Quality in online learning

Quality in online learning

Interactive and effective learning

Let's go!

Learning Objectives

Componets of high quality courses

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

Frameworks

Discuss one or two frameworks for quality in online learning.

Synthesize

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

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

Survey

Examples

Example 1: Computer Science, Harvard

Example 2: Design Your Career, Stanford

Recap

Example 1

+ more info

CS50 at Harvard College

Next

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."

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

Choose your evaluation method for Harvard's course

Examine using Quality Matters rubric

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

Examine using IELO framework

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

did not meet standard

met standard

Strong use of technology.

Many ways to engage with professor.

Research supported.

Lack of annotations.

Updated regularly.

Lack of concrete assessment.

Many ways to meet.

Learning objectives not measurable.

The Harvard Computer Science course stacks up like this:

quality matters

Return to evaluation methods

Continue

Learning context lacked collaboration, except hackathon.

did not meet standard

met standard

Multidisciplinary.

Student role of explorer.

Flexible and interactive.

Lack of performance-based assessment.

Media use and "learning by doing."

Instructor did not do much facilitation.

Interconnected material.

Lacked a sense of seamlessness.

The Harvard Computer Science course stacks up like this:

IELO

Return to evaluation methods

Continue

Survey

Examples

Example 1: Computer Science, Harvard

Example 2: Design Your Career, Stanford

Recap

Example 2

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

This course includes a lot of personal reflections and exercises.

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 Quality Matters rubric

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

Examine using IELO framework

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

did not meet standard

met standard

Engaging videos.

High accessibility score.

Backed by research.

No one-to-one support offered.

Had interactive surveys.

Lack of concrete assessment.

Offered an overview and introduction,

Hard to reach a real teacher.

The Stanford Design Your Career course stacks up like this:

quality matters

Return to evaluation methods

Continue

Learning context lacked collaboration.

did not meet standard

met standard

Media use through technology.

Lack of performance-based assessment.

Authentic, realistic tasks and prompts.

Not highly interactive.

Generative mode of learning via surveys.

Lacked flexibility.

The Stanford Design Your Career course stacks up like this:

IELO

Return to evaluation methods

Continue

Survey

Examples

Example 1: Computer Science, Harvard

Example 2: Design Your Career, Stanford

Recap

Recap | Activity

Click only on the concepts within the respective framework

Learning objectives

AI-driven

Learner support

Use of tech

Updated regularly

Interactive

Seamless

Generative

Quality matters

IELO

Check

Check

Seamless

Multidisciplinary

Scaffolding

Surveys

Generative

Instructor facilitates

Authentic tasks

Learning objectives

Recap

Conclusions

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

Engagement and quality are connected

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

Use of technology

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

Role of instructor

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

Role of student

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

Provide your feedback

Survey 1/3

CLARITY AND RELEVANCE OF CONTENT

Survey 2/3

course objectives

GENERAL FEEDBACK

Survey 3/3

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.