Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

MOOCSs for Universities and Learners An analysis of motivating factors


Published on

a presentation summarising recent research at the University of Southampton in the Centre for innovation in technologies and education. Content analysis and online survey looking at motivation factors - research ongoing in the group

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

MOOCSs for Universities and Learners An analysis of motivating factors

  1. 1. MOOCs for universities and learners: an analysis of motivating factors Hugh Davis1, Kate Dickens1 Manuel Leon2, Maria del Mar Sanchéz Vera3 and Su White2 1Centre for Innovation in Technologies and Education, University of Southampton, UK 2Web and Internet Science, ECS, University of Southampton, UK 3Departments of Didactics and School Organisation, University of Murcia, Spain {hcd, kate.dickens}; {ml4c08,saw}; Presentation CSEDU 1st April 2014: Barcelona, Spain @suukii
  2. 2. WAIS & CITE CITE @suukii
  3. 3. Academic Year 2013-14 @suukii
  4. 4. @suukii
  5. 5. @suukii
  6. 6. At Southampton we’ve done moocs with futurelearn… Why am I here? @suukii
  7. 7. FL context @suukii
  8. 8. @suukii
  9. 9. @suukii What is Web Science?
  10. 10. @suukii
  11. 11. @suukii
  12. 12. @suukii
  13. 13. @suukii
  14. 14. FutureLearn today @suukii
  15. 15. Prehistory MOOCs and on… But hold on, what’s the back story? @suukii
  16. 16. @suukii
  17. 17. Methodology What we did for this paper @suukii
  18. 18. We wanted to be prepared Ran the MOOC HEIs Motivations Student Motivations @suukii
  19. 19. HEIs Motivations  Literature Meta review  Qualitative  content analysis  Additionally  Our experience  FL partnership discussions Student Motivations  Online survey  Mainly quantitative @suukii
  20. 20. Over 60 articles Journal papers  Content analysis  Herring’s (2004) adaption  after Krippendorf’s (1980)  Categorising sources Grey literature @suukii Curated sources Valueing authorship and provenance
  21. 21. Looking at the sources Perspectives Journals open movements evolution in distance education Disruptive innovations in education Grey Literature sustainability quality impact @suukii
  22. 22. Literature analysis What did we find? @suukii
  23. 23. Motivations of HEIs: literature  Strategic growth  Reputation and market share  Marketing  Recruitment gateway  Strategic collaboration  Perceived place  Collaborative opportunities  Organic growth evolution  After OERs  Response to learners  Demand for networked interactions  Perceived place (response)  Learner analytics  Big (learner) data  Feedback to educators  Effective education  Educational enhancement  Sub objective  Or… additional gain @suukii
  24. 24. Motivations of HEIs: grey literature Three areas of debate  Sustainability  Quality  impact Key focus of discussions  Business analogies  If the product is free… you are the product  Sustaining learner participation  Dropout …. And what it means  Dropout… success or failure?  Learner  provider @suukii
  25. 25. MOOCS as distance education Perspectives 1 Correspondence (mail) 2 Technologically enriched 3 telelearning 4 Flexible learning 5 Flexible learning 6 Web 2.0 Learner interactions ?? 7 Are MOOCs the next stage? @suukii
  26. 26. Online survey What did we do? @suukii
  27. 27. Learners’ motivations survey Motivations about you demographics education Prior experience MOOC experience platform Mode of access Motivations Why? Completed? @suukii
  28. 28. Learners’ motivations survey Target communities Spanish Arabic English Dissemination Twitter facebook Platform iSurvey Data Analysis SPSS Nominal data frequency @suukii
  29. 29. Survey analysis What did we find? @suukii
  30. 30. Structure and Assessment structure  cMooc  Connectivism  The social  Emergent  Fragmented  Diffuse  Diverse  No credit assessment  xMOOC  Structured  Opportunity for reward/credit  Opportunity for monetisation  Third party providers @suukii
  31. 31. Our data Survey data Total - 258 english spanish arabic • 52 • 40 • 193 Mostly male @suukii English: 67.3% male Arabic: 77.2% male Spanish: 48.7% male Artefacts can be interesting
  32. 32. Learners’ motivations @suukii Why MOOCs? They are free Platforms Motivations
  33. 33. What learners value  Free and open  Convenience: any time any place  Update knowledge, enhance CV  Build a learning community  Satisfy interest/ edutainment  Learning with the best  Professional development/lifelong learning @suukii
  34. 34. Planning my future @suukii Motivations
  35. 35. There are some issues Reflecting on literature and experience @suukii
  36. 36. Issues  Pedagogic possibilities  illusion or reality?  Assessment  How and why  Reality of peer grading  Free – but at what cost?  Reputational damage  It still costs money to produce  Production values  Inequalities  Illusion of value?  Some stuff can’t be done online  Unequal educators  Star performers  Culture of ego  Undermining the value of the local/personal  Unequal  Cultural imperialism  Destroys diversity, perspectives @suukii
  37. 37. issues  Learners’ digital competencies  May be part of the issue with dropout?  Neat and tidy?  Formal, informal  Plagiarism  Does it matter?  Certification a solution? @suukii Thinking about the roots of cMOOCs … there are many different learner preferenc
  38. 38. Conclusions/future work  Understanding are changed by experience  Disruptions demand agility  MOOCs feed back into the curriculum  MOOCs can be used to make change happen  In ways that we do not yet know  Learners can decide what they want to do:  educational tourists  I know enough  Things have moved on (life overtakes intention) @suukii Two cycles: approx 20,000 students Lots of data, lots of analysis, wip plus experience Watch this space … Hugh Davis Wednesday 14.00
  39. 39. Available from soton eprints @suukii
  40. 40. @suukii Su White Web and Internet Science, ECS University of Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK @suukii
  41. 41. Slides not used A few extra bits … sorry no funny out takes… refs and mug shots @suukii
  42. 42. @suukii Hugh Davis Kate Dickens Manuel Leon Maria del Mar Sanchéz Vera Su White
  43. 43. REFERENCES Barber, M., Donnelly, K., Rizvi,S., and Summers.L., An avalanche is coming: Higher education and the revolution ahead. Institute of Public Policy Research (2013)., Barber, R., & Sharkey, M., 2012. Course correction: using analytics to predict course success. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 259-262). ACM. Barnard-Brak, L., Lan, W.,L., & Osland, V., 2010. Profiles in self-regulated learning in the Online Learning Environments. In International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11 (1). Bates, A.W., 1995. Technology, e-learning and distance education. Routledge: Oxon Belanger, Y., & Thornton, J., 2013. Bioelectricity: a quantative approach. Duke University´s first MOOC. (pp. 1–21) Boud, D., 1995 Assessment and learning: contradictory or complementary. In Assessment for learning in higher education. pp 35-48. Breslow, L.B., Pritchard, D.E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G.S., Ho, A.D., & Seaton, D.T. 2013. Studying learning in the worldwide classroom: Research into edX's first MOOC. In Research & Practice in Assessment, 8, 13-25. Brown, S. 2013. MOOCs, OOCs, flips and hybrids: the new world of higher education. In ICICTE 2013. Proceedings (pp. 237–247) Caladine, R. 2008. Enhancing e-learning with content and interactions. Hershey-New York: Information Science Publishing. Castells, M. 1996. The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture (Vol. 1). Oxford: Blackwell Catropa, D., 2013. Big (MOOC) Data. Inside Higher Education. Cookson, P 2013 Are MOOCs the Answer? Preserving Value of Higher Education. The Quick and the Ed. Posted on 23 August 2013. education.html Daniel, J., 2012. Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility. In Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 3. @suukii