Group items tagged

How an open course can work. "We don't want the students to remember the formulas. We want to change the way they look at the world."

I liked how Ted explains the way students access to Open Courses and how right he is when he says that if there are no due dates, even if the topic is very interesting, there are always other things to do first, therefore, you end up not doing it. I am also with him in not doing moocs to long that can get you bored and end up losing all your attention.

very informative!

In 1990, after seven years of teaching at Harvard, Eric Mazur, now Balkanski professor of physics and applied physics, was delivering clear, polished lectures and demonstrations and getting high student evaluations for his introductory Physics 11 course, populated mainly by premed and engineering students who were successfully solving complicated problems. Then he discovered that his success as a teacher "was a complete illusion, a house of cards."

The thing that I liked most about this article (and I really liked it!) was the mention of numerous research studies that have looked into the effects of active learning. Also how Mazur himself collects data on his students' results. The fact that interactive learning can be backed by empirical research only adds to its strength as an effective pedagogical method.

Digital technologies and online learning environments permitting harvesting, analysis and use of student data is nothing new in higher education. They open up a number of opportunities and equally a number of perils - creating the need for higher education institutions to find ways to protect the harvested data.

Dr Jane McGonigal (a professional game developer) talks about the time spent playing video games (which approximates to the span of human evolution), and that this time has to increase to make any major changes to the world. I have selected this resource partially in relation to week 3's Clarke's lecture (and others), which talks about using our idle time to do something meaningful - participate in citizen science games, for example. Dr McGonigal's talk very much illustrates this point - except that it talks about solving global issues through indirect games, e.g. a World Without Oil online game simulates a world in which you have to survive oil shortage. Creator's research shows, that people maintain the skills and habits they have taken up after playing this intense game, which include making better choices for our changing environment. The only difference here from actual citizen science games is that Dr McGonigal's games are fictional (rather than providing direct data / input for actual scientific research), however, they empower people to influence global change, which is the topic of the other lectures this week, especially Morozov's thoughts about the power of internet and connectiveness to create "revolutions". Although Morozov has taken up a rather critical view, suggesting only those who want it, take the best from the Internet, Dr McGonigal's ideas might be what bridges the two - taking games, which are integral part of many people's lives, especially in the younger generation, and turning them into real "life schools" may help more people get the idea and the essential skills to "fix" their environments. In all honesty, this is a video I would watch again and again, and recommend it to anyone who would listen (and that doesn't happen often for me).

Gamification for learning - using game elements - sounds very promising. Prior to the internet, technology, there were board games or hands on projects - all with the intent to engage and interact with each other. So it is no surprise to me given the appropriate design/project that students can learn and solve real world problems. Letting students choose their persona and role also allows them to make their own future and take ownership for how they want to participate. Just like the original promise of multimedia training that was purported to replace the traditional classroom events and enable getting the "best" teacher recorded for all to have the same experience...I believe it was then thought that the learning experience needs o be "blended". Different techniques - online, face to face, etc.. This is not my field of expertise so these are just personal opinions. If the online game approach can be combined with face to face and tactile/outdoor activities, aka a blended approach - I think that might be very useful. I do also believe that design solutions should be encouraging win win situations to reinforce collaboration and the feeling that all can succeed. One question I might have is how do you measure success in learning?

Gaming promoters unfortunately for me have a commercial agenda and its always difficult to make that balance of pure learning and commercialization aspect

This is an open education tutorial that is designed to help people find the courses that they want to take. Provide directions on how to define success when taking an open education course so that you have a plan that you can execute. Finally it gives ways to stay motivated when taking and open education course so that you can fulfill your goals. This was created by a student in the OKMOOC.

Thanks for linking to this tutorial. I think it touches on some great points of staying motivated while participating in courses that rely more on self directed initiatives (such as this mooc)!

Recently had to use YouTube to figure out how to make videos licensed under the creative commons!

Interesting how the article closed with this statement: "The rethink of Moocs has given rise to a new buzzword in the education industry: Spocs, which replace "massive" and "open" with "small" and "private". Should we change the "massive" and "open" words to ease fear of losing privacy, especially after viewing the video on online privacy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCmKJyVx9AY Your thoughts?

The site won't allow me to read the article without a subscription. The heading of the article touched on my initial concerns for this course. In saying that, my experience at University showed that the student's who wanted to really get something out of their studies were the least reliant on the guidance of their lecturers and found their own ways to improve making it easier for the lecturer to guide. I read this https://landing.athabascau.ca/blog/view/617323/what-is-connectivism article on connectivism which https://twitter.com/@stranack posted earlier. It makes sense that personal success within this education format relies on the pro activity of the student to engage in the described culture of connecting, forming groups, targeting desired information, and making sure that when they share it the reason it is important to others is made obvious.

Some preliminary findings from the MOOC Research Initiative.

Interesting that most people who do well in MOOCs are generally people who have a "growth mindset" and are not necessarily the people in most need of learning. I think any research on MOOCs is interesting since it is such a new phenomenon and it's going to be interesting to see how they evolve.

Very interesting indeed that it is not necessarily those people who are most in need of learning who do well in MOOCs. The question is how MOOC's can, indeed, become more beneficial and attractive to those who need them the most. Access to internet in rural areas around the globe, and availability of cheap computers are both key.