A disciplinary perspective on university teaching and learning

Neumann, Ruth

doi:10.1016/s1479-3628(03)80011-4

Cited by 15 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, curricular content and resources in these six hard and soft MOOCs were consistent with Neumann's (2003) categorization. Hard MOOCs represented expert knowledge and promoted mastery of concepts and professional skills.…”

Section: Curriculum and Contentsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…Neumann et al (2002) and Neumann (2003) proposed a framework with two dimensions of disciplinary knowledge and social practices to characterize teaching and learning across four categories of disciplines: hard pure (e.g. natural sciences), soft pure (e.g.…”

Section: Pedagogical Practices In Disciplinary Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rather than being restrictive and prescriptive, this framework offered a set of dimensions related to teaching and learning practices that facilitate the comparison of course design in MOOCs. Neumann et al (2002) and Neumann (2003) proposed a framework with two dimensions of disciplinary knowledge and social practices to characterize teaching and learning across four categories of disciplines: hard pure (e.g. natural sciences), soft pure (e.g.…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…education). Three knowledge-related dimensions of Neumann's (2003) framework, briefly described below, were relevant to this study:…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Synthesizing existing conceptions of teaching in different disciplines (Neumann et al, 2003), courses associated with hard disciplines tend to have structured and sequenced content. In soft disciplines, competing paradigms often coexist, leading to courses that have less structured content and showcase more of a spiral curriculum.…”

Section: Content and Curriculummentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Variations in Pedagogical Design of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) Across Disciplines

Najafi

Rolheiser

Håklev

et al. 2017

TLI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 ...

show abstract

Section: Curriculum and Contentsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Pedagogical Practices In Disciplinary Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%