MOOC Assessment and Grading

Because of the massiveness of the MOOC course, assessing learning and grading assignment is a big concern for me.  While there have been several potential solutions I struggle to believe there a clear cut method that effectively assessed learning for all students involved. As I read Davidson's (2009) article on crowdsource grading, subjectivity kept coming to mind.  Depending on the student's goals, relationships with their peers, and their classification  (i.e. freshman, etc.), the level of assessment will vary. I'm sure peer evaluation will offer some value to the learning process. However, from a student's perspective, I would not want that evaluation to determine the overall course grade. 

As I continued to think and read, I also concluded that every MOOC is not designed to have an exam or some form of assessment that requires a test. Some MOOCs may require more application of the material indicating an understanding of the content.  If this is the case, how do instructors or course designers factor that into the course development? This approach has more applicability and can generate ideas and conversations that can improve the overall learning experience.

This approach is what I believe will be used in my MOOC.  Because student engagement is so important to the online course experience, one way to access the participant's understanding of the content is to have them develop an engaging piece (or outline this in the form of storyboard, mind map, etc.) for their course.  This will allow them to receive feedback from their peers and maybe gain new ideas on how to engage students.  This form of assessment also enables meaningful conversation and collaboration amongst the participants.

Sources:

Davidson, C. (2009). How To crowdsource grading.

MOOCs Pedagogy

Learning occurs from the constructivist's standpoint when individuals create their own understanding of the material based on what they already know and what they are learning.  The learning for these individuals involves significant interaction with their peers (Richardson, 2003). In a sense, the learning moment encompasses more than the professor and the content.  The content developer is forced to rethink how to create a learning environment that encourage interaction and the collaboration of ideas amongst students. 

The content, objectives, learners, and professors all play a role in the disseminating of knowledge.  The key is thinking outside of the box when it comes to developing content and identifying new ways to teaching the materials.  As stated by Morris and Stommel (2012), simple and reusable units of learning should be created so it can be applied in different ways, thus the notion of learning objects.  These objects can be helpful for the learning process. Early on, however, it can be difficult to create them because of the many ways of learning and the various types of learners. 

I like the approach Udacity has taken on regarding online learning.  Too many times, we take what's done in the classroom and try to replicate it in some form in the online environment.  While I don't fully disagree with this model (as I'm guilty of it), I believe it does lead to a course with pdf syllabi, talking heads, tons of discussions, etc. My goal is to make learning immersive as highlighted by Morris and Stommel (2012).  Using games is indeed one way to accomplish this; however, the use of case studies and group work encourages interaction and collaboration. In the end, the learning must be student-centered with the professor facilitating the learning.


Sources:

Morris and Stommel (2012). Udacity and online pedagogy: Players, learners, objects.  Hybrid Pedagogy. 
 
Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 1623-1640.

Micro-MOOC

The MOOC I will be developing will be on how to build student engagement in an online course. This area is of particular interest to me since many professors share concerns about how to engage students in the online environment, which can also be used for MOOCs. I will be focusing on three areas of engagement: student-to-student, student-to-instructor, and student-to-content. In my MOOC, I will share best practices and research on how to engage students in each of the three areas. In addition to discussions and blogs, some other teaching pedagogies that could be use include case studies, games, etc. The key will be to deliver the content in an engaging manner that mimics how professors can replicate the activities in their classes.

The objectives for this MOOC are as follows:

• Identify strategies to engage students with the three areas.
• Discuss ways to incorporate engagement into an online course you are teaching.
• Create and post a case-scenario on activity with engagement.

The Role of Faculty in MOOCs

After reading the articles for this week, the divide between MOOCs and higher education seemed to have grown wider.  To some faculty, developing MOOCs mean an increased workload with one professor spending hundreds of hours preparing material and developing course content. This same professor calls it a full-time job. (Kolowich, 2013).  If preparing a MOOC is a full-time job, how would institutions account this into faculty existing workload given most professors have to conduct research, publish, teach, advise, serve on committees, etc.  Some professors hoped developing MOOCs increase their visibility amongst their discipline, media, and the public (Kolowich, 2013).  My concern is what type of visibility are they trying to get and for what reasons?  Are they trying to become the next superprofessor since the ability to become a rock star professor wasn’t achieved?  Being the top professor on campus can encompass so many things till it makes it challenging to identify the characteristics of a rock star professor (Rees, 2013). 

Nonetheless, some professors are jumping on the latest educating trend to be recognized at any rate possible, which they believe and hope will boost their visibility within their department, institution, and constituents around the world. With this approach and as Rees’s (2013) article title indicate, it will be disastrous for the professors who truly care about the students and their education and for the ones who don’t seek fame or notoriety (i.e. the non-aspiring rock stars or superprofessors). It will also cause tremendous problems for the people that matters the most – the students. 

With this in mind, every professor can’t be the superprofessor or develop MOOCs.  Before developing a MOOC, it will be essential for each professor to consider why develop a MOOC.  As with any project, it will be helpful to identify the goals and why this is necessary. 

It was enlightening to read that some professors stated the reason for developing a MOOC was to increase access to higher education worldwide (Kolowich, 2013).  If that is indeed the reason, it appears some professors do want to contribute to our society and are striving to make it a better place.  While I embrace this notion, I still struggle with the idea of developing MOOCs for increased visibility.  To me, there is no concern about the students, just another line for the curriculum vitae. 

No matter the case, MOOCs are being developed and some people are benefiting from them.  While this means an increase workload for the superprofessor, it also causes problems for the lesser known professors as they wonder about their future and how MOOCs will impact their jobs (Kolowich, 2013).  The future is unknown, but it is important to recognize the overall impact (workload, employee lives, education world, etc.) this has on the professors, families, current students (both undergraduate and graduate) and a quality education.

Lastly, below is my video discussing the MOOC I will be developing for this course.  



Sources:

Kolowich, S. (2013). As MOOC debate simmers at San Jose State, American U. calls a halt.  The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Kolowich, S. (2013). The professors who make the MOOCs. The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Rees, J. (2013). The MOOC racket: Widespread online-only higher ed will be disastrous for students and most professors.   Future Tense.

What does “Open” Mean for Higher Education?

When I hear the word open used in a sentence with education, I immediately think of resources and information that is free and available to the public for increasing one’s own knowledge.  These open resources as stated by Carr (2013) also provide opportunities for students to save money.  As tuition continues to rise and student loan recipients increases, the need for saving money is heightened and parents and students look for ways to save money.  One way to save money is through the use of open textbooks.  Carr stated that textbook costs have risen over 800% on the past three decades. As a result of the rising costs, some students have opted to not purchase the textbook (Carr, 2013). However, we along with Howard (2012) believe and know that reading is a necessary component when taking courses.

Open resources can also supplement face-to-face (and online) instructions.  Khan academy is a great example of how students who need additional help with math and other subjects can find step-by-step examples and guidance.  This type of open resources has been used by many to supplement what was learned in the classroom. 

When it comes to MOOCs, I characterize open as the full availability of information for public access.  In higher education, open can be defined as access to a quality education. It can also include open resources and software that can be used to supplement the course content.  The benefit to higher education institutions is professors can use the resources from MOOCs to supplement their instructions and to aid students as they study. 

Sources:

Carr, D. F. (2013). In shadow of MOOCs, open education makes progress.

Howard, J. (2012). Publishers see online mega-courses as opportunity to sell textbooks. The Chronicle of Higher Education.