Blended MOOCs

6

BlendedMOOCs

BlendedMOOCs

Computerand internet based technologies have had huge impacts on the moderneducation systems. Massive Open Online Courses is one of the recenttechnologies that have transformed the modern education system(Guthrie, 2012, Mangan, 2012). The most important contribution ofMassive Open Online Courses have been the expansion of access tohigher education by eliminating entry requirements, educationbackgrounds, fees and income as important prerequisites to access tohigher education (Yousef, 2014a). However, there are several types ofMOOCs, which includes classified MOOCs and connectivist MOOCs(Daniel, 2012, Siemens, 2013). By expanding the accessibility toeducation, MOOCs have increased the accessibility to second languagelearning. Today, an individual does not need to attend thetraditional classroom in order to learn a second language. Despitethe huge impacts of MOOCs on second language learning and highereducation, there are some concerns that have been raised. Accordingto Yousef (2014), the absence of human interactions is the majorcriticism that has been raised against MOOCs in major literatures.Other concerns that have been raised include pedagogical challengesand the impacts of feedbacks in the learning process, learner-videocontent interactions and high rates of dropouts (Daniel, 2012,Grunewald, 2013, Luo et al, 2014).

Themain contribution of blended MOOCs is addressing or eliminating theseconcerns and limitations. The strengths of blended MOOCs are theability to bring together the advantages of face to face classroomand online classroom to create a more effective learning platform(Bruff et al, 2013). The development of blended MOOCs was based onthe hurdles and challenges that faced the standalone online learningplatform (Ostashewski &amp Reid, 2012,). According to Yousef et al(2015), blended MOOCs “hasthe potential to bring human interactions into the MOOC environment,foster student-entered learning, and support the interactive designof the video lectures, provide effective assessment and feedback, aswell as contemplate the diverse perspectives of the MOOCparticipants”.

Accordingto Bowen et al (2012), the integration of offline or face to facelearning environment and the online supported MOOCs learning hascreated a flexible and more effective model of learning. Hill (2012)also noted that blended MOOCs enhances learner to instructorinteractions and feedbacks. According to a meta analysis by Means etal (2010), a blended MOOCs is more effective when compared to apurely face to face traditional learning environment or a fullyonline learning platform. This is because the blended system combinesthe learning advantages of an online and offline classroom. Accordingto Rodriguez and Anicete (2010), the advantages of blended MOOCs areaccrued the fact that the traditional on campus instructor isintroduced in the online learning environment. For example, thelearners are able to get exposure to the learning material throughonline materials such as video lectures and engage in a deeperlearning process with the instructor in the traditional face to faceclassrooms (Bruff et al, 2013). While the role of face to faceinteraction between the learner and the instructor as well as leanerinstructor may not be critical in other subjects, it is verynecessary in second language learning. The blended MOOCs have beensignificantly successful. However, there are several challenges thatare associated with the program. As a result, there are a wide rangeof views and comments from educationists and theorists (LaMartina,2013).

References

Bowen,W. G., Chingos, M. M., Lack, K. A., &amp Nygren, T. I. (2012).Interactivelearning online at public universities: Evidence from randomizedtrials.New York, NY: Ithaka S+R.

Bruff,D. O. et al (2013). Wrapping a MOOC: Student Perceptions of anExperiment in Blended Learning, MERLOTJournal of Online Learning and Teaching,9(2).

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

Fini,A. (2009). The technological dimension of a massive open onlinecourse: The case of the CCK08 course tools. TheInternational Review Of Research In Open And Distance Learning,10(5).

Garrison,D. R. and Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering itstransformative potential in higher education. The internetand higher education,7, (2), 95–105.

Grünewald,F., Meinel, C., Totschnig, M., &amp Willems, C. (2013). DesigningMOOCs for the Support of Multiple Learning Styles. In Scaling upLearning for Sustained Impact(pp. 371-382). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Guthrie,K. M. (2012). Barriers to the adoption of online learning systems.EDUCAUSEReview,47(4), 50-51.

Hecking,T. (2014). Analysisofdynamic resource access patterns in a blended learning course,Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on LearningAnalytics and Knowledge.

LaMartina,D. (2013). BlendedMOOCs: The Best of Both Worlds?http://campustechnology.com/articles/2013/08/21/blended-moocs-the-best-of-both-worlds.aspx

Luo,H., Robinson, A. C., &amp Park, J. Y. (2014). Peer Grading in aMOOC: Reliability, Validity, and Perceived Effects. OnlineLearning: Official Journal of the Online Learning Consortium,18(2).

Mangan,K. (2012, October 1). Massiveexcitement about online courses. The Chronicle of Higher Education. http://www.chronicle.com/article/Massive-Excitement-About/134678/

Means,B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., &amp Jones, K. (2010).Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: Ameta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, andPolicy Development.

Ostashewski,N., &amp Reid, D. (2012). Deliveringa MOOC using a social networking site: the SMOOC Design model. InProc. IADIS International Conference on Internet Technologies &ampSociety, (2012), 217-220.

Rodriguez,M. A., &amp Anicete, R. C. R. (2010). Students` views of a mixedhybrid ecology course. MERLOTJournal of Online Learning and Teaching,6(4), 791-798.

Rodriguez,O. (2012). MOOCs and the AI-Stanford like Courses: two successful anddistinct course formats for massive open online courses. EuropeanJournal of Open, Distance, and E-Learning,(2012).

Sánchez-Vera,M. M., &amp Prendes-Espinosa, M. P. (2015). Beyond objective testingand peer assessment: alternative ways of assessment in MOOCs. RUSC.,12(1). pp. 119-130.

Sandeen,C. (2013). Assessment’s place in the new MOOC world. Research&amp Practice in Assessment,8 (1), 5-12.

Yousef,A. M.et al (2014). MOOCs – A Review of the State-of-the-Art. In Proc.CSEDU2014 conference,Vol. 3, pp. 9-20. INSTICC, 2014.

Yousef,A. et al (2015). TheEffect of Peer Assessment Rubrics on Learners` Satisfaction andPerformance Within a Blended MOOC Environment, &ampth InternationalConference on Computer Supported Education,http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ahmed_Mohamed_Fahmy_Yousef/publication/278675891_The_Effect_of_Peer_Assessment_Rubrics_on_Learners%27_Satisfaction_and_Performance_Within_a_Blended_MOOC_Environment/links/5582d10408ae6cf036c2f83b.pdf

Yousef,A. M. et al (2015). A Cluster Analysis of MOOC StakeholderPerspectives. RUSC. Universitiesand Knowledge Society Journal,12(1), 74-90.

Blended MOOCs

6

BlendedMOOCs

BlendedMOOCs

Computerand internet based technologies have had huge impacts on the moderneducation systems. Massive Open Online Courses is one of the recenttechnologies that have transformed the modern education system(Guthrie, 2012, Mangan, 2012). The most important contribution ofMassive Open Online Courses have been the expansion of access tohigher education by eliminating entry requirements, educationbackgrounds, fees and income as important prerequisites to access tohigher education (Yousef, 2014a). However, there are several types ofMOOCs, which includes classified MOOCs and connectivist MOOCs(Daniel, 2012, Siemens, 2013). By expanding the accessibility toeducation, MOOCs have increased the accessibility to second languagelearning. Today, an individual does not need to attend thetraditional classroom in order to learn a second language. Despitethe huge impacts of MOOCs on second language learning and highereducation, there are some concerns that have been raised. Accordingto Yousef (2014), the absence of human interactions is the majorcriticism that has been raised against MOOCs in major literatures.Other concerns that have been raised include pedagogical challengesand the impacts of feedbacks in the learning process, learner-videocontent interactions and high rates of dropouts (Daniel, 2012,Grunewald, 2013, Luo et al, 2014).

Themain contribution of blended MOOCs is addressing or eliminating theseconcerns and limitations. The strengths of blended MOOCs are theability to bring together the advantages of face to face classroomand online classroom to create a more effective learning platform(Bruff et al, 2013). The development of blended MOOCs was based onthe hurdles and challenges that faced the standalone online learningplatform (Ostashewski &amp Reid, 2012,). According to Yousef et al(2015), blended MOOCs “hasthe potential to bring human interactions into the MOOC environment,foster student-entered learning, and support the interactive designof the video lectures, provide effective assessment and feedback, aswell as contemplate the diverse perspectives of the MOOCparticipants”.

Accordingto Bowen et al (2012), the integration of offline or face to facelearning environment and the online supported MOOCs learning hascreated a flexible and more effective model of learning. Hill (2012)also noted that blended MOOCs enhances learner to instructorinteractions and feedbacks. According to a meta analysis by Means etal (2010), a blended MOOCs is more effective when compared to apurely face to face traditional learning environment or a fullyonline learning platform. This is because the blended system combinesthe learning advantages of an online and offline classroom. Accordingto Rodriguez and Anicete (2010), the advantages of blended MOOCs areaccrued the fact that the traditional on campus instructor isintroduced in the online learning environment. For example, thelearners are able to get exposure to the learning material throughonline materials such as video lectures and engage in a deeperlearning process with the instructor in the traditional face to faceclassrooms (Bruff et al, 2013). While the role of face to faceinteraction between the learner and the instructor as well as leanerinstructor may not be critical in other subjects, it is verynecessary in second language learning. The blended MOOCs have beensignificantly successful. However, there are several challenges thatare associated with the program. As a result, there are a wide rangeof views and comments from educationists and theorists (LaMartina,2013).

References

Bowen,W. G., Chingos, M. M., Lack, K. A., &amp Nygren, T. I. (2012).Interactivelearning online at public universities: Evidence from randomizedtrials.New York, NY: Ithaka S+R.

Bruff,D. O. et al (2013). Wrapping a MOOC: Student Perceptions of anExperiment in Blended Learning, MERLOTJournal of Online Learning and Teaching,9(2).

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

Fini,A. (2009). The technological dimension of a massive open onlinecourse: The case of the CCK08 course tools. TheInternational Review Of Research In Open And Distance Learning,10(5).

Garrison,D. R. and Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering itstransformative potential in higher education. The internetand higher education,7, (2), 95–105.

Grünewald,F., Meinel, C., Totschnig, M., &amp Willems, C. (2013). DesigningMOOCs for the Support of Multiple Learning Styles. In Scaling upLearning for Sustained Impact(pp. 371-382). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Guthrie,K. M. (2012). Barriers to the adoption of online learning systems.EDUCAUSEReview,47(4), 50-51.

Hecking,T. (2014). Analysisofdynamic resource access patterns in a blended learning course,Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on LearningAnalytics and Knowledge.

LaMartina,D. (2013). BlendedMOOCs: The Best of Both Worlds?http://campustechnology.com/articles/2013/08/21/blended-moocs-the-best-of-both-worlds.aspx

Luo,H., Robinson, A. C., &amp Park, J. Y. (2014). Peer Grading in aMOOC: Reliability, Validity, and Perceived Effects. OnlineLearning: Official Journal of the Online Learning Consortium,18(2).

Mangan,K. (2012, October 1). Massiveexcitement about online courses. The Chronicle of Higher Education. http://www.chronicle.com/article/Massive-Excitement-About/134678/

Means,B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., &amp Jones, K. (2010).Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: Ameta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, andPolicy Development.

Ostashewski,N., &amp Reid, D. (2012). Deliveringa MOOC using a social networking site: the SMOOC Design model. InProc. IADIS International Conference on Internet Technologies &ampSociety, (2012), 217-220.

Rodriguez,M. A., &amp Anicete, R. C. R. (2010). Students` views of a mixedhybrid ecology course. MERLOTJournal of Online Learning and Teaching,6(4), 791-798.

Rodriguez,O. (2012). MOOCs and the AI-Stanford like Courses: two successful anddistinct course formats for massive open online courses. EuropeanJournal of Open, Distance, and E-Learning,(2012).

Sánchez-Vera,M. M., &amp Prendes-Espinosa, M. P. (2015). Beyond objective testingand peer assessment: alternative ways of assessment in MOOCs. RUSC.,12(1). pp. 119-130.

Sandeen,C. (2013). Assessment’s place in the new MOOC world. Research&amp Practice in Assessment,8 (1), 5-12.

Yousef,A. M.et al (2014). MOOCs – A Review of the State-of-the-Art. In Proc.CSEDU2014 conference,Vol. 3, pp. 9-20. INSTICC, 2014.

Yousef,A. et al (2015). TheEffect of Peer Assessment Rubrics on Learners` Satisfaction andPerformance Within a Blended MOOC Environment, &ampth InternationalConference on Computer Supported Education,http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ahmed_Mohamed_Fahmy_Yousef/publication/278675891_The_Effect_of_Peer_Assessment_Rubrics_on_Learners%27_Satisfaction_and_Performance_Within_a_Blended_MOOC_Environment/links/5582d10408ae6cf036c2f83b.pdf

Yousef,A. M. et al (2015). A Cluster Analysis of MOOC StakeholderPerspectives. RUSC. Universitiesand Knowledge Society Journal,12(1), 74-90.

Blended MOOCs

BlendedMOOCs

Nameof Institute

BlendedMOOCs

SectionOne

MOOCis an abbreviation for Massive Open Online Course whereby any onlinecourse is offered to large scale participants through the internetplatform. Basically, it is similar to university courses with theminor difference of offering academic credit. Academic research showsthat MOOC is a means used to improve the learning curriculum wherebystudents are given the option of personalizing their curriculumsbased on their academic goals and objectives. In addition, MOOCsallow students understand their learning capacity because of theavailability of the self-paced coursework. It is important to notethat MOOCs are easily accessible to students unlike the traditionalclassroom models which limited students to classroom and the schoolenvironment.

Researchstudies conducted in California Universities showed that there was anacademic improvement of most students within a single semester whichsaw a noticeable grade improvement for all campus students. Thisacademic improvement was attributed to the fact that students couldstudy their course materials at their own pace and designated timeeither at home or in their dormitory rooms. However, the MOOCplatform exposed the students to a lot of course work in the form ofassignments, projects and case studies that related to the student’scourse. The Horizon Report 2014 showed that the MOOC provided ablended learning approach whereby there was a mixture of face-to-faceand online learning activities where students would integrate theinformation and data gathered from both platforms to improve on theirlearning techniques. Scholars have referred this blended technique asa pedagogical approach because students will integrate thesynchronous and asynchronous learning tools hence providing room forenforcing an effective learning process for students enrolled in theMOOC platform. The characteristics of MOOC have allowed studentsachieve better grades whereby students are not charged, can easilyaccess recorded traditional lectures, minimize student-teacherinteractions and it is easily accessed through the internet for largescale participation. All these features of the MOOC platform haveallowed campus students from all over the United States to learnprogressively based on the student’s speed. Blending MOOCtechnology with the traditional classroom model will transform andimprove the education system. This is due to the fact that the MOOCeducation package will be synthesized into smaller packages in orderto fit in the classroom setup. For instance, according to thePresident of edX,Anant Agarwal, in the summer of 2013, there were about 100 blendedcourses hosted on the edXplatform which was made available across the entire country.

SectionTwo

Studiesconducted by supporters of the K12 classroom model termed MOOC as aneducational platform which appeals to the YouTube generation becauseof its online gaming and social media capabilities which makeslearning entertaining, fun and informative. For instance, informationis delivered with an average of 15minute presentation whereby thereare pauses for students to take short quizzes and receive instantresults. A study conducted by an American professor teaching of theimportance of integrating instructional technology in South Africa,asserted that MOOC has allowed the structuring of learning coursematerials to fit the busy schedule of adult learners who are usuallytied by work and family responsibilities. Studies conducted by JohnHarvard in the Harvard magazine showed that most Americanuniversities campaigned for the use of MOOC by encouraging campusadministrations to install the necessary host sites like edX,and Courseraamong others. These hosting websites allowed teachers to adjust theirteaching techniques from the traditional model to the digital versionof teaching students in the 21stcentury.

References

Bárcena,E., Read, T., Martín-Monje, E., &amp Castrillo, M. D. (2014).Analysing student participation in Foreign Language MOOCs: a casestudy.&nbspEMOOCs2014: European MOOCs Stakeholders Summit,11-17.

Bruff,D. O., Fisher, D. H., McEwen, K. E., &amp Smith, B. E. (2013).Wrapping a MOOC: Student perceptions of an experiment in blendedlearning.&nbspMERLOTJournal of Online Learning and Teaching,&nbsp9(2),187-199.

Blom,J., Verma, H., Li, N., Skevi, A., &amp Dillenbourg, P. (2013). MOOCsare more social than you believe.&nbspeLearningPapers.

Breslow,L., Pritchard, D. E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G. S., Ho, A. D., &ampSeaton, D. T. (2013). Studying learning in the worldwide classroom:Research into edX’s first MOOC.&nbspResearch&amp Practice in Assessment,&nbsp8(1),13-25.

DeFreitas, S. (2013). MOOCs: The Final Frontier for HigherEducation.CoventryUniversity. Retrieved October,&nbsp27,2014.

Forsey,M., Low, M., &amp Glance, D. (2013). Flipping the sociologyclassroom: Towards a practice of online pedagogy.&nbspJournalof Sociology,&nbsp49(4),471-485.

Fournier,H., Kop, R., &amp Durand, G. (2014). Challenges to research inMOOCs.Journalof Online Learning &amp Teaching,&nbsp10(1).

Freeman,M. A. R. K., &amp Hancock, P. (2013). Milking MOOCs: Towards theright blend in accounting education.&nbspAcademicLeadership Series,&nbsp4,86-100.

Gutiérrez-Rojas,I., Alario-Hoyos, C., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Leony, D., &ampDelgado-Kloos, C. (2014). Scaffolding self-learning inMOOCs.&nbspProceedingsof the Second MOOC European Stakeholders Summit, EMOOCs,43-49.

Holotescu,C., Grosseck, G., Cretu, V., &amp Naaji, A. (2014, October).Integrating MOOCs in Blended Courses. In&nbspTheInternational Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education&nbsp(Vol.4, p. 243). &quot Carol I&quot National Defence University.

Jobe,W., Östlund, C., &amp Svensson, L. (2014, March). MOOCs forprofessional teacher development. In&nbspSocietyfor Information Technology &amp Teacher Education Internationa lConference&nbsp(Vol.2014, No. 1, pp. 1580-1586).

Koutropoulos,A., Gallagher, M. S., Abajian, S. C., de Waard, I., Hogue, R. J.,Keskin, N. O., &amp Rodriguez, C. O. (2012). Emotive Vocabulary inMOOCs: Context &amp Participant Retention.&nbspEuropeanJournal of Open, Distance and E-Learning.

Kim,K., &amp Bonk, C. J. (2006). The future of online teaching andlearning in higher education: The survey says.&nbspEducausequarterly,&nbsp29(4),22.

Liyanagunawardena,T. R., Adams, A. A., &amp Williams, S. A. (2013). MOOCs: Asystematic study of the published literature 2008-2012.&nbspTheInternational Review of Research in Open and DistributedLearning,&nbsp14(3),202-227.

Milligan,C., Littlejohn, A., &amp Margaryan, A. (2013). Patterns ofengagement in connectivist MOOCs.&nbspMERLOTJournal of Online Learning and Teaching,&nbsp9(2).

Massis,B. E. (2013). MOOCs and the library.&nbspNewlibrary world,&nbsp114(5/6),267-270.

O`Toole,R. (2013). Pedagogical strategies and technologies for peerassessment in Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs).

Seaton,D. T., Bergner, Y., Chuang, I., Mitros, P., &amp Pritchard, D. E.(2014). Who does what in a massive open onlinecourse?.&nbspCommunicationsof the ACM,&nbsp57(4),58-65.

Stein,K. (2013). Penn GSE study shows MOOCs have relatively few activeusers, with only a few persisting to course end.&nbspPressrelease, University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education,December,&nbsp5.

Reilly,C. (2013, October). MOOCs deconstructed: variables that affect MOOCsuccess rates. In&nbspWorldConference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, andHigher Education&nbsp(Vol.2013, No. 1, pp. 1308-1338).