140509 (wr) v1 presentation moocs beyond the hype

Massive Open Online Courses: Beyond the Hype

Wilfred Rubens http://www.wilfredrubens.com

Project leader, e-learning consultant, blogger

Lector e-learning NTI

Project leader, e-learning consultant, blogger

Lector e-learning NTI

EMMA

• Providing multilingual access to European MOOCs

• Project, supported by EU

• Aim: showcase excellence in innovative teaching methodologies and learning approaches through the large-scale piloting of MOOCs on different subjects.

3

#EUMoocs http://europeanmoocs.eu/

EMMA

• System for delivery of MOOCsin multiple languages from different European universities

• To help preserve Europe’s rich cultural, educational and linguistic heritage

• To promote real cross-cultural and multi-lingual learning

4

#EUMoocs http://europeanmoocs.eu/

Who of you already….

5

Who of you already….

• Subscribed for a MOOC?

5

Who of you already….

• Subscribed for a MOOC?

• Started a MOOC?

5

Who of you already….

• Subscribed for a MOOC?

• Started a MOOC?

• Completed a MOOC?

5

6

7

7

Research on satisfaction and

participation

Content• Once upon a time….

• Reasons for offering a MOOC

• Pedagogical diversity of MOOCs

• Case study

• Lessons learned

• Pedagogy and quality

• Costs and benefits

• MOOC: whats in a name?

8

Once upon a time…

• 2003: Open educational resources came up

• 2008: first MOOCs connectivism (term: Dave Cormier)

• 2008: increasing focus on learning analytics

• 2011: first xMOOCs by ‘elite’ universities (hugh amount subscriptions)

• Coursera+Harvard+MIT: 5,6 million registered users (195 countries), ± 1700 MOOCs

9

10

Foto: Audrey Watters

Reasons for MOOCs• Increasing accessibility (higher) education

• Massive participation > feedback > quality

• Impression courses: lead to regular courses

• Marketing & branding

• Valorisation

• Innovation & improvement education (MOOC als laboratory)

• New business model

• Cost effectiveness

11

Pedagogical diversity

• cMOOCs: learning in networks, distributed learning technology, non-hierarchical, co-creation

• xMOOCs: video instructions, assessments (automatic feedback), fora with peers

• Pedagogical diversity increases (respond to critique)

12

12 Dimensional Classification Schema (Conolé, 2014)

• Degree of openness

• Scale of participation (massification)

• Amount of use of multimedia

• Amount of communication

• Extent collaboration is included

• Learner-centred - teacher-centred

13

• Level of quality assurance

• Extent to which reflection is encouraged

• Level of assessment

• Degree of formality

• Degree of autonomy

• Diversity of learners

Case study

14

Aims• Offering: keep up with e-learning profession (not interested

in program)

• High degree flexibility (e.g. learning needs)

• Experimenting with MOOC:

• Appropriate for professional development?

• Meaningful learning experience with student-teacher interaction?

• Alternative for cMOOC and xMOOC

15

Set up• Study tasks (different assignments). E.g.

learning theories and e-learning, pedagogy and e-learning (partly based on learners needs)

• Online live sessions (interviews, chat)

• 45 (discussion) assignments

• Self tests

• ± 100 resources (articles, papers, videos)

• Feedback by teachers

• Dutch

16

Set up (2)

• Turnaround time: 18 weeks

• Study load: max. 120 hours (cherry picking was promoted)

• Certificate (285 euro)

17

12 Dimensional Classification Schema (Conolé, 2014)• Degree of openness: full (except registration and certificate)

• Scale of participation: 890 learners subscribed

• Use of multimedia: live sessions, video

• Amount of communication

• Collaboration (peer feedback)

• Content mainly teacher-led, choices by learner

• Reflection by assignments (e.g. blog posts)

• No formal assessment

18

Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs

Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs

Experiences with MOOC

Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs

See how we designed a MOOC

Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs

Acquiring knowledge about new profession

Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs

Keeping up to date about existing profession

Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs

Certification

Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs

Extent to which MOOC met reasons participation (N=226)

Experiences with MOOC

See how we designed a MOOC

Acquiring knowledge about new profession

Keeping up to date about existing profession

Certification

Other

Satisfaction• 45 participants: participated sufficiently to provide

feedback MOOC

• 24,5% (very) dissatisfied, 44,5% (very) satisfied

• Mainly satisfied about online live sessions, resources, self assessments.

• Satisfaction influenced by….

Participation• 226 respondents: 80% started

• ‘Drop out’: 40% after 3 weeks, then gradually

• > 82%: did not (at all) study intensively, 6% did study (very) intensively

• 23 participants logged in 3 weeks after closure

Participation (2)• Lot of content used, relatively low degree of

interaction

• About 20% participated in group discussions

• 88,5% less intensive than planned, 9,6% as much as planned

• Has my contribution added value?

• Issues with schedule largest barrier

• Participants learn outside online environment

Lessons learned

Pedagogy and quality• Turnaround time: 8 weeks, study load ± 3 hours a

week

• Adapted release?

• Offering different levels needed

• Interaction: less intense as expected, high quality

• High degree permissiveness (‘cherry picking’)

Pedagogy and quality (2)• Massive Open Online Content

• MOOC ≠ regular course (permissiveness)

• Motivation learners MOOC differ from learners regular course

• Able to learn self-directed, learning preferences (passive learning), priority for learning in a MOOC

Costs and benefits

27

Costs and benefits

27

Average convertion rate: 2,4%

Please join me in calculating…

28

Please join me in calculating…

• Investments in hours: 413

28

Please join me in calculating…

• Investments in hours: 413

• In euro’s: 40.000 euro (development & implementation)

28

Please join me in calculating…

• Investments in hours: 413

• In euro’s: 40.000 euro (development & implementation)

• Income per certificate: 80 euro

28

Please join me in calculating…

• Investments in hours: 413

• In euro’s: 40.000 euro (development & implementation)

• Income per certificate: 80 euro

• Needed: 500 paying participants

28

Please join me in calculating…

• Investments in hours: 413

• In euro’s: 40.000 euro (development & implementation)

• Income per certificate: 80 euro

• Needed: 500 paying participants

• Conversion ratio: 2,4% (=500 participants)

28

Please join me in calculating…

• Investments in hours: 413

• In euro’s: 40.000 euro (development & implementation)

• Income per certificate: 80 euro

• Needed: 500 paying participants

• Conversion ratio: 2,4% (=500 participants)

• 20834 participants needed

28

Average amount of registrations was 20.000

29 Bron: http://www.katyjordan.com/MOOCproject.html

Benefits

30

Benefits• Laboratory

30

Benefits• Laboratory

• Validation

30

Benefits• Laboratory

• Validation

• Reaching new target group

30

Benefits• Laboratory

• Validation

• Reaching new target group

• Creating opportunity lifelong learning

30

Benefits• Laboratory

• Validation

• Reaching new target group

• Creating opportunity lifelong learning

• PR and branding

30

Benefits• Laboratory

• Validation

• Reaching new target group

• Creating opportunity lifelong learning

• PR and branding

• Additional financing (temporarily)

30

Benefits• Laboratory

• Validation

• Reaching new target group

• Creating opportunity lifelong learning

• PR and branding

• Additional financing (temporarily)

• Data for research

30

Overall conclusions• MOOCs suitable for professional development (in

case of self-directed learning, if learners process content, certification fosters)

• Do not compare MOOCs with regular courses (motivation, drop out rate)

• Laboratory for learning innovations (e.g. large scale interactions, self testing)

• Combine content MOOCs with small scale online learning, F2F, informal learning

31

Overall conclusions (2)

• Serious doubts business model • Teachers ‘pay the bill’ (development in own time) • Large scale participation: ’passive

learning’ (LittleJohn, 2014) • Is student-teacher interaction a must for learning

(compensation possible)? (Anderson, 2014) !

32

Overall conclusions (3)

• Explicit attention for practical application: requirement relevance corporate learning

• Disruptive innovation depends on societal recognition

• Pew Research 2014: employers still prefer diplomas (MOOCs not a meaningful alternative)

33

MOOC: what’s in a name?

34

MOOC: what’s in a name?

34

MOOC: what’s in a name?

34

Massive Open Offline Concert

MOOC: what’s in a name?

35

MOOC: what’s in a name?

• A MOOC is a MOOC if it is a MOOC

35

MOOC: what’s in a name?

• A MOOC is a MOOC if it is a MOOC• There is nothing wrong with an ‘ordinary’ e-

learning (open) course (of good quality)

35

MOOC: what’s in a name?

• A MOOC is a MOOC if it is a MOOC• There is nothing wrong with an ‘ordinary’ e-

learning (open) course (of good quality)• Cheap standard courses: fixed low monthly fee

35

MOOC: what’s in a name?

• A MOOC is a MOOC if it is a MOOC• There is nothing wrong with an ‘ordinary’ e-

learning (open) course (of good quality)• Cheap standard courses: fixed low monthly fee• Curatr: facilitating social learning, gamification and

curation

35

MOOC: what’s in a name?

• A MOOC is a MOOC if it is a MOOC• There is nothing wrong with an ‘ordinary’ e-

learning (open) course (of good quality)• Cheap standard courses: fixed low monthly fee• Curatr: facilitating social learning, gamification and

curation

35

Questions?

• wilfred.rubens@ou.nl

• @wrubens

• http://www.wilfredrubens.com