<p>We interviewed eight University of Toronto (U of T) instructors who have offered MOOCs on Coursera or EdX between 2012 and 2014 to understand their motivation for MOOC instruction, their experience developing and teaching MOOCs, and their perceptions of the implications of MOOC instruction on their teaching and research practices. Through inductive analysis, we gleaned common motivations for MOOC development, including expanding public access to high quality learning resources, showcasing U of T teaching practices, and attempting to engage MOOC learners in application of concepts learned, even in the face of constraints that may inhibit active learning in MOOC contexts. MOOC design and delivery was a team effort with ample emphasis on planning and clarity. Instructors valued U of T instructional support in promoting systematic MOOC design and facilitating technical issues related to MOOC platforms. The evolution of MOOC support at U of T grew from a focus on addressing technical issues, to instructional design of MOOCs driven, first, by desired learning outcomes. Findings include changes in teaching practices of the MOOC instructors as they revised pedagogical practices in their credit courses by increasing opportunities for active learning and using MOOC resources to subsequently flip their classrooms. This study addresses the paucity of research on faculty experiences with developing MOOCs, which can subsequently inform the design of new forms of MOOC-like initiatives to increase public access to high quality learning resources, including those available through U of T.</p>
The advent of massive open online courses (MOOCs) has created opportunities for learning that are clearly in high demand, but the direction in which MOOCs should evolve to best meet the interests and needs of learners is less apparent. Motivated by our interest in whether there are potential and purpose for archived MOOCs to be used as learning resources beyond and between instructor-led live-sessions, we examined the use of a statistics MOOC and a computer science MOOC, both of which were made available as archived-courses after a live-session and for which enrolment continued to grow while archived. Using data collected from surveys of learner demographics and intent, the course database of major learner activity, and the detailed clickstream of all learner actions, we compared the demographics, intent, and behaviour of live- and archived-learners. We found that archived-learners were interested in the live-MOOC and that their patterns of use of course materials, such as the number and sequence of videos they watched, the number of assessments they completed, their demonstration of self-regulatory behaviour, and their rate of participation in the discussion forums, were similar to the live-learners. In addition, we found evidence of learners drawing on an archived-MOOC for use as reference material. Anticipated areas of impact of this work include implications for the future development of MOOCs as resources for self-study and professional development, and in support of learner success in other courses.
We investigated how high school students taking a university preparatory economics course would engage with the learning and assessment components of a Behavioural Economics MOOC that was integrated into their school-based course. Students were divided into two groups, MOOC-only, with no teacher support, and blended-mode, with weekly tutorials. MOOC only students scored slightly lower on a teacher designed knowledge test but scored slightly higher in a MOOC test. Although the MOOC-only students watched more unique videos, the blended-mode students stayed more on-track with the MOOC. The blended-mode students showed more persistence in retaking quizzes, yet they scored lower than the MOOC-only students.
Given that few studies have formally examined pedagogical design considerations of Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs), this study explored variations in the pedagogical design of six MOOCs offered at the University of Toronto, while considering disciplinary characteristics and expectations of each MOOC. Using a framework (Neumann et al., 2002) characterizing teaching and learning across categories of disciplines, three of the MOOCs represented social sciences and humanities, or "soft" MOOCs, while another three represented sciences, or "hard" MOOCS. We utilized a multicase study design for understanding differences and similarities across MOOCs regarding learning outcomes, assessment methods, interaction design, and curricular content. MOOC instructor interviews, MOOC curricular documents, and discussion forum data comprised the data set. Learning outcomes of the six MOOCs reflected broad cognitive competencies promoted in each MOOC, with the structure of curricular content following disciplinary expectations. The instructors of soft MOOCs adopted a spiral curriculum and created new content in response to learner contributions. Assessment methods in each MOOC aligned well with stated learning outcomes. In soft MOOCs, discussion and exposure to diverse perspectives were promoted while in hard MOOCs there was more emphasis on question and answer. This study shows disciplinary-informed variations in MOOC pedagogy, and highlights instructors' strategies to foster disciplinary ways of knowing, skills, and practices within the parameters of a generic MOOC platform. Pedagogical approaches such as peer assessment bridged the disciplines. Suggestions for advancing research and practice related to MOOC pedagogy are also included. KEYWORDSMassive Open Online Courses (MOOCs); Pedagogical design; Disciplinary differences; MOOC pedagogy PURPOSE Few studies have formally examined pedagogical design considerations of MOOCs. In this study we focused on deconstructing curriculum design and implementation in six MOOCs representing a range of disciplinary affiliation and then identified promising practices. The purpose of this research is to understand Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) design across disciplines with respect to four dimensions: learning outcomes, assessment of learning outcomes, interaction design, and curricular content (Neumann, Parry, & Becher, 2002). Within existing literature, students' overall learning experience, course design, and course implementation in higher education may reflect discipline-specific Najafi, Rolheiser, Håklev, & Harrison Najafi, H., Rolheiser, C., Håklev, S., & Harrison, L. (2017). Variations in pedagogical design of massive open online courses (MOOCs) across disciplines. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 5(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.2.5 48 epistemological differences. Researchers have pointed out such disciplinary differences in various dimensions of teaching practices, including fostering deep approaches to learning (Laird, Shoup, Kuh, & Schwarz, 2008); teacher ...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.