![\"Print\"](\"http:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/teachinginadigitalage\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2015\/01\/Wei-large-line.jpg\")
<\/a>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2107\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"746\"]<\/a>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2107\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"746\"]![\"Figure](\"http:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/teachinginadigitalage\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2015\/02\/Stepping-stones.jpg\")
<\/a> Figure 11.2 Nine steps to quality teachingPuzziferro, M., & Shelton, K. (2008). A model for developing high-quality online courses: Integrating a systems approach with learning theory\u00a0Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks<\/a><\/em>, Vol. 12, Nos. 3-4<\/p>","rendered":" In the previous section, I pointed out that there are lots of excellent quality assurance standards, organizations and research<\/a> available online, and I’m not going to duplicate these. Instead, I’m going to suggest a series of practical steps towards implementing<\/em> such standards.<\/p>\n I am assuming\u00a0that all the standard institutional processes\u00a0towards program approval have been taken, although it is worth pointing out that it might be worth thinking through my nine steps outlined below\u00a0before finally submitting a proposal. My nine steps approach\u00a0would also work when considering the redesign of\u00a0an existing course.<\/p>\n The ‘standard’ quality practice for developing a\u00a0fully\u00a0online course would be to develop a systems approach to design\u00a0through something like the ADDIE model (see Chapter 4, Section 3<\/a>). Puzziferro and Shelton (2008) provide an excellent example.\u00a0To get a sense of the difference in approach to a ‘standard’ systems model, the ADDIE model wouldn’t\u00a0kick in until around Step 6 below.<\/p>\n However, I have already pointed to some of the limitations of a systems approach in the volatile, uncertain, chaotic and ambiguous digital age (Chapter 4, Section 7)<\/a>, and in any case, I think we need a process that works not only for fully online courses but also for face-to-face, blended and hybrid courses and programs. So I\u00a0am aiming for a more flexible but still systematic approach to quality course design, but broad enough to include a wide range of delivery methods. Furthermore, it\u00a0is\u00a0not enough just to look at the actual teaching of the course, but also at building a\u00a0complete learning environment in which the learning will take place (see Appendix 1<\/a>).<\/p>\n So to provide a quality framework, I will outline nine steps, although they are more likely to be developed in parallel than sequentially.\u00a0Nevertheless there is a logic to the order.<\/p>\n These steps will draw on material from earlier in the book.<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\r\nIn the previous section, I pointed out that there are lots of excellent quality assurance standards, organizations and research<\/a> available online, and I'm not going to duplicate these. Instead, I'm going to suggest a series of practical steps towards implementing<\/em> such standards.\r\n\r\nI am assuming\u00a0that all the standard institutional processes\u00a0towards program approval have been taken, although it is worth pointing out that it might be worth thinking through my nine steps outlined below\u00a0before finally submitting a proposal. My nine steps approach\u00a0would also work when considering the redesign of\u00a0an existing course.\r\n\r\nThe 'standard' quality practice for developing a\u00a0fully\u00a0online course would be to develop a systems approach to design\u00a0through something like the ADDIE model (see Chapter 4, Section 3<\/a>). Puzziferro and Shelton (2008) provide an excellent example.\u00a0To get a sense of the difference in approach to a 'standard' systems model, the ADDIE model wouldn't\u00a0kick in until around Step 6 below.\r\n\r\nHowever, I have already pointed to some of the limitations of a systems approach in the volatile, uncertain, chaotic and ambiguous digital age (Chapter 4, Section 7)<\/a>, and in any case, I think we need a process that works not only for fully online courses but also for face-to-face, blended and hybrid courses and programs. So I\u00a0am aiming for a more flexible but still systematic approach to quality course design, but broad enough to include a wide range of delivery methods. Furthermore, it\u00a0is\u00a0not enough just to look at the actual teaching of the course, but also at building a\u00a0complete learning environment in which the learning will take place (see Appendix 1<\/a>).\r\n\r\nSo to provide a quality framework, I will outline nine steps, although they are more likely to be developed in parallel than sequentially.\u00a0Nevertheless there is a logic to the order.\r\n\r\n\t
Reference<\/h2>\r\n
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>
Image: \u00a9 http:\/\/kennedysdisease.blogspot.ca\/<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/a><\/p>\n\n
Reference<\/h2>\n