News | about | Search Language: DE | EN | FR
 
 Controlled Vocabulary: Quality Selection Policy

European Treasury Browser
About
ETB Handbook
Interoperability
Multilinguality and Thesaurus
News
Outputs and Documents
Quality
•  Controlled Vocabulary: Quality Selection Policy
•  Forum on Quality - Week I
•  Forum on Quality - Week I - Archive
•  Forum on Quality - Week II
•  Forum on Quality - Week II - Archive
•  Forum on Quality - Week III -Archive
•  Forum on Quality - Week III -Summary
•  Forum on Quality - Week III: Recommendation on Quality Assurance and Selection of resources for the ETB-network
•  Rationale behind the quality management
•  Recommendations on quality criteria
Search this area

Advanced Search

Print this page!
Tell a friend!
To get a reminder when this page is updated, please enter your email address here:



To assure the quality of the resources in the ETB-network, ETB will apply a Quality Selection Policy vocabulary to tell users about the quality assessment the local repository has.

The Quality Selection Policy is also translated in six languages that are avaiblable only in the Word document.
Download the word.doc from here http://www.eun.org/etb/voc/cld_quality.pdf'.

Quality Selection Policy

1. Do you have a Selection Policy for the material included in your collections?

Yes

Occasionally

No

If you answered “No”, it is not necessary to answer the following questions.
You shall only describe the procedure you follow for the selection of the material to be included in your collection/s.

2.1 Does your Selection Policy include a Quality Statement?

- National criteria note the URL:

- ETB recommendations

- other, please specify and note URL:

2.2 Does your Selection Policy include an Internet Safety Statement?

- National criteria note the URL:

- Internet Content Rating Association ICRA Labelling,
URL: http://www.icra.org/….

- other, please specify and note URL:

- no

3.1 Who is responsible for the Quality policy?

- teachers' association

- governmental agency

- regional or local school

- pedagogical organisation /network

- national association

- content editors/ subject specialists

- other (please specify)

3.2 Who is doing the actual selection of resources to be included in the collection?

- teacher/ teachers' association

- content editors/subject specialists

- librarian/-s

- webmaster

- national association

- governmental agency

- robot harvester

- other (please specify)

4. How often are the hyperlinks reviewed?

-daily

-weekly

-monthly

-other pls. specify

-never

5. How often does a human review the content of the resources?

- weekly

- monthly

- ongoing process

- other pls. specify

- never

The following is an example of Quality Selection Policy metadata record that is available for an end-user:

Quality Selection Policy: No

Or

Quality Selection Policy: Yes, URL:http://quality.eun.org
Internet Safety Statement: URL: http://www.icra.org/...
Policy responsible: pedagogical network
Selection body: teachers' association
Hyperlinks reviewed: monthly
Content reviewed: ongoing process


II. TWO SETS OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Quality of resources is a key factor in ETB. There are recommendations on quality assurance procedures provided by the workpackage that deals with the Quality Assurance of the project. These recommendations are aiming at two different groups: there are guidelines on quality processes and recommendations for (1) teachers and (2) repository managers.

The First Set of Recommendations aims at teachers working in the educational settings using web-based material. On one hand the recommendations deal with the aspects educators must keep in mind while creating the content of their own material. In other words these recommendations are focused on the process of developing the resources. The recommendations are also to consider when a teacher or a student wants to submit material to the ETB-network through the EUN native repository.

On the other hand these recommendations are good to keep in mind when searching and selecting already existing material or products from the Web. The recommendations on the developing process of material are much in agreement with GEM's indications and with DESIRE. This list will be further developed in the future.

-          Appropriateness: the resource should contain information for the intended learners' level; the resource should use an appropriate and suitable vocabulary, language or concepts, avoid mistakes or stereotyping.

-          Clarity: information should provide a clear tie between the purpose (goals, objectives) and the content and procedures suggested. Correlation should be comprehensive and obvious. Redundancy is usually unwelcome and isolated activities without a relationship are superfluous.

-          Completeness: the resource should be complete, i.e., offer all essential information and elements, as well as inclusion of such components as self-contained activities, materials required, prerequisites, information for obtaining related resources, assessment criteria, links to quality indicators and standards. The resource should offer wide and in-depth information related to the topic.

-          Motivation: the resource should achieve the active engagement of the learner and be interesting, innovative and appealing, build on prior knowledge and skills, and promote relevant action on the part of the learner.

-          Organisation: the resource should be easy to use and logically sequenced, with each segment of the resource related to other segments. It should flow in an orderly manner, using organising tools (i.e. headings, a map, etc.) and avoiding use of unrelated elements that are potentially ineffective or overpowering; it should provide for references, bibliographies and other supporting materials available for the users.

 

The Second Set of Recommendations is for repository owners, i.e. managers, curators and/or administrators of an educational server. This group is strictly responsible for submitting and administrating the metadata records circulating on the network. The recommendations will deal with issues that matter for the network; i.e. what kind of material is wanted for the ETB-network.

Every joining repository carries out documentation processing (source selection, documentary processing, information processing and diffusion) in relation to its target users. However, after populating the ETB-network, it is emphasised that repositories should think of added European value of their resources to the audience when submitting the records of resources and collections to the network. Quality, European level and good practice of resources are a priority issue of ETB rather than sheer numbers.

The following check-list have been established to guide the selection of material to the ETB-network highlighting the ETB-quality factors.

Quality Selection

ETB recommendations as regards the lifecycle
and organisation of the resources

Tick boxes:

Yes

No

Not
considered

a) Information on Collection/ Repository

  • Are there stated criteria for inclusion of a new learning resource to the collection?
  • Has the learning resources been filtered, e.g. peer-reviewed?
  • Is the subject matter of sites linked to the resources important?
  • Does the resource have an added European value?
     

b) Information provider/ Source

  • Is the resource attributed to a reputable author or organization, and is that information stated?
  • Are commercial resources acceptable?
  • Are private resources acceptable?
     

c) Validity

  • Does the information appear to be well researched, e.g. are references and contact data given?
  • Is the content of the resource verifiable, e.g. can you cross check the information?
  • Is there information that has a limited period of use?
  • Is information is current and up-to-date?
  • Are all the pages dated with the last revision date?
  • Are you able to check the accuracy of the information?
     

d) Information Coverage

  • Are resources that contain advertising acceptable?
  • Is biased information e.g. are opinions and ideologies acceptable?
  • Are there subjects which could be censored, e.g. for ethical reasons (please specify)?
  • Does the resource contain substantive information?
  • Could the resource be used in another European language/cultural/learning environment?
     

e) Composition and Organisation

  • Is the information clearly organised, i.e. arranged logically and consistently?
  •   Is the resource organised by the needs of intended users' level?
  • Are key words given to indicate the information content?
  • Is it important that the grammar and spelling is accurate?
     

f) Evaluation of the Medium

  • Are you considering the resources' ease of navigation/browsing/searching?
  • Are you considering the resources' provision of user support, e.g. online help, documentation?
  • Are you considering the resources appearance for different users, e.g. valid HTML, older browsers?
     

The concept of quality within the ETB-network is described in a very general way. They will be further developed and completed in the document D 3.2 Recommendation on Quality Assurance and Selection of resources for the ETB network, which will come out in the beginning of 2002.

More information on the quality in ETB is found from:

-          http://etb.eun.org

-          ETB Quality-issues on the website: http://www.en.eun.org/eun.org2/eun/en/etb/sub_area_frame.cfm?sa=439&row=1

-          ETB datamodel http://www.en.eun.org/eun.org2/goto.cfm?did= 5874

-          ETB survey on quality-issues http://www.en.eun.org/eun.org2/goto.cfm?did= 2347

Other links:

- http://www.iso.org
- http://www.cenorm.be/isss/Workshop/lt
- http://www.desire.org
-
http://www.geminfo.org/

Information:
Author: Riina Vuorikari
Web Editor: Riina Vuorikari
Published: Tuesday, 6 Nov 2001
Last changed: Saturday, 28 Sep 2002
Keywords: etb, quality, standards, recommendations, interoperability