Internet Learning Volume 5, Number 1, Fall 2016/Winter 2017 | Page 9

improve our online courses and this was
part of our effort to improve our overall
adult education program. To improve
these online courses, we utilized Quality
Matters™ (QM) standards. QM is a
faculty-centered, peer review process
that is designed to certify the quality of
online and blended courses (Shattuck,
Zimmerman, & Adair, 2014). We had
three objectives: (1) to assess whether
the adult online graduate courses fulfilled
the key components of QM standards;
(2) to assess whether student
evaluations of their adult education
online graduate courses were consistent
with peer instructor evaluations of
those same courses; and (3) to identify
the strengths and weaknesses of the
adult education courses.
Adair and Shattuck (2015) stated,
“Quality Matters (QM) is a belief
statement put to practice and made tangible
as a system of integrated tools and
processes to improve and assure quality
in the structure of online courses. The
process it entails enacts the following:
• A belief that online courses should
reflect in their design what research
has revealed as important for student
learning;
• A belief that instructors best serve
their students and each other
through peer review and feedback
focused on continuous improvement;
and
• A belief that a shared understanding
of quality can support diverse
pathways to meeting standards of
excellence” (p. 159).
Internet Learning
8
Therefore, the primary goals of
Quality Matters are to promote student
learning and to guide continual quality
improvement of online courses. The
review process is a faculty-driven, collegial
peer review (Dietz-Uhler, Fisher,
& Han, 2007).
The QM process was utilized in
this study because it has contributed to
a significant body of research. Shattuck
(2015) provided an extensive literature
review that describes what has been
learned from QM-focused research under
four major themes: Learning Outputs,
Professional Enhancement Outputs,
Organizational Impact and the
Continuous Validation of the QM Rubric
and Processes. This research and
its concomitant themes provided background
for this current research study,
and were particularly useful in identifying
literature dealing with learner
and instructor perceptions of quality
and satisfaction. More specifically, research
by You, Hochberg, Ballard, Xiao,
and Walters (2014) focused on learners’
perceptions concerning whether QM
standards were met in selected online
courses and compared their perceptions
with those of peer reviewers; research
by Ralston-Berg (2014) surveyed
students’ perceptions of online course
design features that indicate quality and
how those results correlated with standards
of quality in the QM Rubric; and
research by Dietz-Uhler et al. (2007)
investigated course completion rates
in courses designed in a way that met
QM standards. In order to validate the
QM standards, it is necessary to listen
to students’ voices about course design
and their learning experiences (Shat-