140509 (wr) v1 presentation moocs beyond the hype

1. Massive Open Online Courses: Beyond the Hype Wilfred Rubens http://www.wilfredrubens.com

2. Project leader, e-learning consultant, blogger Lector e-learning NTI

3. Project leader, e-learning consultant, blogger Lector e-learning NTI

4. 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/

5. EMMA • System for delivery of MOOCs  in 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/

6. Who of you already…. 5

7. Who of you already…. • Subscribed for a MOOC? 5

8. Who of you already…. • Subscribed for a MOOC? • Started a MOOC? 5

9. Who of you already…. • Subscribed for a MOOC? • Started a MOOC? • Completed a MOOC? 5

12. 7 Research on satisfaction and participation

13. 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

14. 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

15. 10 Foto: Audrey Watters

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. Case study 14

20. 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

21. 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

22. Set up (2) • Turnaround time: 18 weeks • Study load: max. 120 hours (cherry picking was promoted) • Certificate (285 euro) 17

23. 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

24. Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs

25. Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs Experiences with MOOC

26. Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs See how we designed a MOOC

27. Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs Acquiring knowledge about new profession

28. Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs Keeping up to date about existing profession

29. Hordenloop naar open en online onderwijs Certification

30. 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

31. 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….

32. 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

33. 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

34. Lessons learned

35. 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’)

36. 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

37. Costs and benefits 27

38. Costs and benefits 27 Average convertion rate: 2,4%

39. Please join me in calculating… 28

40. Please join me in calculating… • Investments in hours: 413 28

41. Please join me in calculating… • Investments in hours: 413 • In euro’s: 40.000 euro (development & implementation) 28

42. Please join me in calculating… • Investments in hours: 413 • In euro’s: 40.000 euro (development & implementation) • Income per certificate: 80 euro 28

43. 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

44. 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

45. 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

46. Average amount of registrations was 20.000 29 Bron: http://www.katyjordan.com/MOOCproject.html

47. Benefits 30

48. Benefits • Laboratory 30

49. Benefits • Laboratory • Validation 30

50. Benefits • Laboratory • Validation • Reaching new target group 30

51. Benefits • Laboratory • Validation • Reaching new target group • Creating opportunity lifelong learning 30

52. Benefits • Laboratory • Validation • Reaching new target group • Creating opportunity lifelong learning • PR and branding 30

53. Benefits • Laboratory • Validation • Reaching new target group • Creating opportunity lifelong learning • PR and branding • Additional financing (temporarily) 30

54. Benefits • Laboratory • Validation • Reaching new target group • Creating opportunity lifelong learning • PR and branding • Additional financing (temporarily) • Data for research 30

55. 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

56. 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

57. 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

58. MOOC: what’s in a name? 34

60. MOOC: what’s in a name? 34 Massive Open Offline Concert

62. MOOC: what’s in a name? • A MOOC is a MOOC if it is a MOOC 35

63. 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

64. 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

65. 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

66. 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

67. Questions? • wilfred.rubens@ou.nl • @wrubens • http://www.wilfredrubens.com

140509 (wr) v1 presentation moocs beyond the hype

WilfredRubens.com

140509 (wr) v1 presentation moocs beyond the hype