Towards Identifying Quality Assurance Standards in … PAPERS/JSSH Vol. 20 (3...Towards Identifying Quality Assurance Standards in Virtual Learning Environments for Science Education

Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. & Hum. 20 (3): 797 - 828 (2012)

ISSN: 0128-7702 © Universiti Putra Malaysia Press

SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIESJournal homepage: http://www.pertanika.upm.edu.my/

Article history:Received: 8 December 2010Accepted: 13 September 2011

ARTICLE INFO

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (Amani Al-Hosan), [email protected] (Afnan Oyaid)* Corresponding author

Towards Identifying Quality Assurance Standards in Virtual Learning Environments for Science Education

Amani Al-Hosan and Afnan Oyaid*

Faculty of Education, Princess Nora University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

ABSTRACT

Many studies indicated the beneficial impacts of Virtual Learning Environments (VLE) on teaching and learning experience (Barbour & Reeves, 2009). Therefore, quality and standardisation of e-learning have become a crucial success factor to ensure the quality of learning and to maximize benefits gained from such learning experience. This research sought to identify and propose a set of standards for VLEs in science education so as to ensure the quality of these environments and maximize the learning benefits for students. A wide range of studies have been analyzed in order to identify the main dimensions of VLE from which quality standards should be derived. Hence, an evaluation form with six main standards was developed based on previous studies. It was then distributed to purposively selected panel of experts who ranked on a 3-point scale and determined the importance of each standard. The ranking of these standards was done by the panel of experts from Saudi, European, and Malaysian universities with different backgrounds. These standards, arranged in their order of importance, are: design, support, authority and safety, improvement and review, VLE cost effectiveness, and quality VLE software. Moreover, the findings indicated that the devised form is suitable to be used as an evaluation tool to assess the quality of VLE for science education.

Keywords: Virtual learning environments, VLE, total quality, standards, science education, virtual environments

INTRODUCTION

A learning environment is defined as a group of circumstances and factors that learners interact with and are influenced by them. They characterize the educational situation and give it its uniqueness. Research has shown that the learning environment affects the learner according to the degree of its

Amani Al-Hosan and Afnan Oyaid

798 Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. & Hum. 20 (3): 798 - 828 (2012)

authenticity (Khamees, 2003). However, when it is difficult to provide this kind of environment, simulated environments are the most suitable alternatives (Ibid).

Using simulations and virtual reality, which have become well established during the last ten years, have made it possible to design simulated learning environments using computers that may sometimes surpass the real, natural environments (Hamit, 1993; Helsel, 1992). Virtual reality is interactive as it responds to users’ actions and behaviour. In fact, it provides a degree of interaction that is not possible in traditional multimedia since it allows users to go anywhere and discover any place in the virtual reality environment (Berge & Clark, 2005). Virtual reality has become a new method of learning using computers that adds a wide range of scientific imagination and learning possibilities to individuals (Chow, Andrews, & Trueman, 2007). It also offers an individualized learning experience that fulfills the educational needs of students with different learning styles, in addition to VLE’s flexibility in terms of time and place (Barbour & Reeves, 2009). Moreover, one of its most important advantages is the ease of continuous renewal of the information provided, which helps make learning more enjoyable and individualised (Al-Shanak & Doumi, 2009).

Although virtual reality emerged as an area of distinction for computer applications during the eighties, this technology is still considered in its early stages of development. So far, there has been little research on this technology, particularly with regard to its educational applications. Its novelty has

led researchers and educators to exert huge efforts to build a theoretical and conceptual basis for this emerging technology and its potential (Clark & Berge, 2005; Mclellan, 1996).

With the increasing need for virtual learning technology, both locally and internationally, the development of virtual learning environments has become a science with its own foundations and origin. The development of educational materials and learning environments is no longer left to personal efforts. In fact, it now has its internationally known principles and standards, especially after the development of quality concepts. Thus, quality assurance has become a very important issue because virtual learning universities and institutions cannot be accredited without subjecting them to quality standards. If we look at the reality of science education today, especially in the Arab region, we find that the learner’s knowledge acquisition depends mainly on theory rather than practice and experimentation of newly acquired knowledge in real life. This is due to many reasons, which include the lack of suitable equipment and lab instruments, the risks and dangers of some laboratory experiments, and the high cost of materials and shortage of time (Al-Radi, 2008).

A virtual environment that is well-designed provides learners with authentic learning experiences that enable them to transfer what is happening within the virtual learning environment, in terms of skills, experiences and experiential learning acquired to real life situations.


799Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. & Hum. 20 (3): 799 - 828 (2012)

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The First and Second International Conferences of e-Learning and Distance Learning, which were held in Riyadh in March 2009 and February 2011 subsequently, recommended activating the roles of professional institutions and specialized groups in emphasizing quality control procedures in e-learning and distance learning contexts. They also suggested establishing a clear policy for encouraging and supporting interested staff and students. Furthermore, standard tools should also be developed and adopted to determine the extent of readiness to plan and apply e-learning at universities and other academic institutions (First International Conference of e-Learning and Distance Learning, 2009; Second International Conference of E-Learning and Distance Learning, 2011).

The benefits or the advantages of virtual learning in general and in science education in particular, and the widespread nature of its applications around the world, have led to increasing attention to improvement of its quality. The issue of quality assurance in virtual learning has become a new challenge to e-learning in higher education. Ignoring this challenge means that e-courses and programmes created will neither be recognized nor certified and lacking in quality. This challenge is faced by most traditional universities, and all virtual universities based on e-learning (Al-Mulla, 2008).

It is well known that even the world’s leading universities have started to provide virtual academic programmes. These include

Harvard University, Berkeley University, University of Massachusetts, Stanford University, The British Open University, University of London, and University of Oxford. The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) for Higher Education in Britain pays a special attention to assuring the quality of electronic and virtual learning programmes (QAA, 2010). Indeed, there are some virtual universities that offer their educational services using purely virtual methods, including admission and registration, evaluation and granting of degrees. Among these universities are Jones International University in the United States of America and the International Management Centre’s Association in Britain (Middlehurst, 2002).

Therefore, the assurance of quality in virtual and e-learning is a very important issue for any academic courses, programmes, and educational environment. If quality is a prerequisite for the success of the educational process in general, it is essential for virtual and e-learning in particular. Since the concept of quality in virtual and e-learning is associated in the literature and recent studies with the outcome of the educational process, most definitions of quality in e-learning have described it in terms of measuring or testing the effectiveness and quality of e-learning programs in accordance with standards and benchmarks (Barker, 2007).

Based on the foregoing, the issue of ensuring the quality of virtual and e-learning programmes is subject to the adherence and conformity of these programmes to the quality standards issued by professional non-profit organizations. Therefore, it is



crucial to develop appropriate criteria and measures to insure the quality of these programmes (Al-Mulla, 2008).

In light of these issues, the aim of this study was to set mechanisms and standards so as to ensure quality and validity of virtual science learning environment. Therefore, this study sought to construct a concept proposal and frame of reference for the future to ensure the quality of virtual learning environments, especially in view of the lack of such studies in the Arab World in general and in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in particular.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The objective of this study was to identify standards for the quality assurance model of the science virtual learning environments, and rank the standards in their order of importance.

The study aimed to answer the following key questions:

1. What is the proposed view of virtual environments of science education in the light of total quality standards?

1.1 What are the important standards that can be included in the quality assurance model of VLE for science education and virtual laboratories?

1.2 To what extent are these standards important in order of ranking to ensure the quality in VLE of science education?

RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

Recent research has proven the importance of quality assurance in VLEs (Al-Shanak & Doumi, 2009). In this paper, we sought to identify these standards based on research in the area of quality assurance in VLE for science education. However, we believe that these standards vary in importance, and that prioritizing them will better ensure the quality of VLE. Hence, the aim of this paper was to identify and prioritize these standards based on previous research in the field, as well as input from experts in the field of VLE and E-learning.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The Importance of VLE in Education

In order to define and develop quality standards for VLEs, it is important to review and point out the factors that facilitate its effectiveness and usefulness. For this purpose, the researchers set the study of Barbour and Reeves (2009) as the starting point. This study focused on revising previous research, which dealt with the current status of virtual schools between 2004 and 2008. This study also differentiated between the various types of virtual schools on the basis of learning type, namely, synchronized, asynchronized or an independent virtual school. The researchers in this study have pointed out some of the educational benefits of virtual learning. The most significant ones can be summed up as follows:



• The ability to offer an individual sophisticated learning programme that is customized to meet the particular requirements of a certain student to fit his or her own learning style,

• The flexibility in terms of time and place,

• The enhanced opportunities for disabled students whose disability otherwise prevented them from pursuing a conventional education,

• Providing higher levels of motivation,

• Widening the coverage of educational services,

• Offering high-quality educational opportunities,

• Improving the skills and results of students, and

• Offering the opportunity for multiple educational options (Ibid).

Barbour and Reeves (2009) also pointed out the challenges that virtual education faces, such as the nature of the students and the need for them to have positive attitudes towards self-study, the technical skills needed, enthusiasm for the educational method in use and time management skills. The study concludes by emphasizing the importance of assessing the functionality of the virtual science learning environments, in addition to assessing the extent to which these environments provide the expected benefits both for the teacher and the students.

The integration of VLEs in education has been proven as useful and beneficial for students’ attainment in many studies.

The study of Abofakhr (2008) used the pre- and post-test method to measure students’ attainment as a result of using VLEs in a sociology course at the Syrian virtual university. Among the most important conclusions of the study is that the attainment level of the experimental group students, who were taught via the virtual university, increased as compared to their counterparts who had studied the same module within the framework of conventional education at the University of Damascus. In addition, there were differences in the results of the pre-test and post-test to which the students of the experimental group were subjected. The results are in favour for the post-test which provides strong support for the effectiveness of learning via a virtual university.

The study of Meisner, Hoffman and Turner (2008) used pre- and post-test in a science course. The researchers conducted a pre-test on the students who were to be involved in the experimental sample before allowing them to use a high-quality VLE, which consisted of a virtual physics lab. Then, after one semester, the researchers conducted a post-test which further demonstrated the effectiveness of VLE, as students’ attainment improved. In addition, the test revealed their perceptions and positive attitudes towards this type of learning. According to the researchers, the study lends strong support to the view that the attainment level of students being taught via VLE is far better than those taught in a conventional learning environment.

Finally, the study of Al-Husari (2002) sought to identify the perceived benefits of



using VLEs from the students’ viewpoint. Students pointed out that the programme helped them to understand scientific processes and the concepts that they usually found difficult to grasp through conventional methods. In addition, these programs also gave them the chance to understand the changes that occur as a result of conducting a physical or chemical experiment. Moreover, the VLE helped to increase students’ concentration and attention, as well as increasing the students’ contribution and interaction. It also developed the students’ sense of responsibility for their own learning.

Quality Assurance in VLE

Ensuring the quality of VLE becomes essential in order to achieve the educational benefits presented above. In this regard, it is useful to point out that quality assurance in virtual learning is a concept that is in the interests of all stakeholders, as academic accreditation agencies call for this quality, and users of these environments expect it. Moreover, teaching staff need it in order to support their educational role (McLoughlin & Visser, 2003;Wang, 2006). Therefore, governmental quality agencies and educational institutions throughout the world exert their best efforts to address the challenges which arise from the use of VLEs around the world. One particular example of this interest in quality assurance is the survey carried out by the UK’s OFSTED (Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills) (Ofsted, 2009) which reported that a lot of participants expressed their concern about quality assurance of VLEs

being used in British schools. They have also emphasized the importance of having official procedures to assure the quality of VLEs in education in general as well as in specific content areas.

In general, the quality standards for VLEs should take the needs of all the stakeholders and beneficiaries into consideration, namely, the students, the teacher and the educational institution (Middlehurst, 2003). In this regard, the British agency for the quality of higher education (the QAA) is concerned with setting uniformed standards to assure their application within the framework of higher education in general and all forms of electronic education in particular. The main point on which the concept of quality of electronic education is established and of which virtual learning falls under can be summed up under the following headings: ease of access, arrangement of educational content, delivery system, student support, communication and interaction, and evaluation (QAA, 2010). Frydenberg (2002) proposed and discussed a set of general standards to be used to assess the quality of electronic education, and also defined the criteria that should be covered by each standard. These standards are as follows: institutional commitment, technology, students services, curriculum design and development, education and teacher, delivery system, financing, legal issues, and evaluation. The study of Chibueze (2008) agrees with the former studies in terms of general quality standards which include institutional support, curriculum development, the process of teaching and



learning, structure of educational content, students’ support, teaching staff’s support, examining and evaluation, and ease of access.

In this regard, Fyodorova (2005) studied the implications of the theory of multiple intelligences on the quality of virtual education. This study is very useful for the present study because of its comprehensiveness and specificity concerning all of the components of VLE and because of the framework proposed by the author for assessing and designing VLE. The evaluation standards include gaining students’ attention, identifying the learning objectives, stimulating recall of prior knowledge, presenting the content, extracting and providing feedback, estimation, improving retention and transfer, assessment, improving the process of saving and transferring information, providing a variety of educational content, creating interaction that attracts attention, providing instant feedback, encouraging interaction with other students and teachers. This framework distinguishes between educational standards and technical standards, which include interface, navigation, supervision, learners’ interaction, efficiency, presentation, practice activities, feedback, and course introduction.

On the regional level, Al-Mulla (2008) designed a proposed tool for quality assurance of academic programmes delivered electronically. The tool consists of 65 indicators which are divided into 9 main standards, namely, administrative, program design, curriculum design, content display,

curriculum evaluation, student support, teaching staff support, other resources, and revision. Al-Mulla proposes using his tool as an indicator to evaluate the quality of e-learning programs; however, the tool does not lend itself to be used in evaluating VLE, especially ones that were designed for science education.

The study of Al-Saleh (2005) concerned with measuring the quality of e-learning by setting basic standards in order to evaluate the quality of education delivered. These standards were then categorized; each standard contains indicators that indicate the quality of the e-curriculum being evaluated. In addition, the researcher suggested a method to evaluate and measure how much a given e-curriculum meets the standards of educational design quality. These standards include institutional support, technical support, student support, teaching staff support, technology, design and development of the curriculum, visual design, the economics of e-learning system, and evaluation. As for the standard of educational design quality, the researcher allocated specific main and subsidiary standards that tackle and discuss the details of the e-learning experience. These standards include the quality of the design process, the objectives and requirements of the curriculum, the electronic content, motivation, educational strategies and learning activities, interaction and feedback, interface design, e-learning technology, evaluation of learner’s performance, and evaluation of curriculum effectiveness.



The authors feel that it necessary to point out that the aforementioned quality standards lack the legally binding nature that obliges educational institutions to apply them, although these quality standards are issued by official governmental bodies and research institutions, and in some countries, these standards come from educational institutions. The standards serve as indicators and applications that can be described as complying with quality, yet these standards are not obligatory.

From the studies presented above, it is evident that there are common quality standards shared among these studies despite the different terms used to identify them. Therefore, the researchers attempted to point out and categorize these standards in order to understand the multiple dimensions of quality in VLE. It can be concluded that these standards fall mainly under three headings institutional, educational, and technical standards. These standards were further examined in more detail to improve their accuracy and representativeness, and this resulted in other standards such as the evaluation of the learning experience, which was labelled in Chibueze (2008) as the standard of “examining and evaluation”, and in QAA (2010) as “evaluation”. Moreover, different studies discussed standards related to support, whether it was “students services” (Frydenberg, 2002) or “staff support” (Al-Mulla, 2008) or even “technical support” (Al-Saleh, 2005), in which they were all grouped in this current study under management and support standards.

Dimensions of Quality

In this paper, a wide range of studies were analyzed to identify the main dimensions of VLE quality standards. This was achieved through reviewing the studies which are related to total quality standards within programmes and educational institutions that apply virtual and e-learning. The most important dimensions were identified, and these should serve as the basis for the quality standard within the virtual environment. The dimensions are as follows:

1. The institutional dimension: This concerns with the administrative and management issues such as organization, certification, finance, investment returns, information technology services, educational development, marketing services and academic affairs such as teaching staff support, educational affairs, work load, class size, salaries, and intellectual property rights. Finally, student services include pre-registration services, programme information, counselling and guidance, financial support, registration, fees, library support, and social support networks.

2. The educational or pedagogical dimension: This refers to teaching and learning. This dimension is concerned with issues related to objectives, content, design and presentation methods, and teaching strategies. There are varied educational methods used in the science education VLE for instance: physical simulation, procedural simulation,



situation simulation, and process simulation.

3. The technological dimension: This examines the i s sues regard ing technological infrastructure of the learning environment. This dimension includes the design and planning of the infrastructure, hardware, and software.

4. Interface design dimension: This refers to the overall appearance of VLE programmes including the design of the website, content design, browsing, and user-friendliness.

5. Evaluation dimension: This includes evaluating students learning and the learning environment.

6. Virtual learning management dimension: This refers to the maintenance of the VLE as well as information distribution.

7. Resource support dimension: This examines the guidance support, technical support, vocational guidance support, and the resources required to support the VLE.

8. Ethical dimension: This refers to the social cultural and geographical variation, as well as variation among students, courses of action and legal actions such as: regulatory policy, copyright and plagiarism.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study followed the descriptive analytical method as it is the most suitable method for this type of research because it operates on the basis of hypothesis

and it involves the collection of data in order to test the hypothesis and to answer questions concerning the research subject and explain these answers qualitatively and quantitatively (Cohen, Manion, & Manion, 2000). Knowing that there is a limited number of experts in the area of VLE for science education, the study used purposive sampling technique and the participants were chosen based on who was thought to be appropriate for the study. The sample consisted of 30 educational experts from Saudi Arabian, European, and Malaysian universities, specialized in science education, pedagogy, psychology, educational technology, e-learning, virtual learning, information systems, and computer programming, in addition to specialists at National and International Academic Standardization Organizations.

In order to answer the first research question, a large number of studies that tackled the quality of virtual environments and e-learning have been analysed. One area of difficulty was that of defining distinctive standards for VLE in particular since most of the work concerned with quality was designed for e-learning and there is a lack of research in the field of VLE quality standards. To remedy this lack, an evaluation form containing six main standards of quality in VLE on a 3 point scale was designed to identify the importance of each standard making (3) the most important.

Based on the research discussed above, the six main standards that have been identified are as follows:



1. The design standard. This was divided into three subsidiary standards: (i) standards for quality design of virtual sc ience educat ion environment dimensions and components, (ii) standards for quality instructional design, and (iii) standards for quality technical design.

2. Standards for quality VLE software.

3. Support standards. It was divided into four subsidiary standards, namely, institutional support, student support, faculty support, and technical support.

4. Authority and safety standards.

5. Improvement and review standards.

6. VLE cost effectiveness standard.

As previously mentioned, the form contained the six main standards as main headings. Under each standard, there are sub-standards and statements that describe the highest level of standard performance

of VLE. To answer the second research question, the participants were asked to specify the importance of each standard and its indicators.

The processes of designing, building and applying the proposed evaluation form for the standards of VLE of science education passed through many phases, as summarized in the following:

The first phase: Identifying VLE for science education quality standards. This was achieved by viewing earlier studies which are related to total quality standards of educational programmes and institutions which apply e-learning and virtual education. We also researched the foundations of virtual and e-learning within the field of science education. Then, Fig.1 was devised to indicate the dimension of the science virtual learning environment.

The second phase: After designing the visual representation of VLE dimensions, the six main standards and their indicators

Fig.1: Science virtual learning environment dimensions.



were derived from the VLE dimensions. Since these dimensions cover a wide range of topics, some of the derived standards overlapped; therefore, we took the decision to avoid overlapping and create the six standards which in some cases combine two dimensions together. For example, the “design” standard was derived from the “pedagogical”, “technological”, and “interface design” dimensions.

The third phase: This phase was concerned with ensuring the validity and usability of the evaluation form. A face validity check was applied as the form was presented to 15 experts who specialize in science education, educational technology, psychology, and educational design to verify

that the indicators of the form serve their objective. After making some amendments and changes to the vocabulary of the form suggested by the experts, they agreed that the form is valid for application.

The fourth phase: The phase aimed to measure the internal consistency of the evaluation form using Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient, which indicates the average correlation of all the items in any scale (Pallant, 2001). In the pilot study, when the Cronbach Alpha coefficient was calculated, an overall coefficient of (0.90) was obtained. Given the nature of the form, the Alpha value was considered to signify adequate reliability.

Fig.2: Proposed visual model for the virtual science learning environment in relation to total quality standards.



The fifth phase: In this phase, the evaluation form was distributed to 30 experts who specialized in science education, educational technology, computer teaching methods, and e-learning in Saudi, European, and Malaysian universities.

Having satisfactorily addressed the two subsidiary questions, the researchers turned their attention to the main question: What is the proposed view of virtual environments of science education in relation to total quality assurance standards? A wide range of studies and websites which tackled issues related to virtual and e-learning quality design were consulted. In the end, the researchers came out with a proposed model, as shown in Fig.2.

Fig.2 demonstrates how the proposed virtual science learning environment model was designed in relation to total quality standards proposed above. The model was designed to serve the needs of both the virtual teacher and virtual students to provide and ensure a quality learning experience. The function of the components of the VLE aligns with the standards presented above. As shown, the support standard is represented in this model in terms of technical support, institutional support, student support, and faculty support. The improvement and review standards as well as the VLE cost effectiveness standard are also clearly presented. The arrows represent the interaction and feedback between all the VLE components, including the inputs and outputs. These connections create a comprehensive system that is bounded to its component through continuous cause-and-effect relations.

The VLE is situated within the content management system that applies all technical design standards. The VLE contains virtual classes which are distributed in the virtual environment, providing various access points for national and international networks, e-mail, mail groups, telnet, video on demand (VOD), interactive televisions, instant and international educational materials (Al-Mubarak, 2004). In these classes, students learn through simulations which were designed according to instructional design standards, quality design standards of VLEs, and standards for quality VLE software. Students can conduct scientific experiments within virtual laboratories by dealing with the variables which they cannot deal with in real life. Within the frame of VLEs, students are left on their own to try, explore, inquire, analyze and build their own knowledge all by themselves (Gerval & Le Ru, 2008). In any learning experience, moreover, students are assessed to evaluate their progress and to identify the weaknesses and strengths; it is important to note that the VLE e-assessment is also subjected to quality technical design standards.

In this VLE model, students can visit scientific clubs, science museum, virtual libraries, and practice a wide variety of enriching activities which enable them to gain authentic experience; all of which were designed according to quality VLE design standards (Hin & Subramaniam, 2005). The continuous communication between teachers, students, and administration plays an important role in this model. The VLE communication tools were designed in accordance with technical design standards.



They enable synchronous and asynchronous online communication via email, chat rooms, science forums, news groups, and video conferencing so as to allow interaction with others who are parts of their educational experience (Ellis & Calvo, 2007).

FINDINGS: SEMANTIC ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE RESULTS

Data acquired from the experts were processed and analyzed. The analysis included frequencies and percentages, in addition to Chi-square test. The appendix shows the form in full length and the percentages for each indicator. The form in the appendix shows that there are statistical differences in arranging the degree of importance of the main and subsidiary standards of virtual sciences learning environment, which reflect its importance from the participants’ point of view. This is applicable at levels 0.05 and 0.01 in all of the main and subsidiary standards, which means that the hypothesis is acceptable on the basis of these indicators. The Chi-square test was used to identify the extent of the significance of differences in arranging the

degree of importance of each standard. The values of χ2 were proven to be significant at all of the indicators, except for 10 indicators; namely, 27-28-29-31-45-67-68-105-164-165. This means that no differences were detected in the experts’ opinions about these ten indicators. Significant value of χ2 means that there is a variance in the respondents’ opinions, which is a result of the unequal frequencies in any indicator.

Through the study and the analysis of the form, we may infer that there is a meaningful statistical difference in arranging the degree of importance of VLE design standards in light of total quality standards which reflects the variance of their importance in the experts’ point of view, and this offers strong support to the study’s hypothesis.

The Relative Importance of the VLE Main Standards Indicated By the Experts

Table 1 and Fig.3 show that the percentage of the arithmetic average of the VLE standards exceeding 90%. This means that these standards are perceived as highly important, and this places heavy emphasis on using these standards as a tool for the purpose of

TABLE 1 The frequencies and percentages of the relative importance of VLE main standards arranged according to the order of importance

Rank Main Standard Frequencies Mean Value The mean average percentage

1 Design 345 316.3667 91.702 Support 177 162.0000 91.533 Authority and Safety 48 43.7000 91.044 Improvement and Review 42 38.1667 90.875 VLE Cost Effectiveness 33 29.9000 90.616 Quality VLE Software 60 54.3000 90.50



evaluating virtual learning environments in general, and science education learning environments in particular. We may also notice that the “design standard” has been ranked as the standard with the highest percentage of 91.7%.

We think that the reason behind this high percentage is that the virtual science learning environment, including its components of hardware and software’s ultimate accuracy, is in its design and development, as design is the basic pillar on which the virtual environment is based, and the foundation which supports all of the other standards. The “support standard” came next in importance according to the experts’ view, with an average that reached 91.53%. We regard this standard as an important one and it is deservedly ahead of the other standards since earlier studies ascertained that the quality of VLEs cannot be guaranteed without supporting systems.

This goes along with the study of Moore (2002), which focused on the importance of support standard, and the satisfaction of teaching staff, as well as students who use the VLE. In the third place, the “authority and safety standard” came third, and the “improvement and review standard” came fourth. The “VLE cost effectiveness” was ranked fifth, and finally, the “quality VLE software” came in last. We consider the fact that the quality VLE software standard came in the last position as not indicating insignificance of the standard. On the contrary, its arithmetic average was 90.5%. This reflects the close similarity of the respondents’ views regarding the importance of the main standards of VLEs. Among the studies which emphasized on the quality of VLE and discussed similar standards are the studies of Al-Husari (2002), Al-Mulla (2008), and Al-Shanak and Doumi (2009).

Fig.3: The percentage of the relative importance of VLE main standards



The Relative Importance of the VLE Subsidiary Standards Indicated by the Experts

Table 2 and Fig.4 show that the subsidiary standard of “quality design dimensions and components” was ranked as first as its arithmetic average reached 97.42%. The

reason for its high ranking was the main standard that it is related to was also ranked as first. Moreover, many studies have asserted the importance of setting accurate and clear indicators of the quality design of VLE dimensions and components, and the experts who participated in this study seem

TABLE 1 The frequencies and percentages of the relative importance of VLE subsidiary standards arranged according to the order of importance.

Rank Subsidiary standard Frequencies Mean value The mean average percentage1 Quality design dimensions

and components 66 64 .3000 97.42

2 Institutional support 42 39.1000 93.13 Technical support 24 22.2333 92.644 Quality instructional design 129 117.6667 91.215 Authority and safety 48 43.7000 91.046 Faculty support 45 40.9000 90.897 Improvement and review 42 38.1667 90.878 VLE cost effectiveness 33 29.9000 90.619 Student support 66 59.7667 90.5610 Quality VLE software 60 54.3000 90.511 Quality technical design 150 134.4000 89.6

Fig.4: The percentages of the relative importance of the VLE subsidiary standards



to agree with these studies (e.g., Abofakhr, 2008; Al-Mulla, 2008; Al-Shaer, 2008). The “Institutional support” came second with 93.01%, followed by the “Technical support” that came third with 92.64%. The fourth was “Quality instructional design” with 91.21%, while “Authority and Safety” was fifth with 91.04%. The sixth was “Faculty support” with 90.89%, followed by “Improvement and review” with 90.87%. The eighth was “VLE cost effectiveness” with 90.61%. The ninth was “Quality VLE software” with 90.5%. The eleventh and last was “Quality technical design” with 89.6%. We believe that the last ranking of this particular standard does not mean that the survey participants have underestimated its importance, since it has a high percentage of 89.6%, and this value is regarded as high. The reason behind this ranking can be attributed to the fact that the technical quality design of VLEs refers to the comprehensive appearance of the environment including website design, pages design, content design, browsing, and usability. These minor details could be of little importance after fixing the cornerstone of the components and dimensions of the VLE design quality.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Many studies which have been reviewed highlight the benefits of using VLE in education. However, these benefits are not possible to be achieved without ensuring the quality of VLE. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the quality standards of VLE and present them in a form that

should be used to evaluate quality level in VLE for science education. In addition, it endeavoured to rank the quality standards in the order of their importance. This study is very thorough and detailed because of the importance and multi-faceted nature of the topic. It managed to identify six main standards for quality in VLE ranked in order of their importance. These standards are Design, Support, Authority and Safety, Improvement and Review, VLE Cost Effectiveness, and Quality VLE Software.

Ensuring the quality of VLEs requires a pluralistic approach that covers all details of the learning and teaching experience. Therefore, the designed form which contains six standards and eleven sub-standards covers every possible aspect of the VLE for science education and pays equal attention to all factors contributing to the beneficial use of VLE. In order to benefit from all the fruitful results promised by VLE, we therefore recommend using the proposed form as an evaluative tool to assess any current VLE or new ones to be implemented. However, given the rapid change and development in the field of VLE, it is suggested to continue researching and creating adaptable new standards as tools to measure and ensure the quality of VLEs.

REFERENCESAbofakhr, Z. (2008, 28-30 April). The Efficiency of

Virtual Learning on Knowledge Acquirement of Educational Qualification Diploma Students of Teaching Methodologies of Sociology, Experimental Study on the Syrian Virtual University. Paper presented at The Second International Conference & Exhibition for Zain



e-Learning Centre. Retrieved June 10, 2011, from Zain E-Learning Centre.

Al-Husari, A. (2002). Patterns and characteristics of virtual reality, the views of students and teachers in some of its programs available through the Internet. Journal of Education Technology, 12, 3-38.

Al-Mubarak, A. (2004). The impact of teaching through virtual classrooms using the Internet on the attainment of faculty of education students studying education and communication techniques at King Saud University. Master thesis, King Saud University.

Al-Mulla, F. (2008, 28-30 April). Model of the proposed standards to ensure the quality of academic programs in e-learning. Paper presented at The Second International Conference & Exhibition for Zain e-Learning Centre. Retrieved June 1, 2011, from Zain E-Learning Centre.

Al-Radi, A. (2008). Virtual Labs as a Model of E-learning. Paper presented at the E-Learning Forum: Ministry of Education, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Al-Saleh, B. (2005, 5-7 July). E-Learning and Instructional Design: Partnership for Quality. Paper presented at the Tenth Scientific Conference for the Egyptian Association for Educational Technology on E-Learning Technology and Total Quality Requirements, Cairo, Egypt.

Al-Shaer, H. (2008). The impact of an introductory training program on “universal design” of e-courses on the knowledge of its principles and use in the design and production of e-courses among instructional designers at e-learning centers. Studies in Pedagogy and Curriculum, 131.

Al-Shanak, K., & Doumi, H. (2009). Foundations of E-Learning in Science Education. Amman, Jordan: Dar Wael for Publishing and Distribution.

Barbour, M. K., & Reeves, T. C. (2009). The reality of virtual schools: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 52, 403-416.

Barker, K. C. (2007). E-Learning Quality Standards for Consumer protection & Consumer confidence: A Canadian Case Study in E-learning Quality Assurance. Educational Technology & Society, 10, 109-119.

Berge, Z. L., & Clark, T. (2005). Virtual Schools: Planning for Success. New York: NY: Teachers College Press.

Chibueze, I. L. (2008, 28-30 April). Factors Necessary for Effective Quality Assurance in a Web-Based Learning Environment. Paper presented at The Second International Conference & Exhibition for Zain e-Learning Centre. Retrieved May 25, 2011, from Zain E-Learning Centre.

Chow, A., Andrews, S., & Trueman, R. (2007). A ‘Second Life’: can this online, virtual reality world be used to increase the overall quality of learning and instruction in graduate distance learning programs? In M. Simonson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2007, Volume 2 (pp. 86-94). Anaheim, CA: AECT.

Clark, T., & Berge, Z. L. (2005). Perspectives on Virtual Schools. In T.Clark & Z. L. Berge (Eds.), Virtual Schools: Planning for success (pp. 9-19). New York: Teachers College Press.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education (5th ed.). New York: Routledge.

Ellis, R. A., & Calvo, R. A. (2007). Minimum indicators to quality assure blended learning supported by learning management systems. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 10, 60-70.

First International Conference of e-Learning and Distance Learning. (2009). First International



Conference of e-Learning and Distance Learning. Retrieved November 15, 2010 from http://www.eli.elc.edu.sa/2009/

Frydenberg, J. (2002). Quality Standards in e-Learning: A matrix of analysis. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3, 1-15.

Fyodorova, A. (2005). Multiple Intelligence Theory in Improving the Quality of Virtual Education. (Master thesis, University of Joensuu). Retrieved from ftp://cs.joensuu.fi/pub/Theses/2005_MSc_Fyodorova_Anna.pdf

Gerval, J. P., & Le Ru, Y. (2008). Virtual Lab: Discovering through Simulation. Paper presented at The 3rd International Conference on Virtual Learning. Retrieved November 2, 2010 from http://www.cniv.ro/2008/disc/icvl/documente/pdf/invited/ICVL_invitedPapers_paper01.pdf

Hamit, F. (1993). Virtual Reality: An Exploration of Cyberspace. Carmel, Indiana: Prentice-Hall Publishers.

Helsel, S. K. (1992). Virtual reality as a learning medium. Instructional Delivery Systems, 6, 4-5.

Hin, L. T. W., & Subramaniam, R. (2005). E-Learning and Virtual Science Centers . Hershey: Information Science Publishing.

Khamees, M. A. (2003). The Development of Educational Technology. Cairo: Dar Quba for Publishing and Distribution.

Mclellan, H. (1996). Virtual Realities. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 457-487). New York: Simon& Schuster Macmillan.

McLoughlin, C., & Visser, T. (2003). Global Perspectives on Quality in Online Higher Education. In D. Lassner, & C. McNaught (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2003 (pp. 253-256).

Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/13756.

Meisner, G. W., Hoffman, H., & Turner, M. (2008). Learning Physics in a Virtual Environment: Is There Any? Lat.Am.J.Phys.Edu, 2, 87-102.

Middlehurst, R. (2002) Quality assurance and accreditation for virtual education: A discussion of models and needs. In B. Wächter (Ed.), The Virtual Challenge to International Cooperation in Higher Education, a Project of the Academic Cooperation Association (pp. 99-109). ACA Papers on International Co-operation in Education, Bonn, Lemmens.

Moore, J. C. (2002). Elements of Quality: The Sloan-C Framework. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.

Ofsted. (2009). Virtual learning environments: an evaluation of their development in a sample of educational settings London, The Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows (Version 10 and 11). Buckingham: Open University Press.

QAA. (2010). Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education Section 2: Collaborative provision and flexible and distributed learning (including e-learning). Gloucester, UK: Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education.

Second International Conference of e-Learning and Distance Learning. (2011). Second International Conference of e-Learning and Distance Learning. Retrieved June 10, 2011 from http://eli.elc.edu.sa/2011/

Wang, Q. (2006). Quality assurance best practices for assessing online programs. International Journal on E-Learning, 5(2), 265-274.



APP

EN

DIX

The

Perc

enta

ges o

f the

Mai

n an

d Su

bsid

iary

Sta

ndar

ds o

f the

VLE

Sta

ndar

d Fo

rm re

late

d to

Tot

al Q

ualit

y St

anda

rds.

Mai

n St

anda

rdIn

dica

tor

Deg

ree

of Im

port

ance

%

32

11. Design Standards

1.1

Stan

dard

s for

Qua

lity

Des

ign

of V

irtu

al S

cien

ce E

duca

tion

Env

iron

men

t Dim

ensi

ons a

nd C

ompo

nent

s67

.723

.3--

1.

Avai

labi

lity

of h

igh

qual

ity p

hysi

cal,

soci

al, c

ultu

ral,

and

psyc

holo

gica

l dim

ensi

ons i

n V

LE.

2.

Des

ign

and

build

VLE

acc

ordi

ng to

“U

nive

rsal

Des

ign”

pro

toco

ls b

ecau

se it

sat

isfie

s le

arne

rs’ n

eeds

with

var

ied

lear

ning

styl

es a

nd m

ultip

le in

telli

genc

e in

clud

ing

spec

ial n

eeds

and

gift

ed le

arne

rs.

83.3

10.0

6.7

3.

VLE

and

labo

rato

ries

for

scie

nce

educ

atio

n ar

e de

sign

ed a

nd d

evel

oped

by

a sp

ecia

lised

team

of

prog

ram

mer

s, en

gine

ers,

inst

ruct

iona

l and

cur

ricul

um d

esig

n ex

perts

in sc

ienc

e ed

ucat

ion,

and

psy

chol

ogis

ts.

80.0

20.0

-

4.

Avai

labi

lity

of sc

ienc

e ed

ucat

ion

virtu

al to

ols a

nd m

ater

ials

des

igne

d ac

cord

ing

to v

irtua

l rea

lity

tech

nolo

gy.

80.0

16.7

3.3

5.

VLE

des

ign

shou

ld b

e sa

fe, s

ecur

e, a

nd c

onve

nien

t. 73

.323

.33.

3

6.

A c

lear

vis

ion

on th

e de

sign

of

VLE

cor

rect

ly b

ased

on

the

stan

dard

s of

acc

redi

ted

natio

nal a

nd in

tern

atio

nal

inst

itutio

ns.

73.3

23.3

3.3

7.

Hig

h qu

ality

spec

ifica

tions

and

stan

dard

s for

VLE

des

ign.

73.3

26.7

-

8.

Cle

ar ru

les a

nd re

gula

tions

to b

e pr

actic

ed in

VLE

.70

.030

.0-

9.

Cle

arly

stat

ed a

nd fo

rmat

ted

gene

ral a

ims o

f VLE

.73

.326

.7-

10.

The

gene

ral a

ims o

f VLE

are

bas

ed o

n ph

iloso

phic

al p

rinci

ples

of c

onst

ruct

ivis

m, b

rain

-bas

ed le

arni

ng, a

nd a

ctiv

e le

arni

ng m

etho

ds.

53.3

33.3

13.3

11.

Avai

labi

lity

of h

igh

tech

equ

ipm

ent t

o em

body

soph

istic

ated

scie

ntifi

c ph

enom

ena.

83

.310

.06.

7

12.

Avai

labi

lity

of tw

o ty

pes

of le

arni

ng in

VLE

: syn

chro

nous

virt

ual l

earn

ing

and

asyn

chro

nous

virt

ual l

earn

ing

via

the

inte

rnet

such

as e

mai

l, ch

attin

g, e

-for

ums,

bulle

tin b

oard

s, vi

deo

and

audi

o co

nfer

enci

ng, a

nd n

ews g

roup

s. 70

.030

.0-

13.

Avai

labi

lity

of v

irtua

l lib

rary

that

con

tain

s spe

cial

ized

ele

ctro

nic

reso

urce

s in

natu

ral s

cien

ces.

73

.326

.7-

14.

The

virt

ual l

ibra

ry is

org

aniz

ed in

a w

ay th

at a

ssis

ts in

sear

chin

g, d

ispl

ayin

g, a

nd u

sing

of i

nfor

mat

ion.

And

allo

w

elec

troni

c tre

atm

ent o

f inf

orm

atio

n by

mat

chin

g le

arne

rs’ n

eeds

with

ele

ctro

nic

reso

urce

s mem

ory

for i

nstru

ctio

nal

activ

ity.

70.0

30.3

-



1. Design Standards

15.

Ther

e are

clea

r inp

ut, p

roce

ss, o

utpu

t of V

LE re

late

d to

diff

eren

t asp

ects

of le

arni

ng i.

e. co

gniti

ve, s

kills

, and

emot

ions

.67

.720

.03.

3

16.

The

re a

re c

lear

inst

ruct

ions

of p

roce

dure

s to

be fo

llow

ed in

usi

ng V

LE te

chno

logi

es.

80.0

16.7

3.3

17.

VLE

supp

orts

col

labo

rativ

e le

arni

ng th

roug

h its

virt

ual s

oftw

are.

60.0

26.7

13.3

18.

Avai

labi

lity

of v

irtua

l lab

softw

are

desi

gned

and

pro

gram

med

in c

oope

ratio

n w

ith h

igh

qual

ity a

cade

mic

, res

earc

h,

and

man

ufac

turin

g in

stitu

tions

.73

.320

.06.

7

19.

Avai

labi

lity

of e

lect

roni

c in

fras

truct

ure,

net

wor

ks, a

nd p

hysi

cal f

acili

ties f

or E

-Del

iver

y sy

stem

.90

.06.

73.

3

20.

The

choi

ce o

f E-D

eliv

ery

syst

em s

houl

d be

bas

ed o

n th

e re

quire

men

ts o

f the

prin

cipl

es o

f sci

ence

of i

nstru

ctio

n an

d le

arni

ng.

76.7

20.0

3.3

21.

Avai

labi

lity

for s

imul

atio

n so

ftwar

e su

itabl

e fo

r the

fiel

d un

der s

tudy

in V

LE.

56.7

40.0

3.3

22.

Usa

ge o

f del

iver

y sy

stem

s and

teac

hing

par

adig

ms s

uita

ble

for t

he c

urric

ulum

and

virt

ual l

ab.

63.3

33.3

3.3

23.

Con

side

ring

of e

lect

roni

c w

aste

dur

ing

plan

ning

pha

se o

f V

LE a

s w

ell a

s du

ring

conc

lusi

on o

f co

ntra

cts

with

co

mpa

nies

and

inst

itutio

ns a

nd a

gree

of r

ecyc

ling

of h

arm

ful e

lect

roni

c w

aste

in sa

fe m

etho

ds.

60.0

33.3

6.7

1.2

Sta

ndar

ds fo

r Q

ualit

y In

stru

ctio

nal D

esig

n

1.

Ther

e is

a sy

stem

atic

pro

cess

in d

esig

ning

, dev

elop

ing,

and

pro

duci

ng th

e cu

rric

ulum

to m

eet l

earn

er’s

cog

nitiv

e,

skill

s, an

d em

otio

nal n

eeds

and

con

vert

them

to c

riter

ia in

virt

ual m

odul

e de

velo

pmen

t. 60

.023

.316

.7

2.

Des

ign

virtu

al a

nd e

lect

roni

c m

odul

es to

ens

ure

cohe

sion

and

stru

ctur

e of

con

tent

act

iviti

es.

90.0

6.7

3.3

3.

Virt

ual m

odul

e is

dev

elop

ed o

n th

e ba

ses o

f defi

ning

pre

requ

isite

s and

exp

erie

nces

in e

-lear

ning

.83

.313

.33.

3

4.

Virt

ual m

odul

e is

dev

elop

ed o

n th

e ba

ses o

f ana

lysi

ng th

e im

porta

nce

and

adva

ntag

es o

f the

mod

ule

from

lear

ner’s

pr

ospe

ctiv

e (O

rient

ing

Cont

ext),

phy

sical

spec

ifica

tions

of V

LE (I

nstru

ctio

nal C

onte

xt),

and

the c

hanc

es fo

r pra

ctic

ing

new

ly a

cqui

red

skill

s (Tr

ansf

er C

onte

xt).

60.0

40.0

-

5.

Cou

rse

cont

ains

orie

ntat

ion

activ

ities

and

defi

ned

prer

equi

site

s to

clar

ify le

arne

rs’ m

isco

ncep

tions

.66

.733

.3-

6.

Con

tent

stru

ctur

e of

con

cept

s, pr

inci

ples

, the

orie

s, an

d la

ws

are

defin

ed u

sing

ana

lysi

s su

itabl

e fo

r the

nat

ure

of

know

ledg

e an

d sk

ills r

equi

red

to fu

lfill

the

mod

ule

aim

s.56

.743

.3-

7.

Inst

ruct

iona

l crit

eria

of v

irtua

l mod

ule

is d

evel

oped

usi

ng su

itabl

e to

ols s

uch

as st

oryb

oard

ing

and

scen

ario

s. 76

.723

.3-

8.

App

ly fo

rmat

ive

asse

ssm

ent b

y us

ing

Alp

ha a

nd B

eta

test

ing

durin

g th

e pr

oduc

tion

of th

e m

odul

e to

impr

ove

it ac

cord

ing

to a

sses

smen

t res

ults

.66

.733

.3-

9.

Dur

ing

desi

gn p

hase

dat

a co

llect

ion

proc

edur

es f

or m

odul

e ev

alua

tion

and

lear

ners

’ tra

inin

g an

d su

ppor

t are

all

defin

ed.

73.3

26.7

-

10.

Dur

ing

desi

gn p

hase

ove

rall

asse

ssm

ent p

roce

dure

s are

defi

ned

and

perio

dica

l rev

iew

s of v

irtua

l mod

ule

to e

nsur

e its

effi

cien

cy a

nd c

ompe

tenc

y.

70.0

26.7

3.3



1. Design Standards

11.

Com

preh

ensiv

e syl

labu

s of t

he m

odul

e tha

t cle

arly

des

crib

e its

aim

s and

requ

irem

ents

on th

e web

bef

ore c

omm

enci

ng

teac

hing

the

mod

ule

in V

LE.

73.3

26.7

-

12.

Virt

ual m

odul

e sy

llabu

s des

crib

es sk

ills a

nd m

etho

ds o

f per

form

ance

eva

luat

ion.

83.3

13.3

3.3

13.

Mod

ule

aim

s are

form

ulat

ed in

pro

cedu

ral b

ehav

iour

al a

nd m

easu

rabl

e ap

proa

ch.

76.7

20.0

3.3

14.

Mod

ule

aim

s sho

uld

be a

chie

vabl

e in

ligh

t of l

earn

ers’

char

acte

ristic

s.83

.310

.06.

7

15.

Virt

ual m

odul

e ai

ms

shou

ld b

e re

late

d to

ped

agog

ical

stra

tegi

es, c

onte

nt, l

earn

ing

activ

ities

and

per

form

ance

ev

alua

tion

as a

n in

tegr

ated

syst

em.

83.3

10.0

6.7

16.

Virt

ual m

odul

e aim

s sup

port

high

er o

rder

thin

king

skill

s suc

h as

criti

cal t

hink

ing,

Met

a cog

nitio

n, cr

eativ

e thi

nkin

g,

and

deci

sion

mak

ing.

90.0

10.0

-

17.

Aim

s are

bas

ed o

n lif

e sk

ills a

nd c

ontin

uous

real

istic

app

licat

ions

in V

LE.

83.3

13.3

3.3

18.

Con

tent

shou

ld b

e of

hig

h qu

ality

and

car

eful

ly d

esig

ned

in te

rms o

f nov

elty

and

orig

inal

ity a

nd fl

awle

ss.

76.7

23.3

-

19.

Con

tent

shou

ld b

e fle

xibl

e to

cov

er v

arie

d V

LE a

pplic

atio

ns83

.316

.7-

20.

Con

tent

is d

esig

ned

and

pres

ente

d in

pur

pose

ful o

rgan

ized

chu

nks t

hat f

acili

tate

lear

ning

.83

.313

.33.

3

21.

Con

tent

incl

ude

trust

ed e

xter

nal l

inks

cho

sen

of h

igh

qual

ity a

nd s

tand

ard

to b

enefi

t sup

porti

ng v

irtua

l lea

rnin

g m

odul

e ac

tiviti

es a

nd a

ims.

73.3

20.0

6.7

22.

Inst

ruct

iona

l con

tent

is lo

gica

lly c

onne

cted

and

bas

ed o

n le

arne

r’s p

revi

ous e

xper

ienc

es

66.7

33.3

-

23.

Uni

fied

user

inte

rfac

e th

roug

h ou

t the

VLE

for c

ontro

l ico

ns, b

row

sing

, and

link

s.68

.710

.03.

3

24.

Virt

ual m

odul

e bo

ost l

earn

er’s

sel

f est

eem

and

cap

abili

ty to

ach

ieve

virt

ual l

earn

ing

aim

s th

roug

h sk

ills

and

tool

s of

self

lear

ning

and

eva

luat

ing

incl

uded

in th

e m

odul

e.

83.3

16.7

-

25.

Cou

rse

empl

oys t

he u

se o

f vis

ual t

hink

ing

tool

s suc

h as

con

cept

map

s, lo

gica

l org

aniz

atio

n of

con

cept

s, an

d vi

sual

m

aps.

70.0

26.7

3.3

26.

Cou

rse e

mpl

oys l

earn

ing

strat

egie

s sui

tabl

e for

its a

ims a

nd re

quire

men

ts, an

d le

arne

rs’ c

hara

cter

istic

s and

indi

vidu

al

diffe

renc

es b

etw

een

them

usi

ng sy

nchr

onou

s and

asy

nchr

onou

s too

ls.

76.7

20.0

3.3

27.

Avai

labi

lity

of le

arni

ng a

nd te

achi

ng st

rate

gies

and

tool

s to

assi

st le

arne

rs w

ith sp

ecia

l nee

ds.

83.3

16.7

-

28.

Cou

rse

uses

enr

ichi

ng a

nd a

ctiv

e le

arni

ng a

ctiv

ities

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith te

achi

ng st

anda

rds.

73.3

26.7

-

29.

Lear

ning

act

iviti

es o

ffer

link

s to

enr

ichi

ng in

form

atio

n su

itabl

e fo

r lea

rner

’s p

erfo

rman

ce a

nd p

rogr

ess.

72.3

26.7

-

30.

Inst

ruct

iona

l con

tent

in V

LE is

pro

gres

sive

in d

ifficu

lty a

nd so

phis

ticat

ion

as th

e le

arne

r pro

gres

s in

stud

ies.

66.7

30.0

3.3

31.

Info

rmat

ion

is p

rovi

ded

to le

arne

rs o

n pr

otoc

ols

of a

ctiv

e le

arne

r-co

nten

t, le

arne

r-te

ache

r, an

d le

arne

r-le

arne

r in

tera

ctio

n.76

.723

.3-

32.

Cou

rse

utili

ses s

uita

ble

tech

niqu

es a

nd m

etho

ds to

pro

vide

suffi

cien

t fee

dbac

k.70

.030

.0-



1. Design Standards

33.

Cou

rse

enco

urag

es le

arne

rs to

pro

vide

feed

back

on

cour

se d

eliv

ery

and

activ

ities

in se

crec

y.76

.720

.03.

3

34.

VLE

has

an

elec

troni

c fo

rum

for l

earn

ers

in w

hich

they

exp

ress

thei

r edu

catio

nal n

eeds

, sug

gest

ions

, pro

blem

s, an

d ch

alle

nges

they

face

.60

.036

.73.

3

35.

Mul

timed

ia d

esig

n ut

ilise

s th

e sa

me

basi

c pr

inci

ples

of

inte

rfac

e de

sign

(as

wel

l be

note

d in

Tec

hnic

al D

esig

n St

anda

rds)

.70

.026

.73.

3

36.

Cou

rse

uses

aut

hent

ic a

nd re

al a

sses

smen

t met

hods

such

as e

-por

tfolio

and

self

asse

ssm

ent.

80.0

13.3

6.7

37.

Cou

rse

goes

thro

ugh

perio

dic

revi

ew, c

ontin

uous

eva

luat

ion,

and

cos

t and

per

form

ance

mea

sure

men

t to

ensu

re

qual

ity a

nd c

ompa

tibili

ty w

ith v

irtua

l lea

rnin

g pr

ogra

ms o

f the

inst

itutio

n.80

.020

.0-

38.

Suita

ble d

ecis

ions

are m

ade t

o im

prov

e virt

ual c

ours

e effe

ctiv

enes

s and

effic

ienc

y ac

cord

ing

to ev

alua

tion

outc

ome.

83.3

16.7

-

39.

Avai

labi

lity

of se

cure

ele

ctro

nic

syst

em fo

r sub

mitt

ing

lear

ners

’ tes

ts a

nd re

sear

ch p

aper

s.73

.326

.7-

40.

E-re

ceip

t sys

tem

to in

form

lear

ners

and

teac

hers

of c

orre

ct a

nd a

ppro

ved

subm

issi

on o

f tes

ts a

nd re

sear

ch p

aper

s.

80.0

16.7

3.3

41.

Test

E-B

ank.

76.7

23.3

-

42.

Enco

urag

e el

ectro

nic

colla

bora

tive

proj

ects

and

virt

ual t

eam

s.76

.720

.03.

3

43.

E-pu

blis

hing

for l

earn

ers a

nd te

ache

rs w

ork.

66

.730

.03.

3

1.3

Sta

ndar

ds fo

r Q

ualit

y Te

chni

cal D

esig

n

1.

Put t

echn

ical

and

pre

sent

atio

nal i

nter

face

des

ign

issu

es in

to c

onsi

dera

tion

such

as s

urfin

g, li

sts,

icon

s, fo

nt si

ze a

nd

type

, con

trol t

ools

, and

log

in –

log

off V

LE to

ols.

66.7

33.3

-

2.

VLE

is li

nked

to in

stitu

tion’

s dat

abas

es su

ch a

s stu

dent

dat

abas

e sy

stem

and

aca

dem

ic re

cord

s dat

abas

e sy

stem

.66

.733

.3-

3.

VLE

is li

nked

to c

entra

l lib

rary

dat

abas

e.86

.713

.3-

4.

Web

tech

nolo

gy is

use

d to

des

ign

VLE

to a

llow

acc

ess t

o it

from

any

pla

ce.

70.0

26.7

3.3

5.

VLE

pro

gram

min

g is

com

patib

le w

ith v

arie

d op

erat

ing

syst

ems s

uch

as W

indo

ws a

nd L

inux

.76

.723

.3-

6.

Serv

er c

apac

ity is

suita

ble

with

num

ber o

f lea

rner

s in

VLE

.90

.010

.0-

7.

Each

lear

ner i

s allo

cate

d a

spac

e to

stor

e pe

rson

al fi

les a

nd d

ocum

ents

.76

.720

.03.

3

8.

VLE

con

tain

repo

sito

ry to

stor

e in

stru

ctio

nal m

ater

ials

, act

iviti

es, a

nd le

arni

ng re

sour

ces.

73

.323

.33.

3

9.

All

file

type

s with

diff

eren

t ext

ensi

ons c

an b

e up

load

ed a

nd d

ownl

oade

d.76

.723

.3-

10.

Ther

e ar

e pr

ogra

ms t

hat f

acili

tate

team

wor

k su

ch a

s e-c

alen

dar,

bulle

tin b

oard

s, an

d fo

rum

s.80

.016

.73.

3

11.

Inst

ruct

iona

l con

tent

can

be

deve

lope

d ea

sily

usi

ng u

ser f

riend

ly so

ftwar

e w

ithou

t the

nee

d fo

r prio

r pro

gram

min

g sk

ills.

76.7

20.0

3.3

12.

Avai

labi

lity

of p

rogr

ams t

o de

sign

ass

essm

ent a

nd e

valu

atio

n to

ols s

uch

as V

isua

l Cer

t Exa

m.

83.3

16.7

-



1. Design Standards

13.

VLE

con

tain

s RSS

feed

s and

con

tent

can

be

acce

ssed

offl

ine.

83.3

16.7

-

14.

Sim

ple

user

inte

rfac

e fo

r VLE

.66

.726

.76.

7

15.

Two

diffe

rent

use

r int

erfa

ce o

ne fo

r lea

rner

s and

the o

ther

for t

each

ers s

ince

they

per

form

diff

eren

t act

iviti

es in

VLE

.76

.720

.03.

3

16.

Uni

fied

inte

rfac

e th

roug

hout

VLE

.83

.313

.33.

3

17.

Acc

essi

ble

page

des

ign

in te

rms

of f

ont s

ize

and

colu

re, c

ontro

l of

audi

o m

ater

ials

vol

ume,

con

trol o

f pi

ctur

e re

solu

tion,

and

ava

ilabi

lity

of z

oom

ing

for p

ictu

res.

73

.313

.313

.3

18.

Acc

essi

ble

desi

gn in

term

s of p

ossi

bilit

y to

upl

oad

mul

timed

ia.

76.7

16.7

6.7

19.

Hom

e pa

ge fo

r eac

h le

arne

r tha

t dis

play

info

rmat

ion

such

as d

ate

of la

st v

isit,

num

ber o

f unr

ead

repl

ies i

n a

thre

ad

s/he

star

ted,

or n

umbe

r of e

mai

ls in

box.

70.0

26.7

3.3

20.

Poss

ibili

ty to

per

sona

lize

page

s for

eac

h le

arne

r usi

ng fo

nt si

ze a

nd c

olou

r and

bac

kgro

und

27.3

23.3

3.3

21.

Spec

ial n

eeds

lear

ners

are

put

into

con

side

ratio

n w

hen

desi

gnin

g V

LE le

arne

rs su

ch a

s dys

lexi

c, c

olou

r blin

d, a

nd

shor

t sig

hted

.60

.026

.713

.3

22.

Suita

ble

size

icon

s with

cle

ar la

bels

.80

.020

.0-

23.

Cle

ar d

rop

dow

n lis

ts w

ith lo

gica

lly re

late

d ite

ms.

70.0

26.7

3.3

24.

Sync

hron

ous

and

asyn

chro

nous

com

mun

icat

ion

such

as

chat

pro

gram

s, fo

rum

s, bu

lletin

boa

rds,

emai

l, an

d vi

deo

and

audi

o co

nfer

ence

s.80

.716

.73.

3

25.

Avai

labi

lity

of se

nsor

y tra

nsfo

rmer

s suc

h as

virt

ual r

ealit

y gl

asse

s, he

lmet

s, an

d gl

oves

83.3

13.3

3.3

26.

Con

nect

and

use

dev

ices

to in

tera

ct w

ith v

irtua

l rea

lity

in V

LE s

uch

as d

ata

glov

es a

nd h

ead

mou

nted

dev

ice

and

sens

e an

d m

otio

n tra

nsfo

rmer

s.63

.326

.710

.0

27.

Each

lear

ner h

as u

niqu

e us

erna

me

and

pass

wor

d fo

r sig

ning

in V

LE.

66.7

20.0

13.3

28.

Res

trict

ed le

arne

rs’ a

cces

s to

inst

ruct

iona

l con

tent

acc

ordi

ng to

lear

ner’s

or t

each

ing

prog

ress

(lea

rner

s ar

e on

ly

allo

wed

acc

ess t

o le

sson

s tha

t hav

e be

en ta

ught

).80

.016

.73.

3

29.

Poss

ibili

ty to

trac

k le

arne

rs’ a

ctiv

ities

in V

LE to

eva

luat

e th

eir i

nter

actio

n w

ith in

stru

ctio

nal c

onte

nt.

66.7

23.3

10.0

30.

Cre

ate

back

up o

f VLE

to sa

ve it

s con

tent

from

lost

in c

ase

of se

rver

failu

re.

73.3

26.7

-

31.

Serv

er sh

ould

be

chos

en a

ccor

ding

to c

onte

nt v

olum

e, b

and

wid

th, h

oste

d fil

es i.

e. te

xt, a

udio

, vid

eo, a

nd p

ictu

re,

and

prog

ram

s exe

cute

d by

serv

er su

ch a

s Per

l Scr

ipt,

Java

Ser

ver P

ages

, Act

ive

Serv

er P

rogr

am.

83.3

16.7

-

32.

Bro

wse

r is u

sed

to a

cces

s VLE

.70

.726

.73.

3

33.

Avai

labi

lity

of m

edia

pla

yer f

or a

udio

, pic

ture

, and

text

file

s.80

.020

.0-

34.

VLE

shou

ld c

onta

in a

pla

ce to

ans

wer

que

stio

ns re

late

d to

usa

ge o

f VLE

and

virt

ual l

abor

ator

ies.

76.7

23.3

-

35.

Bro

wsi

ng ic

ons s

uppo

rt ba

ck a

nd fo

rwar

d m

ove

and

scro

lling

up

and

dow

n an

d us

ing

help

but

ton.

76.7

23.3

-



1. Design Standards

36.

Cop

ies o

f som

e pr

ogra

ms l

earn

ers m

ight

nee

d to

bro

ws V

LE c

onte

nt su

ch a

s Fla

sh a

nd A

crob

at R

eade

r.80

.020

.0-

37.

VLE

shou

ld co

ntai

n al

l pro

gram

s lea

rner

s nee

d to

ope

rate

som

e lea

rnin

g re

sour

ces s

uch

as M

S W

ord

and

Pow

erPo

int.

70.0

26.7

3.3

38.

Ano

ther

col

our i

s use

d to

dis

tingu

ish

elec

troni

c lin

ks in

VLE

.76

.723

.3-

39.

Con

cept

s use

d in

the

cour

se a

re d

efine

d by

cre

atin

g hy

perli

nk o

n th

e w

ord

whi

ch w

ill o

pen

a sm

all p

op o

n w

indo

w

that

incl

udes

the

defin

ition

.53

.326

.720

.0

40.

Nav

igat

ion

tool

s are

des

igne

d in

sim

ple

and

easy

to u

se w

ay to

mov

e be

twee

n co

nten

t ite

ms.

53.3

43.3

3.3

41.

Use

of s

impl

e id

eatio

nal m

aps t

o pr

esen

t cou

rse

cont

ent.

70.0

76.7

3.3

42.

All

page

s con

tain

(Hom

e) ic

on.

60.0

33.3

6.7

43.

Use

pic

toria

l nav

igat

ion

tool

s suc

h as

pic

toria

l ico

ns.

83.3

13.3

3.3

44.

Red

uce

text

link

s in

one

para

grap

h to

ens

ure

non

disp

ersi

on63

.330

.06.

7

45.

Use

hyp

erlin

ks in

tabl

e of

con

tent

s and

pic

k lis

ts.

56.7

36.7

6.7

46.

Cou

rse

is d

esig

ned

to c

orre

ct a

ll op

erat

ing

and

use

mis

take

s tha

t use

rs m

ight

fall

in.

60.0

33.3

6.7

47.

Secu

rity

syst

em ag

ains

t ele

ctro

nic a

ttack

s inc

ludi

ng en

cryp

tion

of d

ata e

xcha

nged

bet

wee

n le

arne

rs an

d ed

ucat

iona

l in

stitu

tions

via

the

Inte

rnet

.73

.323

.33.

3

48.

Avai

labi

lity

of v

ideo

and

audi

o cl

asse

s cap

ture

d vi

a web

cam

s to

activ

ate c

oope

rativ

e lea

rnin

g en

viro

nmen

ts in

VLE

.66

.726

.76.

7

49.

Mai

nten

ance

and

tech

nica

l sup

port

are

cont

inuo

usly

ava

ilabl

e fo

r VLE

.73

.323

.33.

3

50.

Use

wire

less

LA

N n

etw

orks

for V

LE.

63.3

26.7

10.0



Mai

n St

anda

rdIn

dica

tor

Deg

ree

of Im

port

ance

%

32

1

2. Standards for Quality VLE Software

1. P

rogr

ams a

re d

esig

ned

acco

rdin

g to

Inte

rnet

pro

toco

ls a

nd st

anda

rds.

70.0

26.7

3.3

2. A

vaila

bilit

y of

lear

ning

syst

ems a

nd e

duca

tiona

l con

tent

man

agem

ent s

yste

m.

73.3

23.3

3.3

3. A

vaila

bilit

y of

aut

omat

ed p

acka

ging

syst

ems a

nd st

anda

rds t

ools

.80

.016

.73.

3

4. P

repa

ratio

n of

qua

lified

tech

nica

l tea

m to

des

ign

and

deve

lop

VLE

with

coo

pera

tion

with

an

expe

rienc

ed c

onsu

ltant

. 73

.320

.06.

7

5. A

ttent

ion

is p

aid

to c

hoos

e un

com

plic

ated

syst

ems t

hat d

o no

t req

uire

radi

cal r

estru

ctur

ing

in p

rese

nt sy

stem

and

th

en d

evel

op sy

stem

func

tions

gra

dual

ly.

73.3

23.3

3.3

6. E

stab

lish

porta

l sys

tem

s tha

t can

pro

vide

and

inte

grat

e su

itabl

e se

rvic

es fo

r VLE

.76

.720

.03.

3

7. A

vaila

bilit

y of

lear

ning

reso

urce

s dat

abas

e pr

ogra

ms i

.e. h

andb

ook

prog

ram

, dow

nloa

d pr

ogra

ms,

Mic

roso

ft A

dope

R

eade

r, A

crob

at, I

nter

net E

xplo

rer a

nd N

etsc

ape.

83.3

16.7

-

8. A

vaila

bilit

y of

Ele

ctro

nic

portf

olio

pro

gram

.70

.023

.36.

7

9. G

ener

al g

uide

lines

gov

erni

ng p

rocu

rem

ent a

nd re

plac

emen

t of h

ardw

are

and

softw

are.

The

se g

uide

lines

alw

ays

ensu

re d

evel

opm

ent o

f har

dwar

e an

d so

ftwar

e.66

.726

.76.

7

10.

Effic

ient

infr

astru

ctur

e to

und

erta

ke m

aint

enan

ce a

nd re

pair

oper

atio

ns fo

r har

dwar

e an

d so

ftwar

e.76

.716

.76.

7

11.

Secu

rity

syst

em to

pro

tect

lear

ners

and

teac

hers

per

sona

l inf

orm

atio

n, a

sses

smen

t and

gra

des,

and

to p

rote

ct V

LE

from

viru

ses.

86.7

13.3

-

12.

Ada

pt v

irtua

l lea

rnin

g pr

ogra

ms w

ith th

e or

ient

atio

n an

d ai

ms o

f edu

catio

nal i

nstit

utio

ns.

83.3

16.7

-

13.

Spec

ial p

rogr

ams t

o m

anag

e V

LE a

nd re

gist

er le

arne

rs in

virt

ual l

earn

ing

cour

se, a

nd sp

ecify

acc

ess r

ight

s for

ea

ch u

ser.

76.7

23.3

-

14.

Spec

ial p

rogr

ams t

hat r

ecor

d th

e tim

e a

lear

ner n

eede

d to

ach

ieve

lear

ning

goa

ls, p

erfo

rm a

ctiv

ity, o

r con

duct

an

expe

rimen

t in

virtu

al la

b.73

.323

.33.

3

15.

Spec

ial p

rogr

ams t

o m

anag

e re

sour

ces i

n V

LE.

73.3

23.3

3.3

16.

Virt

ual l

ab p

rogr

ams c

onta

in to

ols t

hat s

uppo

rt th

e ex

perim

ent s

uch

as g

raph

s, an

imat

ion,

and

stat

istic

al a

naly

sis

softw

are.

66

.726

.76.

7

17.

Spec

ial p

rogr

am in

VLE

to d

evel

op so

cial

, beh

avio

ural

, and

act

ive

hum

an c

omm

unic

atio

n sk

ills t

o fa

ce th

e sh

ortc

omin

gs o

f virt

ual l

earn

ing.

63.3

33.3

3.3

18.

Spec

ial p

rogr

am th

at e

xpla

in e

thic

al, s

ocia

l, an

d cu

ltura

l iss

ues r

elat

ed to

ICT

use

that

is c

onsi

sten

t with

ed

ucat

iona

l ins

titut

ion

aim

s and

orie

ntat

ion.

60.0

36.7

3.3

19.

Virt

ual l

abor

ator

ies s

oftw

are

feat

ure

diffe

rent

env

ironm

ents

to u

nder

take

exp

erim

ents

such

as v

acuu

m, w

ater

, air

and

dark

env

ironm

ents

. 83

.316

.7-

20.

Virt

ual l

abor

ator

ies s

oftw

are

feat

ures

the

poss

ibili

ty o

f sel

f-as

sess

men

t dur

ing

solo

per

form

ance

of l

abor

ator

y te

sts.

83.3

16.7

-



Mai

n St

anda

rdIn

dica

tor

Deg

ree

of Im

port

ance

%

32

1

3. Support Standards

3.1

Inst

itutio

nal S

uppo

rt

1. E

duca

tiona

l ins

titut

ion

supp

ort f

or p

rovi

ding

hig

h qu

ality

LV

E.80

.020

.0-

2.

Avai

labi

lity

of st

rong

supp

ort s

yste

m fo

r all

inpu

t, pr

oces

s, an

d ou

t put

of V

LE.

83.3

16.7

-

3.

Form

pol

icie

s and

spec

ial s

yste

m to

supp

ort t

he d

evel

opm

ent o

f virt

ual l

earn

ing

prog

ram

s in

VLE

.80

.020

.0-

4.

Suita

ble

tech

nica

l crit

eria

and

fina

ncia

l com

mitm

ent t

o V

LE so

ftwar

e.86

.713

.3-

5.

Educ

atio

nal i

nstit

utio

n m

anag

emen

t enc

oura

ges a

nd su

ppor

t virt

ual l

earn

ing

by a

ccre

ditin

g th

is m

etho

d of

le

arni

ng.

83.3

16.7

-

6.

Educ

atio

nal i

nstit

utio

n un

derta

kes i

nter

nal a

nd e

xter

nal a

udits

to re

duce

risk

rate

and

to e

nsur

e qu

ality

con

trol.

83.3

16.7

-

7.

Educ

atio

nal i

nstit

utio

n ad

opts

syst

em, p

olic

ies,

and

regu

latio

ns th

at su

ppor

t new

VLE

.76

.723

.3-

8.

Educ

atio

nal i

nstit

utio

n ad

opts

syst

ems,

polic

ies,

and

regu

latio

ns th

at su

ppor

t virt

ual e

duca

tiona

l inn

ovat

ions

.76

.720

.03.

3

9.

Prov

ide

suffi

cien

t fina

nce

to su

ppor

t VLE

syst

em a

nd o

pera

tion.

80.0

20.0

-

10.

Educ

atio

nal i

nstit

utio

n us

es a

dmin

istra

tive

acco

unta

bilit

y sy

stem

to e

nsur

e qu

ality

con

trol a

nd p

rodu

ctiv

e us

age

of

VLE

reso

urce

s.76

.723

.3-

11.

Enco

urag

e co

oper

atio

n an

d pa

rtner

ship

in re

sour

ces s

uch

as e

-libr

ary,

dis

tinct

virt

ual a

pplic

atio

ns, a

nd fa

culty

be

twee

n A

rab

virtu

al u

nive

rsiti

es th

roug

h sp

ecifi

c ty

pes o

f reg

ulat

ion

and

links

to th

ose

reso

urce

s (in

form

atio

n cl

earin

g ho

use,

ele

ctro

nic

inde

xes)

.

83.3

16.7

-

12.

Supp

ort,

com

mitm

ent,

and

cont

inuo

us c

oope

ratio

n w

ithin

edu

catio

nal i

nstit

utio

n to

wor

k w

ith sh

ared

val

ues a

nd

visi

ons t

o en

sure

succ

ess a

nd c

ontin

uous

dev

elop

men

t of q

ualit

y in

VLE

. 83

.313

.33.

3

13.

Exte

nt to

whi

ch sa

larie

s of s

uppo

rting

serv

ices

wor

kers

attr

act j

ob c

ompe

tenc

ies t

o th

e fie

ld o

f virt

ual l

earn

ing.

73.3

23.3

3.3

14.

Avai

labi

lity

of lo

ng te

rm p

lans

to d

evel

op V

LE’s

and

thei

r inf

rast

ruct

ure.

76

.720

.03.

3

3.2

Stu

dent

Sup

port

1.

M

anag

emen

t sys

tem

to p

rovi

de re

gist

ratio

n an

d ac

cept

ance

serv

ices

in V

LE.

83.3

13.3

3.3

2.

Prov

ide

lear

ners

with

cop

ies o

f the

Stu

dent

Gui

de to

intro

duce

them

to te

stin

g sy

stem

and

how

to a

nsw

er q

uest

ions

be

side

s usi

ng it

as s

tudy

skill

s gui

de.

83.3

16.7

-

3.

Esta

blis

h a

cent

re to

ass

ess l

earn

ers’

skill

s (pr

ofici

ency

ass

essm

ent)

to a

sses

s and

dev

elop

lear

ners

’ var

ied

skill

s.70

.026

.73.

3

4.

Educ

atio

nal t

echn

olog

y sp

ecia

lists

to su

ppor

t stu

dent

s and

to p

rovi

de g

uida

nce

and

solu

tion

with

rega

rd to

el

ectro

nic

reso

urce

s tec

hnol

ogy.

73.3

23.3

3.3

5.

Avai

labi

lity

of p

erso

nalis

ed le

sson

s and

mul

timed

ia v

ia V

LE.

60.0

33.3

6.7




6.

Lay

a re

alis

tic st

rate

gy to

dev

elop

and

supp

ort s

elf l

earn

ing

and

enab

le le

arne

rs o

f con

trolli

ng th

eir e

duca

tiona

l pr

ogre

ss.

76.7

61.7

6.7

7.

Avai

labi

lity

of fu

ll an

d cl

ear i

nfor

mat

ion

for l

earn

ers r

egar

ding

the

natu

re a

nd re

quire

men

ts o

f virt

ual l

earn

ing.

In

clud

ing

info

rmat

ion

on th

e re

latio

n be

twee

n ac

hiev

emen

t, at

tain

men

t, as

sess

men

t, ac

adem

ic p

rogr

ess,

and

num

ber o

f hou

rs a

ppro

ved.

83.3

16.7

-

8.

Prov

ide

train

ing

on V

LE a

nd h

ow to

inte

ract

with

it b

y pu

blis

hing

Stu

dent

Gui

de o

n V

LE.

66.7

30.0

3.3

9.

Easy

acc

ess t

o pr

oduc

tivity

tool

s, in

tern

et se

rvic

es, i

nter

activ

e m

edia

, and

dig

ital r

esou

rces

to e

nric

h le

arni

ng a

ims

and

activ

ities

.76

.720

.03.

3

10.

Suffi

cien

t tec

hnic

al su

ppor

t to

prov

ide

mai

nten

ance

, tec

hnic

al a

ssis

tanc

e, o

pera

tion,

and

upg

radi

ng te

chni

cal

infr

astru

ctur

e.

70.0

23.3

6.7

11.

Star

t enc

oura

gem

ent a

nd in

cent

ives

syst

em su

ch a

s giv

ing

Virt

ual D

igita

l Cre

ativ

ity A

war

d.73

.326

.7-

12.

Avai

labi

lity

of fe

atur

e th

at e

nabl

es a

nsw

erin

g le

arne

rs’ q

uest

ions

on

issu

es re

late

d to

virt

ual c

ours

e.

76.7

23.3

-

13.

Avai

labi

lity

of h

elp

and

guid

ance

in a

ll V

LE p

ages

.66

.733

.3-

14.

Avai

labi

lity

of a

ssis

ting

tool

s in

virtu

al c

ours

e su

ch a

s mul

ti-la

ngua

ge d

ictio

nary

, dat

abas

es, c

alen

dar,

stat

istic

al

softw

are,

and

tran

slat

or.

63.3

36.7

-

15.

Giv

e le

arne

rs a

spac

e to

pub

lish

idea

s and

sugg

estio

ns to

thei

r tea

cher

s and

oth

er le

arne

rs w

ithou

t the

use

of e

mai

l.70

.030

.0-

16.

Avai

labi

lity

of c

olle

ctiv

e co

mm

unic

atio

n to

ols a

mon

g le

arne

rs in

VLE

.73

.323

.33.

3

17.

Avai

labi

lity

of c

onta

ctin

g te

chni

cal s

uppo

rt fo

r hel

p w

hen

acce

ssin

g th

e co

urse

.73

.323

.33.

3

18.

Dire

ctio

n an

d gu

idan

ce p

rogr

ams f

or n

ew le

arne

rs to

ens

ure

full

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

VLE

.70

.030

.0-

19.

Con

tinuo

usly

trac

k se

rvic

es p

rovi

ded

to le

arne

rs in

VLE

thro

ugh

lear

ners

satis

fact

ion

surv

ey.

80.0

20.0

-

20.

Secu

rity

softw

are

to p

rote

ct le

arne

rs’ fi

les,

reco

rds,

and

resu

lts.

80.0

16.7

3.3

21.

Rec

eive

feed

back

from

lear

ners

on

thei

r virt

ual l

earn

ing

expe

rienc

e at

the

end

of th

e co

urse

.83

.313

.33.

3

22.

Avai

labi

lity

of e

duca

tiona

l sup

port

for l

earn

ers p

rovi

ded

by te

ache

rs in

VLE

.76

.720

.03.

3

23.

Prov

ide

train

ing

cour

se fo

r lea

rner

s on

how

to u

se V

LE a

nd it

s adv

anta

ges a

nd c

hara

cter

istic

s bef

ore

com

men

cing

te

achi

ng a

ctiv

ities

. 80

.020

.0

3.3

Fac

ulty

Sup

port

1.

C

ontin

uous

pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t tra

inin

g co

urse

s and

pro

vide

s pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t res

ourc

es fo

r fa

culty

mem

bers

wor

king

with

VLE

. Tha

t is t

o en

sure

effi

cien

t use

of V

LE a

nd v

irtua

l lea

rnin

g pr

ogra

ms.

80.0

20.0

-

2.

Avai

labi

lity

of sp

ecifi

catio

ns o

f IC

T an

d pe

dago

gica

l ski

lls re

quire

d fo

r fun

ctio

ning

with

in V

LE a

nd tr

ain

facu

lty

mem

bers

on

them

.76

.723

.3-

3.

Star

t enc

oura

gem

ent a

nd in

cent

ive

syst

em to

enc

oura

ge fa

culty

in c

ontri

butin

g an

d pa

rtici

patin

g in

dev

elop

ing

VLE

.80

.020

.0-




4.

Mea

sure

VLE

per

form

ance

and

use

ben

chm

arki

ng to

com

pare

it w

ith o

ther

VLE

’s.

73.3

26.7

-

5.

Star

t a sc

hem

e th

at fo

cus o

n im

prov

ing

facu

lty m

embe

rs’ t

alen

ts, w

iden

thei

r hor

izon

s, an

d im

prov

e th

eir

effic

ienc

y in

the

field

of v

irtua

l lea

rnin

g.73

.326

.7-

6.

Dev

elop

trai

ning

cou

rses

for f

acul

ty o

n us

ing

VLE

mat

eria

ls a

nd re

sour

ces.

76.7

23.3

-

7.

Dev

elop

crit

eria

and

indi

cato

rs o

f fac

ulty

tech

nica

l per

form

ance

in V

LE.

73.3

26.7

-

8.

Dev

elop

pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t pro

gram

s tha

t foc

us o

n ur

gent

pro

blem

s of V

LE a

nd a

re d

irect

ly re

late

d to

fa

culty

nee

ds.

80.0

20.0

-

9.

Ado

pt e

ffect

ive

asse

ssin

g m

etho

ds a

nd p

rovi

de in

form

ativ

e fe

edba

ck to

impr

ove

facu

lty p

erfo

rman

ce.

73.3

26.7

-

10.

Dev

elop

facu

lty p

erfo

rman

ce th

roug

h w

orks

hops

to im

prov

e al

l com

pone

nts o

f VLE

.73

.326

.7-

11.

Prov

ide

reso

urce

s, re

fere

nces

, dire

ctio

ns a

nd g

uida

nce

on e

ffect

ive

use

of th

e w

eb in

teac

hing

virt

ual c

ours

es.

63.3

33.3

3.3

12.

Use

ince

ntiv

es to

ass

ist t

he p

roce

ss o

f inc

reas

ing

qual

ity p

erfo

rman

ce.

70.0

20.0

10.0

13.

Supp

ort f

acul

ty m

embe

rs w

ith tu

tors

to a

ssis

t the

m in

VLE

act

iviti

es.

63.3

30.0

6.7

14.

Facu

lty a

re o

ffere

d a

chan

ce to

exp

ress

thei

r opi

nion

s on

purc

hasi

ng a

nd re

plac

ing

ICT

plan

s.73

.326

.7-

15.

Ann

ual b

udge

t for

trai

ning

facu

lty a

nd o

ther

VLE

mem

ber.

80.0

20.0

-

3.4

Tec

hnic

al S

uppo

rt

1.

Prov

ide

suffi

cien

t tec

hnic

al a

nd m

aint

enan

ce su

ppor

t to

keep

VLE

in st

ate

of re

adin

ess t

o pe

rfor

m o

pera

tions

and

ac

hiev

e ai

ms.

16.7

-

2.

Avai

labi

lity

of sp

ecia

l sec

urity

mea

sure

s i.e

. lea

rner

PIN

num

ber a

nd b

acku

p in

cas

e of

syst

em fa

ilure

.76

.723

.3-

3.

Prov

isio

n of

hum

an, a

dmin

istra

tive,

and

tech

nica

l res

ourc

es to

pro

vide

supp

ortin

g se

rvic

es. A

ccep

tabl

e ra

tio is

one

fa

culty

to 2

5 le

arne

rs.

76.7

23.3

-

4.

Trai

n an

d de

velo

p ad

min

istra

tive

and

tech

nica

l hum

an re

sour

ces t

o en

sure

and

impr

ove

qual

ity o

f per

form

ance

in

VLE

.76

.720

.03.

3

5.

Prov

isio

ns o

f virt

ual l

ibra

ries e

quip

ped

acco

rdin

g to

qua

lity

in v

irtua

l lea

rnin

g st

anda

rds.

76.7

23.3

-

6.

Prov

isio

n of

virt

ual l

abs a

nd so

ftwar

e ac

cord

ing

to q

ualit

y in

virt

ual l

earn

ing

stan

dard

s.80

.020

.0-

7.

Prov

isio

n of

suita

ble

finan

cial

supp

ort t

o op

erat

e V

LE a

nd m

aint

ain

qual

ity.

76.7

23.3

-

8.

Avai

labi

lity

of a

dmin

istra

tive

and

tech

nica

l tea

m re

spon

sibl

e fo

r mai

nten

ance

and

tech

nica

l sup

port

of h

ardw

are

and

netw

orks

in V

LE.

76.7

23.3

-



Mai

n St

anda

rdIn

dica

tor

Deg

ree

of Im

porta

nce

%

32

1

4. Authority and Safety Standards

1. C

reat

e se

curit

y sy

stem

that

pro

tect

s sec

recy

of i

nfor

mat

ion.

80.0

20.0

-

2.

Hyp

erlin

ks li

nk to

safe

site

s tha

t do

not c

reat

e pr

oble

ms f

or o

pera

ting

syst

em a

nd b

row

ser.

83.3

16.7

-

3.

Secu

re sy

stem

that

iden

tifies

eac

h us

er to

pro

tect

con

fiden

tial i

nfor

mat

ion

from

man

ipul

atio

n an

d el

ectro

nic

espi

onag

e.80

.020

.0-

4.

Ask

for i

nfor

mat

ion

that

dis

tingu

ishe

s eac

h le

arne

r fro

m th

e ot

her.

83.3

16.7

-

5.

Mod

ifyin

g in

form

atio

n in

virt

ual c

ours

es is

not

per

mitt

ed w

ithou

t ent

erin

g le

arne

r’s u

niqu

e PI

N n

umbe

r.83

.316

.7-

6.

Virt

ual c

ours

e is

free

of v

iruse

s and

spyw

are.

83.3

16.7

-

7.

Prov

isio

n of

regu

latio

ns a

nd se

curit

y pr

otec

tion

for m

ater

ials

on

sync

hron

ous n

etw

orks

.73

.323

.33.

3

8.

Avai

labi

lity

of in

form

atio

n of

seni

or m

anag

emen

t with

job

title

for a

cade

mic

s.66

.726

.76.

7

9.

Prov

isio

n of

info

rmat

ion

on c

opyr

ight

ed m

ater

ials

in V

LE.

73.3

26.7

-

10.

Prov

isio

n of

inst

ruct

iona

l con

tent

des

igne

rs’ e

mai

ls to

faci

litat

e in

tera

ctio

n w

ith th

em.

73.3

23.3

3.3

11.

Iden

tify

the

nam

e of

the

body

or e

duca

tiona

l ins

titut

ion

that

pro

vide

s VLE

.63

.330

.06.

7

12.

List

the

nam

es o

f act

ion

team

incl

udin

g pr

ogra

mm

ers,

tech

nici

ans,

engi

neer

s, an

d ex

perts

and

stat

e th

eir

qual

ifica

tions

and

pre

viou

s exp

erie

nces

. 66

.723

.310

.0

13.

Pref

eren

ce re

sour

ces,

refe

renc

es, m

odel

s, an

d de

sign

s tha

t hav

e be

en u

sed

in d

esig

ning

VLE

.70

.026

.73.

3

14.

Ass

ess a

nd a

ccre

dit V

LE b

y ot

her a

genc

ies r

espo

nsib

le fo

r qua

lity

and

educ

atio

nal a

ccre

dita

tion.

73.3

26.7

-

15.

Con

side

r cop

yrig

ht, d

esig

n, a

nd in

telle

ctua

l pro

perty

law

s.76

.720

.03.

3

16.

Form

suita

ble

law

s and

pol

icie

s to

prot

ect c

opyr

ight

s and

inte

llect

ual p

rope

rty o

f ins

truct

iona

l con

tent

pro

duce

d by

facu

lty.

80.0

20.0

-



Mai

n St

anda

rdIn

dica

tor

Deg

ree

of Im

port

ance

%

32

1

5. Improvement and Review Standards

1. T

here

are

regu

latio

ns a

nd su

itabl

e ac

tiviti

es to

ass

ess a

nd re

view

VLE

des

ign.

83.3

13.3

3.3

2.

Ther

e is

ass

essm

ent p

roce

ss a

nd in

tern

al a

udit

for V

LE.

80.0

20.0

-

3.

Ther

e is

ext

erna

l aud

it fo

r e-le

arni

ng p

rogr

ams.

70.0

30.0

-

4.

Lear

ners

are

ask

ed fo

r the

ir op

inio

ns d

urin

g V

LE re

view

pro

cess

.66

.730

.03.

3

5.

Ther

e ar

e in

dica

tors

of d

evel

opm

ent a

nd im

prov

emen

t in

VLE

in li

ght o

f ass

essm

ent a

nd re

view

resu

lts.

66.7

30.0

3.3

6.

Ther

e ar

e in

dica

tors

of p

erio

dica

l ass

essm

ent a

nd re

view

for V

LE p

rogr

ams,

the

resu

lts a

re u

sed

for i

mpr

ovin

g V

LE.

73.3

20.0

6.7

7.

Aca

dem

ic a

nd a

dmin

istra

tive

depa

rtmen

t in

the

educ

atio

nal i

nstit

utio

n (in

clud

ing

seni

or m

anag

emen

t) pa

rtici

pate

in

impr

ovem

ents

and

qua

lity

cont

rol i

n V

LE.

80.0

20.0

-

8.

Ass

essm

ent r

epor

ts o

ffer a

hol

istic

vie

w o

n V

LE p

erfo

rman

ce in

clud

ing

all c

ompo

nent

s, pr

ogra

ms,

and

outp

ut.

They

defi

ne st

reng

ths a

nd w

eakn

esse

s and

impr

ovem

ent s

trate

gies

. 80

.020

.0-

9.

VLE

ass

essm

ent d

epen

ds o

n in

put,

proc

ess,

and

outp

ut w

ith sp

ecia

l foc

us o

n ou

tput

qua

lity.

73.3

23.3

3.3

10.

Adm

inis

tratio

n de

sign

pro

cess

es th

at e

nsur

e ac

hiev

ing

acce

ptab

le st

anda

rds a

s wel

l as e

nsur

e co

ntin

uing

im

prov

emen

t in

perf

orm

ance

.70

.030

.0-

11.

Pres

ence

of a

pro

gram

that

stud

ies a

nd a

naly

ses V

LE a

nd in

form

seni

or m

anag

emen

t sta

ff ab

out t

he q

ualit

y of

im

porta

nt a

spec

ts in

VLE

.70

.026

.73.

3

12.

Avai

labi

lity

of im

porta

nt to

ols s

uch

as q

uest

ionn

aire

s to

unde

rtake

a su

rvey

on

qual

ity o

f VLE

par

ts a

nd

com

pone

nts,

in a

spec

ific

time

fram

e fo

r rev

iew

s, as

sess

men

t, an

d re

sults

. 80

.016

.73.

3

13.

Pres

ence

of p

erio

dic

asse

ssm

ent p

roce

dure

s for

VLE

(int

erna

l and

ext

erna

l) fo

r aca

dem

ic a

ccre

dita

tion

purp

oses

.70

.030

.0-

14.

Form

Qua

lity

Impr

ovem

ent T

eam

with

mem

bers

from

diff

eren

t dep

artm

ents

to re

view

and

impr

ove

VLE

to e

nsur

e qu

ality

.73

.323

.33.

3



Mai

n St

anda

rdIn

dica

tor

Deg

ree

of Im

port

ance

%

32

1

6. VLE Cost-Effectiveness Standards

1.

Find

low

pric

es fo

r Int

erne

t con

nect

ion

by m

akin

g us

e of

com

petit

ion

betw

een

Inte

rnet

pro

vidi

ng c

ompa

nies

.73

.323

.33.

3

2.

Incr

ease

effi

cien

cy a

nd c

ompe

tenc

y of

VLE

and

redu

ce d

rop

out r

ate.

73.3

23.3

3.3

3.

The

retu

rn v

alue

of d

esig

ning

and

pub

lishi

ng a

cou

rse

is c

omm

ensu

rate

with

the

cost

.70

.026

.73.

3

4.

Ther

e is

no

fee

for u

sing

virt

ual c

ours

es.

70.0

20.0

10.0

5.

Acc

ess

to w

ebsi

tes

and

reso

urce

s re

late

d to

the

cour

se is

free

.70

.020

.010

.0

6.

Poss

ibili

ty to

upl

oad

free

reso

urce

s an

d as

sist

ing

prog

ram

s th

at v

irtua

l cou

rse

files

nee

ds to

ope

rate

.73

.323

.33.

3

7.

Spec

ialis

ed d

epar

tmen

t tak

e on

the

resp

onsi

bilit

y of

adm

inis

tratin

g an

d su

perv

isin

g th

e bu

dget

and

acc

ount

s fo

r VLE

.70

.030

.0-

8.

Form

a c

omm

ittee

to re

view

law

s, re

gula

tions

, aca

dem

ic, a

dmin

istra

tive

and

finan

cial

pro

cedu

res

in V

LE.

76.7

23.3

-

9.

Ava

ilabi

lity

of a

ccou

ntin

g an

d fin

anci

al s

yste

m to

ens

ure

qual

ity in

VLE

.86

.713

.3-

10.

Exte

nt to

whi

ch c

osts

and

exp

ense

s of

VLE

are

equ

al to

thos

e of

oth

er A

rab

and

Inte

rnat

iona

l virt

ual

univ

ersi

ties.

80.0

16.7

3.3

11.

Exte

nt to

whi

ch a

ll co

mpo

nent

s of

VLE

inve

st it

s fin

anci

al, m

ater

ial,

and

hum

an re

sour

ces.

83.3

16.7

-

Documents

Towards Identifying Quality Assurance Standards in … PAPERS/JSSH Vol. 20 (3...Towards Identifying Quality Assurance Standards in Virtual Learning Environments for Science Education