Group items tagged

MOOCs, or "Massive Open Online Courses", are a relatively new model of distance e-learning where hundreds and sometimes thousands of participants all take an online course together. The instructional mode of the courses is fairly decentralized; since there are so many participants in the course, the individual students cannot typically expect to have much individual interaction with the professors running the course. As a result, individual members of the MOOCs take on roles of peer teachers, and these roles are assumed organically (i.e. nobody invites them to become teachers in the course, they simply step up and take the reins). The assessment of MOOCs is extremely flexible; there are no grades and people only participate in what they want to participate in. The theory is that the MOOC creators put the learning environment into place, and the participants learn what they want to learn; less participation simply means that they will not learn as much. Thought this was a though-provoking model of eLearning and the changing role of the instructor in an eLearning environment.

Provides an interesting classification system for MOOCs, of which edX, Coursera, and Udacity fall into one category--content-based. The other two MOOC categories are network-based and task-based. Interesting argument...

Sebastian Thrun, CEO of Udacity, has openly admitted that his company's MOOC courses are a lousy replacement for actual university class and instead will be taking his company to focus more on corporate training. I personally will reserve further judgement until after I finish the readings for next week.

Grif - where did the Stephen Downes quote come from ? I read the Rebecca Schuman article and don't really agree with her. To expand on the Schuman quote you posted - it's really interesting how she says the massive lecture format doesn't work but then provides two examples of massive technology that do work - texting and World of Warcraft. This relates directly to some of what we talked about earlier this semester. I don't think it's the 'massive,' as Schuman implies, that causes the failure of a MOOC. It's part of the design. Once the design is better and more engaging, then MOOCs may find that they have higher retention rates. Schuman: Successful education needs personal interaction and accountability, period. This is, in fact, the same reason students feel annoyed, alienated, and anonymous in large lecture halls and thus justified in sexting and playing World of Warcraft during class-and why the answer is not the MOOC, but the tiny, for-credit, in-person seminar that has neither a sexy acronym nor a potential for huge corporate partnerships.

The Downes quote was from OLDaily, which is a daily listserve of his that I subscribe too. I think the difference between texting/WoW and MOOCs is that, while both have many many users, the former two have means in which those groups are disaggregated into smaller units that are largely responsible for the UX/individual growth that goes on. I agree with you that massive is not necessarily the failure, in fact, I think it's the best thing they have going for them. However, until the design can leverage meaningful collaboration, like WoW and texting, the massive will remain a burden.

Here's an example of one person who excelled in a MOOC. While everyone may not have the drive of this student, this is a good example of how an online technology facilitated a social learning group. Also - yet another example of how online resources can benefit people across the country who do not otherwise have access.

A friend just sent me this same article, Molly! However, my takeaway was much different. Whenever I read articles about young people doing extraordinary things with limited resources and technology, my first thought is always "how is this possible??" The article addresses my question directly: "The answer has to do with Battushig's extraordinary abilities, of course, but also with the ambitions of his high-school principal." The principal, also a graduate of MIT, was focused on developing more skilled engineers in Mongolia, and made it his mission to bring science and tech labs to his students; while MOOCs, the government's heavy investment in IT infrastructure, and the ubiquity of a 3G network made it possible to extend and enhance learning opportunities, the students may have never been exposed to engineering were it not for the encouragement of the principal. This human component, combined with technology, was what nurtured Battushig's drive and talent. This path will not work for just any student. If most homes in Mongolia have an Internet connection and even nomads cell phones, why have more people not found success with MOOCs? The author of the article summed it up best when she said, "Battushig's success also showed that schools could use MOOCs to find exceptional students all over the globe." Battushig is exceptional, just as elevated learning through MOOCs is still the "exception" and not the rule. MOOCs still lack a certain (perhaps human?) element that can move them from producing the anomaly of one "boy genius" to a more widespread level of learning.

Hi Laura - That's a good point about the principal. The principal and the student were both exceptional. While I do not think that MOOCs, as they are right now, can work for everyone, I do think that this example of educating an exceptional student is heartening. Maybe this exceptional student can learn a lot and then in turn, help others in his community. As undemocratic as it is, many advances in society are made by individuals or small groups of people. Overall though, I agree that MOOCs lack, as you said maybe a human element, to promote widespread education.

I think it's curious that you're having universities like Antioch and others that are including MOOC courses as for credit options without any kind of evaluation or data on the actual efficacy of MOOCs, let alone specific classes.

My understanding of the pilot program is that students will still have faculty-led components, though, so it's not purely MOOC. It's more like a blended-learning environment that uses the MOOC as the digital part. So the students will have Antioch exams and homework sets, discussions, etc. If they are satisfied with the efficacy after the pilot, then they will expand the model.

MOOCs are losing momentum as word spreads that they are not wonderful, but a popular topic still can get a big initial enrollment.

Are MOOCs really losing momentum? It seems as if there is still a lot of hype in the media about it, and campuses are continuing to add classes based on the MOOC concept. Even here at HGSE, there is talk of MOOC type classes.

Another article about MOOCs and some general criticisms. I haven't heard the "groupthink" argument before (if everyone took the same MOOC on economics, we would all have the same opinion of economics instead of generating healthy debates), so that was interesting to see.

The Knight Center's MOOC on data visualization was a bit smaller than traditional MOOCs (it actually capped enrollment at 2000), but the second version of the same class already has 4000 students registered. It sounds like the professor gave a lot of attention to the students and the projects, and the fact that the numbers went up is a good sign.

A letter to President Obama about MOOCs and higher education, from his council of advisors on science and technology. This was released just a couple of days ago and highlights some of the potential benefits and current issues in the ongoing MOOC debate which we have all discussed. "Although the new technologies introduced by MOOCs are still in their infancy, and many questions and challenges remain, we believe that they hold the possibility of transforming education at all levels by providing better metrics for educational outcomes, and better alignment of incentives for innovation in pedagogy."

"The advent of this so-called "lousy product" - the MOOC - may be triggering a change, however. Indeed, recent survey evidence suggests that the acceptance of online learning among certain constituencies may be plateauing. Is it possible that a backlash against MOOCs could even precipitate a decline in the broader acceptance of online learning?"

This article looks at one case study in El Salvador where MOOCs have cracked open the door for university reform. Universities in emerging markets operate on really low budgets compared to U.S. universities, and MOOCs give them access to current content, especially important for high-tech subjects.

A year in review about MOOCs

Britain jumps into the MOOC Mania

Financial analysis of MOOCs and potential impact on lesser-known universities...though I think people are still trying to figure out where MOOCs play in the general higher education landscape.

Looks like there is some funding available to scientifically evaluate MOOCs for remedial education! I think the results will be interesting to see, since I remember from discussion or a reading that some ed tech seems to work for autism and special needs students...so maybe MOOCs also have a niche.

The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is offering ten grants for MOOCs that reach lower achievers in schools.

A new publication dedicated solely to MOOCs.

Semester Online is a MOOC consortium intending to compete with edX

A new experiment in online learning: MIT OpenCourseWare, Codecademy, OpenStudy and P2PU are partnering together to offer a new kind of MOOC. The first course is "A Gentle Introduction to Python." It sends out emails to thousands of small groups pointing them to lectures, tutorials, and exercises - but also encourages learners to think for themselves and share additional resources with each other. It provides a map to learning Python, but doesn't discourage folks from careening off the beaten path. 

An interesting, critical appraisal of MOOCs' transformative potential by education historian Larry Cuban. Includes some hilarious graphics, in addition to good insights...