Activity 14 : Comparing MOOCs

We are invited to compare a connectivist MOOC, for example Change.mooc.ca and an institutional MOOC, for example a Coursera one. I participated in a Coursera MOOC lately, the EDC MOOC (e-learning and digital culture) and I’d like to take it for analyze. I hope it’ll bring shades in the debate opposing xMOOCs and cMOOCs.

	Change.mooc.ca	EDC MOOC
Organisators	3 individuals (private initiative)	5 teachers from University of Edinburgh, within the Cousera platform
Learning activities	– resources to learn (videos, scientific and folk publications…) – discussing, debating, creating… through social medias and networks	– resources to learn (videos, scientific and folk publications…) – discussing, debating, creating… through social medias and networks
Assessment	none	– final assignment : a digital artefact to be created by the participant – peer reviewed based on 5 quality criteria (grade and qualitative feedback)
Accreditation	none	– a nominative Statement of Accomplishment, if final assignment submitted in due date

Analysis

1) This parallel highlights well the new « institutionalisation » of MOOCs (in Weller’s words, Weller, 2012) led by companies like Coursera, edX, Udacity… : this course is not an individual initiative but an official one, signed by a university rather than by teachers in their own names; there are forms of assessment and accreditation, like in a « real » course in a Higher Education school. This MOOC tend to an official image.

The EDC MOOC relies on two labels : the University of Edinburgh label and the Coursera one. Those two institutions are better off offering quality courses; they both could be hurt in their reputation if courses delivered do not fit standards of Higher Education, especially as courses are followed by thousands of learners all around the world. Following Daniel (2012), I see in this institutionalisation of MOOCs a trigger for teaching quality, by means of reputation challenge. Of course, we could discuss what is quality in Higher Education…

2) Concerning the pedagogical model, I know this EDC course is not representative of usual Coursera courses. Those – you can see that if you explore courses descriptions randomly in the Coursera catalog – are usually designed on a transmissive model : lectures (in video format and/or texts to read), quizzes or exercices and final exam. However, EDC course doesn’t fit this format, it applies the pedagogical model that McAuley, Steward, Siemens and Cormier (2010, p.23) propose for connectivist MOOCs :

•  » High levels of learner control over modes and places of interaction,
• Weekly synchronous sessions with facilitators and guest speakers,
• The Daily email newsletter as a regular contact point for course participants. The Daily includes a summary of Moodle forums, course participant blogs, Twitter discussions re-lated to the course, etc.
• Using RSS-harvesting (gRSShopper) to track blogs of course participants,
• Emphasis on learner autonomy in selecting learning resources and level of participation in activities,
• Emphasis on social systems as effective means for learners to self-organize and way-finding through complex subject areas,
• The criticality of “creation” – i.e. learners create and share their understanding of the course topics through blogs, concept maps, videos, images, and podcasts. Creating a digital artifact helps learners to re-centre the course discussion to a more personal basis. »

Thus, a connectivist approach seems to be possible even in a Coursera context. There is room for openness and pedagogical experiment, even in an institutional MOOC context. It’s up to university partners to bring their own vision of what they consider a quality MOOC course. « With [distance teaching faculty] support, MOOCs provide a great opportunity to develop new pedagogy » (Daniel, 2012).

3) In the debate opposing cMOOCs and xMOOCs, I see mostly the common denominator : they pursue a shared intention – to share knowledge in the most large and open way ; to provide learning opportunities to every learner who wants to learn, without admission barrier. They differ however in the mean of reaching their intention : cMOOCs aim to « prepare people for participation in these very complex chaotic knowledge settings that most of us live in these days » (Siemens, 2012) ; xMOOCs aim to « give everyone access to the world-class education that has so far been available only to a select few » (Coursera website, page « about »). Future will show if this intention is really humanist and not only economic…

So I would see cMOOCs and xMOOCs as two different ways of offering open education :

	cMOOCs	xMOOCs
Learning outcomes	developing digital, social and intellectual Web 2.0 skills; « to choose an answer » (Cormier, 2012)	acquiring knowledge; « to find an answer » (Cormier, 2012)
Topics	open and prospective topics, where knowledge is still to build through experience, debate, analysis, identification of patterns…	basic topics or, at least, topics where knowledge is formalized, stabilized, delimited; introductory courses
Pedagogical model	connectivist approach, building one’s own knowledge by sharing and discussing with others	traditional approach : clearly structured, closed to what you find in classrooms, reassuring
Expected effective audience	learners with prerequisites in digital skills (Kop, 2011)	larger audience, less digitally skilled learners

If the specific goals, methods, target audiences… are acknowledged, polemic about « real », « noble », « pure »… MOOCs should decrease and make room for intelligent experimentations and research.

References

Cormier, D. (2012) Interviewed by Martin Weller on 15 October 2012 for Open University. YouTube hangout at http://youtu.be/l1G4SUblnbo (accessed 13 April 2013).

Daniel, J. (2012) ‘Making sense of MOOCs: musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility’, Journal of Interactive Media in Education, no. 18 [online]. Available at http://jime.open.ac.uk/ jime/ article/ view/ 2012-18 (accessed 13 April 2013).

Kop, R. (2011) ‘The challenges to connectivist learning on open online networks: learning experiences during a massive open online course’, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, vol. 12, no. 3 [online], http://www.irrodl.org/ index.php/ irrodl/article/ view/ 882 (accessed 13 April 2013).

McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Siemens, G. and Cormier, D. (2010) The MOOC Model for Digital Practice, Charlottetown, University of Prince Edward Island, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council’s Knowledge synthesis grants on the Digital Economy. Also available online at http://davecormier.com/ edblog/ wp-content/ uploads/ MOOC_Final.pdf (accessed 13 April 2013).

Siemens, G. (2012) Interviewed by Martin Weller on 15 October 2012 for Open University. YouTube hangout at http://youtu.be/l1G4SUblnbo (accessed 13 April 2013).

Weller, M. (2012) ‘MOOCs Inc’, The Ed Techie, 28 May [online], http://nogoodreason.typepad.co.uk/ no_good_reason/ 2012/ 05/ moocs-inc.html (accessed 13 April 2013).