Click here to download this Memo as a .Docx document.
Course Review Checklist
MOU Addendum 1: Course Design and Development Minimum Standards
This checklist is intended as an adaptable tool for reviewing components of online courses. For each applicable course a selected Instructional Designer, other than the course’s assigned designer will (1) use the checklist to determine if the professor has successfully incorporated each standard and will (2) offer recommendations to the professor for the course regarding areas that need improvement. This instrument should be used as a tool for making formative assessments and recommendations for continuous improvement, as well as assessing readiness for initial course offering. In order for a course to be approved, it must meet 80% of the listed standards, particularly those items deemed essential.
Timeline Review Process:
Faculty Responsibilities:
The proposed eight week module must be submitted by the Faculty Member to their assigned Instructional Designer at least eight weeks prior to the section’s starting date.
In the event of a late faculty course assignment (less than sixteen weeks prior to the section’s starting date) exceptions will be made in regards to the submission deadline.
At least four weeks of the proposed eight week module content (i.e. syllabus, objectives, assignments, assessments, activities, rubrics, etc.) must be submitted at least eight weeks prior to the section’s starting date.
The remaining four week module content must be submitted at least six weeks prior to the section’s starting date.
Instructional Designer Responsibilities:
The course must be fully developed (all eight week module content) and submitted by the Instructional Designer for review of all standards outlined in Addendum 1 at least four weeks prior to the section’s starting date. The review will be performed by a selected Instructional Designer, not the course’s assigned designer. The selected Instructional Designer will return their assessment of the course within 7 days of its receipt.
In the event that corrections need to be made, the revised course must be submitted for review at least two weeks prior to the section’s starting date. The selected Instructional Designer will return their assessment of the revised course within 7 days of its receipt.
Each course standard includes a set of review guidelines and recommendations on how each standard might be implemented. Information on each is provided below:
Guidelines: These references serve as a foundation for the items on the checklist, as well as the guidelines for how to approach each item. These guidelines should be read and understood by all involved parties (Faculty Member, Instructional Designer, and Selected Instructional Designer Reviewer) to ensure that each standard is analyzed properly.
Recommendations: The recommendations included in this section are provided to encourage discussion on how online courses may be improved. These recommendations are meant to be examples of activities, policies, or procedures. This list is not exhaustive, nor does it apply to the context of every course. Rather, these recommendations are possibilities to consider as standards are implemented.
Standard Point Values
This Course Review Checklist consists of 14 standards. Each standard has been assigned a point value depending on its relative importance. Seven (7) of the standards are considered essential in a quality online course and have the highest point value of three (3). These standards have also been deemed mandatory. The remaining seven (7) standards are assigned a point value of one (1) or two (2). The maximum number of possible points is thirty-three (33).
Relative Value
# of Standards
Relative Totals
Essential/Required (3pts)
7
21
Highly Recommended (2pts)
5
10
Important (1pt)
2
2
Total
14
33
Rating Procedure
The selected Instructional Designer will rate each standard by deciding whether or not the course meets the standard (i.e., either “yes” the course meets the standard, or “no” it doesn’t.). A “yes” rating is the value assigned to the standard (1, 2 or 3). A “no” rating is a value of “0”. Comments should be provided for each standard, especially if improvement is required for a particular standard(s).
In order for a course to successfully meet the established standards, the following are required.
Answer “Yes” to all of the 3-point, Essential/Required standards (1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 4.1)
Earn 26 or more points out of 33 (approx. 80%).
QMR: Quality Matters Rubric Compliant. If a standard is labeled as “QMR”, it is directly aligned with the Quality Matters Rubric.
Course (i.e. MAN 6625)
Program (i.e. MIB, MISRE)
Department (i.e. Management)
Course Professor(s)
Reviewer Name
Review Completion Date (dd mm yyyy)
Course Content (CC)
CC
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
1.1
(QMR)
The course is built using FIU Online’s Master Template
3
Guidelines:
All courses should use the Master Template as a foundation for course design
Recommendations:
· Refrain from modifying the course from the Master Template to any great degree (Course Layout, Course Navigation Menu, Color Schemes, Instructions, Module Level Formatting should remain consistent).
· Utilize the tools and layout which are already built into the Master Template and are necessary for your course.
CC
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
1.2
(QMR)
The tools necessary to facilitate communication between students and faculty members are readily available
3
Guidelines:
Email/Messages, Discussion forums, and/or chat rooms are incorporated into the course design in order to facilitate communication between all members of the course.
Recommendations:
· Make use of the built in communication features of Blackboard (Course email/Messages, discussion forums, etc.). The instructor’s plan for response time should be clearly stated.
· Adobe Connect Pro may be incorporated in all Master-level courses in order to enhance course delivery, Professor-to-student feedback, as well as student-to-student level communication.
CC
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
1.3
(QMR)
The course goals and objectives are clearly stated. The faculty member has made use of course-level and unit/module-level objectives.
3
Guidelines:
Students are easily able to view both course level and module/unit level objectives from within the course.
Recommendations:
· Use clear and concise rhetoric, avoiding complex and confusing instruction.
· Objectives should include criteria by which the faculty member can assess a student’s performance.
· Objectives should be measurable. Use action verbs that describe activities that students will perform and the faculty member will observe and measure.
· Objectives should inform (align with) all course resources, assignments and assessments.
CC
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
1.4
Intellectual property rights have been respected and appropriate citation has been used in order to avoid infringement of copyright laws
2
Guidelines:
Questions to consider include the following:
1. Has the faculty member been careful to respect the intellectual property rights of others by using proper citation?
2. Does the faculty member indicate to students the importance of intellectual property rights and copyrighted materials and the penalty for violating this rule?
Recommendations:
· When necessary, obtain written permission for use of graphics, text, charts, diagrams, etc., which have been acquired from other content producers.
· Consider using hyperlinks in order to direct students to the original location of certain content, as opposed to importing the aforementioned content into the course design.
· Consider educating students on the importance of intellectual property rights.
· Make use of the College of Business’s “Certificate of Authorship” cover page on written assignments.
CC
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
1.5
(QMR)
There is a clear statement informing students of course requirements and expectations (prior to and at the very beginning of the semester).
1
Guidelines:
Prior to enrolling in the course, students should have access to the following course information via the Course Catalog page:
1. All course requirements such as textbooks, software, etc.
2. The weekly commitment and specific computer skills required by the course
3. The differences and possible challenges online students face versus face-to-face students
4. Whether or not students are required to meet on-campus.
5. When, where and how to contact the instructor, as well as the instructor’s timeline for responding to student inquires.
Recommendations:
· Course Catalog pages are available to students 2 to 3 weeks prior to the start of each semester; these pages can be used to dispense all of the aforementioned items.
Student Management (SM)
SM
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
2.1
(QMR)
Students have access to pertinent course information such as course grades, the course syllabus, assignment information, etc.
3
Guidelines:
Students should be able to find pertinent course information easily. All course materials should be consistently and clearly identifiable. Students should have the ability to access and track their personal progress through the course online. If a faculty member provides feedback to students, this should be readily available within the course.
Recommendations:
· Make use of the built in Grade Center and the My Grades tool. (All gradable components should have a corresponding column in the Grade Center made to visible to the students in the My Grades tool).
SM
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
2.2
(QMR)
Instructions are provided for all gradable components, and are clearly outlined in the course.
3
Guidelines:
Instructions regarding all gradable components (assignments, assessments, group projects, discussion board postings, etc.) are clearly and effectively communicated in the syllabus and/or course. There should be little room for interpretation regarding the faculty member’s expectations. Response time for feedback should be clearly stated.
Recommendations:
· Take the time to ensure that all communication sent to students is free of errors (formatting, grammar, etc.)
· Be sure to respond to students’ questions.
· Make sure that all objectives are clearly communicated to students in a logical and sequential manner.
· When in doubt, have a colleague, office assistant, friend, etc. read your proposed communication. If that person is confused, chances are the students will be as well.
SM
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
2.3
(QMR)
Course resources are rich and varied, taking into account different learning styles.
2
Guidelines:
Course resources should be presented using various methods. Faculty members should avoid relying solely on text-heavy content such as silent PowerPoint presentations and .pdf files.
Recommendations:
Consider using the following to enhance course resources:
· Audio and/or visual elements (NBC Learn, Youtube, Flickr Photo, Slideshare, McGraw-Hill Connect, NookStudy, sound clips, images, charts, illustrations, graphics, etc. )
· Presentations (a recorded lecture), instead of articles/assigned readings
· Use of case-studies and real-world examples
SM
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
2.4
(QMR)
The course contains rubrics for graded assignments, and/or a clear description of grading requirements are outlined in the course syllabus
2
Guidelines:
Faculty members are encouraged to make use of grading rubrics in order to provide a clear explanation of the expectations surrounding assignments. In the absence of an actual rubric, the Faculty member should at least contain a description of expectations in the assignment section of their course syllabus.
Recommendations:
· Clearly inform students of what it will take in order to achieve full credit for any assignment in the course.
· Provide students with a checklist, example of a successfully completed assignment, or a performance rubric in order to aid their approach to the assignment.
Value
SM
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
2.5
(QMR)
Attention is paid to students with disabilities per the American’s with Disability Act section 508.
2
Guidelines:
Alternative means of access to the course materials should be provided for the vision or hearing impaired student.
Recommendations:
· An audio lecture should have a text transcript available
· A video clip should be captioned and/or have a text transcript available
Assessments & Assignments (AA)
AA
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
3.1
(QMR)
The course takes advantage of new assessment opportunities offered by online instruction.
3
Guidelines:
The types of assessments used are appropriate for the course material.
Recommendations:
Assessments should vary in form and not rely solely on multiple choice exams or publisher-generated exams/quizzes.
Alternative Assessment opportunities can include:
· Grading of online discussions that require immediate feedback.
· Peer and Self-assessment. (Consider using one of Blackboard’s third party tools to evaluate self-assessments. i.e. Study mate & Raptivity)
· Teamwork and collaborative assessment tasks.
· Online dialogue and debate.
· Online simulations and role plays.
· Digital scrapbooks and portfolios.
· Research Papers
User generated content (blog, journal, wiki, etc..)
AA
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
3.2
Precautions have been taken to limit the possibility of cheating.
2
Guidelines:
High valued assessments such as exams should be administered via a proctor and/or through alternative assignments online.
Recommendations:
· Each online exam should not be weighed over 30% of the final grade.
· High valued online exams should be proctored.
· Consider other forms of assessment. (e.g. group projects, research papers, portfolios, participation in discussions forums). (See standard 3.1)
· For online quizzes/exams:
o Vary the type of questions used, e.g. multiple choice; fill in the blank, ordering, matching, essay, or multiple answer.
o Create a “pool” of questions for each exam. Bb has the option of picking questions randomly for each student to ensure different questions in different order.
Communication Standards (CS)
CS
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
4.1
(QMR)
The Faculty Member makes adequate use of asynchronous and synchronous communication, apropos to the course content.
3
Guidelines:
Has the Faculty Member provided ample opportunities for –instructor to- student communication, as well as student-to-student communication? (Discussion Boards, Email/Messages, Journals, Wikis, Blogs, Groups, Adobe Connect etc.)
Recommendations:
· Encourage students to make use of chat rooms, group collaboration tools, discussion boards, etc.
· Include asynchronous communication in the form of emails, announcements, and discussion boards.
· Establish “virtual office hours” when the Faculty Member will be available to answer questions.
· Inform students as to the expected turnaround time for Faculty Member responses and feedback.
CS
Standard
Value
Comments
Rating
4.2
Adobe Connect Pro interactions are worked into the course design when appropriate and/or feasible.
2
Guidelines:
Whenever possible, Faculty Members should make use of the Adobe Connect Pro tool in order to provide synchronous interaction with the class. Each Faculty Member should make it a point to integrate at least one Adobe Connect session per semester. In cases where a faculty-led session is not feasible, the Faculty Member may implement student-led sessions. Such sessions may include group project collaboration, student-led discussions, etc. Implementing either of these methods would satisfy this particular standard.
Recommendations:
· Start off the semester with a welcome/orientation session.
· Faculty Members may find it useful to incorporate at least one session per topic/module.
· Adobe Connect can be used to hold review sessions prior to exams, or to explain the instructions/expectations of assignments.
· It is highly recommended that any and all Adobe Connect sessions be recorded and made available for students’ use at a later time.
· Incorporate a “study-room” or communal session for student use.
General Comments
Total Points