Purpose of
this form:
The RODP Course Content Assessment Form has been developed on
behalf the RODP Curriculum Committee to serve as a guide for
incorporating best practices in online teaching and learning in the
development of Regents Online Degree Program (RODP). This form will
serve as a tool for formative evaluation of the RODP efforts. In
addition, outside experts will review and provide feedback on the
program through use of this form. This form is designed to assist
the course developer by providing a means for third parties to review
and provide feedback to the developer as to areas of strengths and
weaknesses to guide further development efforts for RODP course
development. This form is to be completed by
the Course CONTENT Reviewer. |
Instructions to the Reviewer:
Your review will be from the student's perspective and will be a
critical tool in insuring that only quality courses become part of the
RODP. First, enter the RODP WebCT website (http://webct.rodp.org)
and navigate to the course to be reviewed. Second, log in using the
user name and password provided to each reviewer via email. Third,
select the course to be evaluated from the navigation bar at the left
of the screen. We would appreciate your reactions concerning the
course content and organization, including correlation with other
courses in sequence, if applicable. Once you feel you have reviewed
the course sufficiently to provide recommendations for improvement,
then complete the assessment items below. Note: The reviewer's
name and contact information will be kept confidential and will not be
a part of the report issued to the course developer. |
| Reviewer Name: |
|
| Reviewer Title: |
|
| Reviewer E-mail
Address: |
|
| Reviewer Work Phone: |
|
| Reviewer Institution: |
|
| Review
Date |
|
| Course Title: |
|
| Course Number: |
|
| Developer Name: |
|
NOTE TO RODP REVIEWER:
The following evaluation instrument
is organized in parallel to the "Seven Principles of Effective
Teaching: A Practical Lens for Evaluating Online Courses" by Graham,
Cagiltay, Lim, Craner, and Duffy. (Technology Source. March/April
2001.
http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=839)
|
|
Principle 1:
Good Practice Encourages Student-Faculty Contact. |
| a.
|
Instructor has implemented
the WebCT e-mail tool and has indicated its importance in the syllabus
and other places, where appropriate, within the course. |
| b.
|
Instructor has indicated
the expected frequency of emails from student to instructor. |
|
c.
|
The use of WebCT email, as
well as other forms of class participation, is an integral part of the
overall assessment of student performance. |
|
Note: RODP
standards require instructors to reply to student communications
within 24-48 hours. Instructors should communicate with class a
minimum of three times per week. |
Please explain any needed improvements
as indicated above. Other comments are also welcome.
|
|
Principle 2:
Good Practice Encourages Cooperation Among Students. |
| a.
|
Instructor has implemented
the WebCT discussion tool and has indicated its importance in the
syllabus and other places, where appropriate, within the course.
|
| b.
|
Instructor has indicated
the expected frequency, quality, and purpose of discussion postings
from students. |
| c.
|
Instructor has implemented
the Wimba Voice Board and has indicated its importance in the syllabus
and other places, where appropriate, within the course. |
| d.
|
Instructor has indicated
the expected frequency, quality, and purpose of Voice Board postings
from students. |
|
e.
|
Discussions, as well as
other forms of class participation, are an integral part of the
overall assessment of student performance. |
|
f.
|
Instructor communicates an
intention to monitor and participate in class discussions. |
|
Note: RODP
standards require instructors to reply to student communications
within 24-48 hours. Instructors should communicate with class a
minimum of three times per week. |
Please explain any needed improvements
as indicated above. Other comments are also welcome.
|
|
Principle 3: Good Practice Encourages Active Learning |
| a.
|
Instructor has implemented
student projects and/or team presentations. |
| b.
|
Students are expected to
review, comment, critique, or otherwise evaluate peer projects and/or
presentations. |
| c.
|
Presentation of course
content requires student interaction via discussion posting,
interactive web page, self-quiz, glossary, or other action on the part
of the student. |
Please explain any needed improvements
as indicated above. Other comments are also welcome.
|
|
Principle 4: Good Practice Gives Prompt Feedback |
| a.
|
Instructor has indicated a
commitment to acknowledge, via confirmation message, student
inquiries and submissions of assignments and tests. |
| b.
|
Instructor has indicated a
commitment to provide meaningful feedback to student inquiries
in a timely manner. |
| c.
|
Instructor has indicated a
commitment to evaluate (grade) assignments and tests in a timely
manner. |
| d.
|
Instructor has indicated a
commitment to apprise student of overall course performance on a
regular basis, such as a mid-term progress report or grade-to-date
column in the grade book. |
|
Note: Research into
Best Practices consistently indicates the importance of prompt,
genuine, and meaningful feedback on student performance. Grades,
comments, and other feedback on major assignments should occur within
two weeks of submission. |
Please explain any needed improvements
as indicated above. Other comments are also welcome.
|
|
Principle 5: Good Practice Emphasizes Time on Task |
| a.
|
Course content is clearly
organized and implemented (at some level) using one or more WebCT
"content modules". WebCT content modules may be identified by their
"Table of Contents" outline structure. |
| b.
|
Instructor has used a
clear and reasonable timeline to facilitate achieving the course
objectives and has identified regular milestones so that students may
monitor their progress through the course. |
| c.
|
Instructor has implemented
a realistic and comprehensive schedule of due dates and has
incorporated these deadlines in the WebCT calendar. |
Please explain any needed improvements
as indicated above. Other comments are also welcome.
|
|
Principle 6: Good Practice Communicates High Expectations |
| a.
|
Public and private
syllabus are complete and consistent. |
| b.
|
Course objectives are
consistent with the same or similar courses taught in a traditional
format. |
| c.
|
Course objectives meet
standards as set by national and/or regional discipline-related
professional organizations. |
| d.
|
Instructor's expectations
for student performance are clearly stated. |
| e.
|
Grading criteria are
clearly stated. |
| f.
|
Assessment activities,
while appropriate for web-based instruction, require the same level of
student achievement as traditional courses. |
| g.
|
Instructor communicates
time commitment expected of students. |
| h.
|
Time commitment required
of students is reasonable. |
Please explain any needed improvements
as indicated above. Other comments are also welcome.
|
|
Principle 7: Good Practice Respects Diverse Talents and Ways of
Learning |
| a.
|
Instructor provides
opportunities for students to choose discussion topics, project
topics, paper topics, etc. where appropriate. |
| b.
|
Instructor has provided
alternative textual information for all audio/video presentations for
ADA compliance. |
| c.
|
Instructor presents
content for diverse learning styles where feasible and appropriate. |
| d.
|
Instructor employs
available appropriate technological tools, such as Flash applets,
CD-ROMs, audio, video, voice enabling, narrated PowerPoint, streaming
media, DHTML, java applets, etc. when it supports the course
objectives. |
| e.
|
Instructor has noted a
reasonable degree of technical competencies of students and
communicates these requirements. |
| f.
|
Instructor has provided
links to additional web resources such as tutorials, text book web
site, examples, case studies, and other supplementary materials
available to students. |
| g.
|
Instructor has made use of
available public domain learning objects such as can be found at
Merlot. |
| h.
|
Instructor makes effective
use of RODP resources such as the Virtual Library. |
Please explain any needed improvements
as indicated above. Other comments are also welcome.
|
Summary: Overall, is this course ready
for hosting and presentation?
Yes
Yes, with minor
modification (does not require a subsequent follow-up review by panel)
No, major
modification, clarification, etc. are recommended (requires review by
panel before hosting) |
|
If "No, major modifications," please state
the primary areas for improvement and ways to assist the developer:
|
Best Practices
In what ways, if any, do you believe that this course represents an
important innovation or advance in online education? If none please
enter N/A.
|
