In the European Higher education sector, various forms of cross-national collaborations are expected and encouraged when developing quality online education. We report on the early development of collaborative practices of two European universities. As a result of the collaboration a set of MOOCs titled "The Success Factors Behind the Finnish Education" produced at the Open University of the University of Jyväskylä, Finland have been embedded into the Distance Learning Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) at Leeds Beckett University, United Kingdom. Both institutions have a strong emphasis on emerging modes of teaching and pedagogies.

1. Cross-national
collaboration in promoting
and delivering MOOCs
LEEDS BECKETT UNIVERSITY, UK
OPEN UNIVERSITY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ, FINLAND

2. Authors
Leeds Beckett University, UK
Alison Iredale
a.c.iredale@leedsbeckett.ac.uk
Edmund Hewson
e.hewson@leedsbeckett.ac.uk
Open University of the University
of Jyväskylä, Finland
Päivi Kananen
paivi.kananen@jyu.fi
Virpi Uotinen
virpi.uotinen@jyu.fi

3. Introduction
Case Study of collaborative practices of two European
universities incorporating MOOCs.
European, National and Institutional perspectives on MOOC
promotion and delivery.
The benefits, issues and challenges of early phase cross-
national collaboration.

4. Cross-national collaboration in
promoting and delivering MOOCs
MOOCs produced at the Open University
of the University of Jyväskylä, Finland are
embedded into the Distance Learning
Postgraduate Certificate in Education
(PGCE) at Leeds Beckett University, United
Kingdom.
◦ MOOClets
LBU has no formal position statement on
MOOCs.
◦ Criteria:
◦ clear purpose and justification and a link to the
university’s strategy
◦ external funding
◦ Skills for Learning MOOClet

5. Background
Long-term focus on developing the online education.
Collaboration began at EADTU Conference in Hagen
in the year 2015.
Site visits: equal partners learning together.
Appreciation of each other’s pedagogical basis.

6. • 23,000 students from 144
countries and territories
• Over 1,000 are distance
learning students
• Degree awarding powers
• University of Jyväskylä (JYU):
15,000 students from 100
countries and territories
• Open University of JYU:
15,000 students
• Offering parts of degree to
non-degree and degree
students

7. Legislation and policy
UNITED KINGDOM, NATIONAL LEVEL
No national or governmental guidance for Distance
Learning provision
Long history of Distance Learning: Open University
Universities are autonomous institutions subject to
regulatory frameworks (e.g Quality Assurance Agency)
UNITED KINGDOM, INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL
Distance Learning Unit
Central Service to devolved Schools
All new distance/blended learning courses need to
be validated to ensure adequate front-loaded
resource allocation.
FINLAND, NATIONAL LEVEL
The Finnish Universities Act (558/2009): Life-long learning and
educational equality
• Ministry of Education and Culture: Higher education
institutions are autonomous actors that are responsible for
the content of their education and research as well as the
development of their own activities
• The new modes of teaching and learning are recognized in
all levels of education, no national guidelines for MOOCs,
distance education or OERs
FINLAND, INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL
University strategies recognize distance education but
set no guidelines for the delivery
• Strategy of University of Jyväskylä: Technologically
supported pedagogical solutions enable lifelong
learning and studies independent of time and place

8. Funding of higher education
UNITED KINGDOM
•Quasi market basis
•Tuition fee loans
•Undergraduate and Postgraduate fee
loans available
FINLAND
•Higher education is based on core funding
from the Ministry of Education and Culture.
•The online education is included in
governmental funding rules.
•Open universities are integral parts of
universities delivering parts of undergraduate
degrees.
The funding of OU
◦ 70 % of funding from the Ministry of Education
and Culture (ECTS).
◦ 30 % of funding from the study fees (15 €/ECTS).
◦ New external funding elements: Key Project
Funding, research and development funding

9. Quality assurance
LEEDS BECKETT UNIVERSITY
EU LEVEL
◦ European Association for Quality Assurance
in Higher Education (ENQA); The UK QAA is
a registered agency
NATIONAL LEVEL
◦ Framework for higher education qualifications
◦ QAA
◦ Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF)
◦ Research Excellence Framework (REF)
◦ Knowledge Excellence Framework (KEF)
INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL
◦ 1st in the world for technology
◦ 2nd in the world for virtual learning
FINLAND
EU LEVEL
◦ European Association for Quality Assurance in
Higher Education (ENQA); The Finnish Education
Evaluation Centre FINEEC is one of the full
members.
NATIONAL LEVEL
◦ Based on the Universities Act, the Finnish
universities take part in external evaluation of their
activities and quality assurance systems on a
regular basis.
◦ Evaluation of the quality systems and their
functioning is done by FINEEC
https://karvi.fi/en/fineec/
◦ There is no accreditation and universities are in
charge of the quality assurance themselves
INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL
◦ The University of Jyväskylä has been awarded a
quality label by FINEEC in 2015 (valid until 2021)

10. Areas of collaboration
Enhancing the quality of course contents
Sharing good practices in online education
Strengthening the visibility of both institutions
Sharing of resources and knowledge
Common marketing efforts

11. Sources
Bax, S. 2003. The end of CLT: a context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal 57/3: 278–87
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: D.C. Heath & Co.
De Wit, H. (2015, April 15–18). Evolution of internationalization in the context globalization. Paper presented at the International
Exhibition & Conference on Higher Education, Riyadh.
Egron-Polak, E. (2015, April 15–18). Internationalization of higher education: Conversions or diversions across regions? Paper Presented at
the International Exhibition & Conference on Higher Education, Riyadh.
Hardy, C., Lawrence, T. B., & Grant, D. (2005). Discourse and collaboration: The role of conversations and collective identity. Academy of
Management Review, 30, 58–77.
Holliday, A. 1994. Appropriate Methodology and Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kraus, K., & Sultana, R. G. (2008). Problematising ‘cross-culture’ collaboration: Critical incidents in higher education settings.
Mediterranean Journal of Educational Studies, 13, 59–83.
Marginson, S. (2004). Going global: Governance implications of cross-border traffic in higher education. In W. G. Tierney (Ed.), Competing
conceptions of academic governance: Negotiating the perfect storm (pp. 1–32). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
Stewart, D. (2015, February). The best practices of international collaboration between universities. Presented at A Series of Lectures,
Hosted by Vice Rectorate for Development and Quality, Princess Nourah University, Riyadh.