Online Learning. Online Learning at CSU. Quality Macers How does it work? Quality Macers What is it? 5/28/15

Transcription

1 Building a Quality Assurance Network for Online Classes: Early Successes & Lessons Learned Online Learning Characterized by rapid prolifera8on. 4.3 million undergrads 20% of all undergrads Nik Gorman, MPH, EdD & Accredita8on Coordinator, School of Nursing Marsha Orr, MS, RN Faculty Liaison, Distance Educa8on, School of Nursing Su Swarat, MS, PhD Director of & Educa8onal Effec8veness, CSUF Both championed and maligned The No Significant Difference Phenomenon when course materials and teaching methodology were held constant, there were no significant differences Online Learning at CSU State of California Assembly Bill 386 Requires CSUs provide students access to all fully online CSU courses across 23 campuses by Fall 2015 At CSUF, we had 9438 online students in online degree programs 16 online professional development 2 online degree comple8on programs Students enrolled in standalone online courses Systemwide Program to Support and Enhance Academic Quality in Online Courses Flexible program Professional development Establishing faculty associates Integra8ng system- wide services Ex: Quality Macers, QOLT, Wiley Learning Ins8tute $10-20k per grant cycle Began March 2014 Currently approaching the third grant cycle Quality Macers What is it? From their website: A na8onally recognized, faculty- centered, peer review process designed to cer8fy the quality of online course design and online components Scale 23,000 faculty & instruc8onal design staff Quality Macers How does it work? Workshops/Cer8fica8ons QM rubric 8 General Standards 43 Specific Standards Alignment Peer Reviewer + 17 others Course Reviews Informal Official The QM Rubric is used in course reviews that result in continuous improvement and F faculty development 1. Course Overview & Intro 2. Learning Objectives 3. & Measurement 4. Instructional Materials 5. Course Activities/Interaction 6. Course Technology 7. Learner Support 8. Accessibility & Usability 1

2 Ac8vity Our Proposal Quality MattersQM workshops Survey distributed all School of completed by Certification 29tofaculty/staff: Nursing Faculty to assess: Utilizing QM-trained faculty to support QM certification QM Training ready redesign of three classes Needs 29 Applying the QM Rubric QM Training 2Current Teaching& Load Needs Peer Reviewers were sharedteaching during the results Interest in Online School of Nursing s Back to School Confidence in Online Teaching Faculty Meeting in August 2014 Conference Computer Proficiency attendance included: Knowledge of Software 6th Annual Quality Matters AACN Barriers to Online Teaching Baccalaureate Essentials Replication Interest in Training Annual Online Learning Consortium Grant Cycle 1 Establishing Network Expanding needs assessments Professional & establishing networks Development through all eight colleges Grant Cycle 1 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Grant Cycle 2 Fall 2014 Summer 2015 Ac8vity Results Challenges to implemen=ng high- quality online courses iden=fied by conference par=cipants: Students Faculty Step 1: Take Step 2: Place Papers x2 A challenge to implementing or assessing online courses Ac8vity Results Problems Proposed Solu=ons Student online readiness (and how to assess) Tech Literacy/Providing training (Crea8ng videos, Group assignments,, CMS) Time Student online readiness (and how to assess) Finding/mo8va8ng faculty to teach Interac8vity / Social presence Cap8oning video Tech Literacy/Providing training (ex: Crea=ng videos, Group assignments,, CMS) Explaining difficult concepts Course Logis=cs A solution to another s posted challenge Group assignments / Team- based learning Finding / Mo=va=ng faculty to teach Allowing students to self- select Provide Roadmaps Provide Rubrics Video (Camtasia, Adobe Cap8vate) Tech Support Faculty Mentors Instruc8onal Designers Faculty Learning Communi8es S8pends Cyclical tech changes (ex: CMS) Technology Alignment with course needs Academic Integrity Needs Interac=vity / Social presence Group assignments / Team- based learning hcps://padlet.com/ Student- created Wikis Early Successes: Combined, 47% were interested Results eeds in tryingoaf N new teaching medium 2

3 Early Successes: Over half of responding faculty use Adobe Results oaf synchronous Needs Connect, technology In contrast, asynchronous tools were rarely used Early Successes: Among online educators, this is Results of Needs the most popular (83%) Among online educators: 25% Among non-online: 61% Lessons Learned: CraPing QM Cer=fied Courses What have we learned so far in preparing our courses for QM Cer8fica8on? Time It (can) take a village Reimbursement 508 Compliance Time Mee8ng 2x/month In 3 months of work 3/8 of the way through the rubric Note: Course needed substan8al content revision, too It (can) take a village One course prepara8on involving up to 6 people per mee8ng Graduate Programs Coordinator Concentra8on Lead Course lead faculty Campus QA Lead 2 QM- trained Faculty Members Certainly not the case with every review, but has implica8ons for scaling up cer8fica8ons 3

4 Reimbursement 508 Compliance QM- trained faculty assis8ng with course reviews reimbursed Another issue commonly raised in online learning discussions Need mechanisms to fund the faculty member revising the course Low- hanging fruit A larger issue in conver8ng classes to online formats in general More intensive Accessible syllabi Course templates Transcrip8on Scrip8ng Lessons Learned: What new issues have been voiced as we expand our network across all 8 Colleges? Copyright and intellectual property Exper8se Quality Assurance or Online Expansion Sustainability Copyright and Intellectual Property Who owns the course materials created? What can a department reasonably ask faculty to share? Exper8se Intrinsic challenge of recrui8ng field experts to academia Burden imposed by learning technologies 4

5 Lessons Learned Building a Network Quality Assurance or Online Expansion Not all support the online educa8on trend Creates a balancing act Want all at the table to have a voice Want to ensure uniform quality assurance Sustainability Fluctua8ons in grant support Lessons Learned Building a Network Changes in ideological direc8on Ex: QM versus QOLT Thank You! Any Ques8ons? Contact Informa=on Nik Gorman Marsha Orr Su Swarat ngorman@fullerton.edu marshaorr@fullerton.edu sswarat@fullerton.edu 5