Examining Faculty Perceptions of Distance Course Quality Review Feedback
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v29i2.4436Keywords:
feedback, quality assurance, course review cycleAbstract
The purpose of this explanatory sequential mixed methods study was to examine faculty perceptions of distance course quality review feedback at a small healthcare-focused college in the United States. The Examining the Evaluator Feedback Survey tool was adapted and used to determine faculty perceptions (N=16) of five key aspects of reviewer feedback (usefulness, accuracy, credibility, access to resources, and responsiveness) and the importance of feedback characteristics. Follow-up interviews (N=3) were conducted for in-depth exploration of survey results. Results indicated that faculty perceived feedback to be useful and accurate and reviewers to be credible. However, faculty would like to have more involvement both to explain their teaching context and to clarify and prioritize results. While receiving feedback was initially unpleasant and the amount of feedback may be overwhelming, faculty responded by using it to make course improvements. The study adds to limited faculty perception research amongst extensive research on quality tools and institutional review processes.
References
Altman, B., Shattuck, K., Simunich, B., & Burch, B. (2020). Quality assurance implementation: How it works. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 23(4). https://ojdla.com/articles/quality-assurance-implementation-how-it-works
Aminy, M., Boyd, B., Pickett, A., & West-Smith, P. (2022, April 6). Frameworks and rubrics. Presentation at the WCET Elements of Quality Digital Learning Virtual Summit. https://pheedloop.com/wcetsummit2022/site/sessions/?event=wcetsummit2022§ion=120441&id=SESAXFIS5DT0555GU
Ash, H., & Oberlin, C. (2019). The QM rubric says & I suggest: How to write a helpful recommendation. Presentation at QM Connect Conference. https://www.qualitymatters.org/qa-resources/resource-center/conference-presentations/qm-rubric-says-i-suggest-how-write-helpful
Baldwin, S., & Ching, Y.-H. (2019). Online course design: A review of the Canvas Course Evaluation Checklist. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(3), 268–282. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i3.4283
Baldwin, S., Ching, Y.-H., & Hsu, Y.-C. (2018). Online course design in higher education: A review of national and statewide evaluation instruments. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 62(1), 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0215-z
Bazluki, M., Gyabak, K., Udermann, B. (2018). Instructor feedback on a formal online course quality assurance review process. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 21(2). https://ojdla.com/archive/summer212/bazluki_gyabak_udermann212.pdf
Chen, Y., & Carliner, S. (2021). A special SME: An integrative literature review of the relationship between instructional designers and faculty in the design of online courses for higher education. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 33(4), 471–495. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21339
Cherasaro, T. L., Brodersen, R. M., Reale, M. L., & Yanoski, D. C. (2016). Teachers’ responses to feedback from evaluators: What feedback characteristics matter? (REL 2017–190). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Central. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/rel/Products/Region/central/Publication/3790
Cherasaro, T. L., Brodersen, R. M., Yanoski, D. C., Welp, L. C., & Reale, M. L. (2015). The examining evaluator feedback survey. (REL 2016–100). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Central. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/rel/Products/Region/central/Publication/3244
Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods designs (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Dawadi, S., Shrestha, S., & Giri, R. A. (2021). Mixed-methods research: A discussion on its types, challenges, and criticisms. Journal of Practical Studies in Education, 2(2), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.46809/jpse.v2i2.20
Gregory, R. L., Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J., & Cook, V. S. (2020). Community college faculty perceptions of the Quality Matters™ rubric. Online Learning, 24(2), 128-141. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i2.2052
Hunter, S. B., (2024). High-leverage teacher evaluation practices for instructional improvement. Education Management Administration & Leadership, 52(4), 991-1013. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221112995
Hunter, S. B., & Springer, M. G. (2022). Critical feedback characteristics: Teacher human capital, and early-career teacher performance: A mixed-methods analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 44(3), 380-403. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373721106291
McGahan, S.J., Jackson, C.J., & Premer, K. (2015). Online course quality assurance: Development of a quality checklist. InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching, 10, 126–140. https://doi.org/10.46504/10201510mc
McNeal, L., & Gray, J. (2019). A new spin on quality: Broadening online course reviews through coaching and slow thinking. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 22(4). https://ojdla.com/archive/winter224/mcnealGray224.pdf
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Nworie, J., & Charles, C.B. (2021). Quality standards and accreditation of distance education programs in a pandemic. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 24(3). https://ojdla.com/articles/quality-standards-and-accreditation-of-distance-education-programs-in-a-pandemic
Open SUNY Online Course Quality Review Rubric (OSCQR) (n.d.). Research. https://oscqr.suny.edu/research/
Ouahada, K. (2019). Course evaluation for low pass rate improvement in engineering education. Education Sciences, 9, 1-27.
Quality Matters (QM) (n.d.). Research. https://www.qualitymatters.org/research
Samuel, A., Larsen, K., Cervero, R., & Maggio, L. (2020). A participatory approach to developing online course quality standards in health professions education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 23(3). https://ojdla.com/articles/a-participatory-approach-to-developing-online-course-quality-standards-in-health-professions-education
Shorten, A, & Smith, J. (2017). Mixed methods research: expanding the evidence base. Evidence-Based Nursing, 20, 74-75. https://ebn.bmj.com/content/20/3/74
Wargo, K. (2021). Faculty development for online learning: Catalysts for transforming practice across modalities. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 24(3). https://ojdla.com/articles/faculty-development-for-online-learning-catalysts-for-transforming-practice-across-modalities
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Kristy Plander, Renee Hathaway, Dr. Deb Maeder
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
