Standards quality assurance best practice and benchmarking in e learning
Download
1 / 30

Standards, quality assurance, best practice and benchmarking in e-learning - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 81 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Standards, quality assurance, best practice and benchmarking in e-learning. Professor Paul Bacsich Matic Media Ltd, and Middlesex University, UK. The Menu. Standards (technical) Quality Assurance Standards (content) Standards (pedagogy and process) Best Practice Excellence?

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha

Download Presentation

Standards, quality assurance, best practice and benchmarking in e-learning

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Standards, quality assurance, best practice and benchmarking in e-learning

Professor Paul Bacsich

Matic Media Ltd, and

Middlesex University, UK


The Menu

  • Standards (technical)

  • Quality Assurance

    • Standards (content)

    • Standards (pedagogy and process)

  • Best Practice

    • Excellence?

  • Benchmarking

  • Conclusions


Standards (technical)

  • UK follows mainly IMS

  • Agency called CETIS set up by JISC to advise universities and colleges on IMS

  • A few mega universities (OU, Ufi, etc) are direct members of IMS

  • IMS Learning Design gaining influence

  • Also e-portfolios


Standards (Content)

  • Quality Assurance Agency has set up “subject benchmarks”

  • More about generalised competences than detailed syllabi

  • See www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/benchmark/


Standards (pedagogy and process)

  • Quality Assurance Agency (QAA)

  • “Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education”

  • See www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeOfPractice/

  • Not much on pedagogy – this is left to the discretion of the professor


QAA in e-learning

  • Little has been done specifically on e-learning – but see…

  • “Collaborative provision and flexible and distributed learning (including e-learning)”

  • Recent – September 2004

  • Some feel it says too little, others do not want to be restricted


Digression on Pedagogy

  • Higher Education Academy

  • “works with universities and colleges, discipline groups, individual staff and organisations to help them deliver the best possible learning experience for all students”

  • Runs Subject Centres for each subject

  • Beginning to advise on e-learning


Best practice in e-learning

  • Not much studied in the UK yet

  • OU a major source of advice

  • UKeU set up to crystallise best practice into an operational business

  • It failed – but its legacy may help

    • Committee for Academic Quality

  • US much more active – see e.g. “Quality on the Line” (IHEP, 2000)


In UK, universities compete- and now in e-learning

  • Universities want to judge how well they are doing in e-learning

  • And funding agencies also want to know

  • But universities don’t want to tell if they are doing badly! Not the public, not the funding agencies.

  • And universities (like people) are not good at judging themselves.


Benchmarking

  • Like Activity Based Costing, it has been around for many years

  • Unlike ABC, but like BPR, quality, excellence, etc; no one is now sure what it means…


Back to Basics (Xerox)

a process of self-evaluation and self-improvement

through the systematic and collaborative comparison of practice [process]

and performance [metrics, KPIs]

with competitors [or comparators]

in order to identify own strengths and weaknesses,

and learn how to adapt and improve

as conditions change.


Implicit

Independent

Internal

Vertical

Inputs or Processes

Metric

Explicit

Collaborative [clubs]

External

Horizontal

Outputs

Qualitative

(After Jackson)

Benchmarking Dichotomies


Focus of my work

  • Focussed purely on e-learning

  • But not to any particular style (e.g. DL)

  • Oriented to institutions past the “a few projects” stage

  • Suitable for desk research as well as invasive studies

  • Suitable for single- and multi-institution studies


Benchmarking (in Universities)

  • There are several reports that will tell you how to do benchmarking in general

    • Higher Education Academy (UK)

    • Learning and Skills Development Agency (UK)

    • Department of Education Training and Youth Affairs (Australia)


Benchmarking (in Universities)

  • And some agencies can help:

    • European Benchmarking Programme on University Management (ESMU, Brussels)

    • English Universities Benchmarking Club


Benchmarking in e-Learning

  • There are veryfew reports

    • National Learning Network (UK) –not for universities, but for colleges

    • E-Learning Maturity Model (NZ) – brand new!


Quality/Best Practice in e-Learning

  • There are a few reports (US):

    • APQC/SHEEO Study 1998 (US)

    • IHEP “Quality on the Line” 2000 (US)

  • And several projects (EU):

    • BENVIC

    • SEEQUEL

    • Swiss Virtual Campus @ Lugano: MINE


Excellence (?) in e-Learning

  • New project:E-xcellence (EADTU and others)

  • Outside e-learning, several projects:

    • Consortium for Excellence in Higher Education (UK)


Benchmarking e-learning

A “synthesis”


Processes or Outputs?

  • Outputs first (can be done by desk research)

  • Processes later (best done in clubs or invasive studies)

  • Inputs not of interest to students; but of course of interest to funders


Metrics or Bureaucratic

  • Use a 6-point scale

    • 5 from Likert plus 1 more for “excellence”

  • Backed up by metrics where possible

  • Also contextualised by narrative

  • Remember the problems of judging “best practice”; judging “better practice” is easier


Other Decisions

  • Explicit (otherwise you are not trying)

  • Independent or collaborative

  • Internal or external

  • Horizontal: focus on processes across the whole institution; do not be seduced into individual projects


How Many Benchmarks?

  • It is like ABC: how many activities?

  • Answer: Not 5, not 500.

  • Better answer: Well under 100.

    • Composite some criteria together

    • Remove any not specific to e-learning

    • Be careful about any which are not provably critical success factors.


How Many do Others Have?

  • LSDA (UK) has 14

  • IHEP (US) has 24

  • APQC/SHEEO (US) had 14

  • (Breaking news) EMM (NZ) has 43


Pick and Mix System

  • 25 criteria (liable to grow to around 30)

  • 6 levels, backed up by qualitative and numeric information

  • Student-oriented

  • Focussed on critical success factors

  • Requires no long training course to understand, if you know about e-learning

  • Methodology-agnostic


“Adoption phase” (Rogers)

  • Innovators only

  • Early adopters taking it up

  • Early adopters adopted; early majority taking it up

  • Early majority adopted; late majority taking it up

  • All taken up except laggards, who are now taking it up (or retiring or leaving)

  • First wave embedded, second wave under way (e.g. m-learning after e-learning)


“Training”

  • No systematic training for e-learning

  • Some systematic training, e.g. in some projects and departments

  • U-wide training programme but little monitoring of attendance or encouragement to go

  • U-wide training programme, monitored and incentivised

  • All staff trained in VLE use, training appropriate to job type – and retrained when needed

  • Staff increasingly keep themselves up to date in a “just in time, just for me” fashion except in situations of discontinuous change


What’s next?


Next Steps

  • Correlate with “quality” and “excellence” projects in EU

  • Publish a review report on UK Committee for Academic Quality (in e-Learnng) August

  • Review underpinning methodologies (CMM etc)

  • Literature search outside Europe, US and Commonwealth

  • Series of workshops

    • at ALT-C 2005 Manchester September

    • At ACODE Australia November

    • at Online Educa Berlin December


Thank you for listeningAny questions?

Professor Paul Bacsich

Global Campus, Middlesex University

p.bacsich@mdx.ac.uk

www.cs.mdx.ac.uk/staff/profiles/p_bacsich.html


ad
  • Login