Quality in online learning

Let's go!

Interactive and effective learning

Quality in online learning

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

Synthesize

Discuss one or two frameworks for quality in online learning.

Frameworks

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

Componets of high quality courses

Learning Objectives

Start Course

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.

Introduction

Recap

Example 2: Design Your Career, Stanford

Example 1: Computer Science, Harvard

Examples

Survey

This is locked until you visit at least one example.

This is locked until you visit at least one example.

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

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

CS50 at Harvard College

+ more info

Example 1

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

Examine using IELO framework

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

Examine using Quality Matters rubric

Choose your evaluation method for Harvard's course

Continue

Return to evaluation methods

quality matters

The Harvard Computer Science course stacks up like this:

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.

met standard

did not meet standard

Continue

Return to evaluation methods

IELO

The Harvard Computer Science course stacks up like this:

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.

Multidisciplinary.

met standard

did not meet standard

Learning context lacked collaboration, except hackathon.

Recap

Example 2: Design Your Career, Stanford

Example 1: Computer Science, Harvard

Examples

Survey

This is locked until you visit at least one example.

This is locked until you visit at least one example.

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

This course includes a lot of personal reflections and exercises.

+ info

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.

Design your career, Stanford

Example 2

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

Examine using IELO framework

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

Examine using Quality Matters rubric

Choose your evaluation method for Stanford's course

Continue

Return to evaluation methods

quality matters

The Stanford Design Your Career course stacks up like this:

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.

met standard

did not meet standard

Continue

Return to evaluation methods

IELO

The Stanford Design Your Career course stacks up like this:

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.

met standard

did not meet standard

Learning context lacked collaboration.

Recap

Example 2: Design Your Career, Stanford

Example 1: Computer Science, Harvard

Examples

Survey

Learning objectives

Authentic tasks

Instructor facilitates

Generative

Surveys

Scaffolding

Multidisciplinary

Seamless

Check

Check

IELO

Quality matters

Generative

Seamless

Interactive

Updated regularly

Use of tech

Learner support

AI-driven

Learning objectives

Click only on the concepts within the respective framework

Recap | Activity

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

Role of student

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

Role of instructor

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

Use of technology

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

Engagement and quality are connected

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

Conclusions

Recap

CLARITY AND RELEVANCE OF CONTENT

Survey 1/3

Provide your feedback

course objectives

Survey 2/3

Survey 3/3

GENERAL FEEDBACK

Course completed!

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.

Self reflection

a component of this course

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.

Shorts

a component of this course