# Development of the selection criteria for China's Top Level Courses Project


As the Ministry of Education has gained experience, there have been
continuous changes from year to year of the evaluation criteria for Top
Level Courses. These range from minor variations in the rating rubrics
used, to more large-scale changes in priorities. The actual rubric used
to evaluate courses has five comprehensive indicators: teaching teams,
teaching content, teaching conditions, teaching methods and practice,
and instructional outcome. These five are subdivided into 15 secondary
indicators (one was removed in 2008) as listed by Wang Peng (2008):

-   teaching team, including responsible person and main lecturer
-   the composition and quality of teaching team
-   educational reform and educational research
-   the course content
-   the organization and planning of the course content
-   the practical components (removed in 2008)
-   teaching materials and other resources
-   conditions for practical components
-   online teaching environment
-   instructional design
-   instructional approach
-   instructional practice
-   instructional outcomes – evaluation by peers, by university
  supervisor,
-   student evaluations
-   evaluation of recorded materials

When it comes to large scale changes in focus, Professor B3 commented
that initially the online resources were not that important, because the
Internet was not very developed at the time that the Top Level Courses
Project started. As the web grew in importance and sophistication this
changed, and in 2004 and 2005, requirements about the functionality and
design of the course website increased.

Likewise, Mr. B0 stated that the provinces and the Ministry of Education
have focused increasingly on the sharing of resources and providing a
service to others. This is a marked change from the first few years,
when the application process was the main focus. Initially there were
not many courses, and attracting a number of high-quality courses was
the focus. Later, as the number of courses increased, it became
important to offer better access to these resources, which led to the
creation of the Jingpinke.com portal (see the later section on this).

Wang Peng (2008) who studied how the evaluation criteria had changed
from 2003-2008, also identified a number of trends. He reaffirmed the
added focus on instructional design, pedagogy, use of technology, impact
and sharing, and the building of local teams. When evaluating the
changes, it is often more interesting to look at the explanations given
for the different criteria, than the weight assigned. For example, the
explanation for the criteria “evaluation of recorded materials” changed
from specifying “dignified bearing, clear sound, full of teaching
enthusiasm, lively class atmosphere, high student participation rate,
and effective student-teacher interaction” in 2003 to asking for
"influential teaching which attracts students attention, enlightens and
inspires thinking, association and creativity” in 2004 (ibid. 39).

As new categories of courses were added, new rubrics also had to be
developed. For example, the evaluation of online courses put more focus
on course resources for self-learners, the teaching and learning
process, and learning support design. Zeng, Zeng and Fan (2007) believe
this to be natural, and mention high student numbers, and a focus on
adult learners that need practical and vocationally oriented training as
key features distinguishing distance education from teaching programs in
traditional universities.

* * * * *

The quotes in this text is from the MA Thesis "The Chinese National Top
Level Courses Project: Using Open Educational Resources to Promote
Quality in Undergraduate Teaching" by Stian Håklev, University of
Toronto 2010.

-   [Download the canonical PDF
  version](http://reganmian.net/top-level-courses/Haklev_Stian_201009_MA_thesis.pdf)
-   [Central page collecting all blog posts, many different download
  formats, and supplementary
  material](http://reganmian.net/top-level-courses)

* * * * *