The timing of this blog assignment is interesting. This week, I was preforming the initial Quality Assurance Review on a course for one of our colleges. The SME on this development is a remote faculty member who has never developed a course for our university before. As I started my review, I found the sequencing of and context provided for several assignments to be confusing and/or unclear – so much so that I was unable to continue performing the review without obtaining clarification from the SME regarding the intended meaning of these components. |
I remained calm, analyzed the situation, and made a solid case for my new requirements (Greer, 2010, p. 36).
I then approached my associate director as well as the program chair for the college with my exact concerns as they related to our schedule and the academic quality of the finished product (Greer, 2010, p. 36).
- He and I could work together and resolve the issues in a short period of time; or
- I could request a phone conference with the faculty member so she and I could work together to resolve the issues.
The program chair and I agreed that the latter option would be best because (1) it wouldn’t pull him away from other pressing matters, and (2) it would provide an opportunity for the faculty member to learn best practices as they relate to our development process.
The program chair sent a preliminary email to the faculty member (marked “high importance” and alerting her to expect my conference request). I sent a copy of the notes I’d made so far to the faculty member when I requested the conference so she would be aware of the key issues I’d cited and needed clarification on in order to move forward.
An hour after I sent my email, the faculty member and I were on the phone reviewing and discussing the course. When we finished our conversation (another hour later), I had a clear picture of how to proceed without altering her intended meaning of and goals for the assignments.
Shortly thereafter, I composed a “thank you” email to the faculty member and sent a summary email to my associate director and the program chair (Greer, 2010, p. 36). In my summary email, I noted that no change in the project schedule was indicated (i.e., the promised deadline would still be met).
Finally, I forwarded the faculty member’s response to my thank you email, in which she expressed her appreciation me for taking the time to walk her through the process and offered to answer any further questions I may have regarding the course as I move through the rest of my initial review, to my associate director and the program chair.
Lynch, M. M., & Roecker, J. (2007). Project managing e-learning: A handbook for successful design, delivery, and management. London: Routledge. Copyright by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. Reprinted by permission of Taylor & Francis Group, LLC via the Copyright Clearance Center.