Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

A DISRUPTION OF ONLINE LEARNING COURSE DESIGN: COMPARING SELF-REPORTED LEVELS OF FACULTY SATISFACTION WITH ONLINE COURSES CREATED APPLYING THE 2011-2013 EDITION OF THE QUALITY MATTERS™ RUBRIC STANDARDS TO THOSE ONLINE COURSES CREATED WITHOUT.

Blundell, Gregory Edgar
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1426268368

Abstract Details

2015, PHD, Kent State University, College of Education, Health and Human Services / School of Foundations, Leadership and Administration.
Faculty satisfaction with designing online courses matters a great deal, for a number of reasons. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether applying the Quality MattersTM Rubric [QMR] as a foundation for online course design increases faculty’s self-reported levels of satisfaction with online courses designed using the QMR, in comparison to faculty’s self-reported levels of satisfaction with online courses that were not designed using the QMR. The local and national importance of this study is fully underscored by an increased emphasis from government, employers, and other stakeholders, on the rigor and role faculty play in creating efficacy through the medium of instruction, particularly online instruction. This study explored and answered the question: Does the design mode make a difference to faculty’s self-reported levels of satisfaction in terms of online course design? The Online Faculty Satisfaction Survey [OFSS], originally developed by Bolliger & Wasilik (2009), was augmented as the Online Faculty Satisfaction Survey-Revised [OFSS-R], and was distributed throughout private higher education institutions in the state of Ohio. There is a clear link between an increased level of faculty satisfaction and an increased level of student satisfaction in their experiences throughout online course. Therefore, it was important for this researcher to establish whether the QMR provided different levels of satisfaction when compared to other instructional design models, and the hypotheses were established to test these differences. However, analysis found no significant difference in faculty self-reported satisfaction levels between the QMR and other instructional design methods in terms of designing online courses. For this researcher, this shall be a matter of future study.
Mark, A Kretovics, PHD (Committee Chair)
Susan, V. Iverson, PHD (Committee Member)
Victor, L. Berardi, PHD (Committee Member)
283 p.
Educational Technology; Instructional Design
Distance or online learning; faculty satisfaction; instructional design; traditional, web-facilitated, blended hybrid, flipped, and fully online modes; asynch and synch learning networks; Online Faculty Satisfaction Survey OFSS; learning effectiveness

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Blundell, G. E. (2015). A DISRUPTION OF ONLINE LEARNING COURSE DESIGN: COMPARING SELF-REPORTED LEVELS OF FACULTY SATISFACTION WITH ONLINE COURSES CREATED APPLYING THE 2011-2013 EDITION OF THE QUALITY MATTERS™ RUBRIC STANDARDS TO THOSE ONLINE COURSES CREATED WITHOUT. [Doctoral dissertation, Kent State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1426268368

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Blundell, Gregory. A DISRUPTION OF ONLINE LEARNING COURSE DESIGN: COMPARING SELF-REPORTED LEVELS OF FACULTY SATISFACTION WITH ONLINE COURSES CREATED APPLYING THE 2011-2013 EDITION OF THE QUALITY MATTERS™ RUBRIC STANDARDS TO THOSE ONLINE COURSES CREATED WITHOUT. 2015. Kent State University, Doctoral dissertation. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1426268368.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Blundell, Gregory. "A DISRUPTION OF ONLINE LEARNING COURSE DESIGN: COMPARING SELF-REPORTED LEVELS OF FACULTY SATISFACTION WITH ONLINE COURSES CREATED APPLYING THE 2011-2013 EDITION OF THE QUALITY MATTERS™ RUBRIC STANDARDS TO THOSE ONLINE COURSES CREATED WITHOUT." Doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, 2015. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1426268368

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)

kent1426268368
1,455
© 2015, all rights reserved.
This open access ETD is published by Kent State University and OhioLINK.