Learning to ‘run a MOOC’
There are more learner interactivity options available than multiple–choice questions and ‘drag and drop’ responses, says Bob Little.
Everyone in the learning world, it seems, is talking about the phenomenon that is the massive open online course (MOOC).
These are being offered by a growing number of organisations – notably, but not exclusively, higher education institutions. To qualify as a MOOC – a term first coined in 2008 to describe a course offered by the University of Manitoba - a course must have a very large number of students and offer open access.
Their supporters claim that MOOCs are ideal for the socially-networked world. Indeed, they’re usually ‘discovered’ via online networks. For example, there’s a website offering ‘200 MOOCs from the Great Universities’ (depending, of course, on your definition of a ‘great university’). Those wanting free access to higher education courses from the UK could look at Futurelearn, a company launched last December by the Open University and comprising a consortium of UK universities.
MOOCs aim to be open, distributed, participatory and contribute to life-long networked learning. They’re ways to connect, collaborate and engage in the learning process. They bring together like-minded people to discuss, explore and learn in at least a semi-structured way. All work done is accessible to, and shared by, others. So, while students keep their work, everyone else can benefit from it too. In addition, MOOC participants have the networking contacts they’ve built up by engaging in study with each other.
MOOCs can help students explore interests, prepare for entrance exams and gain exposure to college level coursework. They can also help in faculty development, educating the public and providing learning opportunities for those lacking access to more conventional college courses.
The work resulting from the course exists in pockets around the web, rather than in one place – even in the cloud. Moreover, there’s no prescribed ‘right’ way to follow the course – so new ideas can develop and different points of view can co-exist. This encourages learners to be independent – of thought and of study – as they build their own networks. Learners choose what they’ll do; how they participate - and only they can decide if, ultimately, they’ve been successful.
While this sounds like a lot of fun to some people, others see it as the first step to educational anarchy and even a dangerous loosening on the reins of educational publishers’ intellectual property ownership.
In their current form, MOOCs can be challenging for the learner because:
•The process can appear chaotic as each learner creates her/his own content.
•Taking part in a MOOC demands a degree of digital literacy.
•It demands a serious commitment in terms of time and effort.
•The learning process is organic and so will take its own path, in terms of trajectory and velocity.
•It requires strict self-regulation – especially in terms of defining learning goals and, thus, ultimate success.
MOOCs are a result of today’s readily accessible vast amount of information - but accessing information is no guarantee of it being assimilated. There’s a danger of information overload – and this puts pressure on learning materials’ developers to make these materials as engaging, motivating, memorable and, thus, effective as possible. Indeed, there are concerns that MOOCs are repeating the same instructional design mistakes that were being made in the early days of e-learning, some 20 years ago.
Poonam Jaypuriya, Senior General Manager - Program Management (Innovation and Products), at Harbinger Knowledge Products, based in Pune, India, explained: “Many MOOCs include video – often as an introduction to the course - which might set out the course’s learning objectives or outline the course contents. This video merely gives information to the learner. There’s no element of interactivity.
“To engage learners and keep them interested in the course - and motivated to continue and complete it, there’s a need to develop MOOCs that are highly interactive (iMOOCs).”
“No wonder that MOOCs’ learner drop-out rates are extremely high,” she commented. “According to our information, typically, we’re seeing only seven or eight per cent of learners completing courses.”
Institutions, including Stanford University in the USA, boast that individual MOOCs attract over 100,000 people. However, Stanford has also stated that some 85 per cent of these people fail to ‘complete’ the course. One mathematics course, taught as a MOOC in 2012, attracted some 65,000 students. By the end of the third week, it had some 20,000 students and, at the end of the course, there were only 10,000 students. Some 1,200 of these took the optional final examination to earn a certificate.
“One reason for this low completion rate could be that the initial course material is boring because there’s no opportunity for the learners to interact with it. This reliance on passive content delivery is no different to the very early e-learning materials,” said Poonam.
Those developing e-learning materials at the end of the last century learned the hard way that passive content delivery – merely ‘putting lecture notes and other text online’ – is neither an effective nor an engaging way of learning.
“Effective learning materials involve the learners,” Poonam said. “This can be done in various ways – including, increasingly, via social media – but there are now ways to engage the learner via video. This medium, in particular, can help in the development of interactive, or ‘iMOOCs’.”
Those wanting to build iMOOCS – or at least include greater learner interactivity into their courses – could gather inspiration for their instructional design strategy from interactivity building tools, such as Harbinger Group’s well-known, Raptivity. There’s certainly more to ‘interactivity’ in modern online learning – and more learner interactivity options available - than multiple–choice questions and ‘drag and drop’ responses.
How virtual learning can help plug public sector skills gaps? Read more HERE
For over 20 years, Bob Little has specialised in writing about, and commentating on, corporate learning – especially e-learning – and technology-related subjects. His work has been published in the UK, Continental Europe, the USA and Australia. You can contact Bob via email@example.com His e-book, ‘Perspectives on Learning Technologies’ (e-book; ASIN: B00A9K1VVS) is available from The Endless Bookcase and from Amazon. It contains over 200 pages of observations on issues in learning technologies, principally for learning & development professionals.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Information Daily, its parent company or any associated businesses.
Login/Register to Post Comment
NICE has to make difficult decisions because there is not enough money in the NHS, and plays a critical role in…
The tabloids portray NICE as the angel of death, a skeletal hand withholding resource when it is literally a matter…
Public sector commitment to "open data" is patchy despite a raft of fine sounding policy statements. The "D" word…
The new procurement framework for Commissioning Support Units (CSUs) will not allay CCG concerns over commissioning…
With public sector austerity set to continue, governments across the world are looking to forge new relationships…
Neighbourhood planning, a measure brought in by the Localism Act to devolve power to local communities, may not…
Do you do digital? Take the test
Headline results so far: Results from 105 users
HealthCare Innovation Daily (an Information Daily channel) is supporting Science Capital in presenting their Innovative…
VIDEO: At June’s Making a Difference with Data event, Barnet Chief Operating Officer Chris Naylor spoke…
MPs and campaigners want suppliers to be covered by Freedom of Information law, with the Cabinet Office considering…