Internet Learning Volume 3, Number 1, Spring 2014 | Page 37

Internet Learning
Literature Review
Student Perspectives
Several QM-related studies have
been conducted with regard to student perspectives.
These studies can be separated
into two categories: a) student perceptions
of the value of QM features in an online
course, and b) student opinions about
whether a course meets QM standards or
not. Ralston-Berg and Nath (2008) stated
that students value the same standards
marked as essential “3” and very important
“2” by QM, but value significantly less on
standards marked as important “1” by QM.
They further noted that students who claim
to have high satisfaction in online courses
also value all QM features over those
who claim low satisfaction. Similarly, in
Ralston’s (2011) study results by rank of
importance to students for success correlated
with QM standards. Knowles and Kalata
(2010) as cited in Shattuck (2012) stated
that there might be a discrepancy in expectations
between students and experienced
QM master reviewers. They further offered
possible explanations about this possible
discrepancy--that students simply completed
the survey without thinking about
the standards and the course content or
many of the design aspects that were clarified
by the instructors during the course
were being taught via channels that are not
available to the peer reviewers.
Quality Matters Standards and Review
Process
Quality Matters (QM) is a process
and a rubric to continuously improve online
course quality (Shattuck, 2012). It
is a faculty-driven, peer-review process
that is collaborative, collegial, continuous,
and centered in national standards of best
practices and research findings in online
and blended learning to promote student
learning. Quality Matters is a leader in
quality assurance for online education and
has received national recognition for its
peer-based approach and continuous improvement
in online education and student
learning. The research-based QM Rubric is
designed to evaluate only course design--
not course delivery or content. The QM
Rubric consists of eight broad categories
broken down into 41 individual standards.
These 41 standards can be used in a variety
of ways ranging from providing guidelines
for course development to the evaluation
and certification of courses through an internal
or external review process.
The goal of the QM review process
is to continuously improve online course
quality. According to Shattuck (2007),
the process begins with a mature course,
meaning the course has been offered for at
least 2 semesters and the course instructor
has revised it based on previous experiences.
A review team with three certified QM
reviewers who have online teaching experiences
will review the course and provide
feedback to the course developer. When
conducting formal reviews, one of the review
team members must be a subject matter
expert in the field of the course being
reviewed and one member must be a master
reviewer. In the event that a course does
not meet the required 85% (81 of 96 points,
including all 21 3-point essential specific
standards) constructive recommendations
will be sent to the instructor/course developer.
The instructor/course developer
can meet with instructional designers to
revise the course according to the recommendations.
All courses reviewed by the
QM review team are expected to meet the
standards after necessary design improvements.
36