Customizable Modalities for Individualized Learning: Examining Patterns of Engagement in Dual-Layer MOOCs

Matt Crosslin, Justin T. Dellinger, Srecko Joksimovic, Vitomir Kovanovic, Dragan Gasevic

Abstract


Dual-layer MOOCs are an educational framework designed to create customizable modality pathways through a learning experience. The basic premise is to design two framework choices through a course - one that is instructor guided and the other that is student-determined and open. Learners have the option to create their own customized pathway by choosing or combining both modalities as they see fit at any given time in the course. This mixed-methods study sought to understand the patterns that learners engaged in during a course designed with this pathway framework. The results of the quantitative examination of the course activity are presented, as well as the categories and themes that arose from the qualitative research. The results of the analysis indicates that learners value the ability to choose the pathway that they engage the course in. Additional research is needed to improve the technical and design aspects of the framework.

Keywords


MOOCs, personalized learning, engagement, learning pathways

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aleven, V., Sewall, J., Popescu, O., Xhakaj, F., Chand, D., Baker, R., Wang, Y., Siemens, G., Rosé, C. P., & Gasevic, D. (2015). The Beginning of a Beautiful Friendship? Intelligent Tutoring Systems and MOOCs. In Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 525-528). Springer International Publishing.

Anders, A. (2015). Theories and Applications of Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs): The Case for Hybrid Design. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(6), 39-61.

Cabiria, J. (2012, August). Connectivist learning environments: Massive open online courses. In The 2012 World Congress in Computer Science Computer Engineering and Applied Computing, 16-19.

Bell, F. (2011). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 98-118.

Biktimirov, E. N., & Nilson, L. B. (2003). Mapping your course: Designing a graphic syllabus for introductory finance. Journal of Education for Business, 78(6), 308-312.

Calvani, A. (2009). Connectivism: new paradigm or fascinating pot-pourri? Journal of E-learning and Knowledge Society, 4(1).

Crosslin, M. (2015, October 23). Words That Don’t Work: Courses as Neutral Zones [weblog]. Retrieved from http://www.edugeekjournal.com/2015/10/23/words-that-dont-work-courses-as-neutral-zones/

Crosslin, M. (2016, April 8). Reclaim the Front Page of Your Learning Experience for #IndieEdTech [weblog]. Retrieved from http://www.edugeekjournal.com/2016/04/08/reclaim-the-front-page-of-your-learning-experience-for-indieedtech/

Crosslin, M. & Dellinger, J. T. (2015). Lessons learned while designing and implementing a multiple pathways xMOOC + cMOOC. In D. Slykhuis & G. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2015 (pp. 250-255). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Dabbagh, N., Benson, A. D., Denham, A., Joseph, R., Al-Freih, M., Zgheib, G., Fake, H. & Guo, Z. (2016). Massive Open Online Courses. In Learning Technologies and Globalization (pp. 9-13). Springer International Publishing.

Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal Learning Environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. The Internet and higher education, 15(1), 3-8.

Daniel, J. (2012). Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 3.

Dawson, S., Joksimović, S., Kovanović, V., Gašević, D., Rosé, C. P. Rosé, C. P. Rosé, C. P. Rosé, C. P. Rosé, C. P.& Siemens, G. (2015) Recognising learner autonomy: Lessons and reflections from a joint x/c MOOC. In proceedings of Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia 2015.

Dillahunt, T., Wang, B., & Teasley, S. (2014). Democratizing higher education: Exploring MOOC use among those who cannot afford a formal education. The International Review Of Research In Open And Distributed Learning, 15(5).

Downes, S. (2013, April 9). What the 'x' in 'xMOOC' stands for [Google+ post]. Retrieved from https://plus.google.com/+StephenDownes/posts/LEwaKxL2MaM

Downes, S. (2013, October). Connective knowledge and open resources [Web log entry]. Retrieved from: http://halfanhour.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/connective-knowledge-and-open-resources.html

Fini, A. (2009). The technological dimension of a massive open online course: The case of the CCK08 course tools. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(5).

Gašević, D., Joksimović, S., Kovanović, V., & Siemens, G. (2014). Where is research on massive open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC Research Initiative. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5), 134-176.

Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107.

Ho, A. D., Chuang, I., Reich, J., Coleman, C., Whitehill, J., Northcutt, C., Williams, J. J., Hansen, J., Lopez, G., & Petersen, R. (2015, March). HarvardX and MITx: Two years of open online courses fall 2012-summer 2014 (HarvardX Working Paper No. 10).

Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative health research, 15(9), 1277-1288.

Jordan, K. (2015). Massive open online course completion rates revisited: Assessment, length and attrition. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3).

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.

Kizilcec, R. F., Piech, C., & Schneider, E. (2013, April). Deconstructing disengagement: analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses. In Proceedings of the third international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 170-179). ACM.

Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., GaÅ¡ević, D., Siemens, G., & Hatala, M. (2015). What public media reveals about MOOCs: A systematic analysis of news reports. British Journal of Educational Technology. 46(3), 510—527.

Lett, J. (1990). Emics and etics: Notes on the epistemology of anthropology. In T.N. Headland, K.L. Pike, & M. Harris (Eds.). Emics and etics: The insider/outsider debate. Frontiers of anthropology, v. 7. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications.

Lin, C. F., Yeh, Y. C., Hung, Y. H., & Chang, R. I. (2013). Data mining for providing a personalized learning path in creativity: An application of decision trees. Computers & Education, 68, 199-210.

Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(2). Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1089/2385

Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.

Nilson, L. B. (2009). The graphic syllabus and the outcomes map: Communicating your course (Vol. 137). John Wiley & Sons.

Onah, D.F.O, Sinclair, J. & Boyatt R. (2014). Dropout rates of massive open online courses: Behavioural Patterns. Proceedings of 6th International Conference on Education and New Learning (pp. 5825-5834).

Reddy, V. K., Said, L., Sengupta, B., Chetlur, M., Costantino, J. P., Gopinath, A., Flynt, S., Balunaini, P., & Vedula, S. (2015). Personalized Learning Pathways: Enabling intervention creation and tracking. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 59(6), 4-1.

Reich, J. (2014). MOOC completion and retention in the context of student intent. Educause Review Online. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/mooc-completion-and-retention-context-student-intent

Rodriguez, C. O. (2012). MOOCs and the AI-Stanford Like Courses: Two Successful and Distinct Course Formats for Massive Open Online Courses. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. 2012(1).

Rosé, C. P., Ferschke, O., Tomar, G., Yang, D., Howley, I., Aleven, V., Siemens, G., Crosslin, M., Gasevic, D., & Baker, R. (2015). Challenges and opportunities of dual-layer MOOCs: Reflections from an edX deployment study. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning.

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10.

Siemens, G. (2011, August 4). Stanford University does a MOOC [weblog]. Retreived from http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2011/08/04/stanford-university-does-a-mooc/

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research (Vol. 15). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1080