How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Matt Bury -
Number of replies: 24
Picture of Plugin developers

A provocatively loaded question intended to incite a lively and robust debate...

MOOCs cannot be effective forms of mainstream education because they do not effectively, sufficiently, and consistently provide mediated learning experiences (MLEs), i.e. There's just not enough teaching going on. One or a small handful of teachers simply cannot effectively mediate tens of thousands, or even tens of hundreds of learners.

For more about MLEs please see: http://www.thinkingconnections.org/theory/MLE.shtml

So, how long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out? Have they already died out and now people are just repeating empty rhetoric?

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Don Hinkelman -
Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Plugin developers

Thanks, Matt, for starting a good discussion and agreeing to be our Mediator in this MLE. If it weren't for the well-worded, flame-like wording of the question, I would never have joined.  smile

But you got me interested and I just read the beginning of the link you sent, and learned that the quality of learning on this thread will depend on the degree of mediation by you, the leader/teacher/moderator, and the interaction of the thread members, like me.  Sound very Vygotskian--that the social interaction is as important as internal cognition.

This is a mini-MOOC of sorts--of course without the "Massive".  I, too, believe MOOCs have died out, or at least the rhetoric that MOOCs are a disruptive approach that will change the face of education.  But then, again, I have never really joined a MOOC to give a direct opinion. I did, however, write a paper on blended learning where I argued that MOOCs will transform themselves into various forms of blended learning because people need quality interaction, assessment, coaching, and mentoring.

In the model of education where the main interaction is with a piece of text (written or visual), that we must "master", MOOCs may continue to have a role. For example, if my learning goal is to pass the real estate licensing exam or to get a TOEIC score of 700, there might be usefulness for a free, massive online learning experience to raise my scores or get some advice.

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Don Hinkelman

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Matt Bury -
Picture of Plugin developers

Hi Don,

As an already highly proficient learner yourself, very little, if any 3rd party mediation is required for you to learn productively and efficiently. Also, post-grad students pretty much only need a syllabus and access to reasonable quality resources, e.g. libraries and self-access centres, in order to learn. Mediation by expert faculty can be minimal and usually is.

On the other hand, the MOOC pundits are claiming that undergraduates and even school children can benefit from MOOCs. MOOCs require learners to already have highly developed metacognitive skills. Even though we've known about why and how to develop school children's metacognitive skills, autonomy, and self-regulation for the best part of a century, mainstream education systems still do not place any great value or emphasis on them, therefore our average undergraduate student is ill-prepared to assume the responsibilities of self-regulated, self-mediated learning. I believe that the very high drop-out rates of unmediated educational methods, like MOOCs, are evidence of this. The same appears to be true of standalone language learning software such as Auralog's Tell Me More and Rosetta Stone.

Perhaps a significant issue with MOOCs is that the people who advocate for them, being proficient learners themselves, assume that other learners are just as proficient.

BTW, if you want to raise your learners' TOEIC and TOEFL scores as efficiently as possible, you might find this researcher's work interesting: http://benikomason.com/

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Natalie Denmeade -

Bernard Bull has included MOOCs in his list of

10 Higher Education Trends to Watch in 2015 & Beyond

http://etale.org/main/2015/04/27/10-higher-education-trends-to-watch-in-2015-beyond/

As a self confessed MOOC addict, as in this long Moodle Post, I have to admit I just signed up for another one! (I promise I will quit after that and find matching socks for my hungry pizza-fed children). 

I am someone who promotes 'Mediated Learning Experiences' and likes MOOCs too. My last MOOC had almost zero interaction. It really wasn't much different to reading a Book. Except I was watching videos and using an interactive screen to create code and get instant feedback. As opposed to paper and pen and a two week turn around to get a massive fail/pass. The learning was 'mediated' by the Python auto-grader.

In Previous MOOCs I have been highly social and our self organised Facebook support group is still going on a daily basis years later. The MOOC platform itself didn't make this happen but we created the 'affinity ' spaces'.

I see a lot of similarity in my children's learning and mine over the last few years. Minecraft is a platform that a small part of a larger world of modding, Youtube, and common ground to chat about. The learning is not happening in one place to be tracked. My MOOC activities are one part of my Personal Learning Network. I hope they are here to stay! I was surprised that the MOOC format hadn't changed much in the last 2 years to become more interactive. But to think that the linear delivery of MOOCS is doomed is like saying that Books are useless for learning because they are not a 'MLE'. For me, a MOOC is, at least,  a book that is free, available 24/7 and more entertaining. Sometimes they are more than that. Just one part of my Learning Journey.


Average of ratings: Useful (2)
In reply to Natalie Denmeade

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Matt Bury -
Picture of Plugin developers

Hi Natalie,

It sounds to me like what you're advocating for is online communities of inquiry/practice rather than MOOCs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_practice

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_inquiry

However, communities of inquiry require some quite intensive mediation from skilled teaching practitioners, so not really a cheap and easy laissez-faire approach that MOOCs promise to be.

In both cases, there are high ratios of expert practitioners to novice learners in the educational/practice environments meaning that novices have frequent opportunities and access to skilled mediation.

Any way you look at it, the majority of 10,000 - 100,000 undergrads aren't going to get very far on a course if left to their own devices/left to sink or swim.

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Marcus Green -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Plugin developers Picture of Testers

I'd like to have a quiet intense one to one conversation with the person who invented the term "community of practice", it seems a random combination of warm sounding words that can be used for anything and without meaning.

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Marcus Green

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Tim Hunt -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Documentation writers Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Peer reviewers Picture of Plugin developers

It came from a specific area of Cognitive anthropology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_practice

The fact that it later became widely adopted and debased is hardly the fault of the inventors.

Average of ratings: Useful (2)
In reply to Tim Hunt

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by dawn alderson -

Hi all,

watching this thread develop, with interest. Please can I just add at this point, very briefly, Tim, that is a very decent post about inventions, it may be things that are invented, do become obsolete over time.

But I could be wrong, of course.  

In reply to Tim Hunt

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Matt Bury -
Picture of Plugin developers

To expand on Tim's point...

AFAIK, CoP was originally Etienne Wenger's PhD thesis, inspired in part by his collaboration with Jean Lave. John Seely-Brown read it and encouraged him to expand it into a book.

Check out Jean Lave's presentation on her work studying apprentice tailors in Liberia here:


As Wenger himself points out CoP is hardly a new concept and has been around for at least as long as civilisation. The modern, formalised equivalent would be guilds and apprenticeship programmes.

Also, check out Seely-Brown's and Duguid's highly influential paper on situated cognition: http://people.ucsc.edu/~gwells/Files/Courses_Folder/ED%20261%20Papers/Situated%20Cognition.pdf

As Dave Snowden (Complex Adaptive Systems guy) puts it, "Beware magpies." In other words, beware of people who take the shiny new buzzwords that they like, and then play semantics with them until they fit what they were already doing before they heard of the new method, approach, strategy, or technique.

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by dawn alderson -

Hi,

Matt, you mention work from a long time ago-late 80s/90s...that was a blast from the past!  I enjoyed reading John SB et al., work then and still do now, he takes a sociological approach to unpick the landscape, more so lately, and-remains to be one of a very few academics who do so. Of course those references stem from the days of very early cross-domain attempts and we have moved on...I have been reading about great thinkers who studied within domain of architecture and making links with that for computer science and education-we have indeed, moved on. But, multidisciplinary/interdisciplinary paradigms/theories/approaches are here to stay, and we see this in the design of MOOCs.

So, Matt you posted:

 MOOCs cannot be effective forms of mainstream education because they do not effectively, sufficiently, and consistently provide mediated learning experiences (MLEs), i.e. There's just not enough teaching going on. One or a small handful of teachers simply cannot effectively mediate tens of thousands, or even tens of hundreds of learners.

Might be worth-staying with the cognitive theories for a moment then, maybe-I would like to post a few questions, taken from a book-from a very long time ago (Smith, Cowie and Blades late 80s-I think):

1. Vygotsky argued that instruction is at the heart of developing and internalizing new ideas? Is this what you mean by not enough teaching across MOOCs?

2. Does language structure out thinking or thinking structure our language (Vygotsky-former stance/Piaget latter stance)? 

The answers=may help us to determine what we mean by mediate.  I am not sure we have defined that accurately, thus far.

p.s. Dave Snowden Yes

D

In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Natalie Denmeade -

Hi Matt,

I do lean toward 'Community of Inquiry' but see books and MOOCs as playing a part in the learning. Certainly not to replace teachers or institutes. The MOOC I recently started on Python was in my classroom. I asked the students to form Guilds of of either web, video or game design. To manage teaching three subjects at once I use Open Education Resources like MOOCS. So 5 of them sat there  doing a MOOC together in a classroom with me  coming over to join in some of the time. So I was still meditating the experience for them. The whole course was provided as a Moodle mbz file which I could download and provide access for the students at any time.

I am sure MOOCs could be designed to be more collaborative and interactive but they are still a step up from what I used to have available to me as resources. 

Dawn your question on language and Mediation led me to this article: https://edge.org/conversation/how-does-our-language-shape-the-way-we-think . It was encouraging to see that peoples perceptions can be changed my something as simple as the language used. I have been reading Professor's Dweck's experiments with the way teachers words encourage a fixed or growth mindset and how that builds resilience. As a mum of two young kids and a teacher of teenagers, it is very hard to change my habits of rewarding and acknowledge ability over effort! A lot of it comes naturally to me but I still have many words and phrases I now recognize as undermining a Growth mindset.


 Siemens, Dragan, and Daw have just released this report which is a meta-study of MOOC Analysis ... http://linkresearchlab.org/PreparingDigitalUniversity.pdf ' "Preparing for the  digital university:  a review of the history and  current state of distance,  blended, and online learning" : The abstract states:

"The results revealed the main research themes that could  form a framework of the future MOOC research: i) student  engagement and learning success, ii)  mooc  design and  curriculum, iii) self-regulated learning and social learning,  iv) social network analysis and networked learning, and v)  motivation, attitude and success criteria. The theme of social  learning received the greatest interest and had the highest  success in attracting funding. The submissions that planned  on using learning analytics methods were more successful.  The use of mixed methods was by far the most popular.  Design-based research methods were also suggested commonly, but the questions about their applicability arose  regarding the feasibility to perform multiple iterations in the  mooc  context and rather a limited focus on technological  support for interventions. The submissions were dominated  by the researchers from the field of education (75% of the  accepted proposals).  not only was this a possible cause of  a complete lack of success of the educational technology  innovation theme, but it could be a worrying sign of the  fragmentation in the research community and the need  to increased efforts towards enhancing interdisciplinarity."


Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Natalie Denmeade

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Natalie Denmeade -

The paper I mentioned above is being criticized by Stephen Downes:

"This is why I said in my assessment of the paper that "the major conclusion you'll find in these research studies is that (a) research is valuable, and (b) more research is needed." These are empty conclusions, suggesting that either the authors of the original papers, or the authors summarizing the papers, had almost nothing to say.

In summary, I stand by my conclusion that the book is a muddled mess. I'm disappointed that Siemens feels the need to defend it by dismissing the work that most of his colleagues have undertaken since 2008, and by advancing this nonsense as "research and evidence."

http://halfanhour.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/research-and-evidence.html


George has defended the paper here: http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2015/04/30/on-research-and-academic-diversity/

This conversation between George Siemens and Stephen Downes really brings up so many key points. It is pretty amazing that it is such a public discussion. Which I am sure I will glean more value from than the original paper!

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Natalie Denmeade

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by dawn alderson -

Natalie, hi

thanks for this info, links to the reports/book, nice to know about that.

The tittle-tattle, not that interested to be honest, but it does reflect how passionate these two men are-that is priceless eh, to be fair.

I think George S has been a gent in his response...but there is one common denominator that connects both chaps-scuse the pun ;)

That is.....when GS says this:

  We took two approaches in the report: one a broad citation analysis of meta-studies in distance, online, and blended learning. This forms the first three chapters. While we no doubt missed some sources, we addressed many of the most prominent (and yes, prominence is not a statement of quality or even impact).  To my knowledge neither scholars have investigated this -arguably a top priority for the dev of MOOCs.

And

The heart of the discussion for me is about the nature of educational technology narrative. At least three strands of discourse exist: the edtech hypesters, the research literature in peer reviewed publications, and the practitioner space.  Nope, there are four.....the learner space...(Kop, 2011 for example, and others in the UK-at the OU and so on).

ta

D

In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Derek Chirnside -

"However, communities of inquiry require some quite intensive mediation from skilled teaching practitioners, so not really a cheap and easy laissez-faire approach that MOOCs promise to be"

  1. I'm not convinced yet: mediation is a function and can be assisted by careful course material construction pathways - and it can be a distributed function seen in participant interaction.
  2. "Laissez faire approach" need not be. Some of the MOOCs around for instance computer languages are anything but this.
    That's why I don't see Moodle.org as being anything like a MOOC.  More a CoI or CoP.

-Derek

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Derek Chirnside

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Matt Bury -
Picture of Plugin developers

Hi Derek,

Mediation is something that human beings do with each other, usually a teacher/mentor with a learner. The easiest way to picture it is to imagine a counsellor, psychiatrist, or guru listening to a client, patient, or follower and using prompts, questions, or even silence (called "wait time") to encourage them to think more deeply about and/or reflect on what they're saying. it's targeted directly at what the mediator perceives as the learners current zone of proximal development on the particular focus of attention at the time and as such will vary greatly from leaner to learner, from situation to situation, and from moment to moment. It's a fuzzy, rapidly changing, dynamic activity that emerges from the interaction between mediator and learner.

This isn't something that learning resources or AI or anything else can do. In fact, some teachers find it very difficult. It's a set of skills that take many years of practice to master.

Average of ratings: Useful (2)
In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Derek Chirnside -

Matt, "Mediation is something that human beings do with each other, usually a teacher/mentor with a learner"

This is an assertion, which may be a question of semantics and something I don't get.

I think there is a process that happens/can happen/may happen between entity (ie learner) and tool, peer, content, teacher, or experience.  May not be 'mediation' but it does exist in my experience (not very reliable I know).  It can/may result in learning.  

One partially relevant idea is activity theory.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activity_theory

Can we learn from a book or do we need a mediator?  Teacher/tutor type?

-Derek

Average of ratings: Useful (2)
In reply to Derek Chirnside

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by dawn alderson -

I see Matt

Mediation is something that human beings do with each other, usually a teacher/mentor with a learner. The easiest way to picture it is to imagine a counsellor, psychiatrist, or guru listening to a client, patient, or follower and using prompts, questions, or even silence (called "wait time") to encourage them to think more deeply about and/or reflect on what they're saying. it's targeted directly at what the mediator perceives as the learners current zone of proximal development on the particular focus of attention at the time 

So, to mediate is to enable language to structure thinking....I am sure I am echoing something there-something I said earlier-I am not in the zone......let me find my zone and I might remember where I learned/how I know about that.....

hang on it is here wide eyes surprise

https://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=312582#p1251781

Got it-I am now in the zone.

thanks. 

 

In reply to Derek Chirnside

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Matt Bury -
Picture of Plugin developers

Hi Derek,

If you look more closely at the Wikipedia.org page on Activity Theory (AT), you'll see that the diagram of Engestrom's extended AT (Engeström, 1987) was provided by me smile

For a fuller explanation of Vygotsky's notion of mediation, here's an extract from Mind in Society:

"We call the internal reconstruction of an external operation internalisation. A good example of this process may be found in the development of pointing. Initially, this gesture is nothing more than an unsuccessful attempt to grasp at something, a movement aimed at a certain object which designates forthcoming activity. The child attempts to grasp an object placed beyond his reach; his hands, stretched toward that object, remain poised in the air. His fingers make grasping movements. At this initial stage pointing is represented by the child's movement, which seems to be pointing to an object - that and nothing more.

When the mother comes to the child's aid and realises his movement means something, the situation changes fundamentally. Pointing becomes a gesture for others. The child's unsuccessful attempt engenders a reaction not from the object he seeks but from another person. Consequently, the primary meaning of that unsuccessful grasping movement is established by others. Only later, when the child can link his unsuccessful grasping movement to the objective situation as a whole, does he begin to understand this movement as pointing. At this juncture there occurs a change in that movement's function: from an object-oriented movement it becomes a movement aimed at another person, a means of establishing relations. The grasping movement changes to the act of pointing. As a result of this change, the movement itself is then physically simplified, and what results is the form of pointing that we may call a true gesture. It becomes a true gesture only after it objectively manifests all the functions of pointing for others and is understood by others as a gesture. Its meaning and functions are created at first by an objective situation and then by people who surround the child.

As the above description of pointing illustrates, the process of internalisation consists of a series of transformations:

(a) An operation that initially represents an external activity is reconstructed and begins to occur internally. Of particular importance to the development of higher mental processes is the transformation of sign-using activity, the history and characteristics of which are illustrated by the development of practical intelligence, voluntary attention, and memory.

(b) An interpersonal process is transformed into an intrapersonal one. Every function in the child's cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the individual level; first between people (intrapsychological), and then inside the child (intrapsychological). This applies equally to voluntary attention, to logical memory, and to the formation of concepts. All the higher functions originate as actual relations between human individuals.

(c) The transformation of an interpersonal process into an intrapersonal one is the result of a long series of developmental events. The process being transformed continues to exist and to change as an external form of activity for a long time before definitively turning inward. For many functions, the stage of external signs lasts forever, that is, it is their final stage of development. Other functions develop further and gradually become inner functions. However, they take on the character of inner processes only as a result of a prolonged development. Their transfer inward is linked with changes in the laws governing their activity; they are incorporated into a new system with its own laws.

The internalisation of cultural forms of behaviour involves the reconstruction of psychological activity on the basis of sign operations. Psychological processes as they appear in animals actually cease to exist; they are incorporated into this system of behaviour and are culturally reconstructed and developed to form a new psychological entity. The use of external signs is also radically reconstructed. The developmental changes in sign operations are akin to those that occur in language. Aspects of external or communicative speech as well as egocentric speech turn "inward” to become the basis of inner speech.

The internalisation of socially rooted and historically developed activities is the distinguishing feature of human psychology, the basis of the qualitative leap from animal to human psychology. As yet, the barest outline of this process is known.” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 56-57)

It's worth noting that in higher education especially, learners have already had at least 17 years of these ZPD episodes and so have internalised a vast number of thinking processes and ideally should already be highly independent learners capable of mediating at least most their own learning and each others'. However, we don't live in an ideal world and our education systems appear to place more value on conformity, compliance, and standardised test scores than on learning. This may be partly why colleges and universities complain that their intake are often poorly prepared for the kinds of studying, higher-order and critical thinking that's expected of them.

References
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by Expanding:  An Activity - Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research. Retrieved February 10, 2015, from http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/Paper/Engestrom/expanding/toc.htm
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard.
Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by dawn alderson -

How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Derek Chirnside -

Small wry smile here Matt.  Well done.

But, have you answered my last question?

-Derek

In reply to Derek Chirnside

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Matt Bury -
Picture of Plugin developers

Do you mean this one? "Can we learn from a book or do we need a mediator?  Teacher/tutor type?"

Yes, even young children can learn a lot from books. Mediation is only necessary when the child, in Vygotsky's terms, cannot acquire a psychological tool (i.e. a new way of thinking) unaided, i.e. when it is in their ZPD.

In the context of MOOCs and their "disruption" of higher education, participants can use whatever psychological tools that they've already acquired to add and process new information, and integrate it into their prior knowledge. However in higher education, we're concerned with acquiring new tools and new ways of thinking, whether it's formal logic, mathematical concepts, the scientific method, or whatever. As I've said earlier, faculty frequently report that many of their new students have substantial difficulty with college/university study and require intensive remedial tutoring to "bridge the gap."

So how will unmediated approaches to learning, like MOOCs, help undergraduates through the process of acquiring these new tools/ways of thinking? Who will help them to bridge the gap?

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Derek Chirnside -

Sorry, Matt, this slipped off my radar.

So you are not against MOOCs per se, just that you believe most potential students can't cope with them.  And that you don't think MOOCs can help develop these higher level skills?

As a side comment, this is one example of a better than avetage MOOC, and one reason why I think there will still be MOOCs around in the future:

https://www.coursera.org/course/ltto

-Derek

In reply to Derek Chirnside

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Matt Bury -
Picture of Plugin developers
Hi Derek,

Thanks for the link to the example Coursera MOOC course, Learning to Teach Online. Looking at the number of hours "on task," we have 6 weeks at 3 - 6 hours per week. That's 18 - 36 hours in total. When you consider that the average online graduate course estimates are around 180 hours or more, and around a dozen or so courses to make up a programme, it leaves me wondering just how "deep" this course goes.

The course is aimed exclusively at K-12 and higher-ed teachers, in other words, people who already have a post-graduate level of education and can be considered already "expert learners." It's also explicitly designed to serve teachers who are required to attend a minimum number of hours of continuing professional development (CPD) training, conferences, sessions, etc., as an easy, convenient way to tick the "CPD box" and submit it to their HR departments/bosses. So it's a replacement for finding, paying for (and claiming back), setting the time aside, travelling to, and attending a face-to-face CPD session. It may even be a pilot/marketing scheme for future paid for CPD courses.

So the question is, how does this course achieve the claims that the pundits are making about MOOCs?

  1. Does it serve learners who otherwise wouldn't have access to education?
  2. Does it provide sufficient support and mediation to novice higher-ed learners, i.e. undergraduates or high school/6th form students?
  3. Does it provide a pathway or at least provide a step towards entering higher education?
If MOOCs are "evolving," what are they evolving into? Most of the MOOCs I've seen seem to replicate a mixture of traditional chalk'n'talk, telling, explaining, etc., and the worst of 1980s - 90s stand-a-lone, fend for yourself, multiple choice & short answer question test, elearning modules, with unsupervised and unmoderated forums added. Is this what we mean by revolutionising education?
Average of ratings: Useful (2)
In reply to Matt Bury

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Visvanath Ratnaweera -
Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Translators
Matt

I know, "to die out" is for provocation. The thing with hype is that in its original form it stabilzes somewhere to be replaced by the next generation of things much later.

Anyway, here is a set of arguments for MOOC:
MOOCs: Charles Severance at TEDxKalamazoo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?foo=bar&v=slscHD40r78

P.S. Of special interst to the Moodlers, the upper arm of the speaker!
smile
Attachment moodle-tattoo.png
In reply to Visvanath Ratnaweera

Re: How long do you think it will take for MOOCs to die out?

by Daniel Bailey -

Brilliant thread. I almost feal unworthy to comment.

I have never participated in a MOOC. I got my masters in Education online from the University of Texas. I did this in 2005 before I even knew what a MOOC was. I never once felt my courses were static. I cherished every message from my supervisors, and they brought my courses to life. Granted, I was well on my way to being a self-regulated learner so a great deal of interaction wasn't necessary. In my opinion, MOOCs are awful from an undergraduate's viewpoint. I took a medical terminology course for my undergrad which involved zero interaction with a teacher. It sucked. I aced it with the least amount of effort. I could have received equal quality of education from the back of a cereal box. That being said, there is a huge amount of middle ground between professor-heavy interaction and stand-alone courses.

I'm a teacher with a big stake hold on keeping the human teacher element alive in the classroom. I'm also beginning doctoral research in education technology. I feel the human interaction of MOOC instructors will be the crux of their usefulness for developing minds.

Regarding the thesis of this thread, of course MOOCs aren't going anywhere. They are at the Model-T level of their development. The only difference is that we will not have to wait long to see what the Ferrari of MOOCs will look like.

Exciting times folks

Average of ratings: Useful (1)