A_Proposed_Quality_Assurance_Procedure_f.pdf

10th
International Conference in Open & Distance Learning - November 2019, Athens, Greece - PROCEEDINGS
SECTION A: theoretical papers, original research and scientific articles
252
A Proposed Quality Assurance Procedure for Distance Learning Programs: Design,
Development and Implementation
Προτεινόμενη Διαδικασία Ποιοτικού Ελέγχου Εξ Αποστάσεως Προγραμμάτων Σπουδών:
Σχεδιασμός, Ανάπτυξη και Υλοποίηση
Nikleia Eteokleous
Πανεπιστήμιο Frederick
mail@nikleia.net
Raphaela Neophytou
Πανεπιστήμιο Frederick
raphaelaneophytou@gmail.com
Abstract
The explosive growth and the rapid diffusion of the Internet, created new approaches to teaching
and learning specifically in higher education. The interest in the development and use of distance
learning in higher education has been steadily increasing and the past four decades. The Distance
Learning Committee of Frederick University, has developed a procedure for Internal Quality
Assurance Procedure for the distance learning programs as part of the university’s implementation
of strategic planning in providing quality distance learning education and updating continuously
the distance learning program of studies. The goal of this research was to implement and evaluate
the internal quality assurance procedure as well as to identify and discuss whether the courses
(design, delivery, assessment, interaction etc) are aligned to the philosophy, the pedagogical
framework and the guidelines of DL operations provided by the Distance Learning Committee to
DL stakeholders.
Key words: distance learning programs, quality assurance procedure, higher education
Περίληψη
H ραγδαία και εκρηκτική ανάπτυξη του διαδικτύου δημιούργησαν νέες προσεγγίσεις στη
διδασκαλία και μάθηση ειδικά στην τριτοβάθμια εκπαίδευση. Η ανάγκη και το ενδιαφέρον για την
ανάπτυξη των εξ αποστάσεως προγραμμάτων σπουδών αυξάνεται σταθερά τις τελευταίες
τέσσερις δεκαετίες. Η Επιτροπή Εξ Αποστάσεως Μάθησης του Πανεπιστημίου Frederick
ανέπτυξε εσωτερική διαδικασία ποιοτικού ελέγχου των εξ αποστάσεως προγραμμάτων σπουδών
που προσφέρονται στο Πανεπιστήμιο. Η διαδικασία αυτή είναι μέρος του πλαισίου εφαρμογής
του στρατηγικού σχεδιασμού του Πανεπιστημίου με σκοπό την αυξανόμενη παροχή ποιοτικής
εκπαίδευσης στα εξ αποστάσεως προγράμματα σπουδών και για τη συνεχή βελτίωση και
ανάπτυξή τους. Στόχος της τρέχουσας έρευνας είναι να εφαρμόσει και να αξιολογήσει την
προτεινομένη εσωτερική διαδικασία ποιοτικού ελέγχου, όπως επίσης και να διερευνήσει και
συζητήσει κατά πόσο ο σχεδιασμός, η παράδοση των μαθημάτων, η αλληλεπίδραση και η
αξιολόγηση είναι ευθυγραμμισμένα με τη φιλοσοφία, το παιδαγωγικό πλαίσιο και τις
κατευθυντήριες γραμμές που δίνονται από την Επιτροπή Εξ Αποστάσεως Μάθησης και το
Πανεπιστήμιο.

10th
253
Λέξεις κλειδιά: εξ αποστάσεως προγράμματα σπουδών, ποιοτικός έλεγχος, τριτοβάθμια
εκπαίδευση
Introduction
The explosive growth and the rapid diffusion of the Internet, created new approaches to teaching
and learning specifically in higher education (Crosta, 2004; Hewitt, 1998, Martin, Budhrani,
Kumar, & Ritzhaupt, 2019). The interest in the development and use of distance learning in higher
education has been steadily increasing and the past four decades. As reported by Seaman (2017)
approximately 6 million of students attended at least one online learning course in 2015.
Consequently, the past twenty years the number of higher education institutions around the globe
offering distance learning degrees have been significantly increased.
Distance Learning is a system and a process that connects learners and instructors at remote
locations. It can be described by the phrase “anytime, anywhere learning” (Berge, 1999; Tianguang
Gao, & Lehman, 2003). Online courses as a medium to implement distance learning; has been a
pervasive new channel for education that makes it more accessible, more appealing to students, as
well as enabling new ways of learning (Tianguang Gao & Lehman, 2003). Online courses require
different teaching and learning models, and design principles to be implemented.
Frederick University established in 2007 after a long and successful presence in Cypriot higher
education. It is one of the first 3 private universities granted a permanent license of operation in
2012. Since its operation, a remarkable growth has been achieved in student and faculty population
and research output. Frederick University seized the opportunity granted by the ECPU in June
2012 to introduce new programs of study using the distance learning mode of delivery. Offering
distance learning programs was seen both as an opportunity and as a challenge. An opportunity,
because given the established demand for such programs, and additionally, the ability to reach
students that would be otherwise impossible, provided growth opportunities for the University.
This was also seen as a challenge because for Frederick University, as with all programs, achieving
and maintaining quality was of paramount importance (Eteokleous, Louca, Charalampous,
Valanides, Hadjiconstantinou, Kyriacou, & Tsorakis, 2013). Within the Internal Quality
Assurance System, an additional internal quality evaluation procedure is developed and
implemented for the Distance Learning Programς of Study. The Internal Quality Committee in
collaboration with the Distance Learning Committee (DLC) developed an evaluation quality
process to ensure that specific standards are met regarding the operation of the DL programs of
study. The evaluation takes place based on quality indicators derived from the Pedagogical
Framework that underpins the design, development and delivery of the Distance Learning
Programs of Study. The procedure identifies gaps and good practices in order for suggestions for
improvements and requested actions to be communicated via personalized reports to the DL
instructors and DL coordinators. The Distance Learning Committee (DLC) and the Open and
Distance Learning Center (ODCL) oversee and monitor the quality evaluation process for the DL
programs of study. The internal quality reporting process is obtained through the following data
collection instruments 1) Evaluation rubric – courses observation, 2) Learning Management
System Data analytics, ad 3) the Student Course Evaluation questionnaire.
Frederick University is one of the 21 Universities in Europe to receive E-xcellence label for
Associates in Quality. After six year of operation Frederick University was awarded the e-
xcellence label by the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities (EADTU),

10th
254
Europe’s leading institutional association in online, open and flexible Learning. By achieving the
E-xcellence Associates in Quality label, Frederick University demonstrates that it offers quality
controlled e-learning and keeps up to date with the latest developments. Furthermore, that it uses
the E-xcellence instrument for benchmarked self-assessment on e-learning and take measures of
improvement accordingly. By becoming an E-xcellence Associate in Quality, Frederick University
is now part of a network of universities with opportunities to meet virtually with peers and experts
in the field of e-learning. Frederick University will have access to the expertise of other universities
and share its own expertise with them in a virtual community. The University is recognized as
operating in a continuous process of improving its e-learning performance. The evaluation and the
e-xcellence label was based on the following six pillars: 1)Strategic Management, 2) Program
Design and Development, 3) Course Design and Development, 4) Course delivery, 5) Staff
Support, and 6) Student Support.
With E-xcellence, EADTU is leading a European movement of universities that follow new
developments and innovations in e-learning. The E-xcellence Associates are focusing on the
improvement of four priority elements of progressive higher education: Accessibility, Flexibility,
Interactiveness and Personalisation. So far 21 E-xcellence awards have been handed out to
faculties and universities all over Europe.
Firstly, the context of the study is described where the Distance Learning Strategy, the Pedagogical
Framework, and the Internal Quality Assurance procedure. The second pat of the paper presents
the implementation of the internal quality assurance procedure for the the distance learning
programs of study. Therefore, it is described how the basic evaluation takes places in two phases
collecting qualitative data. Subsequently, the quantitative data collection process is presented
where data is collected from two main sources: the questionnaire completed by the student and
data collected via the learning management platform. Finally, research methodology and initial
results are given.
Main Aim and Research Objectives
After 6 years of Distance Learning Programs implementation, the Distance Learning Committee
(DLC) put in place the proposed quality assurance plan. The current study, as part of a greater
research project, aims to implement and evaluate the proposed internal quality assurance procedure
as well as evaluate DL operations and specifically DL courses development and delivery. More
specifically, the overall project examines the alignment of the courses (design, delivery,
assessment, educational material, interaction etc) to the philosophy, the pedagogical framework
and the guidelines of distance learning operations provided by the DLC to related stakeholders
(instructors and teaching assistants). It also aims to provide recommendations to further improve
the evaluation process in order to meet both the needs of the institution, and to be able to effectively
support the DL programs, thus the DL coordinators, instructors, and students.
The current research study aims to address the following research questions:
- To identify the current deviations and their degree: minor or major,
- To examine the reasons of deviations existence and how to address these deviations,
- To identify good practices and their degree: minor or major.
The part of the study that is presented and discussed in this paper focuses on describing and
explaining the internal quality assurance procedure and provides initial results in regards to the
first research question.

10th
255
The Context
Distance Learning Strategy
Frederick University has incorporated the development and expansion of its Distance Learning
(DL) programs of study within the pillars of its core aims, thus assuring relevant drive and
direction, for inclusion of DL within the University. Specifically, within the University's strategic
plan clear aspects relating to the operation and continuous development of DL and its programs of
study exist. Based on this, specific targets and goals have been set in the University’s action plan
and these have been communicated to the relevant bodies, for implementation. According to the
University’s organizational structure, each body has clear responsibilities and authorities, which
relate to and support the provision of DL programs of study.
Furthermore, the University implements a Quality Management System, which includes internal
regulations, policies and procedures and thus ensures continuous quality improvement. Frederick
University’s Distance Learning Policy (DLP) defines the framework for the DL operation,
including its conformity to legal and ethical requirements. The DLP was developed by the DLC
and approved by the Senate. Local guidelines regarding provision of DL programs, are enforced
and monitored by the regulatory authority, the C.Y.Q.A.A. (The Cyprus Agency of Quality
Assurance and Accreditation for Higher Education) and define specific requirements prior to
registering students; this includes the framework for evaluation and accreditation of programs of
study by an external team of experts, where one member of the evaluation team is a DL expert.
The Pedagogical Framework for Online Courses Design developed by the Distance Leanring
Committee
The Pedagogical Framework (PF) and its elements mainly define the evaluation parameters of the
suggested internal quality assurance procedure. The PF serves as the backbone of the design of
new programs of study and intended for online learning delivery. Furthermore, the PF explains the
manner in which various stakeholders are involved in this endeavour interacted in order to
successfully accomplish design, implement and deliver online learning programs of study. The
proposed framework is based on research evidence and contemporary theoretical approaches to
online learning in higher education and capitalises on the expertise gained by academics and
instructional designers from participating in research and educational projects related to distance
and open learning. The PF was built upon various Online Pedagogical models such as the Five
stage model of E-learning by Salmon (2000, 2004), the Community of Inquiry Model by Garrison,
Anderson and Archer (2000, 2007), and Shea and Bidjerano (2010) and the ExConTra by Makrakis
and Costoulas-Makrakis (2012) and other research findings (i.e. Stephenson, 2001; Salmon, 2007;
Shea, & Bidjerano, 2010; Watts, 2010).
The PF was developed after resolving the following crucial issues: 1) the location of potential
students (local, and/or European, and/or international students), 2) international trends and
research developments regarding the mode of delivery of distance learning programs and 3) the
requirements set by the regulatory authority in terms of accreditation of distance learning programs
and the recognitions of degrees awarded from such programs.

10th
256
The PF provides an academically sound framework within which programs and content is to be
developed. It describes the adopted mechanisms of achieving learning via distance and what is
expected to be provided and finally it serves as guideline for course design. The PF consists of the
following three pillars, grouped in Learning Activities and Assessment Activities:
 Directed Learning Online (Learning Activities)
o Mandatory Content
o Supplementary Content
 Dynamic Online Interaction (Learning Activities)
 Assessment Activities: Formative/Continuous, Summative and Self-assessment
(See Diagram 1: Pedagogical Framework Diagram) (Eteokleous et al, 2013).
Description of the Internal Quality Assurance Procedure
The DLC has developed a procedure for internal Quality Assurance for the DL programs as part
of the university’s implementation of strategic planning in providing quality distance learning
education and continuous updating of the DL programs of studies. The DLC recognizes the need
of quality assurance and continuous improvement of quality and the effective operation of the
program of studies.
The developed procedure is in line with international practices, policies and research results as
well as with the guidelines and instructions of the regulatory authority, C.Y.Q.A.A. The Quality
Assurance procedure that is part of this procedure refers to academic issues and does not
cover/include administrative support processes. The quality assurance procedure described is part
of the Quality Assurance Policy and System of the University, which is developed and
implemented by the Internal Quality Committee. The Distance Learning Committee closely
collaborates with the Internal Quality Committee in regards to the following:
- new programs of study/courses design,
- existing programs of study/ courses review and update,
- implementing the quality assurance procedure and ensuring that the necessary actions are
taken.
The Quality Assurance Procedure aims to examine, evaluate and identify the levels of compliance
or of no relevance to the teaching of the distance learning programs as defined by the Pedagogical
framework regulating the DL at Frederick University, the duties form of the distance learning
programs instructors, as well as the procedures that must be kept in accordance within the operation
of the University. The evaluation also aims at carrying out formative measures and taking timely
actions in matters of non-compliance, as well as to identify and then to disseminate good practices
and examples. Finally, it seeks to take steps towards recognizing and rewarding good practices
and examples. Examples of non-compliance and good practices are reported and explained during
the DL Instructors training sessions, as well as disseminated through the DL Instructors’ Portal
and the DL Induction Course. Additionally, good practices are also identified through the research
performed by the Open and Distance Learning Center (ODLC). The DLC in collaboration with
the ODLC schedules every semester, introductory training for the new DL instructors. Follow up
trainings are scheduled when new developments, processes or policies relating to DL delivery are
in place. Finally, trainings are also implemented upon request.
The identification of gaps (non-compliances) and good practices facilitate the review, update and
revision of the DL programs operation and specifically course development, design and delivery.

10th
257
Based on the above, this procedure intends in strengthening the mechanisms of continuous
improvement of the quality of teaching, as well as in developing a culture of teaching quality in
the distance learning programs. This will greatly assist in the further evolvement of the
University’s prestige and improve its competitive position in relation to other congener
Universities locally and abroad in the distance learning education. In particular, the University’s
procedure concerning the non-compliance review in the DL programs intends to:
- systematically enhance and improve the infrastructure and the procedures of online
teaching,
- improve the online teaching and learning environments,
- develop online learning environments that meet European and international standards and
specifications,
- update systematically the teaching methods and resources, and implement innovative
teaching methods,
- upgrade the technical and online infrastructure to support instructors,
- upgrade the websites of the online courses and specifically the content and educational
material of the online courses,
- reinforce the full use and integration of the Information and Communication Technologies
in educational procedures,
- improve the distance learning programs on a regular basis.
At Frederick University the Information Systems Office manages, supports and develops an
information technology system, which constitutes the principal database. Furthermore, the e-
learning platform Moodle, is exploited for the development and delivery of the distance learning
courses. Both the information technology system FRE and the electronic platform (LMS) are the
main sources of information/data collection for collecting quantitative and qualitative data
required for the quality assurance and evaluation procedure.
Implementation of the Internal Quality Assurance Procedure for Distance Learning
Programs of Study
Qualitative Data Collection - Basic Quality Evaluation
The basic quality evaluation is conducted in two phases and it is mainly based on qualitative data.
The 1st
phase of the quality assurance procedure includes the observation and evaluation of courses
based on a number of parameters and the 2nd
phase of the basic quality assurance procedure
includes the development of reports for each program of study and each DL instructor. The two
phases are explained below in detail.
1st
phase - Every two years, an evaluation is carried out for all courses taught in the current year
within the fall and spring semesters. As aforementioned, the evaluation is based on specific
criteria/parameters resulting from the Pedagogical framework and the course design requirements
as well as the responsibilities of the distance learning instructors and specifically on the basis of
what is expected in a distance learning course (overall evaluation as a course and weekly basis
evaluation). The DL instructors’ responsibilities are described in the Study Guide for Distance
Learning Instructors as well as in the contract given to the instructors to sign at the beginning of
each semester. The evaluation takes place by the ODCL officers in collaboration with the DLU
officers under the guidelines and directions of the DLC.

10th
258
The evaluation process is described below. If the instructor has included what is requested then
the symbol "√" is given, if not, the symbol "X" is given. Due to the fact that this way of assessment
can be considered absolute, there is a column where comments and clarifications are provided
when is deemed necessary. These criteria are assessed based on the expected elements/ parameters’
integration in the course and not based on the content of the course.
- Firstly, week 0 is assessed which differs from the other weeks and includes: welcoming
message and/ or video by the instructor, course outline/syllabus, getting to know each other
discussion forum (optional), discussion forum of general enquiries/questions (forum for
discussion, questions and communication – it runs throughout the semester), information
sources and necessary references, the digitized book of the course/ readings of the course
the 1st
teleconferencing session and the recorded link of the 1st
teleconferencing session.
- Then, the remaining weeks are assessed (all in the same way). The parameters checked in
each week are as follows: dates, title of the week/unit, keywords (optional), description of
topics (word/ pdf file) and learning objectives of the week/unit, readings (e.g. digital
book(s), e-books, articles, newsletters, case studies, etc), educational material (e.g. simple,
narrated and annotated presentations, interactive presentations, and documents, screen
casting documents, podcasting documents), dynamic interactive online activities via
collaboration and content development tools (e.g. discussion forums, blogs and wikis,
google documents, videoconferencing, audio conferencing and text conferencing) and
assessment methods (self-assessment and/or graded exercises/ assignments, online quizzes
and midterms).
- After the evaluating all the weeks/units based on the parameters, an overall evaluation and
a numerical grade is provided. For example, the narrated presentations, the annotated
presentations, or the teleconferencing sessions are not obligatory for every week but all
instructors are required to develop a specific number for each presentation type and
organize a specific number of teleconferencing sessions, depending on the course duration.
2the
phase - For the implementation of the second phase the data collected during the first phase
are required. The ODLC officers under the guidelines of the DLC prepare evaluation reports for
each program of study and for each instructor taking into consideration the evaluation for all of
the courses taught. The report of each instructor consists of 2 parts:
- Firstly, there is a table which is divided in two parts. One part of the table provides
information regarding the degree of consistency for week1 and the second part of the table
provides information regarding the degree of consistency for the rest of the weeks.
- The marking given for each parameter is categorized into 3 levels: a) Full deviation (0
points), b) Partial deviation (1/2 points) and c) No deviation (1 point). At the end of each
table the overall degree of consistency is calculated for each instructor.
- In addition to the marking, comments and suggestions are given in order to better guide
and help the instructors understand and realize where to focus and what is expected to be
accomplished. The comments are as follows:
o No Deviation – and/or guidelines/suggestions for improvement: In this category
suggestions/guidelines/directions for improvement are given to instructors who have
no particular deviations. Therefore, good practices and examples to follow are
identified and collected in order to be presented at the DL Instructors’ Portal and DL
Induction Course.
o Minor Deviations: Important parameters which are missing from the course and
should be integrated by the instructor are presented in this category. They may not

10th
259
fall under the category of major deviations but this does not mean that they are
optional or not-important. Suggestions for improvement and/or recommendations of
closing the gaps (additions of missing elements) are given.
o Major deviations: This category includes important elements which are missing and
are significant to be present in a distance learning course, hence the instructors are
expected to treat these as urgent and significant to be addressed before the
commencement of the new semester. For example, this category includes, specific
number of teleconferencing sessions and the recorded ones, duration of
teleconferencing sessions, dynamic online interactive activities (e.g. tools employed,
methods), variety of simple, annotated, narrated and interactive
presentations. Suggestions for improvement and/or recommendations of closing the
gaps (additions of missing elements) are given.
The report of each instructor is communicated to the coordinator of the program as well as to the
instructor. Meetings take place with the coordinator of each program as well as with the instructors.
The Distance Learning Committee is also informed about the evaluation reports. The ODLC
organizes meetings (face to face and/or online) with the DL coordinators and DL instructors to
guide and support them through the process of enhancing, changing and improving their content.
In cases of major deviations an evaluation takes place by the end of the following semester in order
to ensure that the suggestions have been addressed, changers were made and deviations were
decreased and/or eliminated. In the cases where major deviations still exist a second report is
developed by the ODLC and the DLC. The program coordinator is informed and specific actions
are expected to be decided. In cases where simple deviations exist, the evaluation takes place after
one academic year.
Qualitative Data Collection - Comprehensive check / Check of specific parameters
At the beginning of each semester, and specifically during the 3rd
week of the courses a
comprehensive check on specific parameters takes place. For example, the ODCL teams conducts
a quick check on: week 0 (mentioned before), the content of week 1,2 and 3 (mentioned before),
student enrollment, access to the course, student activity.
Quantitative data Collection (information system)
Besides the qualitative data, quantitative data are also collected by the ODLC from two main
sources: 1) questionnaires completed by the students by end of the semester for each coursr and 2)
data analytics and information collected via the Learning Management System (LMS-Moodle).
Questionnaires completed by students – The questionnaire has 16 questions and is divided in two
parts. The first part includes statements related to the course content and delivery and the second
part of the questionnaire includes questions regarding the instructors. The results of the completed
questionnaires are posted on Extranet (online internal management system) where the instructors
have access. The DL coordinators also have access to the questionnaire results. The DL coordinator
of each program is expected to inform/give feedback to the Distance Learning Committee at the
end of each semester regarding the academic course/instructor that need close attention. Taking
into account that the students use a Likert scale 1-5, the coordinators are expected to inform the
DLC when an instructor overall evaluation 3/5 and less. Moreover, the DL coordinators are
expected to inform the DLC when a DL instructor gets excellent rates and can be considered as a

10th
260
good practice and an example. As aforementioned good practices are presented at the DL
Instructors’ Portal and DL Induction Course.
Data Collection from the Learning Management System (LMS-Moodle) (Data Analytics) -
Quantitative data are also collected every semester from the Learning Management System
(Moodle). In particular, the DLC gets information from the platform in regards to the following:
- Activity and student participation in the platform (access)
- Number, type and methods of assessment / assignments (e.g. self-assessment, online
quizzes)
- Feedback on the assignments
- Number of self-assessment exercises
- Number of collaboration tools employed (e.g. discussion forums, wikis, chat rooms)
- Use of other technological tools for collaboration and group work purposes
- Student participation in dynamic interactive online activities (e.g. discussion forums and
student posts)
- Exploitation of technological platform tools
- Employment of content development tools
- Number, duration and content of teleconferencing sessions
- Student participation in teleconferencing sessions
- Use of alternative materials (printed material, digital material, links, videos, pictures,
charts, presentations – variety of presentations)
- Interactive presentations (e.g. presentations in the form of SCORM)
Research Methodology & Sample
Qualitative methodology was employed in order to analyze the data collected from the courses.
During the Spring Semester of 2018, data the DL programs of study were collected and analyzed.
More specifically, quality assurance procedure was implemented for the DL programs of study
(100 DL courses and 90 DL instructors) offered by three schools of Frederick University during
Spring Semester 2018. As shown the table below the following number of courses per School were
evaluated: 6 courses offered by the School of Business and Law programs, 1 course offered by the
School of Health Sciences and 4 courses offered by the School of Education and Social Sciences.
Initial Results
The deviations are grouped in two categories: minor and major, without meaning that minor
deviations are not important and should not be taken into consideration. The deviations presented
at Table 2, do not exist all together in a particular course, however they were identified as a
synopsis of the deviations revealed to exist at the DL courses under evaluation.
The simple deviations category includes elements mainly relayed to the lesson’s structure and
elements missing. At the beginning of the course the DL instructor is expected to welcome his/her
students employing a combination of the following approaches: text, video, teleconferencing. This
considers to be extremely necessary due to the absence of physical contact between the instructors
and the students. The aforementioned was absent from lots of courses since the instructors
preferred to introduce themselves only through text. Additionally, in many courses the instructors
did not include the discussion forum discussion forum of general enquiries/questions (forum for
discussion, questions and communication – it runs throughout the semester). It is important for

10th
261
both the students and the instructor to have a floor to express any concerns and questions regarding
the course. The goal of the particular forum is mainly supportive/ administrative and it is not
related to the learning goals of the course (e.g. content discussion). In all of the courses the syllabus
was uploaded which is extremely important for the students to be aware of the content of the
course, its main goal and objectives, the assessment, the communication and interaction methods
and activities, the bibliography and of course their responsibilities. In some courses, each week
was not consistently structured in order for the students to easily navigate within the course and
identify the elements needed, i.e. content, readings, quizzes, assignments, deadlines, etc. In some
courses the title, course summary content and objectives were missing making it difficult for
students to follow the course.
The major deviations category includes elements related to the content, the educational material,
the instructor(s) and students’ interaction and the delivery of the course. It has been revealed that
in few cases not all necessary reading sources were available. The absence of Open Educational
Resources (OERs) and the use of social media tools was also revealed. Additionally, the lack of
presentations’ variety (simple, narrated, annotated and interactive) was identified. Additionally,
another deviation revealed that considers to be extremely important is the interaction between the
instructor and the students, among the students and the between the student and the content. Some
instructors did not integrate the aforementioned in their courses to the desired degree and approach.
The DLC gives great emphasis on interaction, communication, collaboration among all partners
involved. One of the three main pillars of the Pedagogical Framework is Dynamic Online
Interaction, where it includes student-to-student and student-to-teacher interaction and
collaboration and encourage student active engagement and participation. Additionally, student
to content interaction is achieved through SCORM presentations and virtual simulations. The
ODLC, which is responsible in helping educators to develop and revise the educational materials,
is in the process of working along with the instructors to develop more advanced SCORM
presentations as well as identifying appropriate and relevant virtual simulation environments to be
integrated within the DL courses. Finally, the student-to-content interaction is also promoted
through online quizzes. The ODLC team is in the process of developing more online quizzes to be
included within the courses for self-evaluation purposes.
In very few cases the requested evaluation assignments were missing as well as the self-assessment
methods, i.e. quizzes, reflective journals. The last major deviation is related to the number, the
duration and content of the teleconferencing sessions. In all of the course there were
teleconferencing sessions organized and delivered, however deviations on the number, the duration
and the approach were revealed. There were cases where the instructors did not organize the
expected number of teleconferencing sessions, or the content of the sessions were not related to
content delivery but to addressing students’ questions only.
Concluding Remarks
More data is in the process to be analyzed in order to evaluate the quality of the DL programs of
study, such as DL students’ questionnaires. The results of the questionnaires will be compared and
contrasted to the aforementioned results. The upcoming results are expected to provide more
information in regards to the demographics, educational background, beliefs, attitudes of the
instructors which revealed to have no deviations, minor and major deviations, attempting to also
identify the reasons of the deviations existence. Identifying the reasons of the deviations existence
would help the DLC to appropriately define actions and policies to address the gaps. Additionally,

10th
262
identifying and revealing good practices would help to boost DL instructors’ confidence and
provide live examples to follow.
It seems that the DL instructors need continues support and guidance. The role of the DLC and the
ODLC is extremely important. They need to provide guidelines and support to be able to
effectively and successfully deliver DL courses in regards to content development and delivery,
and to students’, instructors’ and content engagement and interaction. It seems that help,
motivation and guidance is extremely necessary and important in regards to achieving active
engagement and interaction through various activities (discussion forums, blogs, wikis, online
quizzes, and reflective journals, narrated and annotated presentations). Student-to-student and
student-to-teacher interaction and collaboration and encourage student active engagement and
participation should be further promoted. For example, student to content interaction is achieved
through the development of interactive presentations and student-to-content interaction is also
promoted through virtual simulations and online quizzes. DL instructors need guidance, help and
training to achieve the aforementioned. Most importantly, closed collaboration among DL
instructors and the ODLC deems to be extremely necessary.
References
Berge L.Z., & Collins, M.P. (1995). Computer mediated communication and the online classroom. eds. Distance
learning: Volume III. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Crosta,. L. 2004. Beyond the use of new technologies in adult distance courses: an ethical approach. International
Journal on E-Learning, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp 48-61.
Eteokleous, N., Louca, P., Charalampous, C., Valanides, N., Hadjiconstantinou, E., Kyriacou., C. & Tsorakis, S.
(2013). Design and Implementation of a Pedagogical Framework for the Introduction of Distance Learning
Programs at Frederick University. Proceedings of the International Conference in Open and Distance
Learning (ICODL 2013), Athens, Greece, November 10-13, 2013.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer
conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2-3), 87−105.
Garrison, D.R. & Arbaugh, J.B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework:
Review, issues, and future directions. Internet and Higher Education, 10 (3), 157-172.
Hewitt, J. S. M. 1998. Design Principles for the Support of Distributed Processes, Educational Psychology Review,
Vol.10, No. 1,pp 75-96.
Makrakis, V. & Costoulas-Makrakis, N. (2012). Course curricula design and development of the M.Sc. programme
in the field of ICT in education for sustainable development. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability,
14 (2), 5–40.
Martin, F., Budhrani, K., Kumar, S., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2019). Award-winning faculty online teaching practices: Roles
and competencies. Online Learning, 23(1), 184-205. doi:10.24059/olj.v23i1.1329
Salmon, G. (2000). E-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online (1st ed.). London: Kogan Page.
Salmon, G. (2004). E-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online (2nd ed.). London: Taylor & Francis.
Shea, P. & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation and the
development of a communities of inquiry in blended and online learning environments. Computers &
Education, 55 (4) 1721-1731.
Stephenson, J. (2001). Teaching and learning online: Pedagogies for new technologies. London: Kogan Page.
Tianguang Gao and James D. Lehman, (2003). The effects of different levels of interaction on the achievement and
motivational perceptions of college students in a web-based learning environment. Journal of Interactive
Learning Research, 14 (4), 367-387.
Watts, N. (2010). Reflecting on Models for Online Learning in Theory and Practice. The All Ireland Journal of Teaching
and Learning in Higher Education, 2 (1), 1-12. Retrieved from http://ojs.aishe.org/index.php/aishe-j/article/view/19
Appendix

10th
263
Table 1: DL Programs Evaluated
Table 2: Minor and Major Deviations
DEVIATIONS
Minor Deviations Major Deviations
Welcoming message Variety of presentations
Discussion forum Interactive activities
Course outline Assessment activities
Title Tele-conferencing sessions
Dates
Weekly objectives and topics
Study resources
Digital book(s) /e-book(s)
Exams revision
Weekly structure
Schools Programs of Studies Courses Instructors
School of
Business and Law
BA in Business Administration 6 5
MA-MLL in Maritime Law and Shipping
Management
7 5
Master in Business Administration (Greek) 3 6
Master in Business Administration (English) 25 13
MSc in International Trade and Shipping
Management
6 4
School of Health
Sciences
MSc in Health Management 2 3
School of
Education and
Social Sciences
MA in Educational Administration 32 31
M.Ed in Adult Education 6 6
M.Ed in Special Education 9 11
MSc in Curriculum and Instruction 4 6
Overall: 100 90

A_Proposed_Quality_Assurance_Procedure_f.pdf

More Related Content

What's hot (19)

Similar to A_Proposed_Quality_Assurance_Procedure_f.pdf (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A_Proposed_Quality_Assurance_Procedure_f.pdf