2013 05 17 (uned) emadrid mtotschnig grados apertura mooc

Michael Totschnig, 17. Mai 2013

Degrees of Openness in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC)

Michael TotschnigE-Learning Consultant

eMadrid, 17th of May 2013


About me

● PhD in Communication from Université du Québec à Montréal

● Active in E-Learning R&D since 2005 – WU Wien

● LMS (Learn@WU), Authoring Tools, E-Learning Standards

– KnowledgeMarkets● Learning Object Repository (EducaNext, Bildungspool Austria)

– Econtent+ project Icoper● Outcome-oriented education (OICS)

– Hasso-Plattner-Institute● MOOC (openHPI)


Context for this talk

● Based on the experience as coordinator for openHPI, a platform for xMOOCs

● Evaluation presented at Educon 2013 (with Franka Grünewald, Christian Willems, Ralf Teusner and Elnaz Mazandarani)

● Interested in the pedagogical, technical, social innovations of cMOOCs

● Inspired by Fischer's theory of “culture of participation” and “meta-design” (thanks to Franka Grünewald)


Outline

● Definitions of Openness in cMOOCs and xMOOCs

● Experience with openHPI (xMOOC)● Cultures of participation● Design guidelines● Conclusions:

– Technical: From LMS to SOA

– Conceptual: Beyond the c/x dichotomy

MOOC – A New and Successful Trend in E-Learning

■ What happens when courses traditionally taught to members of an educational institution are offered online and opened (accessible without cost and preconditions). They can attract a massive world-wide audience.

■ Expected Consequences– Content will be scrutinized massively and can be improved through

suggestions

– Participants will help each other solve problems and create vibrant communities

– Learning analytics will allow to gain deeper understanding of learning processes

– Competition between educational providers will motivate improvements

– Economies of scale allow to decrease cost and increase quality


OPEN

● Open Access !: free of cost and free of preconditions

● Open Content ? Can the content be reused as Open Educational Resources ?

● Open Source ? Is the system open to experimentation ?

● Open Space? Where are the Boundaries ?


Boundaries of the learning eventxMOOC cMOOC

Temporal fixed Potentially unlimited

Cultural One dominant voice Polyphonic

Organizational One institution in the center Network of institutions and invididuals

Technical Monolithic system Aggregation of tools

Domain Definite and independent Infinite and connected

Knowledge Theoretical content Situated context, process


MOOCs and social learning

● Social software as „the ability to speak into the context others have created“ (Siemens and Tittenberger)

● Learning spaces as stages for the orchestration of learning activities in specific roles as individuals, groups, communities

● Are these roles prescribed by the system or open for experimentation?


openHPI● hosted at the Hasso Plattner Institute in Potsdam (HPI),

Germany● Courses in English and German


OpenHPI: Technical Platform

● Based on CanvasLMS (Open Source LMS written in RubyOnRails)

● Private cloud infrastructure behind LoadBalancer

● Video streaming from Vimeo

openHPI – Course Format● Course content is split into 6 units

● Each unit is taught during one consecutive course week

● Learning material provided during a week consists of

– sequences of lecture recordings,

– self tests and weekly homework

– additional reading materials,

– dedicated discussion forums.

● Final exam is held in seventh course week

● Cumulated result of homework and final exam decides upon reception of openHPI certificate

11


openHPI courses

● In-Memory Data Management, Prof. Hasso Plattner. 13,126 registrations, 2,137 certificates

● Internetworking mit TCP/IP, Prof. Dr. Christoph Meinel, 9,891 registrations, 1,635 certificates

● Semantic Web Technologies, Dr. Harald Sack, 5,692 registrations, 784 certifactes

● Datenmanagement mit SQL, Prof. Dr. Felix Naumann, currently 6478 registrations

● Web-Technologien, Prof. Dr. Christoph Meinel


OpenHPI: insights on community management

● Leave questions unanswered for at least one day in order to allow student engament

● Answer questions that remain unanswered for 3-5 days in order to prevent student dissatisfaction

● Do not tolerate any dismissive behavior or bad manners. React friendly, but determined

● Self-regulative community: Users react to offenses and protect the teaching team


OpenHPI: degrees of participation

● Inactive● Passive● Reacting● Acting● Supervising / supporting

OpenHPI: Emergence of additional user types● Domain expert: active when his domain of expertise is the current course

topic; gives high quality answers and points out possible mistakes in the teaching material (including errata)

● Contributing user:

– provision of very detailed solutions to homework on private websites, where the sample solution of the teaching team was not detailed enough for all learners.

– implementation and distribution of tools for the solution of exercises with algorithmic or mathematical nature.

– generation and allocation of audio files.

– discussion triggers initiated by students.

● Users switch between roles and become active in specific contexts


Culture of participation and Meta-Design

● Concepts suggested by Gerhard Fischer● active participation and empowerment of a subject● Design guidelines for participative communities● „conceptualize, create, and evolve socio-technical environments

that not only technically enable and support users’ participation, but also successfully encourage it.“

G. Fischer. “Understanding, Fostering, and Supporting Cultures of Participation”. interactions, vol. 80, no. 3, 2011, pp. 42-53.

Gerhard Fischer and Elisa Giaccardi: Meta-Design: A Framework for the Future of End-User Development. In: In Lieberman, H., Paternò, F., Wulf, V. (Eds) (2004) End User Development - Empowering People to Flexibly Employ Advanced

Information and Communication Technology,:


Roles in a culture of participation

Source: Grünewald et. al.: openHPI - a Case-Study on the Emergence of two Learning Communities. Educon 2013

Design guidelines I: Support different levels of engagement

● 0: allow incremental discovery of the system● 1: allow peripheral participation● 2: give incentives for contributions (users are

responsible for knowledge construction) ● 3: grant privileges to highly involved

participants● 4: allow experiments that extend, transcend the

system

Design guidelines II: Support human-problem interaction

● Multiple choice questions assess remembering and understanding (referring to Blooms taxonomy)

● hands-on exercises allow much deeper practical involvement (application, analysis, evaluation)

● Exercises linked to concrete experience● Challenges that require creativity

Design guidelines III: Underdesign for emergent behaviour

● “allow the “owners of problems” to create the solutions themselves at use time” (Fischer)

● Encourage negotiation and discussion opportunities via channels internal and external to the system

● Allow connections to external tools (social networks, personal learning environments, e-portfolio systems)

Design guidelines IV: Reward and recognize contributions

● Support „social capital, reputation economies and gift cultures“

● Stackoverflow Q&A model:– Questions, answers and comments can be up-

and down-voted

– Users earn points and badges

Design guidelines VI: Co-evolution of artefacts and the community

● „Support the mutual cross-polination between the evolution of the communities and the resources for system developments“

● Community ownership● Seeding, evolutionary growth, and reseeding

(SER) model

Seeding, evolutionary growth, and reseeding (SER) model

Seed: „collection of domain knowledge that is designed to evolve at use time.“Evolutionary Growth: „users focus on solving a specific problem and creating problem-specific information“Reseeding: organize the contributions into a coherent whole, create a new seed


Conclusions: Technical

● From monolithic LMS to distributed SOA● Re-use state-of the art backend services

where available and scalable● Provide APIs that enables community-

developped clients for heterogenous client environments and integration with third-party tools (PLE, social networks) and external learning facilities


Conclusions: Conceptual

cMOOC and xMOOC not as dualistic opposition, but as challenge for creating underdesigned systems that encourage participation, experimentation and creativity


Thank you for the invitation and the attention!

[email protected]

Date post:	08-Jul-2015
Category:	Education
Upload:	emadrid-network
View:	399 times
Download:	2 times