mooc research initiative
DESCRIPTION
Draft results from MOOC Research InitiativeTRANSCRIPT
An Overview of the MOOC Research Initiative: The project, literature, and landscape
George Siemens, PhDOctober 22, 2013
and this doesn’t include
Or the many flavours of MOOCs
And quasi-MOOCs
UNESCO, 2013
I’ll posit:MOOCs: the billion $$ solution to a problem we haven’t identified yet:
Over the past two years, MOOCs have drawn over $500m in hard investment & expenses from major/minor MOOC providers and universities.
(and at least as much in soft investment in the form of time, research, publication, course-taking, etc).
MOOCs:
A supply-side answer to decades of change in demand-side learning needs.
Increasing diversity of student profiles
The U.S. is now in a position when less than half of students could be considered fulltime students. In other words, students who can attend campus five days a week nine-to-five, are now a minority.
(Bates, 2013)
“Tertiary institutions not only have to meet the growing demand for university education by expanding the number of places they offer, they also have to adapt programmes and teaching methods to match the changing needs of a more diverse generation of students.”
OECD 2013
Favours women over menMore learners as % (up to 60%)Average entrance age increasingTop three countries for entering students:
China, India, USATraditional science courses waning in popularityGreater international student
OECD 2013
MOOCs: Shadow learning economy
Today in education, we are witnessing an unbundling of previous network structures.
And a rebundling of new network lock-in models.
MOOCs are a keystone concept in reformulating education models and creating new ecosystems
Enter: MOOC Research Initiative
Intent of MRI:Evaluate MOOCs and their impact on teaching, learning, policy, and education
Contribute to research literature (largely lacking)
Connect researchers and create a forum for research-based dialogue
FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Initial funding: $400k
Funding doubled: $830k
Steering CommitteeYvonne Belanger, Gates FoundationStacey Clawson, Gates FoundationMarti Cleveland-Innes, Athabasca UniversityJillianne Code, University of VictoriaShane Dawson, University of South AustraliaKeith Devlin, Stanford UniversityTom (Chuong) Do, CourseraPhil Hill, Co-founder of MindWires Consulting & co-publisher of e-Literate blogEllen Junn, San Jose State UniversityZack Pardos, MITBarbara Means, SRI InternationalSteven Mintz, University of TexasRebecca Petersen, edXCathy Sandeen, American Council on EducationGeorge Siemens, Athabasca University
http://www.moocresearch.com/
Timeline:June 5: Call announced
July 7: Initial short submission due
July 20: Notification of short-listed applications
August 20: Final submissions due
August 30: Final notification of successful grants
Tight timeline“How can you design the experiment, designate the control group, run the experiment (randomizing assignment of students to regular classes and MOOCs) and compare and analyze the results of the different modes of teaching for a presentation at a December conference. Obviously, this isn't intended for people who want to run an experiment, using scientific modes of discovery, or the deadline for presentation of results would be later.”
Review Process
Each paper: 3 peer reviewersFinal selection based on “over all fit” (i.e. gaps, methodology)
Lessons learned- Extend review/selection time to
resolve review discrepancies- Allow time for discussion between
reviewers - Add more reviewers
Project:PM: Stella GeorgeInternal Athabasca U processes: contracts, ethics review, much debateResearch Centre, Legal, Faculty involved
Results
The results on the following slides are preliminary. Final results will be presented at the MRI conference in December.
Phase 1 Stats266 total submissions37 countries represented
Top countries:- USA- Canada- China- UK- Spain- Australia
Phase 2 Stats
78 total submissions15 countries represented
Top Countries:- USA- Canada- UK- China- Australia
Final selectionMOOC platforms represented:
- Coursera: 12- edX: 4- Multiple: 5- Non-Major: 6
Countries: 4 (USA, Canada, UK, Australia)Institutions: ~28
UniversitiesU TorontoOpen University UK U of Oxford MIT/edX/PEIMIT Carnegie Mellon Duke U UC Berkeley/Stanford/WPIStanfordPenn (Wharton) Athabasca UColumbia U (Teachers C.)
HarvardXCal State / Mt San Jacinto UC Irvine Glasgow Caledonian University UT Austin NC State Monash U U Penn Université de Montréal/HEC Montreal/Université du Québec à Trois-RivièresU Michigan/U Saskatechwan UW Lacrosse
Researchers
Dragan GasevicSrecko JoksimovicVitomir Kovanovic George Siemens
Intent of this analysis:What is the state of MOOC research?1. Home disciplines of researchers2. Research methods used3. Influential authors/publications
More concretely• What is the distribution of the fields involved
in MOOC research? o E.g., are the majority of them educational
researchers, CS & Technology professors, Social Scientists or from Industry?
• What body of knowledge serves as a base for MOOC research? • Who are the major researchers that influence
the MOOC research?• What methodologies are being used?• What are the main topics and concepts
discussed in the MOOC research?• What fields are most central thus bringing other
fields together in the MOOC research?
Methodology• From all submissions we manually extracted the list of
authors.o For every author we collected information about his
baseline field, institution and research interests.• From all submissions we manually extracted the list of
all citations.o For every citation extracted the list of authors, year
and the number of times it has been cited.• From all submissions we manually extracted the
information about the used methodology.o We categorized the paper as quantitative, qualitative
or mixed-methods based and also extracted the list of methodology-related keywords.
• From all submissions we automatically extracted the list of concepts and then created a cooccurrence graph with all terms in all submissions.
Methodologies per field
Lori Breslow, David E. Pritchard, Jennifer DeBoer, Glenda S. Stump, Andrew D. Ho and Daniel T. Seaton (2013), “Studying Learning in the Worldwide Classroom: Research into edX’s First MOOC,” Research & Practice in Assessment Journal, Summer;
Kizilcec, R. F., Piech, C., & Schneider, E. (2013). Deconstructing Disengagement: Analyzing Learner Subpopulations in Massive Open Online Courses. Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, LAK ’13 Leuven, Belgium.
Yuan, L. & Powell, S. ( 2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher education. Retrieved from http://publications.cetis.ac.uk/2013/667.
Mackness, J., Mak, S. and Williams, Roy (2010) The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010. University of Lancaster, Lancaster, pp. 266-275. ISBN 9781862202252
Daniel, J., (2012) Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility, Korean National Open University, Séoul.
Pappano, L. (2012, November 2). The year of the MOOC. New York Times. Available: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-aremultiplying- at-a-rapid-pace.html.
McAuley, A., B. Stewart, G. Siemens and D. Cormier, 2010. The MOOC Model for Digital Practice. https://oerknowledgecloud.org/sites/oerknowledgecloud.org/files/MOOC_Final.pdf
Belanger, Y., & Thornton, J. (2013). Bioelectricity: A Quantitative Approach. dukespace. Retrieved from http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/6216/Duke_Bioelectricity_MOOC_Fall2012.pdf
Kop, R., Fournier, H., & Mak, J. S. F. (2011). A pedagogy of abundance or a pedagogy to support human beings? participant support on massive open online courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7 SPECIAL ISSUE), 74-93.
Siemens, G. (2012). MOOCs are really a platform. eLearnspace. http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2012/07/25/moocs-are-really-a-platform/ accessed 2012-09-21
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age.International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, January 2005, Volume 2 Number 1. Retrieved from Webhttp://www.itdl.org/journal/jan_05/article01.htm
http://www.moocresearch.com/
ConferenceDecember 5-6, 2013University of Texas Arlington
Twitter/Gmail: gsiemens