north park quality matters presentation

Implementing QM at North Park University Online

What is Quality Matters? http://www.qmprogram.org/

• A quality assurance process to increase student retention, learning and satisfaction in online and hybrid courses by implementing better course design

– Faculty-centered– Research-based– Adopted by hundreds of higher

education institutions across forty-two states, Canada, Australia and Bermuda

Why Subscribe to QM?

• Required growth in online and hybrid programs

• Fiscally responsible• Solid quality assurance in online and

hybrid courses – research-based and widely accepted

Why Subscribe to QM? (con’t)

• Accreditation’s increasing focus on assessment of student learning

• More of a faculty review process than a process imposed by a university department

• Networking opportunities

Need to Ensure Quality

• Trained 2 Office of Distributed Learning (ODL) staff to function as– Course reviewers– Development course facilitators– Online and hybrid mentors

Need to Ensure Quality (con’t)

• Trained 2 faculty members to function as– Review chairs– Development course facilitators – Online and hybrid mentors

North Park’s Online Development Course

• Consists of 3 Modules– Based on ADDIE course design model

(Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation)

– Online format; faculty members as students

– Constant communication with faculty– Incorporates material from QM

rubric throughout

3 Modules

Module 1:General teaching and learning theory with QM tie-in

Module 2: Planning and organizing course content with QM tie-in

Module 3: Building course content in CMS with QM tie-in

QM Rubrics with tie-in to course

Module 3: Building course content in CMS

• Internal reviews of new online and hybrid courses– As the last step in Module 3– Review starts 6 weeks before start of

term– Completed by a team of 3 QM-trained

reviewers• 2 ODL staff – team members• 1 faculty member – team chair

Module 3 (con’t)

• Internal reviews of repeat online and hybrid courses– Faculty with 3-year-old courses will

participate– As a last step in Module 3– Review starts 6 weeks before start of

term– Completed by a team of 3 QM-trained

reviewers• 2 ODL staff – team members• 1 faculty member – team chair

Findings: Positives

• Encourages faculty buy-in– Rubric is based on research– Process is ongoing – Criteria is standardized for reviews

• Guides development of new courses– Outlines expectations before review– Provides design ideas– Supports consistency in quality

Findings: Positives (con’t)

• Faculty member as team review chair aids in communication– Encourages peer-to-peer discussions– Can provide tried-and-true ideas

Findings: Positives (con’t)

• Online QM rubric tool saves time– Instructor worksheets in one

accessible area– Rubric includes annotations and

space for additional notes– All final rubrics merged at the end– Course amendment form– History of reviews saved online

Findings: Positives (con’t)

• After going through development process and internal review, courses are high quality

– Per internal peer reviewers– Per comparison to QM managed

reviews

Findings: Challenges

• Online QM rubric tool not always utilized by faculty– Separate site location– Separate login than all other

university tools– Faculty often fall back on email

Findings: Challenges (con’t)

• Not all courses meet standards 1st time – Professors feel frustrated– Repeat course creators don’t

understand why past courses were fine (before QM)

– Professors don’t see that this is an ongoing process (not a pass/fail situation)

Findings: Challenges (con’t)

• Why courses don’t meet standards– Repeat professors don’t always follow

all steps that match to rubric– Content in “final” course can be

different than originally reviewed content submitted in the development process

– Facilitator of faculty development course and reviewers have differing opinions

Future Plans

• Reorganization of the development course based on– Needs assessment– QM team brainstorming– Updated research on other school’s

programs

• Review of team communication– Wording in development course– Email wording

Future Plans

• Adding new forms of recognition– Faculty/Staff announcements– Special logo in course in CMS– Others?

• Jenny Henrikson

jhenrikson@northpark.edu• Sonja Strahl

sstrahl@northpark.eduEmail for temporary access to our Faculty Development course or with any questions

Presentation on www.slideshare.net