Tuesday, July 31, 2007
I was able to locate these references:
Lee, J. & Hsu, Y. (2004). Visual Metaphor Interface and Cognitive Style: A study for On-line Learning. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2004 (pp. 4478-4481). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Guss, Sarah. Interface Metaphors and Web-Based Learning: Lecture Notes in Computer Science Springer Berlin / Heidelberg from Advances in Web-Based Learning - ICWL 2003
I could only locate a couple of examples:
Marketing Course as "peeling the orange:
Art Education and "tropical sunrise"
Numerous studies demonstrate that many students scan text online and read text offline. This means that your well crafted words may not be read on the computer screen. Most readers do not read an online page from start to finish. Here are some ways to write to expose your message:
- Summarize main points in an executive summary format so these points appear at the start to the reading section.
- Use lists and concise paragraphs
- Write for scanning behavior
-Use heading to organize related concepts
-Set off important concepts and terminology with text styles
- Create printable documents
-Readers will print documents if they are comprehensive and contain sufficient detail.
- What do I want the students to learn?
- What is the best way for me to present content to enhance learning?
- How do I create interaction – student-to-student, student-to-instructor, and student-to-content?
- How will I assess that learning occurred?
- How will I get feedback on the course for future improvements?
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Faculty members design a writing assignment on the site. Students compose a written response to the assignment. Students work through a tutorial on peer review and must score at a certain level on the calibration exercises. Successful students then review the work of classmates (authors and evaluators are anonymous). Instructors can see all submissions. Students then review their own assignment according to the same standards. Students and the instructor receive a performance report.
Read more about CPR at: http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI5002.pdf
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Hello! My name is Heidi Ashbaugh, and I am one of the new Instructional Design Specialists. I'm excited to be working with everyone here at Distance Learning and Lifelong Learning. My assigned area will be the College of Health Sciences. Previously I worked at the TWU library for several years, and I also teach First-Year Composition as an adjunct instructor. I'm looking forward to learning more about the Quality Matters project, and the many other exciting things that are going on in Distance Learning.
TWU Cell 940-231-3673
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
TWU cell: 940-231-4956
The Quality Matters™ (QM) project, sponsored by MarylandOnline, Inc. (MOL) developed a rubric to guide the development and revision of online courses and a peer-based approach to quality assurance in online education. The QM rubric and process are based on national standards of best practice for online learning, review of literature on online courses, and sound instructional design principles. Unique to the QM process is the faculty-driven, collegial review process and the emphasis on continuous quality improvement. The QM process is not an evaluation process; it is a collegial review process. As such, the course developer is a part of the review team and process.
Critical course components are reviewed according to the QM rubric by the review team. The QM rubric is comprised of 40 standards assigned different point values based upon relative importance. 14 of the standards are considered essential in a quality online course. This is reflected by the highest point value (3) in the rubric. For a course to attain recognition, it must meet all of these essential standards and meet a percentage of the remaining standards. The remaining standards are assigned one or two points in the rubric. Courses are reviewed by a team of three reviewers. Participants will also meet monthly with others in the project and staff from Lifelong Learning.
Year One (Spring 2007)
For the spring semester, ten faculty members will receive training on the QM™ rubric and process and become MOL certified reviewers. Each faculty member, using expertise within project participants and Lifelong Learning will redesign an existing online course. This redesign, limited to one semester, will focus on the essential categories outlined in the QM rubric. Using skills learned through the QM process, project participants will review these modified courses. Participants will provide data to Lifelong Learning about the application of this process to TWU.
Year Two (Fall 2007)
Year two of the project will add 25 faculty members. Faculty will receive training on the QM Rubric and become MOL certified reviewers. This phase of the project will run from September 2007 – August 2008. Faculty will redesign one course to meet all standards found in the QM rubric. Participants will also review another course, according to the QM review process.
Year Three (Fall 2008)
Year three of the project will add 35 faculty members. Faculty will receive training on the QM Rubric and become MOL certified reviewers. This phase of the project will run from September 2007 – August 2008. Faculty will redesign one course to meet all standards found in the QM rubric. Participants will also review another course, according to the QM review process.
Manager, Instructional Design
Stoddard Hall, 306
Senior Instructional Design Specialist
Stoddard Hall, 306
Sunday, July 8, 2007
This Educause Review discusses the possibilities of adding Web 2.0 technologies to existing course management systems to increase interactivity.
Read it here: http://www.educause.edu/apps/er/erm07/erm0725.asp
Thursday, July 5, 2007
The repository is located at: http://www.twu.edu/dl/faculty/handouts.htm
Monday, July 2, 2007
(Dewey 1934 p. 15-16)