Group items tagged

This literature review (2015) by Dr Sarah Hayes, who is a lecturer in Technology Enhanced and Flexible Learning at Aston University, contributes to the MOOCs' debate. "The review demonstrates the breadth and quality of the discussions, and supporting evidence, that are continuing to occur. The review is provided on the basis of offering a wider range of resources, which offer different perspectives and different ways of thinking about the issue of quality that MOOCs generate. "

Yousef, A. M. F., Chatti, M. A., Wosnitza, M., & Schroeder, U. (2015). A Cluster Analysis of MOOC Stakeholder Perspectives. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 12(1). pp. 74-90. doi http://dx.doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v12i1.2253 Abstract "Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are providing opportunities for thousands of learners to participate in free higher education courses online. MOOCs have unique features that make them an effective Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) approach. Institutions are offering a growing variety of MOOCs. Nevertheless, there are several crucial challenges that should be considered in the development of MOOCs, e.g., the drop-out rate of over 95% of course participants. One of the potential reasons for that is the complexity and diversity of MOOC participants. This diversity is not only related to the cultural and demographic profile, but also considers the diverse motives and perspectives when enrolled in MOOCs. This paper aims to cluster and analyze the different objectives of MOOC stakeholders to build a deeper and better understanding of their behaviors. Our main finding was a set of eight clusters, i.e., blended learning, flexibility, high quality content, instructional design and learning methodologies, lifelong learning, network learning, openness, and student-centered learning. This cluster schema creates a meaningful picture for the MOOC community" (p. 71). This is a peer reviewed scholarly article that uses qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze survey data on MOOC instructors and learners. Responses were relatively low: 158. The context is unclear - where did they get the sampling frame from? And why did they combine the learners and instructors? So there is some question as to the sample and it cannot be generalized. That said, they are innovative in their qualitative analysis. The qualitative work analyzed the open ended questions in their survey. They used a research method that allowed them to catego

EDU681102 - Module 2, Week 2. Mark Ness, article #2.

Edited link - https://diigo.com/08285f

Although many libraries already offer some type of reference service geared toward people who use mobile devices, they generally focus on the reference transaction and not on some of the broader aspects of service, including availability of content for mobile devices and relationship of the library's services to mobile initiatives on campus. Asking the right questions during the planning process can assist librarians in clarifying their goals for the service, identifying units to work with on campus, and determining whether the service is successful. This is a rapidly developing area and flexibility is key. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] [Abstract from ESC Academic Search Complete database] Link: http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.library.esc.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=22&sid=777400f5-917a-43a0-83b8-26cdc83f8315%40sessionmgr4003&hid=4103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=49153076&db=a9h Lippincott, J. K. (2010). Mobile Reference: What Are the Questions?. Reference Librarian, 51(1), 1-11. doi:10.1080/02763870903373016