Metaphors for Learning and MOOC Pedagogies

Swan, Karen; Day, Scott; Bogle, Leonard

doi:10.1145/2876034.2893385

Cited by 13 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We emphasize, again, that Neuman et al 's (2002) framework provided an analytical lens through which we recognized main dimensions of teaching and learning rather than prescribing our search for expected differences or commonalities. Few studies have formally examined pedagogical design considerations of MOOCs (Swan et al, 2014). Studies of instructional presence within a MOOC context (Chandrasekaran et al, 2015), or comparing learner engagement in MOOCs differing in their level and topic (Cofrin, Corrin, Barba, & Kennedy, 2014) are, at the time of reporting this study, starting to emerge in MOOC literature.…”

Section: Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mooc Pedagogymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Course content in this study was examined from a discipline specific epistemological perspective, which differentiates our findings from the work of Swan et al (2014), where content was rated on a continuum of abstract to concrete regardless of a course's disciplinary affiliation. Swan et al (2014) also defined structured-ness of a MOOC in terms of consistent organization and presentation of content.…”

Section: Content and Curriculummentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In one study, Swan, Bogle, Day, van Prooyen, and Richardson (2014) developed a rubric to characterize MOOC development along 10 dimensions, including epistemology, teacher/student centeredness, and cognitive focus of learning activities. Applying the rubric to 13 STEM (Science, Technology, Math, & Engineering) and four non-STEM MOOCs, Swan et al (2014) observed differences in pedagogical approaches of the two categories of MOOCs: non-STEM courses were more student-centered and included activities that facilitated knowledge construction, rather than knowledge reproduction.As for interaction, Chandrasekaran, Ragupathi, Kan, and Tan (2015) examined ways to maximize the benefits of instructor intervention in MOOC discussion forums. In 61 Coursera MOOCs from various disciplines, Chandrasekaran et al (2015) observed an overall higher proportion of instructor intervention in exam-related threads compared with lecture-related threads.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All three soft MOOC instructors, as explained in the findings section, created new content in response to discussions around existing curricular content. In these courses, students actively shaped course content and built on the foundation of the instructors' original visions.Course content in this study was examined from a discipline specific epistemological perspective, which differentiates our findings from the work of Swan et al (2014), where content was rated on a continuum of abstract to concrete regardless of a course's disciplinary affiliation. Swan et al (2014) also defined structured-ness of a MOOC in terms of consistent organization and presentation of content.…”

mentioning

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: Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mooc Pedagogymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Content and Curriculummentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 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

show abstract

Participating by activity or by week in MOOCs

Baikadi

Epp

Schunn

2018

ILS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study was to provide a new characterization of the extent to which learners complete learning activities in massive open online courses (MOOCs), a central challenge in these contexts. Prior explorations of learner interactions with MOOC materials have often described these interactions through stereotypes, which accounts for neither the full spectrum of potential learner activities nor the ways those patterns differ across course designs. Design/methodology/approach To overcome these shortcomings, the authors apply confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis to learner activities within three MOOCs to test different models of participation across courses and populations found within those courses. Findings Courses varied in the extent to which participation was driven by learning activities vs time/topic or a mixture of both, but this was stable across offerings of the same course. Research limitations/implications The results call for a reconceptualization of how different learning activities within a MOOC are designed to work together, to better allow strong learning outcomes even within one activity form or more strongly encourage participation across activities. Originality/value The authors validate new continuous-patterns rather than a discrete-pattern participation model for MOOC learning.

show abstract

Increasing interactivity and collaborativeness in MOOCs using facilitated groups: A pedagogical solution to meet 21^stcentury goals

Gamage

Perera

Fernando

2018

2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metaphors for Learning and MOOC Pedagogies

Cited by 13 publications

References 5 publications

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

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

Participating by activity or by week in MOOCs

Increasing interactivity and collaborativeness in MOOCs using facilitated groups: A pedagogical solution to meet 21^stcentury goals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Metaphors for Learning and MOOC Pedagogies

Cited by 13 publications

References 5 publications

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

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

Participating by activity or by week in MOOCs

Increasing interactivity and collaborativeness in MOOCs using facilitated groups: A pedagogical solution to meet 21stcentury goals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Increasing interactivity and collaborativeness in MOOCs using facilitated groups: A pedagogical solution to meet 21^stcentury goals