Views
7 months ago

Advances in E-learning-Experiences and Methodologies

Quality Assessment of

Quality Assessment of E-Facilitators Issues In QuALIty Assessment oF e-FAcILItAtors the rationale for a Quality Assessment model The quality assessment model resulted from the authors’ experience as a former HR professional and e-facilitator for different universities. Only two of the five universities (both of which were true virtual schools) offered some type of training program for new e-faculty members; these programs varied in length, thoroughness, intensity, and rigor. It was not a priority to communicate the expectations of basic quality standards to new e-faculty members. In addition to having a high quality training program, which really serves as the interview for potential e-faculty candidates, one of the universities that offered a training program offers a mentor program in which a full-time e-facilitator monitors the course of another e-faculty colleague. Nevertheless, there is no quality feedback given during the time that the e-faculty member is teaching the course, which would be useful for making immediate improvements; only a short evaluation is provided at the end of the class. While most colleges provide surveys in which students rate the overall course content and the e-facilitator, this is insufficient for quality improvement as far as the e-professor is concerned. Who monitors consistent quality assessments of product delivery via the e-facilitator? How is the quality of the e-facilitator measured? What methods are in place to maintain the highest quality standards? There is a need for a quality assessment tool that can be used to provide support and to consistently maintain good practices while the e-facilitator is teaching online. Moreover, such a tool can be linked to the e-facilitator’s annual performance appraisal. Online teaching requires an adjustment of methods. Unlike traditional face-to-face settings, applied online pedagogy requires faculty to adjust to the latest technology and to enhance student-centered learning based on cooperation and collaboration. There appears to be a correlation between what students perceived as quality service and the behavior displayed by faculty and administrators (Ham, 2003). Addressing quality and assessment during training and development sessions modifies faculty behavior, resulting in an immediate impact on the students’ perception of quality. Helms et al. (2001) argue that most university faculty in the U.S. are evaluated on their performance in teaching, research, and service and may be a part of the quality problem of higher education. For example, some e-facilitators poorly apply pedagogical methods, are not present in discussion areas, do not provide detailed and constructive feedback, or do not reply to questions in a timely manner. The University of Wisconsin won the first Baldrige education award as a higher education institution in 2002, making the successful application of TQM methods worthwhile criteria for consideration on a global level (Daniels, 2002). Since then, some 160 universities in the U.S. have actively applied TQM methods, and 50% of those universities have created quality councils (Burkhalter, 1996). Total quality in online education requires quality assessment and management tools that develop teaching and learning. There are not enough e-TQM methods currently in place to address the more significant problems (such as consistent quality delivery of teaching by e-facilitators) facing higher education in the delivery of distance learning. soLutIons And recommendAtIons Deming (1989) argues that continuous quality improvement will ultimately lead to higher customer satisfaction and lower costs as a result

Quality Assessment of E-Facilitators of fewer mistakes and delays, and better use of time, materials, and competencies, allowing firms to achieve sustainable competitive advantages. When reviewing candidates for accreditation, the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) focuses on how continuous quality improvement is integrated into the university culture. The e-quality assessment matrix (e-QAM), as part of the e-quality management (e-QM) model, meets these criteria and bridges the gap between missing TQM methods in online education. Evaluation allows us to construct and to communicate a certain level of quality (Stake, 1999). The e-QAM serves as a standard against which the e-facilitator’s performance should be evaluated and compared. This matrix can assist online universities in their continuous quality assurance, improvement, and management efforts in the delivery of e-teaching and e-learning. the e-Quality Assessment matrix (e-QAm) The e-QAM (Table 1) evaluates the e-facilitator in six areas: presence, classroom organization and environment, interaction with students, discussion, and feedback. The e-facilitator’s daily presence on the discussion board encourages students to engage in conversation; responding quickly in a respectful tone and encouraging questions conveys professionalism. Preparing the necessary administrative components of the course, such as e-mailing and posting the e-facilitators introduction, sending a welcome e-mail to the students inviting them to ask questions any time throughout the course are examples of creating an open and collaborative online environment. Furthermore, e-mailing students additional guidelines regarding course expectations, such as late assignments for example, the discussion board protocol, or even guiding them to helpful sections within the course ware are also elements of assessment for the organization and environment criteria. Interacting with students in a respectful manner, consistently applying a friendly and enthusiastic tone, being aware and sensitive to cultural differences, assisting and guiding them to a successful completion of the course are elements of assessment in the student interaction criteria. The discussion and feedback criteria assess how well e-facilitators respect student diversity and how well they provide constructive, detailed, and meaningful feedback. The matrix describes the expected performance of the e-facilitator; these activities are constructed quality standards of practice that should be delivered continuously. In addition, target activities for outstanding performance are presented as a TQM approach to exceed quality commitment to delivering e-teaching and e-learning. In contrast to the typical evaluation approach, this quality assessment tool relies on an alreadyexisting category level of good, consistent quality that is taken to the highest level by providing continuous feedback. This tool is more formative and positive to the individual being assessed: by focusing on best quality practices, it gives e- professors something toward which to strive. All quality criteria in the e-QAM are interrelated to achieve outstanding quality performance. Application of the e-QAM provides detailed and applicable feedback to the e-facilitator, allowing him or her to improve continuous quality efforts. The matrix can also serve as a tool to enhance intercultural communication and understanding between facilitators. The e-QAM respects the knowledge that each individual can bring to the online classroom while integrating quality criteria. The evaluation criteria of the e-QAM (if met and exceeded by the e-facilitator) may also affect how the online learning environment is perceived by students. As a leadership tool, the e-QAM serves sets forth the expectation of certain behavior and allows for the review, assessment, and planning of training and development approaches.

  • Page 2 and 3:

    Advances in E-Learning: Experiences

  • Page 4 and 5:

    Table of Contents Preface .........

  • Page 6 and 7:

    Chapter XIV Open Source LMS Customi

  • Page 8 and 9:

    Chapter III Philosophical and Epist

  • Page 10 and 11:

    of constructive and cooperative met

  • Page 12 and 13:

    Chapter XIV Open Source LMS Customi

  • Page 14 and 15:

    contents, learning contexts, proces

  • Page 16 and 17:

    xv these organizations do not get a

  • Page 18 and 19:

    xvii QuALIty In e-LeArnIng Before t

  • Page 20 and 21:

    allow that the teachers in training

  • Page 22 and 23:

    xxi ISO. (1986). Quality-Vocabulary

  • Page 24 and 25:

    Chapter I RAPAD: A Reflective and P

  • Page 26 and 27:

    RAPAD in fields such as law, engine

  • Page 28 and 29:

    RAPAD mystery to the new student. B

  • Page 30 and 31:

    RAPAD example, whereas Laurillard h

  • Page 32 and 33:

    RAPAD Ontologically, systems philos

  • Page 34 and 35:

    RAPAD information related processes

  • Page 36 and 37:

    RAPAD methods and techniques accord

  • Page 38 and 39:

    RAPAD 2. An introduction to learnin

  • Page 40 and 41:

    RAPAD then asked to reflect on and

  • Page 42 and 43:

    RAPAD Figure 4. A rich picture to h

  • Page 44 and 45:

    RAPAD Again using techniques from t

  • Page 46 and 47:

    RAPAD university preparation course

  • Page 48 and 49:

    RAPAD The third interface is at the

  • Page 50 and 51:

    RAPAD Knight, P.T., & Trowler, P. (

  • Page 52 and 53:

    RAPAD AddItIonAL reAdIngs Goodyear,

  • Page 54 and 55:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning t

  • Page 56 and 57:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning (

  • Page 58 and 59:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning s

  • Page 60 and 61:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning r

  • Page 62 and 63:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning o

  • Page 64 and 65:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning n

  • Page 66 and 67:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning M

  • Page 68 and 69:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning W

  • Page 70 and 71:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 72 and 73:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 74 and 75:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 76 and 77:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 78 and 79:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 80 and 81:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 82 and 83:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 84 and 85:

    Chapter IV E-Mentoring: An Extended

  • Page 86 and 87:

    E-Mentoring However, what is unders

  • Page 88 and 89:

    E-Mentoring baugh, & Williams, 2004

  • Page 90 and 91:

    E-Mentoring Table 2. Contact. Diffe

  • Page 92 and 93:

    E-Mentoring Table 10. Ethical impli

  • Page 94 and 95:

    E-Mentoring Table 15. Technology st

  • Page 96 and 97:

    E-Mentoring Table 21. Coaching. Bes

  • Page 98 and 99:

    E-Mentoring Table 27. Moment. Best

  • Page 100 and 101:

    E-Mentoring Moreover, existing rese

  • Page 102 and 103:

    E-Mentoring Kasprisin, C. A., Singl

  • Page 104 and 105:

    E-Mentoring Ensher, E. A., Heun, C.

  • Page 106 and 107:

    Chapter V Training Teachers for E-L

  • Page 108 and 109:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning FL

  • Page 110 and 111:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning ne

  • Page 112 and 113:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning A

  • Page 114 and 115:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning yo

  • Page 116 and 117:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning Di

  • Page 118 and 119:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning ht

  • Page 120 and 121:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 122 and 123:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 124 and 125:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 126 and 127:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 128 and 129:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 130 and 131:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 132 and 133:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 134 and 135:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 136 and 137:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 138 and 139:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 140 and 141:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 142 and 143:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 144 and 145:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 146 and 147:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 148 and 149:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 150 and 151:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 152 and 153:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 154 and 155:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 156 and 157:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 158 and 159:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 160 and 161:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 162 and 163:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 164 and 165:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 166 and 167:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 168 and 169:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 170 and 171:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 172 and 173:

    Chapter IX AI Techniques for Monito

  • Page 174 and 175:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 176 and 177:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 178 and 179:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 180 and 181:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 182 and 183:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 184 and 185:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 186 and 187:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 188 and 189:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 190 and 191:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 192 and 193:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 194 and 195:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 196 and 197:

    Chapter X Knowledge Discovery from

  • Page 198 and 199:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 200 and 201:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 202 and 203:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 204 and 205:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 206 and 207:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 208 and 209:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 210 and 211:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 212 and 213:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 214 and 215:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 216 and 217:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 218 and 219:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 220 and 221:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 222 and 223:

    Chapter XI Swarm-Based Techniques i

  • Page 224 and 225:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 226 and 227:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 228 and 229:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 230 and 231:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 232 and 233:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 234 and 235:

    Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin

  • Page 236 and 237:

    Chapter XII E-Learning 2.0: The Lea

  • Page 238 and 239:

    E-Learning 2.0 Table 1. Different s

  • Page 240 and 241:

    E-Learning 2.0 Figure 1. Difference

  • Page 242 and 243:

    E-Learning 2.0 where the blog is al

  • Page 244 and 245:

    E-Learning 2.0 process. Along this

  • Page 246 and 247:

    E-Learning 2.0 forth, and, of cours

  • Page 248 and 249:

    E-Learning 2.0 Finally, it is impor

  • Page 250 and 251:

    E-Learning 2.0 never be a hotchpotc

  • Page 252 and 253:

    E-Learning 2.0 McPherson, K. (2006)

  • Page 254 and 255:

    E-Learning 2.0 Rosen, A. (2006). Te

  • Page 256 and 257:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 258 and 259:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 260 and 261:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 262 and 263:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 264 and 265:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 266 and 267:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 268 and 269:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 270 and 271:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 272 and 273:

    Telematic Environments and Competit

  • Page 274 and 275:

    Open Source LMS Customization Intro

  • Page 276 and 277:

    Open Source LMS Customization or ev

  • Page 278 and 279:

    Open Source LMS Customization compa

  • Page 280 and 281:

    Open Source LMS Customization Figur

  • Page 282 and 283:

    Open Source LMS Customization Figur

  • Page 284 and 285:

    Open Source LMS Customization Figur

  • Page 286 and 287:

    Open Source LMS Customization Haina

  • Page 288 and 289:

    Evaluation and Effective Learning p

  • Page 290 and 291:

    Evaluation and Effective Learning r

  • Page 292 and 293:

    Evaluation and Effective Learning t

  • Page 294 and 295: Evaluation and Effective Learning p
  • Page 296 and 297: Evaluation and Effective Learning m
  • Page 298 and 299: Evaluation and Effective Learning c
  • Page 300 and 301: Evaluation and Effective Learning H
  • Page 302 and 303: Chapter XVI Formative Online Assess
  • Page 304 and 305: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 306 and 307: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 308 and 309: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 310 and 311: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 312 and 313: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 314 and 315: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 316 and 317: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 318 and 319: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 320 and 321: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 322 and 323: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 324 and 325: 0 Chapter XVII Designing an Online
  • Page 326 and 327: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 328 and 329: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 330 and 331: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 332 and 333: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 334 and 335: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 336 and 337: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 338 and 339: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 340 and 341: Designing an Online Assessment in E
  • Page 342 and 343: Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator
  • Page 346 and 347: Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator
  • Page 348 and 349: Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator
  • Page 350 and 351: Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator
  • Page 352 and 353: Chapter XIX E-QUAL: A Proposal to M
  • Page 354 and 355: E-QUAL is proposed to evaluate the
  • Page 356 and 357: E-QUAL provide competent, service-o
  • Page 358 and 359: E-QUAL 2004; Scalan, 2003) and qual
  • Page 360 and 361: E-QUAL benchmarks address technolog
  • Page 362 and 363: E-QUAL E-learning added two differe
  • Page 364 and 365: E-QUAL Table 6. Application of the
  • Page 366 and 367: E-QUAL Future trends The future of
  • Page 368 and 369: E-QUAL (EQO) co-located to the 4 th
  • Page 370 and 371: E-QUAL SMEs: An analysis of e-learn
  • Page 372 and 373: E-QUAL Meyer, K. A. (2002). Quality
  • Page 374 and 375: Compilation of References Argyris,
  • Page 376 and 377: Compilation of References Biggs, J.
  • Page 378 and 379: Compilation of References Cabero, J
  • Page 380 and 381: Compilation of References Comezaña
  • Page 382 and 383: Compilation of References Downes, S
  • Page 384 and 385: Compilation of References Fandos, M
  • Page 386 and 387: Compilation of References national
  • Page 388 and 389: Compilation of References Hudson, B
  • Page 390 and 391: Compilation of References Harbour.
  • Page 392 and 393: Compilation of References Little, J
  • Page 394 and 395:

    Compilation of References Metros, S

  • Page 396 and 397:

    Compilation of References ONeill, K

  • Page 398 and 399:

    Compilation of References Preece, J

  • Page 400 and 401:

    Compilation of References Sadler, D

  • Page 402 and 403:

    Compilation of References Shin, N.,

  • Page 404 and 405:

    Compilation of References tional Co

  • Page 406 and 407:

    Compilation of References Vermetten

  • Page 408 and 409:

    Compilation of References Yu, F. Y.

  • Page 410 and 411:

    About the Contributors Juan Pablo d

  • Page 412 and 413:

    About the Contributors part: “An

  • Page 414 and 415:

    About the Contributors María D. R-

  • Page 416 and 417:

    About the Contributors Applications

  • Page 418 and 419:

    Index e-learning tools, automated p

  • Page 420:

    Socrates 55 Sophists 55 student-foc

TOP - IRC - ACT - Advanced Communication Technologies
October 2007 Volume 10 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...
Advancing Collaborative Learning with ICT - The ICT Connection ...
Learn Hay Group's world renowned methodologies
Cameron final report 2009 - Office for Learning and Teaching
Social Network and E-Learning
RECENT ADVANCES in RISK MANAGEMENT ... - Wseas.us
Advances In Clinical Psychiatry - CME Activities
National Standards of Quality for Online Courses - K12HSN
RM Kaleidos Learning Platform - RM.com
Support for Learning Team - East Ayrshire Council
June New Rank Advancements N E W S L E T T E R - Synergy Pulse
Wings of Learning - Esmée Fairbairn Foundation
The Role of Student Affairs in Student Learning Assessment
Leading After-School Learning Communities - Utah Afterschool ...
HIV & AIDS and supportive learning environments; Good policy and ...
Parents and learning - National School Climate Center
Learning to Be Where We Are - Great Lakes Stewardship Initiative
the new girls' movement - Civic Practices Network
Introducing Netbook Pedagogies in Schools - European Schoolnet
Evaluating the Educational Progress of Young ... - Victoria University
MTM Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience in Ambulatory Care
Organizational Change Management Methodology
The Joy of Learning - ACT - Advanced Communication Technologies
Non-inferiority trials: advances in concepts and methodology
Methodology for Monitoring and Assessment of the Level of ...