprobate.com 51