![\"Print\"](\"http:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/teachinginadigitalage\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2015\/01\/Wei-large-line.jpg\")
<\/a>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_878\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"750\"]<\/a>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_878\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"750\"]![\"Figure](\"http:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/teachinginadigitalage\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2014\/11\/Cattle-breeds-2.jpg\")
<\/a> Figure 5.3 There are many variations of the basic MOOC design![\"Print\"](\"http:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/teachinginadigitalage\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2015\/01\/Wei-2.jpg\")
<\/a>\r\n\r\nIn this section the main MOOC designs will be analysed. However,\u00a0MOOCs are a relatively new phenomenon, and design models are still evolving.\r\nxMOOCs use\u00a0specially designed platform software that allows for the registration of very large numbers of participants, provides facilities for the storing and streaming on demand of digital materials, and automates assessment procedures and student performance tracking. It also allows the companies that provide the software to collect and analyse student data.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
xMOOCs use the standard lecture mode, but delivered online by\u00a0participants downloading on demand recorded video lectures. These video lectures are normally available on a weekly basis over a period of 10-13 weeks. Initially these were often 50 minute lectures, but as a result of\u00a0experience some xMOOCs now are using shorter recordings (sometimes down to 15 minutes in length) and thus there may be more video segments. As well, xMOOC\u00a0courses<\/em> are becoming shorter in length, some now lasting only five weeks. Various video production methods have been used, including\u00a0lecture capture (recording face-to-face on-campus lectures, then storing them and streaming them on demand), full studio production, or\u00a0desk-top recording by the instructor.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Students complete an online test and receive immediate computerised feedback.\u00a0These tests are usually offered\u00a0throughout the course, and may be used just for participant feedback. Alternatively the tests may be used for\u00a0determining the award of a certificate. Another option is\u00a0for an end of course grade\u00a0or certificate based solely on an end-of-course online test. Most xMOOC assignments are based on multiple-choice, computer-marked questions, but\u00a0some\u00a0MOOCs have also used text or formula boxes for participants\u00a0to enter answers, such as coding in a computer science course, or mathematical formulae, and in one or two cases, short text answers, but in all cases these are computer-marked.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Most xMOOCs award some kind of recognition for successful completion of a course, based on a final computer-marked assessment. However, at the time of writing, MOOC badges or certificates have not\u00a0been recognised for credit or admission purposes even by the institutions offering a MOOC, or even when the lectures are the same as for on-campus students. No evidence exists to date about employer acceptance of MOOC qualifications.<\/p>\r\n\r\n It is not surprising that over time, the design of MOOCs is evolving.\u00a0There seem to be three\u00a0distinct kinds of development:<\/p>\r\n\r\n It is likely that innovation in MOOC design and the way MOOCs are used will continue.<\/p>\r\n However, some of these developments also indicate a good deal of confusion around the definition\u00a0and goals of\u00a0MOOCs, especially regarding massiveness and open-ness. If participants\u00a0from outside a university have to pay a hefty fee to participate in an otherwise 'closed', on-campus course, or if off-campus participants have to be selected on certain criteria before they can participate, is it really open? Is the term MOOC now being used to describe any unconventional online offering or any online continuing education course? It's difficult to see how a SPOC for instance differs from a typical online continuing education\u00a0course, except perhaps in that it uses a recorded lecture rather than a learning management system. There is a\u00a0danger of having any online course ending up being described as a MOOC, when in fact there are major differences in design and philosophy.<\/p>\r\n Although each of these individual innovations, often the result of the\u00a0initiative of an individual instructor, are to be welcomed in principle, the consequences need to be carefully considered in fairness to potential participants. Individual instructors designing MOOCs really need to make sure that the design is consistent in terms of educational philosophy, and be clear as to why they are opting for a MOOC rather than a conventional online course. This is particularly important\u00a0if there is to be any form of formal\u00a0assessment. The status of such an assessment for participants who are not formally admitted to or\u00a0registered as a student in an institution needs to be clear and consistent.<\/p>\r\n There is even more confusion about mixing MOOCs with on-campus teaching. At the moment the strategy appears to be to first develop a MOOC then see how it can be adapted for on-campus teaching. However, a better strategy might be to develop a conventional, for-credit online course, in terms of design, then see how it could be scaled for\u00a0open access to other participants. Another strategy might be to use open social media, such as a course wiki and student blogs, to widen access to the teaching of a formal course, rather than develop a full-blown MOOC.<\/p>\r\n Thinking through the policy implications of incorporating MOOCs or MOOC materials with on-campus teaching\u00a0does not appear to be happening at the moment in most institutions experimenting with 'blended' MOOCs.\u00a0If MOOC participants are taking exactly the same course and assessment\u00a0as registered on-campus for-credit students, will the institution award the\u00a0external MOOC participants who successfully complete the assessment\u00a0credit for it and\/or admit them to the institution? If not, why not? For an excellent discussion of these issues framed for an institution's Board of Governors, see Green, 2013<\/a>.<\/p>\r\n Thus some of these MOOC developments seem to be operating in a policy vacuum regarding open learning in general. At some point, institutions will need to develop a clearer, more consistent strategy for open learning, in terms of how it can best be provided, how it calibrates with formal learning,\u00a0and how open learning\u00a0can be accommodated within the fiscal constraints of the institution, and then where MOOCs, other OERs and\u00a0<\/strong>conventional for-credit online courses\u00a0might fit with the strategy. For more on this topic, see Chapter 10<\/a>.<\/p>\r\n\r\n In this section the main MOOC designs will be analysed. However,\u00a0MOOCs are a relatively new phenomenon, and design models are still evolving.<\/p>\n MOOCs developed initially by Stanford University professors and a little later by MIT and Harvard instructors are based primarily on a\u00a0strongly behaviourist,\u00a0information transmission model, the core teaching being through online recorded videos of short lectures, combined with computer automated testing, and sometimes also through the use of peer assessment. These MOOCs are offered through special cloud-based software platforms such as Coursera, Udacity and edX.<\/p>\n xMOOCs is a\u00a0term coined by Stephen Downes (2012) for courses developed by Coursera, Udacity and edX. At the time of writing (2015) xMOOCs are by far the most common MOOC.\u00a0Instructors have considerable flexibility in the design of the course, so there is considerable variation in the details, but in general xMOOCs\u00a0have the following common design features:<\/p>\n xMOOCs use\u00a0specially designed platform software that allows for the registration of very large numbers of participants, provides facilities for the storing and streaming on demand of digital materials, and automates assessment procedures and student performance tracking. It also allows the companies that provide the software to collect and analyse student data.<\/p>\n xMOOCs use the standard lecture mode, but delivered online by\u00a0participants downloading on demand recorded video lectures. These video lectures are normally available on a weekly basis over a period of 10-13 weeks. Initially these were often 50 minute lectures, but as a result of\u00a0experience some xMOOCs now are using shorter recordings (sometimes down to 15 minutes in length) and thus there may be more video segments. As well, xMOOC\u00a0courses<\/em> are becoming shorter in length, some now lasting only five weeks. Various video production methods have been used, including\u00a0lecture capture (recording face-to-face on-campus lectures, then storing them and streaming them on demand), full studio production, or\u00a0desk-top recording by the instructor.<\/p>\n Students complete an online test and receive immediate computerised feedback.\u00a0These tests are usually offered\u00a0throughout the course, and may be used just for participant feedback. Alternatively the tests may be used for\u00a0determining the award of a certificate. Another option is\u00a0for an end of course grade\u00a0or certificate based solely on an end-of-course online test. Most xMOOC assignments are based on multiple-choice, computer-marked questions, but\u00a0some\u00a0MOOCs have also used text or formula boxes for participants\u00a0to enter answers, such as coding in a computer science course, or mathematical formulae, and in one or two cases, short text answers, but in all cases these are computer-marked.<\/p>\n Some xMOOCs have experimented with assigning\u00a0students randomly to small groups for peer assessment, especially for more open-ended or\u00a0more evaluative assignment questions. This has often proved problematic though because of wide variations in expertise between the different members of a group, and because of the different levels of involvement in the course of different participants.<\/p>\n Sometimes copies of slides, supplementary audio files, urls to other resources, and online articles may be included for downloading by participants.<\/p>\n These are places where participants can post questions, ask for help, or comment on the content of the course.<\/p>\n The extent to which the discussion or comments are moderated varies probably more than any other feature in xMOOCs, but at its most, moderation is directed at all participants rather than to individuals. Because of the very large numbers participating and commenting, moderation of individual comments by the instructor(s) offering the MOOC is rarely\u00a0possible, although there are some examples. Some instructors offer no moderation whatsoever, so participants rely on other participants to respond to questions or comments. Some instructors ‘sample’ comments and questions, and post comments in response to these. Some instructors use volunteers or paid teaching assistants to comb for or identify common areas of concern shared by a number\u00a0of participants then the instructor\u00a0or teaching assistants will respond. However, in most cases, participants moderate each other’s comments or questions.<\/p>\n Most xMOOCs award some kind of recognition for successful completion of a course, based on a final computer-marked assessment. However, at the time of writing, MOOC badges or certificates have not\u00a0been recognised for credit or admission purposes even by the institutions offering a MOOC, or even when the lectures are the same as for on-campus students. No evidence exists to date about employer acceptance of MOOC qualifications.<\/p>\n Although to date there has not been a great deal of published information about the use of learning analytics in xMOOCs, the\u00a0xMOOC platforms\u00a0have the capacity to collect and analyse ‘big data’ about participants and their performance, enabling, at least in theory, for immediate feedback to instructors about areas where the content or design needs improving and possibly directing automated\u00a0cues or hints for individuals.<\/p>\n xMOOCs\u00a0therefore primarily use a teaching model focused on the transmission of information, with high quality content delivery, computer-marked assessment (mainly for student feedback purposes), and automation of all key transactions between participants and the learning platform. There is rarely any\u00a0direct interaction between an individual participant and the\u00a0instructor responsible for the course, although instructors may post general comments in response to a range of participants’ comments.<\/p>\n cMOOCs, the first of which was developed by three instructors for a course at the University of Manitoba in 2008, are based on network learning, where learning develops through the connections and discussions between participants over social media. There is no standard technology platform for cMOOCs, which use a combination of webcasts, participant blogs, tweets, software that connects blogs and tweets on the same topic via hashtags, and online discussion forums. Although usually there are some experts who initiate and participate in cMOOCs, they are by and large driven by the interests and contributions of the participants. Usually there is no attempt at formal assessment.<\/p>\n cMOOCs have a very different educational philosophy from xMOOCs, in that cMOOCs place heavy emphasis on networking and in particular on strong content contributions from the participants themselves. Indeed, there may be no formally identified instructor, although ‘guest’ instructors may be invited to offer a web cast or a blog for the course.<\/p>\n Downes (2014) has identified four key design principles for\u00a0cMOOCs:<\/p>\n Thus for the proponents of cMOOCs, learning results not from the transmission of information from an expert to novices, as in xMOOCs, but from the sharing and flow of knowledge between participants.<\/p>\n Identifying how these key design features for cMOOCs are turned into practice is somewhat more difficult to pinpoint, because cMOOCs depend on an evolving set of practices.\u00a0Most cMOOCs to date have in fact made some use of ‘experts’, both in the\u00a0organization and promotion of the\u00a0MOOC, and in providing ‘nodes’ of content around which discussion tends to revolve. \u00a0In other words, the design practices\u00a0of cMOOCs are still more a work in progress than those of xMOOCs.<\/p>\n Nevertheless, at the moment the following are\u00a0key design practices in cMOOCs:<\/p>\n cMOOCs therefore primarily use a networked approach to learning based on autonomous learners connecting with each other across open and connected social media and sharing knowledge through their own personal contributions. There is no pre-set curriculum and no\u00a0formal teacher-student relationship, either for delivery of content or for learner support.\u00a0Participants learn from the contributions of others, from the meta-level knowledge generated through the community, and from self-reflection on\u00a0their own contributions, thus reflecting many of the features of communities of interest or practice.<\/p>\n I have deliberately focused on the differences in design between xMOOCs and cMOOCs, and\u00a0Mackness (2103)<\/a>\u00a0and Yousef et al. (2014)<\/a>\u00a0also emphasise similar\u00a0differences in philosophy\/theory between cMOOCs and xMOOCs, as well as Downes himself (2012), one of the original designers of cMOOCs.<\/p>\n However, it should be noted that the design of MOOCs continues to evolve, with all kinds of variations. Yousef et al. (2014) represent this graphically as follows:<\/p>\n In Yousef et al.’s terminology smOOcs represent small open online courses and bMOOCs represent MOOCs that are blended with on-campus teaching.<\/p>\n However, Chauhan (2014) offers an even wider range of \u00a0MOOC instructional models, as follows:<\/p>\n Hernandez et al. (2014) describe what they term an\u00a0iMOOC developed by the Open University of Portugal which combines features of both xMOOCs and cMOOCs, and other\u00a0features, such as collaborative group work and paced instruction, that can be found in their credit-based online courses. The MOOCs developed by the University of British Columbia and a number of other institutions use\u00a0volunteers, paid academic assistants or even the instructor to moderate the online discussions and participant comments, making such MOOCs closer in design to\u00a0regular for-credit online courses – except that they are open to anyone.<\/p>\n It is not surprising that over time, the design of MOOCs is evolving.\u00a0There seem to be three\u00a0distinct kinds of development:<\/p>\n It is likely that innovation in MOOC design and the way MOOCs are used will continue.<\/p>\n However, some of these developments also indicate a good deal of confusion around the definition\u00a0and goals of\u00a0MOOCs, especially regarding massiveness and open-ness. If participants\u00a0from outside a university have to pay a hefty fee to participate in an otherwise ‘closed’, on-campus course, or if off-campus participants have to be selected on certain criteria before they can participate, is it really open? Is the term MOOC now being used to describe any unconventional online offering or any online continuing education course? It’s difficult to see how a SPOC for instance differs from a typical online continuing education\u00a0course, except perhaps in that it uses a recorded lecture rather than a learning management system. There is a\u00a0danger of having any online course ending up being described as a MOOC, when in fact there are major differences in design and philosophy.<\/p>\n Although each of these individual innovations, often the result of the\u00a0initiative of an individual instructor, are to be welcomed in principle, the consequences need to be carefully considered in fairness to potential participants. Individual instructors designing MOOCs really need to make sure that the design is consistent in terms of educational philosophy, and be clear as to why they are opting for a MOOC rather than a conventional online course. This is particularly important\u00a0if there is to be any form of formal\u00a0assessment. The status of such an assessment for participants who are not formally admitted to or\u00a0registered as a student in an institution needs to be clear and consistent.<\/p>\n There is even more confusion about mixing MOOCs with on-campus teaching. At the moment the strategy appears to be to first develop a MOOC then see how it can be adapted for on-campus teaching. However, a better strategy might be to develop a conventional, for-credit online course, in terms of design, then see how it could be scaled for\u00a0open access to other participants. Another strategy might be to use open social media, such as a course wiki and student blogs, to widen access to the teaching of a formal course, rather than develop a full-blown MOOC.<\/p>\n Thinking through the policy implications of incorporating MOOCs or MOOC materials with on-campus teaching\u00a0does not appear to be happening at the moment in most institutions experimenting with ‘blended’ MOOCs.\u00a0If MOOC participants are taking exactly the same course and assessment\u00a0as registered on-campus for-credit students, will the institution award the\u00a0external MOOC participants who successfully complete the assessment\u00a0credit for it and\/or admit them to the institution? If not, why not? For an excellent discussion of these issues framed for an institution’s Board of Governors, see Green, 2013<\/a>.<\/p>\n Thus some of these MOOC developments seem to be operating in a policy vacuum regarding open learning in general. At some point, institutions will need to develop a clearer, more consistent strategy for open learning, in terms of how it can best be provided, how it calibrates with formal learning,\u00a0and how open learning\u00a0can be accommodated within the fiscal constraints of the institution, and then where MOOCs, other OERs and\u00a0<\/strong>conventional for-credit online courses\u00a0might fit with the strategy. For more on this topic, see Chapter 10<\/a>.<\/p>\n 1. When is a MOOC a MOOC and when is it not a MOOC? Can you identify the common features? Is MOOC\u00a0still a useful term?<\/p>\n 2. If you were to design a MOOC, who would be the target audience? What kind of MOOC would it be? What form of assessment could you use? What would make you think your MOOC was a success, after it was delivered? What criteria would you use?<\/p>\n 3. Could you think of other\u00a0ways to make one or more of your courses more open, other than creating a MOOC from scratch? What would be the advantages and disadvantages of these other methods, compared to a MOOC?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Chauhan, A. (2014) Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCS): Emerging Trends in Assessment and Accreditation <\/span>Digital Education Review<\/a><\/em>, No. 25<\/span><\/p>\n Downes, S. (2012) Massively Open Online Courses are here to stay, <\/span>Stephen’s Web<\/a><\/em>, July 20<\/span><\/p>\n Downes, S. (2014) <\/span>The MOOC of One<\/a><\/em>, Valencia, Spain,\u00a0March 10<\/span><\/p>\n Green, K. (2013) Mission, money and MOOCs <\/span>Association of Governing Boards Trusteeship<\/a><\/em>, No. 1, Volume 21<\/span><\/p>\n Hernandez, R. et al. (2014) Promoting engagement in MOOCs through social collaboration<\/a><\/em> Oxford UK: Proceedings of the 8th EDEN Research Workshop<\/p>\n Mackness, J. (2013) cMOOCs and xMOOCs – key differences<\/a><\/em>, Jenny Mackness, October 22<\/p>\n5.3.1.3 Computer-marked assignments\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\r\n
5.3.1.4 Peer assessment\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\r\nSome xMOOCs have experimented with assigning\u00a0students randomly to small groups for peer assessment, especially for more open-ended or\u00a0more evaluative assignment questions. This has often proved problematic though because of wide variations in expertise between the different members of a group, and because of the different levels of involvement in the course of different participants.\r\n
5.3.1.5 Supporting materials\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\r\nSometimes copies of slides, supplementary audio files, urls to other resources, and online articles may be included for downloading by participants.\r\n
\u00a05.3.1.6\u00a0A\u00a0shared comment\/discussion space\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\r\nThese are places where participants can post questions, ask for help, or comment on the content of the course.\r\n
5.3.1.7 No, or very light, discussion moderation<\/strong><\/h3>\r\nThe extent to which the discussion or comments are moderated varies probably more than any other feature in xMOOCs, but at its most, moderation is directed at all participants rather than to individuals. Because of the very large numbers participating and commenting, moderation of individual comments by the instructor(s) offering the MOOC is rarely\u00a0possible, although there are some examples. Some instructors offer no moderation whatsoever, so participants rely on other participants to respond to questions or comments. Some instructors 'sample' comments and questions, and post comments in response to these. Some instructors use volunteers or paid teaching assistants to comb for or identify common areas of concern shared by a number\u00a0of participants then the instructor\u00a0or teaching assistants will respond. However, in most cases, participants moderate each other's comments or questions.\r\n
5.3.1.8 Badges or certificates\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\r\n
\u00a05.3.1.9 Learning analytics\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\r\nAlthough to date there has not been a great deal of published information about the use of learning analytics in xMOOCs, the\u00a0xMOOC platforms\u00a0have the capacity to collect and analyse 'big data' about participants and their performance, enabling, at least in theory, for immediate feedback to instructors about areas where the content or design needs improving and possibly directing automated\u00a0cues or hints for individuals.\r\n\r\nxMOOCs\u00a0therefore primarily use a teaching model focused on the transmission of information, with high quality content delivery, computer-marked assessment (mainly for student feedback purposes), and automation of all key transactions between participants and the learning platform. There is rarely any\u00a0direct interaction between an individual participant and the\u00a0instructor responsible for the course, although instructors may post general comments in response to a range of participants' comments.\r\n
5.3.2 cMOOCs<\/h2>\r\ncMOOCs, the first of which was developed by three instructors for a course at the University of Manitoba in 2008, are based on network learning, where learning develops through the connections and discussions between participants over social media. There is no standard technology platform for cMOOCs, which use a combination of webcasts, participant blogs, tweets, software that connects blogs and tweets on the same topic via hashtags, and online discussion forums. Although usually there are some experts who initiate and participate in cMOOCs, they are by and large driven by the interests and contributions of the participants. Usually there is no attempt at formal assessment.\r\n\r\ncMOOCs have a very different educational philosophy from xMOOCs, in that cMOOCs place heavy emphasis on networking and in particular on strong content contributions from the participants themselves. Indeed, there may be no formally identified instructor, although 'guest' instructors may be invited to offer a web cast or a blog for the course.\r\n
5.3.2.1 Key design principles<\/h3>\r\nDownes (2014) has identified four key design principles for\u00a0cMOOCs:\r\n
\r\n\t
5.3.2.2 From principles to practice<\/h3>\r\nIdentifying how these key design features for cMOOCs are turned into practice is somewhat more difficult to pinpoint, because cMOOCs depend on an evolving set of practices.\u00a0Most cMOOCs to date have in fact made some use of 'experts', both in the\u00a0organization and promotion of the\u00a0MOOC, and in providing 'nodes' of content around which discussion tends to revolve. \u00a0In other words, the design practices\u00a0of cMOOCs are still more a work in progress than those of xMOOCs.\r\n\r\nNevertheless, at the moment the following are\u00a0key design practices in cMOOCs:\r\n
\r\n\t
\r\n\t
\r\n\t
\r\n\t
5.3.3 Other\u00a0variations<\/h2>\r\nI have deliberately focused on the differences in design between xMOOCs and cMOOCs, and\u00a0Mackness (2103)<\/a>\u00a0and Yousef et al. (2014)<\/a>\u00a0also emphasise similar\u00a0differences in philosophy\/theory between cMOOCs and xMOOCs, as well as Downes himself (2012), one of the original designers of cMOOCs.\r\n\r\nHowever, it should be noted that the design of MOOCs continues to evolve, with all kinds of variations. Yousef et al. (2014) represent this graphically as follows:\r\n\r\n
<\/a>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_783\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"457\"]<\/a> Figure 5.3.3 The range of MOOC designs, from Yousef et al., 2014, Figure 5, p.12[\/caption]\r\n\r\n<\/a>\r\n\r\nIn Yousef et al.'s terminology smOOcs represent small open online courses and bMOOCs represent MOOCs that are blended with on-campus teaching.\r\n\r\nHowever, Chauhan (2014) offers an even wider range of \u00a0MOOC instructional models, as follows:\r\n\r\n\t
5.3.4 What's going on here?<\/h2>\r\n
\r\n\t
\r\nActivity 5.3: Thinking about MOOC design<\/h3>\r\n1. When is a MOOC a MOOC and when is it not a MOOC? Can you identify the common features? Is MOOC\u00a0still a useful term?\r\n\r\n2. If you were to design a MOOC, who would be the target audience? What kind of MOOC would it be? What form of assessment could you use? What would make you think your MOOC was a success, after it was delivered? What criteria would you use?\r\n\r\n3. Could you think of other\u00a0ways to make one or more of your courses more open, other than creating a MOOC from scratch? What would be the advantages and disadvantages of these other methods, compared to a MOOC?\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n
References<\/h2>\r\nChauhan, A. (2014) Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCS): Emerging Trends in Assessment and Accreditation <\/span>Digital Education Review<\/a><\/em>, No. 25<\/span>\r\n\r\nDownes, S. (2012) Massively Open Online Courses are here to stay, <\/span>Stephen's Web<\/a><\/em>, July 20<\/span>\r\n\r\nDownes, S. (2014) <\/span>The MOOC of One<\/a><\/em>, Valencia, Spain,\u00a0March 10<\/span>\r\n\r\nGreen, K. (2013) Mission, money and MOOCs <\/span>Association of Governing Boards Trusteeship<\/a><\/em>, No. 1, Volume 21<\/span>\r\n\r\nHernandez, R. et al. (2014) Promoting engagement in MOOCs through social collaboration<\/a><\/em> Oxford UK: Proceedings of the 8th EDEN Research Workshop\r\n\r\nMackness, J. (2013) cMOOCs and xMOOCs - key differences<\/a><\/em>, Jenny Mackness, October 22\r\n\r\nYousef, A. et al. (2014) <\/span>MOOCs: A Review of the State-of-the-Art<\/a><\/em> Proceedings of 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Education \u2013 CSEDU 2014, Barcelona, Spain<\/span>","rendered":"
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>
Image: \u00a9 Dairy Cattle, India, 2014\u00a9 Dairy Cattle, India, 2014<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/a><\/p>\n5.3.1 xMOOCs<\/h2>\n
5.3.1.1 Specially designed platform software\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\n
5.3.1.2 Video lectures\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\n
5.3.1.3 Computer-marked assignments\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\n
5.3.1.4 Peer assessment\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\n
5.3.1.5 Supporting materials\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\u00a05.3.1.6\u00a0A\u00a0shared comment\/discussion space\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\n
5.3.1.7 No, or very light, discussion moderation<\/strong><\/h3>\n
5.3.1.8 Badges or certificates\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\u00a05.3.1.9 Learning analytics\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\n
5.3.2 cMOOCs<\/h2>\n
5.3.2.1 Key design principles<\/h3>\n
\n
5.3.2.2 From principles to practice<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
5.3.3 Other\u00a0variations<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/p>\n\n
5.3.4 What’s going on here?<\/h2>\n
\n
\nActivity 5.3: Thinking about MOOC design<\/h3>\n
References<\/h2>\n