Quality MattersQuality MattersJennifer Strickland, PhDJennifer Strickland, PhD, , jennifer.strickland@mcmail.maricopa.edu

What is it anyway? Quality Matters (QM) is a faculty-centered, peer

review process designed to certify the quality of online and hybrid courses and online components

A faculty-driven, collaborative peer review process

Committed to continuous quality improvement Based in national standards of best practice, the

research literature and instructional design principles

Designed to promote student learning and success

2

Peer Course Review

Feedback

Course

Course Meets Quality

Expectations

Course Revision

Instructional Designers

Institutions

Faculty Course Developers National Standards &

Research LiteratureRubric

Faculty ReviewersTraining

Quality Matters Course Peer

Review Process

QM Certified Peer Reviewers

QM-Certified Peer Reviewers How to interpret the standards (with examples

and annotations)

How to evaluate a course (hands-on with sample course)

Reviews are conducted by teams of three peer reviewers Master Reviewer/Chair

Peer reviewer (external)

Peer reviewer (SME)

Quality Assurance

700+ faculty trained to review online courses using the rubric

individuals from 158 different institutions in 28 states

More than 2,500 faculty and instructional design staff participated in Quality Matters workshops

The Rubric is the Core of Quality Matters

40 specific elements across 8 broad areas (general standards) of course quality

Detailed annotations and examples of good practice for all 40 standards

http://www.qualitymatters.org/FIPSE.htm

Course Alignment 5 of the 8 general standards should align:

1. Course Overview and Introduction

2. Learning Objectives

3. Assessment and Measurement

4. Resources and Materials

5. Learner Interaction

6. Course Technology

7. Learner Support

8. ADA Compliance

7

Key components must align

Standards 1.1 Instructions make clear how to

get started and where to find various course components.

2.1The course learning objectives describe outcomes that are measurable.

3.1 The types of assessments selected measure the stated learning objectives and are consistent with course activities and resources.

Common Areas for Improvement (2006-2007, based on 95 reviews)

1. Learning objectives at module/unit level (II.2): 45%

2. Self-check/practice with quick feedback (III.5): 42%

3. Instructions to students on meeting learning objectives (II.4): 40%

4. Alternatives to auditory/visual content (VIII.2): 39%

5. Clear standards for instructor availability(V.3): 37%

9

Maricopa Quality Matters Maricopa/MCLI is the

statewide consortium lead

Ten QM Maricopa Colleges

Other online Course Evaluation Resources

67 faculty members, instructional designers and technologists are certified peer reviewers

College-Based Steering Team

Impact on Faculty Support

Nationally, 89% of respondents would recommend the QM review process to others

Sample comments

I was too close to see what could be improved.

Provides a great way to get an objective view of your course.

It made all of my online courses better.

It provides a view from a more student-oriented perspective.

It provides a look into potential student problems areas for course completion.

Many elements that might contribute to a student withdrawing can be eliminated.

11

QM is about course QM is about course designdesign

Not teaching; Not teaching; QM is about peer QM is about peer reviewreview

Not evaluation Not evaluation QM is about improving QM is about improving Student Success Student Success

onlineonlineThrough effective and consistent course designThrough effective and consistent course design