Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Only available when logged in.
techhub.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A hub primarily for passionate technologists, but everyone is welcome

Administered by:

Server stats:

4.6K
active users

techhub.social: AboutStatusProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.4.2

#oscqr

1 post1 participant0 posts today
Alejandra M. Pickett

📢 Calling all distance learning leaders, online directors, and instructional design teams!
Join me on May 7 for a free webinar focused on creating an #OSCQR implementation plan to systematically review and refresh online courses and programs. 🌐
Leave with a template, tools & resources to scale your initiative.
🕛 12–1:30 PM ET
🔗 web.cvent.com/event/b54c0dfe-6
#OnlineTeaching #OnlineLearning #InstructionalDesign #HigherEd #Accessibility #RSI #HigherEducation

Alejandra M. Pickett

Apply the OSCQR rubric as a self-assessment to support effective practices in the design of new online courses & the review and refresh of existing online courses.
Webinar 1: Intro to #OSCQR
10/29/24 Time: 12-1:30PM EST
Introduction to the SUNY #OSCQR rubric & process (oscqr.suny.edu/about/about-osc). A basic understanding of how to access/apply the OSCQR rubric & related tools & resources.
Free Registration: sunycpd.eventsair.com/socqrfal
credly.com/.../collections/osc
#education #edutoot #onlinelearning

oscqr.suny.eduThe OSCQR Process – OSCQR – SUNY Online Course Quality Review Rubric
Library Lead Pipe :OpenAccess:

[New!] 📢 "Using a Proposed Library Guide Assessment Standards Rubric and a Peer Review Process to Pedagogically Improve Library Guides: a Case Study" by Sarah Moukhliss and Trina McCowan.

inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.or

> Instructional designers regularly use vetted assessment standards and a peer review process for building high-quality courses, yet #librarians typically do not when designing library guides. This article explores using a set of standards remixed from SUNY’s Online Course Quality Review Rubric or #OSCQR and a peer review process.

www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.orgUsing a Proposed Library Guide Assessment Standards Rubric and a Peer Review Process to Pedagogically Improve Library Guides: A Case Study – In the Library with the Lead Pipe
Alejandra M. Pickett

SUNY Online has developed a set of OSCQR-aligned course templates for 8 distinct use cases and instructional modalities that are free & openly licensed.

Online Asynchronous, Synchronous, Hybrid, Hyflex, Simple Structure, and to support Face-to-Face instruction.

Non-Credit content repository, and Non-Credit Interactive versions.

online.suny.edu/onlineteaching

bit.ly/dletemplates

#edutoot#OER#templates
Ryan Randall

I've only recently become aware of the #OSCQR standards, and I absolutely love that they're CC-BY openly licensed. Engaging with them was one of many great outcomes of #OpenEd23!

Can anyone more familiar with them help me better understand why Standard 4 asserts that a lack of editability is better than providing a range of document types, including .doc(x)?

The fullest explanation I can find is here: oscqr.suny.edu/standard4/

It repeatedly stresses "editable = bad," but doesn't explain precisely why, or detail what scenarios this lack of editability will solve.

From my #accessibility-focused perspective, allowing students ease of access in a wide variety of formats is generally best.

Is "don't edit" meant to avoid students accidentally editing and confusing themselves? Concerns about academic integrity? Fears that someone will misrepresent the syllabus outside of the institution? #higherEd

oscqr.suny.eduOSCQR – Standard #4 – OSCQR – SUNY Online Course Quality Review Rubric
TrendingLive feeds
About