Tag: cMOOC

This is an archive of the 2013 version of ocTEL.

Difficulties researching the effectiveness of cMOOCs | You're the Teacher

Tags: MOOC, TEL, ocTEL, cMOOC, evaluation, GeorgeSiemens, StephenDownes, DaveCormierby: David Jennings

Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

MOOCs and Mobile Access

This is an excellent post  from Inge Ignatia de Waard on the impact of mobile access on learner interactions in a MOOC as part of her progress towards a PhD. I’ve added her slide deck below for you as this has some excellent findings and figures. I am also (still) reading Inge’s book ‘MOOC Yourself‘ and hope […]

Tagged with: , , , , ,

MOOCs and Beyond | eLearning

Tags: ocTEL, TEL, mooc, xMOOC, cMOOC, historyby: David Jennings

Tagged with: , , , , ,

Sketch of a cMOOC registration system JISC CETIS MASHe

Tags: cMOOC, MartinHawksey, registration, aggregation, ocTELby: David Jennings

Tagged with: , , , ,

Aggregation rumination – oldsmooc

Tags: cMOOC, MartinHawksey, YishayMor, aggregation, ocTELby: David Jennings

Tagged with: , , , ,

MOOC Reflections « OUseful.Info, the blog…


  • Tony Hirst attempts to see beyond/beneath/behind/whatever the hoopla about MOOCs to understand what elements of them might persist, what the relationship to OERs is, and to marketing for institutions and OER producers – David Jennings

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

course without boundaries approach of Jim Groom’s ds106, as recently aided and abetted by Alan Levine, also softens the edges of a traditionally offered course with its problem based syllabus and open assignment bank (particpants are encouraged to submit their own assignment ideas) and turns learning into something of a lifestyle choice

the role that “content” may or not play a role in this open course thing. Certainly, where participants are encouraged to discover and share resources, or where instructors seek to construct courses around “found resources”, an approach espoused by the OU’s new postgraduate strategy, it seems to me that there is an opportunity to contribute to the wider open learning idea by producing resources that can be “found”. For resources to be available as found resources, we need the following:

  1. Somebody needs to have already created them…
  2. They need to be discoverable by whoever is doing the finding
  3. They need to be appropriately licensed (if we have to go through a painful rights clearnance and rights payment model, the cost benefits of drawing on and freely reusing those resources are severely curtailed).
Whilst the running of a one shot MOOC may attract however many participants, the production of finer grained (and branded) resources that can be used within those courses means that a provider can repeatedly, and effortlessly, contribute to other peoples courses through course participants pulling the resources into those coure contexts. (It also strikes me that educators in one institution could sign up for a course offered by another, and then drop in links to their own applied marketing learning materials.)
If we think of the web in it’s dynamic and static modes (static being the background links that are part of the long term fabric of the web, dynamic as the conversation and link sharing that goes on in social networks, as well as the publication of “alerts” about new fabric (for example, the publication of a new blog post into the static fabric of the web is announced through RSS feeds and social sharing as part of the dynamic conversation)), then the MOOCs appear to be trying to run in a dynamic, broadcast mode. Whereas what interests me is how we can contribute to the static structure of the web, and how we can make better use of it in a learning context?
Rather than the ‘on-demand’ offering of OpenLearn, it seems that the broadcast model, and linear course schedule, along with the cachet of the instructors, were what appealed to a large population of demonstrably self-directed learners

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

by: David Jennings

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,