The Quality Matters Rubric is centered on relevant research and was initially developed based on a review of the literature, the expertise of experienced practitioners and existing standard sets. Each of the specific rubric standards is supported by literature from the field. A literature review is conducted for each new rubric edition that builds upon this core matrix.
Listen to the April 8th, 2015, recording of the QM/ELI webinar - Measuring the Effectiveness of Online and Blended Programs.
Interested in conducting research on QM? Get help with the Research Toolkit.
Learn what to do when using QM Rubrics and other intellectual property with the Communications Toolkit.
QM-Dedicated Issue of Internet Learning
The QM Community has submitted articles to the Policy Studies Organization and American Public University's new journal, Internet Learning, for a special issue. The articles are based on presentations given during QM's 5th Annual Conference.
"Collaborating with Faculty to Compose Exemplary Learning Objectives" , Matthew Acevedo
“'What can students do, after taking your course, that they couldn’t do before?’ The answer to this question leads to discussion of the terminal or course-level objectives.”
"Get Rid of the Gray: Make Accessibility More Black and White!", Erin Blauvelt
“Customizing a definition of accessibility in online courses and creating the specific elements and best practices for an institution is essential in carrying out a plan for editing and developing accessible online courses and meeting the QM Rubric.”
"Continuous Improvement of the QM Rubric and Review Processes: Scholarship of Integration and Application", Kay I. Shattuck, Whitney Alicia Zimmerman, Deborah Adair
“The QM Rubric and processes are dynamically interpretive of evolving research and best practices. The plan to conduct a complete review of the QM Higher Education Rubric and peer review process was established during the grant period, and reviews have become more thorough over the past decade.”
"Measuring Online Course Design: A Comparative Analysis", Jiyu You, Sue Hochberg, Phoebe Ballard, Mingli Xiao, Anthony Walter
“The results on most of the standards evaluated in this study provided by both reviewers and students were the same, thus indicating that both peer reviewers and students take the same point of view in terms of evidencing standards . . ."
"Many Shades of MOOCs", Deborah Adair, Susan W. Alman, Danielle Budzick, Linda M. Grisham, Mary E. Mancini, A. Sasha Thackaberry
“Such design considerations as effectively orienting the learner to the purpose and structure of the course and communicating resources and expectations are critical for learners who are not otherwise connected to the academic institution and have no other recourse to gain such information.”
"Effect of Student Readiness on Student Success in Online Courses", Leah A. Geiger, Daphne Morris, Susan L. Subocz, Kay Shattuck, Arthur Viterito
“The research team hypothesized that student success in well-designed courses (those that meet the Quality Matters Standards) and that are taught by experienced, engaged faculty is most influenced by student readiness factors, including individual attributes (such as motivation), life factors, comprehension, general knowledge, reading rate and recall, and typing speed and accuracy. A goal of the study was to determine which of these factors correlated most closely to student success. Results of this study indicated that, when course design, instruction, and LMS are held constant, only typing speed/accuracy and reading rate/recall were statistically significant as measured by the SmarterMeasure instrument and correlated to student course retention and course grade. Recommendations for further research are made.”
"Developing a Community of Practice (CoP) through Interdisciplinary Research on Flipped Classrooms", Bobbie Seyedmonir, Kevin Barry, Mehdi Seyedmonir
“Overall, the results indicate that the flipped-classroom model has the potential to increase student learning but that it requires a more thoughtful redesign process than is suggested in popular literature on the subject.”
"Beliefs Regarding Faculty Participation in Peer Reviews of Online Courses", Andria F. Schwegler, Barbara W. Altman, Lisa M. Bunkowski
“Our objective examination of faculty beliefs, instead of reliance on hearsay and a vocal minority, was useful in identifying genuine faculty concerns that could be directly addressed. Our data provided directions to guide administrative changes in our process to increase participation in internal peer reviews with the goal of improving the online course design quality.”
"Surveying Student Perspectives of Quality: Value of QM Rubric Items", Penny Ralston-Berg
“If the QM Rubric is based on academic research initiated most often by content experts or others in academia delivering online content, do online students – consumers of those courses – have a differing perspective on what makes a quality online course?”