QM Rubric and the Standardization of Online Education: some quick thoughts

Boy, do I dislike these checklist that indicate that to be a good online instructor teaching a good online course, you have to do every one of these 82 things.  If you don't do one of them, or if you choose to disagree with the wording of the requirement, then some administrator will claim that you are not eligible to teach online.

There is a lot of leeway, a lot of flexibility with how an individual instructor teaches in the classroom, and there should be some equal flexibility with the way an instructor teaches online.

Some of this might be a matter of taste, for example, how much personal example is used by an instructor in a class.  Another example, might be more teaching-oriented, for example, the use or non-use of certain features of a course management system.

One thing that the QM template seems to do is create monster syllabi.  A syllabus certainly has to be detailed, but there is a point of no return at which point students will no longer read and pay attention.

The Corporatization of Higher Education

No, I have not disappeared from the blog scene, although I see that my last post was probably six months ago. Things come up, other projects get in the way of writing on the blogosphere; administrative demands attention, etc.  Right now I'm doing training to be qualified to offer a hybrid course.  Even though I've been teaching at a distance and online for a lot of years now, and even though I taught with the inter-college video system years ago, etc, I still need training. It's one of the features of corporate. bureaucratic education run afire, there is absolutely no trust on the part of the administration re the abilities/capabilities of the professors. Got to submit some paperwork to prove that you know how to do this or that.

We are now drowning in paperwork, committees, meetings, credentialing, testing, student learning outcomes.  It's just a much different environment than it was twenty or thirty years ago.