Colorado Online @ takes Quality Matters (QM) as a foundation for effective, research-based online course design. Building on QM, Colorado Online @ has established a set of QM+ quality course design standards that integrate best practices of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), as well as Universal Design for Learning (UDL).
A list of QM+ standards follows (excluding the original QM standards) with brief rationales to assist in interpreting and applying each QM+ standard. Refer to the Quality Matters Higher Education Rubric, Seventh Edition, for annotations of QM’s foundational specific review standards.
| QM+ Standard | Standard Description | Brief Rationale |
| General Standard 1: Course Overview and Introduction | ||
| 1.4+ | Course policies are written in inclusive, student-centered language, such as using a welcoming or invitational tone in a late policy. | Instructors may provide a range of course policies and expectations. Those policies can promote comprehension of expectations, a positive learning community, and learner persistence in the course when written clearly, in a welcoming tone, and with explanation of the purpose for each policy to promote an effective learning environment. |
| 1.9+ | Learners are provided with multiple opportunities to self-identify preferred names and pronouns and use them throughout the course. | Making space for and respecting identity claims of all persons in the academic space promotes an inclusive learning environment. Learners who are part of communities that consciously use and respect preferred names and pronouns feel more psychologically invested in and positively oriented toward their learning. |
| General Standard 2: Learning Objectives | ||
| 2.1+ | CCNS objectives are accurately represented in the course. | Colorado Online @ courses need to represent accurate course outcomes (or standard competencies) from the Common Course Numbering System. This means that course objectives may or may not represent measurable outcomes. Per QM SRS 2.2, the course must provide measurable module-level objectives when course objectives are not measurable. |
| 2.5+ | The design of the course and module objectives allows learners to engage at multiple cognitive levels. | When a cognitive taxonomy such as Bloom’s is appropriate for a course, instructors determine the suitable cognitive level to attain (QM SRS 2.5) and scaffold module objectives so that learners are able to progress through levels of cognitive engagement that support competency of the ultimate learning goals. |
| General Standard 3: Assessment and Measurement | ||
| 3.2+ | The course grade book is organized logically and aligned to the course grading policy. | A grading policy communicates point distributions and weightings that should be accurately represented in the course grade book. Learners can become confused about how their grades will be calculated when there are discrepancies between the grading policy and the grade book. A logically organized grade book may use assessment categories or a time orientation to allow learners to easily locate and track their grade progress. |
| 3.3+ | Assessment tools such as rubrics and feedback utilize “not yet” language to encourage a growth mindset. | Learner-centered language within assessment interactions can promote learner persistence and growth by focusing on effort and progress toward a learning goal. Rubric criteria and descriptions may use language such as “not yet” to indicate potential to apply instructor and scoring feedback toward future assessments. |
| 3.4a+ | Assessments are suited to the level of the course to ensure equity. | Asking learners to demonstrate skills, knowledge, or competencies above the level of the course can disproportionately favor learners who have access to prior learning experiences or academic and support resources beyond the scope of the institution. A variety of assessments that are suitably aligned to the cognitive engagement necessary (see SRS 2.5+) and outcomes required (see QM SRS 2.2) for the course will provide all learners the opportunity to demonstrate proficiency within the course. |
| 3.4b+ | Assignments are scaffolded where possible, breaking larger assignments into smaller deliverables and providing resources such as templates, examples, and rubrics. | Scaffolding is the process of providing guidance and sequencing to support learner progress toward a complex goal. Diverse learners benefit from designed support structures that enable them to manage progress toward a complex assignment. |
| 3.4c+ | Where possible, choice is built into assessment options (authentic assessment where possible), and all assessment options are web accessible. | Universally designed courses acknowledge that diverse learners may have different needs and strengths related to expressing their learning. When a particular assessment type is not required to fulfill a learning outcome, learners benefit from options that can range from topic choice to modality to process for completing the assessment. Authentic assessment is an inclusive, learner-centered approach that provides opportunities for learners to apply academic concepts to realistic situations. Accessibility in assessment ensures that all learners, no matter their abilities, are presented with options. |
| 3.5a+ | The types and timing of assessments provide learners with multiple opportunities to track their learning progress with timely, learner-centered feedback. | This standard represents a modification to QM SRS 3.5 with the addition of the term “learner-centered.” Instructors may provide insight within course policies and/or assessment instructions related to the pedagogical purpose of and learner responsibility for engaging with and implementing feedback. |
| 3.5b+ | The course exhibits strategies that allow learners to track their own progress, such as providing task lists or checklists. | A universally designed course can support the learner’s self-regulation and executive functioning through a variety of strategies, including checklists, rubrics, reflections, and self-assessments. Instructors may also empower learners to choose the type of feedback they would like to receive. |
| General Standard 4: Instructional Materials | ||
| 4.5a+ | The variety of instructional materials provided in each module allows some degree of student choice, such as meeting learning objectives through text versus aural or visual materials. | Variety of materials can refer to offering different media as well as modalities of learning materials, which can give learners autonomy to choose to experience the materials in ways that best fit their learning needs and learning preferences. In some cases, instructors may be able to offer the same material in alternative formats or modalities (such as giving learners the choice to watch a captioned lecture video or read the transcript). In other cases, the instructor may be able to provide options whereby learners can choose from different genres of materials to meet the same learning objectives (such as providing an infographic to illustrate key points from a complex journal article or asking learners to engage with either a video, a podcast, or a text-based article). |
| 4.5b+ | Instructional materials incorporate open educational resources (OER) where possible. | Marginalized and vulnerable learner demographics are disproportionately impacted by rising textbook costs. Openly-licensed resources or curated resources that do not incur a cost to learners (often referred to as zero-textbook cost, or ZTC, resources) promote equitable access to learning materials for all learners. Quality OER materials are not yet available for all disciplines; this standard encourages instructors to consider OER, ZTC, or other low-cost resources in material selection. |
| 4.5c+ | Instructional materials represent a diversity of perspectives, including historically marginalized voices. | Selecting learning materials to represent multiple perspectives can promote critical thinking and perspective-taking, can better reflect the context of the discipline and learner demographics, and can foster an environment of inclusion and learner persistence when diverse learners recognize that their identities are represented within the discipline. Instructors may incorporate diverse perspectives through topics that the instructional materials address relevant to the learning objectives, through selection of or discussion of scholars, through attention to the speakers represented through the materials, or other strategies. |
| 4.5d+ | Instructional materials exhibit diverse demographic representation that disrupts harmful stereotypes and biases. | Attention to the messaging communicated through learning material selection can significantly impact learners’ sense of belonging and persistence within a course, discipline, or academic program. Choosing examples, scenarios, visual representations, names, and descriptions that invoke diverse cultural and social identities can promote an inclusive learning environment but may also invoke consequences such as stereotype threat, imposter syndrome, marginalization, or exclusion if the choices reinforce biases that have and continue to result in disparate impact and inequitable achievement outcomes. In disciplines where grappling with harmful stereotypes and biases may be necessary to meet learning objectives, it can be important to acknowledge the purpose of such representations and create space for critical thinking and discussion. |
| General Standard 5: Learning Activities and Learner Interaction | ||
| 5.2a+ | Learning activities provide opportunities for interactions that support active learning and meaningful collaborative work. | This standard represents a modification to QM SRS 5.2 with the addition of the phrase “meaningful collaborative work.” Collaborative learning provides a way for learners to work together to learn the course content. Research has shown that collaborative learning develops communication, self-management, and leadership skills among learners. Learners are actively engaged with the content and with other learners when they are able to work collaboratively on learning activities in the course. |
| 5.2b+ | Learning activities provide space for metacognition, such as including reflection. | Metacognition allows learners to think about how they are thinking and learning in order to improve their learning. It is closely related to reflection, which involves asking learners to think back on what they have learned and the meaning that they gained from the learning activity. Providing activities that ask learners to reflect on their learning experiences allows learners to conceptualize how what they have learned informs their thinking and learning going forward. |
| 5.2c+ | The variety of learning activities provided in each module allows some degree of student choice, such as completing a practice quiz, practice worksheet, or guided reading. | Diverse learners may have different needs and strengths related to how they learn. When a particular type of learning activity is not required to fulfill a learning outcome, learners benefit from learning activity options that allow them to choose the type of learning activity that best aligns with their individual learning preferences and/or needs. |
| 5.2d+ | Learning activities are structured to make connections to prior learning to strengthen new knowledge being built and applied. | Learning is improved when learners are able to connect what they are learning in a current course to what they have learned in previous courses, in other current courses, or through life experiences. Being able to see connections between previous knowledge and new content allows learners to connect the new content to existing mental schemata. |
| 5.4a+ | The requirements for learner interaction are clearly stated and do not present unnecessary barriers for learners. | Learners need to know how often they are expected to interact in the class, including how many discussion responses they need to post and what constitutes an acceptable discussion post and response for the course. The interaction requirements should not create a barrier to student success; learners should not be asked to interact more than they need to in order to achieve the course objectives. |
| 5.4b+ | Activity prompts and course policies or expectations invite learners to contribute to building a shared body of knowledge in the course. | Providing discussion prompts and other learning activities that invite learners to share their perspectives, lead activities, source and share resources or examples, explain connections to prior experiences, or to collaborate to construct learning objects for peers allows students to take ownership of what they are learning, conceptualize how they can contribute to what they and their peers are learning in the course, and build a robust learning community. |
| General Standard 6: Course Technology | ||
| 6.2+ | The course provides tools for open communication, such as general discussion forums or video conferencing. | It is important for a universally designed and inclusive course to promote collaboration and community. Selected technologies can directly support community-building learner engagement when they facilitate open communication. A general discussion forum or LMS-based chat tool can enable learners to share general questions or course-relevant resources that can benefit everyone in the learning community. A web conferencing tool integrated into the LMS, such as Webex or Zoom, can provide learners with open access to the instructor or peers for virtual meetings, office hours, or other collaboration purposes. |
| 6.3a+ | Thoughtful and deliberate use of external tools and resources minimizes the need to navigate outside the learning management system, protects learner data privacy, and ensures usability across mobile devices and user ability. | While the learning management system provides a suite of tools intended to fulfill many learner engagement needs in the course, it may be necessary to ask learners to interact with a technology that is external to the LMS for specific purposes. Not all browser-based activities may be compatible with learners using mobile devices. Some external tools may require a download that user devices do not support. External tools that do not require learners to create an account, do not require payment from the learner, and are accessible to a range of mobile devices, assistive technologies, and user abilities can support learner success. It is a learner-centered approach to articulate the relevance and need for the external tool in context of the course objective, topic, and/or purpose of the activity. |
| 6.3b+ | Alternatives are provided for required activities that rely on tools and technologies outside the learning management system. | Due to the barriers external tools and technologies can present to learners, it is important to plan for alternatives so that learners are not excluded from a learning activity or practice opportunity based on ability or access to specific hardware, software, or technical skill that was not indicated as required for the course (see also QM SRS 1.5). |
| General Standard 7: Learner Support | ||
| 7.4+ | Course instructions articulate or link to the institution’s student services and resources that support both learner well-being and academic success. | This standard represents a modification to QM SRS 7.4 with the phrase “support both learner well-being and academic success.” Institutional or campus student services may support academic success in a program by connecting learners to departments that facilitate advising, registration, and financial aid. To support learners more holistically, recognizing that personal experiences and identities impact learners’ engagement with and persistence within their courses and programs, it is beneficial to identify, describe, and point learners toward services and resources that have the intent to support the relationship between well-being, belonging, and academic success. Such services may include counseling and mental health resources, virtual student unions, veteran’s services, affinity groups, and others. |
| General Standard 8: Accessibility and Usability | ||
| 8.1a+ | Course navigation facilitates ease of use, including from mobile devices. | This standard represents a modification to QM SRS 8.1 with the phrase “including from mobile devices.” As more learners access their courses from devices such as smartphones and tablets, it becomes more important to recognize that the learner’s experience of the course will differ from the desktop experience, whether they are accessing the course from a browser-based version of the LMS or from a mobile app such as Brightspace Pulse. Testing the design from a mobile device and asking for learner feedback can help ensure usability across devices. |
| 8.1b+ | The course represents a logical and consistent module organization structure that is as flat as possible, avoiding nested modules. | Consistency in module structure supports universal design by minimizing distractions and cognitive effort expended on navigation rather than academic engagement. While nested modules or folders may be necessary sometimes, learners can become confused and frustrated when they cannot quickly locate needed information, resources, and activities at the top level of a content section. A flat structure supports ease of navigation for all users and particularly those accessing their courses from mobile devices. |
| 8.5+ | The course design ensures accessibility of learning objects and interactive activities. | In addition to accessibility of text (QM SRS 8.3), images (QM SRS 8.4), and multimedia (QM SRS 8.5), an inclusive, universally designed course will ensure that activities built through educational technology (such as H5P, SoftChalk, Articulate, and similar) and through LMS tools (such as quiz questions), which require learners to interact with the technology to successfully complete the activity, adhere to accessibility guidelines including providing options for keyboard navigation and compatibility with assistive technologies. |
| 8.7+ | Course design ensures that tools and technologies selected for use are web accessible. | Vendor accessibility statements provided according to QM SRS 8.7 may disclose lack of accessibility or known accessibility issues of a product. For an inclusive, universally designed course, it is important to select tools and technologies that are, in fact, accessible to users relying on assistive technology to engage with course content and complete course activities. |