Several training programs sponsored by the NIH/Fogarty International Center's International Research Ethics Education and Curriculum Development Program offer online graduate-level courses in research ethics to participants in low- and middle-income countries. This paper describes the evaluation of four of these online courses and recommendations for improvements to achieve the highest-quality design and delivery. We used an evaluation matrix consisting of 95 criteria based on recommended best practices in eLearning. Our results showed that these courses are developing or meeting nearly 73% of the criteria, while they are not meeting approximately 21% of the criteria. Together, one or more of the courses are developing or meeting 89 of the 95 criteria. These results suggest that the necessary skills and expertise exist in these programs to bring all of the eLearning courses close to 100% proficiency by sharing a common set of best practices. This paper is part of a collection of articles analyzing the Fogarty International Center's International Research Ethics Education and Curriculum Development Program.
AggarwalR.GupteN.KassN.TaylorH.AliJ.BhanA. (2011). A comparison of online versus on-site training in health research methodology: A randomized study. BMC Medical Education, 11, 37.
2.
AndersonL. W., & KrathwohlD. R. (2001). A taxonomy learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
3.
BenatarS. R. (2001). Distributive justice and clinical trials in the Third World. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 22(3), 169–176.
4.
BhuttaA. Z. (2002). Ethics in international health research: A perspective from the developing world. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 80, 114–120.
5.
CalderonO.PatrakaA., & CiabocchiL. (2012). Multidimensional assessment of pilot blended learning: Maximizing program effectiveness based on faculty and student feedback. Journal of Asynchronous Leanring Networks, 16, 23–27.
6.
CoxB., & CoxB. (2008). Developing interpersonal and group dynamics through asynchronous threaded discussions: The use of discussion board in collaborative learning. Education, 128(4), 553–565.
7.
CurranV. R., & FleetI. (2005). A review of evaluation outcomes of web-based continuing medical education. Medical Education, 39(6), 561–567.
8.
DickeyM. D. (2004). The impact of web-logs (blogs) on student perceptions of isolation and alienation in a web-based distance-learning environment. Open Learning, 19(3), 279–291.
GarrisonD. R., & KanukaH. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7, 95–105.
12.
GlickmanS. W.McHutchisonJ. G.PetersonE. D.CairnsC. B.HarringtonR. A.CaliffR. M. (2009). Ethical and scientific implications of the globalization of clinical research. New England Journal of Medicine, 360(8), 816–823.
13.
GunawardenaC. N., & McIsaacM. S. (2004). Distance education. In JonassenD. H. (Ed.), Handbook of research on education communications and technology (pp. 355–395). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
HyderA. A.WaliS. A.KhanA.N.TeohN.B.KassN. E., & DawsonL. (2004). Ethical review of health research: A perspective from developing country researchers. Journal of Medical Ethics, 38, 68–72.
17.
IbrahimM.RwegasiraK. S. P., & TaherA. (2007). Institutional factors affecting students' intentions to withdraw from distance learning programs in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: The case of the Arab Open University (AOU). Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 10(2). Retrieved from www.westga.edu/∼distance/ojdla/spring2101/ibrahim2101.htm.
18.
JonassenD. H.MyersJ. M., & McKillopA. M. (1996). From constructivism to constructionism: Learning with hypermedia/multimedia rather than from it. In WilsonB. G. (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments (pp. 93–106). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Education Technology Publications.
19.
LarssonS.BoudD.DahlgrenM.A.WaltersS., & SorkT. (2005). Confronting globalisation: Learning from intercontinental collaboration. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(1), 61–71.
MathurR., & OliverL. (2007). Developing an international distance education program: A blended learning approach. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 10(4). Retrieved from www.westga.edu/∼distance/ojdla/winter2104/mathur2104.html.
MerriamS. B.CaffarellaR. S., & BaumgartnerL. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
25.
National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC). (2001a). Ethical and policy issues in international research: Clinical trials in developing countries. 2 vols. Rockville, MD: U.S. Government Printing Office.
26.
National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC). (2001b). Ethical and policy issues in research involving human participants. Rockville, MD: U.S. Government Printing Office.
27.
OkzanS., & KoselerR. (2009). Multi-dimensional students' evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation. Computers and Education, 534, 1285–1296.
28.
PomboL.LoureiroM. J., & MoreiraA. (2010). Assessing collaborative work in a higher education blended learning context: Strategies and students' perceptions. Educational Media International, 7(3), 217–229.
29.
PowerM. (2008). The emergence of a blended online learning environment. Merlot Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(4), 503–514.
30.
PrecelK.Eshet-AlkalaiE., & AlbertonY. (2009). Pedagogical and design aspects of a blended learning course. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(2), Retrieved from www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2618/1221.
31.
Program on Ethical Issues in International Health Research at the Harvard School of Public Health. (2002). Retrieved from www.hsph.harvard.edu/bioethics/.
ReevesT. C., & OakleyJ. R. (1996). Alternative assessment for constructivist learning environments. In WilsonB. G. (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
34.
TRREE. (2013). Training and resources for research ethics evaluation. Retrieved from http://elearning.trree.org.
35.
TwiggC. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: Lessons learned from round I of the PEW grant program in course redesign. Troy, NY: Center for Academic Transformation: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
