Well, it is not about _my_ MOOC. I was just never sure whether the video is the continuation of "PowerPoint" of the last century. Listen to GWU's Prof. Lorena Barba:
https://www.class-central.com/report/why-my-mooc-is-not-built-on-video/
Found in:
http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/03/31/0227247/no-film-at-11-the-case-for-the-less-video-is-more-mooc.
Hi,
I can only assume this post is in the teaching forum because it relates to pedagogy, if it is not related to pedagogy then I suppose it would be in the lounge for those who find it stimulates different debate/discussion.
Thinking in a deductive manner then:
1. Pedagogy in MOOCs
2. The role of the facilitators is to facilitate/support/scaffold-and so on
3. The purpose of MOOCs, in general, is to provide a learning space that affords different modes for self-directed activity that promotes learning. So for example, inherent in the design of the Moodle MOOC run by HQ, is the following premise:
...A course that you could dip into at any time to teach yourself about Moodle..learn from each other and can co-construct artifacts that represent the current state of our learning about how education can work... (Martin Dougiamas).
4. If we think about that for a moment then, and we consider the value of video in its ability to afford different modes for self-directed activity, it appears the use of video is one mode used to support SDA in the Moodle MOOC. Linked to that, we know, having the technicalities spelled out on video can be ever so useful as a sort of instructional design for those new to Moodle, and we know the use of the arrow-cursor is quite a well-used tool within 'how-to' videos, across the net, which aim to demonstrate software features-we know that, right?
5. In that article, it finishes on the point: 'In this sense, a video-however nicely produced-is not better than a lecture.' A controversial point perhaps, but in essence it is about purpose, aims and intended/learning outcomes.
6. Sticking with what we know, if we think about the purpose of the Moodle MOOC, purpose as in....what is that massive course trying to achieve overall? And if it is to support adult, self-directed activity for learning, so it goes, a couple of questions remain in terms of:
a) How many videos of an instructional nature, are too many to support self-directed activity?
b) Across all videos, is there a risk of a voice-over presenting an unintentional didactic approach, instead of providing for an exploratory one?
Drawing on my expertise, I am inclined to suggest less is more-when working with adult-learners/teachers/practitioners/devs/students-and so on...because they wish to make their own connections, and so providing a space for that- in facilitating online courses, especially MOOCs, is essential for retention. They need to feel motivated to make the learning their own, with a sense of freedom to do so in making choices, and in turn be able to recognise that they can take control of their learning-trajectory (however big or small). A final-linkage here, in getting back to the lecture-theatre, by comparison, those items in this last para...is what the lecturer can do face-to-face, because such items are afforded by the environment.
Hi Visvanath,
Good to see that some academics are finally getting the idea that lectures, and by extension video presentations, alone aren't effective teaching. This is what Eric Mazur has been saying for over 10 years and providing us with ample research evidence to back it up (Crouch & Mazur, 2001).
Apparently, lectures and videos have a soporific effect on learners' minds (as measured by portable monitoring devices hooked up to students for weeks at a time). Additionally, even a dazzling, brilliant presentation, with all the accompanying motivational benefits, doesn't have much of an impact on learning, e.g. learners exposed to the same presentation content, one brilliantly delivered, the other mediocrely, achieved the same learning gains.
Video didn't revolutionise education back in the 80s so what makes the designers of MOOCs think it'll do it now?
However, i don't think the culture and expectations of teaching practice in universities will change significantly for the foreseeable future. In the vast majority of cases, there's simply little or no recognition or reward for faculty to develop their teaching skills and curricula. The ones who do, do it out of a personal sense of duty and professionalism and a genuine desire to serve their students better. Most faculty prioritise research and academic practice over teaching because that's what's expected of them and that's what brings recognition, status, and professional advancement, not being a better teacher.
Reference
Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970-977. http://doi.org/10.1119/1.1374249
I'm not entirely convinced.
"Ditch the podium, don't ditch the lecture" is one view
Mazur still gives what could be considered a lecture with his ConcepTests.
They are active. That is the key. Activity in a lot of so called collaborative work is not well focused. (In my experieince, which is not a scientific and random sample)
Google ILD 'Interactive Lecture Demonstrations' for the other major physics thread. Thornton, Laws and Sokoloff.
Some of the stuff I read is about semantics. Matters of definition. If you are not going to use video, what wlll you use? Print? Audio? Images?
I'll dig up Richard Felders 5 minute clip on Active Learning later in the day.
Cheers,
-Derek
ILDs continue to miss the point. Imitation precedes creation. We imitate first and then repeat with variation. This is why labs, where the masters "instruct" by doing their job and the apprentices are trained by job, are far more effective learning environments than lecture halls and even seminar rooms.
If as the instructor you engage your students in ILD and remain an external observer the impact of the activity remains insignificant. Learners can learn from each other, to be sure. But if the learners are equally or similarly inexperienced, the learning is marginal or very slow.
The fact is that most instructors remain external, even in the so called 'blended' courses, because they cannot bring themselves to play the role of a learner, that is straggle and stumble in the effort to solve a problem, in front of their students in a standard course. The authoritative structure is too institutionalized.
Collaborative work is an entirely different issue and I'm inclined to agree with your general observation about it being unfocused.
Print (digital), Image, Audio, in that order. And the order is from the most cost effective to the least. I take the delivery of information to be much less important than offering opportunities for practice and self-assessment and prefer to invest the limited resources in the latter.
Why My MOOC is not built on video...
Re: I don't think the culture and expectations of teaching practice in universities will change significantly for the foreseeable future. In the vast majority of cases, there's simply little or no recognition or reward for faculty to develop their teaching skills and curricula.
This [Open edx free] course (at level one-year one undergraduate) is a collaboration between faculty at three institutions across the world: the George Washington University (Washington, DC, USA); University of Southampton (UK) and Pontifical Catholic University of Chile (Santiago, Chile).* A credit-bearing course will run at each institution at the same time as this MOOC, and students at all locations will participate in the same learning community with MOOC participants.
I suppose it depends on how you measure for significance. This course is clearly linked with new recruitment strategies, retention, engaging as a global learner, global collaboration for staff & inbuilt CPD as well as other added value for uni ed. With three Profs, a Dr and two PhD teaching Assistants.....Are we surprised only one video was used? Having such experts teaching about their specialism, research -active or not, means they already know which features to adopt when disseminating their subject knowledge-dependent on audience, to create a successful learning and teaching environment, and those skills are transferable for online/blended L&T - it appears.
Re: However, Apparently, lectures and videos have a soporific effect on learners' minds (as measured by portable monitoring devices hooked up to students for weeks at a time). Additionally, even a dazzling, brilliant presentation, with all the accompanying motivational benefits, doesn't have much of an impact on learning, e.g. learners exposed to the same presentation content, one brilliantly delivered, the other mediocrely, achieved the same learning gains.
Is there a reference for that paper please?
This paper: Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results.American Journal of Physics,69(9), 970-977.
Focuses on Peer Instruction (PI) = replaced in-class reading quizzes with pre-class written responses to the reading, introduced a research-based mechanics textbook for portions of the course, and incorporated cooperative learning into the discussion sections as well as the lectures. These improvements are intended to help students learn more from pre-class reading and to increase student engagement in the discussion sections, and are accompanied by further increases in student understanding.
Results: increased student mastery of both conceptual reasoning and quantitative problem solving upon implementing PI.
Instead of video? Is that the point?...was there a control group? ....am struggling to make a connection with the point here in view of the title of the thread...and as far as I am aware university teaching has moved on since 2001....thus these modes for learning and teaching actually do exist, among many other creative and innovative approaches.
A post worth some consideration Itamar. I'll need to think about your comment about 'observer'.
Felder's video:
The question is this: is this a lecture or not?
I think it IS active learning.
And to quote an old saying: if you can do what you plan without students present, don't do it. This is what moves a 'lecture' into being something else.
-Derek
Hi Derek,
Yes, this is the same Richard Felder who co-wrote an award winning paper on a project to develop learners' self- and peer-assessment, collaborative, and metacognitive skills (unfortunately, it's pay walled). I wrote a review of the paper for my Masters in Distance Education.
They went much further/deeper into the details, processes, support, leadership, and mediation that are necessary to cultivate productive communities of inquiry in higher-education settings. They use a shortened, improved peer-assessment oriented survey tool which is a Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales system (BARS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behaviorally_anchored_rating_scales ) to raise and develop awareness of what effective collaborative study skills are and look like in practice, and to facilitate learners' abilities to rate collaborators on projects in their groups. The researchers run a dedicated website for the project and give faculty free access to the online tools and rubrics that they've developed: http://info.catme.org/
One of the core points that the project addresses is that simply putting learners together in groups with tasks/projects to complete doesn't necessarily guarantee that they'll collaborate effectively or that they'll learn any better than working individually. They require a substantial degree of leadership, support, and mediation in order to do so and, for the majority of learners, there's a steep learning curve to becoming more aware of and developing metacognitive, self-regulating, "learning how to learn" skills.
Other models of reflection and developing metacognitive skills for learning have been described and investigated extensively by John Dewey, Malcolm Knowles, Donald Schon, Stephen Brookfield, Graham Gibbs, and so on.
MOOCs, and would argue the internet and libraries in general, are great for acquiring new information and processing it into knowledge in ways that are already familiar to us. The purpose of education is to push learners into processing prior and new knowledge in new ways to achieve higher-order levels of knowledge and understanding. For this they need help and guidance and that's the most valuable job of educators, as far as I can see.
Reference
Ohland, M. W., Loughry, M. L., Woehr, D. J., Bullard, L. G., Felder, R. M., Finelli, C. J., ... Schmucker, D. G. (2012). The Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness: Development of a Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale for Self- and Peer Evaluation. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(4), 609-630. http://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0177
BTW, here's a memo that Richard Felder has distributed to his students after exams called, "MEMO TO STUDENTS WHO ARE DISAPPOINTED WITH THEIR LAST TEST GRADE"
Matt
You might have listened to this talk. I am posting it here because I think it contains "food for thought" about a recent development:
"Prof. Barba gave keynote at SciPy 2014"
http://lorenabarba.com/gallery/prof-barba-gave-keynote-at-scipy-2014/
@others
Warning: Listen at your own risk. Don't ask me compensate your lost time!
Apology: It was not my intention to start a discussion on "What is good teaching - in any field, at any level, through any medium, ...". I am just an engineer-turned-teacher out of need. I appreciate the big picture but lack the capacity to contribute in any way. Sorry!
You might have listened to this talk. I am posting it here because I think it contains "food for thought" about a recent development:
"Prof. Barba gave keynote at SciPy 2014"
http://lorenabarba.com/gallery/prof-barba-gave-keynote-at-scipy-2014/
@others
Warning: Listen at your own risk. Don't ask me compensate your lost time!
Apology: It was not my intention to start a discussion on "What is good teaching - in any field, at any level, through any medium, ...". I am just an engineer-turned-teacher out of need. I appreciate the big picture but lack the capacity to contribute in any way. Sorry!