Presentatie tijdens het EADL-congres 2014 over geleerde lessen ten aanzien van massive open online courses

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

10. 6

11. 7

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

59. MOOC: what’s in a name?
34

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

61. MOOC: what’s in a name?
35

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