Peer Review of Online Courses Work in Progress Tech II Group

1
Peer Review of Online CoursesWork in Progress
Tech II Group

• Presenter Irene Queiro-Tajalli
• Members of the team
• Carol J. Williams, Robert Vernon, Darlene Lynch,
  Debra Gohagan, Lynn Adkins, Michael Berghoef

2
Introduction

• Increase in the use of course management software
  to teach social work courses
• Importance of planning and evaluation
• Traditional approaches to course peer review are
  impossible
• How can these courses be peer reviewed?

3
Introduction cont.

• We developed a peer review instrument based on
  important teaching and learning themes found in
  the literature including
• the assumption that learning matters most
  (Angelo, 1999)
• The importance of assessment to promote learning
• Use of assessment to promote teaching skills

4
Purpose

• Provide faculty members who use online teaching
  activities/teach online with an instrument for
• Self assessment of the quality of their online
  activities
• Develop an assessment portfolio of online
  teaching
• Peer review of the quality of online teaching
• Use as a guideline for online course development

5
Literature Review

• Four core components of the learning experience
• Course content
• Teaching
• The learner
• Environmental components (Boettcher, 2003)

6
Literature Review cont.

• Course Content
• Consistent implementation of course goals and
  objectives
• Congruency of teaching approaches with course
  goals and objectives

7
Literature Review cont.

• Teaching
• Seven principles of good teaching
• Encouraging student-faculty contact
• Encouraging cooperation among students
• Promoting active learning
• Giving prompt feedback
• Emphasizing time on task
• Communicating high expectations
• Respecting diverse talents and ways of learning
  (Chickering and Gamson, 1991)

8
Literature Review cont.

• The Learner
• Learning styles
• Interaction and communication
• Disabilities
• Nondiscrimination
• Organizational design
• Assignments

9
Literature Review cont.

• Environmental Components
• User interface is critical
• Comfortable and intuitively easy platform
• Influence of interface on student perception of
  professor (Stoney and Wild, 1998 McMahon et.
  al.,1999)
• Computer anxiety as an influence on student
  performance (Brosnan, 1998)

10
Components of the Proposed Tool

• General Course Information
• Course Classification
• Pedagogy
• Teaching Methods
• Teaching Practices
• Learning Factors
• Technological Factors

11
Format of the Tool

• Throughout the instrument there are opportunities
  for
• Instructor/developers comments
• Reviewers comments

12
General Information about the Course

• Instructor/Course Developer
• Course information
• curriculum content areas addressed by the course
• Number of students
• Purpose of review
• Information about reviewers
• Instructor/course developers statement about
  areas where she/he would like feedback

13
I. Course Classification

• Type of course
• Fully available on line
• partially available online
• Instructor/developers expectations regarding
  communication
• Synchronous
• asynchronous

14
II. Pedagogy

• A. Instructor/developers teaching methods,
  including
• Lecture
• Web reading
• Student presentations
• Group projects
• Student web pages
• Audio clips

15
II. Pedagogy cont.

• B. Teaching practices, including
• Statements of rights and responsibilities,
• Instructor/developers preferred roles to
  interact with students (educator reflector
  moderator facilitator)
• Expectations for students participation

16
II. Pedagogy cont.

• C. Syllabus Assessment, including
• Coherence
• Currency
• Assignments
• Timeliness of feedback
• Grading information
• Type of course assessment

17
III. Learning Factors

• Principles of Effective Learning (Chickering
  Gamson, 1991 Erhmann, 2001)
• Encourages student-faculty contact
• Encourages cooperation among students
• Promotes active learning
• Promotes feedback
• Emphasizes time on task
• Communicates high expectations
• Respects diverse talents and ways of learning

18
IV. Technology Factors

• Expectations for student computer literacy and
  skills
• Expectation for type of needed hardware and
  software
• Interface/technology support