![A
tec[h]tonic
shiC?
• Analogies?
• Public
libraries
• iTunes
• Green
slips
• Democracy
in
Middle
East
• RockNroll
in
the
60s
• Divided
opinions
• SkepPcs
Gartner
Hype
• CriPcs
Cycle
• Proponents
(Source: Gartner, 2008)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/kenneybowermoocssep2012-120924211020-phpapp02/85/A-snapshot-of-MOOCs-in-Higher-Education-6-320.jpg)
![Type‐target‐intent
of
MOOC
futures
(Source: Bonk, 2012)
Poten<al that the
1. AlternaPve
admissions
system
or
list may have
11. Goodwill
significant overlap
hiring
system
with non‐
12. Interdisciplinary
2. Just‐in‐Time
skills
and
competencies
educa<onal large
13. RecruiPng
(Cross,
2012)
crowd online
3. Theory‐
or
Trend‐Drive
14. MarkePng
(Cross,
2012)
experiences
4. Professional
development
15. Conference
(Cross,
2012)
5. Loss
Leader
(dip
toe
in
water)
6. Bait
and
switch
16. Learning
Room
(Cross,
2012)
17. Religious
Revival
?
7. Experimental
18. RotaPng
The list may have
8. Degree/Program
Qualifier
or
System
nothing to do with
Bo/leneck
19. Repeatable
the purpose and
20. Re‐usable
MOOC
func<on of MOOCs
9. Personality
as originally
10. Name
Branding
constructed
(Bonk, 2012)
The list responded to questions posed by
the University [Indiana University] CIO and VP IT](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/kenneybowermoocssep2012-120924211020-phpapp02/85/A-snapshot-of-MOOCs-in-Higher-Education-22-320.jpg)
![MOOCs
as
game‐changers:
educators
• Pressure
on
exisPng
courses
to
look
towards
enhancing
openness
(Kernohan, 2012)
• Going
back
to
regular
classes
is
impossible
aCer
[MOOCs]
Wonderland
(Thrun, 2012)
• Unbundled
roles
and
mulPple
players
in
Personal
Learning
Environments
(PLEs)
(Downes, 2010; 2011) :
‐
who
is
responsible?:
– Learner;
Collector;
Curator;
Alchemist;
Programmer;
Salesperson;
Convener;
Coordinator;
Designer;
Coach;
Agitator;
Facilitator;
Tech
Support;
Moderator;
CriPc;
Lecturer;
Demonstrator;
Mentor;
Connector;
Theorizer;
Sharer;
Evaluator;
Bureaucrat.
• Personal
learning
environments
(Kop, 2010; 2011; Fournier & Kop, 2011)
• Rather
than
replacing
the
teacher,
technology
has
in
many
ways
increased
the
focus
on
pedagogic
skills.
The
art
of
the
pracPPoner
as
insPgator,
designer
and
animateur
remains
key
to
the
process
of
learning
(JISC, 2009, in JISC MOOC Webinar, 2012)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/kenneybowermoocssep2012-120924211020-phpapp02/85/A-snapshot-of-MOOCs-in-Higher-Education-28-320.jpg)
![[ m
a
s
s
i
v
e
o
p
e
n
o
n
l
i
n
e
]
c
o
u
r
s
e
s
Thank
you.
Contacts:
jacqueline.kenney@mq.edu.au
ma/.bower@mq.edu.au](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/kenneybowermoocssep2012-120924211020-phpapp02/85/A-snapshot-of-MOOCs-in-Higher-Education-39-320.jpg)
More Related Content
Similar to A snapshot of MOOCs in Higher Education (20)
A snapshot of MOOCs in Higher Education
- 1. Kenney, J.L. & Bower, M. (2012). Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): A snapshot. Presented at Expanding Horizons, L&T Week, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia, 18 September. Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): A snapshot Jacqueline Kenney & Ma/ Bower Department of Education, Macquarie University Tue 18 Sep, 2012
- 2. Session outline Introducing MOOCs Characterising MOOCs Extreme Openness & Disruptive Pedagogy Criticism, Consequences & Questions Alternatives and Futures
- 3. (Source: Lewin, 2012, in Siemens, 2012)
- 4. ‘I think this could be big the way Google was’ (L. John Doerr, Venture Capitalist, Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers & Coursera Board member) Coursera Founders: Daphne Koller & Andrew Ng, Stanford University (Source:Berger (image); Young, 2012, in Siemens, 2012)
- 5. (Source: Weissmann, 2012, in Siemens, 2012)
- 6. A tec[h]tonic shiC? • Analogies? • Public libraries • iTunes • Green slips • Democracy in Middle East • RockNroll in the 60s • Divided opinions • SkepPcs Gartner Hype • CriPcs Cycle • Proponents (Source: Gartner, 2008)
- 7. Introducing MOOCs A Misnomer? • Massive open online courses: • MOOC as misnomer (Wiley, 2012): – provide no constraints on class size; – Many are massive but not open; – run over a defined Pme period; and, – Many are open but not massive; and, – Many try not to be courses. – are open to all. • ‘Almost every so‐called MOOC • Early instanPaPon pa/ern: ‘let’s put on a violates at least one le/er in the course here, right now’; acronym’. • Recent offerings: – make exisPng university teaching • Not all MOOCs (Cormier & Siemens, 2010): – Mirror discussion at a conference, materials freely available online; in a research lab, or in a workshop; – use computer marked assessment; and, – Bring a wide variety of perspecPves – may give parPcipants cerPficates of on a given topic; complePon. – Members resemble ‘people in a corner having an in‐depth discussion that they can choose to (Source: Open University, 2012, p. 19) enter’; and, – Have enough course structure for interested learners to ‘build sufficient language and experPse to parPcipate peripherally or directly’
- 8. MOOC • Berklee College of Music, Brown Uni., Columbia Uni., Emory Uni., Hebrew Uni.of Jerusalem, Hong Kong Uni. of Science and Technology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Ohio State Timeline Uni., Uni.of British Columbia, Uni.of California at Irvine, University of Florida, Uni.of London, Uni.of Maryland at College Park, Uni.of Melbourne, Uni.of Pittsburgh, Vanderbilt Uni., Wesleyan Uni. 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 • CCK (Connectivism, • Change MOOC & Connective • Digital Storytelling, Knowledge) George • Numerous smaller • Intro to Openness Jim Groom & Martha Siemens, Stephen MOOCs in Education, David Burtis, University of Downes, Athabasca Mary Washington Wiley, OE US Virtual Worlds, University & National Games & Ed Tour • Personal Learning • Artificial Intelligence, P2PU Research Council Sebastian Thrun & Environments (Canada) (25 fee- Peter Norvig, • Virtual Schooling, Networks & paying students + Stanford University Michael Barbour, Knowledge, Dave >2,300 MOOCers* (>160,000 starters) Wayne State Uni Cormier, George *Dave Cormier and Bryan Alexander Siemens & Stephen • Udacity formed • MobiMOOC coined ‘MOOCs’ during CCK ac<vi<es Downes (Thrun) Ignatia Webs • Coursera launched • Georgia Tech, Duke Uni., Open but not always Massive OOCs: Stanford University Uni.of Washington, Rice • Social Media & Open Ed, Alec Courous, University of Regina (2008); Open (Koller & Ng) Uni., Caltech, Uni.of Education Intro , David Wiley, Utah State University (2007); Codecademy/ • edX (MIT (MITx) Edinburgh, Uni.of P2PU (Sims & Bubinski) (2011); Khan Academy – over 189 million lessons; Harvard & Berkeley) Toronto, EPFL Lausanne Academic Earth; Skillshare >5,000 teachers (2011); World Education (Switz.), Johns Hopkins University (2012); Saylor Foundation; Course Hero; Faculty project Uni., UCSF, Uni.of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, (Sources: Ruminate, 2010; OU, 2012; Webs, 2012; Open Education, 2012; Virtual Schooling, Nextweb, 2012; Uni.of Virginia P2PU, 2012; Bavatuesdays, 2012; Marginson, 2012; Coecademy, 2012; Coursera, 2012; Academicearth, 2012)
- 9. MOOCdom A MOOC Directory Keeping up with MOOCs: • All MOOC providers (as registered): • Register with mooc.ca newsle/er: h/p://www.mooc.ca/courses.htm h/p://www.mooc.ca/cgi‐bin/ • Class central: login.cgi?refer=&acPon=Register h/p://www.class‐central.com/ Some resources on MOOCS: Early and original MOOCs: • MOOCs starPng point (to Aug 2012): • CCKChange: h/p://www.worldofwebcast.com/ h/p://change.mooc.ca post/massive‐list‐of‐mooc‐resources‐ • DS106 (Digital Storytelling): lit‐and‐literaP h/p://ds106.us/about/ • OOCs starPng point: • Social Media & Open EducaPon: h/p://openeducaPon.us/ h/p://eci831.ca/about/ ParDcipate in a MOOC on Higher EducaDon Futures (8 Oct to 16 Nov 2012): • InvitaPon, overview & partners: h/p://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEXnVTD0B10 • Register: h/p://www.edfutures.net/index.php?Ptle=Special:UserLogin/signup
- 10. (Source: Change MOOC, 2012) Stephen Downes (Na<onal Research Council, Canada), Dave Cormier (University of Prince Edward Island), and George Siemens (Athabasca University). We've collaborated on numerous online courses before and have conPnued to refine our pedagogical methods and our technical infrastructure. The format this year is different from what we've done in the past: we've invited a group of fascinaPng thinkers to share their experPse with us ‐ one per week. Change MOOC Sep 2011 to May 2012
- 11. (Source: DS106, 2102) DS106 Digital Storytelling MOOC Ongoing since December 2010
- 12. (Source: P2PU, 2012) Virtual Worlds, Games & EducaDon Tour MOOC March to April 2012 and spinoffs to ARG Academy (May), Machinima OOC (June‐July)
- 13. Jesse Stommel et al Marylhurst University & Georgia Tech (Images: Kevin Dooley; Richard Elzey gregw66; Nomadic Lass; JD Hancock; cjdc) MOOC MOOC August 2012 for one week (Source: Hybrid Pedagogy, 2012)
- 14. A MOOC task to define MOOCs … Q: (Source: Hybrid Pedagogy MOOC MOOC, 2012) A: Massive: A typical classroom can hold 30 students or even more. An auditorium around 300. A massive class can go exponentially beyond these numbers: thousands, hundred-thousands, or even millions, a group size beyond Dunbar‘s number for a ‘tribe’ (500-2500 individuals). Open: Available for free and to anyone willing and able to participate. Not bound by geography or time zones. Uses open tools. Uses open educational resources and creative commons licensed assets. Generates open content that can, in turn, be reused freely. Online: Use of the Internet, where individual people from all over the world can participate in the event. Includes access via mobile devices. Course: A sequence of lessons imparting knowledge via an instructor, who guides the process and established guidelines for participation, earning credit, and passing. Conversely, Davidson uses the ‘C’ to stand for “courseware,” and sees the MOOC as the platform to run the learning on, not the act of learning itself. >500 people collaborated on a 1,000 word essay to define MOOCs MOOC MOOC on googledocs (available at: h/p://www.hybridpedagogy.com)
- 15. 6.002x: Circuits and Electronics MOOC (edX - MIT) September to December 2012
- 16. Model Thinking MOOC (Coursera – University of Michigan) September to November 2012
- 17. There are many potential benefits of MOOCs, including flexible access, multiple learning pathways, social inclusion, intercultural collaboration, digital literacy development, and potentially immersion in a community of practice that may result in a lifelong learning network. (Source: Cormier, 2012) (Source: King, 2012) MOOCs not only have the potential to alter the relationship between learner and instructor, but also between academy and the wider community (EDUCAUSE, 2011). MOOCs allow for collaboration that is not immediately available in a traditional style classroom.
- 18. David Wiley OPE NN ESS • Open systems – EducaPon 2.0 • Open classrooms – Crowdsourcing • Open knowledge – Knowmads • Open learning – Everyone Sources: Virtual School MOOC, 2012; Open Education, 2012; Morovec, 2008; UNESCO, 2012)
- 19. Characterising MOOCs to date … • MOOCs integrate: – ConnecPvity of social networking; – FacilitaPon of an acknowledged expert in a field of study; and, – CollecPon(s) of freely accessible online resources. • MOOCs build on parPcipants who: – Are acPvely engaged in learning; – Register in large numbers (several hundred to several thousand parPcipants); – Self‐organise parPcipaPon according to learning goals, prior knowledge and skills, and common interests; and, – Have Internet access. • MOOC offerings: – Start, end and run on predefined Pmelines and topics; – Are usually without fees; – Have no prerequisites beyond Internet access and interest and, – Do not predefine expectaPons for parPcipaPon; and – Frequently give no formal accreditaPon for successful course complePon. (Source: McAuley, Steward, Siemens & Cormier, 2010, pp. 4-5)
- 20. Pedagogic typology of MOOCs • cMOOCs (DS106, CCK08‐9‐10‐12) ‐ connecPvist: – Content as a starPng point: learners expected to create/extend – Changed relaPonship between teacher/learners – Distributed, chaoPc and emergent – Learners are expected to create, grow, expand domain and share personal sense‐making through arPfact creaPon cMOOCs focus on – Distributed, oCen blog‐based, learner created forums and spaces knowledge creation – Instructor graded assessment and peer‐commented tasks and generation whereas xMOOCs • xMOOCs (Coursera/Edx): focus on knowledge – Formal (tradiPonal) course structure and flow duplication (Siemens, 2012) – TradiPonal relaPonship between teacher/learner – Learners are expected to duplicate/master what they are taught – Centralised discussion forum support – Automated assessment and peer‐reviewed assessment (Sources: Siemens, 2012; Downes, 2012)
- 21. Goal‐based typology of MOOCs • Network‐based MOOCs: Goal: conversaPon, socially constructed knowledge; Pedagogy: connecPvist style. • Task‐based MOOCs: Goal: skills, topics and varied formats with distributed learning and community. Pedagogy: instrucPvism and construcPvism. • Content‐based MOOCs: 1. Categories are not mutually exclusive Goal: acquisiPon of ? 2. Pedagogy is the difference (Siemens, 2012) 3. Depth of analysis required (ie, family resemblances) (Lukeš, 2012) content knowledge. Pedagogy: instrucPvist. (Source: Lane, 2012)
- 22. Type‐target‐intent of MOOC futures (Source: Bonk, 2012) Poten<al that the 1. AlternaPve admissions system or list may have 11. Goodwill significant overlap hiring system with non‐ 12. Interdisciplinary 2. Just‐in‐Time skills and competencies educa<onal large 13. RecruiPng (Cross, 2012) crowd online 3. Theory‐ or Trend‐Drive 14. MarkePng (Cross, 2012) experiences 4. Professional development 15. Conference (Cross, 2012) 5. Loss Leader (dip toe in water) 6. Bait and switch 16. Learning Room (Cross, 2012) 17. Religious Revival ? 7. Experimental 18. RotaPng The list may have 8. Degree/Program Qualifier or System nothing to do with Bo/leneck 19. Repeatable the purpose and 20. Re‐usable MOOC func<on of MOOCs 9. Personality as originally 10. Name Branding constructed (Bonk, 2012) The list responded to questions posed by the University [Indiana University] CIO and VP IT
- 23. Visual pracPce (Source: Forsythe, 2012)
- 24. ConnecPvist and rhizomaPc views ConnecPvist view of knowing (Siemens, 2004; 2006): • Knowing is the culminaPon of the connecPons between people • Learning and connecPon: professional, personal and academic • But … it is also connecPon between organised and disorganised worlds …… world of the Web RhizomaPc view of knowledge (Cormier, 2008; 2010; Open University, 2012): • A rhizomaPc plant has no center and no defined boundary; rather, it is made up of a number of semi‐independent nodes, each of which is capable of growing and spreading on its own, bounded only by the limits of its habitat • No one place where knowledge about a ma/er begins and ends • Stores knowledge in people and community (rather than publicaPon) which accommodates a faster rate of change (flux) – knowledge as a moving target • RhizomaPc knowers use a variety of approaches and tools, and community to test/ filter ideas (networking and the social web) • Social learning pracPces and discursive knowledge discovery • Towards community as a valid knowledge repository and away from packaged views of knowledge and experPse – knowledge as fluid, in transiPon and useable (Source: Forsythe, 2012 (image))
- 25. (Source: Class Central, 2012) Impact: Coursera ‘Their web classes consist of a ballet‐like interplay between • 17 internaPonal insPtuPons whiteboard‐style chalk talks, cutaways to professors’ own • USD$22 million funding narraPon, and a steady procession of one‐quesPon quizzes • >680,000 students in under 12 months to make sure students are keeping pace.’ (Anders, 2012) (Ferenstein, 2012) ‘tendency to conservaPve approaches’ (Weller, JISC MOOC Webinar, Impact: edX 2012) … ‘the potenPal missing element of ‘See me’ – the • USD$60 million funding (Hack, 2012) personal element,.’ … are we making connecPons or just throwing out content & MCQs?’ (White, JISC MOOC Webinar, 2012)
- 26. MOOCs as game‐changers: students • Off‐campus access to universiPes (Evans in Roscoria, 2012) • PresPge higher educaPon, for free: ‘There is only one Elvis, and only one Harvard’ (Marginson, 2012) • Direct access for recruitment & to job search • Control & choice: (Skilledup, 2012) • Supplementary educaPon (Gates Foundation, 2012) • Produce knowledge‐producing learners (Moravec, 2012)
- 27. Now Choice George Siemens, Learning & Knowledge AnalyDcs Unit – Athabasca University 2013
- 28. MOOCs as game‐changers: educators • Pressure on exisPng courses to look towards enhancing openness (Kernohan, 2012) • Going back to regular classes is impossible aCer [MOOCs] Wonderland (Thrun, 2012) • Unbundled roles and mulPple players in Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) (Downes, 2010; 2011) : ‐ who is responsible?: – Learner; Collector; Curator; Alchemist; Programmer; Salesperson; Convener; Coordinator; Designer; Coach; Agitator; Facilitator; Tech Support; Moderator; CriPc; Lecturer; Demonstrator; Mentor; Connector; Theorizer; Sharer; Evaluator; Bureaucrat. • Personal learning environments (Kop, 2010; 2011; Fournier & Kop, 2011) • Rather than replacing the teacher, technology has in many ways increased the focus on pedagogic skills. The art of the pracPPoner as insPgator, designer and animateur remains key to the process of learning (JISC, 2009, in JISC MOOC Webinar, 2012)
- 29. ‘When analyzing the disruption potential of MOOCs, it is easy to forget that the actual concept is just 4 or 5 years old. Furthermore, the actual definition of the concept has undergone a significant change in the past 12 months as an entirely new branch has emerged.’ (Hill, 2012) ‘Especially disturbing is that none of the major MOOC providers have hired anyone trained in instrucPonal design, the learning sciences, educaPonal technology, course design, or other educaPonal specialPes to help with the design of their courses. They are hiring a lot of programmers…’ (Source: Edtechdev, Wordpress, 2012 in Siemens, 2012)
- 30. MOOCs as game‐changers: universiDes MOOCs are one of four economic pressures on US higher ed (King & Sen, 2012): 1. The Internet: from community, to exams and books; 2. Distance Ed: US university students taking online = 20% one course; 9% whole degree (US DoE, 2011); 3. For‐Profit UniversiPes: low‐touch and no research but high spend on teaching (Uni. of Phoenix spends USD$200 million per year teaching‐related R&D); 4. Online start‐ups: MOOCs as no‐touch, profitable at scale, overcome physical limits to student numbers and uPlise exisPng technology, people & processes No. % Students Enrolled at public, private No. US Colleges/UniversiDes & for‐profit universiDes (Source: NCES in King & Sen, 2012, p. 6)
- 31. Barriers to sustainability 1. Developing revenue models to make the concept self-sustaining; 2. Delivering valuable signifiers of completion such as credentials, badges or acceptance into accredited programs; 3. Providing an experience and perceived value that enables higher course completion rates (most today have less than 10% of registered students actually completing the course); and 4. Authenticating students in a manner to satisfy accrediting institutions or hiring companies that the student identify is actually known. (Source: Hill, 2012)
- 32. CriDcisms of MOOCs • A red herring that won’t solve higher ed being bust. The issues are about higher ed, digital pedagogy and online learning (Stommel, 2012) • Success is measured by subscripPon (Cohen, 2012) • They remove teaching students from educaPon • Suitability to quanPtaPve subjects, parPcularly for objecPve quesPons and assessment (Skilledup, 2012) • The difference between a real college course and a MOOC is like the difference between playing golf and watching golf. (Vaidhyanathan, 2012) • …MOOC's videos of talking heads, famous profs giving the same old lectures they give in their outdated face‐to‐face classrooms. Really? We think THIS is preparing students for the 21st century? Paradigm shiC? No. That's squandering a technology, not taking advantage of its parPcular affordances that cannot be duplicated elsewhere in the analog, pre‐digital world… (Davidson, 2012)
- 33. Contextualizing socio‐cultural fit of technology uses … . . we need to think about which technologies relate most deeply to what makes us profoundly human . . (Source: Puentedura, 2012)
- 34. Aligning uses of technologies in MOOCs … Paths and possibiliDes of the profoundly human in ed tech (Source: Puentedura, 2012)
- 35. An AlternaDve: Li/le Open Online Courses (LOOCs) OpenU, The University of Maine (Kolowich, 2012)
- 36. MOOC Dimensions ‐ Pedagogical • InstrucPon ‐ quality and modality of resources • InteracPon ‐ forums and how they are used • Co‐construcPon ‐ students work together to create knowledge products (e.g. wiki) • Teachers' input ‐ administraPve versus learning focus • Assessment ‐ Peer marking vs automated • AccreditaPon ‐ none versus cerPficate versus full qualificaPon • New models ‐ quality of informaPon representaPon and facilitaPng sharing
- 37. MOOC Dimensions – InsPtuPonal • Purely for markePng • ArPculaPon/syphon to courses • AdverPsing • InformaPon harvesPng • Small cost (Freemium model) • Pay for accreditaPon • Premium for educaPonal service
- 38. PotenPal MOOC futures • PresenPng delivery opPons: – On a spectrum with other modaliPes – As a combinaPve modality with other delivery modes • PresenPng pedagogic alternaPves: – Outcome specific learning design tools (eg, research, in‐situ learning, community building tools, advanced learning development, etc) – To suit diverse student groups and to support diverse learning needs • ContribuPng to the overall student experience • Contextualizing uses with other technologies (Sources: Skillshare, 2012 (image))
- 39. [ m a s s i v e o p e n o n l i n e ] c o u r s e s Thank you. Contacts: [email protected] ma/[email protected]