CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 42Educational Assessment and PedagogyEvaluation of Teaching PracticesManagement Systems and Quality Improvement

Continuous Improvement of the QM Rubric and Review Processes: Scholarship of Integration and Application

Shattuck, Kay, Zimmerman, Whitney Alicia, Adair, Deborah·2014·Internet Learning
DOI 10.18278/il.3.1.3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18278/il.3.1.3

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An internally designed rubric, often based on the Quality Matters (QM) Rubric, is the most common way to measure course quality.

    “Previous research has suggested that an internally designed rubric, often based on the Quality Matters (QM) Rubric, is the most common way to measure course quality (Lenert & Janes, 2017; Shattuck et al., 2014).”

    From Instructional Designers’ Perceptions of Accessible and Inclusive Online Course Design (2024) · cites this paper as Shattuck et al., 2014

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Shattuck, K., Zimmerman, W. A., & Adair, D.
ORCID
Shattuck, Kay
Venue
Internet Learning
Publisher
Policy Studies Organization
Published
2014
ISSN
  • 2325-0577 (ISSN-L)
  • 2325-0585
DOI
10.18278/il.3.1.3
OpenAlex
W1437171973
Cited by
39
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5
FWCI
22.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Internet learning (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Management Systems and Quality Improvement
Keywords
quality assurance review, continuous improvement, scholarship of integration, scholarship of application, online learning quality, higher education quality assurance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review