Excellence in Online Learning Conference Center for Online Learning and Teaching Technology

Best Practices: Alignment to Course Objectives

• Alignment to individual course objectives

Course objectives fully aligned and addressed comprehensively.

Course objectives partially aligned and addressed.

Course objectives neither aligned nor addressed.

Description of OER: Explanation of the Subject Matter
Is the

• Course Number and Section provided?
• OER Content valid and appropriately current?
• OER Content understandable by target audience?
• OER Content authoritative and appropriate (age level, language, visuals, cultural sensitivity)?

Does the

• OER Content present main ideas clearly?
• OER Content connect associated concepts?

Content is valid, appropriately current, understandable by target audience, authoritative, and appropriate. Content presents main ideas clearly and connects to associated concepts.

Content is partially valid, less than appropriately current, garners less than complete understanding by target audience, is incomplete in elements of authority and appropriateness. Content presents most main ideas clearly and connects to some associated concepts.

Content is invalid, outdated, not understandable by target audience, deficient in authority and appropriateness. Content neither presents main ideas clearly nor connects associated concepts.

Best Practices: Utility for Instruction

• Are instructions for OER use provided?
• Do the components of the OER function as intended?
• Does functionality require specific software or hardware?
• Is the OER licensed for open use? (CC license for reuse, remix, revise, redistribution)
• Is content adaptable or revisable?
• Is metadata available?

Comprehensive instructions are provided; components function as intended; functionality does not require additional software or hardware; OER is licensed for open use; content is adaptable and revisable; and, metadata is available.

Instructions are incomplete; some components do not function as intended; some functionality does require additional software or hardware; OER license is partially open; content is not easily adaptable and/or revisable; and, metadata is incomplete.

Instructions are not provided; components do not function as intended; functionality requires additional software or hardware; OER is not licensed for open use; content is not adaptable and/or revisable; and, metadata is not available.

Best Practices: Quality of Assessment

• Is assessment aligned to the OER content?
• Does the assessment measure and appropriately weight the major concepts of the OER content?
• Does the structure of the assessment support an accurate measurement of proficiency?

Assessment is aligned to the content; measures and appropriately weights the major concepts of the content; and, the assessment structure supports an accurate measurement of student proficiency.

Assessment is moderately aligned to the content; inconsistently measures and weights the major concepts of the content; and, the assessment structure compromises an accurate measurement of student proficiency.

Assessment is misaligned to the content; does not measure or appropriately weight the major concepts of the content; and, the assessment structure does not support an accurate measurement of student proficiency.

Quality of OER Material: Technological Interactivity

• Does the OER functionality allow individualized learning by being flexible or adapting to individual control?
• Is the OER functionality well designed and functions as expected on the intended platform?
• Does the OER functionality invite student use or encourage learning?

Functionality allows an individualized learning experience; is well-designed; and, encourages student use or learning.

Functionality moderately allows an individualized learning experience; the design is deficient in some areas; and, may not encourage student use or learning.

Functionality does not allow an individualized learning experience; has design flaws; and, discourages student use or learning.

Quality of OER Material: Instructional and Practice Exercises

• Does the OER offer more exercises than needed for the average student to master elementary content?
• Does the OER offer one to two rich practice exercises for complex content?
• Are exercises clearly written?
• Are exercises keyed and scored with appropriate documentation?
• Is there a variety of exercise types and formats appropriate for the intended content?

OER offers appropriate number of exercises for mastery of elementary and complex content; offers clearly written, keyed, and scored exercises with documentation; and, provides a variety of types and formats of exercises.

OER offers an insufficient number of exercises for mastery of elementary and complex content; question clarity or documentation for keying or scoring is insufficient; and, provides little variety in types and formats of exercises.

OER lacks an appropriate number of exercises for mastery of elementary and complex content; does not offer clearly written, keyed, and scored exercises with documentation; and, provides no variety of types and formats of exercises.

Best Practices: Opportunities for Deeper Learning

• Does the OER offer opportunities for deeper learning by incorporating at least three of the following:
• Thinking critically and solving complex problems
• Reasoning abstractly
• Constructing viable arguments and critiquing the reasoning of others
• Applying discrete knowledge to real world situations
• Constructing, using, or analyzing models?
• Does the OER offer a range of cognitive demand that is appropriate and supportive of content?
• Does the OER provide appropriate scaffolding and direction?

OER provides opportunity for deeper learning through at least three areas of higher-level thinking skills; offers a range of cognitive demand commensurate with the content; and, provides appropriate direction and scaffolding.

OER provides opportunity for deeper learning through fewer than three areas of higher-level thinking skills; offers a range of cognitive inconsistently matched with the content; and, provides incomplete direction or scaffolding.

OER does not provide opportunity for deeper learning through higher-level thinking skills; does not offer a range of cognitive demand commensurate with the content; and, does not provide appropriate direction or scaffolding.

Overall Economic Impact

The nominee provides evidence of zero textbook cost for students. In addition, provides thorough description of how effective the OER content was compared to previously used text.

The nominee provides evidence of minimal textbook cost for students. In addition, provides partial description of how effective the OER content was compared to previously used text.

The nominee did not provide evidence for cost efficiency and effectiveness.

Educational Impact to Learning Outcomes
The nominee has demonstrated a strong partnership between OER instructional materials and strategies towards achieving the course learning outcomes. In this section, we ask for sample student work and explanation.

Has provided examples, such as:

• Positive correlation with grades
• Student sample work displaying meeting higher order outcomes
• Faculty evaluation student comments

Provides three or more types of evidence.

Provides minimal evidence.

Does not include evidence

Enable Accessibility

• Does the OER comply with current ADA accessibility standards?
• Accessibility Resources

Components and functionality of OER comply with current ADA accessibility standards.

Parts of OER components or functionality comply with current ADA accessibility standards.

OER does not comply with current ADA accessibility standards.

Recommendations
The nominee provides evidence of learner's satisfaction and effectiveness in their use of OER.  In this section, we will ask for a letter of recommendation from a former student.

Includes strong letters of
recommendation from an
administrator/colleague and student.

Include good letters of
recommendation from an
administrator/colleague and student.

Does not include a letter from recommendation from an
administrator/colleague and student.