What college do you represent?

Does your college have a set of best practices for online course design?

If your college has a set of best practices for online course design, how did you determine them?

If your college has a set of best practices for online course design, how do you share this information with faculty?

Does your college use a checklist or rubric to perform quality assurance in online course design? If so, what model is it?

Does your college use an online course review process to ensure quality? If so, check all that apply.

If your college has best practices or an online course review process, how do you provide professional development to support faculty?

If your college has best practices or an online course review process, how do you incentivize faculty participation?

kelley.meeusen@cptc.edu

Clover Park Technical College

In-house ,and will likely switch to the rubric being developed by SBCTC

We would like to beat it into them, but that idea was vetoed. Instead, we let their Deans not tell them.

SBCTC Course Design Checklist

Courses are reviewed by instructional designers or eLearning staff, Only if there is a significant student complaint, and the Dean asks us to.

We develop and offer PD courses that are never enrolled in.

Whatcom Community College

eLearning Team and based on QM

There is a checklist shared with them when they fill out a proposal to create an online or blended course.

SBCTC Course Design Checklist

A course is reviewed before it is taught for the first time, Courses are reviewed by instructional designers or eLearning staff

We have professional development days where I, the instructional designer, provide workshops and presentations on best course design practices.

Faculty receive a stipend for developing courses.

patrick.mceachern@ccs.spokane.edu

Spokane and Spokane Falls

We use several of these together.

N/A - we don't have a course review process

djorgenson@shoreline.edu

We use a QA rubric with measures similar to QM and the WA State Rubric

The rubric is available in a Canvas course for faculty resources, and we also offer a quarterly Online and Hybrid Institute in which faculty develop and/or revise their courses using the rubric.

Courses are reviewed regularly to ensure consistent quality, Courses are reviewed by instructional designers or eLearning staff, Courses are reviewed by administrators, Courses are reviewed by faculty (peer review process)

Our instructional designers provide one on one support in addition to the quarterly Institute offered for Hybrid and Online course development and revision.

We offer a stipend for participation and completion of the quarterly Institute, and a stipend for successful review of an online course.

Mostly we seem to use QM as a standard.

We will be sharing them through our new faculty portal.

We use both the QM and SBCTC versions.

Courses are reviewed by faculty (peer review process)

Many of our faculty have completed QM workshops.

There is no incentive program.

We have used the full Quality Matters standard set exclusively, since 2007

Workshops, incentives, part of a larger certification, stipends, a funded course development requirement

Courses are reviewed by instructional designers or eLearning staff, Courses are reviewed by faculty (peer review process), Quality Matters course reviews for those desiring certification and for those in the funded course development process

APPQMR, online and occasionally f2f on campus

We have a certification for eLearning Professional, five requirements including APPQMR and course review through QM. Earning the certification comes with a $500 stipend, identified as being an eLearning Professional, some departments require all online instructors to earn this first (except for the review until they've taught the course at least once). There is also potential funding for course development, approx $2000 per course. To get that stipend, the course must meet QM standards in an official review. Obviously this might then be the final pieces for completing the certification as well.

Everett Community College

SBCTC Course Design Checklist

N/A - we don't have a course review process

Fundamentals of Online Teaching (4 week online course with one hour follow-up with ID), required to teach online, but no review of course before it is run.

Currently paid $500 for completion of Fundamentals and one hour meeting. Possibly moving towards $250 to complete Fundamentals and $250 for review of finished course with ID.

SBCTC Course Design Checklist

A course is reviewed before it is taught for the first time, Courses are reviewed by instructional designers or eLearning staff

Newly created courses get a $200/credit stipend,

sgriffith@lowercolumbia.edu

We're working on putting something in place, but we're having a hard time getting all faculty onboard or even requiring a review. Hopefully, we can put some language into the faculty contract...

Email, Department chairs sharing out information, eLearning Committee sharing information, eLearning website.

Courses will be reviewed by faculty (peer review process) once we can get something in place.

Renton Technical has a great eLearning certificate that I've sent two faculty through. We also recommend the Applying the QM Rubric and Improving your Online Course that are provided by SBCTC through QM.

We pay a stipend to convert courses from face-to-face to hybrid or online. For courses that are already created, we currently don't have any incentive in place. We plan on paying a stipend of $100 to the faculty reviewer with the idea that it would take roughly 4 hours or less to go through a course. Depending on the average time it takes our reviewers to review a course, we may increase that amount.

sarah.mickel@centralia.edu

We use the WA Course Design Checklist

We sent it out through normal avenues like listserv, but it is now also used to assess courses being outfitted for online modality.

SBCTC Course Design Checklist

A course is reviewed before it is taught for the first time, Courses are reviewed by instructional designers or eLearning staff, Courses are reviewed by faculty (peer review process)

We offer workshops through our Teaching & Learning Center

Kevin.Bowersox-Johnson@seattlecolleges.edu

elearning Advisory Committee (eLearning Director, Staff, and faculty)

Online & Face-to-Face Training, Faculty Learning Communities, Advisory Committee Members

A course is reviewed before it is taught for the first time, Courses are reviewed by instructional designers or eLearning staff, Courses are reviewed by faculty (peer review process), We are moving to courses design and review before being taught

Faculty Online Learning Academy (Community of Practice)

Stipend designer for taking course on quality design and stipend peer reviewer

wboswell@greenriver.edu

We're using QM/WA Checklist unofficially.

We use it when we work with faculty on instructional design projects individually.

SBCTC Course Design Checklist - adjusted with Present, Not Present and Incomplete and space for feedback; only used when requested by faculty for course review/"look at my course"

N/A - we don't have a course review process

Workshops (when they come), training/resources MOOC, presentations to Faculty Senate

Not yet. A few are using QM. I hope to get more traction with SBCTC Course Design Checklist

Courses are reviewed by administrators, Deans sporadically review courses; some are reviewed for tenure

Workshops (when they come), training/resources MOOC, weekly drop-in support sessions

Lacing upper administration support, I have no way other than to appeal to their pride in a job well done.

jlewis@columbiabasin.edu

e-mail, person-person, occasional training, offering online and prof dev opportunitis

We have had a few QM reviews and are looking at the SBCTC checklist

N/A - we don't have a course review process

We have paid for QM reviews

jennifer.page@email.edcc.edu

Edmonds Community College

I begged Faculty Senate to consider adopting best practices. They want to write their own instead of using one of the established checklists/rubrics, so it may take a while to develop anything.

We share generic best practices through workshops and when faculty visit our Technology Resource Center for help.

N/A - we don't use a checklist or rubric

N/A - we don't have a course review process

We provide training on general best practices and recommend it to faculty; few people attend.

We are unable to incentivize faculty participation in a course review process.