Online Course Evaluation Rubric LMS Evaluation Group 2 Haines, Jennings, McClean

Student/Faculty Interaction This category refers to the degree of student/faculty interaction, measured as quality and quantity of asynchronous and synchronous modes of communication between student, instructor, and peer groups. This design element is very important in student motivation, engagement and involvement. 1 Exemplary 2 Sufficient 3 Needs Revision Evidence/Description
Instructor is readily available via discussion board, email, text, other. Instructor response time stated. Evidence of consistent timely responses to posts. Instructor availability clearly identified in online syllabus. Hot links available and encouraged. Instructor is available via one or two sources only. Majority evidence of timely responses. Only one electronic source of access to instructor. Access is unreliable, responses are rare at best.

Instructor availability only listed in written syllabus.

No instructor availability identified.

Instructor promotes and Student interaction and encourages student interaction collaboration suggested. and collaboration with tools: discussion boards, email, groups.

No evidence of encouragement to interact with instructor, or contact discouraged

Online Course Evaluation Rubric LMS Evaluation Group 2 Haines, Jennings, McClean
Student Collaborative Interaction This category refers to the degree of student-student interaction, measured as quality and quantity of asynchronous and synchronous modes of communication between students. Sharing, cooperation between and amongst students, and relationships of reciprocity improve thinking and deepen understanding. 1 Exemplary 2 Sufficient 3 Needs Revision Evidence/Description
Collaborative learning space set Collaborative learning space up with multiple approaches: encouraged, not supported discussion boards, email, groups, wiki Unreliable or no collaborative learning space, little or no support by instructor/institution resources

Instructor promotes and Forum for student interaction encourages student interaction and collaboration suggested. and collaboration with tools: discussion boards, email, groups, wiki Instructor establishes clear written guides for meaningful and constructive discourse between the students, including incentive Instructor suggests constructive discourse between the students, incentive linked to some of the interaction

Little or no evidence of support for students to interact

Discourse between students hinted at without clear guidelines

Online Course Evaluation Rubric LMS Evaluation Group 2 Haines, Jennings, McClean
Active Learning This category refers to the degree of active learning encouraged and supported. Active learning is supported through the interaction and cooperation previously noted in relationships with faculty, and collaboration with fellow students. 1 Exemplary 2 Sufficient 3 Needs Revision Evidence/Description
Course uses a variety of material and media: textbook, articles, URL references to other sites, examples. Course uses one or two media/material resources Course is paper based files posted online.

Visual and auditory tools are integrated within multiple aspects of the course.

Visual and auditory tools are mentioned, and may be used on at least one assignment.

No visual or auditory tools provided.

Assignments and projects encourage critical thinking strategies

Basic assignment and projects,

Limited or no assignments or projects,

Some coursework requires pooling of skills in collaboration for completion; guidelines for collaboration enhance/streamline the experience

Collaborative thinking is optional somewhere in coursework; effective guidelines to collaboration exists

No project utilizes collaboration, or project designs are prone to counterproductive collaboration

Online Course Evaluation Rubric LMS Evaluation Group 2 Haines, Jennings, McClean
Prompt Feedback This category refers to the degree to which instructor provides open access and prompt response to students. Formative assessment strategies and feedback help students gauge their performance, reflect upon their learning, and know how and when to make necessary adjustments. 1 Exemplary 2 Sufficient 3 Needs Revision Evidence/Description
Course has a variety of Self-assessment and/or peer opportunities for self-assessment feedback provided, but not and/or peer feedback explained. no self-assessment or per feedback provided

Course has multiple formative and summative assessment evaluations constantly throughout the course.

Limited feedback on assessments given throughout the course.

few or no assessments given

Models and/or exemplary materials are utilized to help students govern their own progress.

Assessment expectations are provided and described, but only a few models are included.

No models are provided and assessment expectations are unclear.

Grading rubrics included are thorough enough to be clear what performance corresponds to target, acceptable and unacceptable; grading and feedback is consistent with rubric

General outline of scoring differentiates between acceptable and unacceptable; instructor is fairly consistent with rubric and scoring

Ambivalence on rubrics or absence of expected performance/grade relationship; instructor rarely matches grading to rubric

Online Course Evaluation Rubric LMS Evaluation Group 2 Haines, Jennings, McClean
Time on task This category refers to the degree to which the course provides work flow for assignments and projects. Students are provided ample guidance regarding the allocation of realistic amounts of time for effective learning and achievement of course expectations. 1 Exemplary 2 Sufficient 3 Needs Revision Evidence/Description
Course has clear and specific road map of assignments and projects that enable students to set their own goals. Course has list of assignments and projects and some specifics or suggestions for accomplishment. Little or no overall course listing of assignments and projects.

Time allotted for task completion is sufficient based on expected performance level of student category, history of performance, and comparative programs Assignments feed into each other strategically where applicable to foster deeper understanding of subject matter that aids in completion of higher order coursework

Some alignment with other programs at this level determined pacing of assignments and time for each task Coursework is sequenced with a consistent hierarchy

Weight of project not consistent with time of expected completion

Coursework does not follow a clear building plan, leading to extra time unnecessarily spent on lower tiered assignments

Online Course Evaluation Rubric LMS Evaluation Group 2 Haines, Jennings, McClean
Course Expectations This category refers to the degree to which the course is rigorous and communicates high expectations. High expectations communicated explicitly and efficiently support higher levels of analysis, synthesis, application, and evaluation. 1 Exemplary 2 Sufficient 3 Needs Revision Evidence/Description
Course has detailed rubrics, models, and examples to help student achieve highest expectations. Course has minimal rubrics, models, and examples to help student achieve highest expectations. Little or no rubrics, models or examples.

Instructor establishes high expectations of course in communications with students.

Instructor occasionally communications with students.

Instructor does not participate or evaluate course until the end.

Instructor communicates expectations without bias and provides information and feedback to allow student to gauge how they do or can meet those expectations

Instructor communicates that he/she has high expectations of all students

Instructor communicates no high expectations, or displays biases

Online Course Evaluation Rubric LMS Evaluation Group 2 Haines, Jennings, McClean
Respects Diverse Talents and Learning Methods This category refers to the degree to which the course respects diverse talents and provides for various ways of learning. Respect for learner diversity is reflected in diversity of instructional approaches. 1 Exemplary 2 Sufficient 3 Needs Revision Evidence/Description
Course provides a diverse array of materials and media to accommodate a variety of learning strategies. Course provides a limited array of materials and media to accommodate a variety of learning strategies. Course provides for a single learning strategy.

Course utilizes universally designed materials and media.

Course utilizes a limited number of universally designed materials and media.

Course utilizes a single design.

Instructor and materials make no discriminatory, exclusionary, or derogatory references in accommodation language for diverse learners; attention is clearly drawn to policies governing accommodations and non-discrimination

Instructor refers to policies that govern non-discrimination, and establishes that s/he does not discriminate

Language can be subject to interpretations that could be or are exclusive of diverse learners

References:
Chickering, A. W. & Ehrmann, S. C. (1996). Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever, available at:

http://www.tltgroup.org/programs/seven.html

University of Southern Mississippi Learning Enhancement Center (n.d.) Online Course Development Rubric. Retrieved from: https://files.pbworks.com/download/l6Z6cZvJCd/ablendedmaricopa/1240547/LEC_Online_course%20rubric.pdf