AMP: A tool for characterizing the pedagogical approaches of MOOCs

Abstract

Online instruction has become part of the core of higher education and a voluminous literature has developed establishing that online instruction is just as effective as face-to-face learning. Simultaneously, however, pervasive reports of isolation and attrition among online learners, attributed to the presumed inability of online classes to support the substantive social interaction and sense of community among learners, have led some to conclude that online learning is not suitable for students who highly value interaction and who cannot function well independently. This study, however, explores how innovations in online instructional media and design may heighten interaction and community building among online learners.This study examines how the use of an online virtual environment impacts on student learning experiences in terms of four constructs: Presence, social presence, social interaction, and sense of community. During this ethnography, the online class proceedings of four hybrid classes were observed over the course of three academic terms. The transcripts of the proceedings, some conducted in the virtual environment and some in an asynchronous discussion forum, were subjected to content analysis to examine how the constructs manifested themselves in the virtual environment, how the environment impacted on their manifestation, how they mutually influenced one another, and how they mutually impacted upon student learning experiences. In addition, the researcher conducted interview and focus group sessions with key informants.The results indicated that the MOO demonstrated stronger manifestations of the constructs than did Blackboard, primarily due to the fast-paced, synchronous exchanges and the ability to display slides which the MOO supported but Blackboard could not.The results suggested that the presence and social presence supported by the MOO promoted the growth of social interaction in both forums which, in turn, promoted the development of sense of community among learners which minimized students' sense of isolation and combated attrition. However, the results also established that the use of the virtual environment was not a panacea, and that the manifestation of the constructs was also dependent upon the pedagogy and degree of involvement and investment in the online forum of both the instructor and the students.

Implementation of Tel Aviv University MOOCs in academic curriculum: A pilot study

“…Most recent studies Daniel, 2012;Rodriguez, 2012: Swan, Day, Bogle, & van Prooyen, 2014 on the MOOCs phenomenon mainly examine the benefits of this model from pedagogical, social, and technological aspects; however, future studies should also focus on the processes of running MOOCs, the advantages of integrating them into the academic curriculum, as well as on issues such as copyright, privacy, cultural differences (including language), and economic and organizational aspects.…”

Self- and Peer Assessment in Massive Open Online Courses

“…Although the data included thousands of participants, only three MOOCs of one host institution (Leiden University) in one platform (Coursera) were studied. Swan et al (2014) already showed that the pedagogy of MOOCs at different platforms differs, with the Coursera MOOCs emphasizing a more teacher-centered pedagogy. It might be that self-and peer-assessment, which align more with a learner-centered pedagogy, show higher reliability indices in EdX or Udacity MOOCs.…”

“…Researchers at the University of Illinois Springfield have developed the Assessing MOOC Pedagogies Tool (Swan, Day, Bogle, & Van Prooyen, 2014). They used this tool to characterize the pedagogical approaches taken in 13 MOOCs of Coursera (5), Udacity (7) and EdX (1), which are the three mostly used providers of a MOOC platform.…”

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

“…This enabled us to systematize the analysis of experiences in line with some of the studies reviewed in the first phase (Swan et al, 2015;Yuan & Powell, 2013, among others). This methodological procedure was defined by the focus of the study aimed at understanding which topics were being addressed in the courses offered, as well as their pedagogic or curricular architecture.…”

“…Our main objective is to review this training from an educational perspective in order to gain an in-depth understanding of the reality of these massive open courses given that research in this field usually focuses on the technological and economic dimension of these phenomena without in-depth analysis on their pedagogic aspects (Ossiannilsson, Altinay, & Altinay, 2015;Swan, Day, Bogle, & Van Prooyen, 2015).…”