This document provides an overview of MOOCs and open learning. It discusses different types of MOOCs, theoretical frameworks for open learning, and 900 years of open education history. The document also examines uses of MOOCs in different learning contexts like K-12, higher education, and professional development. Benefits and limitations of MOOCs are considered. The thesis is that MOOCs are not suitable for all learners but can be effective when combined with other tools to meet the needs of diverse learners in various contexts.

1. MASSIVE… because size matters!
#massivelearning www.massivlearning.wordpress.com
MOOCs and Open Learning in ODL
By Kelli Buckreus, Katherine LeBlanc and Leeann Waddington
EDDE 801, Athabasca University | August 24, 2017
Image attribution: Vecteezy.com

2. Types of MOOCs & their theoretical underpinnings
Where to go with future MOOC research
MOOCs for different learning environments and contexts
Benefits and limitations of MOOCs
THESIS STATEMENT:
MOOCs are not the solution for all learning needs, but used
thoughtfully or in combination with other tools, they meet the need of
a variety of learners in multiple contexts.

3. What is Openness in Learning/Education?
Basic concept:
FREE, PUBLIC ACCESS
Four areas of openness:
• Technical characteristics
• Social characteristics
• Nature of the resources
(content)
• Systemic digital resilience
and policy
(Hylen, 2006, in Peter & Deimann, 2013, p. 8; Tschofen &
Mackness, 2012; Weller & Anderson, 2013)
Reuse
Revise
Remix
Redistribute
Open Content: The “4Rs” (Wiley, 2009):

4. (Peter&Deimann,2013,p.11;Steffens,2015)
900 Years of Open Leaning

5. The 21st Century… and beyond!
Institutional response: Digital resiliency conceptual model (Weller & Anderson, 2013):
Latitude, Resistance, Precariousness, Panarchy
• OpenUniversity (United Kingdom) => OpenLearn & FutureLearn
• Athabasca University
• xMOOCs: Stanford (Coursera, Udacity); MIT &, Harvard (edX) (Anders, 2015)
• hMOOCs: University of Maryland (Griffiths, Mulhern, Spies, & Chingos, 2015)
• cMOOCs: CCKs (Anders, 2015)
Image attribution: Abrams, J. J. (2009). Star Trek. Spyglass
Entertainment and Bad Robot Productions. URL

6. (Anders,2015;Andreasen&Buhl,2015;Carneiro,2010;Knox,2014;McGreal,Anderson,Conrad,2015;
Mercado-Varela,etal.,2017;Rodriguez,2013;Siemens,2006;Steffens,2015)

7. Small Group Activity:
Draft a Sample Course Design
In class, break into three groups:
• Pedagogy
• Androgogy
• Heutagogy
Work together to develop a basic course design outline that incorporates open
learning and MOOC elements appropriate to your group’s assigned approach:
– Describe your targeted learning context and learner population;
– What activities and engagement elements would you include? Why?
– Where on the theoretical continuum does your course fit? Why?
– How could MOOCs be integrated into your course?
– Tweet as you go to #massivelearning
– In your work, address any questions or comments received from the external
network participants via #massivelearning
– Share your course design outline on (a sharing website; Google Docs, SlideShare,
etc.), then tweet the link to #massivelearning

8. MOOCs in K-12
Primary Use:
Blended Delivery
(Atkeson, 2014; Ferdig, 2014; Najafi, Evans, & Federico, 2014)
OPPORTUNITIES
CASE
EXAMPLES
CHALLENGES

9. MOOCs in Higher Education
(Baumgartner, 2015; Hlinak, 2016; Israel, 2015; Munoz-Merino, et al., 2017; O’Connor, 2014; Perez-Sanagustin, et al., 2017; Sandeen, 2013; Townsley, 2016; Zemsky, 2014)
Typical Uses:
• Faculty PD
• Curriculum Supplement
• Hybrid Course Delivery
• SPOCs
FACULTY
PERSPECTIVES
INSTITUTIONAL
PERSPECTIVES
STUDENT
PERSPECTIVES

10. MOOCs for Professional Development
Existing research:
• Demographics
• Completion Rates
• Learner motivations
• HR perspectives
(Littlejohn and Milligan, 2015; Milligan and Littlejohn, 2014, 2017; Olsson, 2016; Radford, et al., 2014; Tschofen & Mackness, 2012)
DEMOGRAPHICS
&
COMPLETION
RATES
HUMAN
RESOURCE
PERSPECTIVES
LEARNER
MOTIVATIONS

11. Our “Aha!” Moments
Considering how my own MOOC
‘lurking’ fits into the theoretical ‘big picture’
and may still be consistent with aspects of
connectivism.
”
“
I knew nothing about MOOCs coming into this project, other
than my own dabbling… Now I feel they could be a bridge to
higher education reform by supporting a transition to
technology integration… It let’s people play and discover.
“
”
Recognising the relevance of MOOCs
for all ages of learners, and the
potential for MOOCs for addressing
certain workforce gaps.
This slide utilizes free vector art modified from Vecteezy.com
“
”

12. References
Anders, A. (2015). Theories and applications of massive online open courses (MOOCs): The case for hybrid design. International
Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(6), 40-62. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i6.2185
Andreasen, L. B., & Buhl, M. (2015, October). Understanding MOOCs through connectivist and social constructivist approaches. In
ECEL2015-14th European Conference on e-Learning: ECEl201, 34-40. Academic Conferences and Publishing Limited.
Retrieved from
https://books.google.ca/books?id=HI5mCwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA34&ots=atuyupvQAp&dq=Understanding%20MOOCs%20throug
h%20connectivist%20and%20social%20constructivist%20approaches&lr&pg=PA34#v=onepage&q=Understanding%20MOO
Cs%20through%20connectivist%20and%20social%20constructivist%20approaches&f=false
Atkeson, Sam. Harvard-MIT partnership opens MOOCs for high schoolers. (2014, September 23). Education Week. Retrieved from
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/09/24/05moocs.h34.html
Baumgartner, K. (2015). Strategies for hybrid course design in second-year German. DieUnterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 48(2),
211–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/tger.10196
Carneiro, R. (2010, June 7) Open educational practices and generativism [Slides]. Retrieved from
https://www.slideshare.net/robertocarneiro/opal-video-slide-show
Chafkin, M. (2013, November 14). Udacity’s Sebastian Thrun, godfather of free online education, changes course. Fast Company.
Retrieved from http://www.fastcompany.com/3021473/udacity-sebastian-thrun-uphill-climb
Christiansen, C., Horn, M., Caldera, L., & Soares, L. (2011, February). Disrupting college: How disruptive innovation can deliver
quality and affordability to postsecondary education. Centre for American Progress. Retrieved from
http://newfaculty.mst.edu/media/campussupport/newfaculty/documents/2012/DisruptingCollege.pdf
Christensen, G., Steinmetz, A., Alcorn, B., Bennett, A., Woods, D., & Emanuel, E. J. (2013). The MOOC phenomenon: Who takes
massive open online courses and why? Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved from
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2350964.
Ferdig, R.E. (2014). Preparing for K-12 MOOCs. Technology & Learning. (6). 26.
Griffiths, R., Mulhern, Spies, R., & Chingos, M. (2015). Adopting MOOCs on campus: A collaborative effort to test MOOCs on
Campuses of the University System of Maryland. Online Learning, 19(2). Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1062937
Hlinak, M. (2016). Flipping and MOOCing your class or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the MOOC. Journal of Legal
Studies Education, 33(1), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/jlse.12033
Israel,Maria J. (2015). Effectiveness of integrating MOOCs in traditional classrooms for undergraduate students. International
Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 16(5), 102-118. doi:
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2222/3402

13. Jacoby, J. (2014). The disruptive potential of the massive open online course: A literature review. Journal of Open, Flexible, and
Distance Learning, 18(1), 73-85. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1079845
Knox, J. (2014). Digital culture clash: “massive” education in the E-learning and Digital Cultures MOOC. Distance Education, 35(2),
164–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.917704
Littlejohn, A., & Milligan, C. (2015). Designing MOOCs for professional learners: Tools and patterns to encourage self-regulated
learning. eLearning Papers, 42, 38-45. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/46385/
McGreal, R., Anderson, T., & Conrad, D. (2015). Open educational resources in Canada 2015. International Review of Research in
Open and Distance Learning, 16(5). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2404/3421
Mercado-Varela, M. A., Beltran, J., Perez, M. V., Vazquez, N. R., & Ramirez-Montoya, M. (2017). Connectivity of learning in MOOCs:
Facilitators’ experiences in team teaching. Turkish Online Journal Of Distance Education, 18(1), 143-156. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1124890
Milligan, C., & Littlejohn, A. (2014). Supporting professional learning in a massive open online course. International Review of
Research in Open and Distance Learning 15(5), 197-213. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i5.1855
Milligan, C., & Littlejohn, A. (2017). Why Study on a MOOC? The Motives of Students and Professionals. The International Review
Of Research In Open And Distributed Learning, 18(2). doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i2.3033
Muñoz-Merino, P. J., Ruipérez-Valiente, J. A., Delgado Kloos, C., Auger, M. A., Briz, S., de Castro, V., & Santalla, S. N. (2017). Flipping
the classroom to improve learning with MOOCs technology. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 25(1), 15–25.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.21774
Najafi, H., Evans, R., & Federico, C. (2014). MOOC integration into secondary school courses. International Review of Research in
Open and Distance Learning, 15(5), 306-322. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1861
Noe, R.A., Clarke, A.D.M., and Klein, H.J. (2014). Learning in the twenty-first-century workplace. Annual Review of Organizational
Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2014(1), 245-275. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091321
O’Connor, K. (2014). MOOCs, institutional policy and change dynamics in higher education. Higher Education, 68(5), 623–635. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9735-z
Olsson, U.(2016) Open courses and MOOCs as professional development – is the openness a hindrance? Education + Training,
58(2), 229-243. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-01-2015-0006
Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Hilliger, I., Alario-Hoyos, C., Kloos, C. D., & Rayyan, S. (2017). H-MOOC framework: Reusing MOOCs for
hybrid education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(1), 47–64. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9133-5
Peter, S., and Deimann, M. (2013). On the role of openness in education: A historical reconstruction. Open Praxis, 5(1), 7–14.
Retrieved from https://openpraxis.org/index.php/OpenPraxis/article/view/23
Rodriguez, O. (2013). The concept of openness behind c and x-MOOCs (massive open online courses). Open Praxis, 5(1), 67-73.
Retrieved from https://www.openpraxis.org/index.php/OpenPraxis/article/view/42

14. Sandeen, C. (2013). Integrating MOOCS into traditional higher education: The emerging “MOOC 3.0” era. Change, 45(6), 34–39.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2013.842103
Siemens, G. (2004, December 12). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. eLearnspace.ca. Retrieved from
http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
Steffens, K. (2015). Competences, Learning Theories and MOOCs: Recent Developments in Lifelong Learning. European Journal of
Education, 50(1), 41–59. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12102
Townsley, L. (2016). Using a MOOC format for a precalculus course. PRIMUS, 26(6), 618–630. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2016.1153544
Tschofen, C., & Mackness, J. (2012). Connectivism and dimensions of individual experience. The International Review of Research
in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 124-143. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1143
Weller, M. and Anderson, T. (2013). Digital resilience in higher education. European Journal of Distance and e-Learning (EURODL),
16(1), 53-66. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/36988/
Wiley, D. (2009, 16 November 2009). Defining “Open” [Weblog post]. Retrieved from http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/1123
Zemsky Robert, A. (2014). With a MOOC MOOC here and a MOOC MOOC there, here a MOOC, there a MOOC, everywhere a
MOOC MOOC. The Journal of General Education, (4), 237. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/jgeneeduc.63.4.0237