Quality Matters Rubric
From ElateWiki
In Fall 2003, MarylandOnline, Inc. commenced a three-year grant to create inter-institutional quality assurance for online learning. This consortium continued as a self-supporting organization after the ending of the grant through educational institution subscribers in over thirty states in the US.
Contents |
Stated Principles
The stated principles of this rubric and process are that this would be a continuous and evolving process for course quality. The rubric was built on research into e-learning, with a focus on student learning (and centeredness). The process of course reviews is based on faculty peer review, in a cross-institutional and collegal approach. The review is collaborative, based on a team approach (of three experienced online instructors along with the course faculty developer) instead of an individual reviewer.
An Overview of the Rubric
The rubric itself focuses on 8 general areas, with specific standards defined in each category (and points assigned for the evaluation). The focus is on transparency and alignment in the course build, with clear connections between the course objectives and the learning design. This rubric also encourages plenty of interactions--between the instructor and learners, learners and learners, and learners and the course contents.
The general areas include the following:
Course Overview and Introduction Learning Objectives Assessment and Measurement Resources and Materials Learner Engagement Course Technology Learner Support Accessibility
This rubric aligns with federal accessibility standards. Critical course components should work together for an aligned learner experience. Some suggest that five core elements should align especially: Learning Objectives, Assessment and Measurement, Resources and Materials, Learner Interaction, and Course Technology.
A quality course is understood to achieve a point score of 85% (with a "Yes" to all 3-point essential standards and 72 or more points overall).
Course Areas for Improvement
One trainer who has worked in higher education to support quality in online courses offered the following statistics as common areas for improvement (based on faculty responders):
Instructor self-introduction 22% Activities that foster interaction 22% Stated pre-requisite knowledge 24% Links to support services 24 - 27% Learning objectives 27% Netiquette expectations 32% Self-check / practice with feedback 38% B/W alternatives to color content 54% Alternatives to auditory / visual content 59% (Jackson, 2009).
Training for Credentialing
Quality Matters peer assessors need to be formally trained into this system.
Updates to the Rubric
The rubric is updated every two years, with the next one due in 2011.
Other Needs
An add-on to this rubric could involve intellectual property guidelines, which are not directly addressed.
This rubric seems to focus on a standard college course--and may only apply partially to short-courses, modules, and other types of online training.
Various universities and institutions of higher education have created their own rubrics and standards for quality e-learning. This rubric offers an external source for the definition of quality online learning standards in course building.
See Also
Quality Matters: http://www.qualitymatters.org/
Quality Matters Rubric: http://www.qualitymatters.org/Rubric.htm
- An annotated version of the rubric is available only with paid membership. However, a general rubric is available for perusal at their site (above).
References
Jackson, D. (2009). Create Online Courses that Meet Quality Matter Standards. SoftChalk Innovator Series.