Effective Instructional Strategies and The Quality Review Process; Lessons In Using Evaluation Technology Tools to Impact Student Outcomes.

 

Session Title:
The title of the presentation is limited to 120 characters.

 Try to create something that accurately describes your intended session, which is also catchy or interesting. Consider reviewing previous Best in Track proposals. 

 

Title: Effective instructional strategies and the quality review process; lessons in using evaluation technology tools to impact student outcomes.
(118 characters) (Enter title here)

 

Presenters and Authors:
All individuals listed on a conference proposal must have a current OLC account and their profile must be up to date. When submitting the proposal, you will select your co-presenters by using their email addresses. The system will only allow you to select individuals who have an OLC account. To make the submission process quick and easy, obtain the names and email addresses used by your collaborators prior to logging in to the system.  Note: OLC uses “Additional Authors” to indicate non-presenting contributors.

 

Speakers: 
Joy Valerio
joy.valerio@wgu.edu(obtain email addresses prior to accessing the submission form)

Hannah Beaux
hannah.beaux@wgu.edu

 

Additional Authors: (obtain email addresses prior to accessing the submission form)

 

Session Type, Conference Track, Institutional Level, and Audience Level

In the system, these items are dropdown menus. You will be asked to select the option that most accurately aligns with your proposal. Please access the appropriate conference site for detailed descriptions of each.

 

Session Type:  Education Session(The format of your proposed session.)

 

Conference Track: Instructional Design (The track or category of your intended session.)

 

Institutional Level: Higher Ed (The academic level, rigor, or emphasis aligned with your intended session. Choose one of these options: K-12, Higher Ed, Industry, Government, Other)

 

Audience Level: All Attendees (The level of expertise of people who will gain the most out of attending your intended session. Choose one of these options: All, Expert, Intermediate, Novice)

 

I would prefer to present: Virtual (Your preference for format of presentation. Choose one of these options: Either onsite or virtual, Onsite only, Virtual only)

 

Special Session Designation and Intended Audience

In the system, these items are check-boxes that need to be selected. You will be asked to choose the option that most accurately aligns with your proposal. Please access the appropriate conference site for detailed descriptions of each.

 

Special Session Designation: (Does your intended session directly address the unique perspectives of any of the following: Blended, Community College, HBCU, Research, Leadership, or Equity & Inclusion?) 

 

Intended Audience: Instructional Designers, Design Thinkers, Administrators, Technologists, Faculty (The roles of people who will gain the most out of attending your intended session. Choose from these options: Administrators, Design Thinkers, Faculty, Instructional Support, Students, Training Professionals, Technologists, Researchers, All Attendees, Other)

 

 

Keywords:

Identify the top 3-5 that most accurately represent your intended presentation. You may also add your own keywords. Keywords must be comma-separated.

Instructional Design Process, Course Quality Review, Instructional Strategies, Technology

Short Abstract:
This section has a limit of 50 words. In a few short sentences describe the main idea of your intended presentation. Use active language and craft an abstract that would make you excited to attend that session (if it were accepted). Review our guide on writing effective abstracts and proposals.

By applying an effective course quality review process to assess instructional strategies, design teams can impact student outcomes, alignment, and student satisfaction in competency-based education.  In this presentation, we will provide evidence of improved student outcomes based on applying rigorous course quality review processes in our design and development.  
(49 words)

 

Extended Abstract

You will have up to 1500 words to describe your intended presentation. The extended abstract will be listed on the conference website and mobile app for attendees to review (provided your proposal is accepted.) Your extended abstract should include the following points:

• The topic of the session and why it is relevant or important to the community.

• Your plan for interactivity (this is often overlooked - including a strong engagement strategy is one way you can significantly raise your scores during the evaluation process.

• What the attendees are going to learn from the presentation (the takeaways)

• No identifiable information (Proposals should be void of information that would indicate institution, organization, or personal affiliations. Anonymity is key to ensure fairness.)

As instructional designers, we follow various processes to develop quality online courses.  During design and development, teams often experience setbacks in processes that are complicated and difficult to follow.  These setbacks result in missed deadlines, stressful collaborations, and misunderstandings among team members.  Design teams often have to solve these problems by creating processes which not only work for their own immediate team, but that are also user-friendly for other stakeholders. One of the approaches in creating processes is to use technology tools to apply strategies that support evidence of rigor, outcomes, and alignment.  We utilize technology tools to manage processes that create time and workflow efficiencies among team members as well as to quality check the instructional strategies that encourage student engagement.   The use of technology plays a critical role in addressing these challenges we face as instructional designers to develop and safeguard course quality through more streamlined processes. 

Course Quality Review. Creating a quality review process that all stakeholders are amenable in applying can be a challenge.  To solve this problem, your design team can utilize technology tools which can streamline and clarify communications, track progress, and document possible project management issues.  In addition, sufficient use of these tools can create a more efficient and organized course quality review workflow among all stakeholders.  This approach of utilizing a course quality review technology tool can assist your team to apply course quality benchmarks, apply strategies that improve student outcomes, and meet critical deadlines through more efficient workflows.
 

Review of Instructional Strategies Process. By incorporating rigorous practice for students through interactive means, your team can create an engaging course which will improve student outcomes in both performance and satisfaction.  The course quality review process using technology can also provide your team the means to ensure that effective instructional strategies are employed and reviewed for functionality and accuracy.  An effective course quality review tool can create a more organized review and approval or hand-off process between instructional designer, subject matter experts, and faculty and can allow for a more organized review of the functionality of interactive tools within your course design.
 

Evidence.  Your design team can benefit from utilizing existing tools within your organization as a means to create a more time and workflow efficient quality review process. During this review process, a more impactful quality review of instructional strategies, interactive engagement, and content quality can be measured, tracked, and documented by the entire team. The use of technology to allow this approach will create not only an acceptable process among your team, but can contribute to impacting student satisfaction and performance within a quality course.  During the design and development process, we often ask ourselves, “How can I make our processes more efficient?”, “What methods can I use to encourage buy-in from all stakeholders?”, “Does an improved process also improve student outcomes?” All of these questions and more will be answered during our engaging educational session.  Come join us to learn more about how our team was able to achieve both a more harmonious development and thus improve the student experience and performance outcomes using a new approach.  

Level of Participation: (Your plan for interactivity (this is often overlooked - including a strong engagement strategy is one way you can significantly raise your scores during the evaluation process.

 

This session is designed to be an educational forum, with each panelist presenting details within 30 minutes on how our team applied the course review process during design and development.  The presentation will include evidence of student satisfaction and performance as a result of applying this new quality review process.  There will be a short 5 minute poll taken with our attendees before the presentation and a 10 minute poll after the presentation to also include a question and answer session.  

  

Session Goals:  What the attendees are going to learn from the presentation (the takeaways)

Attendees of this session will (1) learn how to use technology tools to create a more streamlined course review process within their team, (2) learn how benchmarks were used within this tool to review instructional strategies and content quality, (3) learn more about what benefits the approach provides for tracking progress, communications, and meeting deadlines. Finally, attendees will (4) see evidence of how one course design and development process using this course review tool improved student outcomes and student satisfaction.