D3.4.5

=E-learning design and (re)development activities are subject to formal quality assurance reviews at key milestones. =

Evidence
Kidney, Cummings & Boehm (2007) describe the quality assurance strategies in place for e-learning courses at the University of Houston-Clear Lake. Courses that made use of their eight QA strategies reported high student satisfaction, those that did not use all the strategies rated on average one or more standard deviations below the mean satisfaction.

Often course design and instruction processes are so intense that those involved lose sight of the big picture. Periodic phases of reflection are necessary to combat this and ensure that linkages to institutional objectives and strategic plans are in place.

To perform quality assurance and staff reviews the university added quality assurance evaluator positions to their instructional technology team. Because some faculty teach with online courses before they have been reviewed and some online courses get developed through informal processes and miss the quality review phase it is desirable to undertake peer review in timely fashion. These authors recommend peer review of course design, content, rigor and androgogy to ensure compliance with the eight quality assurance processes and maintain academic rigor. Peer reviewers could come from within the university or outside. Review of accuracy, completeness, scope, prerequisites, objective, fit within the specific degree and level of rigor can be performed. However, there was faculty resistance to this approach and Kidney et al. explain how this resistance may be defused (table 3, p. 27).

Two forms of ‘Team Review’ are undertaken. First, there is an Instructional Plan Review, which examines the course objective, materials and assessments. Second, there is a Web Design Review, which helps identify problems with the instructional design, functionality or feasibility. These two review milestones have had several additional benefits including better project management, identifying professional development needs, ensuring diversity, and identifying strengths and weaknesses in the quality assurance processes themselves.