Expert evaluation of an on-line course in clinical immunology

[摘要] ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This assignment describes an evaluation by experts of an on-line course in Clinical Immunologyoffered to medical registrars and scientists as a supplement to a practical rotation.Because of a lack of agreement on what constitutes quality in e-learning and to avoid the customaryfocus on usability evaluation, an open-ended, interpretivist approach was used here which, while not entirelynovel, was unusual in an e-learning environment.For this project it was decided to evaluate both content (subject matter) as well as instructional valueusing two groups of peers from various academic institutions, clinical immunology experts and e-learningexperts.Feedback was obtained through participation in a focus group or in writing. Replies were much easierto obtain from the e-learning group. Five out of seven e-learning experts provided a response, versus threeout of twenty subject matter experts. Eventually most of the feedback was obtained from colleagues fromthe home institution.Both groups made valuable, somewhat overlapping suggestions. Subject matter experts indicatedthat the course materials were of good quality and adequate on a postgraduate level. E-learning expertsexpressed concern about the ability of the course to facilitate learning and identified also some usabilityissues.Some of the findings may well apply to other settings. A number of five evaluators in each groupappeared to give a good coverage within an open-ended approach. Expert peer review offered insights thatneither student feedback nor self-reflection could. Rather than imposing evaluative criteria on the expertsthrough the use of fixed checklists, the open-ended approach allowed them to cumulatively develop theirown framework tailor-made for the course.The choice of subject matter plus e-learning experts may be helpful in similar situations of evaluatingon-line courses where dual expertise is not readily available. The open-ended interpretivist approach can beused for formative evaluation only and may work well for courses that are still in development or where anamount of uncertainty about teaching effectiveness exists.Future efforts will likely focus on implementing the recommendations, identifying sustainable waysof quality review for the current course and similar open-ended evaluation of other courses.

[发布机构] Stellenbosch University