{"id":670,"date":"2020-05-22T14:52:41","date_gmt":"2020-05-22T18:52:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/?p=670"},"modified":"2020-05-22T14:52:41","modified_gmt":"2020-05-22T18:52:41","slug":"what-will-it-take-to-make-moocs-better","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/what-will-it-take-to-make-moocs-better\/","title":{"rendered":"What Will it Take to Make MOOCs Better?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"Photo by\u00a0<\/a>NASA<\/a>\u00a0on\u00a0<\/a>Unsplash<\/a><\/p>\n

Prior to experiencing one of Coursera\u2019s MOOCs, the ideas that I had surrounding MOOCs were limited, other than to think that they were providing high-quality educational content to many people who might not otherwise have access. I did not blindly accept the claims of MOOCs\u2019 goals to \u201cdemocratize education,\u201d but I recognized significant strengths in the variety and quality of content, and the open access (as in \u201cfree\u201d) to these courses for people with<\/em> access to technology and digital literacy skills. However, after engaging in a critical inquiry with a team of peers on MOOCs: Barriers to Access <\/em>(Einarson, Goodes, McCarthy, Reid, & Samokishyn, 2020), as well as reviewing a presentation by another group of peers surrounding MOOCS out of the Khan Academy (Ambata-Villanueva, Kuipers, Monsell, & Pottinger, 2020), I have more concerns about the learning technology of MOOCs than I do about the opportunities that they afford learners.<\/p>\n

My greatest concerns surround the following three issues: the digital divide (device, internet, bandwidth), the content divide (language, culture, socially and culturally relevant pedagogy models), and digital literacy skills. These three issues make MOOCs more exclusive to English- speaking students, often university educated, who have access to technology and digital literacy skills (Rohs & Ganz, 2015; Watters, 2015; Weller, 2020). We have observed the strengths that emanate from the massive <\/em>element of the MOOC <\/em>acronym, however, the open<\/em> element of the acronym remains the most questionable to me of Massive Open Online Courses.<\/em> MOOCs are indeed open, largely free for people to take a course, yet part of the original openness<\/em> of MOOCs is that of open educational resources (OER) and open educational practices (OEP), which are not as prevalent in many of today\u2019s MOOC models (Weller, 2020). The difference between \u201copen\u201d and \u201cproprietary\u201d MOOCs have far-reaching consequences to educators and learners around the world (Ambata-Villanueva et al., 2020; Watters, 2015; Weller, 2020).<\/p>\n

One question in particular has resonated with me during this course of study, discussions, and critical inquiry: \u201cWhat could be done to make MOOCs better?\u201d I see a vital element of the answer to this question in the openness of MOOCs.<\/em> One missing element of MOOCs is the absence of local governments and communities funding or supporting MOOCs based on their cultural and pedagogical models (versus Western models), and in their languages (versus English)(Rohs & Ganz, 2015). In fact, there is a need to decolonize the content and language structures of MOOCs on many levels (Clement et al., 2012; Houlden & Veletsianos, 2019). Similarly, working to promote \u2018openness,\u2019 promoting the use of Creative Commons Licencing to make MOOCs more open internationally, to be adapted to very educational different needs and settings, would make MOOCs \u2018better\u2019 (Ambata-Villanueva et al, 2020; Weller, 2020). Weller (2020) posits that \u201cwhile we bemoan the fact that MOOC themselves are not really open in the sense of openly licensed, they do form part of a larger system, which helps drive openness\u201d (p. 133). Similarly, approaching the planning of MOOCs by moving beyond a \u201cmeans-end thinking\u201d (Boody, 2001, p. 7, in Selwyn, 2010, p. 68) and approaching the critical study of them through micro, messo, and macro levels, could make MOOCs better, having more of a \u2018democratizing\u2019 effect. These three levels, in the context of MOOCs, need to apply the \u201cunderstanding technology is \u2018socially-shaped\u2019 [and] therefore allows, for analyses that \u201copen up the black box of technology\u2019 (Biker et al., 1987) and consider the organizational, political, economic and cultural factors which pattern the design, development, production, marketing, implementation and <\/em>\u00a0\u2018end use\u2019 of a technological artefact\u201d (Selwyn, 2010, p. 69).<\/p>\n

For MOOCs to be \u2018better,\u2019 to democratize education, people around the world need access to technology, but equally as important is the social infrastructure of local communities that needs to support local creators, versus consumers, of MOOCs (Clement et al., 2012; Watters, 2015). Part of the social infrastructure of local communities involves supporting students\u2019 in the acquisition of digital literacy skills. When technological access is combined with supporting local social infrastructure, the potential for MOOCs to empower learners will have fewer barriers to access and become more of the democratizing force they were predicted to be in 2012. I appreciate Dron\u2019s (2014) reminder in speaking to teaching and learning technologies, that \u201cwe also need to be mindful that change is, for the most part, not a wave so much as a diverse rippling tide that fills in gaps very unevenly\u201d (p. 260).<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

References<\/p>\n

Ambata-Villanueva, Kuipers, S., \u00a0Monsell, C., Pottinger, S. (2020, May 15). Team 2: Critical Inquiry of Educational Video [Blog post]. Retrieved from https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0118\/team-2-critical-inquiry-of-educational-video\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Clement, A. H., Gurstein, M., Longford, G., Moll, M., Shade, L. R. (Eds.) (2012). Connecting Canadians: Investigations in Community Informatics<\/em>. Edmonton: Athabasca University Press.<\/p>\n

Dron, J. (2014).\u00a0Chapter 9: Innovation and Change: Changing how we Change.<\/a>\u00a0In Zawacki-Richter, O. & T. Anderson (Eds.),\u00a0Online distance education: Towards a research agenda<\/em><\/a>. Athabasca, AB: AU Press. Retrieved from http:\/\/www.aupress.ca\/books\/120233\/ebook\/09_Zawacki-Richter_Anderson_2014Online_Distance_Education.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n

Einarson, E., Goodes, J.,\u00a0 McCarthy, J. L., Reid, S., & Samokishyn, S. (2020, April 21). Addressing Barriers to Access in MOOCs: Critical Inquiry<\/a> [Blog post]. Retrieved from https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/addressing-barriers-to-access-in-moocs-critical-inquiry\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Houlden, S., & Veletsianos, G. (2019, March 28). A posthumanist critique of flexible online learning and its \u201canytime anyplace\u201d claims. British Journal of Educational Technology. <\/em>Retrieved from https:\/\/doi-org.ezproxy.royalroads.ca\/10.1111\/bjet.12779<\/a><\/p>\n

Rohs, M., & Ganz, M. (2015). MOOCs and the claim of education for all: A disillusion by empirical data. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning<\/em>, 16<\/em>(6), 1\u201319. doi<\/a>: 10.19173\/irrodl.v16i6.2033<\/a><\/p>\n

Selwyn, N. (2010). Looking beyond learning: notes towards the critical study of educational technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26<\/em>(1), 65-73. doi:10.1111\/j.13652729.2009.00338.x<\/a><\/p>\n

Watters, A. (2015, April 8). Edtech\u2019s inequalities [Blog post]. Retrieved from<\/p>\n

http:\/\/hackeducation.com\/2015\/04\/08\/inequalities<\/a><\/p>\n

Weller, M. (2020). 25 Years of Ed Tech.<\/em> Athabasca University Press. Retrieved from https:\/\/www.aupress.ca\/app\/uploads\/120290_99Z_Weller_2020-<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 25_Years_of_Ed_Tech.pdf<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Photo by\u00a0NASA\u00a0on\u00a0Unsplash Prior to experiencing one of Coursera\u2019s MOOCs, the ideas that I had surrounding MOOCs were limited, other than to think that they were providing high-quality educational content to many people who might not otherwise have access. I did… Continue Reading →<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":163,"featured_media":671,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-670","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lrnt526"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/670","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/163"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=670"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/670\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":673,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/670\/revisions\/673"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/671"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=670"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=670"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0125\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=670"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}