Spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic, digitally delivered adult education and training (AET) is now mainstream but its rapid expansion presents significant challenges, particularly in the area of quality assurance (QA). Digital AET exists on a continuum with traditional programmes, whether fully online, hybrid or blended with face-to-face instruction, and comprises both synchronous (real-time) and asynchronous (self-paced) learning. It can be more accessible, affordable and flexible than traditional options, catering to the diverse needs of adult learners. This chapter considers what makes digital AET different, and the challenges that providers face in delivering it effectively, covering course design, staff skills, verification of users and assessments, data safeguarding, and maintaining the underlying technical infrastructure. Drawing on experiences from a number of countries, analysed in case studies, it outlines how QA frameworks would need to be updated to reflect these challenges and concludes with recommendations to QA bodies to enable them to strengthen their assessments of digital AET provision.
Quality Matters
Abstract
The digital transformation has revolutionised the landscape of adult education and training (AET), providing unprecedented opportunities for digital learning. This transformation has allowed adult learners to access educational content that fits their schedules and personal circumstances, making lifelong learning more attainable than ever before. The shift towards digital education has been driven by advances in technology, which have facilitated the development of various online platforms and tools that cater to the diverse needs of adult learners. These platforms offer a range of educational experiences, from structured programmes to informal learning resources, enabling learners to engage in continuous professional development and personal enrichment.
Digital education and training is expanding rapidly, with more individuals and institutions embracing online learning modalities (Jütte and Wildemeersch, 2017[1]). This trend is reflected in the significant growth in participation rates across different forms of digital education. For instance, massive open online courses (MOOCs) have become immensely popular, providing access to high-quality educational content from renowned universities and institutions worldwide. The use of online learning management systems has become commonplace in both academic and professional settings, facilitating the delivery and management of educational programmes. Blended learning approaches, which combine online and in‑person instruction, have also gained traction, offering the benefits of both traditional and digital education. Other forms of digital learning, such as synchronous webinars (online events taking place live), asynchronous self-paced modules (where learners follow in their own time) and mobile learning applications, have further diversified the ways in which adult education and training can be delivered.
Digitally delivered AET is now mainstream, as evidenced by growing participation rates. For example, in the European Union, 28% of Internet users aged 16 and older reported taking online programmes or using online learning materials in the preceding three months of 2023, nearly double the 16% reported in 2017 (Eurostat, 2024[2]; Eurostat, 2024[3]). Globally, the COVID-19 pandemic acted as a catalyst for the expansion of online learning, significantly accelerating enrolment rates. Coursera, a prominent online learning platform, saw its number of learners increase from 21 million in 2016 to 71 million in 2020 and further to 92 million in 2021 (World Economic Forum, 2022[4]). This surge in participation highlights the growing acceptance of and reliance on digital education as a viable and effective mode of learning.
The advantages of digital education are numerous and well documented. One of the primary benefits is accessibility. Digital AET eliminates geographical barriers, allowing learners from remote or underserved areas to access high-quality educational content. This is particularly beneficial for adult learners who may have work or family commitments that make attending traditional in-person classes challenging. The flexibility offered by digital learning platforms enables learners to engage with course materials at their own pace and on their own schedule, accommodating different learning styles and personal circumstances. Additionally, digital education can be more cost-effective than traditional education, as it often reduces the need for physical infrastructure and can harness economies of scale to cut costs for learners (European Commission and Ecorys, 2015[5]).
Moreover, digital education can provide a more personalised learning experience. Advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning can tailor educational content to individual learners' needs, preferences and progress. This personalisation can enhance engagement and improve learning outcomes by addressing learners' specific strengths and weaknesses. Interactive and multimedia content, such as videos, simulations and gamified elements, can also enhance the learning experience, making it more engaging and effective. The availability of vast online resources and communities further enriches the learning experience, providing learners with opportunities for collaboration, networking and peer support.
However, the rapid expansion of digital education also presents significant challenges, particularly concerning the assurance of quality. Assessing the quality of digitally provided AET is complex due to the diverse nature of digital platforms and the varying levels of regulation and oversight. Traditional quality assurance (QA) mechanisms may not be directly applicable to digital education, necessitating the development of new standards and guidelines tailored to the digital context.
To address these challenges, robust QA frameworks for digital education need to be developed and implemented. These frameworks should include clear standards and guidelines for curriculum design, delivery methods and assessment practices specific to digital education. QA bodies must establish criteria for online learning providers, ensuring that they meet established benchmarks for quality.
This chapter explores what makes digitally delivered AET different and what this means for ensuring its quality. It starts with an examination of what makes digital AET different from traditional in-person forms of delivery. It then highlights specific challenges related to ensuring the quality of digitally delivered AET and provides some examples of the steps providers have taken to overcome these challenges, drawing on illustrative case studies. Next it outlines how quality assurance agencies and systems can ensure that providers of digital adult education and training implement the proposed solutions, illustrated with further case studies. Finally, it makes recommendations for measures QA agencies should take to assess whether providers of digital AET are adopting best practices, drawing on the insights gained from the analysis of the case studies.
AET has a longstanding tradition in many countries, closely intertwined with the history of distance learning. The shift towards digitally delivered learning is not a radical departure but rather a continuation of established practices. Digital AET is an extension of the distance education tradition that began in the 18th century, with the first known reference being an advertisement by Caleb Phillips on 20 March 1728 in the Boston Gazette, offering weekly lessons for remote learners (Kentnor, 2015[6]). This tradition saw significant expansion in the 1990s. This tradition includes learning through correspondence, television, radio and early computer-based methods, long before the Internet became a prominent educational tool (Kentnor, 2015[6]). The evolution of digital methods has built on these foundations, leveraging modern technology to enhance accessibility and engagement in adult learning.
Moreover, the notion that adult education and training should primarily rely on face-to-face, synchronous instruction runs counter to many principles of effective adult learning or andragogical practice (i.e. the adult learning equivalent of pedagogy). AET should be offered through flexible, tailored learning pathways that allow adults to learn at their own pace, taking into account their prior knowledge, and enable them to take control of their learning process (Knowles, Holton and Swanson, 2011[7]). Digitally delivered AET can often better meet the needs of adults than traditional classroom-based delivery. Adults bring a wealth of life experience and have clear self-perceptions as learners, often seeking education and training that directly relate to their professional or personal goals. Consequently, they prefer programmes that accommodate their busy schedules and emphasise practical application over theory. This preference translates into a demand for learning opportunities that provide greater autonomy.
By adopting digital approaches, providers can offer adults flexible and customised learning pathways, allowing them to learn at their own pace while considering their pre-existing knowledge (Gegenfurtner, Schmidt‐Hertha and Lewis, 2020[8]). Digital learning, unconstrained by the need for physical proximity, allows programmes to be offered that might not be economically feasible in traditional classrooms. It also enables learners to access programmes even if they do not live near brick-and-mortar institutions. Digital AET’s flexibility and ability to provide customised learning pathways stand in contrast to the more rigid structure of traditional in-person AET. For example, online platforms can offer a range of multimedia resources and interactive tools that allow learners to choose the format that best suits their learning style, such as videos, interactive quizzes, and discussion forums.
Thus, digital AET can cater to a diverse range of learning needs and preferences, making education more inclusive and adaptable to the varying circumstances of adult learners. For example, working professionals can take courses that fit their work schedules, or parents can learn during times that fit around childcare responsibilities.
In practice, the distinction between digital and non-digital learning is often not clear cut. Classroom-based AET frequently incorporates digital tools, learning resources, online platforms and assessments, which makes it more accurately described as a hybrid form of learning. Conversely, even fully online education and training programmes often include in-person elements such as intake conversations, assessments and examinations. To clarify these distinctions, it is helpful to refer to the OECD definition of digital education, which encompasses various forms of digitally enhanced teaching and learning. Box 5.1 provides a detailed explanation of the different modalities within digital education. For the sake of brevity, when referring to all of these forms generally, this chapter uses the term digitally delivered AET, or digital AET.
The term “digital education” encompasses all forms of teaching and learning enhanced by the use of digital technologies – whether fully online (both synchronous and asynchronous), hybrid or blended:
Online education: In this type of education, all instruction is delivered online, either synchronously or asynchronously, or a combination of both. Although instruction is delivered at a distance, learners may have an opportunity to meet in person with peers or instructors or to make use of on-campus facilities and learning materials. It is different from “distance education”, which is the term used to describe all technologies in which learner and instructor are physically separated.
Hybrid education: This type of education relies on a mix of online and face-to-face instruction, with the online components taking place synchronously, asynchronously or as a combination of both. In contrast to blended education, hybrid education uses online instruction to replace and thus reduce the frequency of in-person instruction.
Blended education: In this type of education, instruction takes place fully in person and is blended with and complemented by online materials and activities. In blended programmes, instruction may make use of a virtual learning environment / learning management system, online open educational resources, digital adaptive learning software, simulations, or gaming.
A range of digital tools, software, and learning resources can be used for education provided through all modes of delivery. The focus of this report is on digital technologies used by educators and students in the process of teaching and learning, rather than the other functions for which digital technologies are used by educational institutions (e.g. operational and business processes, resource management, and research activity).
Source: OECD (2023[9]), Shaping Digital Education: Enabling Factors for Quality, Equity and Efficiency, https://doi.org/10.1787/bac4dc9f-en.
Furthermore, although distinctions are often made between digital and non-digital AET based on their whether they are synchronous (real-time) or asynchronous (self-paced), these categories are also not always clear-cut. Synchronous delivery involves real-time engagement, whether in-person or on line through web conferencing tools, facilitated by an instructor, and structured for active interaction in manageable time increments. Asynchronous participation allows learners to engage from any location at any time, fostering self-directed learning, active interaction and manageable content consumption at their own pace (Phillips and St.Croix, 2021[10]). In practice, most educational programmes, whether online or face-to-face, incorporate a mix of both synchronous and asynchronous delivery methods. The integration of various delivery methods highlights the flexibility and adaptability of modern AET, catering to diverse learner needs and preferences.
Figure 5.1 illustrates how the different concepts (synchronous-asynchronous, virtual-physical space) relate to each other. This integration of various delivery methods highlights the flexibility and adaptability of modern AET, catering to diverse learner needs and preferences.
The inherent differences between digital and non-digital AET, such as the delivery methods, the use of technology, and the level of flexibility, affect how quality is assured. Traditional external quality assurance systems, designed for in-person education, may not adequately address the unique aspects of digital AET. These differences mean QA frameworks need to be adjusted to ensure that digitally delivered AET maintains high standards of educational quality and effectiveness.
This section identifies several challenges related to ensuring the quality of digitally delivered AET and provides examples of the steps providers have taken to overcome these challenges. These challenges are: i) ensuring instructional quality and effectiveness; ii) ensuring providers have adequately trained and competent staff; iii) authenticating learners and learning assessments; iv) safeguarding data and personal privacy; and v) ensuring adequate infrastructure and technical support (Figure 5.2). In response to these challenges, AET providers have developed a wide range of innovations to ensure learners receive high-quality learning experiences.
Ensuring the quality and effectiveness of course design
Ensuring the quality and effectiveness of course design is essential for any AET programme, regardless of the delivery method. However, digital delivery presents unique challenges in this area. Effective digital course design and pedagogy must integrate evidence-based practices, such as active learning and interactive content, to enhance outcomes. It is also crucial to align the content of digital courses with specific learning objectives to maintain coherence and ensure that the material is relevant and targeted.
Engaging learners in digital formats involves using interactive elements like quizzes, discussion forums and collaborative projects. A mix of synchronous and asynchronous interactions allows digital programmes to cater to different learning preferences and schedules. Clear digital learning pathways, effective online guidance and regular feedback are vital for supporting learners and monitoring progress. This multifaceted approach highlights the complexities of digital education but is necessary to create an effective and inclusive learning environment.
Course design
Incorporating evidence-based teaching practices is crucial for effective digital AET. Implementing teaching methods that have been empirically validated through numerous studies and rigorous academic research can significantly improve learning outcomes. Active learning strategies, for instance, involve engaging students through activities and discussions rather than passive listening (Freeman et al., 2014[11]). Implementing such strategies in digital AET involves creating interactive content and providing real-time feedback to learners. For example, the University of Queensland offers active learning components like interactive simulations and real-time quizzes in their online programmes to enhance student engagement and comprehension (University of Queensland, 2020[12]).
Ensuring that the content of the course is aligned with its learning objectives and intended outcomes is also fundamental to effective digitally delivered AET. Each lesson should be designed to meet specific, measurable outcomes, ensuring that all content supports these goals (Biggs and Tang, 2011[13]). This alignment maintains course coherence and provides adult learners with a clear roadmap of their expected learning achievements.
Learner engagement and interaction
It is also important to use varied instructional materials to cater to different learning styles. Adult learners have diverse backgrounds and learning preferences. To accommodate this diversity, digital programmes should use a variety of instructional materials, including videos, readings, simulations and interactive activities (Mayer, 2014[14]). This approach ensures that learners can engage with the material in ways that best suit their individual learning styles. Platforms like Coursera (see Box 5.2) and edX offer programmes incorporating multimedia elements such as video lectures, interactive simulations and peer-reviewed assignments, catering to different learning styles and making learning more engaging and effective.
Offering programmes that foster active student engagement is a critical factor in successful learning. Digital programmes should be designed to actively involve learners through interactive content, discussions and collaborative projects. Techniques such as gamification, peer-to-peer learning and real-world problem-solving make learning more engaging and relevant. For instance, Duolingo, a language-learning app, uses gamification elements such as points, badges and leaderboards to motivate language learners, fostering high levels of engagement and persistence among users.
Digital programmes should offer opportunities for both synchronous and asynchronous interactions to accommodate different learning preferences and schedules (Hrastinski, 2008[15]). Synchronous sessions might include live lectures, webinars and virtual office hours, while asynchronous activities might include discussion forums, recorded lectures and self-paced assignments.
Quality and flexibility of learning pathways
A well-structured learning pathway is essential for guiding learners through their educational journey, particularly in the context of digital adult education. Programmes should be designed with a clear and logical progression of topics, ensuring that each module builds on the previous one. This approach not only reinforces learning but also helps maintain coherence throughout the course. For instance, General Assembly (Box 5.2), a private provider of vocational training, structures its programmes with a clear progression of topics, starting with foundational skills and advancing to more complex subjects, ensuring a coherent and cumulative learning experience.
Effective guidance and resources are crucial to helping learners navigate digital programmes. This includes providing a detailed syllabus, course map, orientation materials and instructional guide (McLoughlin and Lee, 2010[16]). These resources serve as a roadmap for learners, helping them understand the course structure, expectations and key milestones. For example, an orientation module at the beginning of the course can introduce learners to the digital platform and explain how to access materials, participate in discussions and submit assignments. A detailed course map and syllabus outline the topics to be covered and the sequence in which they will be addressed, providing learners with a clear understanding of their educational journey.
Regular milestones and checkpoints are important for monitoring learner progress and providing timely feedback. These can take the form of quizzes, assignments or reflective activities that allow learners to assess their understanding and instructors to identify areas where additional support may be needed (Hattie and Timperley, 2007[17]). For instance, weekly quizzes can help reinforce learning and provide immediate feedback, enabling learners to gauge their understanding of the material. Assignments and projects can serve as major milestones that require learners to apply what they have learned, demonstrating their mastery of the subject. Reflective activities, such as discussion forums and self-assessment surveys, encourage learners to reflect on their learning experiences and identify areas for improvement.
Coursera: Integrating evidence-based practices
Coursera, a prominent provider of online programmes, demonstrates how digital AET can effectively incorporate evidence-based teaching practices. Coursera programmes employ active learning strategies that engage students through interactive content, real-time feedback and peer assessments. For instance, many programmes include quizzes, interactive simulations and discussion forums to enhance engagement and comprehension. By aligning content with specific learning objectives, Coursera ensures that each lesson builds on the previous one, providing a coherent and cumulative learning experience. This structured approach helps learners achieve measurable outcomes, crucial for maintaining course quality and relevance.
In its accredited specialisation programmes, including university-accredited degrees, Coursera collaborates with renowned institutions such as the University of London to offer digital bachelor's and master's degree programmes, ensuring that its digital learning experience meets high standards of educational excellence. Recently, Coursera became the first online learning platform to receive prestigious accreditation from the American Council of Education for its academic integrity, security, rigour of learning experience and design.
General Assembly: Clear learning pathways
General Assembly is US-headquartered for-profit education organisation, with campuses in various countries throughout the world. It teaches entrepreneurs and business professionals practical technology skills, such as mobile and software engineering, data science, product management, and other digital technology–related programmes. Its programmes are designed to offer a logical progression, starting with foundational skills and advancing to more complex subjects. This structure ensures that learners develop a comprehensive understanding of their field. General Assembly also uses varied instructional materials, including video lectures, readings and interactive projects, to cater to different learning styles. Their 12-week intensive tech bootcamp programmes offer real-time collaboration and interaction with classmates and instructors to facilitate peer-to-peer learning. This variety helps maintain engagement and ensures that learners can absorb material in ways that best suit their preferences.
The European Association of Distance Teaching Universities
The European Association of Distance Teaching Universities (EADTU) enhances the quality of online and distance education in Europe through comprehensive quality assurance frameworks and guidelines. Their OpenupEd Label sets specific benchmarks for MOOCs, ensuring high standards in course design, learner support, assessment, accessibility and sustainability. Its guidelines emphasise clear learning objectives, structured content, engaging activities, and robust assessment methods. Additionally, the OpenupEd Label promotes inclusive practices and scalability, ensuring MOOCs are accessible and sustainable. EADTU's initiatives help institutions deliver high-quality online education, enhancing programme credibility and ensuring effective learning experiences for diverse learners.
Source: Coursera (n.d.[18]), Coursera, www.coursera.org/degrees; COL (2016[19]), Guidelines for Quality Assurance and Accreditation of MOOCs, https://oasis.col.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/da903d00-4d14-41d1-a30f-3834741904d7/content; General Assembly (n.d.[20]), General Assembly, https://generalassemb.ly; EADTU (n.d.[21]), European Association of Distance Teaching Universities, www.eadtu.eu/
Ensuring staff are competent and have adequate training for a digital context
Ensuring that adult education and training providers themselves have adequate training and competent staff is core to any AET programme, regardless of the delivery method. However, in the digital context, it is crucial that teachers and providers not only possess strong general skills but also have a sound understanding of online teaching methodologies and best practice, as well as the technical skills needed to use digital technology effectively.
Digital teaching proficiency
Teachers and trainers need to be proficient in instructional design to create effective digital learning experiences. Educators need to be skilled in designing programmes that incorporate evidence-based teaching practices and align with learning objectives. This involves understanding how to structure programmes, develop engaging content, and use technology to enhance learning.
Educators must also be familiar with the educational technologies they will use, including learning management systems, multimedia tools and other digital resources, as in the case of the British Columbia Institute of Technology (Box 5.3). Educators will need to be capable of troubleshooting common technical issues to minimise disruptions in the learning process.
The digital landscape is constantly evolving, with new tools, platforms and methodologies emerging regularly. Educators need ongoing professional development to stay current with these changes and effectively integrate new technologies into their teaching practices. This requires continuous learning and adaptation, which can be overwhelming and resource-intensive for both educators and institutions. The University of Illinois’ Center for Innovation in Teaching & Learning helps instructors explore new tools and recommend the best technologies to enhance online teaching and student engagement.
Digital andragogy skills
Digital andragogy involves understanding how to teach adults effectively in an online environment. This includes knowledge of best practices for online engagement, assessment and feedback. Educators must be able to design and facilitate programmes that cater to adult learners’ needs, offering flexibility, practical application and self-directed learning. As discussed above, effective digital course design includes employing a range of techniques to engage adult learners effectively. One of these is peer-to-peer learning, where students collaborate and learn from each other. This can be facilitated through discussion forums, group projects and peer review activities. Real-world problem-solving tasks are also crucial, allowing learners to apply their knowledge in practical scenarios. For example, in a digital marketing course, learners might be tasked with developing a real marketing plan for a business, providing them with practical experience that is directly applicable to their careers.
Educators need to be equipped with the skills to create such experiences. This includes understanding how to use various digital tools and platforms effectively, designing interactive and multimedia-rich content, and providing timely and constructive feedback. Khan Academy, a non-profit organisation dedicated to online tutoring and adult education, prioritises digital pedagogy with programmes designed to equip educators with the necessary skills to develop engaging and interactive online learning environments (Box 5.3).
Khan Academy: Building digital pedagogy skills
Khan Academy, a non-profit organisation offering online tutoring and adult education programmes places a strong emphasis on digital pedagogy. Their Life Skills programmes focus on equipping educators with the skills needed to create engaging and interactive online learning experiences. This includes programmes on teaching and learning using artificial intelligence (AI) and Adobe to create engaging lessons. By offering workshops and certification programmes in digital pedagogy, Khan Academy’s programmes ensures that educators are well-versed in best practice for online engagement, assessment and feedback. This approach helps educators create learning experiences that keep students motivated and actively involved.
British Columbia Institute of Technology (BCIT): Familiarity with educational technology
The British Columbia Institute of Technology (BCIT) in Canada highlights the importance of familiarity with educational technologies. Their Learning and Teaching Framework includes a student-centred and empowered faculty approach, which include programmes focused on training in the latest course development and revision, learning management systems, multimedia tools and other digital resources. This hands-on experience ensures that instructors are comfortable and proficient in using these technologies, which enhances the learning experience for students. By integrating technology effectively into their teaching, BCIT instructors can deliver more engaging and accessible programmes.
Source: Khan Academy (2024[22]), Resources: Teachers, www.khanacademy.org/khan-for-educators/resources/teacher-essentials; BCIT (n.d.[23]), British Columbia Institute of Technology, www.bcit.ca.
Ensuring verifiability and integrity
Ensuring that educators and training providers can verify learners and the validity of their learning outcomes is particularly challenging in the context of digital AET. They need to be able to verify student identities and take steps to limit cheating and plagiarism, which are fundamental to maintaining the integrity and credibility of digital AET.
Verification of credentials and student identity
One of the primary concerns in digital education is verifying the identity of students to ensure that the individual receiving the education and the associated credentials is indeed the rightful learner. Technologies such as digital badges and blockchain have emerged as effective solutions to this challenge. Digital badges provide a secure and verifiable way to recognise and share achievements. These badges are often embedded with metadata that can be verified by employers or other educational institutions, providing a transparent record of the learner's accomplishments.
The example of Blockcerts (Box 5.4) shows how blockchain technology can be used to offer a tamper-proof method for recording educational credentials. Blockchain's decentralised ledger system ensures that once a credential is recorded, it cannot be altered or forged. This technology is increasingly being adopted by educational institutions and corporations to enhance the security and credibility of digital credentials. For example, IBM uses blockchain technology to issue digital badges for its training programmes, ensuring the authenticity and verifiability of the credentials. Similarly, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has implemented blockchain for issuing digital diplomas, providing students with a secure and verifiable way to share their academic achievements.
Another innovative approach is the use of biometric technologies, such as facial recognition and keystroke analysis, to verify student identity and monitor behaviour during online assessments. These technologies add an additional layer of security, ensuring that the person taking the exam is indeed the enrolled student.
Preventing cheating and plagiarism
Preventing cheating and plagiarism is another significant challenge in digital education. As students can access a wide range of information online, ensuring that their work is original and that they are not receiving unauthorised assistance during assessments is critical. Proctoring technologies and plagiarism detection software are essential tools in addressing these issues.
Online proctoring services provide robust solutions for monitoring and maintaining the integrity of online exams. As used by edX (Box 5.4), these services typically use webcam monitoring, screen recording, and AI to detect and prevent cheating during exams Companies like ProctorU, Examity and Respondus offer these services, enabling educational institutions to can ensure that students are adhering to exam protocols and not engaging in dishonest practices in online exams.
Plagiarism detection software is another critical component in maintaining the integrity of digital education. Tools like Turnitin and Grammarly help educators identify instances of plagiarism by comparing student submissions against a vast database of academic works and online content. These tools provide detailed reports highlighting similarities and potential plagiarism, allowing educators to address issues promptly and uphold academic standards.
Additional measures for ensuring authentic learning assessments
Other measures that can enhance the authentication of assessments in digital education. One approach is the use of formative assessments and continuous evaluation methods. By frequently assessing student performance through quizzes, discussions and interactive activities, educators can get a more accurate picture of a student’s understanding and progress, reducing reliance on high-stakes exams that are more susceptible to cheating.
Project-based assessments and real-world problem-solving tasks can also help ensure that learning assessments are authentic. These types of assessments require students to apply their knowledge and skills in practical scenarios, which are more challenging to fake or plagiarise. For instance, instead of a traditional exam, students might be asked to complete a comprehensive project that demonstrates their mastery of the course content.
edX: Comprehensive identity verification and integrity tools
edX is a US-based massive open online course (MOOC) provider that employs a multifaceted approach to authenticating learning assessments. To verify student identities, edX requires learners to submit a government-issued ID and a photo, ensuring the credentials awarded are rightly attributed. It also uses plagiarism detection tools like Turnitin to confirm the originality of student submissions. To maintain exam integrity, edX partners with ProctorU, which uses AI and webcam monitoring to observe a student’s computer desktop, webcam and audio to identify suspicious behaviour patterns that might indicate cheating, thereby providing a greater level of scrutiny than traditional in-person proctoring methods. This comprehensive approach helps maintain high standards of academic integrity across its programmes.
Blockcerts: Use of blockchain technology for education
Blockcerts, developed by Learning Machine and MIT Media Lab, is an open standard platform for creating, issuing and verifying blockchain-based certificates. It provides a secure, tamper-proof method for digitally recording educational achievements, ensuring credentials are immutable and verifiable. Institutions like MIT, Southern New Hampshire University, and the University of Melbourne use Blockcerts to issue digital diplomas and certificates, allowing graduates to easily share their verified credentials with employers and other institutions. This adoption demonstrates the practical application of blockchain technology in enhancing the security and credibility of digital education records.
Source: edX (n.d.[24]), edX website, https://www.edx.org/; Blockcerts (n.d.[25]), Blockcerts website, www.blockcerts.org/.
Safeguarding data and personal privacy
Ensuring that providers are maintaining the security and confidentiality of learners’ data and assessments is critical to quality assurance of digital AET. Educational institutions need to be implementing robust data security measures, complying with relevant regulations and protecting the confidentiality of learner data.
Data security
Educational institutions are lucrative targets for cybercriminals due to the vast amount of sensitive data they hold. This may include student and staff personal information, academic records, and financial data. The decentralised nature of data storage within these institutions often exacerbates their vulnerability, as data is stored across various departments and systems, creating multiple points of potential weakness (Fishman and Clark, 2021[26]).
Educational institutions must implement comprehensive security measures to protect against cyber threats and safeguard sensitive information. This includes using advanced encryption methods to ensure data are securely transmitted and stored, deploying firewalls to prevent unauthorised access, and establishing secure access controls to restrict data access to authorised personnel, as exemplified by Udacity (Box 5.5). Regular security audits and updates are essential to identify and address vulnerabilities, ensuring that the digital learning environment remains secure (von Solms and van Niekerk, 2013[27]).
Data confidentiality
Protecting the confidentiality of learner data involves ensuring that data is used ethically and transparently, without compromising privacy. Educational institutions must establish clear policies for data usage and communicate these policies to learners, ensuring that they understand how their data will be used and protected. Transparency in data usage builds trust between learners and institutions, fostering a secure and respectful learning environment.
Compliance with regulations
Compliance with regulations governing the collection, retention, and use of data is critical for educational institutions (Box 5.5). Adhering to laws such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union (EU) and other relevant regulations ensures that learner data is collected and used ethically and legally. These regulations mandate that institutions handle personal data with care, providing transparency about data usage and ensuring that data is used only for its intended purposes.
The GDPR is a comprehensive data protection law enacted by the EU in May 2018 (European Commission, 2018[28]), designed to safeguard the privacy and personal data of EU citizens. Key features include the requirement for explicit consent for data processing, the right to access and delete personal data, data portability, and mandatory breach notifications. It also mandates the appointment of Data Protection Officers for organisations handling significant amounts of personal data. For AET providers, including those offering digital education, GDPR compliance is crucial. This entails conducting regular data protection audits, securing informed consent from learners, implementing secure data storage solutions and ensuring transparency in data usage. Compliance not only builds trust with learners but also enhances institutional credibility and protects against substantial fines for non-compliance.
FutureLearn: UK Data Protection Act compliance and ethical data handling
FutureLearn, a UK-based online education provider, adheres strictly to the UK Data Protection Act 2018 to ensure the ethical and legal handling of personal data. FutureLearn’s privacy policy outlines comprehensive guidelines on data collection, retention and usage, ensuring transparency and security. When learners register with the website, create a learner profile and purchase online programmes, the platform collects information such as their names, email addresses and data related to course participation, and uses secure servers and encryption methods to protect it. FutureLearn also respects user rights by providing options to access, correct or delete personal information and ensuring informed consent for data usage.
Udacity: Comprehensive data security and privacy measures
Udacity, a private provider of digital AET based in the United States, implements comprehensive data security and privacy measures to protect learner information. Udacity employs advanced encryption to secure data during transmission, and storage, and runs regular security audits to identify and rectify vulnerabilities. The platform also uses secure access controls to limit data access to authorised personnel only, ensuring that learner data remain confidential. Udacity’s commitment to data security and privacy builds trust and maintains the integrity of its learning environment.
Source: FutureLearn (2024[29]), Privacy Policy, www.futurelearn.com/info/terms/privacy-policy, Udacity (2023[30]), Udacity Privacy Policy, www.udacity.com/en-US/legal/privacy.
Providing adequate infrastructure and technical support
Ensuring that AET providers have the necessary infrastructure and technical support to deliver high-quality digital education is a significant challenge. This involves addressing platform usability and compatibility, ensuring regular updates and maintenance, and providing responsive technical support.
Platform usability, compatibility and maintenance
Digital learning platforms must accessible using multiple devices and operating systems. This ensures that learners can access their programmes regardless of the technology they use, promoting inclusivity and ease of use. Platforms should also be user friendly, with an intuitive interface and responsive design to provide a seamless learning experience. An intuitive interface means that learners can navigate the platform easily, find resources quickly and focus on their learning without struggling with the technology. Responsive design means that the platform functions well on different screen sizes, from smartphones to desktop computers, making it adaptable to the needs of diverse learners. Platforms like those used by the Open University, Coursera and edX are recognised for their user-friendly interfaces and ease of navigation. These platforms support a variety of devices and operating systems, ensuring broad accessibility and a consistent learning experience across different technologies.
Platforms also need regular updates and maintenance to prevent technical issues and ensure that they remain secure and functional. This includes addressing bugs, updating security features and improving platform performance Without regular maintenance, platforms can become outdated, vulnerable to security threats and prone to technical glitches that disrupt the learning experience.
Establishing responsive technical support teams
Responsive technical support teams are crucial for assisting both instructors and students with any technical issues they may encounter. This support should be available through multiple channels, such as phone, email and live chat, to ensure that help is readily accessible when needed. Effective technical support minimises disruptions and maintains a positive learning experience (Bates and Sangrà, 2011[31]). When technical issues arise, they can cause significant frustration and hinder learning. Prompt and efficient technical support ensures that issues are resolved quickly, allowing learners and instructors to focus on their educational activities. This proactive approach not only enhances the overall user experience but also fosters confidence in the digital learning environment.
Continuous training and updates are essential for support staff to keep up with evolving technologies and user needs, further ensuring the effectiveness of the support provided. Some institutions may rely on external providers to augment their technical support services, bringing specialised expertise and resources that further enhance the quality and scope of support available to students. For instance, the Calgary Catholic School District (CCSD) in Canada uses a self-service portal to handle technical support requests and free up staff (Box 5.6).
University of Tartu: Comprehensive user support
The University of Tartu in Estonia offers comprehensive information technology (IT) support to ensure smooth digital operations for its students and staff. Its IT support page provides various resources, including help with accounts, email, wireless networks and software services. It also includes instructions for setting up and using digital tools essential for online learning and administrative tasks. By maintaining a robust IT support system, the University of Tartu ensures that technical issues are efficiently managed, contributing to a stable and effective digital learning environment.
Calgary Catholic School District (CCSD): Leveraging external systems to free up IT staff
CCSD implemented a self-service portal called “ASK” (Action, Service and Knowledge) to handle technical support requests efficiently. It initially started using ServiceNow, a cloud-based IT management platform, as a ticketing tool to manage helpdesk requests and streamline workflows. Recognising the benefits of a unified platform for such inquiries, CCSD soon developed ASK, powered by ServiceNow, providing a one-stop shop for IT, human resources and facilities services inquiries, allowing IT staff to focus on higher-value tasks like professional development. By empowering users to find answers independently through the portal, IT staff could dedicate more time and resources to ensuring a smooth transition to remote learning. This included setting up necessary infrastructure, addressing more complex technical challenges, and supporting teachers and students in adapting to online learning platforms (Castelo, 2020[32]).
Source: University of Tartu (n.d.[33]), IT Support Service, https://ut.ee/en/it-support-service; CCSD (2020[34]), Annual Report 2019-2020, https://webdocs.cssd.ab.ca/AboutUs/ReportsandPublications/Documents/CCSD_Annual_Report_2020.pdf.
The rapid expansion of digital education presents significant challenges for quality assurance systems, particularly in the context of adult education and training. The key challenges for providers of digital AET identified above and outlined in Figure 5.2 also require quality assurance bodies, including agencies, ministries, and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), to adapt their functioning in response.
The framework provided in Chapter 2 can guide the discussion about where specifically these changes are needed. This framework uses four macro-dimensions: key features, assessment processes, outcomes and benefits to providers, each with detailed dimensions, sub-dimensions and indicators (see Figure 2.1 in Chapter 2).
Digital education affects how QA is conducted, requiring significant modifications, particularly to the two main parts of the assessment processes dimension: i) quality assessed training elements; and ii) assessment tools and methods. Quality-assessed training elements refers to the specific domains or components that are evaluated and assessed during the quality assurance process. These training elements encompass crucial aspects of the provision that contribute to the overall learning experience and ultimately to the quality of the programme. Meanwhile, assessment tools and methods refers to the instruments and tools used to gather the information and data needed to conduct the quality assessment.
For example, for quality-assessed training elements, standards must now encompass digital competency requirements for leadership and staff; the incorporation of interactive and multimedia content in course design; whether there are robust measures for verifying the integrity of learning assessments, safeguarding data and personal privacy; and whether providers offer adequate infrastructure and technical support. This includes implementing secure data management practices, ensuring continuous monitoring and updating of IT systems, and adopting advanced technologies for identity verification and assessment integrity. By integrating these additional elements, QA bodies can more effectively evaluate and ensure the quality of digital AET programs. These adaptations are crucial for maintaining high standards and addressing the challenges posed by the digital learning landscape.
Similarly, assessment tools and methods need to evolve if they are to effectively evaluate the quality of digital AET programmes. For instance, the provision of education in a digital format involves different areas of expertise, requiring evaluators with specialised knowledge in digital pedagogy and cybersecurity. Additionally, traditional site visits may transform into virtual inspections.
Updating quality assessment criteria
To effectively respond to the challenges posed by digital education, QA bodies must update the assessment criteria they use in their assessment processes. This involves revising existing standards to address the unique aspects of digital learning environments, ensuring they are secure, engaging and effective. QA bodies will also need to communicate these changes and provide guidelines to help educators adapt. These changes can be directly tied to the five key challenges identified above: i) ensuring instructional quality and effectiveness; ii) having adequately trained and competent staff; iii) verifying the integrity of assessments; iv) safeguarding data and personal privacy; and v) maintaining adequate infrastructure and technical support.
When assessing the quality of individual AET programmes, QA bodies should update their criteria to cover the interactive and multimedia content of course design. Effective AET design should create engaging and stimulating learning experiences through various multimedia elements, such as videos, simulations, and interactive activities. Regular feedback mechanisms from learners on the effectiveness of these materials can help continuously improve the learning experience. This addresses the challenge of ensuring instructional quality and effectiveness by making learning more engaging and tailored to digital formats.
In contrast, when assessing the quality of providers, QA bodies need to focus on broader institutional capabilities rather than individual programmes. Their criteria should include provisions for digital competency among leadership and staff. This ensures that leaders have strategic planning capabilities for digital transformation and that staff are competent in digital education, including digital pedagogy and cybersecurity. This addresses the challenge of having adequately trained and competent staff to deliver high-quality digital education.
Maintaining adequate infrastructure and technical support is essential for ensuring the digital learning experience is seamless. For individual programmes, this might mean ensuring that the digital platforms and tools they use are up-to-date and effective. For providers, QA bodies should ensure that institutions have dedicated IT support teams and protocols for regular IT system audits and updates. This ensures that educational institutions have the necessary human resources to manage digital learning platforms and provide technical support.
Addressing data protection and privacy concerns also involves updating criteria to include robust data security measures and ensuring compliance with international data protection laws, such as GDPR. Whether assessing programmes or providers, this involves ensuring regular data security audits are being carried out, and ensuring that all digital learning environments maintain high standards of data protection and privacy.
Finally, the need to verify the integrity of learning assessments in digital education requires specific standards for digital environments. Robust systems to confirm the identity of learners are crucial, ensuring that the person obtaining a credential is indeed the person who completed the training. This may involve using biometric verification and secure login procedures, combined with proctored exams to uphold the integrity of digital assessments.
Box 5.7 presents two case studies illustrating the use of comprehensive quality assurance systems to ensure high standards in online education, covering programme design, implementation, teaching support and learner success.
Quality Matters in the United States
Quality Matters (QM) is a non-profit organisation in the United States dedicated to improving the quality of online and blended education. It provides a scalable quality assurance system for online and blended learning, which includes a set of standards, a rigorous review process and professional development opportunities. QM’s primary tool is its rubric for evaluating the design of online and blended courses, focusing on areas like course objectives, assessment, instructional materials and learner interaction. The goal is to ensure courses meet high standards to enhance student learning and engagement.
Quality Matters offers various categories for quality assurance in online education, including:
Online programme design certification: Evaluates the overall design of online programmes using QM’s comprehensive standards.
Online programme implementation: Focuses on how well the programme supports faculty and students in the online learning environment.
Online teaching support: Assesses the quality of support provided to instructors teaching online.
Online learner success: Reviews services and support mechanisms to ensure student success in online programmes.
NZQA Distance Online Delivery Guidelines
The New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) plays a crucial role in quality assurance for digital education, including the approval and accreditation of micro-credentials and online programmes (excluding universities). NZQA has developed extensive documentation to support organisations in listing and approving micro-credentials and delivering them on line, both domestically and offshore.
The key areas covered by the NZQA delivery guidelines include:
Strategic direction: Emphasises the need for a long-term vision and policies for online delivery, including a dedicated leadership position to oversee these programmes.
Financial and physical resources: Highlights the importance of sufficient funding and technical infrastructure to support online learning, ensuring students have access to the necessary digital resources.
Curriculum design and delivery: Requires alignment with learning outcomes and the integration of interactive content, accommodating diverse learning needs.
Assessments and moderation: Mandates clear procedures for verifying student identity and ensuring the integrity of online assessments.
Staffing: Ensures staff are adequately trained in online pedagogy and supported with professional development.
Support for students and staff: Provides comprehensive technical, administrative, and pastoral support throughout the programme.
Quality assurance: Encourages regular reviews and continuous improvement processes to maintain high educational standards.
The guidelines also provide examples of what is considered good evidence for each area, helping institutions meet these standards and enhancing the credibility and effectiveness of digital education.
Source: Quality Matters (2024[35]), Quality Matters website, https://qualitymatters.org/; NZQA (2023[36]), Distance Online Delivery, www2.nzqa.govt.nz/assets/Tertiary/Approval-accreditation-and-registration/Programmes/distance-online-delivery.pdf
Updating assessment tools and methods
To effectively assess the quality of digital education, QA bodies must also adapt their assessment tools and methods. The framework presented in Chapter 2 identifies six key tools and methods commonly used to assess the quality of providers or programmes: i) analysis of performance indicators; ii) expert reviews; iii) interviews; iv) self-assessment questionnaires; v) site visits; and vi) surveys. These tools will need to be updated to address the specific challenges of digital learning environments and ensure their comprehensive evaluation.
Analysis of performance indicators
For QA bodies, analysing performance indicators means focusing on programme or institutional-level performance metrics, such as overall student satisfaction, graduation rates and the effectiveness of support services across digital programmes. This includes evaluating how well the institution supports its learners through digital platforms, the availability and quality of technical support, and the overall effectiveness of the institution’s digital strategy. Metrics might also include the institution's retention rates in digital programmes, feedback from alumni on the long-term benefits of their digital education, and comparisons of performance outcomes between traditional and digital delivery modes.
QA bodies could enhance their analysis by leveraging real-time data collection in digital education. Such continuous data gathering provides valuable resources for monitoring and improving educational quality, offering robust performance indicators and learning analytics.
Real-time data can not only support immediate adjustments by educational providers but also enhance the capacity of QA bodies to monitor and ensure high standards in digital education. Such data can also help identify emerging trends and potential issues, allowing for proactive interventions to maintain the integrity and effectiveness of digital education programmes.
Expert reviews
Expert reviews involve evaluations by individuals with specialised knowledge in education. For digital education, it is crucial that experts possess strong digital competency, including familiarity with educational technologies and digital tools. They need to assess the integration of interactive and multimedia materials in teaching and ensure they are aligned with learning outcomes. They will need proficiency in cybersecurity in order to evaluate data security measures and compliance with regulations, ensuring the protection of learner data. Experts should also understand strategic aspects of digital education, allowing them to assess an institution’s overall digital strategy and the adequacy of its IT infrastructure. See Box 5.8 for a case study on the E-Course Quality Label in Estonia, in which expert reviews play an important role.
E-Course Quality Label in Estonia
The Estonian Quality Agency for Education (HAKA) awards the E-Course Quality Label to recognise and enhance the quality of e-programmes. The programme, initially developed by the Information Technology Foundation for Education (HITSA), involves a detailed evaluation process.
Key elements of the E-Course Quality Label are:
Application process: Involves self-assessment, organisational review, and expert feedback to ensure comprehensive quality assessment.
Expert evaluation: A team of selected e-learning experts, supported by mentors, evaluates the programmes based on established quality criteria.
Recognition: Programmes meeting high standards are awarded the Quality Label, and the most outstanding course receives the "E-course of the Year" title, with a cash prize.
Importance of self-assessment
Self-assessment plays a pivotal role in the E-Course Quality Label process. Applicants undertake a self-analysis using an online matrix specifically developed for this purpose. This tool aims to enhance applicants’ understanding of the quality requirements for e-courses and to encourage providers to critically evaluate their offerings.
Significance of expert involvement
The expert teams play a crucial role in providing objective assessments and feedback, ensuring that the programmes adhere to the highest standards of digital education. Their evaluations are based on an extensive matrix, covering all aspects of e-course quality. Applicants receive constructive feedback from the experts on how to improve their provision regardless of accreditation outcome. Applicants also have an opportunity to provide feedback on the process, which helps to further develop the process and label.
Source: Digital Education Quality Label (2023[37]), HAKA website, https://haka.ee/en/quality-label/.
Interviews
Interviews are a crucial QA assessment tool for gathering detailed, qualitative insights from various stakeholders involved in the educational process. In the context of QA for digital education, interviews help assess the experiences, challenges and satisfaction levels of educators, administrators and learners. Compared to those used for assessing traditional programmes, these interviews need to be adapted to better capture and address the unique challenges of digital education. One example of the use of interviews is in the process of awarding the E-xcellence Quality Label for online programmes (Box 5.9).
For digital AET, interviews with educators and administrators can provide insights into the effectiveness of digital teaching methods, the adequacy of the institution’s IT support and the implementation of its digital strategy. They can reveal how well educators are adapting to digital tools, the training they have received and the support they need to improve their digital competence. Unlike the assessment of traditional settings, these interviews should delve deeper into the specific digital skills and resources required for effective online instruction.
Interviews with learners are equally important, as they offer firsthand perspectives on the usability of digital platforms, the quality of online resources and the overall learning experience. Learner feedback can highlight strengths and areas for improvement in the digital learning environment, helping QA bodies identify issues that may not be apparent through quantitative data alone. These interviews should focus on the digital learning experience, including accessibility issues, the effectiveness of online interaction, and the overall satisfaction with digital tools and content.
The E-xcellence Quality Label by the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities (EADTU)
The E-xcellence Quality Label, provided by the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities (EADTU), is an instrument designed to enhance the quality of online education in universities. The process begins with a free and quick scan, enabling institutions to assess their current performance and identify areas for improvement.
For a more detailed evaluation, universities can opt for an expert review. This review involves thorough on-site or online assessments by blended and online education experts. A key component of this process includes interviews with key stakeholders, providing in-depth insights into the educational practices and allowing reviewers to gather comprehensive feedback directly from those involved.
The expert review evaluates several criteria, including the institution's accessibility and flexibility, and the interactiveness and personalisation of their e-learning programmes. Based on these evaluations, the review team provide a detailed report with recommendations and advice. Institutions that meet the required standards are awarded the E-xcellence label.
The E-xcellence label serves multiple purposes: it acts as a tool for assessing current performance, offers guidance for improvement, and serves as a branding instrument that promotes quality aspects of state-of-the-art online education. It also fosters a community of quality associates who share best practices and continuously strive for excellence in online education.
Source: E-xcellence (n.d.[38]), E-xcellence website, https://e-xcellencelabel.eadtu.eu/.
Self-assessment questionnaires
Self-assessment questionnaires allow providers to internally evaluate their own practices and performance as part of a QA assessment. As with the other tools, these questionnaires need to be adapted to address the specific challenges posed by online learning environments (see Box 5.8 for an example of a self-assessment tool in Estonia specifically designed for e-courses).
Self-assessment questionnaires for digital AET should include sections that focus specifically on digital infrastructure, data security measures and the effectiveness of digital teaching strategies. Providers need to evaluate their digital platforms, the integration of interactive and multimedia content, and the overall user experience of their online learning environments. Questions should probe the adequacy of IT support, the robustness of data protection practices and compliance with relevant digital security regulations.
These questionnaires should also assess the digital competence of educators and staff, identifying areas where further training or support might be needed. This includes evaluating the effectiveness of professional development programmes in enhancing digital teaching skills and the readiness of educators to adapt to new digital tools and methods. In contrast to traditional self-assessments, there should be a strong emphasis on continuous improvement in digital capabilities.
The self-assessment process should also incorporate feedback from learners, gathered through surveys or interviews, to provide a comprehensive view of the digital learning experience. Providers should reflect on learner satisfaction, engagement levels and any barriers faced in the digital learning environment. This helps to ensure that the self-assessment is not solely an internal exercise but also considers the perspectives of the primary beneficiaries of digital education.
Site visits
Site visits provide QA bodies with an opportunity to observe and evaluate educational practices and environments first hand. In the context of digital AET, traditional physical site visits may need to be complemented or replaced by virtual inspections of digital infrastructure and online learning environments. QA bodies should develop protocols for virtual site visits that allow inspectors to evaluate the functionality, accessibility and security of digital platforms. This includes assessing the robustness of IT infrastructure, the adequacy of technical support, and the institution's ability to maintain and update digital systems effectively. Box 5.10 illustrates how the Korean Skills Quality Authority (KSQA) employs site visits, complemented by comprehensive analyses, to detect and prevent fraud in order to ensure the integrity and quality of AET programmes.
Virtual site visits could also involve live demonstrations of the digital tools and platforms used by the institution. Inspectors can observe how these tools are integrated into teaching practices, the quality of interactive and multimedia content, and the user experience from both the educator’s and the learner's perspectives.
QA bodies should also be assessing the institution’s data security measures during virtual site visits. This includes evaluating the implementation of data protection policies, compliance with relevant regulations and the measures in place to protect learners’ data.
Korean Skills Quality Authority fraud prevention and detection
The Korean Skills Quality Authority (KSQA) has implemented comprehensive measures to prevent and detect fraud within training providers. KSQA conducts pre-analysis to identify potential fraud based on data analysis, report analysis, analysis of complaints and media trends. An important component of this process is conducting audits and site visits, which are crucial for preventing fraudulent activities and ensuring compliance.
To maintain transparency and integrity, KSQA provides fraud prevention education, develops prevention content and engages in promotional activities to foster a culture of honesty. The organisation also undertakes follow-up analyses and system improvements to address any detected fraudulent activities effectively. These measures ensure the credibility and quality of training programs offered under KSQA’s purview.
Source: KSQA (n.d.[39]), Fraud Investigation, https://eng.ksqa.or.kr/what/2600_business_6.html.
Surveys
Surveys provide valuable feedback from a range of stakeholders, typically students, former students and staff. As with other tools, surveys will need to be tailored when applied to digital programmes so QA bodies can ensure they gather comprehensive and relevant feedback that highlights the specific needs and experiences of those involved in digital AET.
For learners and former learners, surveys should focus on the usability of digital platforms, the effectiveness of online teaching methods, the quality of multimedia content, and the adequacy of technical support. Additionally, questions should address data privacy concerns and overall satisfaction with the digital learning environment. This targeted feedback helps QA bodies identify strengths and areas for improvement in the delivery of digital education.
For educators and staff, surveys should assess their comfort with and competence in using digital tools, the effectiveness of digital professional development programmes, and their perceptions of the support provided by the institution's IT infrastructure. Understanding these aspects is crucial for ensuring that educators are equipped to deliver high-quality digital education and that they receive the necessary institutional support. See Box 5.11 for a case study on the European Commission’s survey tool.
SELFIE - Enhancing digital education in schools
Self-reflection on Effective Learning by Fostering the Use of Innovative Educational Technologies (SELFIE) is a free tool developed by the European Commission to help schools integrate digital technology into teaching, learning and assessment. The tool gathers anonymous input from students, teachers and school leaders via short statements and questions, generating a detailed report on the school's strengths and weaknesses in technology use.
Key features of SELFIE:
Comprehensive and inclusive: Involves the whole school community in assessing digital technology use.
Customisable: Schools can tailor the tool to their specific needs by adding questions.
Free and anonymous: Ensures privacy and security, providing accessible insights for all schools.
Collaborative development: Created with input from educators, students and experts across Europe.
Advantages of SELFIE
SELFIE helps schools understand how digital technology is being used to support teaching and learning. It involves all school stakeholders in collective reflection, highlighting areas of effective technology use and areas needing improvement. The results help schools develop a vision for technology use, identify beneficial teacher training and allocate funding effectively. SELFIE is easy to set up, private and available in over 30 languages, making it an invaluable tool for continuous improvement in digital education strategies.
Source: EC (n.d.[40]), About SELFIE, https://education.ec.europa.eu/selfie/about-selfie.
Main findings
1. There is a great deal of continuity between digital and traditional adult education and training.
The digital delivery of AET has become increasingly mainstream, blurring the lines between traditional and digital education. This expansion of digital delivery, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, has pushed even traditional, physically-based educational institutions to integrate digital technologies into their offerings. This shift is not a radical departure but rather an extension of the long-established tradition of distance education, which dates back to correspondence programmes and early electronic media. Today, the majority of AET programmes incorporate some form of digital technology, whether through online learning management systems, virtual classrooms or digital resources. This integration highlights a continuum rather than a dichotomy, with digital tools enhancing and complementing traditional educational methods, making education more accessible and flexible for adult learners.
2. Reaping the benefits of digital learning will mean adapting existing quality assurance frameworks.
The integration of digital tools and resources into traditional AET programmes has created hybrid learning environments, providing a holistic approach that combines the strengths of both modalities. Digital AET offers significant advantages, such as enhanced accessibility, flexibility and personalised learning experiences through advanced technologies. However, it also presents challenges, particularly in ensuring the quality of education. Quality assurance frameworks must adapt to address issues unique to digital and hybrid learning environments, ensuring these benefits are effectively realised while maintaining high educational standards.
3. The nature of digital learning environments present some core challenges that must be met to ensure they provide adults with a high-quality learning experience.
This chapter has presented five core challenges that must be addressed to ensure high-quality learning experiences: i) maintaining quality and effectiveness of course design; ii) ensuring digital competency among staff; iii) verifying the integrity of assessments; iv) safeguarding data and privacy; and v) providing adequate infrastructure and technical support. These challenges stem from the unique nature of digital learning environments, which require innovative approaches to pedagogy, robust systems for identity verification and academic honesty, stringent data protection measures, and continuous investment in technology and support services. Addressing these challenges is crucial for the effective implementation and sustainability of digital AET, requiring specific and adapted quality assurance frameworks that can evolve alongside technological advances and changing learner needs.
Policy recommendations
The following recommendations are intended to provide a starting point for bodies responsible for quality assurance aiming to strengthen the quality of digital AET.
Recommendation 1: Update quality assurance criteria.
QA bodies must revise their existing accreditation and certification criteria to incorporate specific requirements for digital education. This update should address the unique challenges of digital AET, such as ensuring instructional quality, verifying assessment integrity, safeguarding data privacy and providing adequate technical support. By including criteria that focus on these areas, agencies can ensure that digital AET programmes maintain high standards and effectively address the complexities of online learning environments. This adaptation is crucial for maintaining the credibility and reliability of digital education in comparison to traditional AET programmes.
Recommendation 2: Update assessment tools and methods for digital AET.
QA bodies should adapt their assessment tools and methods to effectively evaluate the quality of digital AET. Traditional tools such as performance indicators, expert reviews, interviews, self-assessment questionnaires, site visits and surveys will all need to be updated to address the unique challenges posed by digital learning environments. For instance, performance indicators should include metrics on the effectiveness of digital platforms and technical support. Expert reviews will need to focus on digital competency, data security and the integration of multimedia content. Interviews should delve into the specific experiences of educators and learners with digital tools. Self-assessment questionnaires must evaluate digital infrastructure, data security measures and the digital competence of staff. Site visits should incorporate virtual inspections of digital systems, and surveys must be tailored to capture feedback on digital platform usability, online teaching effectiveness and data privacy concerns. By updating these tools, QA bodies can ensure their evaluations are both comprehensive and relevant to digital programmes.
Recommendation 3: Leverage real-time data collection for enhanced quality assurance.
QA bodies should make use of the opportunities presented by real-time data collection in digital education to enhance the effectiveness of their processes. Digitally delivered education allows data to be collected continuously and in real time, providing a wealth of information that can be used for both immediate adjustments by providers and comprehensive monitoring by QA bodies.
For providers, real-time data collection allows learner engagement, progress and outcomes to be continually monitored. This immediate feedback enables providers to make timely adjustments to their teaching methods, course content and support services, addressing learners' needs more effectively and enhancing the overall educational experience.
For QA bodies, this wealth of real-time data offers robust performance indicators and learning analytics for ongoing monitoring. This enhances their ability to assess quality and check compliance with established criteria, ensuring high standards and continuous improvement in digital AET.
Recommendation 4: Develop comprehensive guidelines.
To support providers in meeting the new digital standards, QA bodies should create detailed guidelines that outline best practices for digital teaching, data security and learner engagement. These guidelines should offer clear, actionable recommendations for designing and delivering high-quality digital AET (see Box 5.7 for examples). For instance, they could include strategies for incorporating interactive and multimedia content to enhance engagement, protocols for protecting learner data, and methods for ensuring the reliability and validity of online assessments. Comprehensive guidelines help standardise practices across providers, ensuring a consistent and high-quality digital learning experience for adult learners.
Recommendation 5: Provide training for staff.
It is also essential to ensure that QA staff are well-equipped to assess digital education quality. QA bodies should provide specialised training for inspectors on the specifics of digital education, including technological aspects, data privacy concerns and innovative teaching methodologies. This training should cover how to evaluate digital infrastructure, the effectiveness of online teaching practices and compliance with data protection regulations. By enhancing inspectors' understanding and expertise in digital education, agencies can ensure that assessments are thorough, relevant and capable of addressing the unique challenges posed by digital AET. This preparation will be vital for maintaining rigorous quality assurance standards in the evolving landscape of adult education and training.
References
[31] Bates, A. and A. Sangrà (2011), Managing Technology in Higher Education: Strategies for Transforming Teaching and Learning, Jossey-Bass, https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Managing+Technology+in+Higher+Education%3A+Strategies+for+Transforming+Teaching+and+Learning-p-9780470584729.
[23] BCIT (n.d.), British Columbia Institute of Technology, https://www.bcit.ca/.
[13] Biggs, J. and C. Tang (2011), Teaching for Quality Learning at University (4th Edition), Open University Press/McGraw Hill, Maidenhead.
[25] Blockcerts (n.d.), Blockcerts website, https://www.blockcerts.org/.
[32] Castelo, M. (2020), “How IT staff provide tech support during remote learning”, EdTech, Vol. May, https://edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2020/05/how-it-staff-provide-tech-support-during-remote-learning-perfcon.
[34] CCSD (2020), Annual Report 2019-2020, Calgary Catholic School District, https://webdocs.cssd.ab.ca/AboutUs/ReportsandPublications/Documents/CCSD_Annual_Report_2020.pdf.
[19] COL (2016), Guidelines for Quality Assurance and Accreditation of MOOCs, Commonwealth of Learning, https://oasis.col.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/da903d00-4d14-41d1-a30f-3834741904d7/content.
[18] Coursera (n.d.), Take your career to the next level with an online degree, Coursera website, https://www.coursera.org/degrees.
[21] EADTU (n.d.), European Association of Distance Teaching Universities website, https://www.eadtu.eu/.
[40] EC (n.d.), About SELFIE, European Commission Europa website, https://education.ec.europa.eu/selfie/about-selfie.
[24] edX (n.d.), edX website, https://www.edx.org/.
[28] European Commission (2018), General Data Protection Regulation, EUR-Lex website, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02016R0679-20160504&qid=1532348683434.
[5] European Commission and Ecorys (2015), Adult Learners in Digital Learning Environments: Final Report, Publications Office of the European Union, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2767/063966.
[2] Eurostat (2024), Increase in online education in the EU in 2023, Eurostat News Articles, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/ddn-20240124-2.
[3] Eurostat (2024), Individuals: Internet actiities, Eurostat data browser, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/isoc_ci_ac_i__custom_9385153/bookmark/table?lang=en&bookmarkId=859efcb2-c707-4163-be76-19ed05764991.
[38] E-xcellence (n.d.), E-xcellence website, https://e-xcellencelabel.eadtu.eu/.
[26] Fishman, T. and C. Clark (2021), Elevating cybersecurity on the higher education leadership agenda, Deloitte Insights, https://www2.deloitte.com/xe/en/insights/industry/public-sector/cybersecurity-on-higher-education-leadership-agenda.html.
[11] Freeman, S. et al. (2014), “Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 111/23, pp. 8410-8415, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111.
[29] FutureLearn (2024), Privacy policy, FutureLearn website, https://www.futurelearn.com/info/terms/privacy-policy.
[8] Gegenfurtner, A., B. Schmidt‐Hertha and P. Lewis (2020), “Digital technologies in training and adult education”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 24/1, pp. 1-4, https://doi.org/10.1111/ijtd.12172.
[20] General Assembly (n.d.), General Assembly website, https://generalassemb.ly/.
[37] HAKA/Estonian Quality Agency for Education (2023), Digital Education Quality Label, HAKA, https://haka.ee/en/quality-label/.
[17] Hattie, J. and H. Timperley (2007), “The power of feedback”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 77/1, pp. 81-112, https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.
[15] Hrastinski, S. (2008), Asynchronous and Synchronous E-Learning, Educause Quarterly, https://www.learntechlib.org/p/101357/.
[1] Jütte, W. and D. Wildemeersch (2017), “Editorial: Digital the new normal - multiple challenges for the education and learning of adults”, European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, Vol. 8/1, pp. 7-20, https://doi.org/10.3384/rela.2000-7426.relae13.
[6] Kentnor, H. (2015), “Distance education and the evolution of online learning in the United States”, Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, Vol. 17/1&2, https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=law_facpub.
[22] Khan Academy (2024), Resources: Teachers, Khan Academy website, https://www.khanacademy.org/khan-for-educators/resources/teacher-essentials.
[7] Knowles, M., E. Holton and R. Swanson (2011), The Adult Learner: The Definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource Development (7th Edition), Elsevier.
[39] KSQA (n.d.), Fraud Investigation, Korean Skills Quality Authority website, https://eng.ksqa.or.kr/what/2600_business_6.html.
[14] Mayer, R. (2014), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369.
[16] McLoughlin, C. and M. Lee (2010), “Personalised and self regulated learning in the Web 2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software”, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 26/1, https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1100.
[36] NZQA (2023), Distance Online Delivery, New Zealand Qualifications Authority, https://www2.nzqa.govt.nz/assets/Tertiary/Approval-accreditation-and-registration/Programmes/distance-online-delivery.pdf.
[9] OECD (2023), Shaping Digital Education: Enabling Factors for Quality, Equity and Efficiency, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/bac4dc9f-en.
[10] Phillips, P. and L. St.Croix (2021), A Guide for Designing Online Learning & Increasing Instructional Use of Brightspace, Centre for Innovation in Teaching and Learning, Memorial Univeristy, https://citl.mun.ca/TeachingSupport/instructionalcontinuity/rapid_design_handbook.pdf.
[35] Quality Matters (2024), Quality Matters website, https://qualitymatters.org/.
[30] Udacity (2023), Udacity Privacy Policy, Udacity website, https://www.udacity.com/en-US/legal/privacy.
[12] University of Queensland (2020), Active & Collaborative learning tools, https://elearning.uq.edu.au/elearning-tools/active-learning-tools.
[33] University of Tartu (n.d.), IT Support Service, Univeristy of Tartu website, https://ut.ee/en/it-support-service.
[27] von Solms, R. and J. van Niekerk (2013), “From information security to cyber security”, Computers & Security, Vol. 38, pp. 97-102, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2013.04.004.
[4] World Economic Forum (2022), These 3 charts show the global growth in online learning, Centre for the New Economy and Society website, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/01/online-learning-courses-reskill-skills-gap/.