The following approach represents a way to fast-track the development of online courses by using an integrative approach to develop unique, high-quality courses that reflect the core values and vision of the institution while bringing together media assets, supplemental subject matter experts, and a highly effective online instructional strategy. This article was first written in 2003, but in reviewing it, it seems to be remarkably helpful, particularly as institutions are faced with creating courses and course content for new learning management systems and technologies (m-learning, etc.).
Elements:
* Point Person in the Academic Unit: Coordinates unit-developed curriculum, courses, course descriptions, learning objectives with primary subject matter expert(s) in the academic unit.
* Instructional designer and information technology liaisons: develop templates and manage the course management system / informational infrastructure
* Template or approved course structure: This provides a consistent look and feel, as well as encouraging coordination and competence with students, instructors, and support staff
* Core textbook with extensive media asset support, including online learning elements: Although other texts and resources will be used, a well-respected, high-quality core textbook that contains high-quality media assets provides a content credibility assurance. By utilizing the streaming media, presentation graphics, audio, interactive quizzes and other features that have been developed by the textbook company, huge time and cost savings are possible. See http://www.mlearners.com for examples of content suitable for mobile devices.
* Subject Matter Expert Collaborator #1: The SME is asked to review the course from his/her unique perspective and add content, instructional guides, and directed activities. For example, SME #1 may be asked to provide historical perspectives.
* Subject Matter Expert Collaborator #2: This SME does not duplicate the work of SME #1. Instead, he/she brings a new set of assumptions and approaches to the task, and generates content that goes in a slightly different direction. For example, this SME may focus on adding connections to contemporary concerns (ethics, case studies, etc.).
* Academic Review Committee
Stages of Quality Review and Development:
Review 1: Develop a curriculum and courses that make sense in terms of institutional vision and mission. This is done by members of the academic unit, a key subject matter expert with coordination from the point person.
Review 2: Develop course descriptions. The point person works with the primary subject matter expert, with a review by the instructional designer to make sure that key points are included. It is acceptable to develop a template or form to standardize the course descriptions.
Review 3: Select texts, leverage textbook media assets and support to build a foundation.
Core text: Depending on the course, select a best-selling, widely-adopted textbook from a major textbook publisher which has significant media assets with it. This would include online content, interactive material, presentations, streaming audio and/or video, as well as a CD-ROM.
Additional required texts: Particularly in the case of graduate courses or surveys of literature, trade books which address specific topics will provide depth and breadth to the course.
Articles and online resources: Identify articles, obtain permissions, and place in the online library reserve.
Review 4: Build-out based on course objectives and textbook.
Build-out 4a: Syllabus. Develop a form or template approach in order to provide standard information. Widely-used text and logos should be made into objects and used in a SCORM-compliant manner. A standard course structure can be implemented for a unit’s online offerings, with slight variations depending on the course objectives and approach.
Build-out 4b: Meshing core textbook assets with units.
Build-out 4c: Meshing activities, supporting content, etc. with media assets from core text.
Build-out 4d: Incorporate the additional readings to add depth and breadth to the course content. This may take place in Review 5 or 6 if the SME Collaborators are charged with recommending readings and texts.
Review 5: SME Collaborator #1 — this person complements the primary unit’s online course developer and subject matter expert. SME #1 may be a part of the unit, or an outside contractor / adjunct.
Build-out 5a: Add new SME perspective — develop lecture notes, online reserve articles, additional resources. Provide the SME with a checklist of tasks in order to assure consistency of performance and that he/she does not simply repeat work already done. Carefully define SME’s focus – for example, SME #1 may be asked to provide historical perspectives, a history of key ideas and developments, and an annotated bibliography of seminal works in the field, in addition to guiding questions, sidebar items, readings, etc.
Build-out 5b: SME provides guiding questions, sidebar items, focus / talking points, recommendations on readings / texts / online reserve articles.
Review 6: SME Collaborator #2 – as in the case of SME #1, this person supports the work of the point person in the department and unit-generated content / structure. This person builds on the core course foundation that includes the primary text. SME #2’s focus can be on making connections to current contemporary situations, settings, developments.
Build-out 6a: SME follows a checklist / guidelines sheet in order to accomplish specific tasks. The focus should be carefully defined and delineated so that the work provided creates depth and breadth, always building on the work of the unit point person, unit curriculum / content experts, and SME #1.
Build-out 6b: SME provides guiding questions, sidebar items, focus / talking points, recommendations on readings / texts / online reserve articles. These follow the focus set out in the checklist and guidelines.
Review 7: Instructional Designer / Information Technology Review: The course is reviewed to make sure that objectives are being met, and to suggest places for editing, revision, or expansion.
Review 8: Alignment with Institutional and Academic Vision and Mission. Stakeholders take a look to make sure that the course objectives, instructional strategies, and course content are in line with the institution’s vision and mission, both in terms of academics and in terms of access, etc.
Review 9: Academic Review Committee – The purpose of the academic review committee is not to second-guess or “correct” the work, but simply to take a look at it to make sure it conforms with the institution’s policies and procedures with respect to Best Practices.
Review 10: Final revision before putting into course template and the course management software.
Useful Video on Certificate Courses
Loading ...