6.2 Examining elements of quality within online education programs  (Page 6/9)

The Faculty Satisfaction pillar examines the support and resources needed for faculty to have a positive experience while teaching online. According to the Moore (2002), “Faculty satisfaction is enhanced when the institution supports faculty members with a robust and well-maintained technical infrastructure, training in online instructional skills, and ongoing technical and administrative assistance” (p. 58).

The Scale pillar, originally entitled Cost Effectiveness, focuses on the cost effectiveness and capacity of programs so that quality learning is offered as an educational value to students. They believe an institution should monitor costs to keep tuition as low as possible while providing a quality educational experience for both students and faculty. Strategies for quality improvement were also addressed in the Scale pillar.

The Access pillar assures that students have full access to the learning materials and services they need throughout their online degree program, including support for disabilities and online readiness assessment. This pillar also examines barriers that may be in the way of online students having access to all resources necessary to achieve success.

Quality assurance strategy. Lee and Dziuban (2002) believed there were five primary components for evaluating quality within online education: (1) administrative leadership and support, (2) ongoing program concerns, (3) web course development, (4) student concerns, and (5) faculty support. Structured around the University of Central Florida’s online programs (Lee&Dziuban, 2002), their Quality Assurance Strategy (QAS) maintained the importance of administrative support and leadership for resources, training, and evaluation. They recommended that online programs be extensively planned through discussion, evaluation, and analysis, which is crucial to the overall success of the program.

Assessment model. Lockhart and Lacy (2002) worked with faculty and administrators at several national conference meetings to develop a model that consisted of seven components needed to evaluate online education: (1) institutional readiness/administration (budgets, priority and management); (2) faculty services (support, outcome measurement, and training effectiveness); (3) instructional design/course usability (technology must be user friendly and accessible); (4) student readiness (assessment for student readiness and preparation); (5) student services (effectiveness of provided services); (6) learning outcomes (measurement of learning outcomes); and (7) retention (comparing rates to face-to-face delivery and enrollment monitoring). Focusing on data collection and analysis, they suggested further surveys were needed in the areas of faculty support, training, and student support. They also recommended that student grades and retention rates be examined as well as results of online learning outcomes. Finally, they challenged higher education to understand how important it is for institutions to “plan, evaluate, and then revise programs based upon assessment results rather than just being another institution to deliver classes at a distance” (p. 104).