تحسين جودة المقررات الإلکترونية عبر الإنترنت للتعليم العالي: مراجعة للنظريات والأدبيات العلمية التي تدعم معايير الجودة کواليتي ماترز ((Quality Matters وتقديم نموذج مقترح للمقررات الإلکترونية عبر الإنترنت. Improving the Quality of Online Courses for Higher Education: A Review of Theories and Scholarly Literature Underpinning Quality Matte | ||||
| التربية (الأزهر): مجلة علمية محکمة للبحوث التربوية والنفسية والاجتماعية) | ||||
| Article 17, Volume 39, 186 ج1, April 2020, Page 757-798 PDF (1.12 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: بحوث فی مجال المناهج وطرق التدریس | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/jsrep.2020.84440 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Author | ||||
| فوزية العوبثاني | ||||
| تخصص تقنيات التعليم، قسم رياض الأطفال، کلية العلوم والدراسات الإنسانية بحريملاء، جامعة شقراء، الرياض، المملکة العربية السعودية. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| مع النمو المتسارع الذي يشهده التعلم الإلکتروني عبر الإنترنت تظهر أهمية تقييم وتطوير جودة المقررات الإلکترونية التي تقدم عبر الإنترنت. تعتبر معايير الجودة کواليتي ماترز (QM) من أبرز البرامج التي طورت معايير يمکن أن تساهم في تقييم وتطوير لتحسين جودةالتعلم عبر الإنترنت اعتمادا على أصول بحثية. تم إجراء هذه الدراسة بهدف استقصاء النظريات، والدراسات، والأبحاث التي تدعم معايير الجودة، حيث قامت الدراسة بمراجعة بعض الدراسات التي هدفت إلى بحث الجوانب، والعناصر التربوية ومبادئ التصميم الهامة والضرورية لنجاح المقررات الإلکترونية التي تقدم عبر الإنترنت. بناء على النتائج قدمت الباحثة نموذجا مقترحا للمقرر الإلکتروني عبر الإنترنت وفقا لمعايير (QM)، إلى جانب تقديم بعض المقترحات والتوصيات. Abstract: Online learning is growing rapidly and continuously. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure its quality of online courses. Quality Matters program produced a research-based rubric offering quality assurance for online courses. This paper was conducted to review the theories, studies, and research informing and supporting Quality Matters standards. The study analyzed some studies to examine the important educational aspects and elements and instructional design principles necessary for the success of online courses. Findings showed that the QM standards are reliable and supported by studies and learning theories. Consequently, adopting QM rubric could be useful for improving online courses in Saudi universities. Based on the QM standards, the researcher visualizes a suggested model for an online learning course. Some recommendations and suggestions are provided based on the conclusions of the study. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| جودة التعلم عبر الإنترنت; تطوير التعلم عبر الإنترنت; التعلم عن بعد; تقييم المقررات الإلکترونية عبر الإنترنت; معايير التقييم. Online learning quality- Improving online courses - Distance learning – Evaluating online courses- Evaluation standards | ||||
| References | ||||
|
Ali, W. G. M. (2012). Factors affecting nursing student’s satisfaction with e-learning experience in King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia. dimension, 5, 13-18
Allen, I., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the course: Online education in the United States. Online Learning Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/staying-the-course.pdf
Allen, I., & Seaman, J. (2015). Grade level: Tracking online education in the United States. Online Learning Consortium. Retrieved from
Allen, I. E., Seaman, J., & Seaman, J. E. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group, LLC. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED580852.pdf
Ally, M. (2004). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. Theory and Practice of Online Learning, 2, 15–44.
Al-Salman, S. (2013). The role of faculty in the effectiveness of fully online programs (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. (3565063)
Alubthne, F. (2018). Exploring the Quality Needs of Saudi Electronic University Students: A Learner Perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ohio University, Ohio. Retrieved from https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=ohiou1518699469954247&disposition=inline
Aman, P. R. (2009). Improving learner satisfaction and retention with online instruction through systematic faculty peer review of courses. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
Andresen, M. A. (2009). Asynchronous discussion forums: success factors, outcomes, assessments, and limitations. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 249–257.
Ally, M. (2008.). Foundations of Educational Theory for Online Learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The Theory and practice of Online Learning (pp. 3-31). Retrieved from https://auspace.athabascau.ca/bitstream/handle/2149/411/?sequence=1 Armstrong, D. (2010). A Qualitative Study of Undergraduate Students’ Approaches, Perceptions, and Use of Online Tools. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Document ID 742477661. Retrieved from https://repository.usfca.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1382&context=diss
Bailey, C. J., & Card, K. A. (2009). Effective pedagogical practices for online teaching: Perception of experienced instructors. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(3), 152–155.
Baird, D. E., & Fisher, M. (2005). Neomillennial user experience design strategies: Utilizing social networking media to support “always on” learning styles. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 34(1), 5–32.
Battalio, J. (2009). Success in distance education: Do learning styles and multiple formats matter? The American Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), 71–87.
Benton, S. L., Li, D., Gross, A., Pallett, W. H., & Webster, R. J. (2013). Transactional distance and student ratings in online college courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(4), 207–217. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08923647.2013.838458
Bruning, K. (May 2005). The role of critical thinking in the online learning environment. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(5). http://www.itdl.org/Journal/May_05/article03.htm.&Garrison
Borgemenke, A. J., Holt, W. C., & Fish, W. W. (2013). Universal course shell template design and implementation to enhance student outcomes in online coursework. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 14(1), 17–23.
Chaney, B. H., Eddy, J. M., Dorman, S. M., Glessner, L., Green, B. L., & Lara-Alecio, R. (2007). Development of an instrument to assess student opinions of the quality of distance education courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 21(3), 145–164.
Chen, S. (2007). Instructional design strategies for intensive online courses: An objectivist-constructivist blended approach. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 6(1), 72–86.
Christopher, M. M., Thomas, J. A., & Tallent‐Runnels, M. K. (2004). Raising the bar: Encouraging high level thinking in online discussion forums. Roeper Review, 26(3), 166-171.
Conrad, D. L. (2002). Engagement, excitement, anxiety, and fear: Learners’ experiences of starting an online course. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(4), 2.
Dixon, R., Dixon, K., & Siragusa, L. (2007). Individuals’ perceptions of online environments: What adult learners are telling us. In ICT: Providing Choices for Learners and Learning. Proceedings. Ascilite Singapore 2007. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Dixon4/publication/242083650_Individuals'_perceptions_of_online_environments_What_adult_learners_are_telling_us/links/0046352a00a75c1093000000.pdf
Dabbagh, N., & Bannan-Ritland, B. (2005). Online learning: Concepts, strategies, and
Application. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Dykman, C. A., & Davis, C. K. (2008). Online education forum: Part two-teaching online versus teaching conventionally. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19(2), 157–164.
Dziorny, M. A. (2012). Online course design elements to better meet the academic needs of students with dyslexia in higher education (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. (Order No. 3533577)
Fichten, C. S., Asuncion, J. V., Wolforth, J., Barile, M., Budd, J., Martiniello, N., & Amsel, R. (2012). Information and communication technology related needs of college and university students with disabilities. Research in Learning Technology, 20.
Conole, G., & Fill, K. (2005). A learning design toolkit to create pedagogically effective learning activities. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, (1).
Fisher, C. (2010). Discussion, participation and feedback in online courses. ISECON Proceedings, 27, 1382.
Ford, N., Wood, F., & Walsh, C. (1994). Cognitive styles and searching. Online and CD-Rom Review, 18(2), 79–86.
Gannon-Leary, P., & Fontainha, E. (2007). Communities of practice and virtual learning communities: Benefits, barriers, and success factors. Elearning Papers, 5. pp. 20-29. ISSN 1887-1542
Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2333–2351.
Hendricks, S., & Bailey, S. (2014). What really matters? Technological proficiency in an online course. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 17(2).
Hirner, L. J. (2008). Quality indicators for evaluating distance education programs at community colleges (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri at Columbia, Columbia, MO.
Holsombach-Ebner, C. (2013). Quality assurance in large scale online course production. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 16(3).
Huang, H. M. (2002). Toward constructivism for adult learners in online learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 27–37.
Jensen, D., Self, B., Rhymer, D., Wood, J., & Bowe, M. (2002). A rocky journey toward effective assessment of visualization modules for learning enhancement in engineering mechanics. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 5(3), 150–162.
Jiang, L., & Elen, J. (2011). Why do learning goals (not) work: A reexamination of the hypothesized effectiveness of learning goals based on students’ behaviour and cognitive processes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(4), 553–573.
Kampov-Polevoi, J. (2010). Considerations for supporting faculty in transitioning a course to online format. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(2).
Kerr, E. B. (1986). Electronic leadership: A guide to moderating online conferences. IEEE transactions on professional communication, (1), 12-18.
King, S. B. (2014). Graduate student perceptions of the use of online course tools to support engagement. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(1), 5.
Kiriakidis, P. (2008). What do graduate learners say about instructor and learner discourse in online courses. In The 2008 E-Leader Conference of CASA. Retrieved from
http://www.g-casa.com/PDF/
Kruger, S. (2006, April). Students’ experiences of e-learning: a virtual ethnography into blended online learning. In the International Conference on Networked Learning (p. 29). Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8192/60c2de6e7e2acc3aeda35bed3db60441d9d1.pdf
Lee, L. (2005). Using web-based instruction to promote active learning: Learners’ perspectives. CALICO Journal, 23(1), 139–156.
Lin, H. S., Hong, Z. R., Wang, H. H., & Lee, S. T. (2011). Using reflective peer assessment to promote students’ conceptual understanding through asynchronous discussions. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 14(3), 178–189.
MacKnight, C. B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussions. Educause Quarterly, 23(4), 38–41.
Maor, D. (2003). The teacher’s role in developing interaction and reflection in an online learning community. Educational Media International 40(1–2), 127–138.
Ma, W. W., & Yuen, A. H. (2011). Understanding online knowledge sharing: An interpersonal relationship perspective. Computers & Education, 56(1), 210–219.
McAndrew, P., Farrow, R., & Cooper, M. (2012). Adapting online learning resources for all: planning for professionalism in accessibility. Research in Learning Technology, 20.
Michigan State University. (2016). Evaluating online courses. Retrieved from http://fod.msu.edu/oir/evaluating-online-courses#Online_Course_ Evaluation_Rubrics_or_Checklists
Miner, A. (2014). The effect of quality matters on student satisfaction, grades, and retention at Florida International University (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. (3626290)
Moore, J. C., & Shelton, K. (2013). Social and Student Engagement and Support: The Sloan-C Quality Scorecard for the Administration of Online Programs. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 17(1), 53–72.
Motteram, G., & Forrester, G. (2005). Becoming an online distance learner: What can be learned from students’ experiences of induction to distance programmes? Distance Education, 26(3), 281–298.
Murphy, K. L., Mahoney, S. E., & Harvell, T. J. (2000). Role of contracts in enhancing community building in web courses. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 3(3), 409–421.
Myers, J. M. (2015). Usability in online course design: Comparative perspectives on ease-of-use, satisfaction, motivation, and teacher presence (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. (3714650).
Ozkan, S., & Koseler, R. (2009). Multi-dimensional students’ evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1285–1296.
Parscal, T., & Riemer, D. (2010). Assuring quality in large-scale online course development. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(2). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer132/parscal_riemer132.html
Petraglia, J. (1998). The real world on a short leash: The (mis)application of constructivism to the design of educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(3), 53–65.
Picciano, A. G. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous learning networks, 6(1), 21–40.
Pittenger, A., & Doering, A. (2010). Influence of motivational design on completion rates in online self‐study pharmacy‐content courses. Distance Education, 31(3), 275–293.
Quality Matter. (2015 September 28). Higher education program. QualityMatter. Retrieved from https://www.qualitymatters.org/higher-education-program
Quality Matter. (2019). How to reference & use QM in research. QualityMatter. Retrieved fromhttps://www.qualitymatters.org/qa-resources/resource-center/articles-resources/reference-use-qm-in-research
Ralston-Berg, P. (2014). Surveying student perspectives of quality: Value of QM rubric items. Internet Learning Journal, 3(1).
Rao, K., & Tanners, A. (2011). Curb cuts in cyberspace: Universal instructional design for online courses. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(3), 211–229.
Redmond, P., Devine, J., & Bassoon, M. (2014). Exploring discipline differentiation in online discussion participation. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(2).
Reeves, T. C., & Reeves, P. M. (1997). Effective dimensions of interactive learning on the World Wide Web. Khan, 62, 59–66.
Reeves, T. C. (2000). Alternative assessment approaches for online learning environments in higher education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(1), 101–111.
Reeves, T. C. (2006). How do you know they are learning? The importance of alignment in higher education. International Journal of Learning Technology, 2(4), 294–309.
Revere, L., & Kovach, J. V. (2011). Online technologies for engaged learning. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12(2), 113–124.
Ronsisvalle, T., & Watkins, R. (2005). Student success in online K-12 education. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6(2), 117–124.
Rutherford, C. (2010). Using online social media to support preservice student engagement. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(4), 703–711.
Shattuck, K. (2010). Quality matters: A faculty-centered program to assure quality in online course design. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 3, 49–53.
Shattuck, K. (2015). Research inputs and outputs of Quality Matters: Update to 2012 and 2014 versions of what we’re learning from QM-focused research. Annapolis, MD: Quality Matters.Retrieved from
Sheridan, K., & Kelly, M. A. (2010). The indicators of instructor presence that are important to students in online courses. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(4), 767–779.
Shiratuddin, N., Hassan, S., & Landoni, M. (2003). A usability study for promoting eContent in higher education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 6(4), 112–124.
Sims, R., Dobbs, G., & Hand, T. (2002). Enhancing quality in online learning: Scaffolding planning and design through proactive evaluation. Distance Education, 23(2), 135–148.
Spallek, H., Berthold, P., Shanley, D. B., & Attstrom, R. (2000). Distance education for dentists: Improving the quality of online instruction. American Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 49–59.
Song, L., Singleton, E. S., Hill, J. R., & Koh, M. H. (2004). Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(1), 59–70.
Standards from the Quality Matters Higher Education Rubric, 6th Edition. Quality Matters. Retrieved from https://www.qualitymatters.org/sites/default/files/PDFs/StandardsfromtheQMHigherEducationRubric.pdf
Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., & Maher, G. (2000). Course design factors influencing the success of online learning. In WebNet World Conference on the WWW and Internet (pp. 513-518). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved from https://urresearch.rochester.edu/fileDownloadForInstitutionalItem.action?itemId=2326&itemFileId=3169
Swan, K., & Shih, L. F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 9(3), 115–136.
Swan, K., Matthews, D., Bogle, L., Boles, E., & Day, S. (2012). Linking online course design and implementation to learning outcomes: A design experiment. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 81–88.
Tam, M. (2000). Constructivism, instructional design, and technology: Implications for transforming distance learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 3(2), 50–60.
Topper, A. (2005). Facilitating student interactions through discursive moves. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6(1), 55–67.
University of San Diego (2012).Learning management systems copyright guidelines. Retrieved fromhttp://www.sandiego.edu/library/copyright/lmscopyright.php
Vonderwell, S., & Zachariah, S. (2005). Factors that influence participation in online
learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(2), 213–230.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ728902.pdf
Wang, Y., Peng, H., Huang, R., Hou, Y., & Wang, J. (2008). Characteristics of distance learners: research on relationships of learning motivation, learning strategy, self‐efficacy, attribution and learning results. Open Learning, 23(1), 17–28.
Weiser Friedman, L., & Friedman, H. (2010). Using social media technologies to enhance online learning. Journal of Educators Online, 10(1), 1–22.
Wozniak, H., Pizzica, J., & Mahony, M. J. (2012). Design-based research principles for student orientation to online study: Capturing the lessons learnt. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(5), 896–911.
Xia, C., Fielder, J., & Siragusa, L. (2013). Achieving better peer interaction in online discussion forums: A reflective practitioner case study. Issues in Educational Research, 23(1), 97–113.
Young, M. R. (2014). Integrating quality matters into hybrid course design: A principle of marketing case study. Journal of Marketing Education, 36(3), 233–243. doi:10.1177/0273475314547821
Zhang, D., Zhou, L., Briggs, R. O., & Nunamaker, J. F. (2006). Instructional video in e-learning: Assessing the impact of interactive video on learning effectiveness. Information & Management, 43(1), 15–27. | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 714 PDF Download: 798 |
||||
