Tonight I watched the Quality Matters session entitled “Two Sides of the QM Equation: Perspectives from a Course Representative and Course Reviewer” presented by Cindy Ambrose (Low Country Virtual), Jenna Wells (Berkley County School District), and Sharon McMahon (Beaufort County School District). They shared their experience submitting and reviewing courses. The first part of the session was to learn about the perspective of the course representative. This QM session was posted in November 2022, yet I am thinking about this right now as I am taking the QM Peer Review Course. Wells spoke about starting with the self-review tool. It helped them plan and identify four areas to focus on: course clarity, mapping the course, accessibility, and learner supports. While they work in the K-12 environment, these are similar concerns we have submitting our molecular biotechnology courses. Wells did an activity asking participants to draw a house and then awarded points for certain elements. This activity was meant to emphasize making sure there is clarity. Wells suggested several tips for course clarity:
- Do not overcomplicate
- Use simple language
- Be direct, detailed, & explicit
- Cut the confusion
Wells said “don’t be afraid to offer exemplars” and guidance. The example of a course they shared has a blinking “Start Here.” Wells shared information about the course structure and how to access the teacher from this course. They explained how using a course map helped with alignment. For accessibility, Wells explained that this is for anybody using the course, including parents in their case! I had never thought about that! For this, Wells emphasized that course navigation and course flow are critical. They also used the accessibility checker built into the learning management system. This tool helped identify issues with font colors and tables. Wells noted that they added information in the teacher block and as a module for technical help and accessibility support. Wells and others created templates and a guide for other teachers and courses.
Ambrose provided the perspective of a course reviewer. Ambrose has been a reviewer for one year (at the time of the recording) and their first publisher review. When Ambrose goes to review a course, they always think about course clarity, alignment with standards, instructional activities, and assessments. Ambrose said that becoming a course reviewer provided excellent professional development. Ambrose also suggested utilizing the reviewer resource center in the QM portal. The NSQ publication includes monthly examples and perspectives from reviewers. After walking through the modules, Ambrose checks accessibility and learner support. A master reviewer in the session encouraged all to continue learning and take the master reviewer course. In-house checklist tools were mentioned by participants as very valuable. McMahon shared ways to engage with QM through workshops, the Teaching Online Certificate, and even custom on-campus workshops. I wonder if we can do/host one?!
