Virtual School Meanderings

September 27, 2017

IRRODL Announcement

From the inbox yesterday…

IRRODL Issue 18(6)
Email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser.

Dear readers,

 

We are pleased to bring you another research-packed issue of IRRODL.  Believe it or not, there is one MORE issue that will come out this year!  Watch for it!

Best wishes

The IRRODL team

Vol 18, No 6 (2017)

Table of Contents

Editorial

Editorial – Volume 18, Issue 6
Dianne Conrad

Research Articles

Tali Kahan, Tal Soffer, Rafi Nachmias
Elia Fernández-Díaz, Carlos Rodríguez-Hoyos, Adelina Calvo Salvador
Carol Johnson, Laurie Hill, Jennifer Lock, Noha Altowairiki, Christopher Ostrowski, Luciano da Rosa dos Santos, Yang Liu
Ahmed Al-Azawei, Patrick Parslow, Karsten Lundqvist
Anders Norberg, Birgit Stöckel, Marta-Lena Antti
Elena Barbera, Iolanda Garcia, Marc Fuertes-Alpiste
Panagiota Altanopoulou, Nikolaos Tselios
Scott Woodward, Adam Lloyd, Royce Kimmons
Upasana Gitanjali Singh, Mary Ruth de Villiers
Briju Thankachan, David Richard Moore
Paul Henry Leslie, Celiane Camargo-Borges
Zhiqiang Ma, Jing Wang, Qiyun Wang, Lili Kong, Yajie Wu, Hao Yang
Roberto Salazar-Márquez
Lisa C. Yamagata-Lynch, Deepa R Despande, Jaewoo Do, Erin Garty, Jason M Mastrogiovanni, Stephanie J Teague
Juan-Francisco Martínez-Cerdá, Joan Torrent-Sellens
Chris Meintzer, Frances Sutherland, Dietmar Kennepohl

Field Notes

Anne-Mette Nortvig, René B Christiansen
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to the International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning.
Our mailing address is:
Athabasca University
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (IRRODL)
1 University Drive
Athabasca, AB  T9S 3A3
Canada

August 17, 2017

IRRODL Announcement

Also from yesterday’s inbox…

IRRODL Issue 18(5)
Email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser.

Hello Readers,

We may be into the dog days of summer in Alberta, but we are still working at IRRODL. Today, we are releasing with this announcement, the 5th edition of IRRODL for 2017 with articles on open learning, MOOCs, and other elearning related topics.

Enjoy!

Rory

Vol 18, No 5 (2017)

Table of Contents

Editorial

Editorial – Volume 18, Issue 5
Rory McGreal

Research Articles

Catherine Cronin
Gema Santos-Hermosa, Núria Ferran-Ferrer, Ernest Abadal
C. Edward Watson, Denise P. Domizi, Sherry A. Clouser
Joohi Lee, Leisa Martin
Jo Corlett, Linda Martindale
Ernest Mnkandla, Ansie Minnaar
Christopher Lange, Jamie Costley, Seung-Lock Han
Grace Clifton
Alexander Amigud, Joan Arnedo-Moreno, Thanasis Daradoumis, Ana-Elena Guerrero-Roldan
Elizabeth Archer, Glen Barnes
Aras Bozkurt, Ela Akgün-Özbek, Olaf Zawacki-Richter
Moon-Heum Cho, Moon-Kyoung Byun
Cathrine Edelhard Tømte, Arne Martin Fevolden, Siri Aanstad
Hsi-Hsun Yang, Chung-Ho Su

Field Notes

Allen Rao, John Hilton III, Sarah Harper
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to the International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning.
Our mailing address is:
Athabasca University
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (IRRODL)
1 University Drive
Athabasca, AB  T9S 3A3
Canada

June 18, 2017

IRRODL Announcement 18.4

From the inbox on Friday…  Note the number of open education items.

IRRODL Issue 18(4)
Email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser.

Hello Readers,

We are delighted to offer you this special issue on the Outcomes of Openness: Empirical Reports on the Implementation of OER, edited by John Hilton III.  Special issues such as this allow us more insight into areas of interest to our field.

Enjoy!

Dianne

Vol 18, No 4 (2017)

Special Issue: Outcomes of Openness: Empirical Reports on the Implementation of OER

Table of Contents

Editorial

Editorial – Volume 18, Issue 4
John Hilton III

Research Articles

David Annand, Tilly Jensen
Sarah Goodier
Jessie R Winitzky-Stephens, Jason Pickavance
Marcela Chiorescu
David Wiley, Ashley Webb, Sarah Weston, DeLaina Tonks
Daniel Patrick Kelly, Teomara Rutherford
Christina Hendricks, Stefan A. Reinsberg, Georg W Rieger
Feng-Ru Sheu, Meilun Shih
Eulho Jung, Christine Bauer, Allan Heaps
Lane Fischer, David Ernst, Stacie L Mason
Cailean Cooney
Gabrielle Vojtech, Judy Grissett
Rajiv Sunil Jhangiani, Surita Jhangiani
SuBeom Kwak

Notes from the Field

Jonathan Lashley, Rebel Cummings-Sauls, Andrew B. Bennett, Brian L. Lindshield
Kim Grewe, William Preston Davis
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to the International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning.
Our mailing address is:
Athabasca University
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (IRRODL)
1 University Drive
Athabasca, AB  T9S 3A3
Canada

May 18, 2017

Validated Online Course Design Standards

A few weeks ago I saw this news item scroll across my electronic desk – Edmentum Plato Courses Receive iNACOL Standards Approval. When you go to the news item, you get access to this summary:

Edmentum’s Plato Courseware’s iNACOL Standard Review – http://www.edmentum.com/sites/edmentum.com/files/resource/media/iNACOL%20Summary.pdf

A former doctoral student of mine actually completed his dissertation research focused on whether the iNACOL National Standards for Quality Online Courses could be validated based on research. Here are the results.

Adelstein, D., & Barbour, M. K. (2016). Building better courses: Examining the content validity of the iNACOL national standards for quality online courses. Journal of Online Learning Research, 2(1), 41-73. Retrieved from http://www.learntechlib.org/p/171515

  • The first round focused on whether there was literature and, more importantly, the research literature support for the standards.  David was able to find something for just about every standard, but there was actually little in the way of K-12 distance, online, and blended learning research literature to support most standards as they were written.

Adelstein, D., & Barbour, M. K. (2017). Improving the K-12 online course design review process: Experts weigh in on iNACOL National Standards for Quality Online Courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 18(3). Retrieved from http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/976

  • The second round had two teams of experts review the standards to determine whether, based on their expert opinions, the standards were appropriate measures of the quality of online course design.  While there was some general support for most standards, many of them were revised or dropped based on this expert feedback.

Adelstein, D., & Barbour, M. K. (2016). Redesigning design: Field testing a revised design rubric based of iNACOL quality course standards. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 31(2). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2800

  • The third round had several teams of two reviewers that were responsible for applying the rubric associated with the standards to a variety of online courses to determine if inter-rater reliability could be achieved.  The results of this application were that the rubric could not be reliably applied.

Adelstein, D., & Barbour, M. K. (2016). Redesigning design: Streamlining K-12 online course creation. MACUL Journal, 37(1), 20-21. Retrieved from http://www.macul.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/MACULJournal_Fall2016.pdf

  • This final article was targeted to practitioners.  It was basically an attempt for David to translate what he learned from the three rounds of research that would be of interest and of use to a practitioner audience.

May 16, 2017

Article Notice – Improving the K-12 Online Course Design Review Process: Experts Weigh in on iNACOL National Standards for Quality Online Courses

This was one of the items from yesterday’s IRRODL Announcement 18.3.

David Adelstein, Michael K. Barbour

Abstract

Within the K-12 online learning environment there are a variety of standards that designers can utilize when creating online courses. To date, the only research-based standards available are proprietary in manner. As such, many jurisdictions have begun adopting online course design standards from the leading advocacy organization, which that have yet to be validated from a research perspective. This article reports on the second phase of a three-stage study designed to examine the validity and reliability of the iNACOL National Standards for Quality Online Courses. Phase two utilizes two groups of expert reviewers to examine and provide feedback with goal of further refining these standards (after the standards had been scrutinized through the lens of the available K-12 online learning literature).

Keywords

K-12 online learning, K-12 distance education, virtual school, cyber school, online course design

Full Text:

HTML PDF MP3 EPUB

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i3.2800

 

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.