If you’re wondering how MOOCs are performing and evolving, a report has recently emerged that sheds light on one of the leaders in the field, the edX partnership between Harvard and MIT.
‘HarvardX and MITx: Four Years of Open Online Courses’ offers a snapshot of key findings concerning MOOCs at the two institutions over the period 2012 to 2016. As the abstract explains, the report covers “290 courses, 245 thousand certificates, 4.5 million participants, 28 million participant-hours, and 2.3 billion events logged online. We present our findings in a series of nine exhibits that address questions about the evolution of the MOOC movement from its birth in 2012, through its current adolescence.” [aside: when I first skimmed this, I read the final word as ‘obsolescence’!]
It’s a nice easy read, with illuminating charts and graphs, offering commentary (the authors’ term is ‘exhibits’) on the following series of questions:
- How has total MOOC participation and certification grown over time?
- Who takes a MOOC, and what do they do?
- What percentage of MOOC users earn certificates?
- If a MOOC is repeated, does its enrollment grow or shrink?
- What are the hubs of the MOOC curricular network?
- How do MOOC demographics and activity differ across curricular areas?
- How many MOOC participants state their intention to earn a certificate, and do they?
- How many teachers take MOOCs?
- How much online time does it take for a MOOC participant to earn a certificate?
The question which most caught my eye is number 8, concerning teachers. As the report reveals, “Teacher participation remains high, with 32% responding as being or having been a teacher.” This is reminiscent of the history of the UKOU, where a rapidly emerging pattern was the high participation rate of teachers. Not only that, it was found that many university lecturers were using UKOU teaching materials to prepare their lectures. That this is probably also true in this case is indicated by the further revelation that “Of those self-described as being or having been a teacher, 19% teach the topic of the course.”
Teachers are a pragmatic lot.
Back in July 2012 I wrote a post about a new publication from the UKOU, Innovating Pedagogy. The plan was to make it an annual publication, and they haven’t failed yet (though sometimes it’s a bit late, especially the 2014 edition). Innovating Pedagogy 2016 has now been released. Continue reading
To make sense of our field, every now and then we need to step back and take an historical glimpse at how we’re going. If you don’t already do it, then when you scan the journal contents pages for historical contributions and meta analyses. In terms of the recent history of open education and the emergence of MOOCs, you won’t find a better summary than that by the inimitable Stephen Downes. Continue reading
No, it’s not a grammatical error: DOGS (Australian Council for the Defence of Government Schools) is alive and well, and still vigorously pursuing its objectives:
1. The promotion and protection of public education
2. The separation of Church and State and opposition to public funding of private religious schools
If you undertake an internet search for ‘Making sense of MOOCS’, you’ll find two main results. One is to a 2012 paper by Sir John Daniel, and the other is a recent (June, 2016) publication from the Commonwealth of Learning (CoL) and UNESCO. Continue reading
Keen observers will note a new link added to the list: Hack Education Weekly Newsletter (hence the HEWN). It’s the product of Audrey Watters, a ‘stirrer of the pot’ who appears to aim to keep the ed tech community on its toes (pardon the mixed metaphors). Continue reading
The title quote is the final sentence in the Introduction to The Academic Book of the Future, a compilation of contributions with messages for academics, publishers, librarians and booksellers. It’s an outcome of the machinations of a group devoted to a “two-year AHRC[Arts & Humanities Research Council]-funded research project exploring the future of the academic book.” Continue reading
Yes, a bold claim, I’ll admit. But not only did I work as an instructional designer (or whatever alternative title you want to use) but I also did my PhD on instructional designers. In essence, what I was investigated was the question of what instructional designers do. Continue reading
Editathon I’m not too fussed that I didn’t know this word. It’s a new(ish) one, dreamed up just a few years ago to identify “an event where people develop open knowledge around a specific topic”. I chanced upon it when browsing the site for OER16, the 7th Open Educational Resources Conference, Open Culture, held on the 19th-20th April 2016 at the University of Edinburgh. One of the presentations outlined the journey of a group of 50 people who jointly created pages in Wikipedia by means of said ‘editathon’. Continue reading
It occurs to me that the people whose writing about learning and technology I enjoy reading are all like me: mature (ok, old!) men. My links list is dominated by them: Martin Weller, Tony Bates, Terry Anderson, Rob Waller … on it goes, with Grainne Conole the only exception, and even she is (says he hesitatingly) mature. Continue reading