Assurance in Open and Distance eLearning Seminar on Quality Assurance in ODL Shanghai Open University, PR China 8 November 2016 Assurance in Open and Distance eLearning Rebat Kumar Dhakal School of Education, Kathmandu University Hattiban, Lalitpur Nepal

Why Quality Matters? The promises that get students “in the door” won’t keep them there if their expectations are not met. (Farrell, 2012, p. 10) We should offer all students well-designed courses that help them achieve their learning goals.

Quality Assurance: Criteria? Excellence Exceptional or distinctiveness Assured through external examiners Fitness for purpose Effectiveness Does product or service fit the stated purpose? Consistency Quality as perfection Examined through administrative processes audit Value for money Cost effectiveness Judged against monetary cost / return on investment Transformation Value added element Individual or institutional changes enabling better learning Quality Assurance is a systematic evaluation of the various aspects of programs to maximize the probability of standards being achieved for specified performance indicators. 6/26/2018 (Adapted from Harvey & Green, 1993, as cited in Latchem, 2012, p. 15)

Institutional Commitment • Learning outcomes set at the appropriate level clearly communicated to students • Curriculum/Content and teaching methodologies effective in enabling the student to achieve the outcomes • Assessment appropriately designed rigorously administered (Hope, 2001, p. 127)

Our Realities Barriers Resistance to Change Digital Divide Central Challenges Access (wider): web-based study is still not possible for most Quality (higher) Relevance (demand-driven) Cost (lower) Need Education of higher quality at lower cost Resistance to Change: Viewed with suspicion by conventional institutions and the public Digital Divide: Inequality of access to the technology itself

Our Realities Attitudes towards distance learning Copyright issues of e-contents   Instructor and student concerns Infrastructure problem, including technology Online centers are not yet efficiently managed Harnessing open education resources (Valentine, 2002) Integrating non-cognitive skills into the curriculum (Kunwar, 2012) Harnessing open education resources Instructors must be trained “not only to use technology, but also to shift the way in which they organize and deliver material” (Palloff & Pratt, 2000, p. 3, in Valentine, 2002). Non-cognitive skills are those attitudes, behaviours, and strategies which facilitate success in school and workplace, such as motivation, perseverance, and self-control.

What kind of quality assurance mechanisms are to be adopted by DE providers?

Indicators of Quality Quality of registration Quality of learning material distribution Quality of learning support Quality of examination and certification (Suratinah & Antoro, 2009)

Effectiveness of DE Courses Determined by: student numbers course length learner’s educational backgrounds instructional strategies and methods type of learning activities type of interaction involvement level of tutors level of instructor and administrator preparation level of learning support

Checklist for DE Providers Clearly defined learning objectives Relevant and up-to date-curriculum Well-designed teaching learning materials Well-supported total learning package Equitable access to and use of learning technology Sustained staff development and training Access to additional learning resources (Hope, 2001, pp. 130, 138)

Reflections A DE orientation program, or primer, can give prospective students an idea of how they will fare in a DE program. Easy access to resources and timely feedback by tutors. Staff development is fundamental Providing faculty access to specialized resources and technical support for course development and delivery is also a sign of a quality DE initiative. (U.S. Department of Education, 2006) Program review and evaluation cycle Time to have a Open Education quality assurance agency (Zf}lIfs u'0f:t/ k/LIf0f s]Gb) at the national level. Staff development is fundamental to quality service provision since most faculty come to DE with F2F classroom experience.

References Farrell, G. M. (2012). Marketing and branding of open and distance learning: A topical, start-up guide to distance education practice and delivery. Vancouver, BC : Commonwealth of Learning. Hope, A. (2001). Quality assurance. In G.M. Farrel (Ed.), The changing faces of virtual education (pp. 125-140). Vancouver, BC : Commonwealth of Learning. Kunwar, A. (September 27, 2012). Four decades of ODL: Future directions. Commonwealth of Learning. Latchem, C. (2012). Quality assurance toolkit for open and distance non-formal education. Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning. Suratinah, & Antoro, S. D. (2009). Managing perfect distance services to meet the distance students complaints. AAOU Journal, 4(2), 77-85. U. S. Department of Education. (March,2006). Evidence of quality in distance education programs drawn from interviews with the accreditation community. Author. Valentine, D. (Fall, 2002). Distance learning: Promises, problems, and possibilities .Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(3).

धन्यवाद ḏʰənjəbɑ:d