Connectivists are inclined to turn up their noses at xMOOCs. I've done this myself, (Why can't an xMOOC be more like a cMOOC ?), pointing at the instructivist pedagogy that xMOOCs inherit from traditional courses. Now, one way or another, I've participated in several xMOOCs and I've even completed 'Introduction to Philosophy' and 'Quantum Mechanics for Scientists and Engineers…
Sebastian Thrun, founder of Udacity, one of the most high-profile private sector attempts to “disrupt” higher education discovered inequality this week. Thrun has spent the last three years dangling the shiny bauble of his elite academic pedigree and messianic vision of the future of higher education before investors and politicos. He promised nothing short of radically transforming higher education for the future by delivering taped classroom lessons of elite professors through massive open online courses.So what went wrong?
For better or worse MOOCs (Massively Open Online Courses) tend to produce strong opinions in people. From those who see MOOCs as the future of education, to those who see them as spelling doom for universities, there has been no shortage of digital ink spilled on the topic. And while MOOCs have never disappeared entirely from conversations about the future of education, it seemed like the focus on this particular buzzword has slowed in recent months.
In September 2013, Hybrid Pedagogy published an e-book of graduate student essays focused on student experiences in MOOCs — from EdX, Udacity, and other xMOOCs, to improvisational MOOCs created by the students themselves using open web resources. The full collection, Learner Experiences with MOOCs and Open Online Learning, was published via GitHub. The following article from Cindy Londeore is one of the essays from that volume. You can read more about the e-book in George Veletsiano’s introduction, “How Do Learners Experience Open Online Learning?”
by Cindy Londeore
- See more at: http://www.hybridpedagogy.com/Journal/files/Tales_of_a_MOOC_Dropout.html#sthash.9nbnLJVJ.dpuf
…by Martin Weller,
“For top-secret research I am undertaking, I’m looking at a range of MOOCs, both xMOOCs, cMOOCs and flavours inbetween (although, definitely not ridiculous variations such as SPOCs). Here’s some breaking news – they are all pretty good. Take away all the hype, commercial bubble and rabid arguments on both sides and you are left with some good teaching material.
As I’ve been going through them (admittedly not as thoroughly as a student), I’ve begun to think that a mix of them would probably represent a good grounding in a topic, equivalent to a 1st year of an undergrad degree. It wouldn’t teach some of the other skills you develop, I’ll come to that later. Let’s take an example, say I want to study a degree in Psychology. The following MOOCs would give me a good knowledge base:”
Read the rest of MOOCs as 1st year undergrad replacement – The Ed Techie
Earlier this week I jumped into two Twitter chats that were happening simultaneously. One is an on-going reunion of participants from #etmooc. The other is part of a new, school-year-long professional development forum called Open Online Experience 2013 (#ooe13), a venture that also grew out of the #etmooc community.
That #etmooc connection between the two chats meant that I was not the only one attempting the double-Twitter-chat feat.
One late afternoon last spring I received a visit from a former student and budding entrepreneur. I usually schedule these meetings at the end of the workday. It feels like a treat, witnessing aspiration and insight blend into leadership to create something new.
Luis (not his real name), however, had not come to see me for leadership advice. He had come to pitch his tech startup and ask for my involvement.
Have you noticed that I'm sick of writing about MOOCs? It's not the subject itself that bothers me. It's simply the fact that I think I've read more hype than any one human being can digest and I don't feel like digesting anymore. For example, other than the fact that the author acknowledges that he's in the minority now, there's absolutely no point in…
…because a) it’s not just about us, not an exclusively US #highered issue; and b) (in case you’re Rip van Winkle or have been living under a rock) both MOOCs and higher education are global issues… so is globalization, which probably explains the name…
Excited discussions about ’MOOCs’ are reaching a fever pitch in some quarters. Separating the hope from the hype related to the phenomenon known as Massive Open Online Courses, in which tens, and in some cases hundreds of thousands of students from around the world participate in (or at least register for) the same university course over the Internet, is not an easy task. There is, to be sure, much here to be potentially excited about.
That said, most of news (and hype) is coming out of North America, and the prominent perspectives on MOOCs are, to a great extent, coming out of North America as well. While voices from Silicon Valley and elite educational institutions in the United States (amplified by prominent media personalities) have been the loudest to date, a fair component of the ‘hope’ surrounding MOOCs has to do with their potential to improve educational opportunities for students in so-called ‘developing countries’.
…overview, analysis and comparison of MOOC models, education theories, and learning in the time of internet.
…They were supposed to be educational communities, not hypertextbooks…There’s a dirty little secret at the heart of education: We don’t really know what learning is, how people best do it, or how to measure it.
This article arises from Future Tense, a collaboration among Arizona State University, the New America Foundation, and Slate. Future Tense explores the ways emerging technologies affect society, policy, and culture. To read more, visit the Future Tense blog and the Future Tense home page. You can also follow us on Twitter.