Journal of Adult Education Volume 42, Number 2, 2013 A New Framework for Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) Lindsie Schoenack Abstract The challenges that massive open online courses (MOOCs) bring to the learning arena spur adult educators to improve delivery. A framework for a new type of MOOC is presented to address some of the challenges presented by earlier models. This new MOOC, called a mesoMOOC, can bridge several challenges that hinder current effective delivery of MOOCs and utilize proven strategies in online learning to better imple- ment MOOCs. The framework for the mesoMOOC calls for MOOC designers to address the orientation process, embed a connectivist synchronous component to the classroom, provide online formative and summative assessment, and develop subsections within classes. Introduction accessible online resources” (p. 4). If one were to stop there, this definition might fit the current definition of In spite of the development of massive open online a MOOC. However, McAuley et al. continue on to say courses (MOOCs) as a form of adult learning, adult that “perhaps most importantly, a MOOC builds on the educators as a whole have not been at the forefront of active engagement of several hundred to several ensuring that effective pedagogical and andragogical thousand ‘students’ who self-organize their principles have been embedded in the process. Thus, participation according to learning goals, prior not all forward movement has been characterized as knowledge and skill, and common interests” (p. 4). progress. Linda Morris (2013), the President of the The research on MOOCs is minimal yet growing. American Association for Adult and Continuing The research shows a clear delineation in what a Education (AAACE), acknowledges that MOOCs are MOOC of 2008 and what a MOOC of 2013 represent. gaining ground as a means of reaching adult learners. In 2008, Siemens’ theory of Connectivism became She encourages educators of adults to enter the the basis for development of the “CCK08”, which is discussion that is already taking place and challenges us now referred to as the first MOOC and was delivered to address the ineffective practices of MOOCs. through the University of Manitoba (Mackness, Mak, & McAuley, Stewart, Siemens, and Cormier (2010) Williams, 2010). This MOOC was designed with “the explain that a MOOC “integrates the connectivity of notion that large numbers of participants (thousands) social networking, the facilitation of an acknowledged might gain significant benefits from participating in a expert in a field of study, and a collection of freely course” (O’Toole, 2013, p. 2). 98 cMOOCs very different perspective than cMOOcs. A student comes to the xMOOC expecting most construction of “Connectivist MOOCs (cMOOCs) follow connec- the learning experience to have been done by the course tivist principles, where large numbers of participants providers (O’Toole, 2013). self-assemble collections of knowledge, learning Providers like Coursera, EdX, and Udacity have activities and curriculum from openly available sources brought the xMOOC to the masses through a sustain- across publicly open platforms” (O’Toole, 2013, p. 1). able platform delivery and accessibility (Mallon, 2013). The idea behind cMOOCs is that they focus on collabo- These MOOCs are characterized as behaviorist edu- rative education through knowledge creation as opposed cation in practice. Aoki (2013) recognized that “ped- to duplication of knowledge already known (Siemens, agogical paradigms have shifted from behaviourist to 2012, para. 3). The assumption then is that with collab- cognitivist, and then back to constructivist throughout oration the greatest benefit occurs when more people the history of e-learning, the pendulum has now been put in more effort and thus work more intelligently swinging back to the early days of behaviourism” (para. (O’Toole, 2013, p. 1). 1). The Challenges of cMOOCs Although cMOOCs embed and practice many effective techniques for reaching participants, there are a number of challenges that cMOOC design and implementation should address. Kop (2011) noted that: The motivational factors in a traditional adult education classroom are very important in learners…. If confidence levels are low, it is not likely that a person will take up connectivist learning. The technology itself or the activity the learner is taking on could form a barrier. (p. The Challenges of xMOOCs 22) Another challenge of the cMOOC lies in the According to Kalz and Specht (2013), xMOOCs inability to effectively reach a massive audience. “represent an instructional paradigm oriented on Stewart (2013) points out that with the cMOOC “the classical lectures with very little interaction oppor- network effect of peer-oriented communications and tunities”(p. 6). Rodriguez (2013) further states that “x- connections and process-focused knowledge generation MOOCs are based on a tutor-centric model that estab- may thus be difficult to contain entirely, particularly at lishes a one-to-many relationship to reach massive scale” (p. 8). numbers” (p. 71). The capability of xMOOCs to reach Although the first MOOC was a cMOOC in nature, the larger audiences that Rodriguez emphasizes allows “recent media attention has popularized the term greater ability for scale that remains a challenge for MOOC to refer to xMOOCs” (Kay, Reimann, Diebold, cMOOCs today. & Kummerfeld, 2013, p. 2). The MOOC that we know Those MOOCs that are hyped in media up to now today in practice is the xMOOC. “Extension MOOCs are “based on a very old and outdated behaviourist (xMOOCs) are where traditional institutions use online pedagogy, relying primarily on information trans- platforms to extend access to onsite learning activities, mission, computer marked assignments and peer resources and events, which are typically based upon assessment” (Bates, 2012, para. 7). Within this delivery the transmission of content and verification of reception model, there is a packaging of information as if the model”(O’Toole, 2013, p. 1). xMOOCs start from a student were a consumer (Gur & Wiley, 2007, p. 1) 99 Aoki (2013) challenges developers of xMOOCs in only if these criticisms serve to increase the effec- this delivery model. tiveness of this new phenomenon. Since the introduction of e-learning it has been Kalz and Specht (2013) state that “from our touted that the technology should be used to perspectives the differentiation between the two personalize learning so that learners of diverse archetypes xMOOCs and cMOOCs only represents two backgrounds, prior knowledge, learning styles, extreme positions without taking into account the real learning preferences, skills and competencies, challenges of the learning design of such large-scale work/life conditions, etc. can learn in the most online courses” (para 7). Taking Morris’ challenge to effective way according to their needs (para. 1). address the overarching principles of these two MOOCs xMOOCs are not inherently known for their differ- and O’Toole’s (2013) suggestion that a blending of the entiation and instructional design to address different two might be the solution, the framework suggested learning styles. This leaves a challenge for instructional below can address some of these ineffective practices designers to address within future development of by creating a mesoMOOC. The prefix meso refers to MOOCs. “the middle” (dictionary.com) between the cMOOC, Coursera co-founder, Andrew “Ng’s vision for xMOOC, and andragogy. MOOCs and higher education appears to center around A mesoMOOC is then a MOOC that bridges the assumptions that increasing numbers has no effect on scalability that the xMOOC brings forth and incor- learning except to increase the numbers of those porates the effective pedagogy from the connectivist engaged in the process” (Stewart, 2013, p. 5). However, tradition of the cMOOC while also suggesting effective replicating ineffective pedagogy is not in the best practices from online learning and andragogy. interest of learners. Although a good foundation from Rodriguez (2012) identified that the average age of which to build, the MOOC in its current form should participants from various MOOCS in recent years was not be replicated by different providers across the 30 and greater. Thus a significant number of MOOC world. participants are characterized as adult learners. MOOC designers should capitalize on the andragogical principles that adult learners want to learn what they need to know at the time as well as building on the experience and knowledge that they bring to the learning environment (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2011). Considerations for mesoMOOCs Important considerations in designing, developing, and delivering an effective mesoMOOC include considering the orientation process, embedding a connectivist synchronous component to the class, providing online formative and summative assessment, Addressing the Gaps and developing subsections within the class. “Many of the current MOOC initiatives, both Address the Orientation Process cMOOCs and xMOOCs, are instances of how not to be teaching online” (Naidu, 2013, p. 1). There has been a The first principle of the mesoMOOC will be to great deal of criticism of the current structure of address the orientation process. According to research, MOOCS. The MOOC environment can be improved students in online classes more successfully learn the 100 content when they participate in regulatory activities such as orientation, planning the course of action, evaluating the learning product, and monitoring all activities (Azevedo, Guthrie, & Seibert, 2004). Milligan, Margaryan, and Littlejohn (2013) wonder whether a learner has to learn how to learn in a MOOC (p. 157). Establishing a framework of expectations allows a learner to more effectively participate and perhaps influence level of confidence. Milligan et al. (2013) note that confidence, prior experience, and motivation influenced engagement within a MOOC (p. 157). Adults have the potential to build upon their prior experience (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2011, p. 64) thus providing an opportunity for growth in their con- Embed Connectivist Synchronous Component fidence based on a differentiated learning environment provided within the MOOC. Kop (2011) also found that Morris (2013) stated that “learning occurs where the confidence was affected “if confidence levels are low, interaction takes place.” Through interpretation Morris it is not likely that a person will take up connectivist referred to the interaction between the social and learning. The technology itself, or the activity the instructional presence within a teaching and learning learner is taking on could form a barrier” (p. 22). environment. Kop, Fournier, and Mak (2011) uphold Another area that should also be included in the this assertion based on their research stating that orientation process of a MOOC is to address a potential “meaningful learning occurs if social and teaching digital literacy skills gap. “It goes without saying that presence forms the basis of design, facilitation, and the lack of familiarity with the digital skills privileged direction of cognitive processes for the realization of and rewarded within the MOOC will limit personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile participation” (McAuley et al., 2010, p.51). Creating an learning outcomes” (p. 88). The educators of adults environment whereby a learner upon entry into a entrance into the world of MOOCs can and should MOOC can learn the platform and the process for address what is already known about adult learning, successful engagement can have a positive impact on which includes the aspects of reflection and discussion student confidence and experience. as significant forms of learning. It becomes clear that if people are learning on Clara and Barbera (2013) also suggest the need for these vast, disparate information networks, they “both didactically and technologically, opportunities for need the ability to understand the intricacies of joint activity” (p. 133). Further, “with the rise of the networks in order to negotiate their technology, complexity is growing too, there is one structures. The need for high levels of critical human factor that is now more than ever possible across capabilities… is important to be able to access borders, beliefs and time, that is, dialogue” (deWaard, the information and resources that are relevant 2012, p. 38). True to andragogical principles “that for and required. (Kop, 2011, p. 23). many kinds of learning, the richest resources for A study by Darabi and Lin (2013) observed that the learning resides in the adult learners themselves” quality of the discussion online was significantly (Knowles, Holton & Swanson, 2011, p. 64). Knowles et enhanced by posting examples and limiting the number al. challenge us to provide the room for adults to of postings (p. 21). Laying out clear expectations for synthesize and connect with others. The challenge for students in the MOOC environment can have a direct educators of adults should be to overcome the time and impact on the quality of the work. space challenges in connecting adults with each other 101 through platform and instructional design that support mentioned the need for some sort of supports to make this type of learning. the learning more effective to an individual” (para. 7). A veteran MOOC participant can guide and support a Provide Online Assessment student through the process. Mackness, Waite, Roberts, and Lovegrove (2013) found in their study on MOOCs Kay et al. (2013) challenge the MOOC community that support for learners from a number of MOOC to “engage with the substantial challenges of online veterans provided significant value by serving as role formative and summative assessment” (p. 7). The most models and guides for less experienced MOOC important part of learning is achieved through teacher, learners. Thus, the one-way flow of information that peer and self-assessment; students want to know how characterizes traditional learning environments begins they are doing, for their own benefit as well as for to be interrupted, and the teacher begins to be de- illustrating their worth to others (O’Toole, 2013). centered as the core arbiter of the learning experience” Yet Bates (2012) holds that MOOCs are unable to (Stewart, 2013, p. 10). handle assessment on a grander scale for those courses This new structure then allows the new framework that require critical thinking and higher order thinking to be implemented effectively utilizing both faculty and skills. In order to address assessment effectively, a new student leaders to assist in the assessment process. It framework will need to be addressed so as to ensure also provides a means for smaller groups within the that human resources can manage the work load. In larger class to engage in the process of connectivity. order to implement assessment effectively within MOOCs, the final recommendation of developing sub- Conclusion sections with classes will be pivotal. “The real crunch point in the scalability challenge is assessment and As promising as they are, MOOCs are only as feedback” (O’Toole, 2013, p. 2). strong as they are created to be. The mesoMOOC framework challenges current and future producers of Develop Subsections within Classes MOOCs to embed principles which are known to be effective in reaching adult learners. Future research Splitting learners into smaller groups and utilizing should focus on implementing the principles above veteran MOOC participants to serve as peer leaders within a mesoMOOC while evaluating their effective- within the subsections can address some of the prob- ness for learning within this new MOOC environment. lems with scalability while allowing for group interac- tion. Mackness, Mak, and Williams (2010) found that: References Autonomy, diversity, openness and connectedness interactivity are indeed Aoki, K. (2012, June). Paradoxes between personal- characteristics of a MOOC, but that they present ization and massification. Paper presented at the paradoxes which are difficult to resolve in an meeting of Pixel International Conference: The online course. The more autonomous, diverse Future of Education, Florence, Italy. and open the course, and the more the Bates, T. (2012, August 5). What’s right and what’s connected the learners, the more the potential wrong about Coursera style MOOCs. Retrieved for their learning to be limited by the lack of from http://www.tonybates.ca/2012/08/05/whats- structure, support and moderation normally right-and-whats-wrong-about-coursera-style-moocs/ associated with an online course and the more Clara, M., & Barbera, E. (2013). Learning online: they seek to engage in traditional groups as Massive open online courses (MOOCs), connec- opposed to an open network. (p. 266) tivism and cultural psychology. Distance Edu- Additionally, Aoki (2013) reflected that “many cation, 34(1), 129-136. participants (teachers and students included) in MOOCs deWaard, I. (2012) Merging MOOCs and mLearning 102 for increased learner interactions. International Mallon, M. (Ed). (2013). Internet resources. Public Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 4(4), 34- Services Quarterly, 9, 46-53. 46. McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Siemens, G., & Cormier, D. Gur, B. S. & Wiley, D. A. (2007) Instructional (2010). The MOOC model for digital practice. technology and objectification. Canadian Journal of Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles Learning & Technology, 33(3). Retrieved from /MOOC_Final.pdf http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/151 Morris, L. (2013, November). Move over for MOOCs Kalz, M., & Specht, M. (2013, September) If MOOCS (massive open online courses): A global issue. are the answer–did we ask the right questions? Roundtable, AAACE Conference, Lexington, KY. Implications for the design of large-scale open Naidu, S. (2013). Learning about learning and teaching online courses (Working Paper No.2013/25). The online. Distance Education, 34(1), 1-3. Netherlands: Maastricht School of Management. O’Toole, R. (2013). Pedagogical strategies and Kay, J., Reimann, P., Diebold, E., & Kummerfeld, B. technologies for peer assessment in Massively Open (2013, May/June). MOOCs: So many learners, so Online Courses (MOOCs). Discussion Paper. much potential… IEEE Intelligent Systems, 28(3), University of Warwick, Coventry, UK: University 2-9. of Warwick. (Unpublished). Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. Rodriguez, C.O. (2012, May 7). MOOCs and the AI- (2011). The adult learner. Burlington, MA: Stanford like courses: Two successful and distinct Elsevier. course formats for massive open online courses. Kop, R. (2011). The challenges to connectivist learning European Journal of Open Distance and E Learn- on open online networks: Learning experiences ing, 15(2). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/ during a massive open online course. International materials/contrib/2012/Rodriguez.htm Review of Research in Open and Distance Rodriguez, O. (2013). The concept of openness behind Learning, 12(3), 19-38. c and x-MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses). Kop, R., Fournier, H., & Mak, J. S. F. (2011). A Open Praxis, 5(1), 67-73. pedagogy of abundance or a pedagogy to support Siemens, G. (2012, June 3). What is the theory that human beings? Participant support on massive open underpins our MOOCS? Retrieved from http:// online courses. The International Review of www.elearnspace.org/blog/2012/06/03/what-is-the- Research in Open and Distance Learning. 12(7), theory-that-underpins-our-MOOCs/ 74-93. Stewart, B. (2013). Massiveness + openness = New Mackness, J., Mak, S., & Williams, R. (2010). The literacies of participation? Journal of Online ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. In Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 228-238. Networked Learning Conference, Aarlborg (pp. 266-274). Retrieved from http://www.lancs.ac.uk/ fss/organisations/netlc/past/nlc2010/abstracts/Mac Lindsie Schoenack is a doctoral student at North kness.html Dakota State University in Occupational and Adult Mackness, J. Waite, M, Roberts, G., & Lovegrove, E. Education and is the Director of Business Partner- (2013). Learning in a small, task-oriented, connec- ships and Continuing Education at the University of tivist MOOC: Pedagogical issues and implications Mary, Bismarck, ND. for higher education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(4), 140-159. 103