zmWmQs

Recommendations

Info

A typology and dimensions of a description framework for MOOC Marilyne Rosselle, Pierre-André Caron, Jean Heutte ples are xMOOCs, each column of Table 2 should match the xMOOC column of Table 1. Table 2: Are the four examples xMOOCs according to Gilliot and colleagues In Table 2, we highlight (italic and bold) the differences with the corresponding column of Table 1. “NA” means “not applicable”. For example, for the gamification MOOC (column 1-G), the teacher decided not to integrate group work in his course. From the learner’s point of view, the organization of the group work is closed. Moreover, we put “C/O” when it is closed or opened, depending on what we consider. For example, if the resources are the teaching materials, the choice of resources is closed for our four examples. If the resources are contents on which the learner has to apply his new knowledge on the assessments, then it is opened. Thus, the “choice of resources” dimension definition is too large. With these considerations, only the first two MOOCs match with the dedicated column of Table 1 and thus are xMOOCs in the fourth typology. Moreover, if we focus on the sequence “C, O, C, O, C/O”, the two last columns of Table 2 also match the iMOOC column of Table 1. In brief, • “Gamification” is an xMOOC, a synchMOOC, and a miniMOOC (6 weeks), • “Writing in the Sciences” is an xMOOC (and a transfer-MOOC, and a content-based MOOC), a synchMOOC, a madeMOOC, and a miniMOOC (8 weeks), • “Project management” is an xMOOC (and a transfer-MOOC, a content-based MOOC), a tMOOC, a madeMOOC, a synchMOOC, a groupMOOC, a miniMOOC (5 weeks), and an iMOOC, and • “Digital identity” is an xMOOC (and a transfer- MOOC, a content-based MOOC), a synchMOOC, a groupMOOC, a miniMOOC (8 weeks), and an iMOOC. Discussion 1-G 2-W 3-P 4-D Learning goals C C C C Choice of resources C C/O C/O C/O Organization of the learning activities Organization of the group work Collaborative co-production C C C/O C C (NA) C (NA) O C/O C (NA) C (NA) O C/O The distinction cMOOCs/xMOOCs of the first typology is the best known. Many authors have often referred to this distinction. Even though it can work at first glance, too many differences remain between two MOOCs of the same type. One advantage of Lane’s typology is: the added words before the acronym are more meaningful than letters. However, as with the previous paragraph, too many differences persist inside one type. In his typology, Clark mixes diverse points of view: • Knowledge acquisition mode (via transfer vs. via social connections) • Assignment types (simple vs. crafted) • Mode of delivery (synchronous vs. asynchronous) • Social dimension (small collaborative groups) • Duration (shorter than a semester vs. a semester long) • Adaptation (adaptive or not) All of these features could be components of a type of pedagogy (educational contexts). Moreover, his eight types do not match eight different “pedagogies”. In fact, a MOOC can belong to several of Clark’s types. Moreover, if we consider only two values for the six points of view, we count sixty-four types of MOOCs (two to the power of six). For the fourth typology, as in the previous paragraph, with only five dimensions listed in Table 1, we have thirty-two types of MOOCs. Moreover, other authors consider more than five dimensions, e.g. fourteen in (Jézégou, 2010) thus about four thousand types. Even though we think it is interesting to know what dimension is opened (or not) to describe a MOOC (in a description framework for MOOCs), we do not think we can base a typology of MOOCs on openness. It rather is a property of some features in a MOOC. Existing typologies, which were defined for TEL We present and discuss three typologies. Presentation of the typologies The De Vries’ typology. De Vries described the spectrum of learning software available in 2001 (de Vries, 2001). Table 3 lists eight education functions, the type of software, and the education theory she associated to these functions. The Typology of Gauthier and Colin. Four years later, authors of (Gauthier and Colin, 2005) had the same goal as De Vries. They defined cartographies in order to help teachers to find an ICT (Information and Communication Tools). Each cartography allows accessing the ICTs from different points of view. Thereby, the authors identify Research Track |132
A typology and dimensions of a description framework for MOOC Marilyne Rosselle, Pierre-André Caron, Jean Heutte Education function Type of Software Educational Theory Present information Tutorial Cognitivist Provide exercises Repeated exercises Behaviorist Truly teach Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) Cognitivist Captivate the attention and motivation of the learner Educational (serious) game Mainly behaviorist Providing an exploration space Hypermedia Cognitivist, Constructivist Providing an environment for natural laws discovery Provide an environment for exploring abstract domains Provide a space for exchange among learners Simulation Constructivist, situated cognition Micro-world Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Table 3: The eight educational functions and some Features – translated from (de Vries, 2001). Constructivist Situated cognition educational paradigms ICTs implement, and educational situations they allow. Their eight educational paradigms underlie various activities and teaching practices, which are combinable: • Problem solving • Improvement and progress • Project, practice • Training, assessment • Facilitating, support • Tutoring, coaching • Presentation, demonstration • Discovery, research The nine educational situations are the areas situated at the intersection of a two-dimensional array. These dimensions are the social dimension (three values: individual, groups and communities) and the time dimension (three values: sequence, module, courses). It defines nine areas. An ICT may occupy several areas. Hy-Sup. Hy-Sup (Deschryver & Charlier, 2012) was a European research project. It produced configurations for describing blended learning systems (French: “Systèmes Hy-brides”) used in higher education (Fr: “Éducation Supérieure”). Hy-Sup has defined six configurations: • Scene corresponds to a content-oriented teaching, support to face-to-face education, with mainly textual resources, • Screen is scene with added multimedia resources, • Cockpit corresponds to a course organization oriented teaching, guided by the use of tools (and sometimes integrating relational and reflective goals), • Crew aims for learning focused on supporting the process of knowledge construction and on interpersonal interactions, • Public space aims learning centered on the opening of the training device to external resources, and • Ecosystem aims for learning by operating a large number of technological and educational opportunities. Discussion: are the previous typologies useful to define types of MOOCs The De Vries’, and Gauthier & Colin’s typologies lacks the social dimension of MOOCs. It makes sense because this dimension was almost nonexistent in the ICTs of this period. The six Hy-Sup configurations seem very interesting to keep. Indeed, we can match some categories of MOOCs of this section to Hy-Sup configurations, and make the four following conjectures: • xMOOCs, transferMOOCs, and content-based MOOCs could at least be screens, • tMOOCs, and madeMOOCs could be from cockpits to crews, • cMOOCs, iMOOCs, groupMOOCs, and network-based MOOCs could be from public spaces to ecosystems, and • adaptiveMOOCs, miniMOOCs, synchMOOCs, or asynchMOOCs could be one of the previous three items. However, MOOCs are not blended-learning devices. Therefore, it is important to take into account the description dimensions on which the Hy-Sup configurations rely, even though we should adapt them. Existing description framework for MOOCs Just a few days later, as we presented our research in the LASI meeting (Learning Analytics Summer Institute) in Lyon (France) at the beginning of July 2013, Schneider displayed her framework in an AIED workshop in Memphis (USA). Our approaches are similar. In (Schneider, 2013), Research Track |133
Page 1 and 2:
Proceedings of the European MOOC St
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents Understanding Per
Page 5 and 6:
Understanding Persistence in MOOCs
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Analysing student participation in
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Signals of Success and Self-directe
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Analyzing completion rates in the F
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Challenges for conceptualising EU M
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Scaffolding Self-learning in MOOCs
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Towards an Outcome-based Discovery
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Dropout Prediction in MOOCs using L
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Self-Regulated Learning in MOOCs: D
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Extending the MOOCversity A Multi-l
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82: Encouraging Forum Participation in
Page 89 and 90: MOOC Learning in Spontaneous Study
Page 95 and 96: Dropout: MOOC Participants’ Persp
Page 101 and 102: Reflections on Enrollment Numbers a
Page 107 and 108: The SIRET Training Platform: Facing
Page 115 and 116: MOOCs in fragile contexts Barbara M
Page 123 and 124: Cultural Translation in Massive Ope
Page 131: A typology and dimensions of a desc
Page 135 and 136: A typology and dimensions of a desc
Page 141 and 142: Characterizing video use in the cat
Page 147 and 148: How Students Learn using MOOCs: An
Page 155 and 156: A Platform that Integrates Quizzes
Page 161 and 162: Designing Video for Massive Open On
Page 169 and 170: Proceedings Experience Track Procee
Page 171 and 172: Opening up higher education through
Page 173 and 174: Designing your first MOOC from scra
Page 179 and 180: “A hostage to fortune” - Valida
Page 181 and 182: “A hostage to fortune” - Valida
Page 183 and 184:
“A hostage to fortune” - Valida
Page 185 and 186:
and others discussed COER13 issues
Page 187 and 188:
tion process, in addition to the mu
Page 189 and 190:
TORQUEs: Riding the MOOC wave to be
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Engineering MOOCs for Future Engine
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
The Discrete Optimization MOOC An E
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Recasting a Traditional Course into
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Evaluation and field trials of MOOC
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Learning Electronics through a Remo
Page 217 and 218:
Learning Electronics through a Remo
Page 219 and 220:
abiertaUGR: modelling online learni
Page 221 and 222:
abiertaUGR: modelling online learni
Page 223 and 224:
University of London International
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
The EPFL MOOC Factory Patrick Jerma
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Open Online Courses in the context
Page 237 and 238:
Open Online Courses in the context
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Friendly Handmade Explanation Video
Page 243 and 244:
Friendly Handmade Explanation Video
Page 245 and 246:
Designing for the Unknown Learner H
Page 247 and 248:
Designing for the Unknown Learner H
Page 249 and 250:
MOOC Experience in the University o
Page 251 and 252:
MOOC Experience in the University o
Page 253 and 254:
Mathematics Courses: Fostering indi
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
First time MOOC provider: reflectio
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
An Academic Online Resource at Téc
Page 267 and 268:
An Academic Online Resource at Téc
Page 269 and 270:
Opening up higher education through
Page 271 and 272:
SPOCs for Remedial Education: Exper
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Experiments with connectivism from
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Towards a quality model for UNED MO
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Project-based MOOCs. A Field Report
Page 291 and 292:
Project-based MOOCs. A Field Report
Page 293:
Reviewers of Experience Track: Carl
show all

zmWmQs

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?