WikiEducator:Quality Assurance and Review
- 1 Assumptions and guiding principles
- 2 What are the questions we need to answer?
- 3 Suggestions and considerations
- 4 Existing tools and projects which could support QA in WE
- 5 Tasks and work in progress
- 6 List of volunteers to assist with drafting the QA and review policy
- 7 References
Assumptions and guiding principles
The development of WE mechanisms for quality assurance are directed and founded on our community values of: social inclusion; freedom; the unique and specialised nature of education; and our forward looking disposition in building the future. Consequently our perspective on quality is framed within the context of a number of assumptions and guiding principles.
- Quality is:
- a commitment to improve education around the world and not a mechanism to exclude new members from our community;
- the collective responsibility of WikiEducators who develop and use our teaching materials;
- enhanced by the design and development processes WE adopt and not the technologies we use;
- an illusive and complex concept -- it means different things to different people and will always be context-dependent;
- a process and not a state, recognising that materials start as a draft and mature through reiterative contributions from the originating authors and the community;
- grown out of a healthy community, where all members are recognized and rewarded for their contributions;
What are the questions we need to answer?
We invite the WE community to list the questions we need to answer collectively as a community in developing a quality assurance and review policy for WikiEducator.
- Are our assumptions and guiding principles on target?
- What is the recommended time frame for developing and instituting a QA and review policy in WE?
- Can the WE QA and review process be broken down into "Degrees of completion"?
- Should our commitment to quality be stated as a core value of the WE community?
- Do we need to use inspirational symbols, templates, slogans, which are content related and culture-inclusive to heighten the value awareness and quality conviction?
- Add your questions here ...
Suggestions and considerations
Existing tools and projects which could support QA in WE
|ContentInfobox Template||A template which describes key characteristics of a resource.
|Learning Design Project||A project to support and promote best practice in learning design associated with the development of asynchronous learning materials within a wiki environment. WE are developing a set of tools to help with the learning design of projects.|
|Tutorial: Developing a teaching resource||This is intended as a beginner's resource. It was developed to help graduates from Learning4Content to integrate basic design principles and processes when developing their first teaching resource in WE.||
|Flagged Revisions||A Mediawiki extension which enables Reviewers to rate articles and set those revisions as the default revision to show upon normal page view.||
|WOERMM||Wiki based Open Educational Resources Maturity Model (WOERMM). This idea was born out of the research and writing done for the paper, "Assessing the quality of open education resource based wikis". The WOERMM would be a follow-on to this paper. Maturity models encourage continuous improvement rather than a more "static" review process.||
Tasks and work in progress
These five featured items are designed to set the "quality goal" for the works being developed within WikiEducator.
- Featured learning resource
- Featured collaboration
- Featured reuse materials
- Featured institution
- Featured project
The quality assurance framework provides the set of best practices and quality assessment items and approaches which the featured works are based upon. The framework will be based upon much of the work found in the references section of this page.
List of volunteers to assist with drafting the QA and review policy
WE needs a minimum of four contributor volunteers to assist with initial drafting of the QA and review policy based on discussions and comments from the community. The draft policy will be developed on the wiki and available for comment and review by the community. We also need as many reviewer volunteers as we can find and at least three approver volunteers. If you're interested in helping, please list your name below:
- Wayne Mackintosh
- Peter Rawsthorne
- Declan McCabe
- Sanjaya Mishra
- Leigh Blackall
- Alice Bedard-Voorhees
- The community using a consensus model
Atkins, D., Seely Brown, J. & Hammond, A. (2007). A Review of the Open Educational Resources (OER) Movement: Achievements, Challenges, and New Opportunities. Retrieved on 19 May 2008 from http://www.hewlett.org/NR/rdonlyres/5D2E3386-3974-4314-8F67-5C2F22EC4F9B/0/AReviewoftheOpenEducationalResourcesOERMovement_BlogLink.pdf
Commonwealth of Learning. (n.d.). Quality Assurance Micro-site. Retrieved on 19 May 2008 from http://www.col.org/colweb/site/pid/4225
Jongedijk, L. (2008). Assessing the Quality of K-12 Online Content: A sample assessment rubric. Retrieved on 19 May 2008 from http://cider.athabascau.ca/CIDERSessions/
Marshall, S. (2005). E-Learning Maturity Model. Retrieved on 19 May 2008 from http://www.utdc.vuw.ac.nz/research/emm/index.shtml
Zhao, L. & Elbaum, S. (2003). Quality assurance under the open source development model. Retrieved on 19 May 2008 from http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~luyin/luyin.pdf