Journals / Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education / 2013 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2

Two Distinct Course Formats In The Delivery Of Connectivist Moocs

Pages
66–80
Publication Date
2013-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

From their comparison we establish that connectivist MOOCs delivered with formats A and B share many common features but that their differences are such that the learner’s experience and the outcome of the courses are very different depending on the format used.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Massive Open Online Courses based on the principles of connectivist educational pedagogy known as connectivist MOOCs (c-MOOCs) have been carried out with great success during the last years with hundreds of registered participants.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Examples are CCK08 (2008), PLENK2010 (2010), MobiMOOC (2011), EduMOOC (2011), Change11 (2011/12), and LAK12 (2012).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:From their comparison we establish that connectivist MOOCs delivered with formats A and B share many common features but that their differences are such that the learner’s experience and the outcome of the courses are very different depending on the format used.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2008 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Open Online Courses · MOOC · and Learner Experience.

Abstract

Massive Open Online Courses based on the principles of connectivist educational pedagogy known as connectivist MOOCs (c-MOOCs) have been carried out with great success during the last years with hundreds of registered participants. Examples are CCK08 (2008), PLENK2010 (2010), MobiMOOC (2011), EduMOOC (2011), Change11 (2011/12), and LAK12 (2012). Their implementation required conceptual changes in perspective from both “facilitators” (tutors) and learners. They are so novel that much research needs to be done for their understanding and improvement. Basically two very distinct delivery formats have been used: Ø Those that use what’s referred to as an aggregator, an emailed daily newsletter, called “The Daily” that captures contributions from tutors and participants mainly from their blogs: Format A. Ø Those where all events go through a “centralizing” web page or wiki and discussions happen with the use of a mailing list, in most cases using Google Groups: Format B. In this paper we study in detail representative courses. From their comparison we establish that connectivist MOOCs delivered with formats A and B share many common features but that their differences are such that the learner’s experience and the outcome of the courses are very different depending on the format used.

🔖

Cite This Article

RODRIGUEZ, C. O. (2013). Two Distinct Course Formats In The Delivery Of Connectivist Moocs. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2, 66–80. https://ajindex.com/articles/141070

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (7)

  1. Cormier, D., & Siemens, G. (2010). Through the open door: Open courses as research, learning, and engagement. Educause, 45 (4), 30-39. Retrieved October 20th, 2010 http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume45 /ThroughtheOpenDoorOpenCoursesa/209320 de Waard, I., Koutropoulos, A., Ozdamar Keskin, N., Abajian, S. C., Hogue, R., Rodriguez, C.O., & Gallagher, M.S. (2011a). Exploring the MOOC format as a pedagogical approach for mLearning. Proceedings from mLearn 2011,
  2. Beijing, China. http://mlearn.bnu.edu.cn/The_Ten_Outstanding_Papers.html de Waard, I., Abajian, S., Gallagher, M., Hogue, R., Ozdamar Keskin, N., Koutropoulos, A., & Rodriguez, O. (2011b). Using mLearning and MOOCs to understand chaos, emergence, and complexity in education. The International Review Of Research In Open And Distance Learning, 12(7), 94-115. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1046/2026 de Waard, I., Abajian, S., Gallagher, M., Hogue, R., Ozdamar Keskin, N., Koutropoulos, A., & Rodriguez, O. (2011c). Emotive Vocabulary in MOOCs: Context & Participant Retention. European Journal of Open, Distance, and E-Learning, May 10, 2012. http://www.eurodl.org/?article=507
  3. Fini, A. (2009). The Technological Dimension of a Massive Open Online Course: The Case of the CCK08 Course Tools. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Volume 10, Number 5. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/643
  4. Groom, J. & Levine, A. (2011).Retrieved from: http://ds106.us
  5. Kop, R. & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past?, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Volume 9, Number 3. Retrieved from web http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1103
  6. Kop, R. (2011) The Challenges to Connectivist Learning on Open Online Networks: Learning Experiences during a Massive Open Online Course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Vol 12, No 3 (2011): Special Issue Connectivism: Design and Delivery of Social Networked Learning. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/882/1823
  7. Mackness, J., Mak, S., & Williams, R. (2010). The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. Paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on Networked Learning, Aalborg, Denmark. Retrieved from http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fss/organisations/netlc/past/nlc2010/abstracts/PDFs/Mack ness.pdf McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Si