 |
| img src |
Table of Contents
I. Reflection
II. Rubrics for evaluation
a. Course: Introduction to Databases
b. Course: Genetics and Society: A Course for Educators
For basis of comparison, I evaluated two courses provided by Coursera. I was careful to select two courses that were different in subject area and date of creation, and selected both a self-paced and scheduled course. For this comparison, I decided to use the Quality Matters Rubric Standards 2011- 2013 edition with Assigned Point Values to evaluate both courses.
I first evaluated an introductory database course designed by Stanford educator Dr. Jennifer Widom in 2011. I had actually signed up to take this course last June and enjoyed the chance to evaluate it. Although the original design of the course required strict adherence to a schedule with specific due dates for assignments, the course has since been modified to work as self-paced. To do this, discussion forums are left open, but no instructor interaction is available, no peer interaction is required, and grading is only of automated multiple choice exams. Overall, the course received a 78 out of 95 possible points, scoring zero points on six standards. The stand-out deficiencies of the course are that it is difficult to know how to proceed through the course without referencing three different pages, which caused confusion, and the multiple choice assessments do a poor job of determining one’s understanding of the various components of databases, as the questions often seemed at a distance from the reading material and video lectures. Otherwise, the course succeeds in what it set out to do: provide an introduction to databases for students familiar with basic computer science theory.
By comparison, Genetics and Society by Drs. Rob DeSalle and David Randle is offered the for the first time this month (September 2013) and follows a mandatory schedule. The specifics of the course are outlined in print and in two separate introductory videos. Assignments are varied, expectations are clearly outlined, a weekly checklist is provided, and students know exactly how their grade will be computed. Student interaction is not only encouraged, but a “graded” component of the course, as one of the requirements is to respond in writing to three students’ major papers. This type of peer assessment/commentary was sadly missing from the self-paced course on databases. This course scored an impressive 91 out of 95, losing points in its lack of direction for students who need technical support or accessibility services (though this is more a fault of the MOOC provider, Coursera, than the course creators).
Both courses appear to accomplish what they propose to do; however, the Genetics and Society course was better organized and incorporated more opportunities for student-to-student interaction and engagement. A positive surprise, the courses did provide subtitles for all videos and the entirety of the course material would easily be parsed and understood by a screen-reader.
This exercise influenced my understanding of quality online courses in many ways. One, for the first time I had a rubric by which I could measure the course. It was useful to see in which ways the course succeed and failed to meet the standards, and I began to think of ways to meet those standards if I were redesigning the course. For example, I would clearly link to accessibility options (in the case of Genetics and Society) and then reorganize the course weekly requirements so they are accessible in one place (Introduction to Databases). I am sure I will think of this exercise when I design courses in the future.
Rubric: Quality Matters Rubric Standards 2011- 2013 edition with Assigned Point Values Copied from Quality Matters
Rubric: Quality Matters Rubric Standards 2011- 2013 edition with Assigned Point Values. „Copied from Quality Matters
I. REFLECTION
For basis of comparison, I evaluated two courses provided by Coursera. I was careful to select two courses that were different in subject area and date of creation, and selected both a self-paced and scheduled course. For this comparison, I decided to use the Quality Matters Rubric Standards 2011- 2013 edition with Assigned Point Values to evaluate both courses.
I first evaluated an introductory database course designed by Stanford educator Dr. Jennifer Widom in 2011. I had actually signed up to take this course last June and enjoyed the chance to evaluate it. Although the original design of the course required strict adherence to a schedule with specific due dates for assignments, the course has since been modified to work as self-paced. To do this, discussion forums are left open, but no instructor interaction is available, no peer interaction is required, and grading is only of automated multiple choice exams. Overall, the course received a 78 out of 95 possible points, scoring zero points on six standards. The stand-out deficiencies of the course are that it is difficult to know how to proceed through the course without referencing three different pages, which caused confusion, and the multiple choice assessments do a poor job of determining one’s understanding of the various components of databases, as the questions often seemed at a distance from the reading material and video lectures. Otherwise, the course succeeds in what it set out to do: provide an introduction to databases for students familiar with basic computer science theory.
By comparison, Genetics and Society by Drs. Rob DeSalle and David Randle is offered the for the first time this month (September 2013) and follows a mandatory schedule. The specifics of the course are outlined in print and in two separate introductory videos. Assignments are varied, expectations are clearly outlined, a weekly checklist is provided, and students know exactly how their grade will be computed. Student interaction is not only encouraged, but a “graded” component of the course, as one of the requirements is to respond in writing to three students’ major papers. This type of peer assessment/commentary was sadly missing from the self-paced course on databases. This course scored an impressive 91 out of 95, losing points in its lack of direction for students who need technical support or accessibility services (though this is more a fault of the MOOC provider, Coursera, than the course creators).
Both courses appear to accomplish what they propose to do; however, the Genetics and Society course was better organized and incorporated more opportunities for student-to-student interaction and engagement. A positive surprise, the courses did provide subtitles for all videos and the entirety of the course material would easily be parsed and understood by a screen-reader.
This exercise influenced my understanding of quality online courses in many ways. One, for the first time I had a rubric by which I could measure the course. It was useful to see in which ways the course succeed and failed to meet the standards, and I began to think of ways to meet those standards if I were redesigning the course. For example, I would clearly link to accessibility options (in the case of Genetics and Society) and then reorganize the course weekly requirements so they are accessible in one place (Introduction to Databases). I am sure I will think of this exercise when I design courses in the future.
II. RUBRICS FOR EVAULATION
A. Course: Introduction to Databases by Dr. Jennifer Widom (Coursera)
Rubric: Quality Matters Rubric Standards 2011- 2013 edition with Assigned Point Values Copied from Quality Matters
Note: As stated on the Quality Matters website, “There are no partial points awarded, standard is either met or not based on the majority decision of the review team.”
---------------------------------------------
Course Overview and Introduction
Standard Points Available Pts Earned
1.1 Instructions make clear how to get started and where to find various course components.
|
3
|
3
|
1.2 Students are introduced to the purpose and structure of the course.
|
3
|
3
|
1.3 Etiquette expectations (sometimes called “netiquette”) for online discussions, email, and other forms of communication are stated clearly.
|
2
|
2
|
1.4 Course and/or institutional policies with which the student is expected to comply are clearly stated, or a link to current policies is provided.
|
2
|
2
|
1.5 Prerequisite knowledge in the discipline and/or any required competencies are clearly stated.
|
1
|
1
|
1.6 Minimum technical skills expected of the student are clearly stated.
|
1
|
1
|
1.7 The self-introduction by the instructor is appropriate and available online.
|
1
|
1
|
1.8 Students are asked to introduce themselves to the class
|
1
|
0
|
Learning Objectives (Competencies)
2.1 The course learning objectives describe outcomes that are measurable.
|
3
|
3
|
2.2 The module/unit learning objectives describe outcomes that are measurable and consistent with the course-level objectives.
|
3
|
3
|
2.3 All learning objectives are stated clearly and written from the students’ perspective.
|
3
|
3
|
2.4 Instructions to students on how to meet the learning objectives are adequate and stated clearly.
|
3
|
3
|
2.5 The learning objectives are appropriately designed for the level of the course.
|
3
|
3
|
Assessment and Measurement
3.1 The types of assessments selected measure the stated learning objectives and are consistent with course activities and resources.
|
3
|
0
|
3.2 The course grading policy is stated clearly.
|
3
|
3
|
3.3 Specific and descriptive criteria are provided for the evaluation of students’ work and participation and are tied to the course grading policy.
|
3
|
3
|
3.4 The assessment instruments selected are sequenced, varied, and appropriate to the student work being assessed.
|
2
|
0
|
3.5 Students have multiple opportunities to measure their own learning progress.
|
2
|
2
|
Instructional Materials
4.1 The instructional materials contribute to the achievement of the stated course and module/unit learning objectives.
|
3
|
3
|
4.2 The purpose of instructional materials and how the materials are to be used for learning activities are clearly explained.
|
3
|
3
|
4.3 All resources and materials used in the course are appropriately cited.
|
2
|
3
|
4.4 The instructional materials are current.
|
2
|
2
|
4.5 The instructional materials present a variety of perspectives on the course content.
|
1
|
1
|
4.6 The distinction between required and optional materials is clearly explained.
|
1
|
1
|
Learner Interaction and Engagement
5.1 The learning activities promote the achievement of the stated learning objectives.
|
3
|
3
|
5.2 Learning activities provide opportunities for interaction that support active learning.
|
3
|
3
|
5.3 The instructor’s plan for classroom response time and feedback on assignments is clearly stated.
|
3
|
3
|
5.4 The requirements for student interaction are clearly articulated.
|
2
|
2
|
Course Technology
6.1 The tools and media support the course learning objectives.
|
3
|
3
|
6.2 Course tools and media support student engagement and guide the student to become an active learner.
|
3
|
0
|
6.3 Navigation throughout the online components of the course is logical, consistent, and efficient.
|
3
|
0
|
6.4 Students can readily access the technologies required in the course.
|
2
|
2
|
6.5 The course technologies are current.
|
1
|
1
|
Learner Support
7.1 The course instructions articulate or link to a clear description of the technical support offered and how to access it.
|
3
|
3
|
7.2 Course instructions articulate or link to the institution’s accessibility policies and services.
|
3
|
0
|
7.3 Course instructions articulate or link to an explanation of how the institution’s academic support services and resources can help students succeed in the course and how students can access the services.
|
2
|
2
|
7.4 Course instructions articulate or link to an explanation of how the institution’s student support services can help students succeed and how students can access the services.
|
1
|
1
|
Accessibility
8.1 The course employs accessible technologies and provides guidance on how to obtain accommodation.
|
3
|
3
|
8.2 The course contains equivalent alternatives to auditory and visual content.
|
2
|
2
|
8.3 The course design facilitates readability and minimizes distractions.
|
2
|
2
|
8.4 The course design accommodates the use of assistive technologies.
|
2
|
2
|
Score: 78/95
B. Course: Genetics and Society: A Course for Educators by Rob DeSalle, Ph.D., David Randle, Ph.D (Coursera)
Rubric: Quality Matters Rubric Standards 2011- 2013 edition with Assigned Point Values. „Copied from Quality Matters
Notes: As stated on the Quality Matters website, “There are no partial points awarded, standard is either met or not based on the majority decision of the review team.”
---------------------------------------------
Course Overview and Introduction
Standard Points Available Pts Earned
1.1 Instructions make clear how to get started and where to find various course components.
|
3
|
3
|
1.2 Students are introduced to the purpose and structure of the course.
|
3
|
3
|
1.3 Etiquette expectations (sometimes called “netiquette”) for online discussions, email, and other forms of communication are stated clearly.
|
2
|
2
|
1.4 Course and/or institutional policies with which the student is expected to comply are clearly stated, or a link to current policies is provided.
|
2
|
2
|
1.5 Prerequisite knowledge in the discipline and/or any required competencies are clearly stated.
|
1
|
1
|
1.6 Minimum technical skills expected of the student are clearly stated.
|
1
|
0
|
1.7 The self-introduction by the instructor is appropriate and available online.
|
1
|
1
|
1.8 Students are asked to introduce themselves to the class
|
1
|
1
|
Learning Objectives (Competencies)
2.1 The course learning objectives describe outcomes that are measurable.
|
3
|
3
|
2.2 The module/unit learning objectives describe outcomes that are measurable and consistent with the course-level objectives.
|
3
|
3
|
2.3 All learning objectives are stated clearly and written from the students’ perspective.
|
3
|
3
|
2.4 Instructions to students on how to meet the learning objectives are adequate and stated clearly.
|
3
|
3
|
2.5 The learning objectives are appropriately designed for the level of the course.
|
3
|
3
|
Assessment and Measurement
3.1 The types of assessments selected measure the stated learning objectives and are consistent with course activities and resources.
|
3
|
3
|
3.2 The course grading policy is stated clearly.
|
3
|
3
|
3.3 Specific and descriptive criteria are provided for the evaluation of students’ work and participation and are tied to the course grading policy.
|
3
|
3
|
3.4 The assessment instruments selected are sequenced, varied, and appropriate to the student work being assessed.
|
2
|
2
|
3.5 Students have multiple opportunities to measure their own learning progress.
|
2
|
2
|
Instructional Materials
4.1 The instructional materials contribute to the achievement of the stated course and module/unit learning objectives.
|
3
|
3
|
4.2 The purpose of instructional materials and how the materials are to be used for learning activities are clearly explained.
|
3
|
3
|
4.3 All resources and materials used in the course are appropriately cited.
|
2
|
2
|
4.4 The instructional materials are current.
|
2
|
2
|
4.5 The instructional materials present a variety of perspectives on the course content.
|
1
|
1
|
4.6 The distinction between required and optional materials is clearly explained.
|
1
|
1
|
Learner Interaction and Engagement
5.1 The learning activities promote the achievement of the stated learning objectives.
|
3
|
3
|
5.2 Learning activities provide opportunities for interaction that support active learning.
|
3
|
3
|
5.3 The instructor’s plan for classroom response time and feedback on assignments is clearly stated.
|
3
|
3
|
5.4 The requirements for student interaction are clearly articulated.
|
2
|
2
|
Course Technology
6.1 The tools and media support the course learning objectives.
|
3
|
3
|
6.2 Course tools and media support student engagement and guide the student to become an active learner.
|
3
|
3
|
6.3 Navigation throughout the online components of the course is logical, consistent, and efficient.
|
3
|
3
|
6.4 Students can readily access the technologies required in the course.
|
2
|
2
|
6.5 The course technologies are current.
|
1
|
1
|
Learner Support
7.1 The course instructions articulate or link to a clear description of the technical support offered and how to access it.
|
3
|
0
|
7.2 Course instructions articulate or link to the institution’s accessibility policies and services.
|
3
|
0
|
7.3 Course instructions articulate or link to an explanation of how the institution’s academic support services and resources can help students succeed in the course and how students can access the services.
|
2
|
2
|
7.4 Course instructions articulate or link to an explanation of how the institution’s student support services can help students succeed and how students can access the services.
|
1
|
2
|
Accessibility
8.1 The course employs accessible technologies and provides guidance on how to obtain accommodation.
|
3
|
3
|
8.2 The course contains equivalent alternatives to auditory and visual content.
|
2
|
2
|
8.3 The course design facilitates readability and minimizes distractions.
|
2
|
2
|
8.4 The course design accommodates the use of assistive technologies.
|
2
|
2
|
Score 91/95
No comments:
Post a Comment