Thursday Online Presentation Session 2

Higher Education Session Chair: Paul Corrigan

11:25-11:50

67678 | Hazards of Academic Administrators’ Penchant for (Over)-Standardization of Academic Legal Research Outputs

Md. Rizwanul Islam, North South University, Bangladesh

To compare and classify objects on the basis of quantitative indicators is nothing new. Bereft of any direct subjectivity, quantified method of assessing quality may be a useful tool to avoid or reduce any bias or other forms of human frailties in the assessment. However, the effort to assess the quality of academic outputs in quantifiable metrics is perhaps a relatively new but increasingly common phenomenon. This article would argue that while some higher education rankings can serve some laudable purposes such as sending some signals to aspiring students and other stakeholders and also giving institutions an opportunity for introspecting its affairs, the ranking of research outputs on quantified metrics alone is an inherently hazardous task. Rankings may be used as an indicium of quality; however, it cannot and should not be the sole proxy for assessment of the quality of scholarly outputs.

11:50-12:15

67372 | The Tiger CLIP Pilot

Paul Corrigan, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

The number of universities using English as the Medium of Instruction (EMI) grew in recent decades but students at them face challenges using English for Academic Purposes (EAP). This presentation describes a study to pinpoint EAP challenges for top students (denoted as “Tigers”) in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) at City University of Hong Kong (CityU) and the launch of a pilot Communication and Language Improvement Program (CLIP) to address those challenges.

The author used Evans and Greene’s survey instrument to identify EAP problem areas; 275 Tiger students responded. The CityU survey results showed that 15% to 38% of Tiger students found particular types of EAP "Difficult" or "Very Difficult". A pilot program (i.e., the Tiger CLIP pilot) was then designed and launched to engage those students in peer-to-peer, informal tutoring with students from the Department of English. The full range of EAP tasks identified by Tiger students through the survey as “Difficult” or “Very Difficult,” as well as the lessons of the Tiger CLIP pilot, will be discussed. Audience members will be encouraged to share observations on the relevance of the results and applicability of the Tiger CLIP pilot at their own institutions.

12:15-12:40

66265

| Quality Online Course Sharing: Inter-institutional Collaboration to Meet Students’ Just-in-time Needs to Succeed and Graduate

Yaping Gao, Quality Matters, United States

Nathan Green, Acadeum, United States

The need for collaboration in online education has never been greater across higher education. Institutions have come together across the USA to form various course-sharing consortia to meet students’ just-in-time needs to continue their academic progress and successfully complete their study to graduate. Now, these efforts are scaling globally, creating additional challenges around access, affordability, and quality. Not all online courses are created equal and the continued expansion of collaboration begs the central and crucial question: How do we ensure quality learning experiences in the much-needed and rapidly growing practice of online course sharing? The presenter(s) of this session will 1) share a timely and impactful initiative, between a global leading organization in quality assurance and a US-based course sharing company, to develop quality standards and guidelines for online course sharing by engaging experts in the community, 2) invite participants for feedback on the initial draft standards and guidelines, and 3) encourage institutions to adapt and apply the course sharing standards and guidelines for continuous improvement for digital learning at their own institutions even if course sharing is not currently needed or applicable.