Quality in online learning

Quality in online learning

Interactive and effective learning

Let's go!

Learning Objectives

Synthesize

Frameworks

Componets of high quality courses

In a discussion, synthesize understanding of quality in online courses by relating it to their own high and low quality learning experiences.

Discuss one or two frameworks for quality in online learning.

Recall at least three components of a high-quality online course.

Introduction

This course has explored frameworks for quality in online learning. Let's explore examples and examine how they score with the rubrics. Please explore at least one example. You may explore both if you wish.

Start Course

Examples

Example 1: Computer Science, Harvard

Recap

Example 2: Design Your Career, Stanford

Survey

"Demanding, but definitely doable. Social, but educational. A focused topic, but broadly applicable skills. CS50 is the quintessential Harvard (and Yale!) course."

Example 1

CS50 at Harvard College

This is a course that is offered online but has in-person options. It focuses on computer science, computational thinking, and various programming languages. It culminates with a hackathon where "spots fill up quickly."

Next

+ more info

Choose your evaluation method for Harvard's course

Examine using IELO framework

Examine using Quality Matters rubric

Use the Indicators of Engaged Online Learning (IELO) framework to evaluate this course

Use a common rubric (QM) to evaluate this course.

quality matters

The Harvard Computer Science course stacks up like this:

met standard

did not meet standard

Learning objectives not measurable.

Many ways to meet.

Lack of concrete assessment.

Updated regularly.

Lack of annotations.

Research supported.

Many ways to engage with professor.

Strong use of technology.

Continue

Return to evaluation methods

IELO

The Harvard Computer Science course stacks up like this:

met standard

did not meet standard

Lacked a sense of seamlessness.

Interconnected material.

Instructor did not do much facilitation.

Media use and "learning by doing."

Lack of performance-based assessment.

Flexible and interactive.

Student role of explorer.

Learning context lacked collaboration, except hackathon.

Multidisciplinary.

Continue

Return to evaluation methods

Examples

Example 1: Computer Science, Harvard

Recap

Example 2: Design Your Career, Stanford

Survey

Example 2

This course includes a lot of personal reflections and exercises.

Design your career, Stanford

This is an online, self-paced course to help learners construct their ideal vocation. There are videos and surveys. The course utilizes design thinking as its major framework.

+ info

A "life design lab" at Stanford discusses how to thrive. This is the team who built this course.

Choose your evaluation method for Stanford's course

Examine using IELO framework

Examine using Quality Matters rubric

Use the Indicators of Engaged Online Learning (IELO) framework to evaluate this course

Use a common rubric (QM) to evaluate this course.

quality matters

The Stanford Design Your Career course stacks up like this:

met standard

did not meet standard

Hard to reach a real teacher.

Offered an overview and introduction,

Lack of concrete assessment.

Had interactive surveys.

No one-to-one support offered.

Backed by research.

High accessibility score.

Engaging videos.

Continue

Return to evaluation methods

IELO

The Stanford Design Your Career course stacks up like this:

met standard

did not meet standard

Lacked flexibility.

Generative mode of learning via surveys.

Not highly interactive.

Authentic, realistic tasks and prompts.

Lack of performance-based assessment.

Media use through technology.

Learning context lacked collaboration.

Continue

Return to evaluation methods

Examples

Example 1: Computer Science, Harvard

Recap

Example 2: Design Your Career, Stanford

Survey

Recap | Activity

Click only on the concepts within the respective framework

IELO

Quality matters

Learning objectives

Generative

Authentic tasks

Seamless

Learning objectives

Seamless

Multidisciplinary

AI-driven

Scaffolding

Learner support

Surveys

Use of tech

Instructor facilitates

Generative

Interactive

Updated regularly

Check

Check

Recap

Conclusions

The frameworks are similar, but offer different approaches to assessing the quality of online courses.

Role of instructor

Engagement and quality are connected

High-quality online learning relies on instructors to deliver accessible course content and facilitate meaningful student interactions.

Key findings emphasized the importance of course design in fostering student engagement.

Use of technology

Role of student

The student is an active learner who engages with content, peers, and the instructor, often with more self-directed learning

Both frameworks emphasize how technology use and multi-modal learning adds to quality.

Survey 1/3

Provide your feedback

CLARITY AND RELEVANCE OF CONTENT

Survey 2/3

course objectives

Survey 3/3

GENERAL FEEDBACK

Course completed!

a component of this course

Self reflection

This course prompts learners to be curious and reflective. The first part of the course asks open-ended questions, requiring learners to think about certain career industries or roles that pique their interest.

a component of this course

Shorts

One thing this course does well is provide video "shorts" in addition to long format lecture videos. For example, in the Algorithms chapter, there are a list of "shorts" on at least six topics. A learner can go deeper in a 2:50 minute video.