Evolution of Internal Quality Assurance Models for University Online Programs
https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2024.04.036
Abstract
The widespread adoption of online formats in 2020 established a trend towards the development of online education and intensified the issue of assessing the quality of distance higher education programs. The subsequent necessity to adapt to the post-pandemic context prompted universities to develop both new online programs and innovative approaches to managing their quality. Despite the proliferation of online formats, there is a lack of publications analyzing the evolution of internal quality assurance mechanisms in such contexts. This study examines the dynamics of the emergence and transformation of internal evaluation and quality assurance models for university online programs from 2009 to 2023. The research compares 17 models focused on various aspects of the educational process, thereby tracing the evolution of internal quality assurance mechanisms. The analysis is conducted based on parameters identified through a literature review as well as during the course of the research itself. The results allow for the identification of three developmental periods for these models: experimental, transitional, and contemporary. Educational aspects that are present in all models within the sample (technologies, student-centered design, and online teaching) are distinguished from those characteristic only of some models (environment development, resource reuse, support for students, faculty, and staff, and communication). A description of the evolution of each aspect within the identified periods is provided, along with their connection to the concept of quality in online environments. This work may be beneficial for researchers in the field of quality assurance, higher education administrators, and educational policy specialists.
About the Authors
A. E. Korchak
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Anna E. Korchak – Research Assistant of Centre for Sociology of Higher Education, Teacher of Educational Programmes Department.
16/10 Potaposkiy lane, Moscow, 101000
T. E. Khavenson
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatiana E. Khavenson – PhD (Education); at the moment of preparation of the paper – Associate Professor, Chief Expert, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics; at the moment of publication – Research Associate, Faculty of Education in Science and Technology.
16/10 Potaposkiy lane, Moscow, 101000
Technion
References
1. Misut M., Pribilová K. Measuring of Quality in the Context of e-Learning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015, vol. 177, p p. 312 –319. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.347 (In Eng.).
2. Blagg K. The Rise of Master’s Degrees: Master’s Programs Are Increasingly Diverse and Online. Urban Institute, 2018. 19 p. (In Eng.).
3. Zawacki-Richter O., Naidu S. Mapping Research Trends from 35 years of Publications in Distance Education. Distance Education, 2016, vol. 37, nr 3, pp. 245–269. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2016.1185079 (In Eng.).
4. Ireland J., Mary Correia H., Griffin T. M. Developing Quality in e‐Learning: a Framework in Three Parts. Quality Assurance in Education, 2009, vol. 17, nr 3, pp. 250 –263. doi: 10.1108/09684880910970650 (In Eng.).
5. Britto M., Ford C., Wise J. M. Three Institutions, Three Approaches, One Goal: Addressing Quality Assurance in Online Learning. Online Learning Journal, 2013, vol. 17, nr 4. doi: 10.24059/olj.v17i4.402 (In Eng.).
6. Programma «Sovremennaya kombinatorika» [Program “Moder n Combinatorics”], available at: https://omscmipt.ru/ (accessed 13.10.2024). (In Russ.).
7. Forma № VPO-1 Ministerstva vysshego obrazovaniya i nauki R F [Form V PO -1 of the Mi n ist r y of Hig her Education and Science of the Russian Federation], available at: https://minobrnauki.gov.ru/action/stat/highed/ (accessed 13.10.2024). (In Russ.).
8. Khavenson T. E., Korchak A. E. Osobennosti funktsionirovaniya tsifrovykh kampusov i onlainprogramm magistratury: analiz rossiiskogo i zarubezhnogo opyta [Peculiarities of the Functioning of Digital Campuses and Online Master’s Programs: Analysis of Russian and Foreign Experience], Moscow, NIU VShE, 2024, 162 p. (In Russ.).
9. Stone C. Onli ne Lear ni ng i n Aust ralian Higher Education: Opportunities, Challenges and Transformations. Student Success, 2019, vol. 10, nr 2, pp. 1–11. doi: 10.5204/ssj.v10i2.1299 (In Eng.).
10. Lucander H., Christersson C. Engagement for Quality Development in Higher Education: a Process for Quality Assurance of Assessment. Quality in Higher Education, 2020, vol. 26, nr 2, pp. 135–155. doi: 10.1080/13538322.2020.1761008 (In Eng.).
11. Kidney G., Cummings L., Boehm A. Toward a Quality Assurance Approach to e-Learning Courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 2007, vol. 6, nr 1, pp. 17–30. (In Eng.).
12. Sun P. C., Tsai R. J., Finger G., Chen Y. Y., Yeh D. What Drives a Successful e-Learning? An Empirical Investigation of the Critical Factors Inf luencing Lear ner Satisfaction. Computers & Education, 2008, vol. 50, nr 4, pp. 1183–1202. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007 (In Eng.).
13. Mayer R. E. Multimedia Learning. London, Cambridge University Press, 2009, 304 p. (In Eng.).
14. Don nelli-Sallee E. Suppor t i ng O n li ne Teach i ng Effectiveness at Scale: Achieving Efficiency and Effectiveness Through Peer Review. Journal of Educators Online, 2018, vol. 15, nr 3. (In Eng.).
15. MacDonald C. J., Backhaus I., Vanezi E., Yeratziotis A., Clendinneng D., Seriola L., Papadopoulos G. A. European Union Digital Education Quality Standard Framework and Companion Evaluation Toolkit. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 2021, vol. 39, nr 1, pp. 85–100. doi: 10.1080/02680513.2021.1936476 (In Eng.).
16. Koh J. H. L., Daniel B. K. Shifting Online During COVID-19: A Systematic Review of Teaching and Learning Strategies and Their Outcomes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2022, vol. 19, nr 1. doi: 10.1186/s41239-022-00361-7 (In Eng.).
17. COVID-19 Educational Disruption and Response, Impact on Education, available at: https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/ covid-19-educational-disr uption-and-response (accessed 14.10.2024). (In Eng.).
18. Rameez A., Fowsar M. A., Lu m na N. I mpact of Covid-19 on Higher Education Sectors in Sri Lanka: a Study Based on South Eastern University of Sri Lanka, available at: http://ir.lib.seu.ac.lk/handle/123456789/5076 (accessed 13.10.2024). (In Eng.).
19. Alami N. H., Attieh L. K. Quality in Online Education in Lebanon During the Pandemic: Challenges, Opportunities, and Lessons Learned. Quality Assurance in Higher Education in the Middle East: Practices and Perspectives, 2023, vol. 54, pp. 101–114. doi: 10.1108/S2055–364120230000054006 (In Eng.).
20. Alshibani S. M., Bukhari A., Sharma R., Albishri N. A. Riding the Waves of COVID -19: A Holistic Approach to Accreditation in Higher Education. Quality Assurance in Higher Education in the Middle East: Practices and Perspectives, 2023, vol. 54, pp. 115 –142. doi: 10.1108/S2055–364120230000054007 (In Eng.).
21. Fawns T., Aitken G., Jones D. Online Postgraduate Education in a Postdigital World: Beyond Technology. Springer International Publishing, 2021, 259 p. (In Eng.).
22. Ashida A., Ishizaka H. Effects of Changing from OnSite to Online Distance Classes on Graduate Students’ HelpSeeking: Lessons for Sustainable Teaching and Learning from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Asia Pacif ic Education Review, 2022, vol. 23, n r 4, pp. 653– 667. doi: 10.1007/s12564-022-09783-4 (In Eng.).
23. Alenezi M., Wa rd at S., A kou r M. T he Need of Integrating Digital Education in Higher Education: Challenges and Opportunities. Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15, nr 6, p. 4782. doi: 10.3390/su15064782 (In Eng.).
24. Imran R., Fatima A., Salem I. E., Allil K. Teaching and Learning Delivery Modes in Higher Education: Looking Back to Move Forward post-COVID-19 Era. The International Journal of Management Education, 2023, vol. 21, n r 2, p. 100805. doi: 10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100805 (In Eng.).
25. Molina-Vásquez R. Quality of Programs with Virtual Methodology: a Masters’ Case in Colombia. Quality Assurance in Education, 2022, vol. 30, nr 4, pp. 446–463. doi: 10.1108/QAE-02-2021-0023 (In Eng.).
26. Salama R., Hinton T. Online Higher Education: Current Landscape and Future Trends. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 2023, vol. 47, nr 7, pp. 913–924. doi: 10.1080/0309877X.2023.2200136 (In Eng.).
27. Alyoussef I. Y. Acceptance of e-Learning in Higher Education: The role of Task-Technology Fit with the Information Systems Success Model. Heliyon, 2023, vol. 9, nr 3. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13751 (In Eng.).
28. lić V., Kaljevic J., Jović S., Petković D., Milovančević M., Dimitrov L., Dachkinov P. Survey of Quality Models of e-Learning Systems. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2018, vol. 511, pp. 324–330. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2018.07.058 (In Eng.).
29. Hafeez M., Naureen S., Sultan S. Quality Indicators and Models for Online Learning Quality Assurance in Higher Education. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 2022, vol. 20, nr 4, pp. 374–385. doi: 10.34190/ejel.20.4.2553 (In Eng.).
30. Singh V., Thurman A. How Many Ways Can We Define Online Learning? A Systematic Literature Review of Definitions of Online Learning (1988–2018). American Journal of Distance Education, 2019, vol. 33, nr 4, pp. 289–306. doi: 10.1080/08923647.2019.1663082 (In Eng.).
31. Liu I. F., Chen M. C., Sun Y. S., Wible D., Kuo C. H. Extending the TAM Model to Explore the Factors that Affect Intention to Use an Online Learning Community. Computers & Education, 2010, vol. 54, nr 2, pp. 600–610. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.009 (In Eng.).
32. Sánchez R. A., Hueros A. D. Motivational Factors that Inf luence the Acceptance of Moodle using TAM. Computers in Human Behavior, 2010, vol. 26, nr 6, pp. 1632–1640. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.011 (In Eng.).
33. Cheung R., Vogel D. Predicting User Acceptance of Collabor at ive Tech nolog ies: A n Exten sion of t he Technology Acceptance Model for e-Learning. Computers & Education, 2013, vol. 63, pp. 160 –175. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.003 (In Eng.).
34. De Nito E., Rita Gentile T. A., Köhler T., Misuraca M., Reina R. E-learning Experiences in Tertiary Education: Patterns and Trends in Research over the Last 20 Years. Studies in Higher Education, 2023, vol. 48, nr 4, pp. 595–615. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2022.2153246 (In Eng.).
35. Looyestyn J., Kernot J., Boshoff K., Ryan J., Edney S., Maher C. Does Gamification Increase Engagement with Online Programs? A Systematic Review. PloS One, 2017, vol. 12, nr 3. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173403 (In Eng.).
36. Du mford A. D., Miller A. L. Online Lear ning in Higher Education: Exploring Advantages and Disadvantages for Engagement. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 2018, vol. 30, nr 3, pp. 452– 465. doi: 10.1007/s12528–018–9179-z (In Eng.).
37. MacDonald J. Blended Learning and Online Tutoring: Planning Learner Support and Activity Design. Routledge, 2017, 224 p. (In Eng.).
38. Simpson O. Supporting Students in Online, Open and Distance Learning. Routledge, 2018, 192 p. (In Eng.).
39. Borahan N. G., Ziarati R. Developing Quality Criteria for Application in the Higher Education Sector in Turkey. Total Quality Management, 2002, vol. 13, nr 7, pp. 913–926. doi: 10.1080/0954412022000017021 (In Eng.).
40. Vlăsceanu L., Grünberg L., Pârlea D. Quality Assurance and Accreditation: A Glossary of Basic Terms and Definitions. Bucharest, Unesco-Cepes, 2004, 120 p. (In Eng.).
41. Harvey L., Night P. T. Transforming Higher Education. Society for Research into Higher Education, 1996, 223 p. (In Eng.).
42. Harvey L., Stensaker B. Quality Culture: Understandings, Boundaries and Linkages. European Journal of Education, 2008, vol. 43, nr 4, pp. 427–442. (In Eng.).
43. Harvey L., Green D. Defining Quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1993, vol. 18, nr 1, pp. 9–34. doi: 10.1080/026029393018010242. (In Eng.).
44. Schindler L., Puls-Elvidge S., Crawford L., Welzant H. Definitions of Quality in Higher Education: A Synthesis of the Literature. Higher Learning Research Communications, 2015, vol. 5, nr 3. doi: 10.18870/hlrc.v5i3.244 (In Eng.).
45. Korchak A. E., Khavenson T. E. Ponyatie «kachestvo» v vysshem obrazovanii: ot of laink onlain-formatu [Concept of “Quality” in Higher Education: From Off line to Online Mode]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, 2024, vol. 33, nr 1, pp. 9–27. doi: 10.31992/0869-3617-2024-33-1-9-27 (In Russ.).
46. Bender macher G. W. G., O ude Egbr i n k M. G. A., Wolf hagen H. A. P., Leppink J., Dolmans D. H. J. M. Reinforcing Pillars for Quality Culture Development: a Path Analytic Model. Studies in Higher Education, 2019, vol. 44, nr 4, pp. 643–662. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2017.1393060 (In Eng.).
47. Ehlers U. D. Understanding Quality Culture. Quality Assurance in Education, 2009, vol. 17, nr 4, pp. 343–363. Doi:10.1108/09684880910992322 (In Eng.).
48. Dzimińska M., Fijałkowska J., Sułkowski Ł. Tr ustBased Quality Culture Conceptual Model for Higher Education Instit utions. Sustainabilit y, 2018, vol. 10, nr 8, p. 2599. doi: 10.3390/su10082599 (In Eng.).
49. Simu nich B., McMahon E., Hopf L., Alt man B. Zimmerman W. Creating a Culture of Online Quality: The People, Policies, and Processes that Facilitate Institutional Change for Online Course Quality Assurance. American Journal of Distance Education, 2021, vol. 36, nr 4, pp. 1–17. doi: 10.1080/08923647.2021.2010021 (In Eng.).
50. Ossiannilsson E., Williams K., Camilleri A. F., Brown M. Quality Models in Online and Open Education around the Globe: State of the Art and Recommendations. International Council for Open and Distance Education (ICDE), 2015, 52 p. (In Eng.).
51. Tor raco R. J. Wr iting Integ rative Reviews of the Literature: Methods and Purposes. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 2016, vol. 7, nr 3, pp. 62–70. doi: 10.4018/IJAVET.2016070106 (In Eng.).
52. Brau n V., Clarke V. Using Thematic A nalysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2006, vol. 3, nr 2, pp. 77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa (In Eng.).
53. Zhu J. Predictors of Mathematics and Science Teachers’ ICT Use in their Teaching: Results from 19 PISA Countries ERAS International Conference & WERA Focal Meeting, NTU, Singapore, 2023. (In Eng.).
54. Learning Tools Interoperability, available at: https://www.imsglobal.org/activity/learning-tools-interoperability (accessed 13.10.2024). (In Eng.).
55. SCORM, available at: https://scorm.com/ (accessed 13.10.2024). (In Eng.).
Review
For citations:
Korchak A.E., Khavenson T.E. Evolution of Internal Quality Assurance Models for University Online Programs. University Management: Practice and Analysis. 2024;28(4):82-94. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2024.04.036
Views:
180
Email this article 