La qualità dell'eLearning Un approccio qualitativo per l'analisi dei feedback degli studenti e dei docenti

Patrizia Ghislandi, Juliana Raffaghelli, Federica Cumer

Abstract


The ongoing discussion on the issue of the quality of academic eLearning criticizes the dominating culture of “quality” linked to the industrial production, mostly based on rationalization and conformity to pre-defined standards, that requires the collection of massive quantitative data, with major interest on educational outputs as a vision of system’s productivity (Ehlers & Schneckenberg, 2010, Ghislandi, 2008, 2012).  Instead, quality of education requires reflection and deep understanding of complex contextual elements, interactions and relational dimensions that are essential and often invisible to traditional assessment tools.  In this article, through the presentation of a case study on blended continuing training, we introduce an approach for the monitoring of eLearning quality. This last privilege the adoption of qualitative and participatory methodologies of evaluation, basing on the use of rubrics for the analisis of training activities followed by reflection on the same. According to the authors, this approach is coherent both from the methodological and epistemological point of view, with a new vision of quality as continuing process of reflection on the evaluation of the educational experience, toward the discovery of the meaning and values lying behind.


Keywords


eLearning quality; evaluation; monitoring; qualitative research; rubrics; students and teacher feedback

Full Text:

PDF (Italiano)

References


Abma, T., & Widdershoven, G. (2011). Evaluation as a relationally responsible Practice. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln, The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4th edition (p. 669-679). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Adams, D. (1993). Defining Educational Quality.IEQ Publication No. 1. Biennial Report. Arlington, VA: USAID Institute for International Research.

Auvinen, A., & Ehlers, U. (2007). Handbook of Quality Management of Peer Production QMPP. EFQUEL – url: http://cdn.efquel.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/QMPP-Handbook_ver099.pdf?a6409c retrieved on July 2012.

Bates, A. W., & Sangra, A. (2011). Managing Technology in Higher Education: Strategies for Transforming Teaching and Learning. San Francisco: Wiley&Sons.

Bondioli, A., & Ferrari, M. (2000). -a cura di- Manuale di valutazione del contesto. Milano: FrancoAngeli.

Bruschi, B., & Parola, A. (2005). Verifica dell'efficacia di diversi modelli di didattica online. In C. -a. Coggi, Per migliorare la didattica universitaria. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia.

Clark, P. (2003). Quality in the Digital Age. 2003 Eden Annual Conference: The quality dialogue. Integrating Quality Cultures in Flexible, Distance and eLearning (p. 1-5). Rodhes, Grece: European Distance Education Network.

Conole, G. (2012). Designing for learning in an open world. London: Springer.

CSU. (2003). Rubric for Online Instruction (ROI). Chico, CA, url: http://www.csuchico.edu/tlp/resources/rubric/rubric.pdf (ultima consultazione 22 giugno 2012): California State University.

Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., Hodgson, V., & McConnell, D. (2012). -editors- Exploring the Theory, Pedagogy and Practice of Networked Learning. London and New York: Springer.

Dray, B., Lowenthal, P., Miszkiewicz, M., Ruiz-Primo, M., & Marczynski, K. (2011). Developing an instrument to assess student readiness for online learning: A validation study. Distance Education, vol. 23, n. 1, pp. 29-47.

EFQUEL. (2007). From quality of eLearning to eQuality of Learning. EFQUEL Green Paper Series. EFQUEL, url:

http://cdn.efquel.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/GP3.pdf?a6409c, retrieved on July 2012 .

Ehlers, U. (2004). Quality in E-Learning. The Learners Perspective. Thessaloniki: European Journal of Vocational Training, CEDEFOP.

Ehlers, U.-D., & Schneckenberg, D. (2010). Changing Cultures in Higher Education. Moving Ahead to Future Learning. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case Study. In N. K. Denzin, The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 4th Edition. Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage.

Ghislandi, P. (2005). Didattiche per l'università,. Trento: Università degli Studi di Trento.

Ghislandi, P. (2011). -a cura di- Comunità di pratioca per l'educazione continua in sanità. Trento: Erickson.

Ghislandi, P. (2012). -editor- eLearning. Theories, Design, Software and Applications. Rijeka: InTech.

Ghislandi, P. e. (2008). eLearning e qualità. Il giornale dell'eLearning , 2 (3), url: http://www.wbt.it/index.php?pagina=580, Giugno 2012.

Ghislandi, P., & Cumer, F. (2012). La validazione qualitativa di adASTRA, una suite di rubric per la progettazione/realizzazione di eLearning di qualità. L'integrazione scolastica e sociale, Erickson, 265-271.

Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, California.: Sage.

Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining Quality. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 18 (1) 9-34.

Lorenzo, G., & Moore, J. (2002). The Sloan Consortium Report to the Nation. Five Pillars of Quality Online Education. New York: The Sloan Consortium, SLOAN-C.

Moore, J. C. (2005). The Sloan Consortium Quality Framework and The Five Pillars. New York: Sloan-C.

Mortari, L. (2007). Cultura della Valutazione Pedagogica. Roma: Carocci Editore.

Paolino, D. (2011). The eLFOSS project: genesis and contents. In P. Ghislandi, Distributed Communities of practice and continuing health education. Some contributions to the debate. Trento: Erickson.

Pontalti, L. (2011). The elFOSS project. In P. Ghislandi, Distributed communities of practice and continuing health education. Trento: Erickson.

Rinaldi, F. (2012). Il monitoraggio per la valutazione. Concetti, metodi, strumenti. FrancoAngeli: Milano.

Scriven, M. (1980). Evaluation Thesaurus. Inverness California: Edgepress.

Semeraro, R. (2006). -a cura di- La valutazione della didattica universitaria: una ricerca a carattere nazionale. Milano: Franco Angeli.

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning , 2(10).

Stake, R. (1975). -editor- Evaluating the arts in education: a responsive approach. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Stake, R. (1994). The art of case study research. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.

Stake, R. (2008). Qualitative Case Studies. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln, Strategies for qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.

Tessaro, F. (1997). La valutazione dei processi formativi,. Roma: Armando Editore.

Trentin, G. (1999). Qualità nella formazione a distanza. Tecnologie Didattiche, 10-23 (16).

UNESCO. (2005). Education for All. The Quality Imperative. EFA Global Monitoring Report. Paris: UNESCO.

Vandervelde, J. (2004). A+ rubric: Rubric for electronic portfolio, url: http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/profdev/eportfoliorubric.html (ultima consultazione 22 giugno 2012), University of Wisconsin.

Vertecchi, B. (2011). Manuale della valutazione. Analisi degli apprendimento e dei contesti. Milano: FrancoAngeli.




DOI: 10.6092/issn.1970-2221/3218

Copyright (c) 2012 Patrizia Ghislandi, Juliana Raffaghelli, Federica Cumer

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported License.