Literature and Practice: A Critical Review of MOOCs

Abstract

RESUMENEste artículo se enfoca en una revisión tanto de literatura como de experiencias prácticas acerca de los MOOC. Los textos analizados fueron publicados en revistas entre los años 2007 y 2013. Se seleccionaron 268 artículos para este estudio, de los cuales 100 se analizaron en detalle. Los asuntos encontrados en la revisión se utilizaron posteriormente como criterios de análisis de 10 experiencias empíricas sobre MOOC. La literatura estudiada resalta el rápido crecimiento en el interés por comprender los MOOC, sus fundamentos pedagógicos así como la importancia del concepto de lo abierto que se encuentra en ellos. Un nuevo énfasis ha surgido recientemente en la literatura donde los factores institucionales, particularmente aquellos concernientes con la viabilidad financiera, la certificación y la deserción se encuentran resaltados. El análisis de la prácticas actuales muestra que muchos de los temas relevantes expresados en la literatura académica están ausentes no solo de las prácticas relacionadas con las experiencias de aprendizaje basadas en los MOOC sino que se han ignorado como sustento de la implementación de un modelo de enseñanza basada en ellos. Del análisis realizado se concluye que buena parte de la actual oferta de MOOC es tan solo un pálido reflejo de la conceptualización que les dio origen y que se muestra significativa en la literatura. En síntesis, la verdadera esencia del concepto de lo abierto se ha perdido en la práctica. ABSTRACTThis article focuses on a review of both literature and practical experiences concerning MOOCs. The literature analyzed was published in peer-reviewed journals between 2007 and 2013. 268 items were selected for this study, of which 100 were analyzed in detail. The issues raised by this analysis were used as the criteria for the analysis of 10 current empirical MOOC experiences. The literature study highlighted the rapid growth in interest in understanding MOOCs and seeking to understand the pedagogic frameworks most relevant to their adoption and the importance of the concept of openness embodied within them. More recently a new emphasis has been emerging where institutional factors, particularly those concerned with financial viability, certification and retention have been highlighted. The analysis of current practice showed that many of the concerns in the academic literature were absent from not only the practices embodied in current MOOC-based learning experiences but seem to have been ignored in the conceptual phase of implementing a MOOC-based teaching model. In practice therefore, most of the current MOOC offer is only a pale reflection of the conceptualization that gave them rise and has been shown to be significant in the literature. In particular the true essence encapsulated in the concept described as Openness has been largely lost in practice. PALABRAS CLAVE | KEYWORDSAprendizaje virtual, cursos, educación en línea, entornos de aprendizaje, informática educativa, innovación didáctica, práctica docente, MOOC.

From massive access to cooperation: lessons learned and proven results of a hybrid xMOOC/cMOOC pedagogical approach to MOOCs

“…Transformer of training or education bubble, new learning or marketing model (Cabero, 2015;Salzberg, 2015)-whatever one's view, MOOCs feature prominently in conferences and scientific journals (Chiappe Laverde, Hine, & Martínez Silva, 2015;Jacoby, 2014;Martínez Abad, Rodríguez Conde, & García-Peñalvo, 2014), with huge interest in acquiring reliable data to better understand the MOOC phenomenon and its possible impact on learning strategy.…”

Analysis of the pedagogical perspective of the MOOCs available in Portuguese

“…Specifying the working method is uncommon (223, 62.6%) and in cases in which it is specified it refers to «indepen dent study» with the help of audiovisual resources (50, 14%), automated tests (39, 11%), and the support and guidance of a tutor (31, 8.7%). Nonetheless, these differences contradict the similarity of the underlying methodological design in most of the MOOCs studied as a group, given that the portals use similar «templates» for content providers, leading to the cour ses resembling each other and the platform that hosts them, as was already concluded in the studies by Chiappe-Laverde, Hine, & Martínez-Silva (2015) and RaposoRivas, MartínezFigueira, & Sarmiento Campos (2015). This debate and discussion will be maintained in future if the design does not avoid repeating the «unidirec tional» structure that proposes the didac tics of videos, exercises, and the «banking» pedagogy, as we are reminded by Ebben & Murphy (2014) for whom the pedagogical models will not change despite the incor poration of the new proposals for «Learn ing analytics», «eassessment», etc.…”

“…Few technological developments have inspired as many divided opinions and attracted as much attention and expecta tion in such a short period of time as have MOOCs, or Massive Open Online Courses (Chiappe-Laverde, Hine, & Martínez-Silva, 2015;López, Vázquez, & Román, 2015;Sangrà, González, & Anderson, 2015 Producing open access content that offers certification obviously poses many questions that are yet to be answered: the homogenisation and globalisation of culture, free availability and new busi ness focuses, new strategic approaches and positioning of companies, pedagogical design, new formats and content, and in particular the role of universities in the knowledge society. This is not a phenome non to which we should be indifferent, nor should we approach it from a naïve posi tion and implement MOOC services in ev ery university without considering what Open Educational Resources -OER-in general and MOOCs in particular repre sent for the strategic lines of each insti tution.…”

The Pedagogic Architecture of MOOC: A Research Project on Educational Courses in Spanish

“…Not only is it necessary to be aware of the pedagogic, technological, and financial opportunities offered by these courses, but rather it is also important to know that not all practices developed obey the connectivist, democratizing, and collaborative theoretical foundations upon which they were conceived (Chiappe-Laverde, Hine, & Martínez-Silva, 2015;Méndez García, 2013;Ozturk, 2015). Thus we can overcome a "romantic vision of MOOCs" (Cabero, 2015, p.4) and reach a more critical and reflective analysis which does not only present the advantages of this way of learning, but also its weaknesses, limitations, and opportunities for improvements in the future.…”