Conference Proceedings - The Online, Open and Flexible Higher

Transcription

Conference Proceedings
The Online, Open and Flexible Higher Education Conference
Hosted by FernUniversität in Hagen,
29-30 October 2015
Transforming Higher Education in the 21st century;
Transforming Higher Education in the 21st century;
"Innovating pathways to Learning and Continuous Professional Education”
The Online, Open and Flexible Higher Education Conference 2015 - Proceedings
Table of contents
Hagen Message “Transforming higher education in the 21st century; innovating
pathways to learning and continuous professional education”
5
Conference organisation
Organising Committee
Programme Committee
EADTU Office
14
14
16
Agbu Jane-frances, Vincent Ado Tenebe, Okechukwu Okafor, Dahunsi Opeyemi
Sharing the Experiences of National Open University of Nigeria in its journey towards
understanding and embracing OERs
17
Aydin Sinan, Ozturk Aylin
Segmenting learners in online learning environments
28
Bang Jørgen, Dalsgaard Christian, Kjær Arne, O’Donovan Maria
MOOCs without the M: Open Online Courses as an educational strategy for Opening
up Education in smaller language areas
39
Birkenkrahe Marcus
Building Graduate-Level, Gamified xMOOCs In Moodle
56
Bollmann Alexander, Otto Daniel
Experiencing the deadlock – understanding climate change negotiations using
simulation games
74
Brunton James, Brown Mark, Costello Eamon, Delaney Lorraine, Fox Seamus,
Galvin Ciara, Lonergan Nuala
Free, Focused and Flexible: A Suite of Online Transition Tools for Supporting
Student Success
88
Crosta Lucilla, Manokore Viola, Gray Morag
Exploring the development of authentic online learning communities in an
EdD programme
2
105
Ertl Bernhard
Supporting and evaluating competency based learning scenarios by the university’s
blended learning strategy
125
Ewan Christine
Assurance of higher education standards in disaggregated models of student
Participation and course delivery
141
Feliz Tiberio, Goig Rosa, Santoveña Sonia
Lessons learned about communication
157
Feliz Tiberio, Ricoy Mari Carmen, Feliz Sálvora
How Higher Education Uses Social Media
168
Firat Mehmet, Kuş Gökhan, Uzuner Kubilay
Development Process of Animation Supported Video Modules for MOOCs
182
Gómez Palomo Rubén Sebastián, Martín Cuadrado Ana María,
Cabrerizo Lorite Francisco Javier, Sáez López José Manuel,
López Gómez Ernesto, Pérez Sánchez Lourdes
A Methodological Teaching Guide to Facilitate the Design of LifeLong Learning
Centers in Southern Neighbouring Area Countries
190
Guàrdia Lourdes, Appel Christine, Girona Cris, Padilla Rodríguez Brenda Cecilia,
Witthaus Gabi
Learning from current trends in online and blended degree education to prepare for
the future
204
Loviscach Jörn, Mulligan Brian, Uhl Matthias
Empowering lecturers: How to produce low-cost MOOCs
223
Moser Steffen, Bärtele Stefanie, Wunderlich Kathrin, Gröger Gabriele, Slomka Frank,
Schumacher Hermann
Learners' Requirements on E-Learning Platforms from a Technical Perspective
Supported by a Survey-Based Study
233
Müller Adrian, Karapanos Marios
A Simple Method for Gathering and Analyzing Customized Individual Data Beyond
the Borders of Learning Management Systems
3
251
Oleinik Tatyana, Prokopenko Andrey, Zub Stanislav, Andrushenko Olena,
Berezhna Svetlana, Boichuk Yurii
Digital Technologies for Professional Development at H. S. Skovoroda Kharkiv National
Pedagogical University
270
O’Reilly Naoimh, Brady Malcolm
Learning Management Systems and Virtual Learning Environments: Changing the nature
of academic work?
278
Paaso Leena
ICT-supported Actions in Creating Cooperative Online Learning Environments for Master
Programs
291
Rodríguez-Pérez D., Cortés E., Arias-Zugasti M., Santa Marta C., Desco M.M.,
Antoranz J.C.
European Network for Open Courses Peer Reviewed Quality Assessment: a collaborative
proposal
308
Snow Kathy
Blending in while standing out: a case study of blended learning design for in-community
Indigenous teacher education
314
Thelen Tobias, Emke Martina
The OHN-KursPortal – Opening up higher education to adults with tutor-supported
online courses
328
Thorne Nathalie, Sheridan-Ross Jakki, Hewson Edmund
Empowering Online Learning: changing the shape of Distance Learning at Leeds Beckett
University
345
Venturini Ilaria, Oliviero Rosario
Lifelong Learning in Web 3.0 Environments
361
Vieules Marie Bénédicte, Cohen-Bouhacina Touria, Cormier Eric
Innovative training strategy: the training platforms program of Bordeaux University
380
Zöserl Eva, Reif Josef
Improving Flexibility by Enriching Courses with Web Conferencing – Three Case Studies
4
390
Papers selected for the Open Learning Journal
Online distance higher education: access, graduates and employability
Lorraine Delaney | Margaret Farren
Dublin City University, Ireland
Network versus Hierarchy. The Governance of Knowledge transfer within University-Business
Collaboration
Dr. Boris Becker | Cornelia Eube
FernUniversität Hagen, Germany
A pedagogical model for Science Education through Blended Learning
Jose Bidarra(1) | Ellen Rusman(2)
Universidade Aberta, Portugal(1) | Open Universiteit, Netherlands(2)
Cross-institutional development of sharable learning technology tools for flexible accounting
education
Luke Fannon(1) | Orlaith Kelly(1) | Mario MacBlain(2) | Damien Raftery(3) | Susan Brennan(3)
Athlone Institute of Technology(1) | Dundalk Institute of Technology(2) | Institute of
Technology Carlow(3)
The Open Learning Journal will be published at the end of 2016.
5
The online, open and flexible higher education conference 2015
“Transforming higher education in the 21st century; innovating pathways to
learning and continuous professional education”
Hagen Message, 1 November 2015
EADTU and its members contribute to European objectives like:
-
widening access to higher education, especially by open and flexible education
regional innovation by tailor-made solutions for enterprises and professional
development
open education initiatives
international collaboration and mobility
At a moment, when strategic decisions are to be taken on Higher education in Europe,
EADTU adds a new dimension to the European Higher Education Area.
1. The changing pedagogical landscape
New modes of teaching and learning, based on ICT and new media, will change the
landscape of higher education in three areas of provision:
-
Bachelor and master degree studies change from face to face education to blended
learning, combining traditional teaching formats with e-learning. With blended
learning, higher education institutions expect to enhance the quality and
effectiveness of education and to deal better with increasing student numbers.
Degree education should be innovated by extending and strengthening the classroom
with a virtual environment.
-
Continuing education and continuing professional development (CPD) are important
to transfer and valorise scientific knowledge for innovation in enterprises and for
regional development. The internet creates flexibility, by which students can learn
6
anytime from anywhere in the region or in the world, fit to the needs of students
combining study and a professional life.
-
Open education brings courses to the public domain as is the case with OERs (course
content) and MOOCs (a complete learning experience). Online education has created
the possibility of large-scale open education. Open education (OER, MOOCs) is
important to as a service to society and to share knowledge with citizens as an
emancipatory activity.
These are the main pillars for the next developments in higher education. By online
provisions, the areas of continuing education, continuous professional development and
open education will expand drastically.
All belong to the mission of 21th century universities. Higher education institutions will
profile themselves in degree education, continuing education and open education.
At the system level, governments should stimulate and accelerate a balanced development
in these three areas.
As a follow-up of the Changing Pedagogical Landscape study, EADTU will extend the study to
other countries and report qualitative trend studies very two years.
2. Short learning programmes
As announced already on the Summit 2015 with the European Commission, EADTU has
prepared a Memorandum of Understanding between the European open and distance
teaching universities, confirming their intent to promote short learning programmes (SLP) in
their educational provisions and to collaborate on the development and delivery of SLP’s.
SLP’s respond to the needs for flexible higher education in Europe, especially with regard to
the area of continuous education and continuous professional development. Flexible
education is the only way forward to meet sustainably the EU 2020 objectives and to
improve skills and employability all over Europe.
Open and distance teaching universities will collaborate with regard to SLP’s, aiming at:
7
-
the mutual recognition of modules or courses, leading to exemptions when students
register for SLP’s or for degree programmes at one of the collaborating universities;
-
the development of joint SLP-programmes with a joint award, certificate or diploma
with integrated mobility between partner universities. Ultimately,
-
SLP’s can also be (alternative) tracks in joint bachelor or master programmes.
SLP’s can also contain work-based learning or internships involving university-business
collaboration.
3. Diversified educational pathways
Educational pathways have become more diversified. Apart from the direct path from school
to university and employment, personal biographies are becoming increasingly varied,
switching between employment and studies or simultaneously working and learning parttime. Modern university systems are dealing with students, completing a (short) degree in
computer science or economics at the age of 33 after vocational training and ten years of
working experience; 17-years old secondary school pupils engaged in studies of mathematics
parallel to school; a 62-year old student who – although chronically ill – completes two
degree programmes and doctoral studies in eight year; the student engaged in street work in
India who simultaneously studies at an open university in Europe; the bank clerk without
Abitur or equivalent who completes his bachelor degree and subsequently his master degree
in business administration and economics.
Students combining work and/or family obligations with studying is subject to other general
conditions than traditional students, which requires universities to put in place a different
organisational structure to offer them guidance and follow-up. Only new modes of teaching
and learning can be integrated in such worlds of working and living.
The diversity of demands for education requires diversity of learning opportunities- with
adequate structures.
Universities will increasingly deal with the recognition/accreditation of achievements,
knowledge and skills acquired outside the university.
8
4. MOOCs and OpenupEd
MOOCs are courses designed for large numbers of participants, which can be accessed by
participants from anywhere in the world as long as an internet connection is available to
them. MOOCs are open to everyone without formal entry qualifications, and offer a
full/complete course experience online for free. MOOCs contribute to core the mission of
universities, sharing education with all citizens by open accessibility (open education),
transferring and valorising innovative knowledge to enterprises, and formally or informally
integrating MOOCs as an enriching learning experience in blended degree education.
Hence, key objectives of institutions and governments concerning MOOCs are:
-
Academic knowledge sharing with citizens in society at large:
-
Knowledge transfer and valorisation for innovative enterprises:
-
MOOCS to enrich the learning experience in degree programmes,
Although MOOCs mainly have been conceived as a form of open education (the first
objective), from an educational policy perspective these three objectives are important.
Business models for MOOCs differ according to these areas,
MOOCs were originally conceived as open courses for use in the US and worldwide, in one
language only: massive means worldwide for people who read English. But, language
frontiers are hindering a thorough reach-out of MOOCs to many European regions.
Hence, in European countries the development, delivery and usage of MOOCs should be
stimulated by:
-
Supporting the development of MOOCs in universities in each country, using
innovative models of learning design
-
Organising the delivery of MOOCs, through national platforms where needed,
-
Activating the national and regional use of MOOCs in open education, flexible
continuing education and CPD and in degree education.
9
Activating the usage of MOOCs by participants is a necessary condition for the future
success of MOOCs-provisions. This requires that professional networks, regional
development organisations, cities as well as civil society organisations close to the citizens
are involved, bridging the gap between MOOCs and users of MOOCs in different contexts.
Currently, these issues are discussed in the OpenupEd.
5. EMPOWERing universities
The EMPOWER programme of EADTU is capitalizing on the assets of EADTU members with
regard to new modes of teaching and learning. As suggested by the European Commission,
the principal objective is to accelerate the implementation of new modes of teaching and
learning in higher education institutions European-wide. The experience of EADTU members
will benefit the entire tertiary education system in European countries.
Today, EADTU can report that we have installed twelve expert groups, consisting of more
than 80 niche experts across the membership:
•
Institutional policies and frameworks for online teaching and learning
•
Student-centered online/blended curriculum and course development and design
•
Knowledge resources, e-libraries, knowledge networks
•
Student support and guidance online (incl. learning communities/networks)
•
ICT support, learning environment and educational support services
•
Assessment (incl. learning analytics), examinations, certification
•
On campus online/blended teaching and learning
•
Open and flexible distance education (incl. strategies, organisation, business models,
marketing)
•
Education and training on demand (incl. CPD, university-business collaboration, nondegree courses)
•
Transnational education (incl. collaborative curricula and mobility)
•
OERs and MOOCs (incl. educational design and their use)
•
Governmental policies (incl. funding, incentives, quality assurance and accreditation)
10
These expert groups will collaborate with research and innovation groups in the
membership, e.g. the Welten Institute in the Netherlands, the Institute of Educational
Technology in the UK, the National Institute for Digital Learning in Ireland and the e/Learn
Centre in Spain. Some expert groups will seek cooperation with other specific centres of
expertise in universities across Europe.
Also, this year preparations take place in universities for pilot actions with regard to setting
up staff training and management seminars, led by the institutions concerned. The
EMPOWER expert groups deliver additional niche expertise in situ, according to a prior needs
analysis. Consequently, the institutions concerned prepare an innovation plan for their
institution. In a later stage, the implementation of this plan will be evaluated by a small
assessment team.
The EMPOWER expert pools will also operate as academic groups, exchanging innovative
practice and preparing joint publications as well as course material.
EMPOWER is operating as a direct response to the new priorities of the European
Commission for Europe 2020, which will be discussed later this year by the Council of
Ministers, notably contributing to the achievement of benchmarks related to:
-
the sustainable investment, performance and efficiency of higher education
systems;
-
the support of teaching staff by professional development
-
open and innovative education and training
-
inclusive education, equality and non-discrimination.
6. Actions for refugees
Hundreds of thousands of refugees arrive in Europe or stay in camps in neighbourhood
countries. Figures about their educational background are unknown. The future of refugees
is unsure, but surely it will have an impact on the future of our societies. Education is a
vehicle to mutual understanding, shared citizenship and social emancipation. Access to
higher education is primordial for an enhanced insertion in society, especially for social
11
mobility and employment.
Refugees should be reached where they are, also in refugee/asylum centres, etc.,
irrespective of their personal future (either they stay in the EU or they return to their home
country). In both cases, there is a tremendous added social, economical and political value.
Higher education institutions are challenged to provide accessible and flexible educational
provisions for refugees, fit to the refugees' needs and living conditions, at different levels
and areas:
- higher education/university degree courses at a distance/online for refugees, who have the
competences to enter these courses
- short learning programmes (SLP's) at the university level on Europe (history, policy, politics,
sociology, economics, social policies) and on subjects which increase the employability of
refugee students (business, health care, teacher training).
- language courses (EU languages)
- continuing professional development in some areas, especially where there is a need of
qualifications
- open education for free (e.g. MOOCs)
Besides degree programmes, members are prepared to organise short learning programmes
leading to awards (1-5 ECTS), certificates (6 to 14 ECTS) and diplomas (15 ECTS or more). All
members are used to provide education for large student numbers. Some of the members
have experience with partnerships in developing countries or with higher education in
precarious environments with little facilities (a.o. printed material, mobile learning). EADTU
has coordinated a large number of European projects (EAC) concerning distance education
provisions, quality assurance, OER, MOOCs, networked curricula, mobility, entrepreneurship,
innovation, etc.. EADTU is prepared to mobilize its members for large scale actions of the EC.
This also corresponds with the mission of open and distance teaching universities.
The Open University (OU) already teams up with The British Council to deliver academic
programmes to displaced Syrian refugees who have temporarily settled in Jordan and
12
Lebanon. English, French and German language skills will be taught in classrooms by the
British Council to approximately 3000 Syrians and disadvantaged Jordanian students, with
around 300 of the highest achieving students progressing to Open University accredited
online degree courses. There will also be opportunities for at least 400 students who have
completed a language course to continue their studies by taking a short online course on the
OU’s social learning platform, FutureLearn. While not accredited, these free short courses
provide learners with knowledge and skills that will help them to earn a living or find a job
when they return to Syria.
The European Commission should take a cross-sectoral initiative (DG's NEAR, EAC, EPL,
MARKT, DEV, etc), embracing a pragmatic step by step approach (not waiting until all DG's
are on board, starting with willing universities). The general approach should not be
fragmented but cohesive and aim at a long-term, large-scale policy. However, it should start
in a very short term to keep the momentum (there is need now). Initiatives should respond
to the direct needs of refugees and focus on:
- the delivery side ( bringing courses to refugee students, printed or online facilities, learning
communities, assessment facilities,...). The European Commission should support large-scale
and long term strategies.
- the students' side (awareness raising, reduced fees, ICT equipment, local organisation or
study centres in refugee/asylum centres).
EADTU members will make and inventory of relevant courses and programmes, Apart from
their involvement in national initiatives, they are open to cooperation with the European
Commission on short and long term action plans. EADTU members develop and deliver state
of the art distance/online education courses in all EU languages, some of them also in
Arabic. Many of the members organise MOOCs (English, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese,
Turkish, etc.). They have also experience in integrating migrant student categories in the
university.
13
7. Research and innovation
The EADTU membership hosts the most advanced educational research and innovation
centres in Europe, e.g. In the UK, Spain, the Netherlands, Germany and other member
states. It is strategically important that these institutes join forces in order to develop
synergies.
Of course, collaboration exists today, driven by individual researchers.
With the respective institutes, we have to evaluate what can be done more structurally with
regard to:
-
Collaboration in mission-related R&I, i.e. in the field of online, open and flexible
education. This is mainly educational research (e.g. learning design), but eventually
also sociological, economical and policy research.
-
Collaboration through joint international graduate schools in these fields (example:
the graduate school for OER research)
-
Other instruments for collaboration like staff exchange (Erasmus+, strand one; Marie
Curie actions); joint research programmes (Marie Curie), joint doctoral programmes
(Marie Curie)., European R&I projects (Horizon 2020)
Specific attention should be given to part time (distance) PhD students (who might bring in
their professional context)
Collaboration should strengthen the (1) (national) research agenda of the participating
members; (2) synergies and new approaches in the field; (3) an international experience for
all PhD students and researchers involved; (4) an increased number of international projects,
publications and (joint, double) doctorates.
EADTU will publish the educational research programmes and an inventory of publications
and PhD theses on its website.
14
Conference organisation
Organising Committee






Helmut Hoyer, FernUniversität in Hagen
Heike Brand, FernUniversität in Hagen
Franziska Demmer, FernUniversität in Hagen
Patric Albrecht, FernUniversität in Hagen
George Ubachs, EADTU
Anouk Lennaerts, EADTU
Programme Committee

















Helmut Hoyer, FernUniversität in Hagen, Germany
Herbert Kalb, Johannes Kepler Universität Linz, Austria
Noël Vercruysse, StoHO, Belgium
Jan Lojda, CADUV, Czech Republic
Constantinos Christou, Open University of Cyprus
Arne Kjaer, Danish Association of Open Universities (DAOU), Denmark
Fanny Aguirre de Morreira, Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja, Ecuador
Sirje Virkus, Tallinn University, Estonia
Antoine Rauzy, FIED, France
Vasilis Kardasis, Hellenic Open University, Greece
Seamus Fox, NIDL, Ireland
Maria Amata Garito, Uninettuno - International Telematic University, Italy
Kobi Metzer, Open University Israel
Ilmars Slaidins, Riga Technical University, Latvia
Danguole Rutkauskiene, Kaunas University of Technology, Lithuania
Goran Turk, Slovenian Rectors’ conference, Slovenia
Anja Oskamp, Open University, The Netherlands
15











Andrzej Wodecki, Polski Uniwersytet Wirtualny, Poland
Jan Kusiak, AGH - University of Science and Technology, Poland
Paulo Dias, Universidade Aberta, Portugal
Natalia Tikhomirova, Moscow State University of Economics (MESI), Russia
Mikulás Huba, Slovak University of Technology, Slovakia
Josep Planell, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC), Spain
Alejandro Tiana Ferrer (UNED), Spain
Marc Bors, Fern Schweiz, Switzerland
Naci Gündogan, Anadolu University, Turkey
Peter Horrocks, The Open University, United Kingdom
Susanne Koch, Norwegen Opening Universities (NOU), Norway
16
EADTU Office
P.O. Box 2960 / 6401 DL Heerlen
Valkenburgerweg 177 / 6419 AT Heerlen
The Netherlands
T
E
I
Phone +31 45 5762214
secretariat@eadtu.eu
www.eadtu.eu
ISBN 978-90-79730-17-9
Copyright © 2016 European Association of Distance Teaching Universities and the authors.
All rights reserved.
No part of the material protected by this copyright may be reproduced or utilized in any
form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners, unless
the use is a fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research or review. The authors
reserve the right that their material can be used for purely educational and research
purposes.
17
Agbu Jane-frances(1), Vincent Ado Tenebe(2), Okechukwu Okafor(3),
Dahunsi Opeyemi(4)
SHARING THE EXPERIENCES OF NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA IN
ITS JOURNEY TOWARDS UNDERSTANDING AND EMBRACING OERs
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
National Open University of Nigeria
Nigeria
(1)
oagbu@noun.edu.ng, oer@noun.edu.ng
(2)
vtenebe@noun.edu.ng
(3)
ookafor@noun.edu.ng
(4)
oadahunsi@noun.edu.ng
ABSTRACT
To many in our part of the world, the West Africa sub-region, the concept of OER is almost
alien while the understanding and embrace is still viewed with skepticism among scholars. It
may appear unattractive because of its low business value, at least from the perception of
the content developer, but its social value which is geared toward sharing knowledge for the
common good could be seen to outweigh this. The drivers of OERs in their first contact with
us made us realize that government-funded materials could be shared as OERs while OERs
could also be used to enhance our courses. The National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN),
which is a government-funded Open and Distance Learning (ODL) Institution in the West
African sub-region, upon realizing the potentials of OERs took a bold step to embrace it
which culminated in the establishment of a dedicated unit for OER under the Office of the
Vice Chancellor in August 2014. The ultimate goal was for NOUN to learn how to share its
body of courseware are OERs and also raise awareness on the use of OER. The journey
towards this initiative in NOUN was surprisingly challenging. This paper therefore shares
NOUN experiences towards this journey, specifically from its three capacity-building
workshops in this area. It is hoped that insight from this could serve as reference for other
institutions that are planning to embrace and understand the OER initiative.
18
INTRODUCTION
The concept of Open Educational Resources (OER) and its guiding principles came into NOUN
consciousness much later than its inception. Thus we will not be incorrect to note that
NOUN is a late comer in understanding and embracing OER, unlike some sister institutions in
Southern part of the continent, University of South Africa (UNISA), South African Institute for
Distance Education (SAIDE) etc. However the common belief that it is better late than never
could as well be applicable to NOUN unique experience. This paper therefore shares the
insightful and challenging experiences of National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN) in its
journey towards understanding and embracing OERs. It starts with a general introduction of
NOUN as well as its mission and vision. Subsequently insight and lessons from its
sensitization and technical workshops will be highlighted.
A Bit about National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN)
The National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN) is a single-mode Open and Distance
Learning (ODL) institution with its headquarters located at 14/16 Ahmadu Bello way, Victoria
Island, Lagos, Nigeria. It was established on 22nd July 1983 by the then military government
of Nigeria but was suspended before it could take off on 25 th April 1984 due to poor insight
in ODL. It was however resuscitated in 2002 by the federal government of Nigeria. NOUN is
the only single-mode ODL institution in the West Africa sub region as well as the largest
19
institution in the area. It has an active student population of 186,000+ with an overall
student enrolment of 400,000+, while 2/5th of its student population are between the ages
of 18 to 25 years. NOUN currently has 70 study centres across Nigeria, manned by a centre
directors of Professorial cadre, and a group of staff made up of student counselors, library
staff, ICT, administrative staff, academic staff, etc. NOUN has 6 Schools made up of Schools
of Education, Health, Science and Technology, Law, Business and Management Science as
well as Agricultural Sciences. In addition it has a Center for Life Long Learning and that of
Access and General Studies. As at 2014, statistics of NOUN staff stood at: Academic (Male:
215, Female, 147, Total 352); Non-academic senior staff (Male: 512, Female, 417, Total 983);
Non-academic junior staff (Male: 868, Female, 324, Total 1192). In addition, NOUN has 50+
programmes and 750+ courses cut across all the schools and centers. Courses are delivered
through online facilitation (via NOUN i-LEARN portal) and course materials which are online
and in-print. NOUN currently has 1,600+ online course materials, all in PDF. NOUN’s current
and second Vice Chancellor is Prof Vincent Tenebe, a Professor of Agronomy. The website of
National Open University of Nigeria is www.nou.edu.ng
Aligning the Vision and Mission of NOUN to OER
NOUN in its vision statement seeks to: ‘provide highly accessible and enhanced quality
education anchored by social justice, equity, equality and national cohesion through a
comprehensive reach that transcends all barriers’. Its mission is to: ‘provide cost-effective,
flexible learning which adds life-long value to quality education for all who seek knowledge’
NOUN in line with the promise made understood very well the impact of OER in stimulating
social justice, equity and equality in education and this could be viewed as a trigger towards
embracing OER which culminated in the decision to openly license its body of courseware
and ultimately unlock knowledge for common good. The Hewlett Foundation asserts that “at
the heart of Open movement towards open educational resources is the simple and powerful
idea that the world’s knowledge is a public good. And that technology in general and in the
worldwide web in particular provides an extraordinary opportunity for everyone to share, use
and reuse” This is very true of NOUN’s vision towards OERs.
NOUN AND ITS JOURNEY TOWARDS UNDERSTANDING AND EMBRACING OERS
In August 2014, NOUN made an important decision to key into the OER movement by
establishing an OER Unit under the office of the Vice Chancellor. This stimulated OER-related
activities in NOUN and most importantly collaboration with OER drivers from UNESCO, EU,
20
EADTU, COL and OERu. As earlier indicated, NOUN has a body of 1600+ courseware and we
assumed that contributing to OER is just ‘sticking out the current all right reserve’ statement
and replacing it with open license statement, but we came to realize that it was not as
simple as that. We also realized that generally faculty members had very low awareness of
OER. The following are therefore NOUN’s unique experiences in its journey towards
understanding and embracing OERs.
(1) The first Contact – Meeting NOUN Principal Officers
This first contact was made by UNESCO, through Abel Caine, UNESCO Programme Specialist
for Open Educational Resources (OER) at the Headquarters in Paris, France. He is responsible
for globally promoting OERs with Governments, educational, research institutions, teachers
and learners. Prof Fred Mulder, UNESCO Chair in OER and coordinator of OpenupED as well
as Prof Robert Schuwer of Open University, the Netherlands co-facilitated this meeting. This
meeting took place from 9th to 12th September 2014 at NOUN’s headquarters in Lagos. The
aim of the meeting was to: stimulate OER awareness and benefits in NOUN; trigger the
development of an institutional OER policy in NOUN and other relevant institutions, identify
an outline of implementation plan for NOUN OpenupEd project. The first day of the
workshop was dedicated to OER presentation at the NOUN Senate. About 130 participants
including deans, directors and heads of unit benefited from this and this exercise was aimed
at introducing OER to NOUN policy makers. Day two and three of the workshop was
specifically for training of 30 participants (Deans, Directors, OER committee members) on
Open Educational Resources. Highlights include presentations on the concept of OER and
MOOCs; the licence options; quality assurance in OER, and roadmap to publishing OER.
These roadmaps, presented by Prof Schuwer include: “determine which learning material to
be published; determine the open licence to be used; rework the learning material; clear
copyrights, add metadata to make learning material retrievable, then publish the learning
material”
Experiences from the First Contact
NOUN principal officers affirmed that:
 NOUN is well-positioned to offer OERs to the global community because it is an ODL
institution and it already has a repository of online course materials.
 Though the course materials are online and could be accessed by anybody, they are
not openly licenced. Thus there was a resolution to key into the philosophy of OER,
learn how to add value to NOUN’s course materials and openly license them for
sharing and re-use.
21
 It was observed that on NOUN website, the phrase “open courseware” was used as
directory to its course materials. With insight from the sensitization workshop
especially in the realization that the courses are not truly open, the phrase was
subsequently changed to “e-courseware” to avoid confusion.
 There was a resolution to formulate an institutional OER policy to guide the project.
 There was a resolution to subject NOUN courses to Quality Assurance mechanisms
 The need to take advantage of OER materials to enhance existing course materials
was stressed and encouraged
 NOUN made a resolution to organize enlightenment communication around OER to
further those within and outside NOUN.
 Research in OER was encouraged.
(2) Embracing OER in NOUN: Checking OER Awareness among Senior Staff of NOUN
The second meeting took place from 3rd to 6th February 2015 at NOUN headquarters in
Lagos. The aim was to introduce the concept and philosophy of Open Educational
Resources (OER) and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) to the staff of National
Open University of Nigeria as well as train selected course writers on processes of
OERization of course materials. A total of 350 participants attended the two meetings
which were sensitization workshop for day 1 and training workshop of day 2 and 3.
Participants were 350 academic and non-teaching staff. All of them benefited from day 1
activity which focused on sentitization around OER while 20 course writers were selected for
day 2 and 3 for training on conversion of course materials into OERs. This workshop was
facilitated byAbel Caine of UNESCO, Prof Fred Mulder, UNESCO OER Chair, Mr Oladejo
Olawumi of UNESCO and Jane-frances Agbu of NOUN-OER unit
The Experiences
As requirement for registration for the workshop, participants were encouraged to respond
to an online questionnaire designed to ascertain their level of awareness in OER. Findings
are presented in Figures 1 to 5.
22
Figure 1 Gender of respondents
Figure 1 shows that 132 respondents were males while 110 were males
Fig 2: Department of respondents
Figure 2 shows that participants were from different school and units of NOUN
23
Fig 3: How aware are respondents of OER?
Result from Figure 3 shows that respondents are aware of OERs
Fig 4: OERs are released under flexible intellectual property license
Result in figure 4 shows that respondents are aware that OERs are released under flexible
intellectual property license
24
Fig 5: Are NOUN course materials OERs?
Results in figure 5 shows that respondent believe that NOUN course materials are OERs.
Below are exert from NOUN course materials as at the time of this study (February, 2015).
Headquarters
14/16 Ahmadu Bello Way
Victoria Island, Lagos
Abuja Office
5 Dar es Salaam Street
Off Aminu Kano Crescent
Wuse II, Abuja
e-mail: centralinfo@nou.edu.ng
URL: www.nou.edu.ng
Published by
First Printed 2004
Revised 2013
ISBN: 978-058-108-1
All Rights Reserved
Thus, as at the time of this study, none of NOUN course materials were OERs. This indicates
poor insight in OERs among faculty members.
25
In addition to these observations, the following were also suggested:
 The need to have an OERization framework for course materials that logically flows
from already existing NOUN course materials writing house style
 The need to raise awareness on how to find and use existing OERs to enhance
NOUN’s course materials.
 The need to have a well defined OER policy including open license statement
 Course materials must be subjected to quality assurance processes before
OERization.
(3) Technical training of Course Writers in Open Educational Resources
This third meeting took place from 27th – 31st July 2015 at NOUN Headquarters, Lagos,
Nigeria. The aim was to provide technical training on how to convert course materials into
OER digital publishing, design NOUN OER base template, update NOUN open licence
statement, update draft of NOUN OER policy and stimulate well-defined implementation
plan for transformation of NOUN courses in OERs. A total of 25 staff made up of course
writers participated in this workshop. The chief facilitator was Fred de Vries of Open
University, the Netherlands. Activities carried out include conversion into e-publishing which
entails formatting of courses in line with NOUN-house style of writing courses, cleaning and
reformatting the text, updating graphics and tables, checking for plagiarism, adding style and
converting to electronic format (EPUB), ODT, PDF and finally publish as OER.
Experiences:
Steps required for converting existing courses to OERs and digital publishing were identified
in this workshop. The workflow for the creation of Mobile OER course books consists of the
five steps.
Step 1: the course materials are checked against the applicable policies. This includes texts,
graphics and references. The NOUN-OER unit introduced the Turnitin plagiarism
checker to control lack of references and improper re-use. This approach has also
been introduced officially to all the academic staff of NOUN. Plagiarism software
(currently Turn it in) help indicate texts in the course-materials that need to be reexamined. Also, models and flow-charts need to be checked manually as the
software is not capable of handling images.
26
Step 2: the existing formatting and all the unnecessary textual elements like spaces, linebreaks, page-breaks, tabs etc. are removed after which the document is reformatted
using the OER base template.
Step 3: all the existing images and tables are examined and preferable replaced by improved
ones. For courses with a lot of mathematical formulas steps 2 and 3 are combined by
having the course writer use LaTex to compile his course including all the necessary
formatting.
Step 4: the LaTeX document is converted. With dedicated software the OER re-useable
version, the eBook version and the self-printable electronic version are generated.
Step 5: the new resources are published in the OER repository at http://oer.nou.edu.ng/
Fig. 6: Creation of Mobile OER Course Books
27
CONCLUSION
In this paper, we have been able to share the initial experiences of NOUN in its attempt at
understanding and embracing the concept and principles of Open Educational Resources
(OERs). As mentioned earlier, we felt that because NOUN is an ODL institution with a large
body of courseware, contributing to OER would just be a matter of ‘sticking out the old
license’ and ‘replacing it with a more flexible open license’, but we were very wrong. Though
the institutional support was positive, learning about OER was quite challenging. There was
very little awareness in this area as faculty member could not really ascertain what actually
are OERs, how they can be identified as well as how they can be re-used. With a firm
support of global OER drivers, awareness about OER could be said to be higher than it was
barely a year ago in NOUN. In addition, we have been challenged from the OER workshop
experiences to look inward and identify where we are and steps required to fully convert our
courses into OER, which were triggered by this unique journey towards embracing OERs. This
is an ongoing journey which NOUN hopes to sustain and also invite other institutions and
stakeholders to key into. Thus “At the heart of Open movement towards open educational
resources is the simple and powerful idea that the world’s knowledge is a public good. And
that technology in general and in the worldwide web in particular provides an extraordinary
opportunity for everyone to share, use and reuse” (The Hewlett Foundation)
28
Aydin Sinan, Ozturk Aylin
Segmenting learners in online learning environments
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Anadolu University, Open Education Faculty
Turkey
snaydin@anadolu.edu.tr
aylin_ozturk@anadolu.edu.tr
Abstract
Segmentation means dividing explained entities into homogeneous sub-groups by benefiting
from the similar features. Segmentation is generally used in marketing. It is used education
area in particular to higher education. Segmentation studies may contribute to rendering
customized services to similar learners, specification of the students that may drop-out,
formation of special communication method to each learner group, enhancing the sense of
belonging and satisfaction of the learner. The main aim of this study is to analyze types of
segmentation, use of segmentation in learning environments, its benefits and studies
conducted in the literature. It is thought that segmentations of the learners would
contribute significantly for improvement of the services and customizations, to take
academic, administrative and corporate decisions basing on the learner for the Open
Universities which have students from different socio-economic regions, income groups, age
and professions.
Keywords: Segmentation, e-Learning, Learner characteristics, Learner types, Need-based
approach, Service quality.
29
Introduction
In an educational process of 21st century, learning and learner concepts have become
prominent issues with the changes and transformations in learning with no time and place
limitations, lifelong learning needs, the flexibility and diversification of the content. Along
with these changes, open and distance learning has become a learner-centered education
rather than being technology-based education. In addition, contents, designs and offered
services have been started to be improved in accordance with learners’ abilities and
preferences. Tailor made adaptive environment prepared to the characteristics of the
learner comes forward rather than one-size-fits-all approach in e-learning environment.
Open and distance learning institutions, whose preference in the global market have been
increasing day by day in direct proportion of their number of learners and data. Advances in
communication and information technologies have made it possible to monitor and quantify
the learning activity of individuals and have created a number of data sets in this sense.
Discovering significant and unexplored information, and improvement and development of
them has gained importance by using modern analytical tools such as data mining, learning
analytics, data analysis on the data. In an open and distance learning system, it is primarily
necessary to be acquainted with the learners and know the characteristics of the students to
provide need-based services, to apply learner-centered approach, to increase the quality of
services and to establish effective communication and interaction environment. In this
context, segmentation is one of the methods to be applicable towards to getting to know
learners.
Segmentation means dividing the data into homogenous sub-groups with respect to their
similar characteristics. Segmentation is generally used in marketing. It is used education area
in particular to higher education. The concept of segmentation which was first developed by
Smith in 1956, was used mostly in marketing field to create customer profiles, to provide
better services to customer, and to develop more effective marketing strategies and
strategic plans. Segmentation studies may contribute to rendering customized services to
similar learners, specification of the students that may drop-out, formation of special
communication method to each learner group, enhancing the sense of belonging and
satisfaction of the learner.
The objectives of this study are to recommend services, approaches and access methods
appropriate to each group, and in this way to make it easier for the institutions to take
administrative, academic and support service related decisions, and to support initiatives for
differentiation and designing of services with respect to the characteristics of these groups.
It is thought that this study will help determining the needs of individuals more clearly in the
30
open and distance learning environments in which the personal learning experiences are
increasingly getting important and developing new services in this term.
Literature Review
There are many studies in the marketing area with regard to segmentation in the literature.
Especially in the higher education-level studies in education, segmentation has been used.
Despite the studies on the examination of the learners in the open and distance learning
environments, the learner typology and the modeling of the learners, not many
segmentation studies have been performed. Cluster analysis, multi-dimensional scaling,
discriminant analysis, classification, decision trees and artificial neural networks have been
mostly used in the segmentation studies. Generally, the demographic data have been used
in the studies, but psychographic, behavioral and personality traits of learners should also be
identified to determine the characteristics of learners. Performing segmentation through
accurate data in the open and distance learning institutions serving to learners of several
different characteristics will also contribute an increased service quality as well as increased
satisfaction and sense of belonging.
Goodnow (1982) performed a benefit segmentation based on the learner motivation on
university level. As a result of the study, five different segments were obtained which had
different motivational orientations. The findings of the study were used to define the target
markets and plan program offers according to the needs and interests of the learners in the
selected segments.
In the quality-based segmentation study performed by Woo (1998) on distance learners, a
measuring tool was developed to determine the quality perceptions of the learners and
focus group interviews were made. As a result of this study in which three different
segments were set through cluster analysis, it was emphasized that, in the distance learning
institutions, different segments need to be presented with custom services instead of
treating all learners as a homogenous group.
In the study by Rogers, Finley and Kline (2001), a segmentation based on the learner needs
was performed to have a better understanding of individual differences of undergraduate
learners. In this study, the learner segments and needs were first determined through a
qualitative approach, and then the learner segments were confirmed quantitatively. This
process was emphasized as a critical step for creating the academic programs as well as
possible and for the organizations to develop their strategies.
In the study by Blasco and Saura (2006), the segmentation was performed according to the
learner expectations. CHAID, which is a predictive model, was applied to define the
31
segments and the learners were separated into three segments. These segments showed the
differences between the expected quality of service and the perceived quality. Based on
these data, the quality of service was assessed and recommendations were made for
improvements.
In the study by Hagel and Shaw (2007), learner preferences were investigated in the hybrid
study mode. Cluster analysis was utilized to define the learner segments which have
distinctive preferences through a combination of face-to-face and print-based materials and
web-based study modes. Demographic and situational variables were used to create these
segments. The results show that learners' preferring the combination of face-to-face study
and more independent study mode may be caused by their year levels. In addition, findings
indicate that there is a relationship between the preferences in terms of age, gender and
web-and print-based studies.
In the geodemographic segmentation study performed in the 2009 annual report of Open
Universities Australia, it was identified who were the learners, what were the best
communication methods and how the satisfaction levels of current learners could be
improved. Moreover, online investments reached maximum level through a study on how
learners investigated the facilities of the Open Universities Australia on bigger search
engines.
In the study by Chen and Hsiao (2009), the marketing segmentation theory was adopted to
determine the basic factors emphasized by learners while choosing school or department,
and the learners were divided into three groups. Based on the results of the research,
recommendations were made on improving the assessment standards with regard to how
learners would select schools and the school's reputation itself, enhancing the inner culture
of the school, and creating a unit in charge of learner recruitment.
A segmentation study was conducted by Schatzel et al. (2011) to identify those who were or
not intent to continue their education among adult learners who dropped out from the
higher education. Five segments were created using the demographic and psychographic
variables of the learners. As a result, strategies were recommended to achieve segments
with the highest possibility of going back to the higher education.
In the study by Bailey, Barton and Mullen (2014) on the e-Learning, it was found that four of
the five segments had positive impressions about e-Learning. It was determined that
similarities and differences between the segments offered important indicators for
predicting and shaping the future of e-Learning, and by this means, institutions may explore
great opportunities for improvement, new platforms for innovation and their potential of
32
altering the learning ways of next-generation learners.
In the segmentation study was performed by Ladd, Reynolds and Selingo (2014) to
understand the different needs of today's learners, six segments were created based on the
motivations of learners and their expectations from undergraduate education. Explanations
were made about the characteristics of the learners in the segments, the source of their
motivations, and sizes of the segments. It was stated that universities could reach
appropriate learners and provide them with the most accurate services through determining
those segments.
Methodology
Cluster analysis, which is a descriptive data analyzing technique, will be utilized to divide the
learners into segments in the study. The aim of the cluster analysis is to minimize the
similarity between the clusters and maximize the similarity within a cluster (Han and
Kamber, 2006). The process of knowledge discovery from data (KDD) was utilized in the
study, which was composed of the steps of data cleaning, data integration, data selection,
data transformation, data mining, pattern evaluation and knowledge presentation (Han,
Kamber and Pei, 2012).
Within the scope of the study, the data obtained from 43,106 students who were actively
registered in the Open Education System of Anadolu University in 2014-2015 and completed
the Service Rating Questionnaire was used. In addition, the demographic and geographic
features of learners and their grade point averages were obtained from the databases of the
institution. The data obtained from the questionnaire and the databases were combined on
Microsoft SQL Server, and the data were organized as cleaned, noisy, repetitive,
contradictory and empty. After cleaning the starting 50,001 data, 43,106 of them were kept.
The types of data were organized according to their features and optimized for the cluster
analysis. The studies of achieving the most appropriate and significant clusters on the data is
continuing.
Segmentation
Segmentation was defined by Smith (1956, p.5) as follows: “Segmentation is based upon
developments on the demand side of the market and represents a rational and more precise
adjustment of product and marketing effort to consumer or user requirements”.
Segmentation is a rich field of conceptual research that address defining and analyzing a
market, explaining the types of consumer behaviors, the suitability of basic variables and the
relationship between these all and the administrative tasks (Allenby et al., 2002).
Segmentation can be defined as a powerful marketing tool that allows users to be divided
33
into homogenous groups, taking users' characteristics, needs, demands, expectations,
preferences and requests into consideration in the widest sense. With segmentation,
institutions can get to know users better, creating accurate user profiles, develop more
effective services, strategic plans, marketing strategies, and communicational channels and
explore the new opportunities in the market.
There are different classifications for segmentation in the literature; however, segmentation
has been divided into four categories in many studies: geographical, demographical,
psychographic and behavioral (Kotler and Keller, 2012; Kotler and Armstrong, 2001;
Huddleston and Ivanova, 2004). General properties of these categories are shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Types and Properties of Segmentation
Type of
Segmentation
Geographical
Segmentation
Properties
Variables Used

Geographical properties are one of the oldest
basics for segmentation (Burnett, 2008).

Countries


Regions
Users are separated into segments according to
different geographical units.

Provinces

Different regions have different needs, and these
should be taken into account and localizations
should be made while creating marketing
strategies and services.

Cities

Neighborhoods

Climate

Geographical
structure

Physical
properties

Population
density

Age

Size of the


Demographical 
Segmentation
Regional differences are the most known features
to the institutions to determine user preferences
for products (Burnett, 2008).
For education, geographical segmentation is
related to learner's place of residence. This
approach includes the clarification of messages,
differentiated communication, scholarship
services and the promotion of academic
programs (Black, 2009).
The most common properties used for
segmentation are demographical ones because
requests, preferences and using rates are closely
34
related to demographical properties (Kotler and
Keller, 2012).
Gender
Variables are easy to measure.


Income
Motivations and barriers for registration in
education generally vary according to
demographical segments (Black, 2009).

Profession

Educational
level

Religion

Nationality

Social class

Psychologicalpersonality
characteristics

Socioeconomic
status

Lifestyle

Motives

Values
Addressing these differences during marketing
processes may increase the possibility of
institutions to be preferred (Black, 2009).

This is the most powerful type of segmentation
but also the most difficult to be applied.

Psychographic data can be used to understand
users in a better and more detailed way, and
concrete data could be obtained when used with
demographical data (Kotler and Keller, 2012).

Behavioral
Segmentation



Psychographic
Segmentation
family
The problem in this approach is to access
appropriate information about learner-specific
psychographic properties (Black, 2009).

After creating the psychographic profile, the
custom communication channels and social
activities should be combined with this
information (Black, 2009).

Users are grouped according to the behavioral
similarities for the product.

Information on
product

Behavioral segmentation is related to the learner
purposes within academic context, and more
significant guidance can be provided if the
purposes are known (Black, 2009).

Attitude

User status

Benefit
35

expected from
the product
Learner’ behaviors can be monitored via webbased applications, facilitating analyses.

Brand loyalty

Frequency and
amount of
product use
In defining segments, behavioral variables based on user responses can be used as well as
geographical, demographical and psychographic. Segment types can be used both
individually and together. The key concept here is to comprehend the user differences
(Kotler and Keller, 2012). An effective and beneficial segmentation study should be
measurable, substantial, accessible, differentiable, actionable (Kotler and Keller, 2012).
Segmentation in Learning Environments
Education as service requires meeting learner needs and satisfying them (Azarnoush et al.,
2013). Learner needs are the primary focal point in the learning environments, and there has
been an effort to determine learner characteristics in many studies. Studies on grouping
learners have been performed since 1980s. In 2000s when it became important to design
learning processes according to learner characteristics and needs, it can be said that
segmentation was used especially by institutions of higher education.
A segmentation classification used in educational environment is as follows (Black, 2009):
 Student Type Segmentation: Segmentation is performed according to the registration
status such as high school graduate, transfer learners, e-learners, drop-outs and the
learner characteristics. In this segmentation, strategies should be both marketing and
process orientated and marketing messages, images and communication media
should represent the students groups of which attention the institution want to
attract.
 Program Segmentation: Marketing messages, information and human interactions
are determined according to the program segments of the institution in this type of
segmentation. This approach requires differentiation of strategies, studies and
resources based on the capacity of institution and learner demands.
36
 Influencer Segmentation: Instead of dealing with the possible learners directly,
elements that affect the university preferring process such as family, peer group and
studying conditions are focused on within this approach.
Segmentation provides the decision makers with important information especially for
learners to benefit most in the e-Learning environments. Institutions can detect the
opportunities more effectively when they focus on different segments and their needs and
make more precise arrangements by matching the requests of the target group with the
program (Kotler and Fox, 1995). By this means, the risk could be mitigated during decisionmaking process (Burnett, 2008). In addition, institutions can focus their energies on the
segments and render service in the most effective way, find out the needs and opportunities
yet to be determined, and design and develop programs, services and processes to meet
special needs of this segments (Rogers, Finley and Kline, 2001).
When the segmentation studies performed in e-Learning environments were examined, it
was seen that difficulties were experienced such as different data types while grouping the
educational data, variables recorded on different scales, and large-scale data (Azarnoush et
al., 2013). Another thing that makes it difficult for grouping the educational data is that most
standard cluster methods fall insufficient in the cases in which there are too many features
to be clustered (Azarnoush et al., 2013). There are too many data to be used to define elearners especially. It can be said that increasing number of learners in open and distance
learning environments and diversifying characteristics require studying on large and
different types of data. It can also be said that difficulties of segmentation in e-Learning
environments have been mitigated with the effective use of data mining applications.
Through data warehouses prepared by institutions, analyses and inquiries related to
individual learner needs and responses can be easily made, and useful information on
individual tendencies and segments (Kotler and Keller, 2012).
Conclusion
There have been studies performed on segmentation in institutions of higher education;
however, no comprehensive studies on the subject have been conducted in Open and
Distant learning institutions giving education to large masses. Segmentation studies have
been used to individualize and personalize the services in the field of e-Learning. Choosing
which data to use for segmentation is important in appropriate formation of segments. Data
mining methods and algorithms can be used to perform segmentation for learners in the
open and distance learning systems. As well as allowing to achieve the most accurate
segments, using such methods helps a fast process. Segmentation studies are important in
37
terms of customizing the services, obtaining information used to develop individual solutions
such as determining the most appropriate ways to reach learners and the learning services.
References
Allenby, G., Fennell, G., Bemmaor, A., Christen, F., Dawley, J., Dickson, P., Edwards, Y., Garratt, M.,
Ginter, J., Sawyer, A., Staelin, R., Yang, S. (2002). Market segmentation research: beyond within
and across group differences. Marketing Letters, 13(3), 233-243. Retrieved from
http://www.springerlink.com/index/g6v55mr7rj302082.pdf
Azarnoush, B., Bekki, J. M., Runger, G. C., Bernstein, B. L., & Atkinson, R. K. (2013). Toward a
framework for learner segmentation. Journal of Educational Data Mining, 5(2), 102–126.
Bailey, A., Barton, C., & Mullen, K. (2014). The five faces of online education: what students and
parents
want.
Retrieved
from
http://k12accountability.org/resources/OnlineEducation/Five_Faces_Online_Education_Jun_2014_tcm80-163892.pdf
Black, D. J. (2009). The Enrollment Management and Marketing Nexus ( Part I ). Sem Works,
(January), 1–20. Retrieved from http://www.semworks.net/papers/wp_EnrollmentManagement_Marketing-Nexus_part1.pdf
Blasco, M.F., & Saura, I.G. (2006). Segmenting university students on the basis of their expectations.
Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 16(1). 25–45.
Burnett, J. (2008). Core consepts of marketing. Zurich: Jacobs Foundation. Retrieved from
http://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Core-Concepts-of-Marketing.pdf
Chen, Y. F., & Hsiao, C. H. (2009). Applying market segmentation theory to student behavior in
selecting a school or department. New Horizons in Education, 57(2), 32–43.
Hagel, P., & Shaw, R. (2007). Choosing ICT? A segmentation analysis of students’ preferences for
hybrid study mode. Ascilite 2007- ICT Providing Choices for Learners and Learning. Singapore:
Nanyang
Technological
University.
Retrieved
from
http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/hagel.pdf
Han, J., & Kamber, M. (2006). Data mining: concepts and techniques (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Morgan Kaufmann. doi.org:10.1007/978-3-642-19721-5
38
Han, J., Kamber, M., & Pei, J. (2012). Data mining: concepts and techniques (3rd ed.). San Francisco,
CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Huddleston, T. ve Ivanova, O. (2004). Market segmentation. In R. Whiteside (Ed.), Student marketing
for colleges and universities. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Collegiate Registrars
and Admissions Officers.
Goodnow, B. (1982). Increasing enrollment through benefit segmentation. Adult Education Quarterly,
32(2), 89–103. Retrieved from http://aeq.sagepub.com/content/32/2/89.1.full.pdf
Ladd, H., Reynolds, S., & Selingo, J. J. (2014). The Differentiated University Recognizing the Diverse
Needs of Today’s Students. Boston: The Parthenon Group.
Kotler, P., & Fox, K.F.A (1995). Strategic marketing for educational institutions. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2001). Principles of marketing. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2012). Marketing management (14th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Open Universities Australia. (2009). Open Your Mind. Melbourne: Open Universities Australia.
Retrieved
from
https://www.open.edu.au/content/documents/annualreports/OUA_Annual_Report_2009.pdf
Rogers, G., Finley, D., & Kline, T. (2001). Understanding individual differences in university
undergraduates : a learner needs segmentation approach. Innovative Higher Education, 25(3),
183- 196.
Schatzel, K., Callahan, T., Scott, C. J., & Davis, T. (2011). Reaching the non-traditional stopout
population: a segmentation approach. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 21(1), 47–60.
http://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2011.569590
Smith, W. R. (1956). Product differentiation and market segmentation as alternative marketing
strategies.
Journal
of
Marketing,
21(1),
3-8.
Retrieved
from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1247695?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Woo, K.-S. (1998). Segmenting students in distance education: a quality perception-based
approach. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 13(1), 58–59.
http://doi.org/10.1080/0268051980130110
39
Bang Jørgen(1), Dalsgaard Christian(2), Kjær Arne(3), O’Donovan
Maria(4)
MOOCs without the M
Open Online Courses as an educational strategy for Opening up Education in
smaller language areas
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Aarhus University
Denmark
(1)
jbang@tdm.au.dk
(2)
cdalsgaard@tdm.au.dk
(3)
akjar@tdm.au.dk
(4)
mmdonovan@tdm.au.dk
Abstract
So far the success of MOOCs has been measured through two parameters. On the one hand the
number of course participants counted in thousands or ten thousands, and on the other hand, the
dropout rate. For small language areas (e.g. in the Nordic countries) the massiveness of MOOCs is
hardly applicable or should at least be interpreted in much smaller numbers – even below 100 in
several cases. But seen as an educational and pedagogical tool, Open Online Courses are highly
relevant for further education and lifelong learning also within small language areas. Deeper analyses
of the dropout problem shows that the more experienced the MOOC learners, the fewer drop out.
This indicates that learning by MOOCs is not a skill one is born with but a capacity to be learned –
hopefully, in the future, already in the school system. The obvious target groups for Open Online
Courses are experienced and skilled learners. The courses should, as pointed out in the
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION “Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and
learning for all through new Technologies and Open Educational Resources” (European Commission,
2013) focus “more on what the learner is capable of doing rather than on the mere acquisition of
information or on what the learner is capable of repeating”. In the paper we will discuss the
pedagogical framework for Open Online Courses in smaller language areas integrating Open
Educational Resources with learning activities. Furthermore, we will outline a possible business
model for OOC in universities in small language areas.
Keywords: small language areas, open online courses, open educational resources, innovative
teaching, innovative learning, independent learners, skilled learners, lifelong learning, MOOCs
40
Transforming higher education
The title of this conference is “Transforming higher education in the 21st century; Innovative
pathways to learning and continuous professional education”. Based on the first 15 years of the
century two closely related initiatives catch attention: the Open Educational Resources (OER)
movement and the Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) movement.
The OER movement started I 2001 when MIT launched the OpenCourseWare Initiative, which in 2002
was supported by UNESCO (IIEP: International Institute for Educational Planning) and defined as:
“The open provision of educational resources, enabled by information and communication
technologies, for consultation, use and adaptation by a community of users for non-commercial
purposes.”
Out of these open educational resources in 2008 the MOOC movement grew organising the OER
materials into courses and offering them online for free. According to Wikipedia, a MOOC is “an
online course aimed at unlimited participation and open access via the web. As the movement
evolved towards 2012/13 a distinction between two types of MOOCs appeared: cMOOCs based on a
connectivist educational philosophy and xMOOCs that resemble more traditional courses with a
focus on dissemination of knowledge (the x stands for extended). Both types of MOOCs include on
the one hand a philanthropic and innovative dimension offering access to knowledge for free and on
the other hand a more commercial dimension by branding the educational institution on the market.
So far the xMOOCs have definitely been the most successful in recruiting audiences. The innovative
dimension here is primary to open access to the knowledge traditionally managed by higher
educational institutions e.g. universities. The goal is to open up education and to provide access to
knowledge for free. The innovative dimension of the cMOOCs is more focused on pedagogical
aspects of learning. Following the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION “Opening up
Education: Innovative teaching and learning for all through new Technologies and Open Educational
Resources” (European Commission, 2013) the cMOOC movement focuses “more on what the learner
is capable of doing rather than on the mere acquisition of information or on what the learner is
capable of repeating”.
Since 2012/13 the focus on the learning process has increased and today the resulted is a number of
interesting approaches with innovative abbreviations such as:
BOOC - Big Open Online Course
BOOC - Blending Online and On-Campus Course
DOCC - Distributed Online Collaborative Course
DOCS - Digital Open Courses at Scale
HOOC - Hybrid Open Online Course
41
MOOR - Massive Open Online Research
SMOC - Synchronous Massive Online Course
SPOC – Small Private Online Course
TORQUE - Tiny, Open-with-Restrictions, focused on Quality and Effectiveness
(see Appendix 1)
As indicated in the title of this article our intention goes in the same direction as these
developments. By leaving out the M in MOOCs, our aim is to endeavour to adapt the MOOC
movement – and especially the cMOOC movement – to a Danish context. The ‘massive’ does not
really make sense within a language area of approximately 5 million people, but at the same time the
concept of ‘open online courses’ is a way forward to transform higher education in the 21st century
based on independent learners.
Target groups, subpopulations and dropout rates
The open education movement has for many years aimed at educating people with no or limited
access to the traditional educational system. With the advent of Open Educational Resources (OER)
and not least Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) this aim has been extended to include the
provision of education for all (Caswell et al., 2008; Friesen, 2009; Wiley, 2008). Especially via the
concept of MOOC, "educating the masses" has taken over from "educating people with limited
access to the traditional educational system". This means that a focus on specific target groups has
been exchanged with a focus on a large, massive target group for online education.
This is also evident from the fact that the success of MOOCs is often measured through two
parameters; on the one hand the number of course participants counted in thousands or ten
thousands, and on the other hand, the dropout rate. According to a study by Jordan (2014) an
average of 43,000 students enrol in any given MOOC. This high average of participants in MOOCs
shows that the "massive" part of MOOCs is key in defining and evaluating them. The study by Jordan
(2014) also shows that on average, 6.5% of enrolees complete a MOOC. Often, such low completion
rates are used to criticise MOOCs (Chen, 2014; Daniel, 2012; Kizilcec, Piech & Schneider, 2013; Clow,
2013). Again, this highlights the strong focus on the massiveness of participants and completion.
With this paper we wish to revive the initial objectives of open education by discussing how to
approach target groups for open online courses (OOCs). We do not aim specifically at educating the
many, but at providing education for specific dedicated groups, that might or might not be massive.
In a pursuit of a massive target group, MOOCs can be criticised for disregarding the complexity of the
target group that they address. A study by Jordan (2014) shows that MOOCs are in fact not for all,
since MOOC participants are primarily educationally privileged – having a former degree, whereas
42
disadvantaged students – students with limited study experience, find it difficult to follow and
complete MOOCs. As an example, Jordan (2014) shows that the majority of Coursera students are at
least on an undergraduate degree level. However, targeting the masses may rule out certain target
groups. A study of subpopulations of MOOC participants in Kizilcec, Piech & Schneider (2013)
identifies four prototypical types of learner engagement in MOOCs: learners completing, auditing,
disengaging and sampling.
Thus, MOOCs present us with a disparate audience with disparate aims and intentions. As the study
by Kizilcec, Piech & Schneider (2013) show, we can observe different participant intent, different
participant course pathways. Such diverse audiences of students may force some into thinking that
filtering out the learners who only wish to certify should become the supreme goal. Whilst there is
logic in this, and a history of looking at MOOCs with metrics of dropout rates, we would rather
contend that the central issue is one of engagement – locating it, leveraging it, focusing in on the
individual learners and providing them with opportunities to learn. When discussing dropout rates,
the auditing group is interesting. While none of the auditing learners in the study completed the
course, they generally expressed a high degree of satisfaction with participating in the MOOCs.
Furthermore, the disengaging and sampling groups may not be interested in the entire MOOC, but
have may have a need for certain resources that they find within the MOOCs.
The consequence of prioritising certification rates is also summed up in a study on MOOCs by
Harvard University (via HarvardX) and MIT (via MITx):
“If we wished only to increase overall certification rates, one solution is simple: restrict
access. Online browsers, online explorers, and teachers-as learners would not benefit from
such a policy. And MOOCs would lose their first two letters and much of their claim to
innovation, instead becoming familiar, smaller, online courses” (Ho, A. D, 2015, page 33)
MOOC subpopulations show us the importance of directing our attention towards the nature of the
target group, and not so much the massiveness of it.
In a status report for the EU-supported HOME (Higher education Online: MOOCs the European Way)
project, authors for this paper argue for a more nuanced view on drop-outs (Bang et al. 2015a).
Otherwise the drop-out statistics may be the issue that kills the MOOC movement:
“What is a dropout seen from the institution may not be a dropout from the learner’s point
of view. He or she may have signed-up for the course just to see what a MOOC is or to test if
MOOC-learning is a relevant way of learning for him or her. Or they may only be interested in
certain parts of the course and leave the courses when they have obtained the knowledge
they came for.
43
Dropout may also be a result of difficulties combining MOOC studies with work and family
life. When signing-up for at MOOC is free of charge, it is also easy to quit participation as
soon as obstacles occur.
Our point of view is that we should develop more nuanced ways of investigating dropout
from MOOC courses in order to focus on the reasons for dropout that we are able to improve
in course development and course management. From different analysis of MOOC learners
and especially the ones that have completed the courses, it is obvious that they are
educationally biased. Most of the successful MOOC learners have already a BA, MA or PhD
degree. They have already in their previous studies learnt how to learn. They are experienced
independent learners!”
What we have learned so far within the MOOC movement is that people are not born to be MOOC
learners. MOOC learning has to be introduced and developed in collaboration with learners – which,
to a large extent, this way of learning is not supported by the focus in the traditional school system
on repetition. But parallel to the innovative pedagogical experiments within MOOCs, we also have to
acknowledge that MOOCs have an obvious strength as providers of knowledge to the world – and
here we focus both on the cMOOCs and the more traditional xMOOCs:
“[...] they are able to supply professionals with further education and in this way keep them
updated with the latest research results. Especially within the educational sector the
updating of teachers in combination with access to Open Educational Resources (OER) offers
opportunities for improved education for their students and pupils – not least in third world
countries.” (Bang et al. 2015a).
This element of continuous further education that involves using tutors and teachers to guide the
process of knowledge acquisition within the educational system is unfortunately, too often given
little attention in the commercial market for educational materials. Furthermore, attempts at
increasing access often involve offerings that result in not being able to cater adequately to various
learner types.
Our intent is not to restrict access. Our intent is to enable open access. Whilst MOOCs in their
original inception, favour scale, we suggest a model that embraces innovation for smaller learning
areas (and language areas) – one that advances the principles of open access, brings research and
education to new target groups and also enables dialogue between students and the outside world.
Enhancing on campus education with MOOCs
It is not trivial to establish a sustainable business model for free education. In order to be
sustainable, MOOCs need to support central activities of educational institutions. Currently, de
Langen & van den Bosch (2013) argue that MOOCs are primarily a supplement to the regular forms of
44
education for degree-searching students. But there can be many different motivations behind
institutional commitment to MOOC development. Key motivations are marketing and branding, and
pedagogical and technological experimentation (Yuan & Powell 2013). However, such motives are
difficult to align with the core activities of a university, and they would imply that the MOOC
activities themselves become secondary to the objective of for instance branding, which could be
done by other means.
Over the years there has also been an on-going discussion about the pedagogies behind MOOCs. For
instance, Daniel (2012) argues that MOOCs employ old distance learning techniques that date back at
least 40 years. Especially, the massive use of video lectures and automated assessment has been
criticised for isolating the learners (Chen, 2014; Daniel, 2012; Dolan, 2014).
The newest developments – including the above mentioned approaches with their abbreviations - is
to a large extent experimenting with combining online education and campus-based education, but
also larger institutions are working along these lines. We have tried in this subchapter to locate some
of the more interesting initiatives.
Adopting MOOCs for on campus courses can be done by repurposing select educational elements
and using these within on campus curricula. It can also mean allowing students in on campus
education to interact synchronously/ asynchronously with the broader worldwide community taking
these courses. This second scenario opens up for significant interaction in online networks, which
may conceivably play out via online discussion forums, blogs, social media. There is support for the
claim that on campus education can be enhanced by pedagogical innovations being offered through
MOOC initiatives. MOOC courses offered on edX by Harvard University (via HarvardX) and MIT (via
MITx) have attested to this:
“The flow of resources and innovations between residential and online courses has been
considerable at HarvardX and MITx. Instant-feedback assessment scoring, video annotation
tools, online office hours, and high-quality videos have served both online and residential
students (Ho, A. D. 2015; 5)
Indeed repurposing of resources is happening:
“Beyond Cambridge, Massachusetts, we also have evidence of the potential and desire of
instructors to incorporate HarvardX and MITx content into their own teaching. Yale is
adopting a Harvard computer science course, CS50, for its own students.” (Ho, A. D. 2015; 5)
Repurposing can mean taking out select resources and using these in accordance with instructors’
distinct preferences:
45
“These examples help to communicate the breadth of the impact that the HarvardX and
MITx initiatives have had on the development, visibility, and usage of pedagogical resources
and innovations on campus. At this writing, over 83% of MIT undergraduates have used the
residential MITx system (run separately from edX, but using the same underlying opensource software) for a substantial portion of coursework in one or more classes. At Harvard,
adoption is also proceeding, and many residential courses that have HarvardX counterparts
are using HarvardX resources to support residential instruction (Bergeron, 2014).” (Ho, A. D.
2015; 31)
On campus education may also be enhanced, as mentioned above, through the dynamics of
significant interaction that provide opportunities for learning with a living community of learners,
promoting as they interact, prolific opportunities for disequilibrium – that elusive parameter, often
missing in courses that are purely instructional.
The impact of iterative dialogue and group cognition with significant interaction among peers, where
those peers have included both on campus students and participants from the wider online
community, can already be observed in newer experiments. Tel Aviv University has conducted an
interesting experiment involving students on campus with the wider online community. Their intent
has been to not only provide their MOOC as a public service, but to further pedagogical innovations
that aid in learning outcomes of their on campus students. Tel Aviv University have offered MOOCs
to the worldwide public and simultaneously incorporated these as part of their academic curriculum,
engaging the claim that closing gaps and achieving learning excellence can be complimentarily
supportive (Bang et al. 2015b).
Tel Aviv University has offered three academic MOOCs, taught in English, in the fields of archaeology,
history and science. The courses have been made available through Coursera and have been offered
as a public service and as future training for the information society. Interestingly, Tel Aviv University
has also opened these courses to Tel Aviv University undergraduate students to take these MOOCs as
part of their current curriculum and these students receive academic credit for them upon
completion. Tel Aviv University students were required to take their final exam on campus, in
addition to completing the assignments and the official online course exam. The added value these
MOOCs have had on Tel Aviv University students, as well as suggestions for improvement can be
seen as having value for other universities wishing to integrate MOOCs as part of their academic
curriculum:
"mentioned the valuable convenience of flexible learning – any place and any time, according
to their schedule. In addition, several suggestions for improvement were made, such as
receiving specific guidelines regarding course assignments and especially the final test,
adding subtitles to videos to assist with any language issues, and addressing the imbalance
46
between the difficulty level of the assignments and quizzes versus the final exam" (Soffer, T.,
& Cohen A. 2015)
Another very
interesting and similar model is the
case of the
HOOC
(Hybrid Open Online Course)— project at the University of Pittsburgh. Here, students are proactively
encouraged to interact with online students on the wider MOOC platform:
“The online students can listen to an hour of each three-hour seminar and participate in the
discussion by posting comments on Twitter. And each doctoral students enrolled in the
campus class is required to prepare a lesson in the course and teach it to the online
students.” (Negrea, S. 2014)
Associate professor of communication, Gordon Mitchell, University of Pittsburgh comments on the
dynamic: “It’s a symbiotic evolution for two courses that are happening at the same time.” (Negrea,
S. 2014).
Opportunities are also made possible by new technologies for creating new collegiate experiences.
So far they have only been gleaned but have already appeared on the horizon, having numerous
possible configurations.
Earlier in this document it has been mentioned that creating successful learning outcomes is closely
linked to engaged learning within sub-groups of similarly aligned peer cohorts, which then become
systems for dialectical exchanges, meaning negotiation, knowledge sharing and knowledge creation.
It is interesting to note that the characteristics that combine to form these distinct subgroups/cohort cultures within MOOCs also have their likeness in campus cultures and communities
and it is these dynamic systems that have become attractors to students. These experiential
attributes: the value of culture, community, and resource access are as valid in online experiences as
they are within on campus education and are therefore as desirable to have, as desirable to emulate
and to leverage within online environments. In tandem with on campus face-to-face
environments, the two can work together and be customised to guide students through curricula in a
very effective manner.
Indeed creating spaces for autonomous and collaborative learning, and extending this understanding
to include facilities for problem solving and opportunities for provision of mentors is key for
creating successful learning environments both offline and online:
"At its best, learning is manifestation of curiosity. Campuses should be designed to enable
students to explore their curiosities while equipping them with the necessary skills and
frameworks to work on challenging problems after graduating. Instead of lecture halls,
47
campuses should be design more closely to a co-working space, or at scale, the Googleplex.
Campuses should provide the environment that fosters community and collaboration while
enabling students to engage with the learning they’re curious about.
Instead of relying on on-campus faculty to administer curricula, colleges should provide
mentors and coaches that guide students through curriculums, regardless of which
institution may have generated the curriculum." (Blake, D., 2015)
Online tools provide facilities for creating such spaces and for flexible tailor made solutions that, in a
leaner manner, home in on essential core curricula, whilst eliminating development costs, overhead
costs etc. Not only is this potential for finely tuned customisation, still largely unexplored, the byproduct of extra free time from having leaner flipped classroom implementations, allows for more
time in face to face environments, which could of course be lived out in quite disparate exterior
networks:
"Leveraging third-party curricula will also enable institutions to create more customised
courses, pulling smaller course modules from multiple institutions to create their own unique
course.
Eliminating classrooms, libraries, and research centres means colleges could create a much
larger and leaner network of affiliated campuses. When content is no longer tied to location,
students can seek regions and cities of interest and educational relevance. Imagine a college
finance track that leverages online curricula while allowing students to spend time in New
York, London, and Dubai. Students could maintain core curriculum access throughout their
experience while also benefitting from regionally specific experiences. The opportunity to
leverage new tools in redefining the collegiate campus experience is massive. " (Blake, D.,
2015)
A Danish model for OOCs
Our intent in this paper is to further explore the opportunities to align open online courses with core
objectives of educational institutions. To build a sustainable business model for Open Online Courses,
there has to be a balance between the educational system (law, institutions, degrees, etc.) and the
economy (how are the educational activities financed). For obvious reasons we will take as a starting
point the Danish educational system and focus on the objectives of Danish universities.
Characteristic for Danish universities are that a numerous clauses principle is applied for all fulltime
studies accepted at the university. Even for part-time studies a grant is allocated to the institutions
48
offering the programme, when the student-fee is paid. Furthermore, Danish universities are not
allowed to earn money on part-time students. Universities in Denmark are publicly owned and
financed – as well within education as within research – in the truest sense of the words, the
universities may be called public service institutions.
At the same time being a small language area and country we have very limited funds for developing
open courses and open educational resources without a sound financial basis. Therefore our
strategic thinking and attempt to build a sustainable business model has to be very pragmatic.
Furthermore, it has to rely on a vision for the on-going development of digital technologies within
the educational sector.
As also indicated in our paper from October 2014 for the Krakow EADTU conference – “Opening up
education the Danish way: Considerations based on the redesign of a Master programme in ICTbased Educational Design" (Bang et al. 2014) – the future Danish development has to form a close
relation to new pedagogical models, depending on the technological development within education.
“Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions” from September 25, 2013,
summarises the European educational situation this way:
“Digital technologies are fully embedded in the way people interact, work and trade; yet they
are not being fully exploited in education and training systems across Europe. A recent study
on the state of digital provision in schools in the Union revealed that 63% of nine year olds
do not study at a 'highly digitally-equipped school' (with appropriate equipment, fast
broadband and high 'connectivity'). While 70% of teachers in the EU recognize the
importance of training in digital-supported ways of teaching and learning, only 20-25% of
students are taught by digitally confident and supportive teachers. Most teachers use
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) mainly to prepare their teaching, rather
than to work with students during lessons”. (p. 2)
The communication has the title “Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and learning for all
through new Technologies and Open Educational Resources” and advocates the point that
“Open technologies allow All individuals to learn, Anywhere, Anyway, through Any device,
with the support of Anyone” (…) Most importantly, education and knowledge are able to
travel far more easily across borders greatly increasing the value of and potential for
international cooperation. Thanks to Open Educational Resources (OER), and namely
MOOCs, teachers and education institutions can now reach thousands of learners from all
49
five continents simultaneously; showcasing that language is not always a barrier.
Cooperation is enhanced by allowing learners, educators, researchers and institutions to
create, share and discuss content with peers from all over the world”. (p. 3).
The basic business model that we propose for a Danish model takes existing educational
programmes and courses as the starting point for developing Open Online Courses. One thing is, as
already mentioned, that Danish universities have no access to economical funds within the Danish
higher education to develop new and self-supporting MOOCs or OOCs. Another thing is that the most
important aspect of the OOCs is the exploitation of the new educational technologies in order to
create a new pedagogical approach to learning in the 21st century.
In our paper for the Krakow conference (Bang et al. 2014) we elaborated on how to create
independents learners in a master programme on ICT-based Educational Design. This programme is
still running and we are refining the communication between the students and teachers and the
students themselves in order to extend collaboration and independent learning. Unfortunately this
process has postponed the open online dimension of the project to be started later this year. From a
pedagogical point of view we don’t see the huge difference between the full-time students in the
programme and the part-time students following the course as an OOC. Basically we consider Open
Online Courses as a part of the public service obligations of Danish universities to disseminate
research. Teaching can also be viewed as a form of research dissemination, but to a limited audience,
and not to the general public. Thus, the business model is to build an OOC layer on top of existing
courses and use the course material, activities and assignments as the basis for open, online
activities.
The target group of such OOCs would not be everyone. Instead of having an ambition of reaching a
massive target group, we argue for making thorough considerations about the most relevant target
group as the key group to address. Such a target group could be former students who wish to have a
continuous relation to their main subject matter. Or it could be employees who have worked for
several years in public or private organisations and wish to be updated on their field. These would all
be people already holding a degree, and they would most often be people who are actively searching
for inspiration and knowledge of recent developments within their field.
Such a target group would, for the most part, be independent learners. As we have argued above,
the OOC model is mostly suitable for independent learners who are capable of reading academic
texts, doing analyses, etc. Thus, the pedagogical approach that we propose for an OOC parallel to an
existing course would be based on independent learners. The target group would be independent
learners who already know the basic subject area, and who may also be practicing within the field.
Not only does this model enable the expansion of course activities to a larger audience by opening up
50
education towards society (and industry), but at the same time the model can potentially support
dialogue between students and the outside world. This could foster a reality check on the fantasies
of the enrolled students. Bringing in people working within the field of study may enlighten and put
into perspective the academic work and discussions taking place within the traditional course.
The proposed pedagogical model of a Danish OOC will be based on independent work of the
participants of the open, online track. OOC participants will be expected to acquaint themselves with
the course materials and provide analyses as well as participate in collaborative activities and
discussion. In that respect, the OOC will more closely resemble the cMOOC rather than the xMOOC
pedagogical model. Such a model will, however, require that the existing course with enrolled
students is focused towards affording discussion, dialogue and collaboration. This will enable the
involvement of the enrolled (registered full-time) students in dialogue with the OOC track.
From the perspective of research dissemination and public service, the main objective of the OOC
would not be completion of a course, but would be to inspire and influence the participants. Going
back to the findings of subpopulations in Kizilcec, Piech & Schneider (2013), the OOC would target
both completing, auditing, disengaging and sampling participants. These are all a target group for
research dissemination, but not for completing a course.
Discussion: OOCs for independent learners
We would very much like to use the opportunity in this conference focusing on “Transforming Higher
Education in the 21st Century” to discuss some of the issues brought forward in this paper. If we go
back to the key objective of open education to educate citizens who have difficulties accessing the
traditional educational system, the "massiveness" of open education is not the primary goal to
achieve. We have argued in this paper that the main potential of open, online education may be to
educate other target groups than the students of the traditional educational system. This means that
open, online education should direct its activities towards further education and lifelong learning.
Taking such a direction first of all means that open online education should focus on specific target
groups rather than the masses. Secondly, we have argued that such an approach to open, online
education necessitates independent learners. To sum up, this paper wishes to contribute with the
following point to the discussions around the transformation of Higher Education in the 21st century:
1. Shift the focus away from dropout rates and the 'massive' of open, online courses. The
main objective of lifelong learning should not necessarily be to "complete a course", but
rather to be educated by engaging with relevant subject matter.
51
2. Build Open, Online Courses for specific target groups on top of and parallel to traditional
campus-based courses with enrolled students. We propose a view on OOCs as an extension
of traditional courses, but with a different format that is suitable for lifelong learners.
3. Design OOCs for independent learners. We argue that it is a misunderstanding to conceive
of MOOCs as a substitute to traditional courses that address enrolled students. Instead, we
have argued that the main potential of open online courses is for further education of
independent learners
In conclusion, an innovative transformation of Higher Education would not be to continue developing
courses for enrolled students, but rather to target new groups of independent learners. A central
question arising from a focus on independent learners is how to create independent learners that are
able to study on their own through courses written as MOOCs or OOCs and supported with Open
Educational Resources.
Appendix 1: Overview of MOOC abbreviations
BOOC - Big Open Online Course (Hickey, D., 2013; Hickey, D., Uttamchandani, S., 2013; Tattersall
2013)
BOOC - Blending Online and On-Campus Course (HKU, 2014)
DOCC - Distributed Online Collaborative Course (Hickey, D., 2013; Jaschik 2013)
DOCS - Digital Open Courses at Scale (Kim, J., 2015)
HOOC - Hybrid Open Online Course (Negrea, S., 2014)
MOOR - Massive Open Online Research (Blake, D., 2014; Hosler, A., 2014)
SMOC - Synchronous Massive Online Course (UTNews, 2013)
SPOC – Small Private Online Course (Dillenbourg,P., 2014; White, B., 2013; Bayne, S., 2014; Kjeldstad,
B. 2014)
TORQUE - Tiny, Open-with-Restrictions, focused on Quality and Effectiveness (ETH Zurich )
References
Bang, J., Dalsgaard, C., O'Donovan, M. (2015a). 8.2. HOME: Exploitation Review, internal status
report, HOME project (Higher education Online: MOOCs the European way) (not publicly available).
Bang, J., Dalsgaard, C., O'Donovan, M. (2015b), MOOCs in Europe: A Literature Review. Working
paper, Aarhus University. Accessed August 18th, 2015 from:
52
http://pure.au.dk/portal/files/90670653/MOOCs_in_Europe.pdf
Bang, J., Dalsgaard, C., Kjær, A., & O’Donovan, M. M. (2014). Opening up education the Danish way:
Considerations based on the redesign of a Master programme in ICT-‐based Educational Design.
In EADTU Conference 2014: The Open and Flexible Higher Education Conference. Retrieved from:
http://conference.eadtu.eu/images/Proceedings/Conference_2014_-_proceedings.pdf
Bayne, S. and Ross, J., (2014), The pedagogy of the Massive Open Online Course: the UK view,
Edinburgh University, The University of Edinburgh
Retrieved from:
https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/elt/the_pedagogy_of_the_MOOC_UK_view
Blake, D., (2014) MOOR: The Newest Player in the MOOC Game, MOOCS.com
Retrieved from: http://moocs.com/index.php/moor-the-newest-player-in-the-mooc-game/
Caswell, T., Henson, S., Jensen, M., & Wiley, D. (2008). Open content and open educational
resources: Enabling universal education. The International Review of Research in Open and
Distributed Learning, 9(1).
Chen, Y. (2014). Investigating MOOCs through blog mining. The International Review of Research in
Open and Distributed Learning, 15(2).
Clow, D. (2013, April). MOOCs and the funnel of participation. In Proceedings of the Third
International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 185-189). ACM.
Daniel, J. (2012). Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility.
Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2012(3), Art-18.
de Langen, F., & van den Bosch, H. (2013). Massive Open Online Courses: disruptive innovations or
disturbing inventions? Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 28(3), 216-226.
Dillenbourg,P., Fox,A., Kirchner,C., Mitchell,J.,and Wirsing,M (2014)
Manifesto from Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop, Massive Open Online Courses: Current State and
Perspectives
Retrieved from:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/bdl1eyawmvq4yqu/manifestofromdagstuhlperspectivesworkshop
moocscurrentstateandperspectives.pdf
53
ETH Zurich, TORQUES
Retrieved from: https://www.ethz.ch/en/the-eth-zurich/education/innovation/torques.html
European Commission (2013). Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and learning for all
through new Technologies and Open Educational Resources. Retrieved from http://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1389115469384&uri=CELEX:52013DC0654
Friesen, N. (2009). Open educational resources: New possibilities for change and sustainability. The
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(5).
He, J., Bailey, J., Rubinstein, B. I., & Zhang, R. (2015, February). Identifying At-Risk Students in Massive
Open Online Courses. In Twenty-Ninth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
Hickey, D., (2013), On MOOCs, BOOCs, and DOCCs: Innovation in Open Courses, RE-MEDIATING
ASSESSMENT
Retrieved from http://remediatingassessment.blogspot.dk/2013/09/on-moocs-boocs-and-doccinnovation-in.html
Hickey, D., Uttamchandani, S., (2013), Is Self-Paced Participatory Learning Possible?
Retrieved from: http://remediatingassessment.blogspot.dk/2015/06/is-self-paced-participatorylearning.html
Hosler, A., (2014) Massive Open Online Research: The MOOC Evolves into the MOOR,
www.emergingedtech.com
Retrieved from: http://www.emergingedtech.com/2014/01/massive-open-online-research-themooc-evolves-into-the-moor/
HKU (2014) MOOCs, SPOCs and BOOCs: Improving the learner experience in and beyond campus, elearning Pedagogical Support Unit, The University of Hong Kong.
Retrieved from: http://tl.hku.hk/2014/11/moocs-spocs-and-boocs-improving-the-learnerexperience-in-and-beyond-campus/
Ho, A. D., Chuang, I., Reich, J., Coleman, C., Whitehill, J., Northcutt, C., Williams, J. J., Hansen, J.,
Lopez, G., & Petersen, R. (2015). HarvardX and MITx: Two years of open online courses (HarvardX
Working Paper No. 10). Retrieved from:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2586847
54
Ho, A. D., Reich, J., Nesterko, S., Seaton, D. T., Mullaney, T., Waldo, J., & Chuang, I. (2014). HarvardX
and MITx: The first year of open online courses (HarvardX and MITx Working Paper No. 1). Retrieved
from: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2381263
Jaschik, S. (2013) Feminists challenge Moocs with Docc. Times Higher Education.
Retrieved from: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/feminists-challenge-moocswithdocc/2006596.article
Jiang, S., Williams, A., Schenke, K., Warschauer, M., & O'dowd, D. (2014, July). Predicting MOOC
performance with week 1 behavior. In Educational Data Mining 2014.
Jordan, K. (2014). Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses. The
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(1).
Kim, J., (2015), DOCS not MOOCs, www.insidehighered.com
Retrieved from: https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/technology-and-learning/docs-not-moocs
Kizilcec, R. F., Piech, C., & Schneider, E. (2013). Deconstructing disengagement: analyzing learner
subpopulations in massive open online courses. In Proceedings of the third international conference
on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 170-179). ACM.
Kjeldstad, B., Alvestrand H., Elvestad E. O., Ingebretsen T., Melve I., Bongo M., et al. (2014). MOOCs
for Norway: New digital learning methods in higher education. Norwegian Ministry of Education and
Research. Retrieved from:
https://oerknowledgecloud.org/sites/oerknowledgecloud.org/files/NOU201420140005000EN_PDFS.
pdf
Negrea, S.(2014),Stanford’s hybrid MOOC offers alternative - Graduate students work on same
projects as 25,000 MOOC takers, www.universitybusiness.com,
Retrieved from: http://www.universitybusiness.com/article/stanford's-hybrid-mooc-offersalternative
Reich, J. (2014). MOOC Completion and Retention in the Context of Student Intent. Retrieved 7th
July, 2015, from hhttp://www.educause.edu/ero/article/mooc-completion-and-retention-contextstudent-intent
55
Reich, J. (2015), Rebooting MOOC Research Improve assessment, data sharing, and experimental
design Retrieved from: http://www.edtechresearcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Science2015-Reich-34-5.pdf
Seaton, D.T., Coleman, C., Daries, J., and Chuang, I. (2015) Enrollment in MITx MOOCs: Are We
Educating Educators? Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/enrollment-mitx-moocsare-we-educating-educators
Tattersall, A. (2013) Gold Rush or just Fool’s Gold - A Quick Look at the Literature. ScHARR MOOC
Diaries. Retrieved from: http://scharrmoocdiaries.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/scharr-mooc-diaries-partxvii-gold-rush.html
UTNews (2013), University Offers First-Ever Synchronous Massive Online Course, The University of
Texas at Austin
Retrieved from: http://news.utexas.edu/2013/08/26/university-offers-first-ever-synchronousmassive-online-course
White, B. (2013) An edX SPOC as the Online Backbone of a Flipped College Course, edX
Retrieved from: https://www.edx.org/blog/edx-spoc-online-backbone-flipped-college
Wiley, D. (2008). OER handbook for educators.
Ye, C., & Biswas, G. (2014). Early Prediction of Student Dropout and Performance in MOOCs using
Higher Granularity Temporal Information. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1(3), 169-172.
Yuan, L., Powell, S., & CETIS, J. (2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher education.
Yuan, L., Powell, S., & Olivier, B. (2014). Beyond MOOCs: Sustainable online learning in institutions.
Cetis publications. Retrieved February, 8, 2014.
56
Birkenkrahe Marcus
Building Graduate-Level, Gamified xMOOCs In Moodle
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Berlin School of Economics and Law
Germany
msb@hwr-berlin.de
Abstract
We present preliminary results from two different online course design experiments: in the
first experiment, which ran from April to June 2015, the author developed an online precourse on Research Methods for Master students as a model. In the other experiment, a
group of undergraduates developed similar online course modules for different topics as
part of their term project.
All online modules were designed for, implemented and tested on the school's Moodle
platform. External cloud-based repositories such as YouTube and Soundcloud were used, as
was animation software. Lectures, interviews, and role play material were presented in a
variety of audio and video formats including role plays, interviews, monologues, semiscripted dialogues, and story-telling. All formats were installed on a Moodle platform,
making use of lessons for instruction, forums for discussion, limited game elements and
completion tracking to achieve an immersive effect. Each lesson ended with one or more
topical challenges. The students were then asked to teach each other by engaging in semistructured discussions. They were supposed to challenge each other and respond to each
other’s challenges.
We describe preparation, setup, execution and feedback from both the model course and
the courses created by the undergraduate students. We relate our experiences to the stateof-the-art of creation of Massive Open Online Courses primarily designed for instruction
purposes (xMOOCs). We give an outlook for xMOOC design and development using Moodle
in connection with cloud-based repositories and we speculate about the benefits and issues
with involving students in the design of such courses.
Keywords: Moodle, xMOOC, immersion, gamification, learning-by-teaching
57
1. Introduction
The creation of instruction-centered massive open online courses (xMOOCs) consumes a lot
of time and resources (Elston and Morris, 2015). The more one can use existing
infrastructure and existing staff, the more one can focus on content and execution.
In teaching practice the "Learning through teaching" (in German "Lernen durch Lehren", or
LdL) method developed first by Jean-Pol Martin asserts that assigning the task of teaching
other students to students improves learning efficiency (Grzega and Schöner, 2008).
1.1 Problem
Massive Open Online Courses focused on instruction (xMOOCs) are widely discussed as
serious contenders for traditional teaching. Most of the available literature focuses on the
effectiveness of these courses but little is written about how to create them. There is no
standard approach for the creation of xMOOCs - neither regarding the infrastructure, nor the
design, nor the skills required. At the same time, learning management systems are freely
available at many universities, and students are available as content creators.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this research was to investigate the creation of online courses by students
for students using a standard learning management system (in this case, Moodle1).
In recent publications, we described the rationale for designing instruction-based online
courses (Birkenkrahe, 2014) and outlined criteria and concepts for such courses (Birkenkrahe
and Kjellin, 2015). An earlier paper (Birkenkrahe and Mundt, 2009) also dealt with the
creation of online teaching material by undergraduate students. The focus of that paper,
however, was on diversity in the classroom, and the students were not asked to create
complete courses.
In this paper I will describe and discuss the courses created by students themselves, how
they were built by the students, and how the students were coached towards this goal.
Preliminary feedback from both courses, both from course creators and students, is
presented and discussed.
1.3 Research questions
1) Can students develop online learning courses to be used in xMOOCs?
2) How did the students experience the creation of such courses?
1
See http://moodle.org
58
1.4 Methods
The well-known Moodle learning management system was used as a platform to establish
several online courses. The resulting courses could be classified as "SPOCs" (Small Private
Online Courses) rather than MOOCs (Garlock, 2015). However, they are designed to be
rolled out to a large number of students and to run with little or no supervision. The
teachers who developed the courses were undergraduate students instructed and coached
by the author.
Technically, this investigation can be classified as design-based research in the sense of
Wang and Hannafin (2005) and (for information systems research) Hevner et al. (2004). The
goal is to arrive at evidence-based design principles by constructing and investigating an
artifact, in this case an online course, which is presented as a case study. Evidence is
gathered through insights rather than statistical significance. These insights are obtained by
systemic action research methods in the participant-observer mode (see e.g. Burns, 2007):
the courses were used in a real high education setting, influencing the learning process of
the students. The author of this paper was instigator, co-designer, lecturer and finally
investigator.
2. The courses
The focus of this paper is online course creation by students. The creation of the online
course by the author of this paper, a professional lecturer, was described in detail in
Birkenkrahe and Kjellin (2015). This course is important background for the creation of
courses by the students because it was used as an example throughout and because it was
my first experience in creating such an online course. Therefore I will describe this lecturercreated model course ("pre-course") with an emphasis on the course creation aspects.
2.1 The lecturer's pre-course (model course)
2.1.1 Goal
The goal of the pre-course was to give international students with widely differing research
backgrounds an overview of current research methods, processes and criteria and introduce
them to both the active researchers and the current research processes at the school. The
course was intended to prepare its participants -- both in terms of knowledge and in terms
of process -- for a traditional classroom-based research seminar parallel to the first phase of
research leading to a Master thesis.
2.1.2 Content
The course contained five levels (i.e. topical chapters). Each level contained 2-4 quests (i.e.
topical sub chapters):
59
1) Introduction to the course content, the platform, to the lecturer and to the group; the
latter was facilitated through a forum where the students had to write a post containing
their learning expectations. The lecturer kicked the discussion off with his own
expectations.
2) Principles of scientific investigations with four quests: research skills; research criteria;
research process; research ethics.
3) Research activities with two quests: finding a research problem; reviewing the literature.
4) Research methods with three quests: experiments; survey research; case study research.
All quests included lessons (using the "lesson" activity in Moodle). Each lesson contained a
lecture (created for this course), externally procured topical videos, audio interviews
(created for this course), a quiz with a question or two to test the student's understanding of
the lecture, further reading material and a summary ("cheat sheet") of the quest topic.
At the time of the pilot of the course which is presented here, the content was not
complete: a fifth level, "Research writing", with three quests (Writing; Storytelling;
Publishing) had not been finished. On level 3, one quest "Structuring your thesis" had not
been finished. And on level 4 ("Research Methods"), the quests "Action Research", "Design
Science" and "Grounded Theory" had not been finished.
Besides these levels/chapters covering most of the areas dealt with by research methods
textbooks, the students had access to a collection of 150 audio clips edited from interviews
with both local and international active researchers. The interviews were also used in the
lessons.
Several lectures, especially on the research methods as such in level 4, were audio
recordings of semi-scripted debates between a student and his professor (played by the
author and one of his collaborators, resp.). Semi-scripted means that they were developed
over several meetings using scripted dialogues as the basis of improvisation.
2.1.3 Preparation
The course preparation fell into four different categories: best practice search; technical
infrastructure; securing content; online implementation.
Best practice search: I found a few topical online courses - most of them on research writing
and thesis writing. The course "Solid Science Research Methods" created by the University of
Amsterdam (2014) and delivered through the MOOC provider Coursera2 came closest to my
idea of the online course. However, it had a different focus and rationale, different resources
and and a different user base: the focus was on quantitative research design methods,
specifically in the social sciences; the rationale was a response to several fraud scandals that
2
http://www.coursera.org
60
had seemingly shaken the field's confidence in the validity and practice of its own methods;
the resources, according to the course site and private communication with the lead course
creator, included as many as fifteen professionals fulfilling different roles during preparation
and execution of the course. Finally, the user base was much more diverse and much larger
than usual for public MOOCs.
Besides this topical course, I attended one other course on online teaching methods,
„Learning To Teach Online“, created by the University of New South Wales (2014) and also
hosted by Coursera.
Both courses made a very professional impression and were expertly supervised using a
number of different platforms (including Facebook and Twitter). They used a Wiki as a
growing information resource, forums to facilitate student discussions, and online quizzes.
The Amsterdam course also contained peer review exercises and forum posts could be rated
anonymously. The Australian course contained a wealth of information for further reading
and learning.
Technical infrastructure: I had originally planned to offer the course on the Internet as a
true MOOC. I changed my mind after I realized Moodle's potential for creating learning
paths and tracking task completion (using Moodle's completion tracking settings), Moodle's
ease of creating lessons, and the possibility of implementing peer review exercises using the
Moodle "Workshop" option.
I spent a couple of months researching and experimenting with different visualisation and
animation softwares and hosting platforms before settling on Soundcloud3 for to host audio
clips; YouTube to host videos; Videoscribe4 for whiteboard animations; Goanimate for
animated videos; Zaption5 for interactive video lessons; and Plotagon6 for scripted, animated
dialogs and scenes.
Securing content: this turned out to be the least stable and predictable part of my
preparations. I had originally planned to structure the course according to standard
categories for the topic ("research methods") to be found in any text book. After I read the
student expectations for this course, I restructured the material around student questions.
Content selection and presentation are based on the issues of the students. I could of course
3
http://soundcloud.com
4
http://www.videoscribe.co
5
http://www.zaption.com
6
https://plotagon.com
61
only do this because I was creating the content only shortly - in some cases only one week before publishing it. During the entire time of the course creation, I interviewed experts.
These expert interviews were semi-structured, which allowed me to ask the questions the
students wanted answered.
In terms of content I could also draw on years of experience as a supervisor of researchbased theses. During my supervision I had already successfully used Moodle as a platform
for discussion and content delivery.
I could draw on a wealth of publicly available material in the form of YouTube videos,
ranging from short presentations to full length lectures. For the online course I selected
material after checking it thoroughly. I wrote comments and summaries for the selected
external videos.
Online implementation: the course was made available to a pilot group of full-time MBA
students on 30 March 2015. The last completed quest ("Survey research") was put online on
May 17. The students were asked to provide feedback using a form in Moodle by 26 July
2015.
During this time, quests were published irregularly because of the above-mentioned
dynamic content creation in response to student needs. In the future, one quest will be
published per week, with a total of 18 finished quests or a whole teaching term.
Whenever a new quest was published, a message was posted in the news forum, to which
every student is automatically subscribed. (See image)
There was an FAQ forum where I posted answers to common questions about both the
course and course content. I offered two (optional) live sessions where participants could
ask questions. These sessions were conducted via Adobe Connect.
The course included two elements of gamification - badges and forum ratings. For every
completed level the student would obtain a badge. The criteria for getting a badge can be
inspected in Moodle in the standard "navigation" sidebar. These badges were scanned
images of drawings that I had made and colored myself. They could only be obtained in this
course and represented an element of uniqueness.
The criteria for winning a badge are connected to completion tracking, which must be
enabled by the lecturer (course owner role) in the course settings. Completion tracking
allows the lecturer to set conditions for completion of every single material or activity in the
course. This makes it possible to check class progress at a glance (for the lecturer only).
The other gamification element was the possibility to anonymously rate forum posts using
points. Forum rating must be enabled by the lecturer in the forum settings.
No gradebook was defined or used for this course. Students could complete activities
(materials, forums and lessons) by viewing, posting, replying and by answering in-lesson quiz
questions but these data were not aggregated using the gradebook.
62
The possibilities for gamifying courses like this one has been investigated recently by
Thirouard et al. (2015) and by Bolduan (2015).
2.1.5 Feedback
The pilot course had 16 participants, all of them students in the last term of a 3-semester
full-time MBA program. There was explicit feedback and automatic feedback through course
reports.
Explicit feedback. Course participants were asked to fill in a feedback form in Moodle. The
questions and answers are given in Table 1 below. Five students responded.
Table 1: feedback from students of the lecturer’s model course.
Question
Answers
What did you like
Comprehensive knowledge on research skills and process from various
about this course?
dimension interpreted, very practical.
I came to know about how to do a research on internet for thesis or any
other research....
It helped me in getting started
That it was made with a lot of attention to details, a lot of motivation, and
with expert knowledge. I also liked the different approached (videos,
listening modules, quizzes....). I also like that I can always go back to previous
lessons / that the course stays open
What did you not like Online interaction is not efficient sometime.
about this course?
Would have liked it to be more in person may be just 1-2 classes in between
to connect more
The amount of information was overwhelming, esp. for just being an online
course. I also still don't understand why we had a "regular" course and this
one on top of that. Both cover similar topics.
What did you learn
Besides the skills and methodologies, the passion to the topic search is the
through this course? key for a fruitful achievement.
A lot of valuable things for my Master Thesis
Structuring the thesis
Which other topics
Case explanation, chose specific topics which links our study, to detail the
should this course
process how to constantly change and adhere on the finalise topic till
cover?
achieve satisfied results.
Which advice would
Try to find your topic as early as possible, to discuss with the prof. so that
you give to future
you can find a suitable topic be able to handle later on.
students of this
course?
63
Which advice would
you give to future
lecturers of this
course?
Meeting in person at least once during the course would be nice to clarify
questions. I know web sessions were offered but it isn't really the same.
Specific case display on the process of research
Automatic feedback. At the course level, Moodle offers two types of reports to the lecturer:
an activity report (number of times an activity was used) and activity completion tracking
(manual completion by the student or automatic completion depending on set conditions).
The activity report is useless since it is not possible to distinguish different roles. The activity
completion was checked regularly to make sure if the participants were keeping up with the
publication schedule. The picture was very mixed - one third of the participants worked very
diligently, another third worked erratically, and the last third did hardly any work in the
course. Since the course was announced as a pilot, this is not surprising.
At the activity level, the time spent on lessons is also tracked for each student.
During the course, the average time spent by the students on each lesson was within 10% of
the projected time - this was very valuable information because it meant that the lessons
were well planned and paced.
There was automatic tracking at external host sites - e.g. the host site for the sound files
(audio clips from interviews), which may serve as indicator that the course material was
accessed: during 30 March and July 26, the sound files were played 838 times - individual
audio clips were played as many as 27 times.
2.2 The students' courses (project courses)
2.2.1 Goal
The goal of this project was the creation of an online learning course by students. The
courses had to be usable in class, factually correct and didactically valuable as online
learning resources. Usability and value of the courses was assessed and graded with the help
of a custom-built rubric. The students could pick their own teams of 3-4 members each. They
could choose a topic from the list of topics covered in the class or they could propose their
own topic, as long as it had anything to do with the subject of the class. The subject was
"business information systems with exercises". Its lecture part covered basic areas of
business information systems: digital companies; types of information systems; basics of
process modeling and process management; basics of database management; enterprise
resource planning systems.
The ideas behind this project were: (1) to motivate the students to spend more time on a
specific research topic. (2) to effectively double the number of topics that we could cover in
64
class. (3) to create a library of learning modules created by students for students to use in
future courses.
2.2.2 Content
The students created learning courses in the following areas: (1) digital network
infrastructure; (2) Unified Modeling Language (UML); (3) e-commerce; (4) customer
relationship management (CRM) systems; (5) make-or-buy IT decisions (MOB); (6) databases.
The learning modules were very different even though the students could see each other's
work throughout the course. All modules were centered on Moodle lessons. In the lessons,
text dominated. However, the courses included a variety of media formats: all the tools that
were demonstrated using the lecturer's model course were used in the courses. Some
courses added to the tool roster: the UML course included picture puzzles in the form of an
imported application offered in Moodle. The CRM course used the above mentioned scenic
dialog animation tool Plotagon in connection with screencasts to create a demonstration of
a real CRM system in a video. One course (UML) pushed the gamification concepts and
based the course flow on the "boss fights" known from video games: to advance to the next
level of the course, a "boss" had to be defeated by successfully passing a quiz. These quizzes
were increasingly challenging. The same course also created handmade badges: their
drawings were derived from UML symbols. After intense discussion on online copyright
issues, another group decided to draw all illustrations for the lessons themselves. One group
used GoAnimate, the video animation software, to illustrate database management
principles and let "Barack Obama, President of the United States of America" explain them.
Obama is one of the standard characters available in Goanimate. The MOB team developed
a challenging final test based on a scenario. All groups used Moodle-based games such as
Hangman or crossword puzzles and built at least one game into their courses. Two groups
developed their own glossaries. All groups implemented completion tracking and used it to
create and control online learning paths. Four groups implemented feedback forms at the
end of their courses (they did not share the results). Two groups invited external test users
for informal feedback.
2.2.3 Preparation
All relevant information was made available to the students via a Moodle wiki. This
information included: project goal, project process, lecture and coaching schedule,
suggested topics for the student courses, rubric for evaluation, information on the photo
presentation and the final project report, information on the agile project management
method Scrum, which was used (Schwaber, 2009); and a large number of links to example
online courses and online course creation tools.
65
A separate Moodle course was created for the students: here, they were given lecturer
administration rights so that they could implement their courses online. In this way, the
students could look at the progress of all the other teams.
The possibilities, administration and navigation of Moodle was demonstrated to the
students in the first few sessions of the classroom course.
The evaluation rubric was taken from a high school teacher teaching presentation rubric
(Eastern Illinois University, n.d.) and substantially modified and enlarged to serve as an
evaluation and structural tool for the course creation team projects7.
2.2.4 Setup
There were 25 undergraduates studying Business Informatics8 at the start of the term. Two
students left the school for personal reasons not related to the class. The class was taught
every Monday during term from 10 AM to 4 PM: in this period, the first 2 hours were spent
on lecture and discussion; the next 2 hours were spent on topical exercises; and the last
block of 2 hours was spent on working on the projects. In this block, each team received
fortnightly 30 minutes coaching while the other teams worked independently on their
projects. The projects were set up as agile projects. To this end, students were taught the
basics of agile project management and they were introduced to different online and off-line
tools to better manage agile projects such as Scrum and task boarding (using the free tool
"trello"). There was a total of 13 classroom sessions and one project review session, held
online using the Adobe Connect webinar environment. The project review session was
recorded and the recording was made available to the students afterwards.
The course projects were graded: 50% of the grade was given for the final presentation of
the project as a team grade; 50% of the grade was given to the individual for their project
reports. The presentation evaluation criteria were included in the rubric. The project report
had to contain: (1) a complete list of sources and references used by the individual to create
their part of the course; (2) a description of the methods used to create their part of the
course; (3) a description of the project process from their personal perspective, including a
short reflection on their learning; (4) a PDF copy of the content created for their part of the
course.
2.2.5 Feedback
Feedback on the courses and on the project came from two sources: test users and the
students who had created the courses.
7
The rubric is available online at http://bit.ly/moocrubric)
8
"Wirtschaftsinformatik" in German - a mixture of computer science and business administration
66
Feedback from test users. There was no opportunity to use the courses created by the
students in an actual class. Instead, I invited a number of experienced users to look at the
student courses and provide feedback. These test users were asked to provide this feedback
a few weeks before the final presentation so that the students had an opportunity to correct
mistakes and make modifications for improvements. This opportunity was used by all teams.
Seven test users looked at the student courses - five were students who worked on the
university's e-learning support team. One was a former student who had been involved in
online learning while working on his thesis. One was an expert and administrator of the elearning team. Each test user focused on one course; two test users looked at the same
course. The feedback was very detailed and included corrections of mistakes made and
suggestions for modifications of the courses regarding usability, flow, and content. The
feedback was overwhelmingly positive and content rich. Several test users remarked that
they wished that such a resource had been available to them during their time of study. The
variety of exercises provided, the diversity of media used and the overall quality was
positively noted.
Student feedback. After the final presentation and before the course evaluation, the
students had two weeks to give me feedback. Nine answers to the eight questions were
received. Questions and answers are shown in table 2.
67
Table 2: feedback from the students who created courses as part of their projects9
Question
Answers
How would you
To develop one’s own learning module, own learning methods and own
describe your original games and tools sounded like a lot of fun!
position towards the
project?
Aimless at first. I didn’t know how to begin. I wasn’t aware what exactly
should go into the project. But after some very intense research, the road
became clear.
I was sceptical, very sceptical (as I am before almost every project).
After the lectures, my expectations were very high.
Very positive.
Very motivated, I was looking forward to creating courses in Moodle.
Interesting project, something else, better than a written exam.
I was quite insecure at the start and I couldn’t imagine what it would mean,
and I didn’t know how we would implement the whole thing
How did your position Initial motivation was lessened through Moodle itself: too cumbersome,
change in the course settings hard to find; no automatic format for the course; no automatic list of
of the project?
references.
The lecture part was too over-crowded. One should have covered the topics
less and more directly to have more time for the Moodle courses.
Once I realized that the work load was limited, I actually had fun. I thought
the project made a nice change to other courses because it was quite unique
and innovative.
In the course of the term it became clearer; the lecturer provided more hints
and the team could implement its ideas
[Motivation] went down a bit. I thought the classes had too little to do with
the project as such. Besides that I thought the classes were exciting and the
project was interesting.
A lot of work was necessary, [including] time to get used to the unfamiliar
[Moodle] platform.
Unfortunately, Moodle has got its limitations; nevertheless, we used its
possibilities and stayed positive throughout.
What did you like
Learning how to work with different tools.
about this project?
Getting to know and apply new [software] programs. The project process:
how one could see successes step after step.
9
Translated from German by the author.
68
Making of the videos and the currentness of the topic online courses.
There was a lot of space to be creative.
A lot of scope for own creativity
Develop one’s own creativity; working on the project in a team; using Moodle
as a work platform; trying many different tools.
Team setting and meetings to share experiences
Working with Moodle! Even though I had already dealt with Moodle (at
school and as a student), I had never been allowed full bent to my creativity
as administrator
Too much information on the course page! Sometimes less is more! Simply
What did you not like had problems finding the sought information even though it was there of
about this project?
course.
Moodle. It was a pity that we relied on Moodle so much. Nevertheless
fantastic courses were created. But I was aware that everything had to
happen in Moodle, because of [our] grading.
The scope was too vague. A group report for a group project would have
been better.
Can’t think of anything
Untrustworthiness of certain team members
That we were forced to use Moodle (not user friendly, bad usability,
confusing); partly contradictory statements by the lecturer (e.g. sources had
to be provided in the course, or only in the final report).
What did you learn
My own topic and the topics of the others. Found out about new tools.
through this project? Moodle platform.
Moodle in general; refreshed JavaScript and HTML [skills]; team work, quality
assurance and crisis handling; my topic and its aspects; various algorithms;
document rights issues (CC licences); refreshed video and image editing
[skills]; various historical computer science facts.
How to use Moodle as a lecturer. Preparing content for [online] learning.
Everything concerning the issue of creating an online course.
Team work; learnt new software; learnt something about the topic for our
learning module.
Working with Moodle and other tools, as well as better team work with other
team members.
Not really anything new. Have done dozens of projects like these. At most I
learnt to handle Moodle better.
Which advice would Certainly start as early as possible because the project requires a lot of effort
you give the students if you’re going for a good grade (though I don’t even know yet if our project
who work on this
has received a good grade :D )
project in the next
term?
Pick the ideal topic
69
Which advice would
you give the lecturer
for the next term?
Anything else you
wish to share?
Do as I did: get cracking right away and don’t slacken.
Study Moodle from the start.
Take the user stories seriously and develop a structure for the topic early on.
Don’t put too much fancy stuff into it - instead [build a] solid course with a
focus on content.
[Teach] Moodle settings and SQL right at the start; fewer individual
[coaching] meetings, work in the classroom instead.
Give students leave to work on the project in class, too. You introduced us to
such great tools but one has to do everything at home which takes too much
time...from Monday to Friday all my leisure time goes to studying. On the
weekend one wants to switch off...but this term [your course] always filled
the weekend.
Recommend the Wiki or demonstrate it more; otherwise keep going!
Leave everything as it was. It was good that way.
Say more about online courses and Moodle. Find good examples and explain
them.
Less information on the [wiki?] page or at least clearer and better structured;
especially true for the countless emails: at least separate important from
unimportant emails. E.g. application for the e-learning team = not important;
how should the final report look like = very important!
Leave the lectures as varied as they were this term; continue putting
everthing in Moodle as you do it; clearly define goals and expected results at
the start and don’t change them
The course was extraordinary and furthered creativity, I like it that way.
Please give students more room to breathe because the other courses
require so much time. My team and I never knew what to begin with.
Nevertheless you’re a very good lecturer who absolutely knows a lot. You
invest so much time in every lecture both to prepare beforehand and to
evaluate afterwards...be it your Wiki, your emails and many other things. We
could always reach you thank you very much for that.
3. Discussion
The results in the previous section allow for cautious answers to the four questions asked in
the introduction:
1) can students develop online learning courses to be used in xMOOCs?
The answer is positive within the limits of what was tested. Both the feedback from test
users and from the student-creators was mostly positive. The online learning courses were
realized as SPOCs rather than MOOCs. The question of whether these courses would scale to
large numbers of students on the Internet was not investigated. Nevertheless, the quality of
70
the courses was high and they were conceived as standalone. Many current xMOOCs look no
different from these courses - the dynamic aspect is provided only through forum
discussions and through a publishing schedule.
2) How did the students experience the creation of such courses?
The students experienced the course creation as mostly positive. Some expressed surprise either about the type of assignment or about the fact that Moodle was suited for the task.
The main complaint of the students was the work load. I had not given any direct
expectation regarding the amount of information in the courses to be created (except
indirectly by showing my own course). In the team coaching sessions, I focused on the team
process rather than the course itself. Hence, the work load was largely self-imposed -- a
result of intrinsic motivation and the extrinsic demands of the chosen course topic.
Group issues were largely absent from the feedback. These issues often have dominated
team projects in past classes and required intense coaching. In this class, the teams were
more independent, more focused on the outcome and more enthusiastic throughout than I
have ever seen before (during 8 years of teaching).
A number of students commented positively on the number and the kind of tools they had
available to create their courses. This is a marked contrast to typical student feedback.
Usually, students complain that there are too many tools offered and that they are not the
right tools. Hence, the experience made in this course could mean that letting students
create their own courses is an indirect way of teaching them how to handle software tools
and giving them an overview of available tools.
Several students praised the opportunity of being able to express themselves creatively
using a wide variety of the tools I had recommended that enabled creation of rich digital
content.
The impact of certain details of both the model course and the courses created by students,
such as gamification, the specific flow of lessons, the use of animation, audio and video, was
not investigated.
4. Conclusions
In this paper, I presented recent results from two online course creation experiments. They
are linked in that the first course, which I had created, served as a model and example for a
series of courses developed by students for students.
The outcome of the experiments was validated through qualitative feedback from different
sources. The feedback was mostly positive, confirming the conjecture that students are able
to create online learning courses and that letting them create such courses both brings them
joy and helps them to learn. Creating my own online course before imposing this task on the
students was, for me, an absolute necessity. The experiences made during creation and pilot
71
execution of this course enabled me to more effectively coach the students during the
creation of their courses.
The courses themselves form the basis of a growing collection of online courses that are fit
for use in class.
References
Birkenkrahe, M., Mundt, M. (2009). From crisis to creativity: undergraduates craft their own
online learning modules. International Journal for Innovation in Education, 1(1), 96-119.
Birkenkrahe, M. (2014). Using Storytelling Methods To Improve Emotion, Motivation And
Attitude Of Students Writing Scientific Papers And Theses. In G. Patel et al. (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 13th International Conference on Cognitive Informatics &
Cognitive Computing, August 18-20, LSBU, London, UK.
Birkenkrahe, M., Kjellin, H. (2015). Improving Student Interaction and Engagement In The
Flipped Classroom. In: Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on e-Learning,
University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK, 29-30 October 2015.
Bolduan,
L.S.
(2015).
Autarke
Gestaltung
von
online
Vorkursen
für
wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Studiengänge durch Gamifizierung (Bachelor thesis, Berlin
School of Economics, Berlin, Germany).
Burns, D. (2007). Systemic action research - a strategy for whole systems change. Bristol:
Policy Press.
Eastern Illinois University (n.d.). HST Teaching Presentation Rubric. Retrieved September 18,
2015, from: http://eiu.edu/assess
Elston, C. and Morris, N. (2015) Making MOOCs collaboratively: working effectively with
stakeholders. In: Proceedings of the European MOOC Stakeholder Summit 2015 (pp. 28-31).
Mons, Belgium: Universite catholique de Louvain.
Garlock, S. (2015, July-August). Is Small Beautiful?. Harvard Magazine. Retrieved from
http://harvardmagazine.com.
Grzega, J., Schöner, M. (2008). The didactic model LdL (Lernen durch Lehren) as a way of
preparing students for communication in a knowledge society. Journal of Education for
Teaching: International research and pedagogy, 34(3), 167-175.
72
Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J. and Ram, S (2004) Design Science in IS Research, MIS
Quarterly Vol 28 No 1, pp 75-105.
Schwaber, K. (2009). Agile Project Management with Scrum. New York: O’Reilly.
Thirouard, M., Bernaert, O., Dhorne, L., Bianchi, S., Pidol, L., Crepon, R. & Petit, Y. (2015).
Learning by doing: Integrating a serious game in a MOOC to promote new skills. In:
Proceedings of the European MOOC Stakeholder Summit 2015 (pp. 92-96). Mons, Belgium:
Universite catholique de Louvain.
University of Amsterdam. (2014). Solid Science Research Methods. Retrieved from
http://coursera.org.
University of New South Wales (2014). Learning To Teach Online. Retrieved from
http://coursera.org.
Wang, F., Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhancing learning
environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5-23.
73
Bollmann Alexander, Otto Daniel
Experiencing the deadlock – understanding climate change negotiations using
simulation games
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
FernUniversität in Hagen
Germany
Alexander.Bollmann@fernuni-hagen.de
Daniel.Otto@fernuni-hagen.de1
Abstract
Simulation games have emerged as an innovative learning tool to complement traditional
formats of blended learning. Utilizing simulation games allows students to better understand
complex topics by unveiling underlying dynamics and problems. Furthermore, they help
students develop new skill sets and a common understanding through interaction. These
benefits of simulation games have been put into use in a three-month project between the
FernUniversität in Hagen and the Universidade Aberta (in Lisbon). The course culminated in a
five-day workshop in Lisbon where the upcoming and very important climate change
negotiations in Paris later this year were simulated. Multilateral student groups took the
positions of key state actors and bargained for an agreement. Keynote speakers briefing the
students on different disciplinary perspectives on climate change complemented the
workshop. Overall, the course was designed as a blended learning approach that combined a
three-month virtual learning phase and the workshop in Lisbon. During the virtual learning
phase students got to know each other in a virtual kick-off-meeting, chose their group for the
upcoming negotiations and developed within each group a common negotiation strategy.
The evaluation of the course confirmed the well-known advantages of simulation games as
the participants gained a significantly improved understanding of the dynamics of climate
change negotiations. They especially mentioned the advantages of working and learning in
groups as well as the realistic experience conveyed by the workshop.
Keywords: simulation games; climate change; blended learning, higher education; political
science; interdisciplinarity
1
Corresponding author
74
Introduction
2015 is a crucial year for international climate change politics. In December, the member
states of the Conference of the Parties (COP), the governing body of the climate convention,
meet for the 21st time in Paris to bargain a legally binding agreement to combat the impacts
of climate change.
Efforts to prevent the negative effects of climate change through international commitments
look back on a long history (Bodansky, 2001; Schroeder, 2010). The scientific consensus
about an anthropogenic influence on the climate system has been early manifested in the
Assessment Reports (AR) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) during
the 90s (IPCC, 2010). With the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, 154 states signed
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) with its core
principal in article 2 to prevent "dangerous anthropogenic (i.e., human-caused) interference
of the climate system” (UNFCCC, 1992). Industrialised countries, by acknowledging their
historic responsibility, had paved the way by accepting to reduce their emissions and to
likewise guarantee developing countries adequate resources and time to catch up with
developed nations.
However, very soon it became obvious that the UNFCCC commitments were inappropriate
to comply with article 2 (Paterson, 1996). The first COP in Berlin in 1995 ended with the
Berlin Mandate which set up annual meetings to assess the effects of the measures taken by
the 195 member states and the progress made in achieving the ultimate objective of the
Convention.2 Since the first COP in Berlin, up till now 20 conferences have taken place. In
retrospect of these conferences, it must clearly be stated that the progress achieved so far is
at best marginal. The only legally binding treaty, the Kyoto protocol signed in 1997 and
extended in 2012, is far-off from being adequate to meet the 2 degree target, which is
considered the maximum level of warming for the planet (Geden, 2010). Moreover, large
discrepancies exist between the most influential countries like the US, China, India and the
EU about the questions of how a new agreement should look like. Therefore, merely hope
exists that substantial progress will be accomplished in Paris this year.
This brief introduction about the current state of climate change politics gives a little insight
into the complexity of negotiations. However, especially for interested observers these poor
outcomes of the negotiations and the fragmented community of states are often difficult to
understand. For political science, in particular International Relations, understanding and
2
http://unfccc.int/bodies/body/6383.php
75
explaining international negotiations is in the center of the research field. International
Relations is predominantly interested in the question of why or why not states cooperate. To
answer this questions political scientists have identified two major variables to explain
negotiation outcomes (Breitmeier & Otto, 2012):
1. Interest based approaches which identify common or diverging interests of states as
the central variable to explain cooperation,
2. Knowledge based approaches which explain how mutual or different understandings
of a problem can influence the finding of commons solutions.
In recourse of these approaches, political scientists use theories to analyse different actor
coalitions to explain negotiation outcomes. With the use of theories, political scientists are
able to offer different explanations of why such poor outcomes have been achieved in
climate change politics so far (Breitmeier & Otto, 2012). Beyond, they also provide in-depth
knowledge on the preference formation of the different states.
Although political science provides valuable insights of the political process, climate change
is a topic that goes far beyond one professional discipline. Climate change potentially affects
societies at all levels, e.g. in the form of more frequent natural disasters or sea level rises.
Natural as well as social and economic sciences are concerned with shedding light on all
these dimensions (Hulme, 2009). While political science clearly generates thorough
knowledge about the political aspects of climate change, it lacks a comprehensive picture of
the problem as a whole. For this comprehensive picture, an interdisciplinary approach is
needed. While for example natural science is essential to investigate the causes and impacts
of climate change, sociology is needed to understand how these impacts affect the lives of
for example local people and communities.
From a higher education perspective, climate change literacy is facing the challenge to
provide students with these comprehensive perspectives. In response to these educational
demands, interdisciplinary courses or even study programmes have emerged throughout the
last years to impart this kind of picture (Wilson, 2012; Wilson et al., 2011). In such courses,
students are taught different disciplinary perspectives on climate change. From a political
science standpoint this raises the question: What are compelling and innovative ways for
students (in interdisciplinary contexts) to learn about the politics of climate change?
In this paper, we argue that the use of simulation games can contribute to an enhanced
understanding of international climate change politics. While teaching the use of complex
theories of International Relations might be appropriate for students in political science, it is
too preconditioned for interdisciplinary teaching. Simulation games can provide a fruitful
and interactive alternative to learn about climate change politics – this likewise applies to
political science students. By taking different state positions and by developing the interest
76
formation of a state, students delve into the complexity of negotiations and thus acquire
improved knowledge of why substantial outcomes are so difficult to achieve.
In the following sections of this article we first discuss the theoretical promises of using
simulations games in higher education. Second, based on our findings, we provide
hypotheses for the empirical investigation. Third, we present a course where we used
simulation games to enhance students’ knowledge about climate change politics. Fourth,
based on a qualitative evaluation of the course we investigate whether the theoretical
expectations about simulation games met the empirical reality in the course. Finally, we
draw some conclusions about the use of simulation games in higher education and for
further research.
Simulation games
The idea to use simulation games in training can look back at a comparably long history.
Initially, simulation games were used in the military sector to adequately prepare soldiers for
their upcoming missions (Balikci, 2012, p. 12). In professional contexts, simulation games are
predominantly used to apply knowledge in situations in a way as close to reality as possible,
mostly followed by a common evaluation.
When we, for a conceptual use, take a closer look at the term “simulation games” and its use
in the educational literature, it quickly becomes clear that no common definition exists
(Otto, 2014). Due to the recent technical developments, for many scholars simulation games
are often perceived as being equivalent to computer games. However, following Feinstein et
al., simulation based learning can be differentiated into three different types (Feinstein,
Mann, & Corsun, 2002):
1. Computer simulations
2. Role plays
3. Gaming.
While computer simulations use mathematical formula to reproduce system properties, role
play is referred to as a number of actors who act out different roles in a particular setting
(Alkin & Christie, 2002, p. 211). Each role-play is based on certain rules that the participants
have to follow. While role play does not necessarily require interaction, this is the basic idea
of gaming, often called “experiential games” or “business games” (Faria, 1998).
Predominantly organised round based, gaming ex ante establishes certain rules and
procedures that the participants have to follow. Within a thematic framework the
participants, often assembled in different groups, aim to cooperate in solving a concrete
problem.
For the use in higher education, gaming, as a stand of simulation games, is perceived to hold
several benefits (Otto, 2014, p. 73 ff.): Through vicariousness students better understand the
77
way of looking at a problem. Actively involved in the learning process, they acquire an
improved understanding of the complexity of, in our case, climate change negotiations.
Experiences obtained throughout the simulation game can later be assigned to real world
situations. For this purpose, after the simulation [game] group discussions are used to align
the simulated outcomes with the real conditions in reality. Furthermore, gaming enhances
the learning motivation of students through interactive group learning. Didactically, in
contrast to teacher-centered models, gaming puts students in the midpoint of the course
giving them an active and autonomous role.
In summary, the use of simulation games holds several benefits for educational purposes.
This applies likewise to the case of international climate change politics: As outlined in the
introduction, climate change negotiations, organized in the COP, are the main framework
where political decisions are reached. Simultaneously, this political process is marked by a
high level of complexity and is therefore difficult to understand, even for experts. To close
this gap of understanding and traceability, we tested the use of simulation games in higher
education to examine if the empirical outcomes fulfil the theoretical promises. To analyse
rather than to solely describe the effects of simulation games in higher education teaching,
we developed hypotheses which we deduced from the literature. To verify our hypothesis
and therefore the identified benefits of simulation games, we applied them to a case study:
an international and interdisciplinary course about climate change politics.
For the course we tested two basic guiding hypotheses:
1. By allowing students to act out a particular problem, simulation games contribute
to an in-depth understanding of its complexity and intricacy.
2. Being a students-centered learning approach, simulation games enhance the
motivation of students to learn about a topic and foster sustainable learning
outcomes.
Case study
The potential benefits of simulation games were examined in an international cooperation
project about interdisciplinary perspectives on climate change politics. The project was
carried out by the Interdisciplinary Distance Study Program Environmental Science
(infernum) at the FernUniversität in Hagen (Germany) and the Master of Environmental
Citizenship and Participation (ECP) at the Universidade Aberta (Portugal). It was fully
financed by the German Academic Exchange Program (DAAD) with funding from the German
Federal Foreign Office.
Core aim of the project was to teach students with interdisciplinary backgrounds the basics
of climate change politics. Therefore, we designed a three-month university course on a
master's degree level. We used a blended learning approach which combined virtual
78
learning with a five-day workshop in Lisbon. 20 students from both universities were invited
to participate in the course which was awarded with 5 ETCS credits. Didactically, the course
was divided into three different learning periods:
In the first individual learning period, students became acquainted with the topic of climate
change politics. For this we used individual literature study and all students were required to
summarize one scientific article of choice. In the second group-learning period, students first
of all had to select a country group which they wanted to represent in the negotiations.
Together with the other group members a common negotiation strategy for the country
group had to be developed. To allow students to collaborate in their groups, a common
virtual learning platform was established where students were able to interact using
interactive tools such as Skype or Adobe Connect. To be somewhat representative with
regards to the real negotiations, where 195 states participate, we selected at least one
country from each of the most relevant groups (developing countries, industrialised
countries, G-77, Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) for the simulation. As a formal
requirement each group had to write a positions paper for the negotiations, where the
bargaining position was laid down. Additionally, like in real negotiations, each group had to
give an opening speech at the beginning of the simulation game. The final five days
workshop in Lisbon was the third learning period where the simulation game was actually
carried out.
Concept of the Module
Period
Content
1.
Phase
January 2015
Individual study period where students
familiarised with the topic
2.
Phase
February 2015
Virtual group work to prepare for the
simulation game
3.
Phase
March 2015
Workshop in which the simulation
game took place
At the first day of the workshop, lectures about the current state of climate change science
were given from several professional perspectives, natural as well as social science. On the
second day, a field trip was organized to different climate change related projects. The field
trip was chosen to show the students the various impacts of climate change in the region.
The field trip also included discussions with stakeholders on side. The fourth and fifth day
was fully dedicated to the simulation game.
The simulation game was organized round based. Because the groups met for the first time
face to face, some preparation time was dedicated to them for an adaptation phase. Like in
real climate change negotiations, the plenum was the core where all participants assembled
at the beginning. The tutors of the project led the plenum. Each group was supposed to hold
79
its opening speech to lay down expectations and bargaining position. In the next round, the
tutors created two ad-hoc groups where measures for adaptation and mitigation had to be
discussed between the countries. One tutor chaired each ad-hoc group. For the discussion,
the tutors had produced a draft negotiations text, inspired by a longer draft currently
debated in the COP. Mitigation – reducing the emission of countries – and adaptation –
adapting to the impacts of climate change – are considered core elements of a new climate
change agreement. Each group had to send 2 to 3 members to each of the ad-hoc groups.
For the third round, students gathered again in their country groups to discuss the outcomes
of the ad-hoc groups. The country groups were allowed to modify or reformulate their
bargaining positions. With a reformulated negotiations mandate they returned to the ad-hoc
groups for a second round of negotiations. Like in real practice, the groups were allowed to
offer package deals, meaning they were supposed to make concessions in one ad-hoc group
to receive benefits in the other. With the end of the second round of the ad-hoc groups,
each ad-hoc group had to submit preliminary draft texts to the chairs. For the last round in
the plenum, the chairs were supposed to produce a treaty text to vote on by the countries.
When taking the vote, each of the country groups had to indicate why they agree or disagree
with the treaty text. Voting in the COP is based on the principle of unanimity in combination
with the one state one vote principle. In our case, equal to most of the past COPs, no
common agreement could be accomplished. The differences between the country groups in
the simulation game as well as in real negotiations concerning a common problem definition
were too big to achieve a common ground. In simulation games about climate negotiations
this is mainly the case when all of the groups act close to the real conditions of the country
they represent.
How do simulation games affect learning outcomes?
In our project we applied simulation games to examine, if and how they influence learning
outcomes. Guided by the mentioned potential benefits in the literature, we expected our
students to gain an in-depth understanding of climate change politics by experiencing
negotiations from an inside perspective. Furthermore, we expected interactive learning to
lead to active and highly motivated learning.
A brief note on methods
From the literature about evaluating learning outcomes, we know that there is no clear use
of the term evaluation (Hennig 2006). Despite this vagueness of the concept, however, some
common basic assumptions exist: First, an evaluation should be earmarked to assess certain
measures. Second, an evaluation therefore has to contain an assessment of these measures
by the participants.
80
To evaluate the effectiveness of our measures used in the project, we combined two
methods:
The first method was an individual reflection report written by each student at the end of
the course. In this reflection report, the students were asked to assess their overall learning
outcomes and experiences gained throughout the course. The use of individual reflection
reports to evaluate learning outcomes is inspired by Petraneks concept of written debriefing,
understood
“as an experiential activity in which participants have the opportunity to write about
their experiences and feelings and those of others” (Petranek, 2000: 109).
In our case, the individual reflection reports had to be written as follow-up of the course at a
time when the students still had fresh impressions of the workshop.
For the report, no rigid structure was predetermined; we only provided the students with
some basic issues that they were asked to address in their report, among them their
experience with the simulation game, the intercultural learning or the blended learning
approach of the course. The aim of asking the students to summarize their experiences was
to initiate a process of in-depth self-reflection. Due to the structure of the reflection reports
not being predetermined, we used qualitative content analysis for our assessment to
evaluate how the students implicitly or explicitly assessed the variable we were analysing
(Mayring, 2000). All of the 20 participants of the course had the possibility to receive a
certificate as part of their master degree course by participating in the course. As a
precondition for the certificate they had to hand in a reflection report.
As a second method we used participatory observation to assess the learning impact as well
as the learning processes of the students (Kawulich, 2005). Two tutors supervised the virtual
learning phase and the simulation game. Both tutors conducted participatory observation
and compiled their experiences during and after the course. Their observations covered, for
example, information on how the groups organized themselves, how they shared tasks and
how they socially interacted, but also emerging problems within the groups. Overall,
participatory observation helped to gain valuable insights into the processes of group work.
Analysis
Hypothesis 1: By allowing students to act out a particular problem, simulation
games lead to an in-depth understanding of its complexity and intricacy.
From the participatory observation of the tutors we learned that the students were highly
dedicated to the topic and motivated during the course. At the end of the virtual learning
phase every group handed in a position paper of good quality. The feedback of the tutors
81
gave no evidence of fundamental disagreements in the groups during the virtual learning
phase. This fluent work atmosphere was also observable during the workshop. Even taking
into account that, due to the interdisciplinary character, not all students were at the same
professional level, everybody was still in the position to actively engage in his or her country
group as well as in the ad-hoc groups. From the tutors’ perspective, it was interesting to see
how engagement intensified during the workshop. While at the beginning most of the
students were reluctant to act out the position of their country, with the support of the
tutors the negotiations intensified and discussions became heated, thus resembling realistic
discussions on the topic. Interestingly, in the beginning some students mentioned that it was
hard to adopt a negotiating position they personally do not support, for example those of
China or the US. However, over time they presented a quite realistic performance of the
countries they represented. This manifested in the fact that due to the great discrepancies,
no common agreement was achieved among the participating groups.
Regarding the reflection reports, we found out that in more than half of the reflection
reports, students mentioned, in one form or the other, that the simulation game enhanced
their knowledge of climate change politics. Student 5 for example explained:
“It was my first experience with a simulation game and I’m really impressed by the
learning outcome and to discover that a very complex and to a high degree theoretical
topic can be taught in a very effective and enjoyable way.”
The student continues:
“It [the simulation game] has a much higher learning effect compared to just studying
literature about the topic and I’m sure that the capacity of remembrance is much
higher too.”
Student 7 mentioned specifically the complexity of climate change negotiations:
“The negotiation game itself was a great experience of actually learning how and why
there are so many difficulties and barriers in the real negotiations and why it is so
difficult to get to an agreement.”
Lastly, student 10 states that:
“(…), I can say that my learning outcome exceeded my expectations. Not only do I have
a thorough overview of the background and current status of climate policy (…).”
These and other affirmative statements in the reflection reports reinforced our presumption
that employing a simulation game allowed the students to gain a thorough understanding of
climate change politics.
82
Hypothesis 2: Being a student-centered learning approach, simulation games
enhance the motivation of students to learn about a topic and foster sustainable
learning outcomes.
One of our central goals in the course was to give students an active role in the learning
process. Far too often, the teacher is at the center of the learning process. This reduces the
role of the students to a passive recipient of knowledge. While this might be appropriate to
achieve a common foundation about a topic, it is inappropriate to ensure enduring learning
motivation and therefore a satisfactory learning progress.
By using a simulation game, we aimed to assign the students an active role by making them a
formative element in the learning process. The task of the tutors was to support this role
and to provide assistance only where necessary. We expected this didactic concept to lead
to highly motivated participants and sustainable learning outcomes.
As a first finding, we noticed that all participants completed the course. This is a first
indication of a high motivation of the students. From the participatory observation of the
tutors we learned that all students were active in the learning process. However, especially
due to the interdisciplinarity of the topic, significant variations in the level of knowledge
existed. The tutors noticed though that students were willing to share knowledge in their
group to contribute to the group’s performance.
Increased or high levels of motivation and/or participation where also mentioned by
students in half of the reflection reports. In general, high motivation amongst the students
was found in two areas:
1. Students being motivated to occupy themselves more intensely with the topic in
the future.
2. Students being motivated by the simulation game to engage strongly during the
course.
A quote from student 3 illustrates the motivation to deal more intensely with topic in the
future. She mentions that:
“It [the course] was the perfect ending of my Infernum-studies and a motivating start
for the search of a suitable master thesis.”
Student 5 displays a similarly high level of motivation to keep dealing with the topic by
stating that:
“This motivated me as well to register for another simulation game (…) after the return
from our journey.”
83
With regards to 2., a high level of motivation to engage during the course can be deducted
from the following quote by student 6, who states that:
“(…), I personally find it crucial to have such possibilities where you can meet other
students, get to know them and their backgrounds and motivation for – in our case –
environmental sciences, but also to work together, discuss content and exchange
experiences and views.”
Student 7 adds to that by mentioning that:
“Teamwork in general motivated me a lot because I could talk to others and discuss
different opinions.”
Furthermore, student 12 points out that:
“Moreover, the collective learning motivated for an intensive discussion and reflection
on the individually achieved knowledge.”
Taking also into consideration other statements mentioning increased or high levels of
motivation and participation, we conclude that the simulation game had a positive effect on
the levels of motivation and participation for the students which specifically mentioned this
in their reflection reports. Furthermore, given the overall impression at the workshop as well
as positive statements such as: “(…) we got deeply involved in the debates (…). Altogether, it
was a really intensive experience” (student 2) or “Participation was encouraged, and this is
an important ingredient for successful learning” (student 1), we have found support for our
view that the simulation game was very helpful in motivating the clear majority of the
students and securing persistent participation during the course of the workshop.
Conclusions
In line with teaching and educational research, we argued in this paper that simulation
games provide a promising didactical tool to bridge the gap between theory and practice.
They contribute to an enhanced understanding of a complex problem. This is especially the
case if simulation games stick close to the actual conditions of the issue that is simulated. If
so, they are able to foster cooperative learning by initiating processes of common problemsolving strategies. Thus, not only sustainable learning outcomes but also the so-called soft
skills are enhanced.
Our case study of simulating the upcoming climate change negotiations reaffirmed the
effectiveness of this didactical tool. The two hypotheses about the effectiveness and the
learning motivation can be perpetuated. These outcomes support the necessity for an
increased use of simulation games in higher education. One central challenge is, however, to
84
downsize complex problem issues and make them suitable for a university course, even
though this might not be the case for every thematic area. It should also be noted that
simulation games, to achieve a demonstrable success, require a high amount of planning and
tutorial support. From the efficiency point of view in particular the set up phase has
demanding requirements. The more frequently the simulation game is done the higher is the
possibly return.
References
Alkin, M. C., & Christie, C. A. (2002). The Use of Role-Play in Teaching Evaluation. American Journal of
Evaluation , 23 (2 ), 209–218.
Balikci, A. (2012). Das systemische Planspiel. Lernen durch Erleben. Sozial Extra, 8/10, 12–14.
Bodansky, D. M. (2001). The History of the Global Climate Change Regime. In U. Luterbacher & D. F.
Sprinz (Eds.), International relations and global climate change (pp. 23–40). Cambridge [u.a.]: MIT
Press.
Breitmeier, H., & Otto, D. (2012). Understanding Political Processes in Climate Change Negotiations
by means of an Interdisciplinary Curriculum in Higher Education. International Journal on Innovation
and Sustainable Development, 6(1), 20–30.
Faria, A. J. (1998). Business Simulation Games: Current Usage Levels—An Update. Simulation &
Gaming , 29 (3 ), 295–308.
Feinstein, A. H., Mann, S., & Corsun, D. L. (2002). Charting the experiential territory. Journal of
Management Development, 21(10), 732–744.
Geden, O. (2010). Langsamer Abschied vom 2 Grad Ziel. Ein klimapolitisches Symbol steht vor seiner
Ablösung. Energiewirtschaftliche Tagesfragen, 60(8), 24–27.
Hulme, M. (2009). Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and
Opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
IPCC. (2010). Understanding Climate Change. 22 years of IPCC assessment. Retrieved from
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/press/ipcc_leaflets_2010/ipcc-brochure_understanding.pdf
Kawulich, B. B. (2005). Participant Observation as a Data Collection Method. Forum Qualitative
Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research; Vol 6, No 2 (2005): Qualitative Inquiry:
Research, Archiving, and Reuse.
Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research: Qualitative
Methods in Various Disciplines I: Psychology, 1(2), 1–10.
85
Otto, D. (2014). Let's Play! Using simulation games as a sustainable way to enhance students’
motivation and collaboration in Open and Distance Learning. In U. M. Azeiteiro, W. Leal Filho, & S.
Caeiro (Eds.), E-Learning and Education for Sustainability (pp. 73–82). Frankfurt a. M. [u.a.].
Paterson, M. (1996). Global warming and global politics. London: Routledge.
Schroeder, H. (2010). The History of International Climate Change Politics: Three Decades of
Progress, Process and Procrastination. In M. T. Boykoff (Ed.), The Politics of Climate Change. A survey
(pp. 26–41). London [u.a.]: Routledge.
UNFCCC. (1992). United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Retrieved from
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf
Wilson, G. (2012). The lived experience of climate change: expanding the knowledge base through
collaborative Master´s curriculum in the European Union. International Journal on Innovation and
Sustainable Development, 6(1), 43–52.
Wilson, G., Abbott, D., De Kraker, J., Salgado Perez, P., Scheltinga, C., & Willems, P. (2011). “The lived
experience of climate change”: creating open educational resources and virtual mobility for an
innovative, integrative and competence-based track at Masters level. International Journal of
Technology Enhanced Learning, 3(2), 111–123.
86
Brunton James, Brown Mark, Costello Eamon, Delaney Lorraine, Fox
Seamus, Galvin Ciara, Lonergan Nuala
Free, Focused and Flexible: A Suite of Online Transition Tools for Supporting
Student Success
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
National Institute for Digital Learning, Dublin City University
Ireland
james.brunton@dcu.ie
Abstract:
This paper describes an externally funded research and development project designed to address the
problem of effective flexible learner transitions into higher and continuing education. More
specifically it targets adults engaged in part-time or online/distance-learning during the initial stages
of the study-lifecycle. Enhancing retention and completion rates of this group of life-long learners is
an acknowledged concern both globally and within the Irish context. The literature suggests this
crucial transition period may be enhanced by the availability of appropriately designed, freely
available and strategically focused digital readiness/preparation tools, which scaffold both
prospective students and those about to embark on study for the first time. Drawing on the
literature, the experience of major international online/distance providers, and a set of overarching
guiding principles, this project adopts a design-based methodology to develop eight digital
readiness/preparation tools, along with a guide to supporting new flexible learners, which will inform
institutions/discipline teams on how to effectively deploy the tools. The paper describes each of the
tools and discusses the rationale for their development and how they can be used under a Creative
Commons License (CCL) to support flexible learners through key transitions in the early stages of the
study lifecycle.
Introduction
The Student Success Toolbox project seeks to address the problem of effective transitions and the
foundations for student success during the initial stages of the study lifecycle with a specific focus on
flexible learners. In the context of this project a broad definition is adopted of flexible learners, which
includes adult learners engaged in part-time and online/distance learning. Enhancing retention and
completion rates of this group of flexible learners is a significant problem both globally and within
the Irish context. Although the number of flexible learners in Ireland is relatively low in comparison
to many other countries, around 17% of all undergraduates (HEA 2012), there are increasing
concerns about their ability to progress towards successful completion.
The particular focus of this project is on supporting flexible learners through key transitions in the
early stages of the study lifecycle: from thinking about study, making choices, the registration
87
process and through to the first few weeks. A basic premise of the project is that the foundations for
student success are laid early in the study lifecycle, and that insufficient attention has been given in
the literature and within institutions to the importance of the period before flexible learners formally
commence their study. A related underlying assumption is that this crucial transition period may be
enhanced by the availability of appropriately designed digital readiness and preparation tools, which
help to scaffold both prospective students and those about to embark on part time or
online/distance study for the first time.
Project Partners
The Student Success Toolbox project is funded by the National Forum for the Enhancement of
Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (http://www.teachingandlearning.ie/). The project
involves four partner institutions: Dublin City University; Maynooth University; Dundalk Institute of
Technology; and Institute of Technology Sligo.
Project Website
This project’s website can be found at www.studentsuccess.ie. This website is being used to
disseminate project information and publications and facilitate national and international discussions
on the project, specifically through the use of the linked Flexible Learner Success twitter account
@FLSuccess.
Project Plan
There are five phases to this project.




Phase One involves the project establishment, including formalising the project team,
partner agreements and scope of the work packages.
Phase Two involves an analysis of relevant literature and current digital readiness tools
available internationally to support successful transitions during initial stages of the
study lifecycle for flexible learners. The main deliverable of this phase is an analysis of
the digital tools adopted internationally to enhance transitions to study for this unique
sub population of learners.
Phase Three involves building on the above synthesis to develop a strategically targeted
suite of research-informed digital readiness tools. While they will have wider application
across the sector, the tools will focus on facilitating adult learners who are transitioning
to part-time undergraduate study. The major deliverable from this phase will be the
development of a toolbox of eight digital tools that can be used and/or adapted by other
institutions in the Higher Education sector to support student success at this crucial
period of the study lifecycle. The final selection, design and appropriateness of the digital
readiness tools is being informed by the analysis of the literature and institutional
analysis completed in Phase Two.
Phase Four involves a series of pilot evaluations of the digital tools across the partner
institutions. Based on feedback gather during this evaluation phase, the digital tools will
be adapted/augmented to ensure that they are fit for purpose.
88

Phase Five involves the production of a Digital Guide for Supporting Flexible Learners,
which will provide guidance for institutions and discipline teams on how to effectively
deploy the suite of digital readiness tools. Another key deliverable of this phase is a
series of workshops delivered in different higher education institutions on how to
support transitions for flexible learners.
Methodology
The methodological approach utilised by the project team is a design-based research approach.
Design-based research has increasingly received attention from researchers in education as an
emerging framework that can guide the development of enhanced educational outcomes. This is
because design-based research aims to make a grounded connection between educational research
and real-world contexts. It is an iterative process that does not just evaluate an innovative product or
intervention, but systematically attempts to refine the innovation while also producing design
principles that can guide similar research and development endeavours (Wang & Hannafin, 2005).
Reeves (2006) emphasises the interactive and integrative qualities of this research methodology in
his definition of design based research:
“... complex problems in real contexts in collaboration with
practitioners; integrating known and hypothetical design principles with
technological advances to render plausible solutions to these complex
problems; and conducting rigorous and reflective inquiry to test and
refine innovative learning environments as well as to define new design
principles.”
Impact Evaluation Strategy
To assess the impact of the project, the project is using the Impact Evaluation Framework (IEF) for
teaching and learning projects employed by both the Office for Learning and Teaching in Australia
and the New Zealand National Centre for Tertiary Teaching Excellence (Ako Aotearoa). The
framework examines:
 Reach (generation and dissemination of project outputs)
 Impact on teaching practice
 Impact on learners
 Impact on the project teams themselves
(https://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/project-evaluation)
Also, as part of the project’s impact evaluation strategy, Professor Terry Anderson of Athabasca
University will act as an international advisor on to the project.
Phase 2 – Analysis of the Literature & Existing Tools in Use Internationally
Analysis of the Literature
The methodology used to undertake an analysis of the various literatures that are relevant to the
project was that of a ‘systematic review’ and draws from a number of texts. Torraco (2005) and
89
Boote and Beile (2005) were consulted on writing integrative and substantive literature reviews, and
it was the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating (EPPI) Centre’s (2010)
‘Methods for Conducting Systematic Reviews’ that provided the specific structure adopted for this
literature analysis. The EPPI-Centre’s approach provided a clear and structured frame for conducting
a review of a large body of literature. Systematic reviews, as outlined by the EPPI-centre (2010), are
built around the framework of answering key questions, or a number of smaller sub-questions which
address a broader key question. A good guiding question should help “clearly demarcate what is and
what is not within the scope of the investigation” (Boote and Baile, 2005, p.4) and help define the
criteria for the inclusion or exclusion of studies in the review. This review sought to address the
broad question of “What is effective, when supporting successful transitions into higher education
for flexible learners?” by considering the following sub-questions:
1. Who are flexible learners?
2. What do we know about factors of learner success?
3. How does what we know about supporting transitions relate to the above?
The review will then consider, in conjunction with the analysis of existing digital tools:
4. What connection exists between the literature and what institutions are providing to flexible
learners?
5. What tools could usefully be developed in this project?
Flexible learning is a concept that, in many ways, cannot easily be defined without reference to the
context in which it occurs. In their overview of the concept in the Irish and European contexts,
Flannery and McGarr (2014) observe that flexible learning is heavily linked in public discourse to
lifelong learning, or as the Department of Education and Science (2000) defines it, “mature adult
participation [in higher education] through flexible options which can be combined with family and
work responsibilities” (Flannery and McGarr 2014, p. 424). More recently, the higher education
Authority (HEA 2012) defined ‘flexible learners’ simply as including students who are in “part-time,
distance, e-learning and in-service education.” These learners tend to be from one of two
educational backgrounds; already educated and upskilling ‘CPDs’, or ‘second-chance’ learners,
possibly from marginalised populations who have been previously excluded from higher education
(Flannery and McGarr 2014).
It is widely acknowledged, though not widely publicised, internationally that Flexible Learning
courses have appreciably lower rates of retention and graduation than full-time, campus-based
courses. Gallie (2005) notes that some reports put student attrition in online distance education
delivery to be as high as 80%. This would tally with the UK Open University’s reported
completion/graduation rate of around 22% (Woodley and Simpson 2014, p. 460), as compared to a
(British) national graduation rate of 39% for part-time students. These graduation rates compare
poorly to the 82% graduation rate for full-time students (ibid). In the same discussion, however,
Woodley and Simpson put the international graduation figure for online distance education as often
“around 10% or less”. The discrepancy between this and Gallie’s figure of 20% may appear
substantial, but Woodley and Simpson contend that most figures on retention are disputable due to
different statistical measurements and gaps in the data gathered internationally (ibid). There are also
particular problems in online distance education contexts around analysing retention rates rather
90
than course completion rates, as the former may mask a number of course withdrawals if the
student still passes other courses (Nichols, 2011). If anything, however, this only serves to emphasise
the problem of flexible learner non-completion in online distance education around the world.
The reasons flexible learning courses have high non-completion rates are difficult to state
categorically. As less has been written on the subject of success and retention in flexible learning
than on full-time, campus-based contexts, it is useful to outline some of the latter research first. Two
such studies are briefly considered here. First a seminal work by Yorke (1999). Second, a more recent
synthesis of retention research in the UK by Jones (2008) undertaken for the British HEA’s “What
works? Student retention and success programme” (Thomas 2012, summarised in Thomas 2014,
p.112).
The reasons given for learner withdrawal in both reports are broadly similar, though there has been a
noticeable change in the language used between 1997 and 2008, apart from where both identify
poor preparation for higher education as a key factor in learner withdrawal. Both also identify
financial problems as a major cause, though Yorke describes these as ‘hardship’ whereas Jones
describes them as ‘issues’, which can include hardship but could also cover other problems such as
bureaucratic issues or even a perceived lack of value for money. The largest difference in the
terminology lies arguably in the description of academic issues; Yorke’s learner made ‘poor academic
progress’, while Jones’ had an ‘unsatisfactory academic experience’. The implied responsibility rests
very much with the learner in the former, while the latter focusses on fault in the wider ‘experience’,
which could encompass anything from the initial induction, to course materials, to staff-learner
rapport. With a similar shift in culpability, Yorke sets out an incompatibility between the learner and
their course and a lack of commitment to the course as two different factors, while Jones attributes
any lack of commitment to a weak course or institution match. Again the ‘lack’ reflects on the wider
institution rather than primarily on the learner. Jones also adds personal circumstances to the list,
and a lack of social integration. These are perhaps indicative of a shift in the interest and focus of
more recent research on learners towards a whole-of-person view, which is reflected in the work on
why learners find it necessary to withdraw. A general shift of focus appears to have taken place in
the time between the Yorke and Jones’ publications. The focus has moved from resting almost
exclusively on the learner and the academic side of study, to encompassing difficulties in broader
learner/course, learner/institution, learner/learner and learner/rest of life interactions. As such,
there is a noticeable social turn in how ‘success’ or otherwise is constructed and understood.
Another important note is that both Yorke and Jones rely on self-reported data for their analyses,
which means the reported reasons are by their nature subjective. Nichols (2011), citing Woodley
(2004), highlights how such reasons may not be entirely reliable, given the frequent time-lag
between the learner withdrawing and being asked for their reasons for withdrawal. There is also the
possibility that the ‘real reasons’ for non-completion are not expressed, as learners may only cite
reasons which they perceive to be acceptable, and/or do not threaten their self-esteem (McGivney
2004, in Nichols, 2011).
The comparable work that exists would seem to confirm that the challenges detailed above are felt
equally, if not more deeply, by flexible learners. Woodley and Simpson (2014) describe retention as
91
the “ultimate invisible elephant in the room, the statistic to which everyone gives lip service but
apparently no serious thought” (p. 460). Though studies on the scale of Jones (2008) have not been
undertaken for flexible learners, Nichols (2011)’s overview of several works in the area, including a
number by Woodley and Simpson, certainly suggests that serious consideration has been given to the
subject. A number of similarities and differences can be drawn between the reasons flexible learners
withdraw from their courses and the reasons full-time, campus-based learners do, with three in
particular standing out: personal circumstances; weak course or institution matching; and
unsatisfactory learner experience (Nichols, 2011).
Personal circumstances feature as a reason for full-time, campus student withdrawal, but perhaps
weigh more heavily on many flexible learners, who are more likely to be combining flexible study
with other, time consuming responsibilities (Nichols, 2011). Nichols observes that personal
circumstances are frequently and consistently listed in the literature as one of the top reasons
flexible learners withdraw from study. They may withdraw due to various reasons including
employment demands, the needs of their dependents, workload, problems with finance and
organisation issues (Nichols, 2011).
Poor course or institution match also features as a reason flexible learners withdraw from their
studies. Poor course choice and poor support from friends and family are identified as triggers by
McGivney (2004), though Yorke (2004) notes older learners are less likely to pick the wrong course
and more likely to cite external circumstances and financial reasons for non-completion (Nichols
2011, p. 7). The characteristics of the learners, or of the course itself, can also play a role in the
quality of learning/course match.
On the matter of unsatisfactory student experiences, the quality of the instruction offered is of
considerable importance to student satisfaction; Gallie (2005) found that retention, student
satisfaction and consequent grades achieved were on average higher on a specially designed “social
interactive: cognitive teaching” version of an online course, than they were on ‘shovelware’, where
an already existing course was copied without adaptation onto an online platform (p. 70). The
essential difference between the two versions in this example was the use of learning management
system options on the specially designed course to create dialogue and engagement through active
e-mails, discussion boards, and time-limited lecture postings (ibid).
Regardless of course content though, it appears expectations around the workload on flexible
learning programmes can often be out of kilter with the reality. Learners who drop out typically
found study to be more work than expected (Nichols, 2011). Nichols (2011) found one instance of a
learner expecting the course to be doable in 6 hours a week, even though course requirement clearly
stated a minimum of 10 hours would be required, while another student found she was spending
twice the recommended time per week trying to keep on top of the work (ibid). Both students
withdrew from the course. It would seem to be as important to foster realistic expectations among
prospective learners regarding the nature of flexible learning, as it is to offer a quality learning
experience. In situations such as the latter case, however, it is possible that the learners struggle to
complete the workload if they do not have, and have not been taught, an appropriate skillset before
commencing study. An example of a link between retention and the building up of a particular
92
skillset is where the teaching of information literacy skills, and encouraging engagement with library
services, has been shown to increase both retention and academic attainment among first yearstudents (cf ACRL 2010, Soria et al. 2013). Library led instruction sessions tied to specific assessments
have been shown to be particularly effective in this regard (Hurst and Leonard 2007). Mery, Newby
and Peng (2012) demonstrated the benefits a one-credit online information literacy course could
have on advancing students’ information literacy skills. They argue that the extended guidance and
distributed practice provided learners with more opportunities over time to grasp complex concepts,
and that conducting the course online also provided flexibility and convenience.
This leads us to a further reason why students withdraw from study: poor preparation for the higher
education experience. A number of elements which are relevant under the heading of ‘poor
preparation for HE’ have been mentioned already; incompatible course choice, unrealistic
expectations of workloads, under preparation in terms of developing the skills needed to complete
the course, and unresolved tensions between study and other commitments. Another important
element is that of time-management. To be successful, flexible learners need to be able to manage
their time and self-regulate effectively, in order to both structure their study around their other
responsibilities effectively, and make the most of the time available to them. If they cannot, they will
fall behind in coursework. A 2004 study by Ashby found the top reason for withdrawal at the UK
Open University was falling behind with coursework, followed by personal/family or employment
responsibilities. It seems highly likely that the two are related, and the challenges around them could
perhaps be better prepared for during the pre-entry period.
Learners also withdraw from study due to problems around social integration and socialisation as a
flexible learner. Both full-time and flexible learners can experience problems around belonging, but
isolation is particularly common in flexible learning, perhaps due to to the often solitary nature of
that study mode (Nichols, 2011).
A final common thread between the literature on full-time, campus-based and flexible learner noncompletion is that withdrawal typically occurs when the student faces a combination of such
difficulties. Jones (2008) found an average of 2.1 reasons for withdrawal. Nichols (2011) also found
that multiple reasons were given by flexible learners. This is an important point for academics and
practitioners seeking to help flexible students succeed, as it highlights that an at-risk student will
likely benefit more from a ‘whole of student’ approach to the provision of supports and
interventions, than a fragmented approach. In summary, it is challenging to define the core concerns
that impact success in a flexible learning setting, but there are a number of useful elements and
aspects that surface from the literature on retention and progression (see table 3 above). These
include concerns for the deeply social and personal nature of the learner experience, including the
need to address difficulties around personal circumstances, institutional and course matching
practices, the affective dimension of the academic experience, readiness for higher education, and
the social dimensions of transition. Learners impacted by multiple difficulties are particularly at-risk.
Jones (2008) notes that students are most likely to leave in their year of entry, and as many as 40% of
those who exit early do so in the first few weeks. This is a long established fact (cf. Yorke, 1999;
Quinn et al, 2005; Yorke and Longden, 2007) but what has recently been added is the understanding
93
that students who are actively supported over the course of this transition also develop the key
academic skills needed to succeed in the longer run (Armstrong, 2015). Given also that many of the
students who exit will not re-enroll (Woodley and Simpson, 2014), this highlights the importance of
supporting students in the early stages of the study life cycle in order to promote both retention and
future success.
Further insights from the literature relate to why students persist. Much is related to the personality
and personal circumstances involved, for example, Alt’s (2015) work on self-efficacy for learning in
higher education emphasises the role of students’ beliefs in their capabilities to regulate their own
learning and argues that this can help determine students’ motivation and academic achievement
and, therefore, is significant in their learning processes. However, there is more involved here than
learner characteristics. Institutional structures and arrangements are also central to successful
transitions. For example, if we consider the reasons identified by Jones (2008) for learner withdrawal
we can argue that students can feel stronger commitment to their courses and so are more likely to
persist if there is (a) strong institution and course match involved, (b) good preparation on the part of
the student for higher education prior to entry, (c) no (or at least few) financial issues or difficult
personal circumstances, (d) a satisfactory academic experience, and (e) meaningful opportunity for
social integration in the early stages of their studies. Clearly both learner agency and institutional
action are required if persistence is to be enhanced.
Thomas (2012) also makes a number of observations around the issue of transition, arising from the
What Works? project. These include a number of observations on the value of belonging and how
this can be developed among learners experiencing transition. Evidence from What Works? suggests
a need to put ‘belonging’ at the heart of improving student retention and success, and centres on the
fostering of a set of interrelated engagements and capacity building activities. Doing so, Thomas
argues, requires four institutional-level initiatives. First, Action on Early Engagement in order to
promote belonging that begins early and continues across the student lifecycle. Second, the
‘nurturing’ of engagement across the institution’s services (academic, social and professional) with
Academic Engagement being of primary importance to ensure all students benefit. Third, developing
the capacity of both students and staff to offer an engaging experience, leading to shared
responsibility for improving student engagement, belonging, retention and success. And finally,
senior level responsibility in the institution for nurturing a culture of belonging and creating the
necessary infrastructure to promote student engagement, retention and success.
There are many possible interventions available that have been known to successfully support
engagement. However, these interventions are often applied in a seemingly ‘ad hoc’ manner or a
‘goulash approach’ to distance learners. Institutions need to a) analyse their own retention
strategies, in order to ‘spot the leaks’, and b) move away from the ad hoc, and be strategic in use of
tools to support successful transition (Simpson, 2009).
An example of a successful strategic targeting of support services to promote engagement is
reported by Nichols (2011). This research found that course retention in a group of first-time
distance students improved from 57% in 2008 to 81.7% in 2009 when a number of student supports
were introduced, including a compulsory student support survey, orientation course, general
messages of support, and personal contact with students requesting help. Interestingly, Nichols did a
94
follow up to his survey of dropouts in 2008 with ‘at-risk’ students in 2009 to see if he could find out
why they stayed. He hypothesised that the increased student supports put in place by the institution
made the key difference and concluded that retention was demonstrably higher because of these
additional supports.
Libraries can offer another avenue of student support leading to successful transitions. Libraries are
increasingly involved in teaching academic skills such as information literacy, and matter to the
student experience because they socialise learners into academic life. Haddow (2013) for example,
notes that Library use can be regarded as a form of integration into the academic life and practices of
higher education institutions. Libraries, Haddow argues, attract people, offer concentrations of
expertise and other people who are willing to help. They attract and retain a community of scholars
who demonstrate academic discourse and behaviour and socialise people into this academic way of
being.
Much more low-key interventions can also make a difference to the student experience and
transitions of learners. Murphy, Politis, and Slowey (2015) have noted that the nature of enquiries
and decision making processes are quite different for adult learners from those of school leavers
entering higher education. They recommend that there need to be clearer routes of enquiry for adult
learners who are seeking more generic advice on the range of options at a higher education
institution. Similarly, they suggest that early access to timetables etc. would make it easier for adult
learners to start on their studies as they have to plan for family and financial commitments.
All of these interventions, whether strategic or more low-level, can help create belonging and
engagement among flexible learners. Their impact could also be enhanced if foundational concerns
such as those of Thomas (2012) were taken into account when an institution is planning what it will
do to strengthen the possibility of successful transitions. There is, however, something of a debate
around making interventions mainstream or targeting them at at-risk students. Sometimes, as noted
by Thomas and Hill (2013, p.3), “the exact type of intervention or approach is less important than
either the way it is delivered and/or its intended outcomes”.
Studies relating to the use of digital tools to support flexible learner transition into higher education,
where they exist, tend to cover research based in a single institution. These provide insights into the
possibilities and the challenges of implementing various tools in a higher education setting. Only one
study was found which provided a meta-analysis of a particular tool used with, or by, flexible learners
during the transitional period into higher education; Farid (2014). This study took a birds eye view of
the tool in question, and the work was able to offer more broadly generalisable observations and
comments than are plausible in a single institution setting. Farid (2014) systematically reviewed 5107
papers on student online readiness tools published between 1990 and 2010. Of these it was found
that no standard tool for assessing readiness existed, only 10 instruments had been developed and
published in scientific journals over 20 years, and of these 10, few demonstrated “good psychometric
qualities” (Farid 2014, p. 375). This claim is supplemented by the observation that many unpublished
or ‘homemade’ readiness tools were developed in-house in universities, seemingly without reference
to the tools published in peer-reviewed journals (ibid). Due to this perceived lack of rigor in the
verification process, Farid argues that results from the majority of current self-assessment tools are
subjective, rather than objective and measurable, and may not be the most accurate “unless more
95
serious research is done that proves the validity and reliability of the instrument” (Farid 2014, p.
380). It should be noted that peer-reviewed work on the development of learner readiness tools has
indeed been undertaken since 2010, and works such as that of Dray et al. (2011) are examples of the
‘more serious’ research Farid (2014) recommends, as well as being more practical in terms of
providing examples of the kinds of questions that are useful. Nevertheless, the observation about
tools being ‘home-made’, or developed without verifying their validity and reliability, is an important
one which highlights what appears to be a relatively common phenomenon almost regardless of the
tool in question, when we contrast the dearth of published literature in this area with the wide array
of tools in actual use by universities. It is perhaps not surprising then, that no studies were found
during the review which provided an overarching evaluation of multiple tools used with, and by,
flexible learners during their transitions into higher education. We cannot exclude the possibility that
such studies exist, but extensive searching of library databases and consultation with experts in the
field suggests not.
It was concluded that there is a dearth of peer-reviewed evaluations of tools used with flexible
learners during early phases of the study life cycle.
Database of Existing Tools
To create the database, a list of tools was compiled through an examination of the websites of
twenty-two universities in four different regions around the world. This examination involved the
identification of website-based readiness tools that these institutions were making available to
prospective learners and/or learners who were preparing for study in that institution. The database
is not intended to be a comprehensive list existing tools, rather it seeks to provide an overview of the
type of tools being used by leading, ‘flexible learning’ institutions, to facilitate successful transitions
into higher education.
In the UK, four institutions were examined: the University of Edinburgh; the UK Open University
(OU); the University of Leicester; and the University of Liverpool. Another four institutions were
examined in the US: Pennsylvania State University (Penn State); Arizona State University (ASU);
University of Maryland University College (UMUC); and the University of Wisconsin. Seven
institutions in the Southern Hemisphere; Deakin University were examined: the Open University of
Australia (OU Aus); Charles Sturt University (CSU); University of New England (UNE); University of
South Queensland (USQ); the University of South Australia; Massey University; and the University of
Southern Africa. In Asia, four English language institutional websites were examined; the Malaysian
eUniversity (AeU); Korea National Open University; Hong Kong Open University; and the Singapore
Institute of Management (SIM). Finally, three private education providers were examined: the
University of Phoenix; the American Public University (APU); and Kaplan University (KU).
Tools were defined broadly as any resource or intervention which could be used with or by learners
(prospective or new). The database is comprised mainly of tools designed for use by open and
distance learners, but in many cases these are also available for full or part-time, campus-based
learners. Not all the tools found were digital, though access to them was possible online and in
96
almost all cases they were listed on the institution website. Rather than analyse the tools
geographically or based on their format (video, webpage, quiz, etc.) it was decided to code the tools
thematically, and cluster the tools into groups based primarily on their main function as follows:
1) Course match
2) Preparation for higher education
3) Orientation
4) Addressing personal circumstances
5) Community
6) Satisfactory student experience
The six cluster groups correspond closely with the key factors identified by Jones (2008) as the main
factors that, when in deficit, contribute to learner dropout. The cluster groups are by no means
discrete, indeed there was a large overlap between the preparation for higher education and
orientation tools.
When it comes to course match, the provision of accurate information during the first two stages of
the study life cycle is essential to provide enough information to ensure the best learner/course fit.
For flexible learners, this match is arguably as much about finding a mode of study that will fit into
their busy lives, as it is about choosing an area of study that interests them, and that they will
succeed in. Murphy, Politis and Slowey (2015) emphasise the advantages that generic advice on
flexible study would have for mature adults who are thinking about study.
Preparation for higher education was the cluster group in which the most tools were uncovered
during creation of the database, possibly because preparation for managing the transition into higher
education is complex and multi-faceted. Two sub-categories of these tools stood out: readiness
assessments; and online tutorials.
Orientation for flexible learners, particularly ODL students, is a rather different phenomenon than
orientation for full-time learners. Looking at the tools in the database, there are also a wider variety
of approaches to orientation than to the previous two headings; from a laissez-faire approach, to an
intensive one-day live webinar. This is interesting because in general the “classroom” and “campus”
the students are being introduced to are on the universities’ respective learning management
systems (LMS) and so are quite similar.
Given that personal circumstances are one of the most oft-cited reasons for flexible learners
withdrawing from study, offering quality student support services is of considerable importance to
improve retention. One of the most surprising revelations in the literature was how effective simple
pro-active contact can be in helping student persist when facing personal difficulties. Another
interesting concept arising from the literature is the idea of “support mapping”. Anagnostopoulou
and Parmer (2008) offer an exercise for students to map their own support network early in the
study lifecycle, which can then be referred to in times of needs.
97
As mentioned earlier, feelings of isolation can be common in the flexible learning experience, and the
fostering of a sense of belonging key to improving both retention and the student experience itself.
In terms of tools used to create a sense of community, the extent to which social networking sites
are used it is perhaps not surprising. Early experiments in this space, such as those of Currant (2009)
made use of now largely outmoded platforms such as ‘Ning’. A more recent study (Pinto 2014)
explores the potential use of a similar private networks in ‘Yammer’. Most universities in this study,
however, now have a presence on the currently most popular social networking sites Facebook,
Twitter, and LinkedIn, and to a lesser extent YouTube and Flickr. Some have a podcasting presence
on iTunes and Soundcloud, while the University of Phoenix boasts its own social network,
PhoenixConnect.
There are many dimensions to the creation of a satisfactory academic experience. This section will
focus primarily on the use of discussion boards to create engagement. When Gallie (2005) wrote
about the adaptation of course materials to provide a social interactive: cognitive version of an
existing course, discussion boards in particular as an integral part of the online learning experience
were still a relatively new development. Since then, they have become a standard feature of ODL and
‘blended’ learning, as our database confirms. But though few tools are more pervasive, it is less easy
to establish how frequently or effectively they are used by learners. Anagnostopolou and Parmer
(2008) suggested a spectrum of engagement exists, from active participation, to ‘lurking’, to nonengagement. Selwyn (2011) similarly found that only a small minority of students engaged regularly
on discussion boards, while many shunned them as a distraction to the ‘real work’ of ‘getting an
education’.
Phase 3 - The Toolbox
Based on both the phase 2 analysis of existing literature, and on the analysis of existing tools in use
internationally, eight digital readiness tools were developed to facilitate a successful transition into
higher education for flexible learners.
Tool 1: Am I Ready for Study?
With the opening tool, prospective flexible learners are presented with the opportunity to reflect and
self-assess if they are ready to commit to online study. This quick quiz is comprised of six sections
addressing the following relevant topics: Previous Study, Work and Family, Study Intentions, Study
Skills, Computer Skills and Work Habits. After answering each question personalised feedback is
provided, and upon completion of the quiz every prospective learner is provided with an overall
summary of their results and further personalised feedback. Here, each person is either informed
they are ready for online study or encouraged to access the provided resource links to discover how
they could enhance their readiness to succeed as a flexible learner.
Tool 2: Do I Have Enough Time?
This second tool provides a self-reflective ‘Calculator’ where prospective students are supported in
thinking about the amount of time they spend on different activities during a typical week and how
much spare time they might have to allocate to study. The calculator enables people to self-assess
whether balancing study with their existing life, work and family commitments is realistically
98
achievable. In completing the tool each person is provided with tips on how to most accurately
estimate how they currently spend their time under the sections Work, Family, Household, Hobbies,
Leisure and Sleep. On completion of the exercise people are given feedback on whether their
personal circumstances are conducive to embarking on further study.
Tool 3: Who can I ask?
The ‘Who can I ask?’ tool offers prospective flexible learners the opportunity to think about their
support network and how they might garner support to help them successfully complete their
studies. Through a series of information slides, users are made aware of how they can seek support
from Friends, Family, Employers, Universities and Other Students. In addition, examples of student
scenarios and how they were supported through their studies can be accessed by clicking on quotes
presented throughout the tool. Furthermore advice is offered on how to deal with a lack of support.
Tool 4: My Computer Skills: Am I Computer Ready to Learn?
Through the guidance of a student narrator, prospective flexible learners are informed of the
necessary computer skills needed in higher education. They are also informed of the technology they
will need, and the computer services offered by colleges. Four students’ stories can also be accessed,
which entail flexible learners’ first interactions with email services, online reading materials, Word
and Powerpoint. A computer skills quiz is also offered within this tool, allowing users to self-assess
their current level of computer skills. Three different navigation pathways are available through this
tool pending on the user’s previous experience with computer technology. Online services to assist
students in improving their computer skills are also flagged.
Tool 5: My First Assignment
Through the guidance of a student narrator, prospective flexible learners navigate through a
narrative relating to what it is like to plan out and develop a first assignment in higher education.
Advice on how to start an assignment, develop a plan, break down a research question is also
provided, with key elements within a plan being presented. Additionally a series of student
orientated quotes are readily accessible throughout the tool in order to give users a further sense of
what it is like to tackle your first assignment in higher education. Four different navigation pathways
are available through this tool pending on the user’s previous experience with developing higher
education study skills.
Tool 6: Get Ready to Learn
This tool is a five week online course that provides prospective flexible learners with key messages
about how to prepare for studying at higher education level as a flexible learner. This tool
incorporates a number of the other tools within its structure, in order to aid prospective learners in
assessing their readiness for higher education, calculating how much time they have to study,
examining what supports they have in their lives, learning about necessary computer skills, and also
about the study skills required to study successfully. Additional content (text, audio and video),
activities and facilitated online discussion forums, unique to this tool are also used to help prepare
prospective learners.
99
Tool 7: Study Tips for Me
This tool is designed to provide support for flexible learners from other flexible learners. The site
would be based on a Tumblr platform, and would address topics such as developing a healthy
study/life balance. Each student would be free to post on the site and it is intended that materials
posted would be generic and beneficial for any flexible learner rather than course specific content
appearing on the site. Through encouraging interaction between students in this manner it is thought
it will benefit all students in overcoming challenges and developing suitable plans for study.
Tool 8: Online Orientation
As an online orientation, at the beginning of the academic year, would necessarily be unique to that
programme or institution this tool takes a different from to the other seven tools. This tool is created
as a guide for those who wish to create an online orientation. This guide describes the elements that
should be present in an effective online orientation, gives examples of different approaches to
including that element in an orientation and allows users of the tool to build up a plan for how they
would create an online orientation for their programme or institution.
Next Steps
As the development of the eight tools is completed the project moves into phases 4 and 5. In phase 4
the tools will be piloted and evaluated across the partner institutions. In the light of this evaluation,
the digital tools will be adapted/augmented to ensure that they are fit for purpose. Phase Five will
produce a Digital Guide for Supporting Flexible Learners, which will provide guidance for institutions
and discipline teams on how to effectively deploy the suite of digital tools. Another key deliverable of
this phase is a series of three workshops delivered in different HE institutions on how to support
transitions for flexible learners. Project outcomes will be disseminated through these workshops, a
publication(s) and the project website.
100
References
Alt, D. 2015. Assessing the connection between self-efficacy for learning and justifying academic
cheating in higher education learning environments. Journal of Academic Ethics, 13, pp. 77-90.
Anagnostopolou, K. and Parmer, D. 2008. Practical guide: bringing together e-learning & student
retention. STAR resources.
Armstrong, C. 2015. An evaluation of initiatives implemented to support undergraduate students’
transition into Higher Education at one post-1992 university. Journal of Huddersfield student
research, 1 (1).
Ashby, A. 2004. Monitoring student retention in the Open University: Detritions, measurement,
interpretation and action. Open Learning, 19 (1), pp. 65-78.
Association of College and Research Libraries. (2000). Information literacy competency standards for
higher education. Available from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency
Boote, D. and Beile, P. 2005. Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation
literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6) pp. 3-15.
Currant, B. (2009) ‘Support Me! Develop me! Enhancing the student experience and engaging with
users before they arrive’, LearnHigher website launch. University of Leeds, Leeds 23 January.
Dray, B.J., Lowenthal, P.R., Miszkiewicz, M.J., Ruiz-Primo, M.A. and Marczynski, K. 2011. Developing
an instrument to assess student readiness for online learning: A validation study. Distance Education,
31(1), pp.29-47.
Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre, 2010. Methods for conducting
systematic reviews. London: UCL Social Science Research Unit.
Farid, A. 2014. Student online readiness assessment tools: A systematic review approach. Electronic
Journal of e-Learning, 12(4), pp.375-382.
Flannery, M. and McGarr, O. 2014. Flexibility in higher education: An Irish perspective. Irish
Educational Studies, 33 (4), pp.419-434.
Gallie, K. 2005. Student attrition before and after modifications in distance course delivery. Studies in
Learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 2(3), pp. 69-76.
Haddow G (2013). Academic library use and student retention: A quantitative analysis. Library and
Information Science Research Vol. 35 (2), pp. 127 -136.
Higher Education Authority 2012. Part-time and flexible higher education in Ireland: Policy, practice
and
recommendations
for
the
future.
Available
from:
https://www.dkit.ie/system/files/HEA%20Report%20on%20Lifelong%20Learning%202013.pdf
101
Hurst, S., & Leonard, J. (2007). Garbage in, garbage out: The effect of library instruction on the
quality of students’ term papers. Electronic Journal of Academic & Special Librarianship, 8(1).
Jones, R. 2008. Widening participation - Student retention and success. Research Synthesis for the
Higher Education Academy. Available from: http://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/ssds/projects/studentretention-project/dissemination/resources/wp-retention-synthesis.doc
Mery, Y., Newby, J., & Peng, K. 2012. Performance-based assessment in an online course: Comparing
different types of information literacy instruction. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 12(3), pp. 283298.
Murphy, E., Politis, Y., & Slowey, M. (2014). Contributing to an evidence base for the enhancement of
the experiences and outcomes of mature students at an Irish university. New Voices in Higher
Education Research and Scholarship, 191.
Nichols, M. 2011. Intervention for retention through distance education: a comparison study. Project
output ed. New Zealand: Aotearoa: National Centre For Tertiary Teaching Excellence.
Pinto, M.B. 2014. The use of yammer in higher education: An exploratory study. Journal of Educators
Online, 11(1), pp. 1-33.
Quinn, J., Thomas, L., Slack, K., Casey, L., Thexton, W., and Noble, J. 2005. From life crisis to lifelong
learning. Rethinking working class' drop out' from higher education. York: Joseph Rowntree
Foundation.
Reeves, T. (2006). Design research from a technology perspective. In J. V. D. Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S.
McKenney & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 52–66). New York: Routledge.
Selwyn, N. 2011. Digitally distanced learning: A study of international distance learners' (non)use of
technology. Distance Education, 32(1), pp. 85-99.
Simpson, O. 2009. Motivating learners in open and distance learning: Do we need a new theory of
learner support? Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 23(2), pp. 159-170.
Soria, K. M., Fransen, J., & Nackerud, S. 2013. Library use and undergraduate student outcomes: New
evidence for students' retention and academic success. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 13 (2), pp.
147-164.
Thomas, L. 2012. What works? Facilitating an effective transition into higher education, Widening
Participation and Lifelong Learning 14, pp. 4-24.
Thomas, L. 2014. Student engagement to promote belonging retention and success IN Murray, N.
and Klinger, C. (eds.) Aspirations, Access and Attainment: International perspectives on widening
participation and an agenda for change. Oxon: Routledge. pp. 109-122.
102
Thomas, L. and Hill, M. 2013. Briefing report on the What works? Student retention and success
change
programme,
December
2013.
Available
from:
https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/SRS_Briefing_report_December_2013.
pdf
Torraco, R.J.. 2005. Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples. Human
Resource Development Review, 4 (3), pp 356-367.
Wang, F. & Hannafin, M. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning
environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5-23.
Woodley, A., & Simpson, O. 2014. Student dropout: The elephant in the room. Online distance
education: Towards a research agenda, pp. 459-484.
Yorke, M. (1999) Leaving Early: undergraduate non-completion in higher education. London: Falmer.
Yorke, M. 2004. Retention, persistence and success in on-campus higher education, and their
enhancement in open and distance learning. Open Learning, 19 (1), pp. 19-32.
Yorke, M. and Longden, B. 2007. The first year experience of higher education in the UK: Report on
phase 1. York: Higher Education Academy.
103
Crosta Lucilla, Manokore Viola, Gray Morag
Exploring the development of authentic online learning communities in an
EdD programme
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
University of Liverpool
United Kingdom
lucilla.crosta@online.liverpool.ac.uk
viola.manokore@online.liverpool.ac.uk
morag.gray@online.liverpool.ac.uk
Abstract
The aim of this research was to investigate the extent to which (if at all) a cohort of students
in a Professional Doctorate of Higher Education program evolved into an authentic online
learning community. This programme attracts students from all over the world who interact
in asynchronous virtual learning environment. This research work involved module audits,
and in-depth interviews. Phase one consisted of auditing three out of the nine taught
modules in the programme. The audit explored a cohort of students’ interaction patterns
within and between three modules. At the end of data collection some cohort members
participated in the in-depth interviews designed to gain some insights on the issues that
were identified in phase 1 of the study. Using the Community of Inquiry model we
discovered that a majority of the students did not feel their cohort resembled an authentic
online learning community. Although cognitive presence as higher order learning intent was
evident in the whole class and small team discussion, social presence (emotional and social
connections with other students) was less evident or absent in some cases in the modules.
We found out that teaching presence was predominantly on the mediation with cognitive
presence and social presence. The paper discusses findings from the major findings obtained
mainly from phase 1 and phase 2 of the project.
Keywords: Professional Doctorate, Online, Education Community, social presence, teaching,
team
104
Introduction
The EdD program (Professional Doctorate in Higher Education) is an international online
program run by a well-established European University in partnership with a well-known
consortium of International Universities. The programme is composed of nine tutor
facilitated ten-week modules that run parallel with Doctoral Developmental Planning (DDP)
Modules. In the DDP modules, a mentor provides support and assists students in developing
their transferrable skills throughout the programme. On completion of the taught element of
the programme, students then progress into the thesis stage that lasts between 12 and 30
months.
The researchers are three experienced online tutors who have been working in the
programme across different modules for at least three years. The stimulus to conduct this
study arose from students’ both positive and negative experiences in their collaboration and
interactions with their peers.
The aim of the study was to explore if the EdD international students’ interactions and
collaboration within the learning environment resembled an authentic online learning
community of inquiry (Garrison & Anderson, 2003). In addition, we were interested in
exploring whether the design of the program enhances and supports the evolution and
elevation of EdD cohorts to online learning communities. In this study, we defined an
authentic online learning community as a group of online learners working collaboratively,
that have a shared vision, and empowered by the learning environment (Ke & Hoadley, 2009)
and where continuous discussion and collaboration can lead to higher-level learning
(Garrison & Anderson, 2003). In our research context, this community takes place through
the use of asynchronous text-based Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) (Berge
&Collins, 1995) with tools such as online forums and emails.
Given the international geographical distribution of students and faculty in the EdD.
program, the following research question guided our study - ”Is the online learning
environment enabling learners to build, form and sustain learning communities in order to
support each other throughout their doctoral journey and increase their on-going
motivation?“
105
Brief Literature Review
Within the literature reviewed there has been no single agreed definition of ‘Online learning
community’. Tu and Corry (2002b) define online learning community as electronic
interactions of students as they engage in learning and activities. This definition implies that
any group or cohort of online learners becomes an online learning community. Contrary to
that perspective, Ke and Hoadley (2009) pointed out that not all learning environments are
learning communities. Ke and Hoadley (2009) further argue that “online learning
communities evolve from simple cohorts when learners elevate their engagement with each
other to an emotional sense of community” (p. 489). This is where community members
have a sense of belonging and commitment to individual and group needs (e.g. McMillan &
Chavis 1986 in Ke in Hoadley, 2009). Moreover, according to Palloff and Pratt (1999) and
Rheingold (2000) a learning community needs to be designed and continuously nurtured in
order to evolve online otherwise it may run the risk to become a static entity.
In this study, we conceptualize online learning community as defined by Garrison and
Anderson (2003). According to Garrison and Anderson (2003), the main three main elements
of “community of inquiry” include the following:
 Cognitive presence: as a higher order learning intent, reflection and discussion
 Social presence: as emotional and social connection with other students
 Teaching presence: as the mediator and facilitator actor between cognitive
presence/learning and social presence.
It is important to note that the gap in knowledge is not about whether authentic online
communities enhance learning and encourage students’ persistence; but rather it is about
how learning environments support the evolution of online cohorts to authentic online
learning communities.
106
Previous research has linked the benefits of online learning communities to students’
satisfaction and consequently retention (e.g. Palloff & Pratt, 1999; Rovai & Wighting, 2005).
Swan (2002) used a multiple-choice questionnaire (MCQ) with 3,800 students who were
enrolled on 264 courses. The MCQ was administered at the end of the course with 1,406
completing it giving a response rate of 38%. The main finding highlighted by Swan (2002) was
the importance of social interaction online to student satisfaction. Boston, Gibson, Ice,
Richardson and Swan (2010) distributed the Community of Inquiry questionnaire to
undergraduate students over six semesters. Their responses rate was 38.91% (n=28,777).
They identified that social presence and online interaction in an authentic online community
was one of the most important factors that may enhance students’ retention in online
learning environments. In a related study, designed with questionnaire and related online
and face-to-face interviews with Nigerian online Master and doctoral programme in a UK
Institution, Sgilazyi (2011) analysed cultural aspects on Nigerian students’ retention in online
courses and found out that the students’ sense of belonging to an online learning community
with culturally-specific characteristics helped in motivating them as well as increasing their
retention in the courses.
Contrary to other studies, Drouin (2008) surveyed 77 students as the end of three
undergraduate psychology online courses and a very high response rate of 92% was
obtained. Drouin (2008) reported that a sense of community was not necessarily connected
with student retention in an online course, though it was with student’s satisfaction. In other
words, Drouin’s study highlighted how some students might not feel that being part of a
community as a necessary aspect of their online learning experience and retention.
Hence in this study we will explore also how the social aspect online may play an important
role in the creation of this community and if and how this happened in the EdD programme.
107
Study Design
The research was conducted in two phases and the major outcomes of these phase are
presented in this paper.
The online EdD programme is designed in three tutor facilitated segments, with each
segment containing three modules; making a total of nine modules comprising the taught
component of the programme. On completion of the taught element of the programme,
students then progress into the thesis stage that lasts between 12 and 30 months. In Phase
One, we conducted an audit where we purposively selected one module from each of the
three segments. Each module lasts 10 weeks and has a common structure comprising of the
whole group discussion, weekly focused questions and smaller group learning team tasks.
There is however a progression in terms of developing learner autonomy and peer group
working with the modules in segment three containing more small group learning team
activities. Indeed the structure of the last three modules is more based on small learning
team groups and activities rather than on group discussion as the other six initial modules of
the programme in order to facilitate autonomy and peer review and support.
In Phase One of our research we conducted a retrospective audit process where we coded
and examined students’ interactions within BlackBoard™ learning management system to
find evidence of the development of online learning communities over time. We chose to
audit interactions of one cohort of students in order to gain some understanding on the
progression of their engagement. We received written permission to approach students who
had completed the purposively selected modules. Students were asked to give their consent
for their asynchronous texts to be audited. We explored students’ interactions within and
between the three modules. The words teacher and tutor were used interchangeably in
order to indicate the person who was teaching and facilitating students in the three chosen
modules.
108
Methodological Perspectives
We used Garrison and Anderson’s (2003) explanation of the three tenants (cognitive, social,
teacher presence) of communities of inquiry as a lens to categorize and code students’
asynchronous texts as they interacted in the learning environment. As researchers, we made
interpretations about students’ texts using the interpretivist paradigm (Cohen, Manion &
Morrison, 2011). In the first phase of the research (audit), we relied on interrelating, coding
and analysis existing texts as per interpretivism perspectives (Angen, 2000).The approach
chosen was a single evaluative case study design (Cohen, et al., 2011) since the main aim of
our work is to look in depth at a specific case, namely a specific cohort of students in the EdD
programme and its potential development into a Community of Inquiry (COI). Phase one of
the study helped us to inform phase two and to create the guidelines used for carrying out
the un-structured Skype individual interviews with participants
Methods
Context of the study
Exploring interactions of a single cohort in three different modules enabled us to audit
whether learners were building a community or were already part of an authentic learning
community. During class discussions, students are required to respond to the discussion
question (DQ) of the week and post their response on Blackboard™ by midweek. During the
course of the week, they are required to react to their colleagues’ postings on Blackboard™
by posting 3-5 asynchronous posts. It is their interactions (on class discussion forum or
learning team spaces) in the three modules that form the basis of this study. The model of
teaching adopted is one of facilitation where the tutor confines their online engagement to
no more than 10% of total posts per week.
109
Participants
A cohort of students who had completed the modules that were audited was invited to
participate in the study. Each of the 17 potential participants were identified by codes inorder to protect their identity. These codes were used towards the overall project so that
comparisons of students among the different phases could be made. Students were emailed
the description of the project and asked if they were willing to participate in the study and
have their interactions in already completed modules analysed. A total of 13/17 EdD
students participated in the study and gave their consent for us to retrospectively audit their
posts and learning team activities. The students represented several countries including
China, India, Ireland, Japan, Malaysia, Middle East, Tunisia, United States of America and the
United Kingdom, as well as both genders (men n=6, women n=7). Students also accepted to
have a recorded interview via Skype.
Data collection tools and procedures
Phase One of the study consisted in auditing weekly discussions as the basis of the analysis.
The unit of analysis was a thread of discussion initiated by an initial submission of each
student. Guided by Garrison and Anderson's (2003) framework, we explored for cognitive
and social presence in online asynchronous class discussions interactions in the three
modules. We included exploration of teaching presence, only in terms of type of posts
shared in the discussion board (cognitive and social posts provided by tutor) as it was for all
who participated in the discussion. We also wanted to explore if there were any variations
from module to module and between participants. We purposively chose three modules
representing the beginning (Module 2), the middle (Module 4) and towards the end (Module
7) of the Programme.
110
Each student’s initial post was analysed in Module Two (week 1, 2, 8 & 9), Module 4 (week 1,
2, 9 & 10) and in Module 7 (week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9). In Modules two and four analysis
was done in weeks when they had whole class discussions. The whole class discussions are
structured such that students can freely choose whom they want to respond to. Module 7
was structured in such a way that students interacted in small groups (there were no whole
class discussions) as learning teams. Each learning team (in our case there were two) had
about five students assigned to the learning team by the tutor. The students’ posts were
categorized accordingly as interlocutor, (if the student was the first one to initiate a
conversation) responder (if the student was answering to someone else’s post) or follow-up
post (if the student was posting further additional comments in the thread) as well as
whether is it was of cognitive (cognitive presence) and/or social (social presence) nature. A
post was coded cognitive if the content of the post was mainly course related learning issues,
instructional issues or any course related issues. A social post was when it was mainly about
issues outside subject matter issues such as announcing birthdays, new jobs etc.
Posts connected with the teacher were reviewed separately rather than according with
“teaching presence” theme as explained above, according with types of posts made by the
teacher if of cognitive or of social nature, so according with the type and kind of participation
had by the tutor in the module and some answers or questions provided to him/her from
students.
The 13 participants were also invited to take part in an in-depth un-structured interview to
follow-up on issues identified in the audit. Eight out of the 13 consented to being
interviewed.
Results and Discussion
The findings are presented by the main themes that emerged from the study. Based on the
organisation nature of Module 7 where students were exclusively in learning teams, the
analysis for that module focused more on interaction patterns in learning teams rather than
in whole group discussion forum (Module 2 and 4). The interview findings buil from phase 1
of the study, while adding further themes and insights. Here below the most significant
findings obtained from phase 1 and phase 2 of the study are presented and discussed.
111
Social and Cognitive Interactions
From coding and analysing students’ asynchronous texts, we found out that most of the
interactions that occurred were of cognitive nature. For example, 100% of the posts in the
discussion forum in Module 2 and Module 4 were of cognitive nature although participants
would always have a supportive opening remark to others such as “thank you, insightful
post, informative response” etc. On the other side only the 8% of the overall posts in learning
team discussion of Module 7 were of social nature, considering the posts of those students
who accepted to take part to the research. We also found out that the teaching (tutor)
presence was mainly of cognitive nature with some encouragements.
The lack of social presence in the asynchronous interactions audited in this study, could have
been compounded by many factors. For example, given the cognitive nature of the
interactions, it was evident that the focus was on meeting the stated cognitive objectives of
each module. It is possible that students were not expecting to have social conversations (i.e.
social presence) as part of their interactions in the module (Liu, Magiula, Bonk, Lee, 2007).
Drouin (2008) argued that student-student interactions are more powerful in community
building and lack of tutor mediation on social presence might have contributed towards
general lack of social presence in the modules edited. In addition, tutors generally perceive
their role as that of facilitating the learning process to help students meet the stated
cognitive module learning outcomes. It is also pertinent to note that this online professional
doctorate programme is part-time so time management between their studies, professional
and social life could also factor in the lack of social presence. However, the fact that there
was no if low evidence of social presence in audited texts does not necessarily mean that
participants did not have social interactions outside the online learning environment- a
possibility that was explored with the in-depth interviews.
112
The follow up interviews confirmed the lack of social presence and social aspects in the EdD
programme. Almost all of the participants stated that they rarely if ever had contact outside
the module during the programme. Some of them were concentreated mainly on the course
tasks, while some others defined themselves as self-directed learners. If the relationship was
fostered in the programme was only for very few participants if not for professional reasons
only. Participant # 14 for example reported that there were very surface level of social
aspects because there was no room for social relations in the programme: “ something
pretty “regimental [the course activities] ... on the most parts I thought it was just like to try
to make sure that I had all the work done, so it was very task oriented... this was the general
feeling from the modules so it does’t really leave for me the room for much social
relationships with our classmates or with the tutor because we are just busy making sure
that we are completing everything we need to do by evening Saturday”
Participant # 9 added that she was mainly a self directed learner: “I am quite a self-directed
learner and have always been. So I could see if someone was a community learner, it would
have some kind of impact. But I am self-directed and I feel that’s easier as I can set my own
objectives and plan how to address them. I would go and look at others posts and see if I
could respond to them – in that I could see what they were looking for and that was quite
useful.”
Participant # 10 on the other hand, fostered her relationship on a more professional level
since there was limited opportunity to develop strong ties. For her performing activities
during the programme and being polite was the major goal. She stated that she preferred to
be an independent learner. However although participant # 5 considered the module very
task/oriented he recognize the importance of having more social aspects since this would
help in learning more from each other and to build something together. He states:
“well [socializing online is important] because we learn from each others, it is like if I can
learn from somebody, I can make friends with people, connect with people and then we can
still research together and work in teams and one of the things I learnt from the programme
is the value of working in a team”
113
In addition to this, participant # 8 explained how he usually connected more with the content
than with people since sometimes learning was very “unpersonal”. He stated he did not
connect with anyone outside of the modules for the entire programme. However during the
interview he provided an interesting idea on the importance of the initial personal
introduction of each participant and how providing video clips on this could help in
enhancing the relationship too.
An interesting reflection was made by participant # 6. He discussed how he developed
relationships with colleagues and developed a feeling of belonging with the programme and
how he got in touch with others also outside the module. He was also a participant who
reported an high number of social posts in the discussion board during the Audit phase. He
stated: “Then I developed relationships with colleagues. It became a natural thing to do –
you were part of a discussion with your colleagues. It made for deep learning and it made
going through the modules much easier because if it was just me I would never complete.
But being aware that others are watching you and looking out for you and you have to do
this discussion and being part of a learning team – it kept me going”. We will see however
that surprisingly, this student was the one who received the less number of responses from
others in the online discussion.
Participant # 13 also declared that there was social presence in his view since he got in touch
with others outside the module via Skype in order to discuss about personal and family
issues and when the discussion touches issues other than the academic ones, then it
becomes social.
Participant # 12 however, presented a different view on the issue:
“There was no personal connections though we were polite and formal during interaction.
There was no strong connection though there was friendly communication. I think if we had
more non academic discussion, then we would feel more connected at personal level.
I think socialization is important, need activities where people let down their guards and
interact at a more personal level …. I think it is important to improve socialization, I do not
know how this can be done but I know it is possible. The socialization does not have to be
academic but just something for personal connections. We were polite to each other but not
connected at personal level”.
114
Hence, in the overall programme it seems like students connected with each other in a
formal way and in more academic terms in order to accomplish the course tasks, but not on
a personal level since strong connections or ties did not developed in this cohort. Although
most participants acknowledged the importance of social aspect for improving interaction
online and so learning, it seemed that from the outcomes of phase 1 and phase 2 of the
study, the cognitive aspect in the module was overarching the social one. There seem to be
few different attempts to get involved into social aspects and social interaction with others
outside the module but this seems to have happened only for 2 participants. Carson, (2014)
and Picciano (2002) report how social presence impacts students’ positive perceptions of
their learning an students’ online learning satisfaction too (Tu, 2002a), hence this is an aspect
that will require closer attention in future studies.
Interlocutor and Responder Posts
We analysed participants’ conversations to determine the type of their post as initiator of
the discussion (Interlocutor) or as answer or follow up to other peers’ posts (Responder). We
also use the word Responder to identify the latter type of posts
Figure 1. Summary Interlocultor- Responder posts from 4 students in Module 2 & 4
115
In this analysis we will use participant # 3, # 6, # 12 and # 14 as reference since these were
students who interacted also in Module 7 and for this reason it was possible to make further
comparison among different type of interactions undertaken. In module 2 and 4, we
analysed students’ interactions as they responded to discussion questions in 4 weeks in each
of the two modules. These were the weeks where students had whole group discussions.
With an average post of 4 per week over the 8 weeks (total number of weeks analysed in
Module 2 and 4 where main discussion group took place) the total posts per student are
represented as in Figure 1. As shown in Figure 1, some students had more posts as
interlocutor rather than responding to their colleagues. For example, student #3 had more
interlocutor posts as compared to student # 14 had more response posts. It is also important
to note that student # 14 often had more colleagues ‘reacting’ to her initial DQ response as
compared to student # 3. For example, student #14 had a total of 12 interlocutor and 25
response posts in the 8 weeks (Module 2 & 4) we analysed whereas student # 3 had a total
of 17 interlocutor and 13 response posts in the 8 weeks (Module 2 and 4). It was evident that
a student whose initial DQ had more colleagues reacting to it tended to have more “response
posts” than interlocutor posts as the student tried to respond to issues raised by
‘interlocutor’ peer or tutor. The implications of this finding is that students whose initial post
is not responded to, may end up meeting the minimal participation requirements by being
responders to other students’ posts and not necessarily engage in meaningful back and forth
discussions on issues they could have raised in their initial DQ. This is an important aspect to
investigate further.
In Module 7, the analysis of participants # 3, # 6, # 12, # 14, posts, illustrated in Figure 2
showed that students mainly posted as responder to others with a percentage of around
75% over their overall posts while the remaining 25% posts were as interlocutor. This was
also due to the module requirements that asked participants to post each week 3-5 posts
within their learning teams.
116
It is interesting to note that participant # 6, had 50% of his posts as interlocutor while other
50% were as responder. Hence the same comment can be made for participant # 6 in respect
to the type of post published in the forum, since not having many students reacting to his
post the student did not post a high number of responses and follow-up posts as his other
peers.
Figure 2. Interlocutor-Respond posts from 4 students in Module 7
From the interviews participants were in general agreement that not being responded to
could produce a negative feeling and in some case demotivating students whose posts were
ignored (participant # 8, # 9, # 10). Participant # 8 reported: “once or twice you find that
when you do not get responses to a particular post you made you also become demotivated
in responding to others...what I also found as trend, the first person who posts tends to get
the most responses from others”. In line with this vision participant # 13 indicated that at the
beginning of the programs he was concerned when peers did not respond to his post but this
feeling decreased module after module.
In contrast, participant # 6 indicated that he did not care much about not being responded to
by peers since most of the time the tutor provided him with the support he needed and he
was of the view that sometimes people might not have time to answer to his posts.
117
In addition while participant # 5 stated that it did not happen to him not to be responded in
the discussion board, some other participants declared that the lack of responses to their
posts could have been attributed to the lack of interest of others to the topic they discussed
or to their too aggressive language (participant # 14) Also participant # 14 stated that some
tutors cared for those who were not responded to: “I think like for instance some tutors give
more care for acting to make sure that they respond to everyone more or less in a week
without leaving anyone out”. She interestingly added how the tutoring style changing among
modules, did impacted the type of interaction taking place online among students and the
same was highlighted by participant # 8: “ I think that some tutors were more skilled of
bringing the classroom together than other tutors,...and I found very interesting that across
modules some tutors were responding very much ...they were posting many more
announcements and I thought that there was more presence ... I thought there was more
cohesion I think and for that particular tutor, in that particular module, just because the style
was so different”
Some students valued the tutor response rather than their peers (Participant # 12) since
more attention was payed on the posts published by the tutor rather than those posted by
peers (Participant # 10). : “I didn’t needed a social, I thought that the instructor was the main
person who actually needed to get along with from the very first beginning, because as long
as things were clear from me, I did not feel I need that much of social presence”. (participant
# 10). One student stated that she respond to her own posts when no one answered to them
(participant # 9) while participant # 8 interestingly stated how the first posts to be published
were usually those who received the most number of answers from others and this
confirmed the analysis undertaken in the Audit.
In summary being responded to posts was a key important aspect for most of the students
since not being responded impacted their motivation negatively. On the other side the
tutor’s presence was important for supporting those students who were not much involved
in the discussion because more interlocutor than responder. Indeed participant # 12 states:
“I think it would impact motivation [the online discussion]. In module 1 and 2 there were few
occasions where not many colleagues responded to my post. I figured out that it could be
about people getting interested in what you wrote. I chose to respond to posts that were
interesting to me. Though with time, people tend to respond to certain individuals. In
learning teams, there were some connections such that team members will tend to respond
to each other’s posts more.”
118
Where is the learning community?
Nearly all the participants interviewed indicated that their cohort did not resemble a learning
community in the truest sense of the term. “Well I’ll tell you, I do not think about it as
something social, you know it is like I thought of it as something collegial, where I was
engaging with colleagues from around the world on all of these different topics” (Participant
# 5). It is important however to note that although at the beginning it was like dealing with
strangers (P # 10) they became more familiar with each other towards the end of the
programme. For example, participant # 10 mentioned that each time they started a new
module she would look for familiar names in the class list and that provided a relief.
Participant # 12 did not feel his cohort was fully a learning community because he argued
that he never got to know his colleagues, this was attributed to how cohort composition
changed module after module thereby losing touch with each other. Instead he interacted
more in small learning teams rather than in big group discussions.
The definition participants gave about learning community is best illuminated by participant
# 5 since he mentioned a clear difference between a team and a community and he stressed
the importance of connections and the presence of friends: “ the difference between a team
and a community....a community is where you really engage with everyone and you make
friends, connections and then you are connected with them for years, that did not happen
for me” (Participant # 5). He also declared that he missed the sense of being part of a
community of learners because modules were very much task and goal oriented and this
reflected an impact on the community too. The fact that the module was quite task oriented
is also supported by participant # 14 , # 10 and # 8.
Participant # 13 provided another definition of learning community where encouragement
was enhanced, together with closeness again. However he confirmed that he did not feel
part of that community and that he did not get closer with all of his peers.
“Learning community is not just about school, it is about support, encouragement and
closeness. I got to be friends with some but not all in my cohort “(Participant # 13)
Furthermore, it was noted by some participants that online interactions helped in forming
the community (participants # 12 and # 13). Participant # 12 added that connections
developed better in small online teams than in bigger ones although socialisation was a key
aspect missed in the community.
119
“Yes, I think the levels of interactions and personal connections matter and impact the
formation of a community. In Learning Teams, we had better connections than DQ
[discussion questions]. I think there is need for more socialization” (Participant # 12)
Hence in summary, although this cohort in the EdD programme did not form a real learning
community as defined by Garrison and Anderson (2003), it seems like there is an overall
need of a social presence, of connection and of feeling part of “something” while learning
online. Words like “Closeness, encouragement, friends, small teams” were repeatedly
discussed by participants on several different occasions, together with the need and of the
importance of socializing online.
Conclusion
This study focused on investigating and reflecting if and how a real Community of Inquiry
(COI) established in this cohort of the EdD programme after three years of working together.
Clearly if we define the COI as a place where students take responsibility of their learning
and challenge each other’s ideas in respectful ways, composed by cognitive, teaching and
social presence (Garrison & Anderson, 2003) it was found that not all students were
challenging each others’ contributions.
While “cognitive presence” as an higher order learning intent, reflection and discussion
(Garrison & Anderson, 2003) was a central part of the community in this cohort, if we
consider “social presence” as emotional and social connection with other students (Garrison
& Anderson, 2003) and if we consider that social presence help online students to overcome
their feelings of isolation (Joo, Lim & kim, 2011), from this study we cannot say that this was
overtly present among students. Although the study by Dawson (2006) stated that highly
level of interaction among peers was positively associated with a strong sense of community,
we can postulate at this stage that the type and kind of communication taking place in all the
three modules of the EdD online classes created a “pseudo online learning community” in
within this cohort of students.
120
Students and tutors tended to exchange more cognitive posts in nature, rather than social
ones and the presence of the tutor was cognitively supportive towards students who were
more “invisible” in that their posts were not responded to by colleagues in the class . Indeed
the interviews confirmed that only few students had additional interactions with peers
outside the module (i.e. Skype) and cultivated friendship and closed relationship with peers
also after the end of the module. Last but not least, students who tended to post later in the
week and seemed rather excluded in the discussion from their peers and the tutor usually
engaged with them from a cognitive perspective.
From this small study we can state that although students did not form a real online learning
community, they declared its importance and the need for making more social connections
with others. It was also found that social presence was another missing element in the
programme although students considered it as a key element while learning online and for
helping each other. We found that the role of the tutor was key and impacted the online
interaction patterns among students. Although it was very much focused on cognitive
aspects of the course rather than on social ones, students found tutor’s role to be key in
encouraging, supporting and connecting during the module. Further studies are needed in
order to understand how the role of the tutor may impact the formation of the community
and so students’ motivations toward the programme.
Acknowledgements
We thank Laureate Online Education Institutions who funded this research project
References
Angen, M.J. (2000). Evaluating interpretive inquiry: Reviewing the validity debate and
opening the dialogue. Qualitative Health Research, 10(3), 378-395.
Berge L. Z. and Collins, M. P., (eds). (1995). Computer Mediated Communication and the
Online Classroom. New Jersey: Hampton.
Boston, W., Gibson, A. M., Ice, P., Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2010). An Exploration of the
Relationship between Indicators of the Community if Inquiry Framework and Retention in
Online Programs, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 14(1), 3–20.
121
Carson, M. & Studies, N. (2014). Promoting a Community of Practice Online: How important
is social presence? In Bayne, S., Jones, C., De Laat, M., Rybert, T. & Sinclair, C. (Eds)
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Networked Learning 2014, Edinburgh
University, UK.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K. 2011). Research Methods in Education. London,
Routledge.
Dawson, S. (2006). A Study of the Relationship between Student Communication Interaction
and Sense of Community. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 153-162
Drouin, M.A, (2008). The Relationship between Students’ Perceived Sense of Community and
Satisfaction, Achievement and Retention in an Online Course. The Quarterly Review of
Distance Education, 9(3), 267-284.
Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. 2003). ELearning in the 21 st Century: A Framework for Research
and Practice. London, Routledge Falmer.
Joo, Y.J., Lim, K.Y., Kim, E.K. (2011). Online University Students’ Satisfaction and Persistence:
Examining Perceived Level of Presence. Usefulness and Ease of Use as Predictors in a
Structural Model. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1654-1664
Ke, F., Hoadley, C. 2009). Evaluating Online Learning Communities. Education Tech Research
Development, 57, 487-510
Liu, X., Magjula, R.J., Bonk, C.J., Lee, S. (2007). Does Sense of Community Matter? As
Examination of Participants’ Perspectives of Building Learning Communities in Online
Courses. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(1), 9-24.
Palloff, R., Pratt, K. (1999). Building Learning Communities In Cyberspace: Effective Strategies
for the Online Classroom. San Francisco, Jossey Bass.
Picciano, A. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interactions, presence and
performance in an online course, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 21-40.
Rheingold, H. (2000). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier.
Cambridge, MA., The MIT Press.
122
Rovai, A., & Whiting, M. (2005). Feelings of alien- ation and community among higher
education students in a virtual classroom. Internet and Higher Education, 8, 97-110
Szilazyi, A.M. (2011). Cultural determinants of student retention in the early stages of online
postgraduate study with a focus on the Nigerial student population, University of Liverpool
Conference, July 2011, University of Liverpool.
Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of
interaction. Education, Communication and Information, 2(1), 23-49.
Tu, C.H., (2002a). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment.
International Journal on e-learning, 1(2), 34-45.
Tu, C.H., Corry, M. (2002b). Elearning Communities. The Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 3(2), 207-218.
123
Ertl Bernhard
Supporting and evaluating competency based learning scenarios by the
university’s blended learning strategy
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Donau-Universität Krems
Austria
duk@ertl.org
Abstract
University policies target increasingly on the implementation of competency based learning
scenarios. This can be seen a result of the Bologna-Strategy. Yet, it is also a requirement of
the European Qualification Framework (EQF). This defines different levels and dimensions of
competencies with respect to knowledge, skills, and personal and social aspects. As a result,
university education has to go further than dealing with subject specific knowledge and
skills, it also has to focus on students’ development from a personal and social perspective –
which is often in contrast to the traditional ways of teaching and learning at universities.
Distance learning may provide ambiguous impacts on university learning in this context: It
brings the chance to enrich learning scenarios by the new possibilities that distance learning
offers: they may facilitate the development of competencies and skills. However, there is
also the risk that teachers just transfer traditional teaching pattern to distance education.
This would only offer few benefits for the learners, particularly compared to the efforts
necessary for implementing this the shift from traditional teaching materials to the use of
new media.
This contribution will introduce the ICAP Model, which describes learning activities by the
interactivity students show with their learning materials, as a tool for developing and
evaluating competency based learning at universities. It will exemplify its implementation by
the example of e-portfolios and elaborate on the policy aspect of competency based learning
at universities. The contribution will discuss how far the ICAP model can serve as a tool for
implementing and evaluating didactic scenarios at universities.
Keywords: competency based learning, e-portfolios, policy, evaluation, learners’ activity,
ICAP Model
124
Competency levels and university teaching
The Bologna process and the Europe-wide introduction of Bachelor and Master programs
throw a spot on the competencies the students should develop during their course of study
(Trembley, Lalancette, & Rosevaere, 2012). It goes along with the development of the
European Qualification Framework (EQF; European Parliament, 2008; see also CEDEFOP,
2008) that defines eight different competency levels with respect to knowledge, skills, and
competencies. Member states of the European Union implemented and adapted the EQF for
their national education systems (e.g. BMBF, 2014; Nationale Koordinierungsstelle für den
NQR in Österreich, 2011). The national qualification frameworks (NQR) describe and anchor
these competency levels for the national contexts. The competencies required for receiving
a Bachelor’s or Master’s degree are defined by the competency level six and seven of the
framework. According to these levels, the German national qualification framework (DQR)
describes exemplarily the competencies of individuals with a Master’s degree as following:
“Students should comprise of competencies that are required to solve new and complex tasks
as well as competencies that are necessary for the self-directed control in a scientific subject
or a strategy oriented vocational profession. The structure of these affordances can be
characterized by frequent and unpredictable changes” (BMBF, 2014, n.p.). The definition of
competency levels has also implications for didactics at German and Austrian universities
(see Öchsner & Reiber, 2010): individuals at Master’s level should have developed
professional skills for solving strategic problems, to deal with incoherent and missing
information, and to reflect and evaluate outcomes (CEDEFOP, 2008). The requirements of
competency level seven also include personal and social skills as for example to lead groups
responsibly, to present results and to guide professional discussions. It also includes selfdirected efforts regarding the definition of goals, the selection of methods, and the
development of knowledge required for these tasks (see BMBF, 2014; CEDEFOP, 2008).
In contrast to these requirements, teachers at university are still widely using teachercentered didactics in which learners often take a passive role while receiving knowledge and
primarily getting active when preparing for examinations. The current popularity of MOOCS
(massive open online courses; Hew & Cheung, 2014), can be seen as an approach to deliver
teacher centered didactics at universities by the Internet. While there are so called cMOOCS,
which claim to follow a connectivist approach (Siemens, 2007), xMOOCS primarily offer
contents to the students and, after a period of self-studies, provide certificates for
participating in examinations. Similar approaches for traditional university teaching were
disclosed by a study of Metzger and Schulmeister (2011): the result of this study show that
students significantly overestimate the time they engage actively for their studies,
particularly for continuous learning activities throughout the whole semester. Yet, they
engage very intensively in individual learning phases prior to exams instead. This means that
learners stay passively during their lectures and seminars and reduce their efforts to the
125
preparation for tests (Metzger & Schulmeister, 2011; Römmer-Nossek, Peschl &
Zimmermann, 2011). Such kind of study focus allows students to reproduce their knowledge
in oral or written examinations but inhibits their development of applicable knowledge,
skills, and competencies. Renkl, Mandl, and Gruber (1996) call this as inert knowledge, a
term that describes knowledge structures that allow students to pass exams but fail to offer
them benefits during their later course of studies and particularly lack in applicability with
respect to their desired profession. Acquiring such kind of knowledge structures inhibits
students from the development of further competencies and a sound knowledge base
beyond a particular course and seems therefore not to be appropriate to meet the criteria
set by the EQF. Thus, learning scenarios at universities have to move towards
implementations that allow learners to develop competencies.
Blended learning environments can provide learning scenarios and elements to enrich
university courses in a way that students are more likely to develop their competencies. Yet,
they also may manifest traditional learning patterns. This contribution will provide a more
differentiate view on learning and learning processes and discuss approaches for the
implementation of competency-oriented learning. It will introduce the ICAP-Model (Chi &
Wylie, 2014) as a tool to describe learner’s activities, and exemplify this for different degrees
of co-present and online-learning. The paper will further discuss how far e-portfolios can
provide learning activities according to this model and support learners in developing the
competencies postulated by the EQF. Based on this, the contribution will discuss
consequences for evaluating and establishing a university’s blended learning strategy.
Classifying learning activity
Constructivist approaches emphasize, in contrast to traditional teacher-centered didactics,
the need for active and self-directed learning that allows learners to construct their
knowledge in social and situated learning arrangements (Anderson, Greeno, Reder, & Simon,
2000; Ertl, Winkler & Mandl, 2007; Reinmann-Rothmeier & Mandl 2001). Yet, particularly
the aspect of activity needs some further kind of description. Chi and Wylie (2014) describe
activity as the cognitive engagement of the learners in meaningful interaction with the
learning material. Salomon (1984) tried to grasp this concept and focused on the invested
mental effort of the learners in different learning scenarios. He investigated in his study how
far different kinds of learning materials may evoke different degrees of activity and mental
efforts of the learners. Reiser (2004) discussed with respect to the structure of learning
scenarios that structuring methods sometimes must induce increased task difficulty for the
learners to evoke cognitive activity and to facilitate the investment of mental efforts. Such
approaches often relate to the perspective of cognitive elaboration (Webb, 1989) that
describes how far learners elaborate their knowledge in the context of new learning
126
materials individually and cooperatively and how far they construct thereby, often
stimulated through the social interaction, their personal knowledge base.
Regarding the focus on how to support and evaluate scenarios for competency based
learning for a university’ blended learning strategy, it seems to be convenient to classify
different kinds of activity with respect to their intensity with the underlying assumption
according to Webb (1989) that more activity would evoke more cognitive elaboration of the
learners. In this context, Chi and Wylie (2014) propose a framework that comprises of four
different levels of activity (see figure 1). This framework classifies learning as passive or
receptive, if learners do not show visible interaction with the learning material, e.g. when
they pay attention to a lecture or a film. This is comparable to one of the Salomon (1984)
scenarios during which learners only watched a video. The next level, labeled as active,
describe activities that show learners interacting visibly with the learning materials, e.g. by
making notes to a lecture handout. Thereby, they are manipulating the learning materials.
For such kind of scenario, the Salomon (1984) study could show that learners achieve
significantly higher learning outcomes than for passive scenarios. Constructive activities of
the learners relate to aspects of cognitive elaboration according to Webb (1989), as learners
show activities that go beyond the learning materials by generating artifacts based on the
learning materials, e.g. if they provide personal elaborations for the learning materials by
constructing a map of the contents or by synthesizing different contents. Particularly these
constructive activities can be seen as a first step towards competency development as
learners re-construct their knowledge with respect to a new context for a particular topic,
and therefore also regarding application of knowledge.
Learners’ activity levels
Passive
Active
Constructive
Interactive
Receiving: Attention
without activity
Manipulating:
Interaction with the
learning materials
Generating:
Elaborations beyond
the learning materials
Dialoguing: Interaction
between the learners
Listening to a lecture
Making notes for a
lecture
Constructing a map
Argumentative activity
Reading a text
Underlining,
Summarizing,
highlighting
Individual elaboration
of the text
Posing and answering
questions of colearners
Watching a video
Making brakes, going
Formulating
Discussing similarities
127
forward and
backwards
comparisons
and differences
Figure 1: Examples for different activity levels of the ICAP model (see Chi & Wylie, 2014, p. 221) in
the context of different learning materials.
Interactive learning scenarios include furthermore a social context as stimulation for
learners’ knowledge construction activities. Such scenarios allow learners to participate in
processes of collaborative knowledge construction (see Fischer, Bruhn, Gräsel, & Mandl,
2002) and to engage in dialoguing: They externalize their knowledge for their learning
partners by elaborating specific aspects, they elicit knowledge from their learning partners
and thereby stimulate their learning partners’ externalizations, they negotiate on meanings
and procedures (conflict-oriented negotiation), and they integrate their different
perspectives to a common solution (consensus-oriented integration). Such learning
processes may be implemented in scenarios like collaborative case-based learning (Ertl,
Kopp, & Mandl, 2008), collaborative argumentation (Slotta & Chi, 2006) or in methods like
the jigsaw method (Aronson, Blanes, Stephan, Sikes & Snapp, 1978). The four activity levels
also make assumptions regarding the learning outcomes. Yet, they’re mainly defined as
impacts on knowledge gains, and impacts on the change of leaners’ knowledge (Chi & Wylie,
2014). Thus, this contribution will show the assumptions regarding knowledge gains and
discuss how far the levels also affect the development of skills and competencies.
Passive learning activities e.g. are attributed to store information in memory so that they are
available for a rehearsal at another time rather than contributing to building a sound
knowledge base. This would correspond to the lowest level 1 (remember) of the Anderson
and Krathwohl (2001) taxonomy and to conceptual knowledge of a low quality according to
De Jong and Fergusson-Hessler (1998). Active learning allows learners to integrate their
knowledge in their prior knowledge and to apply it within the given context, which would
correspond to the levels 2 (understand) and 3 (apply) of the Anderson and Krathwohl (2001)
taxonomy. This includes conceptual knowledge as well as procedural knowledge according
to De Jong and Fergusson-Hessler (1998), which means basic skills in a defined context.
Constructive activities evoke that learners make inferences and can thereby facilitate the
transfer of knowledge to new situations. Such activities would furthermore support the
development of situational and strategic knowledge according to De Jong and FergussonHessler (1998) and skills on a higher order level. Interactive learning scenarios are attributed
that learners bring in different perspectives and therefore offer scenarios of heterogeneity
to construct their knowledge and to create new artifacts, which requires social skills and
competencies.
128
Activity level
Passive
Active
Constructive
Interactive
Change of
knowledge (Chi &
Wylie, 2014)
Memorizing
information
Integration of
knowledge
Making
inferences
Inferences from
different
perspectives
De Jong &
Fergusson-Hessler
(1998) knowledge
types
Conceptual
Conceptual
Procedural
Conceptual
Procedural
Situational
Strategic
Conceptual
Procedural
Situational
Strategic
Cognitive
outcome (Chi &
Wylie, 2014)
Rehearsal
Applying
knowledge in
context
Transfer to new
situation
Co-construction in
heterogeneous
scenarios
Anderson &
Krathwohl (2001)
level
1: remember
2: understand
3: apply
4: analyze
5: evaluate
6: create
4: analyze
5: evaluate
6: create
in collaboration
Figure 2: The change of knowledge and the learning outcomes attributed to the different activity
levels of the ICAP model according to Chi and Wylie (2014, p. 228) including the types of
knowledge according to De Jong and Fergusson-Hessler (1998) and their classifications
according to the taxonomy of Anderson and Krathwohl (2001).
As figure 2 shows, constructive and interactive activities according to Chi and Wylie (2014)
correspond, depending of the particular tasks students engage in, to the levels 4 – 6
(analyze, evaluate, create) of the Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) taxonomy. This shows the
differences between the Anderson and Kratwohl (2001) and the Chi and Wylie (2014) model:
While Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) focus on learning outcomes and their impact on
distinctive individual cognitive processes, Chi and Wylie (2014) focus on learners’ visible
activities and make assumptions about underlying cognitive processes. Furthermore, Chi and
Wylie (2014) include collaborative learning settings and thereby assumptions of
collaborative knowledge construction (Cohen, 1994; Ertl, Fischer, & Mandl, 2006; Fischer et
al., 2002) and the respective learning outcomes, which also relate to argumentative skills
(Schwarz, Neuman, Gil, & Ilya, 2003) and competencies. These collaborative aspects show
closer connections to the personal and social competencies described in the EQF (BMBF,
2014) that explicitly require social interaction. Figure 2 shows the learning activity levels by
129
Chi and Wylie (2014) in the context of the change of the knowledge base and the cognitive
learning outcomes, and compares it to the taxonomy of Anderson & Kratwohl (2001).
Trying to map the competencies of the EQF with the ICAP model, it seems to be obvious that
the attributed learning outcomes of interactive learning activities match mostly to the
competencies required by the German Qualification framework for Master’s degrees (see
BMBF, 2014). This match relates mainly to the handling of complex tasks, the self-directed
control of processes and the participation in subject-specific discussion.
Of course, the ICAP classification is just a rough taxonomy of learning and cognitive
activities. Furthermore, the model provides assumptions about underlying learning scenarios
required for each activity level. For example, interaction between learners may also be
discovered in the collaborative memorization of vocabulary but this would not be considered
as the interactive level as defined in this model. Furthermore, the model can only provide
hints to judge cognitive activities of the individual learners (see Chi & Wylie, 2014) and
therefore, it allows conclusions on the learners’ engagement in a particular activity only to a
certain amount. Consequently, the activity level is just an indicator for didactic elements and
scenarios that evoke students’ activities. Yet, the model can be used as a tool to estimate
the plausibility of how far a learning scenario may evoke certain cognitive activities and
therefore give suggestions how to develop and how to evaluate learning scenarios. This can
be particularly valuable for the design and evaluation of distance learning activities and for
the development of benchmarks for a university’s blended learning strategy. When
implementing distance learning activities, there is the challenge how to design materials for
the remote learners. This is crucial because several distance learning scenarios discuss
delivery (Guzley, Avanzino, & Bor, 2003; Smith, 2003) that evokes the metaphor of getting
content to the learners rather than how to engage learners in cognitive activities. For the
context of MOOCS, e.g. Hew and Cheung, (2014) discuss the distribution of passive and
active learning activities as well as the issue of giving feedback to learners’ artifacts in such
scenarios. In the following section, this contribution will take up this issue about how to map
these different activity levels in the context of co-present and net-based learning scenarios.
Learning activities in the context of distance learning
Research regarding activity levels of the ICAP model often takes place in the context of netbased learning scenarios. This research often compares learning scenarios that relate to
different levels of the ICAP model and analyzes differences in learning processes and
outcomes (see Loibl, Deiglmayr, & Rummel, 2014). This empirical research with respect to
the ICAP activities primarily focuses on active, constructive, and interactive learning
scenarios in experimental settings rather than on passive learning activities and field
130
settings. This provides challenges for mapping the ICAP model to scenarios of everyday
university teaching: one has to include both, the traditional university teaching scenarios and
the different degrees of the net-based implementation of such learning scenarios.
Baumgartner (2011, p. 284) classifies different prototypical implementations of university
courses with respect to their structures which consist of present, online learning, and
students’ self-study phases. This contribution, will focus on the intensity and distribution of
presence and online parts in university courses because both may include phases of selfstudy. These intensities and distributions may relate to a continuum that has the traditional
co-present course on the one end and fully online implemented courses on the other end.
Between the both poles, one can locate blended-learning courses with different proportions
of co-present and online-activities. This range may include that teachers provide additional
materials for students in the net-based environment or that learners work collaboratively on
a learning case in the online scenario, document the process in an e-portfolio and present
results during a co-present seminar.
Figure 3 gives an overview on the different activity levels of the ICAP framework that can go
along with different intensities of online activities. As the table shows, the different levels of
the ICAP model may be implemented in face-to-face as well as in online learning
environments: If learners are listening to a lecture – co-present or to the video stream –
their activity level remains passive (as long as they do not take notes, for example). This may
also apply, if they are provided with additional information online. On the other side of the
continuum, learners can collaborate on a project face-to-face as well as work on a
collaborative artifact (see Bereiter, 2002) in an online seminar or in a blend of online and
face-to-face events. This results in a matrix of two dimensions that crosses learners’ activity
level of the ICAP model and the proportions of online and co-present phases in a course (see
figure 3).
Intensity of online
parts
Learners’ activity level
Passive
Active
Constructive
Interactive
Primarily
copresent
Lecture
Seminar with text
readings
Written
elaboration,
presentation
Collaborative
project
Blended
Learning
Lecture with
additional
materials online
Learners
summarize texts
for a seminar
online
Seminar with eportfolio
Collaborative
project with
presentation
131
Primarily
online
Online lecture
Webinar, MOOC
with quizzes
Individual
e-portfolio
E-collaborative
artifact
Figure 3: Examples for implementations of learners’ activities according to the ICAP model (Chi &
Wylie, 2014) in the context of the continuum of co-present, blended and online learning
phases of university courses.
From the mapping the activity levels of the ICAP model in the context of the continuum
between co-present and online learning activities, one can see that both dimensions seem to
be rather independent and that the different activity levels may occur within different kind
of online activities. Learners’ activities may be shaped differently—yet, as figure 3
exemplifies, the activity according to the ICAP framework primarily depends on the didactics
of a learning scenario rather than on the intensities and distributions of online parts. This
means that just shifting aspects of a learning scenario to an online environment does not
necessarily implicate a stronger activation of learners neither a higher level in competency
development. Such insight refers to Clark’s (1994) discussion that “media will never affect
learning”, if the change in media does not result in a change of didactics. Thus, it is the
challenge for didactics to focus the online aspects of learning scenarios towards the
development of competencies – or, vice versa as in approaches of flipped or inverted
classroom (van Treeck, Himpsel-Gutermann & Robes, 2013) to put receptive activities to
individual phases and use co-present phases for collaborative knowledge construction and
competency development. By such kind of activities, online scenarios can open new ways to
increase learners’ activity level.
Supporting distance learning activity
Blended learning scenarios can help to increase learners’ activity levels and facilitate thereby
learning processes, learning outcomes, the development and also the assessment of
competencies. Approaches of blended learning lead to the implementation of participatory
learning formats like flipped classrooms or e-portfolios (see van Treeck, Himpsel-Gutermann
& Robes, 2013), that support learners’ activities in different styles. The approach of flipped
classrooms, for example, tries to put receptive activities to individual phases before or after
co-present activities and to focus on learners’ collaborative dialoguing activities during copresence. This means, that formerly receptive lecture activities are able to transform to
interactive problem-solving activities based on the knowledge developed during the
individual pre-phases (see Lucius, Spannagel, & Spannagel, 2014). E-portfolios may support
the documentation of learning processes and learning outcomes by collecting and
presenting the artifacts learners developed (see Bauer & Baumgartner, 2012). This style of
documentation gives teachers new means for the assessment of learning artifacts and offers
132
thereby new ways for constructive and interactive learning activities. The Australian Flexible
Learning Framework (Perry, 2009) postulates that e-portfolios are particularly supportive for
the presentation and organization of learning artifacts and that they are thereby very
appropriate for facilitating the development of key competencies (Perry, 2009). When
working on the artifacts for their e-portfolios, learners engage in constructive or dialoguing
activities and document these individual or collaborative results in the e-portfolio. ZawackiRichter, Bäcker, and Hanft (2010) analyze e-portfolios with respect to their capability for
making transparent the competencies that students developed during their learning process.
They applied the competency model of Heyse and Erpenbeck (2004) for analyzing students’
e-portfolios and found out that e-portfolios were able to document learners’ competencies
much more differentiated than other kinds of university examinations (Zawacki-Richter et
al., 2010, p.21). E-portfolios allow students to document learning processes and outcomes
and thereby offer universities means for evaluating student learning beyond written or oral
examinations by different artifacts. However, the construction and discussion of different
artifacts of the e-portfolio has support aspects of individual and/or collaborative knowledge
construction (see e.g. Ertl, 2008; Fischer et al., 2002), which is required for interactive
learning according to the ICAP framework. It depends therefore on the didactical approach
of the teachers to provide appropriate instructional scenarios and to facilitate learners’
reflective activities (see Kori, Pedaste, Leijen, & Mäeots, 2014) also for such kind of
scenarios. Just to transfer traditional lecture formats to online settings, for example by
virtual lectures, does not increase learning activities and outcomes by itself. While
implementing such scenarios, one has to pay carefully attention that the online parts are
dedicated to evoke and facilitate learners’ cognitive activities (see Ertl et al., 2006; Reiser,
2004; Salomon, 1984).
Consequences for the evaluation of distance education at universities
To sum up, net-based learning activities and online tools may provide additional benefits for
learning activities in co-present courses. If they are included in meaningful blended learning
scenarios, they may support the development of students’ competencies by their didactic
design. Yet, this requires focusing on learners’ activities during their work during the online
parts of a course. This throws a spot on how to evaluate beneficial learning activities in
blended learning. Traditionally, e-learning and distance learning were evaluated regarding
their features and functionality (e.g. Buendia Garcia & Hervas Jorge, 2006) or with the
balanced scorecard approach with respect to different benefits for an organization (Back &
Leithner, 2005). More recently, there is the tendency to certify e-learning courses. Yet,
certification tools like the eLQe (eLearning Qualitätsevaluation—e-learning quality
evaluation: E-learning Center, 2015) are rather oriented to the personal and technical
infrastructure, e.g. provided by the e-learning system or by the competencies and activities
133
of the instructional staff, but these models miss an explicit model of beneficial learning
processes that an e-learning environment should provide. Such aspects are included in the
Ertl, Ebner and Kikis-Papadakis (2010) approach that describes an evaluation model based on
the four pedagogical infrastructures of Lakkala (2008). They discuss a cognitive dimension,
an epistemological dimension, a social dimension, and a technical dimension as prerequisite
for beneficial net-based learning (see Ertl et al., 2010). This model provides a differentiated
framework for the evaluation of selected courses—however, it is rather complex for
comparative evaluations on a university level. Furthermore, although the model analyzes the
cognitive as well as the social dimension of net-based learning, it is not directly oriented
towards the evaluation of the development of competencies. Zawacki-Richter et al. (2010)
analyzed learners’ activities during their work with e-portfolios and mapped these to the
competency model of Heyse and Erpenbeck (2004). This gives indications how far learners
developed competencies in an e-learning environment. However, analyzing individual
learners’ statements from learning artifacts provides few anchors for a strategic evaluation.
Thus, evaluation and certification models of e-learning at universities have to be developed
further for being able to grasp learners’ development of competencies. Projects like
regarding the Assessment of transversal Skills (ATS2020, 2015) deal with this challenge to
develop appropriate assessment models as well as tools for assessment, in the case of ATS
with respect to transversal skills and competencies in digitally supported school scenarios.
The ICAP model of Chi and Wylie (2014) may serve as tool for the evaluation of competencyoriented e-learning at university. Because the model has an underlying assumption about
which learning activities and processes can provide a basis for the development of
competencies, it allows getting a clue about how far learners have the chance to develop
competencies by analyzing the learners’ options for activity in a blended learning scenario
(assumed that the scenario shows the appropriate didactics). Even if the model only gives a
very rough impression, one can guess how far learning scenarios may evoke learners’
development of competencies. It allows analyzing different activity levels of the learners
that are connected with their development of competencies and allow thereby a first kind of
structural evaluation of how far learning scenarios may support learners’ development of
competencies.
Consequences for the development of an e-learning strategy
Competency orientation in higher education is one of the core aspects of the Bologna
process. This change from knowledge to competencies has huge impacts on the pedagogical
landscape. It requires that universities are more and more capable to define what learners
should be able to do rather than what they should know after participating in a course
(CEDEFOP, 2008). This shift in perspective has also consequences for assessment.
Assessment therefore has to focus on the measurement of competencies and performance
134
in problem-solving, rather than on the testing of factual knowledge. The appropriate
definition of learning outcomes gets more important that the description of learning
contents (CEDEFOP, 2008). Harlev (2004) discusses assessment as the Trojan horse of
learning: When changing the assessment methods, teachers have to think about what to
change in their teaching, so that learners are able to meet the requirements of the
respective assessment method. The introduction of e-portfolios may be one of these Trojan
horses and may change the way of teaching by assessing the development of competencies
instead of knowledge. They give learners the chance to document their learning in different
styles by verbal, visual or pictorial artifacts. This allows teachers to direct learning processes
away from memorizing knowledge towards the development of artifacts that give insights in
learners’ competencies. This introduces a new kind of learning activities to university
courses. Regarding the introduction of e-portfolios at universities, the project
EUROPORTFOLIO developed a maturity matrix that can support strategy development (see
Europortfolio, 2014). This maturity matrix allows a self-evaluation with respect to the
current stage of e-portfolio implementation and shows further directions for development.
Therefore, the matrix can serve as valuable tool for e-portfolio strategy development. Yet, as
e-portfolios are just one aspect of blended learning at universities, this paper won’t discuss
the matrix in detail. Generally, learners have to engage much more in constructive and
interactive activities to provide artifacts that give insights in the competencies they
developed. The ICAP Model of Chi and Wylie (2014) can be seen as a tool to describe,
classify, and evaluate learning scenarios at university. As an evaluation tool, it can disclose
learning processes in different scenarios. Such insights are especially important for distance
learning, because many distance learning settings, particularly in the context of xMOOCS,
are rather oriented towards the delivery of content rather than in the development of
competencies. This is the starting point for a university’s blended learning strategy. It has to
define goals for learners’ activities in blended learning courses. These goals have to go
further than adding or shifting parts of the learning activities to online environments. The
ICAP Model can serve as a tool to define certain amounts of implementation of the different
activity levels in e-learning courses. By setting thresholds for the implementation of
constructive and interactive learning activities, it can provide benchmarks for competency
oriented learning scenarios.
Acknowledgements
Parts of this paper were funded by the EU, project Europortfolio (531312-LLP-1-2012-1-HRKA3-KA3NW; http://www.europortfolio.org/) and ATS2020 – Assessment of Transversal
Skills 2020 (388446-EPP-1-2014-2-CY-EPPKA3-PI-POLICY; http://ats2020.eu/). Particular
thanks to Kathrin Helling M.A. for her comments to this contribution.
135
Literature
Anderson, J. R., Greeno, J. G., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (2000). Perspectives on learning,
thinking, and activity. Educational Researcher, 29(4), 11-13.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
ATS2020. (2015). Assessment of Transversal Skills 2020. Retrieved from http://ats2020.eu/
Back, A., & Leithner, B. (2005). Beiträge des Balanced-Scorecard-Ansatzes zur strategischen
Verankerung von E-Learning im Unternehmen. In M. H. Breitner & H. Gabriela (Eds.),
E-Learning: Einsatzkonzepte und Geschäftsmodelle (pp. 81-99). Heidelberg: PhysicaVerlag.
Bauer, R., & Baumgartner, P. (2012). Schaufenster des Lernens. Münster: Waxmann.
Baumgartner, P. (2011). Taxonomie von Unterrichtsmethoden. Münster: Waxmann.
Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bmbf. (2014). Deutscher Qualifikationsrahmen - Start. Retrieved from http://www.dqr.de/
Buendia Garcia, F., & Hervas Jorge, A. (2006). Evaluating e-learning platforms through
SCORM specifications. Paper presented at the IADIS Virtual Multi Conference on
Computer Science and Information System (MCCSIS 2006).
CEDEFOP European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training. (2008). The shift to
learning outcomes. Luxemburg: Office for official publications of the European
Communities.
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP Framework: Linking Cognitive Engagement to
Active Learning Outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219-243.
doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 42(2), 21-29.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups.
Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35.
De Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M. (1996). Types and qualities of knowledge.
Educational Psychologist, 31, 105-113.
E-Learning Center. (2015). <eLQe> eLearning Qualitätsevaluation.
Retrieved from
http://elqe.at/
136
Ertl, B. (2008). E-collaborative knowledge construction. In N. Kock (Ed.), Encyclopedia of ECollaboration (pp. 233-239). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
Ertl, B., Ebner, K., & Kikis-Papadakis, K. (2010). Evaluation of e-learning. International Journal
of Knowledge Society Research, 1(3), 31-43.
Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2006). Conceptual and socio-cognitive support for
collaborative learning in videoconferencing environments. Computers & Education,
47(3), 298-315
Ertl, B., Kopp, B., & Mandl, H. (2008). Supporting learning using external representations.
Computers & Education, 51(4), 1599-1608.
Ertl, B., Winkler, K., & Mandl, H. (2007). E-learning - Trends and future development. In F. M.
M. Neto & F. V. Brasileiro (Eds.), Advances in Computer-Supported Learning (pp. 122144). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.
European Parliament, & Council of the European Union. (2008). Recommendation of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on the establishment of the
European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning (Text with EEA relevance).
Offical Journal of the European Union, C111/1, 1-7. Retrieved from http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:111:0001:0007:EN:PDF
Europortfolio. (2014). ePortfolios & Open Badges Maturity Matrix.
Retrieved from
http://www.europortfolio.org/matrix
Fischer, F., Bruhn, J., Gräsel, C., & Mandl, H. (2002). Fostering collaborative knowledge
construction with visualization tools. Learning and Instruction, 12, 213-232.
Guzley, R. M., Avanzino, S., & Bor, A. (2001). Simulated Computer-Mediated / VideoInteractive Distance Learning: A Test of Motivation,Interaction Satisfaction, Delivery,
Learning & Perceived Effectiveness. Journal of computer Mediated Communication,
6(3).
Harlev, R. (2004). Assessment: the Trojan horse of blended learning. In K. Morgan, C. A.
Brebbia, J. Sanchez, & A. Voiskounsky (Eds.), Human perspectives in the internet
society (pp. 459-466). Southampton: WIT Press.
Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2014). Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online
courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational Research Review, 12, 4558. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2014.05.001
Heyse, V., & Erpenbeck, J. (2004). Kompetenztraining - 64 Informations- und
Trainingsprogramme. Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel.
Kori, K., Pedaste, M., Leijen, Ä., & Mäeots, M. (2014). Supporting reflection in technology137
enhanced
learning.
Educational
Research
Review,
11,
45-55.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.11.003
Lakkala, M. (2008). The pedagogical design of technology enhanced collaborative learning.
http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media13028.pdf
[22.08.2013]
Retrieved
from
http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media13028.pdf
[22.08.2013]
Loibl, K., Deiglmayr, A., & Rummel, N. (2014). Arbeitsgruppe "Interaktiv < konstruktiv" =
"kooperativ > individuell"? Eine Erweiterung zu Chis ICAP Hypothese. Paper presented
at the 49. Kongress der deutschen Gesellschaft für Psychologie, Bochum.
Lucius, K., Spannagel, J., & Spannagel, C. (2014). Hörsaalspiele im Flipped Classroom. In K.
Rummler (Ed.), Lernräume gestalten - Bildungskontexte vielfältig denken (pp. 363376). Münster: Waxmann.
Metzger, C., & Schulmeister, R. (2011). Die tatsächliche Workload im Bachelorstudium. Eine
empirische Untersuchung durch Zeitbudget-Analysen. In S. Nickel (Ed.), Der BolognaProzess aus Sicht der Hochschulforschung Analysen und Impulse für die Praxis (pp. 6878). Gütersloh: CHE gemeinnütziges Centrum für Hochschulentwicklung.
Nationale Koordinierungsstelle für den NQR in Österreich (NKS) (Ed.) (2011). Handbuch für
die Zuordnung von formalen Qualifikationen zum Nationalen Qualifikationsrahmen
(NQR) - Kriterien. Wien: Nationalagentur Lebenslanges Lernen.
Öchsner, W., & Reiber, K. (2010). Synergie-Effekte und wechselseitige Ergänzung von
Hochschuldidaktik und Medizindidaktik. Zeitschrift für Hochschulentwicklung (ZFHE),
5(3), 116-127.
Perry, W. (2009). E-portfolios for RPL Assessment: key findings on current engagement in the
VET sector. Retrieved from http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv4204
Reinmann-Rothmeier, G., & Mandl, H. (2001). Unterrichten und Lernumgebungen gestalten.
In A. Krapp & B. Weidenmann (Eds.), Pädagogische Psychologie (pp. 601-646).
Weinheim: Beltz.
Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and
problematizing student work The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273-304.
Renkl, A., Mandl, H., & Gruber, H. (1996). Inert knowledge: Analyses and remedies.
Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 115-121.
Römmer-Nossek, B., Peschl, M. F., & Zimmermann, E. (2011). Kognitionswissenschaft. Ihre
Perspektive auf Lehren und Lernen mit Technologien. In M. Ebner & S. Schön (Eds.),
L3T Lehrbuch für Lernen und Lehren mit Technologien. Berlin: epubli GmbH.
138
Salomon, G. (1984). Television Is "Easy" and Print Is "Tough": The Differential Investment of
Mental Effort in Learning as a Function of Perceptions and Attributions. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 76(4), 647-658.
Schwarz, B. B., Neuman, Y., Gil, J., & Ilya, M. (2003). Construction of collective and individual
knowledge in argumentative activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 219256.
Siemens, G. (2007). Connectivism: Creating a learning ecology in distributed environments.
In T. Hug (Ed.), Didactics of microlearning: Concepts, discourses and examples (pp. 5668). Münster: Waxmann.
Slotta, J. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2006). Helping Students Understand Challenging Topics in
Science through Ontology Training. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 261-289.
Smith, P. J. (2003). Workplace learning and flexible delivery. Review of Educational Research,
73(1), 53-88.
Tremblay, K., Lalancette, D., & Rosevaere, D. (2012). Assessment of higher education
learning outcomes. Feasibility study report. (Vol. 1: Design and implementation):
OECD.
van Treeck, T., Himpsl-Gutermann, K., & Robes, J. (2013). Offene und partizipative
Lernkonzepte. In M. Ebner & S. Schön (Eds.), L3T Lehrbuch für Lernen und Lehren mit
Technologien. Das E-Book 2013. Berlin: epubli GmbH.
Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of
Educational Research, 13(1), 21-39.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Bäcker, E. M., & Hanft, A. (2010). Denn wir wissen nicht, was sie tun …
Portfolios zur Dokumentation von Kompetenzen in einem weiterbildenden
Masterstudiengang. Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung, 18.
Retrieved from
www.medienpaed.com/18/zawacki1002.pdf
139
Ewan Christine
Assurance of higher education standards in disaggregated models of student
participation and course delivery
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
University of Wollongong
Australia
oltfellowhestandards@bigpond.com
Abstract
Approaches to quality assurance and cross-national comparability of higher education in
traditional modes of delivery, including online and transnational, are well established but an
emerging and complicating issue relates to disaggregation or “unbundling” of aspects of
higher education. This trend is gathering momentum globally with the emergence of microcredentialling, MOOCs, and ‘mix and match’ qualifications built on open education
resources. For example, some institutions are beginning to explore ways in which content
delivery, assessment and credentialing, while still linked in a design sense, could be carried
out by different organisations or institutions. Technology offers tools that bring ‘disruptive
change’ within feasible reach. A number of drivers combine to make such an approach a
potentially attractive business model and, for some institutions, it offers potential for
realising aspects of their mission more effectively than by traditional on or off campus
delivery. For national and international policies built around qualifications frameworks and
standards frameworks the potential also exists for disruption of traditional concepts of the
meaning of a higher degree qualification. For example, how can the coherence and integrity
of learning outcomes be assured in programs of study that consist of elements aggregated
from an eclectic range of learning experiences? This paper proposes a development agenda
for extending the capacity of qualifications frameworks to deal with an open and
‘unbundled’ learning environment. It is based on work commissioned by the Australian
Office for Learning and Teaching (OLT) for the Australian Higher Education Standards Panel.
Keywords: MOOCs, micro-credentialling, qualifications frameworks, ‘unbundling’, open
education.
140
Introduction
In 2014 the Australian Higher Education Standards Panel and the Office for Learning &
Teaching commissioned a review of the nature and implications, for higher education
standards and formal higher education programs, of emerging models of disaggregated
student participation in learning.
The Standards Panel was particularly interested in:
 Emerging models of disaggregated, open educational process or informal
opportunities for study that have implications for formal higher education.
Drivers
that are influencing the speed and impact of these developments.

 Current national and international approaches to verifying and assessing learning
outcomes and standards from these types of learning for the purposes of assigning
credit, recognition of prior learning (RPL) or credentials in the context of formal
higher education programs.
 Challenges, to academic quality assurance, of disaggregated and informal models of
student participation.
1
 Ways in which the Higher Education Standards Framework (HESF) supports quality
assurance in these emerging models.
 Areas in which the HESF unnecessarily hinders flexibility and collaboration for
disaggregated delivery.
Emerging
global approaches to compiling and assessing evidence of student learning

outcomes, and credit mobility and credentialling in disaggregated learning
environments.
The majority of activity in disaggregated learning environments is, at the time of writing, in
the informal or not for credit sphere. However, considerable energy is being devoted to
incorporating disaggregated components into formal qualifications. If successful and
widespread, as it is likely to be, this will transform formal higher education processes. This
process of transformation calls into question some fundamental assumptions about higher
education qualifications and the curriculum development and quality assurance frameworks
underpinning it. There is a strong belief among those academic stakeholders who are
committed to the transformation that current ways of viewing curricula and quality
assurance will not be sufficiently relevant and sustainable without significant 'reframing' of
views of what constitutes higher education. While these issues appear to be under active
1
http://www.teqsa.gov.au/regulatory-approach/higher-education-standards-framework
141
consideration in most countries they continue to be, by their very nature, both evolving and
unresolvable.
Universities have been, traditionally, gatekeepers for access to esoteric information and
resources and to qualifications that provided entry to prestigious occupations and societies.
This access has been traditionally packaged in degree programs, reflected in policy
structures such as the Australian and European Qualifications Frameworks (AQF and EQF).
Technology, and universal access to information via the internet are challenging these
traditions. Universities now provide guidance and certification to a mass student clientele
from a diverse demographic and with a range of prior experience, who are often explicitly
regarded by both themselves and providers as consumers in a marketplace. The monopoly
on the granting of qualifications is increasingly under challenge by some industries and
professions that can be more flexible and up to date with rapidly evolving technology, states
of practice and knowledge. Hence industry partners, higher education providers and
commercial agencies are entering the marketplace offering specialized “chunks” of
knowledge and skills leading sometimes, but not always, to credentials rather than to
coherently designed complete programs leading to traditional degrees or qualifications. The
key fact that must be acknowledged in this environment is not just that technology has a
stronger and more multi-potential presence in higher education but that the capabilities of
disruptive innovation have significant implications for the business models of higher
education providers and for the standards and regulatory processes underpinning them.
Current Australian practice
Alternatives to face to face classroom based delivery models have been practised for
decades in most Australian universities, particularly in regional and remote locations and for
mature aged and post graduate students. In the global competitive environment most
providers have recognized the need for flexibility and agility, and for forging partnerships
with diverse sectors and agencies. Virtually all are capitalizing on technology to provide
student experiences that are both media-rich and interactive. Mainstream higher education
increasingly offers blended modes for learning and both the HESF and the internal
mechanisms that providers use for quality assurance and enhancement are applicable and
successfully applied to the newer models of delivery.
However, consultations with the sector reveal that, while the HESF itself poses no
impediment to participation in this arena there is a concern to ensure that its interpretation,
reflected in approaches to regulation, policy, data management, quality assurance and
infrastructure fully acknowledges and supports blended options. In addition, a clear need
has emerged in relation to the foreseeable trend towards learner demand to transfer credit
from disaggregated and/or informal learning to formal academic credentials.
142
Some interesting developments
Commercial agencies have been proactive in establishing services to encourage and optimize
digital credentialing. One such is Professional Exam Service, an agency in the US that offers
individuals and providers a digital credential service as supplements or alternatives to
traditional paper credentials2. Deakin Digital in Australia is pursuing a similar strategy3.
Badges and micro-credentials can be scaffolded towards a formal qualification or, as they
are being used by some Australian universities, to certify students’ acquisition of cocurricular or generic capabilities such as leadership. The Curtin Extra Certificate is one such
example4. An OLT funded collaborative strategic project led by Beverley Oliver at Deakin
University, due for completion in 20155, aims to advise Australian higher education providers
how to design courses that allow students to curate and carry forward digital evidence, to
micro-credential outcomes using digital badging and to explore educational pathways and
business models to remain competitive.
Stanford based Udacity is reported to have moved away from free online education to short,
low cost computer and data science ‘nanodegrees’ developed in close collaboration with
technology companies such as Google and AT&T and designed specifically to lead to jobs 6.
Coursera, initiating the ‘Global Skills Initiative’ has also partnered with several technology
and financial firms as well as universities (including the University of Melbourne) to offer
new classes partially designed by those firms to focus on skills training and professional
development. In so doing it is both monetizing its MOOC strategy and addressing the
growing skills gaps reported by major employers (Belkin, 2015). Coursera is also rebuilding
its platform to allow universities to use its courses on demand for teaching in place of
conventional lectures. This will permit large scale ‘flipped learning’ allowing lecturers to
spend more time explaining and discussing rather than dispensing information.
Potentially these digital credentials are not only cheaper and quicker to obtain than full
degrees but they can provide more detailed information about the skills of the holder
through a digital archive of experiences and achievements during the course. These digital
2
3
http://www.proexam.org/index.php/digital-credentials/micro-credentials
www.deakindigital.com
http://graduations.curtin.edu.au/graduate/curtinextra.cfm
http://www.olt.gov.au/project-curate-credential-and-carry-forward-digital-learning-evidence2013
6
Australian Financial Review, 2 February, 2015
4
5
143
open badges can also be designed to make them more ‘search engine discoverable’ to assist
potential employers in their search for specific skills.
There is also evidence that open learning in MOOC format is finding new markets both in
formal and non-formal education provision. For example, an Australian company
OpenLearning7 has won an Australian Government contract for provision of a MOOC on
regulatory impact analysis for public servants and the general public. OpenLearning also has
a contract with the Malaysian government to deliver 15% of the country’s public university
courses as MOOCs by the end of 2015, increasing to 30% by 20208.
Some universities are also experimenting with modularising curricula, particularly in
assessment so that when learners feel ready they can enrol in the assessment module and
pay the course fee at that point. Students use e-portfolios to evidence learning across a
range of modules. This approach is largely at the postgraduate level at present. Futurelearn,
the MOOC spinoff from the Open University currently offers MOOCs provided by a large
number of partners, including several Australian universities – while none of the courses is
yet accredited participants do receive a Statement of Participation and, upon sitting exams
in designated exam centres can be awarded a Statement of Attainment. Some partners
including Monash University are considering the award of credit towards formal
qualifications for successful attainment in the MOOCs (Trounson, 2014).
Unbundling does not relate only to the delivery and assessment of academic content. There
is significant potential to outsource co-curricular components that bear directly on the
student experience as well. Pearson9 has a set of strategies that encompass partnering with
higher education providers globally to improve student success through improving the first
year experience (Brownell & Swanner, 2010); assessing and developing 21 st century skills
and competencies; accelerating completion rates (Attewell et al, 2006); improving learning
outcomes and pass rates/retention through course redesign and online program
management which provides comprehensive support for online learning programs 10.
Pearson has contracts with Australian universities (Barnett, 2015) in which they provide
‘Student Support Teams’. Each online student has a dedicated adviser who stays with the
student throughout their enrolment. The advisers do not take on an academic adviser role
www.openlearning.com
http://www.afr.com/technology/ June 4, 2015
9
http://www.pearsoned.com/higher-education/topics-in-higher-education
7
8
http://www.pearsoned.com/higher-education/topics-in-higher-education/online-andblended-learning/online-learning-services/online-program-management/
10
144
but are support advisers with the aim of increasing retention and student completion. The
aim is to provide a sense of community and connection through personal contact with
students.
Quality Assurance
There is no shortage of research and good practice guidelines for the quality assurance of elearning opportunities. The majority of these address e-learning and related delivery modes
as they relate to formal higher education programs. Disaggregated or unbundled learning
opportunities are, however, a different territory entirely. The stage is set for mixing,
matching and cross-credentialling in ways that have not been possible prior to the digital
revolution.
The emerging practice of unbundling components of courses, not only in terms of content
delivery but also in terms of student support, assessment and recognition of prior learning
poses a serious challenge to core concepts such as integrity and coherence of a program of
study and of the student experience. These concepts are enshrined in the HESF and the AQF
and are central criteria against which regulatory bodies accredit programs of study.
The UK Quality Code for Higher Education (QAA)11 provides a very useful chapter on
‘managing higher education provision with others’ (Chapter B10). This chapter lists the very
large number of ways in which institutions are coping with disaggregation of program
delivery including articulation arrangements, work integrated learning, overseas partners,
franchised delivery by non-degree awarding bodies, and third party provision of learning
support and resources. The Code emphasises that regardless of the wide range and variety
of these third party arrangements the fundamental principle underpinning them is that the
degree awarding body has ultimate responsibility for academic standards and quality.
Consultations with Australian providers confirmed that this fundamental principle is
universally accepted. The difficulty perceived by most providers in putting the principle into
practice is essentially developing scalable processes which allow it to be implemented and
documented in ways that provide evidence of compliance with quality standards.
Australia’s Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) has provided advice
that makes the differentiation explicit:
The use of a MOOC as a mode of delivery will be assessed by TEQSA within the context
of the provider’s overall approach to creating a sound learning environment. The
11
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code
145
evidence supplied by providers to demonstrate compliance may be different to other
delivery modes, but the standards remain constant.
TEQSA’s remit does not extend to MOOCs which are not linked to regulated higher
education awards. The approach to MOOCs in these circumstances is a matter for
individual providers.
Where, however, a provider recognises any part of a MOOC as giving credit or
advanced standing towards a regulated Australian higher education award, then it is
directly relevant for TEQSA, as it relates to the provider’s admissions and credit policies
and practice and whether the Threshold Standards are being met. Many of these
arrangements for recognising prior learning exist, and it is incumbent on providers to
ensure that quality assurance exists for this type of credit as for any other12.
The rapid development of multiple types of, and motivations for studying MOOCs and other
open learning experiences has outstripped the ability to classify them in ways that offer
common criteria for assessment of quality. A principal criterion of quality is ‘fitness for
purpose’, but the purposes of these offerings and the needs of the people who undertake
them defy ready classification. There is no clear singular purpose or taxonomy of purposes
against which fitness can be judged. For this reason it is important to avoid capture by labels
such as MOOCs, badges or open learning and to concentrate on the nature of the interaction
with learners and on their perspectives of the purpose of their ‘unbundled’ learning
experiences. In this vein efforts are underway to gain a better understanding of the variety
of motivations, social contexts, learning profiles and career development of MOOC
participants, (for example MOOCKnowledge, a 3 year funded study to develop a knowledge
base for European MOOCs)13.
Significant international effort is being expended to ensure the quality of MOOCs, for
example the European Foundation for Quality in e-Learning (EFQUEL) MOOC Quality Project
(Creelman et al, 2014). OpenUpEd has also developed a quality label for MOOCs tailored to
both e-learning and open education. The label focuses on benchmarking for institutional
improvement and is intended to be integrated with an institution’s own quality processes 14.
12
ww w.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/.../TEQSAeLearningInformationSheet.pdf
13
http://is.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/EAP/OpenEduMOOC.html
14
http://www.openuped.eu/quality-label
146
The Council for Higher Education Accreditation in the USA has produced a report on Quality
Assurance and Alternative Higher Education (2014)15 which has identified six questions for
further enquiry and action:
 Would a quality review process for alternative providers of postsecondary education
offer effective documentation of quality and credibility to the public, including
students, policy makers and employers, providing a useful and viable public service?
 Would a preliminary cost-benefit analysis of a model quality review be informative? If
so, how might this be done?
 Would development of an experimental model provide a means to demonstrate and
test a workable quality review process? What might that model look like?
 Inasmuch as the offerings of many alternative providers are designed to enable the
student to master or demonstrate specific knowledge or skills, would a quality focus
that measured competence (student outcomes) be a productive approach?
 Would an external quality review process for alternative providers offer a potential
pathway for these organizations to qualify to participate in federal student financial
aid programs, if such an opportunity were available?
 How would greater cooperation or adoption of some form of third-party verification or
certification of standards of practice shared among organizations that review courses
or student learning for credit improve wider understanding, acceptance and
utilization of the work of these organizations by colleges and universities?
It is important to remember that not only do digital technologies make seamless and
interactive learning experiences possible but they also provide the means to maintain and
track student performance data as well as quality improvement data for courses on a
powerful statistical scale that can underpin evidence based quality assurance and quality
improvement.
Agenda for further work
Aside from the issues identified by CHEA (above) there is an interesting and substantial
agenda for further enquiry and development to ensure that we retain the capacity to
innovate while still ensuring confidence in the quality of unbundled modes of study.
How can assessment of diverse unbundled learning outcomes be managed at high volume?
15
http://saturnbook.com/saturn-book/vJgG/quality-assurance-and-alternative-higher.asp
147
The fundamental and universally agreed principle underpinning all future work in this area is
that the degree awarding body has the ultimate responsibility for ensuring academic
standards and quality. However, as diversity and volume increases the difficulty perceived
by most providers in putting the principle into practice is essentially developing scalable
processes which allow it to be implemented and documented in ways that provide evidence
of compliance with quality standards.
Program integrity and discipline coherence – whose definition?
In programs of study leading to professional qualifications such as accountancy or medicine
it is generally the profession and, indirectly, employers who are the arbiters of coherence
and subject integrity. In other academic disciplines the concepts of coherence and subject
integrity are not necessarily well articulated. It is possible to undertake a degree in the arts,
humanities, creative industries and even science where coherence is determined largely on
the basis of levels, based presumably on sequential degrees of intellectual effort, with a
great deal more autonomy available to the student to assemble the content of their own
program.
Qualifications frameworks are based on the premise of sequential aggregation of knowledge
and skills at progressively more advanced levels. However, knowledge and skills acquisition
in the “real world” does not always progress so neatly or sequentially, a fact which is
increasingly acknowledged by those who are breaking the mould and seeking disaggregated
learning opportunities. The AQF Pathways Policy16 (Section 2.1.4) specifies amongst other
things that giving credit into or towards an AQF qualification should not impinge upon “the
integrity of qualification outcomes and discipline requirements”. This criterion may be more
difficult to assess in a disaggregated study program.
The definition of graduate attributes, co-curricular add-ons, threshold learning outcomes,
content and skills mapping and capstone units have all contributed to more systematic
frameworks for program construction, but all of these rest on a basic assumption that course
designers determine the program of study based on the characteristics of the discipline. In a
more “open” learning environment learners, perhaps in consultation with their employers or
potential employers, are seeking to construct their own coherent programs of study based
on their own identified needs and knowledge or skill gaps. Increasingly, if they are paying to
undertake such programs they are seeking formal recognition of their investment of effort
and money. Coherence and integrity of a program of study are the point at which
employability intersects with broader goals of higher education.
16
http://www.aqf.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/AQF_pathways_jan2013.pdf
148
The question that needs to be confronted and eventually addressed by standards
frameworks is “coherence in relation to what”? Much more debate on this point will be
needed as business models for higher education evolve. A more sophisticated and up to
date level of understanding of what higher education actually means, and the diversity of
ways in which it will be accessed in the 21st century, is likely to be needed to ensure that
qualifications frameworks and regulatory practices are not captured by rigid and outmoded
models of program purpose and construction that stifle evolution and render higher
education providers uncompetitive.
Nature of student experience or quality of student performance?
One solution in the end is for providers to design the criteria for awarding a credential or
qualification solely on the basis of performance on specifically designated learning outcomes
– in such a scenario the nature of the ‘student experience’ becomes irrelevant and
subordinate to the quality of the student performance. This is potentially at odds with the
standards frameworks which places a heavy emphasis on the nature of the student
experience. In seeking to ensure a quality experience for students it is important not to
overlook the growing population, particularly of mature aged students, who judge the
quality of their own study experience on the basis of convenience, affordability, accessibility
and a minimum of perceived irrelevant demands from the provider (eg group work
contributing to team skills). This signals the need to adopt a broader view of the ‘student
experience’, which, even when interpreted for online students, makes several assumptions
about the nature of effective education. These assumptions are based largely on evidence
from historically traditional student populations. Many time-pressed mature learners
already know how to engage, collaborate and define their own needs. For these people
learning experiences that offer traditional modes of engagement, even if conducted in
online chat rooms, may be a nuisance. More needs to be known about the effectiveness of
different experiences for different types of learners, based not on traditional notions of
‘learning styles’ but on common sense notions of personal preferences. MOOCKnowledge, a
research project underway through OpenupEd partners may contribute to this knowledge.
What are the implications of separating assessment of performance from course design and
delivery?
Assessment is important because it is the principal way in which institutions and the
regulator can ensure that defined learning outcomes are achieved.
Disaggregation signals a significant shift towards ensuring program integrity not through the
control of content and design but through the ability to measure outcomes. This suggests
the need to develop the abilities of academics to select and curate content from multiple
149
sources and to design valid and robust assessment to assess learning outcomes from
learning experiences developed elsewhere. Accordingly disaggregation suggests that
standards frameworks may need to provide more detailed information about what robust
assessment practices will look like in an unbundled environment.
Decades of research have established a good evidence base for the design of assessment in
higher education (see Boud, 2010). However, disaggregation raises the potential need for
research into the types of evidence that are acceptable in determining achievement where
the assessment process may have been divorced from the framework of a program of study
that has been designed and accredited as an integrated whole. The QAA Quality Code for
Higher Education (Chapter B6, p.4) draws attention to the fact that the key features of sound
practice are common to both assessment used as the basis for recognising learning gained
outside a defined (or formal) higher education program and for learning within a formal
program. However, unbundling places a significant emphasis on the need for demonstrable
rigour in assessing learning against specified course and unit outcomes and on the ability to
do so potentially at scale.
To allow full development of the potential of modern and unbundled delivery modes there
will need to be flexibility in application of course accreditation standards relating to the
alignment of specific assessments with specific experiences and learning objectives. For
example, micro credentialing, through badges that are scaffolded towards a formal
qualification may need to be the focus of new quality assurance measures. Catalano (2014)
has explained the context in which micro-credentials can work for a credentialing sponsor.
They can be a precursor to a traditional credential; or certain parts of a full credential might
be “chunked” to provide a scaffolded starting point for a larger credential; or a separate, less
intense entry-level micro-credential could be developed; or an assessment-based microcredential, created by a credible third party, might satisfy some eligibility requirements for
an established credential.
To some extent the separation of assessment from course delivery is already being
addressed (but with varying degrees of rigour and usually at small scale) in the process of
recognition of prior learning. Feedback from the sector in Australia has indicated that there
is currently insufficient guidance on RPL available in the Australian context (see below). The
AQF explanatory notes for RPL17 specify that RPL assessment “should be undertaken by
academic or teaching staff with expertise in the subject, content or skills area, as well as
knowledge of and expertise in RPL assessment”. One potential interpretation of this
17
http://www.aqf.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/RPL-Explanation.pdf
150
statement could inhibit attempts to outsource RPL assessment to specialised agencies,
although this is probably not its intent.
Unbundling also permits study of program content through open resources where payment
of a fee is required only at the point of enrolment for assessment and only when the learner
has decided they are ready to do so. Increasingly providers of MOOCs (eg Futurelearn) are
offering this option. Particularly at the postgraduate level there is movement in the
direction of modularised assessment where learners indicate when they are ready to
undertake assessment of specific curriculum modules. This also disrupts further the notion
of duration of learning as a yardstick and completely disrupts the use of grading as a means
of differentiating graduates. The test becomes one of individual achievement when the
student is judged ready as opposed to relative achievement at a given point in time.
At this stage ways to assess achievement through completion of open resources still need
further development. Portfolios of evidence against stated learning outcomes, and third
party verification and interview to support portfolios are possibilities. Digital badges and
credentialing in an online environment are still in the early stages. “Challenge assessment
tasks” could be used as de facto capstone assessments to determine proficiency in higher
order integrative learning objectives.
Whatever modes are identified for assessment that is effectively uncoupled from the
learning program itself there will need to be a sustained and targeted research and
development program to ensure that they are rigorous, scalable, affordable and fit for
purpose. This is a fertile field for national and international collaborative effort.
Authentication
Well established approaches to quality assurance and alignment of learning objectives and
assessment are routine practice, however the online environment poses particular
challenges. Those include the ability to authentically assess some learning outcomes online
e.g. practical skills. There are also problems in ensuring integrity of assessment in online or
unbundled settings, ensuring that those who are seeking the credential are actually
those who have done the assessment. Awarding credit for work done and authentication of
assessment are more difficult when the tasks are further removed from the institution. To
some extent this problem is already being confronted daily in the processes of work-place
learning or study abroad programs.
The new features that open and disaggregated learning potentially bring to the task are the
need to upscale considerably and to be able to cope with a potentially greater diversity of
151
experiences and contexts. Some third party agencies are already offering their services in
response to this problem, for example Deakin Digital18. These services are specialized, fee for
service, and able to assist both learners and providers to assemble authentic evidence of
achievement. While this is probably an efficient and growing business model it nevertheless
increases the distance in the relationship between the learner and the institution providing
his or her credential.
Credit mobility
The variety of models of and purposes for disaggregation is considerable and it is unlikely
that the current internal institutional policies and methods for credit recognition, credit
transfer and RPL will be sufficiently and universally robust or sophisticated to cope with the
likely demand in the medium to long term.
A variety of responses to these issues are in the very early stages of development in North
America, United Kingdom, European Union, New Zealand, North America and Australia.
Australian institutions are guided by the AQF Qualifications Pathway Policy - but this is only a
guide and consultations confirm that adherence to it is variable. The best assessment is to
actually review the student's work but this is difficult to do in volume because it requires
individual academic judgements. Individual assessment of students seeking recognition of
prior learning is unlikely to be broadly embraced in the higher education sector apart from
those disciplines in which there are relatively smaller numbers and competencies are easier
to codify and judge as is often the case in the vocational education and training sector.
Higher Education Providers will continue to have policy and procedures in place for
managing RPL and Credit transfer arrangements. However, as complexity and scale increases
policies should offer sufficient clarity on the nature and extent of the evidence required so
as to manage student expectations of entitlement to credit. This will become critical in the
Open Education Resources and MOOCs environment, where students need to be fully
apprised on enrolment whether the units are accredited or eligible for credit and under what
conditions.
As non-university higher education providers become more prominent, particularly if
government policies of deregulation are enacted, there will be impacts on the business
models of many universities such that their internal subsidies and cost structures may
become less viable, leading them to seek ways to better define their core business. This may
lead to new third party providers who specialize in providing quality assurance for RPL and
18
www.deakindigital.com
152
credentialing but without actually delivering any programs themselves. Criteria and
standards may be required for assessing the credentials of commercial agencies that offer
RPL services on a contract basis.
An example of such a service in the United States of America is Learning Counts 19 which
helps students to build an undergraduate portfolio demonstrating expertise and knowledge
acquired outside the classroom for use in gaining credit towards a formal qualification. The
American Council on Education (ACE) has assembled more than 25 participating institutions
in the US to develop an “alternative credit system that will boost the ability of nontraditional learners to gain a college degree”20. The pilot project has been funded by the Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation and extends the work undertaken by ACE to develop “quality
mechanisms for determining the credit worthiness of education, training and life
experiences outside of a formal higher education classroom setting." ACE also intends to
develop a quality framework for issuing recommendations for digital micro-credentials,
competency-based programs and non-degree certificate programs.
What does it mean for teaching staff?
The disaggregation agenda will demand and reinforce the already apparent trend towards
assessing quality on the basis of outcome measures rather than inputs and processes.
Academics will need an enhanced skill set to allow them to select and curate content from
multiple sources and design valid and robust assessment to assess learning outcomes.
More attention will be needed to the specific preparation of teaching staff for disaggregated
forms of delivery, their heavy reliance on social media, their technological capabilities
including for amassing large data sets and the complexities of ownership and rights
management.
What does it mean for students?
A study commissioned by the UK Higher Education Academy into students’ views of Open
Educational Resources (OER) found that most students were positive about many aspects of
OER and more than half expected OERs to play an increasingly important role in their future
learning experiences. The study also found, however, that there is need for more clarity for
students about the relative responsibilities of students and institutions for access to
19
www.learningcounts.org
http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Pages/Twenty-Five-Institutions-to-Participate-in-ACEAlternative-Credit-Project.aspx
20
153
resources such as high speed internet, and more practical support in the discovery and use
of OERs21 .
The overall stance of each higher education provider in relation to acceptance of open or
non-formal studies for credit and the conditions under which credit will be given needs to be
explicitly stated in its policies and marketing material in “plain English”. Some will choose to
be open in their approach, some may choose not to accredit non-formal learning – however,
that choice should be explicit.
Evidence-based frameworks illustrating what is meant by quality assurance in work based or
supervised off campus learning would be helpful as reference points especially in light of the
diversity of work and community based learning experiences. Increasingly diverse
collaborative business partnerships are likely and it is evident from current experience with
regulation that the application of the standards to these types of arrangements needs more
transparent and confident understanding by all of the parties, especially students.
References
Attewell, P., Lavin, D., Domina, T., & Levey, T. (2006). New evidence on college remediation.
The Journal of Higher Education, 77ti5), 886-924.
Barnett, D (2015) Ensuring the learner succeeds in a wholly online environment.
Presentation to Thought Leading Conference #14 on Blended & Online Learning. Global
Mindset Conferences, August 25th, 2015 Australian technology Park, Sydney.
Belkin, D., (2015). Coursera partners with tech, financial firms for online classes. The Wall
Street Journal, August 11, 2015.
Boud, D & Associates (2010) Assessment 2020: Seven propositions for assessment reform in
higher
education.
Sydney:
Australian
Learning
&
Teaching
Council.
http://www.uts.edu.au/research-and-teaching/teaching-and-learning/assessmentfutures/overview.
21
www.heacademy.ac.uk
154
Brownell, J.E. & Swanner, L.E. (2010) Five high-impact practices: Research on learning
outcomes, completion, and quality. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and
Universities
Creelman, A., Ehlers, U.D. & Ossiannilsson, E.S. (2014) Perspectives on MOOC quality: An
account of the EFQUEL MOOC Quality Project, INNOQ UAL: International Journal for
Innovation and Quality in Learning, 2ti3) pp78-87.
Trounson, A. (2014) Monash eyes credit from MOOC platform Futurelearn. The Australian,
Higher Education February 25, 2014. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/highereducation/monash-eyes-credit-from-mooc-platform-futurelearn/story-e6frgcjx1226836276327
155
Feliz Tiberio, Goig Rosa, Santoveña Sonia
Lessons learned about communication
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
UNED
Spain
tfeliz@edu.uned.es
rmgoig@edu.uned.es
ssantovena@edu.uned.es
Abstract
In the real society, the new means have changed our communication ways. Social media
users are actually applying the Cloutier’s model (1972). The ECO project is a European
project that is carrying out 18 MOOCs with 22 partners. The dissemination strategy
implicates 19 partners and has to enrol 50,000 learners in 3 years. For the first 18 months, a
lot of actions have been carried out and allow us to extract some learnings from our wise
choices and errors.
Keywords: communication, European project, strategy, social media.
1. Introduction
The communication has a relevant role in any project. The European Commission is asking to
improve our dissemination strategies to facilitate the knowledge of the European
productions and trademarks. Europe is an important scientist producer but is not as well
positioned as it should. The USA are much better (Williams, 2002).
The communication strategies have progressed through out the time as any other human
activities (Matterns, 2002; Williams, 2002; Platt, 2004). But communication is not only
sending a message (Streissguth, 1997). Cloutier (1972) suggested a radical change in the
communication roles in social media. The Emirec model mean that the receiver is al emitter
and both roles could be exchanged.
156
Modern social media have really changed our roles and the Emirec model is now real. By the
way, the image is really centring our communication model in modern societies (Aparici &
García Matilla, A. (2008). The old rules cannot be maintained with the new means and
strategies have to be updated (Mattern, op. cit.).
In this context, the European projects have to implement very strong organizational
communication, as internal, as external. The organization is the centre of the strategy
(Cornelissen, 2011) and new approaches (Mumby, 2012), integrating sources from several
sciences have to be applied in this complex word where we are living.
2. ECO Project
The ECO Project1 (Elearning, Communication and Open-data) is a European project about
massive mobile, ubiquitous and open learning. It is a three years project (2014-2017). There
are 22 partners: BIC Euronova, European Association of Distance Teaching Universities,
FEDRAVE - Fundação para o Estudo e Desenvolvimento da Região de Aveiro, Geographica,
Humance, Open Universiteit Nederland, Politecnico Di Milano, Reimer IT, Riverthia, Sünne
Eichler Beratung Für Bildungsmanagement, Tabarca Consulting, Universidad de Cantabria,
Universidad de Oviedo, Universidad de Quilmes, Universidad de Valladolid, Universidad de
Zaragoza, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Universidad Manuela Beltrán, Universidad Nacional
de Educación a Distancia, Universidade Aberta, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle , and
University of Manchester. The main goal of the project is designing MOOCs in 6 languages
(English, Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, and German), carrying out them for 3
iterations, evaluating and improving them in each iteration. The project has to enrol 50,000
learners and engage 4,000 to design MOOCs. Teachers are preferentially the target group.
These teachers could become e-teachers learning competences to design and carry out
MOOCs by a three steps strategy: participating as learner in a MOOC, learning how to design
1
Project n. 621127. Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP). CIP-ICT-PSP.2013 Theme 2:
Digital content, open data and creativity. Obj 2.3.a: Piloting and showcasing excellence in ICT for learning for
all.
157
participating in the sMOOC step by step, and joining a team with other teachers to design
and develop their own MOOC.
3. Communication Work Package
The project is organized in six work packages. The fifth one is focusing Communication and
Dissemination and focuses three main goals:
 Design of the diffusion and communication plan
 Implementation of the plan
 Evaluation of the plan
According to these goals, the main actions to carry out are the following:









Developing the Website in different languages
Selecting and implementing an overall communication strategy
Planning dissemination through the social media
Deciding which content will be published and ensuring it is regularly updated
Promoting and holding international and local events
Preparing and distributing brochures at institutions and events
Establishing direct contact with the interested parties, groups and institutions
Drawing up internal and external distribution lists
Participation in blogs and different publications
The communication strategy is described in the Communication plan: 19 partners join the
communication team that meets weekly. The short-term plan describes the activities to
carry out for a period of 3 or 4 weeks. Regularly, the partners provide data to evaluate the
impact and results (figure 1).
158
Figure 1: Communication organization of ECO project
4. Analysis of procedures
After 18 months, we have observed and collected data that allow us to extract some
learnings as:
4.1. Target group
The target group is really the destination of our journey. Don’t listen to your preferences,
don’t follow your trends, don’t analyse your believes. You are not the goal. The target group
is the client, the target group is the audience, and the target group is the spectator. Some
step to reach the target group:
1. Define the target group
2. Imagine the target group
159
3. Characterize the target group
4. Understand the target group
5. Feel as the target group
6. Identify their needs, believes and motivations
7. Discover their preferred channels
8. Present your contents for them
9. Listen to their comments
10. Observe their reactions
11. Reaching people
The Internet community has been disseminating the values of the Web 2.0. We have said
once and other times that we had changed our communication paradigm. In fact, this
reorientation of communication processes and means has affected also to the dissemination
and advertisement. One classical example is about the different ways to pay for online
commercials. According to the Web 1.0, you will pay for people who is seeing your banner or
hearing your spot. In the Web 2.0 universe, you will pay for clicks on your link or image. Web
1.0 is based on impressions; Web 2.0 is based on interactions. The impressions are
perceptions acts that are difficult to monitor. The clicks are behaviours that are very easy to
measure. When your audience clicks, they are communicating their interests and then you
are receiving their manifestation and feelings.
In the same ways, we will interpret calls, mails, comments, follows, shares, likes, and so on.
Any reaction means a manifestation of interest and is a stronger measure of the effects of
our communication actions.
However, it is not sufficient. Our satisfaction cannot focus only the interactions if we do not
convert them into meaningful actions for our project. What is a relevant act for our project?
It could be a MOOC registration, an answer to a questionnaire, an access to your blog, a
download of your book, a view of your video, etc. Your success is not related to impressions
nor to interactions if there is no conversion.
4.2. Formulate your goals
Then the next question is about the means to evaluate the conversions. Firstly, you need to
identify the project goals. What are you looking for really? Perhaps you are researching and
then your goal is collecting data through a questionnaire; your goal is to collect answers.
Perhaps you are disseminating advices and information about AIDS with videos; then your
160
goal is that people watch your videos. Perhaps you are offering training courses; your goal is
the registration and learning.
This identification is strongly important as you will design the strategy according to it and is
related to the target group definition. Then not all the effects, even if they are positive,
could mean that you have reached your goals. Only when the effects are results connected
to goals, you could consider that you are measuring your success.
The results on inversion (ROI) means that you can evaluate your costs in relation to the
results that you have reached. The inversion has not only a money meaning. You have to
consider effort, time, personal staff, and other effects that could be an obstacle for future
actions. By the way, a campaign is not expensive or cheap by the amount of inversion that
you have done, however by the relation of this amount and the results. Then the same
amount could be cheap if the results are very good or expensive if the results are small.
Some means facilitate the valuation of ROI. For instance, social media offer data about the
interactions. If you combine this information with the analytics of your website, you could
analyse the correlation or other relationships among data. However, sometimes it is difficult
to stablish the causes or reasons of the success or the failure.
4.3. Call to Action (CTA)
The Call to Action (CTA) is related to the goal identification and target group. You only move
people when you really know them their motivations, and needs. The CTA is not as easy as
ordering. Then the problem is not to order but to reach actions. CTA means message,
relevance, persuasion, reaction. The CTA is a message (verbal, video, photo, symbol, etc.),
that has to be relevant for the audience that you want to reach, in order to persuade them
to do something. This reaction does not mean even paying but it could be listening,
watching, clicking, registering, downloading, installing, etc.
In the Internet, these are behaviours that can be registered and monitored. These could be
considered results of our campaign and could valuated according to our effort and inversion.
4.4. Experiment
To assure the identification of the causes of the effects, we recommend the experimental
161
model of the behavioural sciences. That means that you design an experiment with several
variables, maintaining most of them as constants, and modifying only one. For instance, you
could tweet at different times (7:00, 14:00, 21:00) and compare the interactions (favourites,
retweets, messages, clicks, etc.) at each time.
This model was called A/B and works only if you are able to monitor the other variables. If
not, you cannot attribute the effects to any cause or you should attribute them to many
causes.
4.5. Matthew Effect
The Matthew Effect has its origin from a verse in the biblical Gospel of Matthew and is used
in Sociology to name phenomena in which rich people get richer and poor people get
poorer. In adult education, the Matthew Effect is applied to identify phenomena in which
people with more training tend to maintain further training and people without training
avoid it. That means for instance that the divide between people with higher level of training
and lower one is increasing constantly.
The application of this effect means that you have the promotion is more effective among
other learners, for instance, participants in other previous courses or students of schools,
centres, universities, or training services. By the way, the previous learners’ messages
4.6. Calendar
The time and the space are the conditions of the perception as Kant said. The time
determines the audience and the scope. We have already used an example explaining the
A/B model. In this one, we were analysing the effects of the changing the timing of tweeting.
For instance, the timing is relevant for synchronous means or very interactive ones as social
media. For others as mailing, timing is not so significant because, even if you send it for the
night, they will read it on next day. In this case, the day of the week is a relevant datum.
Mailing is recommended in the first days of the week (Monday-Wednesday). The other
relevant datum is the calendar. Some dates are relevant to communicate or to avoid it. For
instance, to launch courses or training activities for teachers, take in account the school year
and the holidays.
At the same time, you have to consider the dates of the event, the time needed to
disseminate and the time that the target group needs to decide and organize their journey
162
and participation. Think about a conference. You need time not only to reach the audience.
You have to consider deadlines for presentations and self-planning of your audience.
4.7. Quality
The quality is more effective than the quantity. However, we have to clarify that the quality
is related to the effectiveness. Quality is not necessarily related to expense or inversion.
Quality is related to content and form. The content is the message, what you are talking
about. The form is the presentation of the information. Other elements are related to the
quality as the channel to communicate or the source and its reputation.
The quality provides reliability and confidence, and increases the audience’s receptiveness.
When you communicate, you realize the functions of a content curator. Many people could
read you but only if they believe you, you will reach your communication goals.
4.8. Supporting net
The net is a nice concept to understand that the scope of our communication strategy is
increasable thanks to people who can forward our information to their audience. This
support action is sometimes foreseeable and sometimes it is not. If you have a
communication team, you can agree about these support actions by retweeting, sharing,
commenting, forwarding mails, and many actions that are increasing your eco. If you are
part of an institution, you could ask them to support you. By the way, you could also provide
means to other unforeseeable people who could support your actions. For instance,
downloadable leaflets or posters could be included in mail content to provide means to
support you.
This kind of resources are usual and could facilitate means as to you foreseeable supporters
as to spontaneous ones.
4.9. Planning and coordinating
The planning is the previous activity that conditions your work. We usually teach that failing
in planning is planning falling. Some observations could be useful:




Start from diagnosis.
Do not try to plan all.
Focus the essential tasks.
Prioritize and order step by step.
163
 Delegate and give autonomy.
 Valuate from local knowledge (glocalize).
 Operatize actions and provide means.
Then, planning is an important task but you cannot plan every task. The flexibility is very
important and requires two further actions: coordination and evaluation.
Coordinating means firstly that partners know what they have to do (planning). If they do
not know, no coordination is available. In ECO project, there is a minimum of hierarchical
organization but most of actions are organized in a horizontal way that means a net.
Activities and tasks are common but every hub decide their preferences according to their
local possibilities and benefits. Each one is supporting others according to their roles.
Different roles in the design is not so operational. The practice helps better to specialize
people and to decide who is doing what. The communication has to be very nimble.
Coordination is not collecting data but communication: exchanging information,
interpreting, deciding, giving feedback, etc.
Evaluation is an activity that we do at any moment. We are always collecting data,
interpreting, and deciding if we are maintaining or changing what we are doing. Sometimes
it is and unconscientious activity as when we are walking. Other time it is an explicit and
planned activity as when teachers access students. In a project, the evaluation is also a
permanent activity, as implicit as explicit.
4.10.
Position and communication
In the Internet, everybody can communicate but not all the communication is as effective
and has so much audience. It depends on your position. The position is not only related to
technical questions as the ranking in searchers. The topics that are in style or the relevance
of the institutions has to be taken in account. Some topics are in style and courses will be
looked for more frequently, then they will increase enrolment. The traditional relevant
institutions are also looked for in the Internet. If they support or launch a course, they will
have more opportunities of success.
By the way, the communication companies have a relevant position and would facilitate the
dissemination. Some agency or services have nets to disseminate and contact traditional
164
social media as newspapers. Do not despise them. They still are the basis of the distribution
of news.
However, in the Internet, some new companies have also reached a god position for
dissemination. The main ones as Facebook, Google or Twitter offer adds. You can pay for
advertisement and users will see your information on they accounts. At this moment,
Facebook has a relevant position and provide better results but check in your case.
Remember that you can pay for interactions (clicks) that could assure that users read your
add. However, when it is possible, the best measure will be the conversion. In this case, you
will know that the audience has enrolled.
4.11.
Branding
When you present a project to a call, you do not think always on its name. However, this
names or its acronym will be converted in your branding. Choose an interesting name and
consider the meanings in your context and at international level. Acronyms are not evident
and they will last to be well-known. Some words are better valued according to the cultural
background and in their market. Think about and be strategic.
5. References
Aparici, R. y García Matilla, A. (2008). La lectura de la imagen en la era digital. Madrid:
Ediciones de la Torre.
Cloutier, J. (1972). LÉre Emerec (ou la communication audio-scripto-visuelle a l´heure des
self-media). Montréal: Les Presses de LÚniversité de Montréal.
Cornelissen, J. (2011). Corporate Communication: A Guide to Theory and Practice. London:
SAGE.
Mattern, J. (2002). From Radio to the Wireless Web. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow.
165
Mumby, D. K. (2012). Organizational Communication: A Critical Approach. London: SAGE.
Platt, R. (2004). Communication: From Hieroglyphs to Hyperlink. Boston: Kingfisher.
Streissguth, T. (1997). Communications: Sending the Message. Minneapolis: The Oliver Press.
Williams, B. (2002). Communications. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
166
Feliz Tiberio(1), Ricoy Mari Carmen(2), Feliz Sálvora(3)
How Higher Education Uses Social Media
Affiliation:
(1)
UNED
Vigo University
(3)
Polytechnic University of Madrid
Spain
(1)
tfeliz@edu.uned.es
(2)
cricoy@uvigo.es
(3)
info@salvorafeliz.com
(2)
Country:
Email:
Abstract
Social media are really used in Higher Education. We have studied the main nets as
Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Youtube, SlideShare, blogs and wikis. We have found five main
categories to classify the findings: Universities, services, faculties, teachers, and students. By
the way, three main functions have been identified: information & dissemination; learning &
teaching; and action & organization.
Keywords: Social media, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Youtube, SlideShare, blogs, wiki,
Higher Education, University, faculty, teacher, student.
1. Context
In our context, the main change in the social media comes with the transformation from
Web 1.0 to Web 2.0. That means that people are not only users but we are producers
without needing a strong training in informatics’ sciences. Some years ago, Cloutier (1972)
was suggesting a revolutionary change in the relationships between the media and their
users suggesting the Emirec model: nobody is just receiver but everybody is also emitter.
Social media are based on these horizontal relationships: everybody is receiver and emitter
at the same time.
167
In the last years, the pedagogical approach has also changed to a learning centred
perspective, focusing the learners as the protagonists of the teaching and learning process.
The teaching does not mean anything if there is no learning. The design process has to
support our effort to develop competences in learners. Social media are also users centred.
If you publish without considering the receivers, nobody is reading or interacting with you.
In the other hand, ICT has a strong development. Universities and colleges have integrated
LMS / VLE / PLE to support their degrees, master degrees and other training processes. The
mobile devices are such universal and have supplied others as cameras, recorders, GPS,
computers, etc. Mobile devices offer an extraordinaire opportunity to communicate online
anywhere and at any moment with low cost for users. LMS / VLE / PLE will become obsolete
if they do not offer options for communication supported by these devices.
The open source movement was reaching higher levels of development. Ate the same time,
several companies have developed commercial strategies based on free basic online services
as Google. Most social media are based on this same strategy and users access to them as
free services.
2. State of the art
The communication has really changed in Higher Education. In general, all kind of
organizations have developed new models of communication according the new means
(Mattern, 2002; Cornelissen, 2011; Mumby, 2012). The social movements have also used
social media to organize their actions. The dissemination has really changed and the
knowledge is supported by new actors in new environments (Feroz Khan et al., 2014). The
Higher Education institutions have extended their communication actions to social media at
all the level: institution, faculties, and services (Guzmán, & Del Moral, 2013; GómezCalderón, & Paniagua, 2014; Iglesias-García, & González-Díaz, 2014).
The higher education has then integrated the new means. Some teachers are using them as
additional means; other have integrated them as a compulsory part of their teaching; and
some have transformed their teaching ways definition. Several experiences demonstrate
that social means can be used for several purposes and functions. As teachers (Adalikwu,
2013; Feliz et al., 2013; Risser, 2013), as students (Gómez et al., 2012; Karal, & Kokoc, 2013)
are really changing their roles and their media for communication.
168
3. Research questions
The research questions are:
 Which social media are used in Higher Education?
 How are they using them?
 What are they using them for?
4. Research strategy
The research was based on Virtual Ethnography (Hine, 2000). The data were collected
according to several instruments: screenshots (copied and pasted in a word processor page
identifying the source and time), visual screen information (copied and pasted in a word
processor page keeping pictures and in a spreadsheet as plain text, identifying the source
and time) and comments and observations with field notes. This content was analysed with
Aquad version 7 as texts and pictures with a unique integrated system of categories (codes)
relating the three research questions. The collection and analysis of data were carried out as
paralleled procedures till reaching the saturation level. This point was considered reached
when there were sufficient evidences for each category to consider that they were
consistent and representative of a relevant part of the map. This map describing the uses of
social in the higher education is at least the main goal of this research.
5. Which social media are used in Higher Education?
The social media that we have found are similar to the general ones used by generic
population. All the studied institutions have accounts in each channel but the number of
accounts in each channel is different.

Facebook: bodies (teachers and students) have usually accounts. Institutions also
have theirs. In addition, we can find groups and pages. The groups are usually
related to degrees, courses, topics or subjects. The pages are related to interests,
activities and courses.
169
 Institution: Université d'Alger III (Algeria)
 Description: General university account
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/L.ITFC/
 Institution: Alessandra Derilan (Université Sorbonne, France)
 Description: Professor account at Sorbonne University
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/alessandra.derilan
 Institution: Bibliothèque universitaire de la Faculté polydisciplinaire de Béni Mellal
(Marocco)
 Description: Account of faculty library at Béni Mellal University
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/fpbenimellal/

Blogs and wikis: Bodies have them most frequently. Bodies are communication
most frequently as individuals bur also sometimes as representatives of
institutions, faculties or centres.
 Institution: Top Universities (United Kingdom)
 Description: Community with information about universities in United Kingdom
 Account: http://www.topuniversities.com/blog
 Institution: The University of Sydney (Australia)
 Account: http://sydney.edu.au/blogs/
 Institution: Biola University (United States of America)
 Account: http://www.biolablogs.com/

LinkedIn: As universities as teachers have accounts. Services, faculties and
students don’t use to have. LinkedIn offers several tools related to higher
education as University Rankings, University Finder, and Field of Study Explorer.
170
 Institution: Universidad Complutense de Madrid (Spain)
 Description: Institutional account of the university.
 Account: https://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=12202&trk=edu-sf-card
 Institution: University of Phoenix (United States of America)
 Institution: University of Mumbai (India)

Twitter: most universities, services and faculties have accounts. At the same time,
teachers and students have theirs but not so many as in Facebook in a parallel
way of the general population.
 Institution: Politecnico di Milano (Italy)
 Account: https://twitter.com/polimi
 Institution: Fundação Universidade do Tocantins (Brazil)
 Account: https://twitter.com/unitins
 Institution: University of Cape Town (South Africa)
 Account: https://twitter.com/UCT_news

Others: SlideShare, YouTube, ResearchGate, etc. We have found accounts related
to the higher education mainly managed by teachers. Universities, services and
faculties, as well as students do not use to have, at least identifying them as
higher education activity.
171
 Institution: Orientation Quiz (Jindal Global University)
 Description: A quickly compiled quiz created for the students at Jindal, Sonepat as part of
their Orientation
 Channel: SlideShare
 Account: http://dpli.ir/GJL89X
 Institution: Étudier à l'Université de Montréal : comment s'inscrire (Canada)
 Channel: Youtube
 Description: Video explaining how to register at Montreal University.
 Account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heceeVJJ4KY
 Institution: Lorenzo Garcia-Aretio (UNED, Spain)
 Channel: Research Gate
 Description: Ph.D. Full Professor Distance Education, UNESCO Chair Holder
 Account: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lorenzo_Garcia-Aretio2
6. How are they using them?
To identify the categories, we used the criteria that the activities had to be related clearly to
higher education. At institutional level (Universities, services and faculties), the identification
is usually reflected in the name; at body level, it is more difficult as persons do not always
identify their status or activity in higher education. That means that some data were lost by
this reason but we had no ways to confirm their relationship to higher education. When
bodies are identifying an institutional function or attribution (for instance, a dean or a
rector), we have included them at institutional level. Then the criterion is not related to
individual / collective levels but to functional identification as institutional (university,
services, faculties, and persons in charge) or as training action (trainers and trainees). By the
way, we have included as Trainers (Teachers) their activities or functions related to them in
the higher education as the research or its socialization, and as Trainees (Students) other
activities as leisure or sociability when they start from or are based on the campus field.
We have found five general categories of users (accounts):
 Universities:
In this category, we have included not only universities but also researching centres,
colleges, and other institutions that are related to higher education most of their functions
or competences as evaluation or accreditation institutions. They usually have accounts in
every kind of channel. We could interpret that, as it is free and there is a lot of people in
172
them, they have to be. Most of them have communication services and they manage these
accounts. The name identifies clearly their trademark to promote their position in the
searchers but the activity level is quite different among them. In the following evidences, we
can identify these details. Because of the design of LinkedIn that includes a relevant role for
the universities, most of them have accounts in this net.
 Account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrafvmV2B2Q
 Institution: University of Windsor - Balloon Happiness Activity Canada)
 Channel: SlideShare
 Account: http://dpli.ir/vfSRhe
 Institution: Universidad Central del Ecuador
 Channel: Facebook
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/theuniversityofcambodia?fref=ts
 Institution: University of Cambodia
 Services:
In this category, we have included all kind of services as inclusion of students with
disabilities, ICT promotion, international relationships, continuous training, gender equality,
etc. Surprisingly, usually the communication services have no accounts. We interpret that
they are not the content but the voice or the instrument. In this case, they will stay in a
secondary level supporting the communication but not authoring it publicly. The services
have a very active presence and focus mostly their field. Some persons could be in charge for
those function but they rarely have specific communication services. As there is not a
systematic presence of services accounts, we could interpret that it seems that there is not a
real plan for communication. In the following evidences, we identify easily these details.
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/RevistaEducacionXX1
 Institution: Revista Educación XX1 (Magazine at UNED Faculty of Education, Spain)
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/AUcdi/
 Institution: American University Center for Diversity & Inclusion
 Channel: Twitter
 Account: https://twitter.com/MasterMODER1
173
 Institution: Master MODélisation en Ecologie (University of Rennes, France)
 Faculties:
The faculties are usually the most related level to the training. We have included in this
category all kind of centres or schools as individuals versus the set of all of them that could
be identified as a university or a college. The faculties are perhaps the institutional level with
lower activity in social media. When they are, not all services have accounts and we also
could interpret that there is not a general agreement to create an account for each faculty.
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/groups/acu.cs.2015/
 Institution: Faculty of Computer Science Ahram Canadian University 2015-2019 (Egypt)
 Account: https://twitter.com/UHHMIN
 Institution: Faculty of Mathematics, Computer Science and Natural Sciences
 Account: https://twitter.com/DerechoUBA
 Institution: Low School (University of Buenos Aires)
 Teachers:
The teachers have usually two main functions: teaching and researching. Some of them are
implicated in management roles but, as we have explained, these cases will be included at
institutional level. A lot of teachers use social media for different goals and functions. We
only identify bodies as teachers if they give us this piece of data indicating that they are
teachers, lectures, or professors at a college, faculty, university, degree, post-degree, or
subjects related to higher education. Teachers and researchers interact also in some specific
nets as ResearchGate.
Some example of this category are following:
 Channel: Research Gate
 Account: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jurjo_Torres_Santome
 Institution: Jurjo Torres Santomé (Universidad da Coruña, Spain)
 Description: Personal account disseminating his activity.
 Channel: LinkedIn
174
 Account: http://dpli.ir/9bK6qC
 Institution: Stephen Downes (National Research Council Canada)
 Account: https://twitter.com/JorgeGCastaneda
 Institution: Jorge Castañeda (professor at University of New York)
 Students:
Students are the most frequent users for several reasons. Firstly by their age; secondly
because some social media as Facebook were created by and for students. In these channels
they find a freedom field without the control of teachers and tutors, not as confident as the
official sites but we more immediate answers. By the way they carry out spontaneously the
principles that support the mentoring experiences in higher education. We will analyse in
depth what they use the social media for later, but it is clear that they develop their own
space for communication, agreeing implicitly or explicitly their rules and maintaining the
groups, lists or forums for one year to next one. These are some evidences illustrating this
category:
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/groups/536877599673579/
 Institution: ESAD - Economy Students pursuing Academic Debate
 Description: Forum of students of economics to learn about and discuss economic
approaches which usually do not appear in university curricula.
 Channel: LinkedIn
 Account: http://dpli.ir/R3HCSb
 Institution: Engenharia de Produção - Estudantes e Engenheiros
 Description: Group for exchanging information, study materials, seminars advertising and
other events involving engineers and students of industrial engineering.
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/groups/paris8cinema/
 Institution: Étudiants cinéma - Université Paris 8 (et les autres)
 Description: Exchange of ideas and proposals for collaboration.
175
7. What are they using them for?
The three main categories that we have found are:
a. Universities, Faculties, Services
 General information: Posts to explain or describe the institution (services, training,
etc.).
 Events broadcasting: Publication of activities, cites or documents during an event
(conference, celebration, workshop, etc.).
 Dissemination: Posts to register or enrol students in degrees, master degrees, events
or other courses.
 News: Ads about celebrations, academic events, events, appointments, deaths, etc.
 Answer questions: Some institutions answer directly from central accounts the
questions of students, citizens, and other users.
 Election: In some cases, the persons in charge as deans, directors or chiefs are
elected and we have found publications of the campaigns, posted by the candidates
or their supporters.
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/MaastrichtUniversityLibrary/
 Institution: Maastricht University Library (Netherlands)
 Activities: News, activities, suggestions, and training of the library.
 Account: https://twitter.com/CSecundaria
 Institution: Educación Secundaria. Faculty of Education (UNED, Spain)
 Activities: Dissemination and activities around an international conference of Secondary
Education.
 Account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpKhCs5t-Ac
 Institution: Learning Communities at Ohio University (USA)
 Activities: Disseminating functions and uses of learning communities at university.
176
b. Teachers
 Contents: Some teachers post about their topics or subjects. We can found
documents in several formats as pdf, presentations, podcasts or videos, and shorter
ones as posts or tweets. These last ones are also called pills. Some of those are
recordings of TV, radio o videoconferences.
 Updates: Some posts are about changes, new data o new resources of the topics,
subjects or guides. These updates are useful and easy to share by social media not
only to reach students but also the whole community of interested on this topic.
 Discussions: Sometimes, debates, discussions, or brainstorming sessions are
organised with students. Social media offer very dynamic and powerful means to
support them.
 News: Teachers also post about events, celebrations, academic activities,
developments in the field, etc. By the way, they reach the whole community or at
least their followers, friends or group members.
 Activities: The social media also facilitate the support to do teaching-learning
activities. Some activities are based on communication and interaction with other
people. Nevertheless, other activities are disseminated by social media connected or
not to documents or solvable by themselves.
 Nets: Teachers are also using social media to support or manage their professional
groups, teams or nets, as a complement of official associations, organizations, unions
or societies, as virtual non-formal groups.
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/adm.marceloquintela
 Institution: Marcelo Quintela (teacher at Universidade Metropolitana de Santos, Brazil)
 Activities: Personal account disseminating his activity.
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1408975819409732/?fref=ts
 Institution: sMOOC 'Comunicación y Aprendizaje móvil' (European ECO Project)
 Activities: Group to carry out the activities of this MOOC.
 Account: https://twitter.com/TaniaERS
 Institution: Tania Rocha Sánchez, professor of Social Psychology at UNAM (National
Autonomous University of Mexico)
 Activities: Personal account with pills, activities and events.
177
c. Students
 Net: Students organize their nets in the studies they are carrying out. By this way, we
usually find groups of students inside an institution for a specific degree or course. By
a parallel way, to other platforms that their institutions offer them, they organize
their own communities in social media.
 Mutual help: Students ask for and provide help and support to study, to solve tasks,
to decide in elections, to get materials, to sell or buy books, to comment problems,
to comment or to discuss solutions of exams, etc.
 Participate in activities: Some posts are about activities as courses, events, parties,
workshops, visits, leisure, etc.
 Organize complaints: Sometimes social media are also the platforms to organize
students’ complaints for any kind of reasons.
 Account: https://www.facebook.com/MedicalStudentsCommunity/
 Institution: Medical Students
 Activities: Disseminating information and activities for medical students
 Account: https://twitter.com/HarvardAlumni
 Institution: Harvard Alumni Association (USA)
 Activities: Community exchanging information and news among alumni and friends
worldwide.
 Account: https://twitter.com/uomalumni
 Institution: Melbourne Uni Alumni (University of Melbourne, Australia)
 Activities: News, events, services and benefits available to alumni of University of
Melbourne.
8. Conclusions
The social media used in Higher Education are the same than general population uses: the
most frequent and popular ones. Some others were developed for specific purposes as
ResearchGate but do not reach the same level of popularity and use.
They are using them at five level: universities as institutions, services, faculties, teachers,
178
students. Finally, they using them for three main functions: information and dissemination,
learning and teaching, and action and organization.
9. References
Adalikwu, Ch. (2013). An Exploratory Study of Facebook Integration into Classroom
Management. Croatian Journal of Education, 15(4), 1057-1068.
Cloutier, J. (1972). LÉre Emerec (ou la communication audio-scripto-visuelle a l´heure des
self-media). Montréal: Les Presses de LÚniversité de Montréal.
Cornelissen, J. (2011). Corporate Communication: A Guide to Theory and Practice. London:
SAGE.
Feliz, T., Ricoy, C., & Feliz, S. (2013). Analysis of the use of Twitter as a learning strategy in
master’s studies. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 28(3), 201215.
Feroz Khan, G., Hoffman, Mark C., & Misztur, T. (2014). Best Practices in Social Media at
Public, Nonprofit, Education, and Health Care Organizations. Social Science Computer
Review, 32(5), 571-574.
Gómez, M. S., Roses, S., & Farias, P. (2012). The Academic Use of Social Networks among
University Students. Comunicar, XIX (38), 131-138.
Gómez-Calderón, B. J., & Paniagua, F. J. (2014). The Spanish universities in Twitter:
Messages, contents and publics. Historia y Comunicación Social, 19 (January), 681-694.
Guzmán, A. P. & Del Moral, M. E. (2013). Twitter’s contribution to improving strategic
communication in Latin American universities. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del
Conocimiento, 10(2), 236-251.
Hine, C. (2000). Virtual Ethnography. London: SAGE.
Iglesias-García, M. & González-Díaz, C. (2014). Facebook as an educational tool in the
university context. Historia y Comunicación Social, 19 (January), 379-391.
Karal, K. & Kokoc, M. (2013). Social Networking Site Usage among University Students:
179
Differences of Educational Level. Croatian Journal of Education, 15(3), 629-654.
Mattern, J. (2002). From Radio to the Wireless Web. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow.
Mumby, D. K. (2012). Organizational Communication: A Critical Approach. London: SAGE.
Risser, H. S. (2013). Virtual induction: A novice teacher’s use of Twitter to form an informal
mentoring network. Teaching and Teacher Education, 35, 25-33.
180
Firat Mehmet(1), Kuş Gökhan(2), Uzuner Kubilay(3)
Development Process of Animation Supported Video Modules for MOOCs
Affiliation:
(1)
Anadolu University
Anadolu University
(3)
Eskişehir Osmangazi University
Turkey
(1)
mfirat@anadolu.edu.tr
(2)
gokhankus@anadolu.edu.tr
(3)
kuzuner@ogu.edu.tr
(2)
Country:
Email:
Abstract
MOOC concept of open education agenda led to an exciting, discussed extensively area of
great expectations. Video lessons, assignments, tests and the social web applications are
widely used as teaching materials. Videos are very important materials for Massive Open
Online Course (MOOC) platforms. But related literature review showed that studies on
developing general course videos or designing special course animation videos in MOOC
supported platforms have been neither adequate nor enough. Since videos are the most
commonly used components of MOOC platform, developing educational animated course
videos by using current animation technology based on MOOC content to the Open
Education students have an original value. This paper summarize the second step of an
ongoing project supported by Anadolu University. The main purpose of the project is to
develop, implement and evaluate the course modules supported with video animations. The
first step of the project consist the development of animation supported video modules for
MOOCs. In this study development process of educational animation supported videos
summarized. Also developed animation supported video examples provided.
Keywords: open and distance education, MOOCs, animation supported video
181
Introduction
Discussed extensively in Open and Distance agenda in recent year notion of Massive Open
Online Courses (MOOCs) is considered as an exciting area led to great expectations. In
generally, the MOOCs are defined as open courses which offer a variety of teaching
materials in the framework of a specific program in online environments (Daniel, 2012;
Vardi, 2012). The various media materials and sources used in this course. But the most
commonly used educational instruments are video lessons, homework, tests, and social web
applications. Video is at the very center of the learner experiences in MOOCS as is in world
leading MOOC platforms such as Coursera, edX and Udacity. (Guo, Kim and Rubin, 2014).
These online free courses commonly organized as progressive video lessons and
supplementary instructional materials.
Video is one of the most widely used technology in open and distance education services. On
the YouTube platform, TEDx videos have been watched 613 million times, Khan Academy
videos have been watched 639 million times. There are over than 5 million enrolled students
in edX one of the world's most widely used MOOC platform. McGovem (1983) emphasized
that video has opened the power of MOOCs to world by engaging and motivating students,
and teaching with fun. In this context, it is possible to assume that the video have a vital
importance not only for open and distance education but also for constantly spreading
MOOCs platforms. However, in related literature there is a fairly rare researches on the
design process of educational video for MOOCs, and specifically on animation supported
educational video for MOOCs.
Homeostasis
The main characteristic of physiology is to study dynamic systems, not static. The function of
the cell varies depending on changes nearest surrounding. All living organisms are affected
by the changes in the external environment and internal changes in the cell which is the
basic unit of life. The main objective of many of the physiological reactions is to preserve the
physical and chemical stability in the internal environment. This is known as homeostasis.
Accordingly, the physiological parameters are not constant, but fluctuates around a certain
equilibrium parameters. (Holstein-Rathlou and Marsh, 1994). For example, human core body
temperature is 37 ° C (98.6 ° F). However, the core body temperature show about 1 ° C (1.8 °
F) fluctuations above or below this equilibrium point in both directions. This internal balance
is regulated by the animal's sensory receptors which can detect changes in the internal or
external environment. As one of fundamental issues related to human health Homeostasis is
an issue that concerns everybody. Therefore, it is important to present homeostasis issue in
public and comprehensible manner. For this purpose, the project aims to create animation
supported educational video for MOOCs.
182
Purpose
The main purpose of the project is to develop, implement and evaluate the course modules
supported with video animations. In this respect, the following research questions were
directed in this study.
 How is multimedia scenarios of animations in educational video for MOOCs?
 How to develop and improve animations according to universal designs?
Method
This project was designed as design-based research. Design based research is considered as
an effective method especially for educational research which focus on development of
technology supported educational materials and environments (Wang and Hannafin, 2005).
Design-based research in application development, comprising the steps varied according to
the nature of the research and application such as analyze, implementation, evaluation and
improvement (Tracey, 2002; Richey and Klein, 2005). In this production development
oriented study, these steps determined as literature review and target audience analysis, the
development of the first design, expert opinion, implementation, evaluation and
improvement. Three repeated design steps of animation development process presented in
this study. In this processes the views of field expert (1 Assistant Professor expert about
Interface designs, 1 Professor expert on physiology and homeostasis and one Assistant
Professor expert about distance education) used to improve the animations.
Results
In the improvement stage of design based research, the developed animations improved in a
repetitive design process. In the repetitive design process, improvement steps repeated until
reaching a well-structured design. In the designing of animations for educational video, in
the design based research process, universal design principles considered. Universal design
aims to be able to be easily used by everyone, without the need for a special addition to the
design developed products (Preiser, 2001). In this context, animations developed for
Homeostasis educational video. Animations developed in a repeated design process. There
for, animations designed and improved in three steps. The screenshot of the first animation
design given below in Figure 1.
183
Figure 1. First animation design screenshot
An original presentation aimed in the first design of animations. However, after the views
and suggestions of field experts (1 Assistant Professor expert about Interface designs, 1
Professor expert on physiology and homeostasis and one Assistant Professor expert about
distance education) some important shortcomings have been identified. In this first step of
repeated design process, prenciples of perceptible information, fair of usage, and flexible
usage utilised. Accordingly, the second phase was started in animation design. In the second
step, the initial design improved in accordance with field experts’ views and suggestions. The
screenshot of the second step animation desig giveb below in Figure 2.
184
Figure 2. Second stage step screenshot
As can be seen in the screenshot of the second step animation, more clear orientation,
related images and additional explanations provided. Views and suggestions of field expert
collected again about the animations of Homeostasis improved after the second step.
Animations revised and improved again in accordance with the suggestions of field experts.
Thus, the final design was achieved. In the final design of animations, reliance on errors, low
physical effort, size and proportions for use principles of universal design considered
carefully. A screenshot of the finel design of animations given below in figure 3.
185
Figure 3. Last design screenshot
Internal animations designs of Homeostasis improved based on 7 universal design principles.
The screenshot of two internal animation designs of 5 subtitle given below in Figure 2.
Figure 4. Internal animation designs
186
As can be seen on Figure 4, Internal animation designs of Homeostasis designed in
accordance of universal design principles. this animation designs have a simple language that
everyone can understand, a clear visual design, wide application area, ease of control and a
simple coloring. The main purpose was to provide a universal design of animations that can
be use in MOOCs.
Conclusions and Suggestions
The world's leading universities such as MIT, Harvard and Berkeley provide significant
supports to the development and dissemination of MOOCs and create platforms are open to
everyone. There are various efforts in this direction also from Turkey. However, it is possible
to assume that the application and experimental studies are insufficient about the
pedagogical and technological aspect of MOOCs in this direction. Also, there are insufficient
studies on usage of advance animation in educational video which is one of the most used
component of MOOCs in terms of educational content. In this respect, this project is
considered as an important attempt to fill the gap in the related literature.
The results of this research show that designing an educational material or environment
with heterogeneous audience is a process that requires thoroughness. For such design
process, design based research method is one of the most useful and effective method while
the universal design principles are respectful criteria for such widespread educational
productions. Human physiology is one of the basic course of medicine, nursing, health
services. Beside, Homeostasis is a basic health information concerning everybody. It is
intended to present the subject of Homeostasis to everybody in a clear and comprehensible
way by the ongoing project. For this, it is aimed to support educational video with
animations.
Acknowledgement
This study is a product of the project entitled “Development of Animation Supported Video
Modules for Massive Open Online Course: Case of Homeostasis”. The project supported by
Anadolu University, Head of Scientific Research Projects Commission.
References
Daniel, J. (2012). Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and
possibility. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2012(3), Art-18.
Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014, March). How video production affects student
engagement: An empirical study of mooc videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM
187
conference on Learning scale conference (pp. 41-50). ACM.
Holstein-Rathlou, N. H., & Marsh, D. J. (1994). Renal blood flow regulation and arterial
pressure fluctuations: a case study in nonlinear dynamics. Physiological Reviews,
74(3), 637-681.
MeGovem, J. (1983). The Types of Video Software: A User's Experience in John. Mc Govem
(ed.) Video Applications in English Language Teaching (Oxford: Pergamum Press,
1983).
Preiser, W. F. (2001). Universal design handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2005). Developmental research methods: Creating knowledge
from instructional design and development practice. Journal of Computing in Higher
Education, 16(2), 23-38.
Tracey, M.W. (2002). The construction and validation of an instructional design model for
incorporating multiple intelligences. (Doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University,
2001). Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 62(12), 4135.
Vardi, M. Y. (2012). Will MOOCs destroy academia?. Communications of the ACM. 55(11), 5.
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced
learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4),
5-23.
188
Gómez Palomo Rubén Sebastián, Martín Cuadrado Ana María,
Cabrerizo Lorite Francisco Javier, Sáez López José Manuel, López
Gómez Ernesto, Pérez Sánchez Lourdes
A Methodological Teaching Guide to Facilitate the Design of LifeLong Learning
Centers in Southern Neighbouring Area Countries
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, (UNED)
Spain
(sgomez@issi.uned,es), (amartin@iued.uned.es), (cabrerizo@issi.uned.es),
(jmsaezlopez@edu.uned.es), (elopez@invi.uned.es), (lopesanc@gmail.com)
Abstract
Lifelong learning enables people, at any stage of their life, to participate in stimulating
learning experiences. Nowadays, one of the most important goals of lifelong learning is to
consolidate the job of active workers, to train workers who have lost their jobs and to
promote the employment of people with no work experience. Particularly, this is an
important issue in the southern neighboring area countries (Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia),
where the “Arab Spring” has highlighted a series of serious societal concerns, not least being
high youth unemployment and low prospects. Therefore, lifelong learning is high on the
agenda of these countries to provide training and education opportunities for societal
groups, of which young unemployed are key. The creation and improvement of lifelong
learning centers is an important issue here. In this context, and within the TEMPUS-LOGIC
Project 1 “Implementing the lifelong learning concept in southern neighboring area:
responding to the changing needs of dynamic resources”, we propose a strategy, mission
and objective for lifelong learning centers in southern neighboring area countries with the
aim of strengthening the possibilities of access to employment and social integration of the
participants in it, and prepare them for active work and personal life. To do so, a
methodological teaching guide to facilitate the design of lifelong learning centers is
presented in detail, such that the activities of these centers are directed towards a set of
1
This communication is financed by the European Commission on the framework of the TEMPUS Cooperation
Programme, through the Logic project Contract Reference Number 543914-TEMPUS-2013-1-ES-TEMPUS-JPHES
189
initiatives focusing on providing adapted training to the needs of people in order to promote
and extend the lifelong learning.
Keywords: Lifelong learning center, methodological teaching guide, employment
1. Introduction
Nowadays Life Long Learning and dynamic pedagogies related to technologies are growing
considerably in educational contexts. The European LOGIC Project “Implementing the
lifelong learning Concept” responds to the changing needs of dynamic resources and it aims
to enhance the capacities of the Higher Education Institutions (HEI) in offering Lifelong
Learning (LLL) courses in line with labor market needs.
Some elements to take into consideration in the aforementioned project are the expertise
provider of Continuing Adult Education Centers, relationships to enterprise sector & civil
society, labor market analysis, assisting institutions in organizational development.
The main objectives are to establish a network of LLL Centers, to develop a set of legal
documents, to finish the project with a clear and functional 3-year Business and to ensure
the duration and sustainability of the Network beyond the funding period.
Analysis and capacity building activities will set the basis for the implementation of the
project, providing information on the state of the art of the Lifelong Learning (LLL) practices;
and revealing the needs of the industry sector in terms of employees’ skills compared to the
graduates’ skills offer. On a second phase, training actions will be implemented with the
purpose of update horizontal competences of LLL staff, and provide them with know-how to
retrain teaching staff for future course development.
Participant institutions are from Algeria, Austria, Morocco, Spain and Tunisia. Several
networking actions will be implemented at both national and regional levels with the aim to
provoke national and regional debate, share practice and develop a collective voice for LLL
centers to act as a formal network. Cooperation among institutions will facilitate the
sustainability of the project results.
2. The concept of LifeLong Learning (LLL)
The term ‘lifelong’ as applied to education or learning is said to have first appeared in the
190
1973 UNESCO ‘Report of the International Commission on the Development of Education’.
This term has strong connotations with the learning society. Despite the widespread and
growing importance of the word, lifelong learning has been characterized as an ‘extraordinarily elastic term’ (Smith, 2000), one that lacks ‘any shared understanding of its usage
at the global level’ (UNESCO, 2001).
The knowledge-based economy, new technologies, the growing speed of technological
changes and globalization all influence the needs to improve the population’s skills and
competences. In Europe, this has been acknowledged for several years (European
Commission, 2007).
We need a flexible and adaptable workforce that is ready to reskill and retrain to keep pace
with the economy's skills needs. LLL enables people to take an active part in society (Mascle,
2007). Lifelong learning is characterized by a wide variety of types of learning opportunities
which should be available in multiple contexts, with an important factor of flexibility related
to learning spaces and time. Learners are typically engaged in a variety of formal and
informal learning activities during their lifetime. This implies that the provision of lifelong
learning facilities cannot be a task for a single institute, but has to be seen as the collection
of learning facilities that are provided worldwide by different providers in a specific field and
over time (Koper & Manderveld, 2004; Jarvis, 2014).
Lifelong learning is an essential habit in which participants keep working skills. It is a
challenge related to self-directed learning in the contexts of informal learning. Putting the
learner center-stage means that the learner is responsible for his own learning processes.
This habits foster creativity, technology adoption and they enable benefits and advantages
related to flexibility and improvement. Some recommended pedagogical methodologies are
related to collaborative learning environments, Problem Based Learning and studentcentered learning (Sáez & Ruiz, 2012). Nowadays, there is an increasingly important basic
skill in ever-changing technological universe: ability to learn and adapt to the needed new
skills and training (OECD, 2007).
Applying LLL enables people to keep up with the latest information and technology and new
key trends (Bang, 2010). New careers are created all the time, so we need a continuous
update in order to face challenges at a whole new level. Flexibility related to time and space
provides an environment of freedom, which is particular regarding adult learners. Moreover,
adult learners tend to be considerably experienced.
The concept of lifelong learning refers to the activities people perform throughout their life
to improve their knowledge, skills and competence in a particular field. When integrating
LLL, some barriers reflect issues that are in the minds of people, other problems relate to
economic issues. It is important to provide better access to distance education, improving
191
resources related to Educational Technology.
Networked learning technologies hold tremendous promise for supporting the lifelong
learner, making e-learning available “anytime, anyplace, anywhere”. Through their
application, access barriers to lifelong learning can be lowered, opening marketplaces for elearning. The participants in a Learning Network have different levels of competence, varying
from novices to top-experts, from practitioners to researchers and developers. Traditionally
the heterogeneity of students has been reduced as far as possible by providing clear entry
requirements and using cohorts of groups that are considered homogeneous. In lifelong
learning, the door is opened to exploiting the heterogeneity of learners by setting up
learning communities in which novices collaborate with more experienced people (Koper &
Manderveld, 2004)
3. Developing experience
3. 1. The project & the partners
The project in which we have developed our work is entitled: Implementing the Concept in
SNA lifelong learning: Responding to the changing needs of dynamic economies (TempusLOGIC, reference: 543914-TEMPUS-1-2013-1-ES TEMPUS-JPHES) and is sponsored by the EU
within European Union's Tempus Program, whose main objective is the modernization of
higher education in the partner Countries of Eastern Europe, Central Asia, the Western
Balkans and the Mediterranean region, mainly university-through cooperation project.
The project is developed under the category of Multinational Projects, which are aimed at
several partner countries, establishing regional priorities that are shared by all the countries
in a specific region. In our case, the countries involved are: Spain, French, and Austria, from
Europe; Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia, in the Maghreb. In the following, we include the
universities, enterprise confederations and chamber of commerce, representing, in the
project, each of the countries involved:
-
University of Alicante, Spain.
Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED), Spain.
FH, Joanneum, Austria.
University of Joseph Fourrier Grenoble 1, France.
University of Abdelhamid Ibn Badis de Mostaganem, Algeria.
University of Continuous Formation, Algeria.
University of Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah, Morocco.
Mohammed V Souissi University, Morocco.
Higher Institute of Technology, Tunisia.
192
-
University of Gábes, Tunisia.
Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Dahra, Algeria.
Confédération Générale des entreprises Marrocaines, Morocco.
3. 2. Context
As we aforementioned, this project aims to achieve a number of objectives in the partner
countries in the Mediterranean region (Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia) seeking to enhance
training and employment opportunities for youth, as it is beyond doubt the major challenge
faced in the Maghreb. The 'Arab Spring' movement underlined the failure of past policies to
address the needs of a growing, young population plagued by unemployment.
It should be pointed out that the studied countries are characterized by three realities on
which the project aims to influence:
-
Extremely young population (27.8% under age 15).
Low schooling rates & high illiteracy (60-70 % of workers have primary education
level or less; in MO an estimated 1 mill. school-aged are not enrolled), this is
aggravated by new forms of illiteracy, such as access to & use of ICT.
- Soaring unemployment (conservative estimates indicate approx. 18%; in TN 90% of
the unemployed are 15-39 years, the largest share being secondary or HE graduates.
In all categories women are the most affected).
This situation generates substantial pressure on the labor market, education policy &
resource planning. Demand for education at all levels; particularly adult education is growing
exponentially. The population requires new skills to adapt and remain employable, and to
move out of unemployment & marginal employment. A recent UNESCO report (Adult
learning in the Arab States) highlights that the importance of LLL is widely underestimated,
indicating that the focus on universal primary education underscores the marginalization of
youth, adult literacy and LLL, concluding ‘the simple truth is that improvements in provision,
participation & quality in adult education can accelerate progress towards all 8 MDGs’ and
LLL ‘presents a powerful tool to fight poverty and social exclusion’. Likewise, the Paris
Summit for Mediterranean 2008 concluded that attention shall be paid to enhancing supply,
quality, and ensuring relevance of VET to labor market needs.
LOGIC was conceived to tackle identified needs through capacity building of partner HEIs LLL
Centers to better respond to the needs of labor markets & target groups, whilst laying the
grounds for a quality & an accreditation framework to enhance post-course utility &
recognition of LLL training. LLL culture & multiplication of the LOGIC pilot model is promoted
via targeted dissemination & networking, as well as active involvement of HEIs, enterprises,
civil society, and policy makers.
193
LOGIC will last for two years, and it is organized into nine Work Package (WP). In this
contribution, the WP.4 is described, which is oriented to the improvement of LLL Centers
and Observatory Establishment, in which UNED (Spain) is the lead partner. It will last for 13
months. This WP represents the continuity of the above WPs, which have come to mean the
conceptual basis of the project, identifying demands, expectations, know-how, and training
of teachers, among others.
4. Objectives
The LOGIC Project “Implementing the lifelong learning Concept in Southern Neighboring
Area: Responding to the changing needs of dynamic resources” aims to enhance the
capacities of the Higher Education Institutions (HEI) in offering Lifelong Learning (LLL)
courses in line with labor market needs, while promoting at the same time the development
of a quality & an accreditation framework for LLL. The three countries involved in LOGIC are
Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia. LOGIC is funded with support from the European Commission
through the TEMPUS program.
LOGIC pursues this ambitious goal through the following specific objectives:
1. To create LLL Observatories and modernize existing Centers in 6 PC HEIs by building
capacities to monitor actual needs, and provide appropriate training.
2. To establish a regional network of LLL Centers for good practice exchange, peer to
peer learning and dialogue.
3. To undertake a pilot action of LLL courses in each partner country, promote flexible
learning tools and provide recommendations for the recognition and accreditation of
LLL courses, enabling learners to progress in academic and professional careers.
The activities foreseen for LOGIC project will benefit not only the 6 Higher Education
Institutions that are directly involved, but also other HEIs based in the Southern Neighboring
Area.
The two missions of the UNED team in WP4-LOGIC Project.
1) Elaboration of Methodological teaching guide to facilitate the design of LLL Centers.
2) Report an Observatory of training and employment.
In this contribution, we share the progress of the first mission: elaboration of a
Methodological teaching guide to facilitate the design of LLL Centers. The objective is to
provide LLL Centers with a new lease of life, equipment, widened vision and tools, and an
additional focus on observation via a needs analysis for future activities.
194
5. Methodology
5.1.- The beginning
The methodology of work performed to develop the methodological teaching guide, which
facilitates the design of LLL Centers, is based on the principles of adaptation, flexibility,
openness, collaboration and generation of shared institutional knowledge. To do so, the
work done by colleagues in European contexts has served as a reference point: Strategies
and Business Models for University Lifelong Learning in Higher Education (USBM LLL).
The partners involved, both Europeans and Africans, have assumed an agenda guided by the
need to provide and receive guidance for the design of LLL centers adapted to the
peculiarities of each participant context. To do it, an initial work proposal was prepared by
the team of UNED, as a flexible reference point, incorporating the basic elements which
make sense of a LLL center, namely (Bang , 2010):
-
Global approach (Approach within the meaning of the LLL institutions).
Policy framework.
Goals and objectives.
Students and relevant sectors.
Formative structure: content and methodology.
Organizational structures (policy areas).
Resources.
Quality, measurement and control.
These elements are guidelines that have to be assumed in an autonomous and flexible way.
Here, each institution involved has to reflect on its meaning in each context and to adapt the
proposal to its reality. For this purpose, in a meeting held in Mostaganem (Algeria) in June
2015, a workshop was developed with the heads of each institution involved in order to
investigate how each participant perceives the meaning, significance and value of the
aforementioned elements. In this meeting, a valuable discussion was generated through
open questions. To do so, representatives of the partners involved participated in a process
of reflection and in a shared discourse of the elements that are implicated in LLL Centers.
The issues presented for discussion were:
-
What do you mean by longlife learning centers and activities?
Is there a national or local policy framework collecting and pursuing its objectives?
What benefits or added values do you think they can bring to the population?
Is there a prior initiative in the countries involved in the project?
195
- Would there be more collective needs, for example, young people between 18-25
years, adults over 25 years, women, etc.? In your opinion, what are now the priority
objectives to cover?
- Are there any emerging occupational sectors? What are the most urgent filing
needs?
- What kind of learning programs would be most adequate to meet the demand?
Formal learning, non-formal learning, informal learning experiences.
- As for the content, what are the market needs? Collaboration with other
institutions? Adaptation to the workplace? Retraining?...
- A flexible teaching methodology? What do we mean by flexible methodology?
- Planning, when? Format? Conditions to enter? Teacher-student communication?
Personalisation?
In addition, this meeting provided valuable information to the UNED team, since each
institution showed and left uncovered its needs and expectations, but also its reality, from a
self-analysis by the heads of the institutions in which the LLL Centers are going to integrate.
For more information on this point, it is recommended to see the resource section in the
website of LOGIC Project, where it may be found the diagnosis and subsequent analysis of
the overall situation on the employability of citizens in Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria1.
The meeting at the University of Mostaganem (Algeria) marked a key milestone for the
design of LLL Centers. The UNED team proposed to continue and systematize in a more
rigorous way this initial process of gathering information, with the aim of adapting the initial
proposal for each institutional reality. Therefore, the following work plan was proposed at
the end of this meeting:
1) The partners involved in this initial process (University of Mostaganem and UFC,
Algeria) are going to work in each institution on key questions and to complete a
short questionnaire of open questions, which has to be delivered within a month.
These open questions were directed to the explanation and self-reflection of each
institution on the key elements to the design of the LLL Centers (Global approach,
policy framework, goals and objectives, students and relevant sectors, formative
structure elements: content and methodology, organizational structures (policy
areas), resources, quality, measurement and control), as well as open to incorporate
new elements based on this reflective task of institutional self-knowledge.
2) The UNED team made a second proposal adapting and adjusting the responses. This
proposal was sent to the partners of Tunisia, Morroco and Algeria.
196
3) At the next meeting, to be held in Alicante, the proposals made by each partner will
be collected and discussed. It will be a new landmark that will serve to get to the next
point.
4) Final elaboration of the methodological teaching guide to facilitate the design of LLL
Centers.
At this point, at the moment in which this contribution is submitted to EADTU Congress, the
project focuses on the analysis of the responses of the partners involved (University of
Mostaganem and UFC, Algeria) to adapt and adjust the initial proposal developed with the
aim of achieving that the second proposal is adapted to the context and the needs of the
institutions that will design the LLL Centers.
5.2.- Henceforth.
Nowadays, after the initial steps taken so far, we are at a point of reflection and analysis of
the debates and discussions held at the last meeting in the city of Mostaganem (Algeria) and
reading the questionnaires and answers received.
The analysis of the responses provided by the shareholders at the meeting is one of the main
tasks on which the UNED team is immersed. The aim is to obtain a unifying and summary
report of proposals obtained in this survey. All partners have responded to the questions
raised by offering a wide range of answers, possibilities and nuances. They will be used to
create a working document that will be used in future meetings to guide the decision making
for proper support and guidance in the design of the LLL Centers.
Do not forget that one of the main missions in which the UNED team is working is that
concerning the development of a methodological teaching guide to facilitate the design of
LLL Centers. It will be used to lay the foundation necessary to build a strong and coherent
structure that will be adapted to each real context of each of the participating communities,
institutions, universities, etc., for the construction of LLL Centers.
The result of the analysis of the responses given in the survey will be added to the elements
provided by the UNED team, as a result of a comprehensive study and analysis of real
experiences of LLL Centers, as well as the review of the literature on the subject, which is
found at first and has become an essential source of information.
The second mission of the UNED team is to elaborate a comprehensive report on an
Observatory for training and employment. Employability, career development, training
throughout life, entrepreneurship, etc., are the core concepts that make up the idea that we
defend when we refer to LLL Centers. Thus, we consider that a training throughout life (LLL
Centers) must direct its activities toward a set of initiatives that focus on offering tailored
learning to the needs of people and the context in order to promote and extend LLL; today,
197
one of the most important goals of LLL training is to consolidate the job of active workers, to
train workers who have lost their jobs (for example, discontinued occupations) for working
in other occupations, and promote the first job of the people who have no work experience.
In this sense, designing a quality observatory plays an important role to enhance and
improve the work done in the LLL Centers. Observatories (dedicated in this case to training
and employment, employability and entrepreneurship) are an extension of the center itself
to enhance the economic, social, cultural and educational development, and encourage the
development of local quality initiatives. These observatories are established as key elements
that provide basic information to a level even lower than the local, reaching any user,
whatever their situation, and offering current and actual information about the labor market
of a country, town, etc., at any given time.
At the same time, training has become a fundamental element in the integral development
of individuals, enhancing their job opportunities. The needs of people and the context can be
diverse and accordingly, the purpose and methodology of training may be different. Linking
training and employment implies the accompaniment of a career guidance expert that
advises to the person to discover the personal resources that can be used in the pursuit of
his/her personal and professional project, and that puts him/her in the current job market
(local and global). Career guidance would be one of the key concepts of the LLL Centers: the
observatory is a necessary action that would link the various relationships that can occur
between training-orientation-employment.
To carry out this work, the departure point will be based on an analysis of existing
Observatories to provide us with an initial idea, allowing us to weigh and assess what are the
essential elements that have to build a future observatory, identifying the main sections to
consider, the required management and maintenance personnel, the technological
requirements needed for proper operation, the main elements that will shape its basic
structure, potential elements and innovative training activities (courses on-line, MOOCs),
etc. In short, a comprehensive work also allowing to identify good practices for further
analysis.
5.2.1.- Analysis of good practice.
Both the first and the second mission need the analysis and the scrutiny of existing
experiences which may guide us in the process of developing our initial proposals.
It is at this point where we are, analyzing known and existing proposals that will serve as a
reference point for our work. On the one hand, we are studying existing LLL Centers that
provide us a clear view of the basic structure that any proposal has to use with the aim of
adapting it to its reality and context. From this work, we will initiate the development of a
198
methodological teaching guide to facilitate the design of LLL Centers whose basic elements
are included in the following subsubsection. On the other hand, we are studying
Observatories of very diverse type, subject matter and content that offers a wide view to
analyze and choose those elements and contents that we consider essential and necessary
to form the Observatory, activities and guidance and counseling tasks that will be needed in
each LLL Center.
The two resulting reports will be shared and discussed at the meetings that will be held in
Alicante (October) as part of the agenda of the project.
5.2.2.- Basic elements for LLL Centers: a first approximation.
Based on the analysis and the work carried out so far, we may, in future meetings, show a
basic list of the essential elements taken into account in the LLL centers. In the following, we
are going to describe them (Bang, 2010):
- Global approach. From an initial reflection on its reality and context, each institution
or center must try to fit it into the meaning and purpose that LLL Centers meet.
- Policy framework. It has to take into account the reference framework of political,
educational, and economic in which the future LLL Center will unfold court.
- Goals and objectives. To define and establish the aims and objectives that each LLL
Center will fulfill. It is an essential and necessary task in order to establish a cohesion
of quality between the center and the reality or context in which the work has to be
developed.
- Students and relevant sectors. It is important to know and establish what is the target
population, based on a number of criteria such as age, risk of exclusion, gender,
economic status, access to basic services, etc.
- Formative structure: content and methodology. This point must be adapted to the
reality, groups, resources, etc., that are available and that will be key in determining
the form and structure that must have the content to work (courses on different
subjects of interest, orientation sessions for employment manuals or guides to
develop different training areas, methodology guides to develop learning experiences
with a high level of quality, etc.).
- Organizational structures (policy areas). These centers, on the basis that they have to
adapt to its reality, have to have sections or areas of basic and general performance,
such as vocational training, training from initial to adult education levels,
employment counseling and entrepreneurship, guidance for obtaining grants,
scholarships, subsidies, loans, etc.
- Resources. When it comes to shaping and designing a LLL Center, it requires the
analysis of the resources that will be needed, but especially those with which they
count and that can be exploited or redirected to a new or different use. They have to
199
take into account human resources, material resources, technological resources,
training resources, etc.
- Quality, measurement and control. The constant review and evaluation both the
functioning of the center and the own users is necessary for the continuous
improvement of the performed activities, the personnel involved in the daily running
and the way they work, the material used, the areas to be implemented, its
usefulness and relevance, etc.
This list of elements is the basis on which it is necessary to start working in order to generate
a methodological teaching guide to facilitate the design of LLL Centers in the institutions and
contexts involved.
6. Conclusions
The UNED team, with the tasks presented, has sought insight into the context of the
participants, their needs and expectations as well as generating a process of reflection to
review both conceptual and methodological key elements for the design and
implementation of a LLL Center.
Definitely, one of the highlights of the work carried out has been the flexibility of the
participants and the commitment of each of them to reflect on their own institutional
context. It has generated a shared scenario of dialogue, where were discussed experiences,
expectations, priorities, opportunities and constraints, in a climate of openness and
cooperation that has consolidated the positive synergy of LOGIC project, a key element for
the design of LLL Centers.
The tasks of this ongoing project focus on synthesizing information in a systematic way and
present the findings of this process developed for the participants, integrating explicit
process steps that ensure a proper projection in the practice of the methodological guide for
the design of LLL Centers.
In this sense, the collaborative design and development of LLL Centers will enable us to build
common and basic proposals to all members, but with nuances adapted to the different
realities and contexts. The aim of this methodology is to learn from others and to build
various proposals, elements and concrete actions that can be useful for everyone. Also, a
review of good practices carried out in other parts of the world will give us the chance to see
how others do. It will also allow us to select those issues, elements, activities and
organizational forms that are enriching and useful to our proposal (Popescu, 2012).
200
7. Bibliography
Bang,J. (2010). Organising Lifelong Learning. A Report on University Strategies and Business
Models for Lifelong Learning in Higher Education. Netherlands: EADTU. Retrieved online at:
http://lll-portal.eadtu.eu/images/files/Manual_Organising_EADTU%2024-09-2010.pdf
EADTU Annual Conference 2010. Retrieved online at:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=194778BF94D923D4F8A81FEDDF
F02322?doi=10.1.1.174.6811&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Eggelmeyer, S. (2010). What are the benefits of lifelong learning? Expert Answer. Retrieved
online
at:
http://continuing-education.yoexpert.com/lifelong-learning/what-are-the-benefits-oflifelong-learning-445.html
European Commission (2007). Life Long Learning Programme. Retrieved online at:
http://ec.europa.eu/education/programmes/llp/index_en.html
Friesen, N. & Anderson, T. (2004). Interaction for lifelong learning. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 35(6), 679-687.
Jarvis, P. (2014). From adult education to lifelong learning and beyond. Comparative
Education, 50(1), 45-57.
Koper, R. and Manderveld, Jocelyn (2004). Educational modelling language: modelling
reusable, interoperable, rich and personalised units of learnings. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 35(5), 537-551.
Mascle, D. (2007). No Adult Left Behind: 5 Big Benefits of Lifelong Learning. Article Alley, UK.
Retrieved online at: http://deannamascle.articlealley.com/no-adult-left-behind-5-bigbenefits-of-lifelong-learning-139607.html
OECD (2007). Qualification and lifelong learning (pp. 1- 2). Policy Brief, Organization for
Economic
Co-operation
and
Development
(OECD).
Retrieved
online
at:
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/2/38500491.pdf
Popescu, I. (2012). Essentials of University Strategy Development in the Field of Lifelong
Learning. Issue. Vol.4. Retrieved online at: http://www.ejist.ro/files/pdf/361.pdf
Sáez López, J. M. y Ruiz Ruiz, J.M. (2012). Estrategias metodológicas, aprendizaje
colaborativo y TIC: un caso en la escuela complutense latinoamericana. Revista Complutense
de Educación 23, 115-134.
201
Sáez López, J. M., y Ruiz Ruiz, J.M. (2012). Metodología didáctica y tecnología educativa en
el desarrollo de las competencias cognitivas: aplicación en contextos universitarios.
Profesorado. Revista de currículum y formación del profesorado, 16 (3), 373-391.
Smith, M. K. (2000). The theory and rhetoric of the learning society. The encyclopedia of
informal education. Retrieved online at: www.infed.org/lifelonglearning/b-lrnsoc.htm
UNESCO (2001). Revisiting lifelong learning for the 21st century. UNESCO Institute for
Education. Retrieved online at: http://www.unesco.org/education/uie/pdf/revisitingLLL.pdf
202
Guàrdia Lourdes(1), Appel Christine(1), Girona Cris(1), Padilla
Rodríguez Brenda Cecilia(2), Witthaus Gabi(3)
Learning from current trends in online and blended degree education to
prepare for the future
Affiliation:
(1)
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya
Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León
(3)
Loughborough University Leicestershire
(1)
Spain
(2)
Mexico
(3)
United Kingdom
(1)
lguardia@uoc.edu
(1)
mappel@uoc.edu
(1)
cgirona@uoc.edu
(2)
brenda.padillardr@uanl.edu.mx
(3)
g.r.witthaus@lboro.ac.uk
(2)
Country:
Email:
Abstract
The number of blended and online degrees being offered by European higher education
institutions has increased vastly since 1996, when Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)
was established as the first entirely online university in the world. This increase in choice and
flexibility of higher education offerings has enabled the promise of ‘anywhere, anytime’
education to be realised for many learners around the world. It has also created new
opportunities and threats for institutions that want to thrive and flourish in the new
environment. As part of a high-level strategic planning process, UOC is carrying out a study
called FUTURA. The study began in early 2015 with a desk research investigation to identify
the key trends in online and blended learning at both state- and institution-level in Europe
and beyond. Trend reports, national and regional guidelines, and other readings from
experts and institutions reflecting current issues and debates in the higher education sector,
were analysed to ascertain the key themes and challenges for online and blended learning
providers of higher education degrees. The following 11 themes emerged as trends:
collaboration between higher education institutions, internationalisation, digital literacy,
203
learning analytics, MOOCs, open educational resources, flipped classrooms, Bring Your Own
Device, teacher development, flexible and personalised learning, and an increase in
assessment-related activities. The benefits and challenges associated with each of these
trends, from an institutional point of view, are discussed in this paper.
Key words: trends, online and blended degree education, future of higher education
1. Introduction
Keeping up-to-date with the constantly evolving world is a challenge for higher education
institutions. In order to be prepared for the future, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)
commissioned the FUTURA (Future of University Teaching: Update and a Roadmap for
Advancement) study through its eLearn Center. FUTURA aims to identify current trends and
innovations in online and blended learning in higher education, and to provide insights to
support future strategic decisions. In the first half of 2015, a desk research investigation was
carried out to identify the key trends in online and blended learning at both state- and
institution-level internationally. The selected literature included trend reports, national and
regional guidelines, and other readings from experts and institutions reflecting current
issues and debates in the higher education sector. This paper aims to provide useful insights
from this literature review into the state-of-the-art in blended and online learning in higher
education.
2. Methodology
A search of relevant literature published between 2012 and 2015 was conducted. Three
broad areas guided the search process: 1) online learning and teaching; 2) blended learning
and teaching; and 3) lifelong learning and the labour market. In this paper, we focus on the
first two areas.
The review started with four documents, which were considered core to the study:
1. Report to the European Commission on improving the quality of teaching and learning
in Europe’s higher education institutions, by the High Level Group on the
Modernisation of Higher Education (2013).
2. Report to the European Commission on new modes of learning and teaching in higher
education, by the High Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education (2014).
204
3. Online learning at research-intensive universities, an advice paper by Mapstone,
Buitendijk, & Wiberg (2014), from the League of European Research Universities
(LERU).
4. NMC Horizon Report: 2015 Higher Education Edition, by Johnson, Adams Becker,
Estrada, & Freeman (2015), from the New Media Consortium.
In addition, the following sources of information recommended by experts were referred to:
the Innovating Pedagogy report by Sharples et al. (2014); the Association for Learning
Technology Annual Survey by Hawksey (2015); and the Skills Beyond School report by the
OECD (2014). Backward snowballing was used to expand the number of sources with the
help of these documents; i.e., to identify additional relevant papers through the reference
lists (Wohlin, 2014). A search on Google Scholar helped to further expand the search. While
this review is not exhaustive (e.g., only papers in English and Spanish were considered), it
does represent a broad span of relevant literature.
Salient themes were identified and classified into broad areas of interest. Those that were
named in two or more sources were considered key trends. Once the trends were defined,
references on them were sought to enable further description of their characteristics, and
any benefits and challenges associated with them for different stakeholders.
3. Results
3.1 Online learning and teaching
Within online education, key trends focus on collaboration, internationalisation, learning
analytics and openness (Hawksey, 2015), which is often manifested through interest in
massive open online courses (MOOCs) and open educational resources (OERs).
3.1.1 Collaboration between higher education institutions
Europe’s strategy for international cooperation focuses on developing academic
partnerships, and includes encouragement to national authorities to provide funding for
collaboration to meet infrastructure needs, teacher training and programme delivery (High
205
Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education, 2014). For example, EADTU1
(European Association of Distance Teaching Universities) aims at enabling collaboration in
the EU around the modernisation of higher education. Starting with small projects and
attainable goals, and building on success, are said to be critical to creating long-lasting,
productive partnerships (Rybak, Koster, Gilbert, & Flanigan, 2013).
Collaboration is beneficial for institutions as it may improve provision through the sharing of
resources. It can also facilitate the benchmarking of practices amongst institutions and
increase staff development opportunities, allowing them to engage with and learn from
other professionals (Witthaus, 2012). Collaboration between institutions can enhance
student exchanges and promote the emergence of joint postgraduate degree programmes.
Universities can also find value in the creation of networks for developing open educational
resources (OERs), massive open online courses (MOOCs) and regular credit-bearing online
courses (Mapstone et al., 2014).
In the area of inter-institutional collaboration, key challenges include quality assurance and
accreditation of joint provision. Mechanisms of quality assurance for programme
accreditation have been developed within the European Higher Education Area (EHEA)
(Internationalisation of Universities Working Group, 2014). Other barriers to collaboration
can be disparities in resources (Czerniewicz, 2014) and language barriers.
3.1.2 Internationalisation
Internationalisation manifests itself in different ways, including networking between
institutions from different countries, enrolment of international learners, student and staff
outbound and inbound mobility, foreign language learning, globally-focused curricula, and
transnational delivery of courses and degrees. Internationalisation is considered an essential
activity in higher education (Berry & Taylor, 2014; Egron-Polak & Hudson, 2014; Mapstone et
al., 2014). Developing a strong, global brand is seen as a way of helping universities to attract
students, staff and international partners. Linked to this, establishing international
partnerships with leading institutions enhances the quality of learning, teaching and
1
http://www.eadtu.eu/
206
research, and improves the student experience (High Level Group on the Modernisation of
Higher Education, 2014). In Spain, the Internationalisation of Universities Working Group
(2014) developed a strategy with 28 specific actions for the consolidation of a strong and
internationally appealing university system.
The curriculum is a key focus of internationalisation efforts. Internationalisation of the
curriculum includes ensuring that there is international content, an international classroom
setting, and a strong emphasis on interactive and collaborative learning processes (Brewer &
Leask, 2012). The Bologna Process and the concomitant development of the European Credit
Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) are aimed at ensuring parity of degrees and
credits for programmes taught within Europe, thereby facilitating degree mobility, credit
mobility and lifelong learning in the higher education sector (European Commission, 2015;
European Commission/ EACEA/ Eurydice, 2015).
Limited funding is considered a major obstacle in internationalisation (Berry & Taylor, 2014;
Egron-Polak & Hudson, 2014). In line with this, a key risk is the lack of equal access to the full
range of opportunities listed above, i.e., that these opportunities will only be available to
students with financial resources. Other concerns include “brain drain” (where students
from less well-resourced countries go abroad to study and never return to their home
countries), excessive competition among universities, over-emphasis on internationalisation
at the expense of other priorities, and growing gaps in quality and/or prestige among
institutions (Egron-Polak & Hudson, 2014).
3.1.3 Digital literacy
Digital literacy can be broadly defined as “a set of academic and professional situated
practices supported by diverse and changing technologies” (JISC, 2014). It encompasses
different skills required to find, use, evaluate, summarise, create and share information
using technologies. Training of teachers and students is required to support digital literacy,
incorporate learning technologies, improve course effectiveness and enhance the learning
experience (Dahlstrom & Brooks, 2014; Johnson et al., 2015; High Level Group on the
Modernisation of Higher Education, 2014).
207
Digital literacy takes on a special significance in higher education with the important role
that digital scholarship plays for both teachers and students. Weller (2011) analyses the role
played by digital technologies in all aspects of scholarship, and notes that all stages in the
research process – planning, data collection, analysis and reflection – can be made more
efficient and effective through the use of online technologies.
There are significant challenges in the area of digital literacy. According to an international
survey of 166,000 adults (OECD, 2013), 9.3% of respondents had little or no experience in
the use of computers. The figures are lower when Europe is considered alone: nine out of 28
Member States report no or low computer skills in over 50% of 16-74 year olds (European
Commission, 2012). Not all students developed their digital literacy adequately in school,
and for these students, the role of higher education skills is crucial (High Level Group on the
Modernisation of Higher Education, 2014).
3.1.4 Learning analytics
Learning analytics is the educational use of web analytics. Specifically, the concept refers to
“the measurement, collection, analysis and reporting of data about learners and their
contexts, for purposes of understanding and optimising learning and the environments in
which it occurs” (Siemens, 2010). In a virtual learning environment, these data can include
the learning resources accessed, the time and date of access, and the actions undertaken by
learners (e.g., viewing, adding, updating or deleting items).
There is an increasing interest in learning analytics (Hawksey, 2015; Sharples et al., 2014), as
it can help to personalise the student experience, inform learning design, customise teaching
tools, identify struggling learners, provide targeted support and assess factors affecting
course success. Learning analytics offers an insight into student progress, engagement and
interaction with online courses. It shows the learning process as opposed to only outcomes.
Sharing this information with learners can empower them to take an active part in their
learning (Dahlstrom & Brooks, 2014; High Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher
Education, 2014; Johnson et al., 2015; Sharples et al., 2014).
A limitation of learning analytics is the lack of consensus on which kinds of learner activities
are appropriate to measure and how to interpret the data to improve learning and teaching.
208
Mislabelling students based on incomplete or incorrect information is a risk (Sharples et al.,
2014). User privacy and the possible impact of surveillance (Slade & Prinsloo, 2013) are
other sources of concern. Students should provide explicit consent for the collection and
analysis of their data for educational purposes (High Level Group on the Modernisation of
Higher Education, 2014). Raising awareness of institutional strategies to safeguard data
privacy can mitigate these risks (Dahlstrom & Brooks, 2014).
3.1.5 Massive open online courses
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are free, web-based courses available to all. Over half
of the members of the LERU have some form of engagement with MOOCs (Mapstone et al.,
2014). MOOCs continue to feature strongly within the higher education sector (Johnson et
al., 2015; Ossiannilsson, Williams, Camilleri, & Brown, 2015).
A major benefit of MOOCs is that they represent an increased openness towards online
education in general (Padilla Rodriguez, Bird, & Conole, 2015), and offer ways of
transforming education by providing a space to test new methods of teaching, learning and
assessment (Sharples et al., 2014). MOOCs can potentially increase access to education:
there is emerging evidence that learners with less formal education may have relatively high
completion and success rates (Dillahunt et al., 2014). MOOCs can also be used as a
marketing strategy to attract fee-paying students in countries where tuition fees are
charged, as some participants use MOOCs as an introduction to the topic and degree
programmes (Padilla Rodriguez et al., 2015). MOOCs can also benefit universities that do not
themselves offer MOOCs, by replacing or complementing parts of their regular programmes
with MOOCs from elsewhere (Mapstone et al., 2014). Many European MOOCs are now
offering ECTS credits to students who successfully take an examination (Witthaus et al.,
2015), and existing national policies and guidelines for the recognition of prior learning are
generally considered adequate to enable institutions to recognise the credits obtained by
MOOC students (NVAO, 2014).
However, for institutions engaging in conventional degree provision, MOOCs can represent
an expensive distraction from day-to-day activities (Kopp, Ebner, & Dorfer-Novak, 2014).
Also, the quality of the learning experience cannot easily be guaranteed in MOOCs, although
some frameworks have been developed, such as the UK Quality Code for Higher Education
209
(Rosewell & Jansen, 2014; Ossiannilsson et al., 2015). The massiveness of MOOCs generally
prevents providers from offering support to learners who may be struggling with the
demands of independent learning and the digital literacy skills required (Milligan &
Littlejohn, 2014).
On the other hand, the debate around MOOCs is focused on the social, institutional,
technological and economical aspects, overshadowing the need for development of new
pedagogical approaches that provide consistent guidance on how to design for this new
scenario. A distinctive asset of MOOCs is that they offer an unprecedented opportunity for
recasting well-established educational models and systems. They motivate new ways of
understanding the knowledge production and the learning that, in turn, challenge the core
of learning design, demanding innovative and appropriate approaches to teaching and
learning (Guàrdia, Maina & Sangrà, 2013).
3.1.6 Open educational resources
OERs are learning materials that are freely available for use, reuse, adaptation, and sharing
(UNESCO, 2002). The term “open” implies more than merely “with no cost”; it refers to less
restrictive usage rights (Johnson et al., 2015). OERs represent a significant part of the trend
towards the opening up of education (Hawksey, 2015; Johnson et al., 2015; Ossiannilsson et
al., 2015), based on the ethical principle that publicly funded resources should be made
openly available (Scanlon, 2013).
OERs can help teachers save time when creating their course materials, and can also be used
as a means to provide free education to learners (Mapstone et al., 2014). Research carried
out at the Open University (UK) pointed to potential benefits for widening of participation in
higher education through the use of OERs (Lane, 2012). An example of how OERs are being
used for widening participation is the Open Educational Resources University2 (OERu), which
aims to enable students to build up entire degrees by gaining academic credits through OERbased study, at a fraction of the cost of mainstream university fees.
2
http://oeru.org
210
Despite the perceived interest in OERs, mainstream adoption is still limited (Murphy, 2013).
The concept of OERs can be confusing to many stakeholders. Teachers often see OERs as a
threat to themselves and their professionalism. Educational institutions do not promote
OERs because senior management does not see any obvious or immediate financial benefit
(Falconer, McGill, Littlejohn, & Boursinou, 2013). Other challenges for the uptake of OERs
include quality concerns, reluctance to reuse materials with another institution’s branding,
and understanding of copyright and licences. The amount of time and effort required to
repurpose OERs can be high (Ng’ambi & Luo, 2013). Finding suitable OERs can also be
complicated for people with low computer skills (European Commission, 2012). Some
teachers need guidance and support on how to benefit from OERs in their own context.
3.2 Blended learning and teaching
Blended learning draws from best practices in both online and face-to-face environments
(Johnson et al., 2015; Sharples et al., 2014). Within this area, key trends include flipped
classrooms, “bring your own device” initiatives and teacher development. There is also a
growing interest in fostering flexible and personalised learning, and a strong focus on
assessment.
3.2.1 Flipped classrooms
The flipped classroom refers to an educational model characterised by the rearrangement of
learning activities to emphasise flexibility and engagement. Learners are required to access
curriculum content outside the classroom, usually via video lectures but also via podcasts, ebooks and online communities. Thus, instead of using class time to deliver information,
teachers can use the session to explain particularly challenging concepts, engage students in
active, project-based learning and focus on interacting with students (Johnson et al., 2015;
Sharples et al., 2014).
Evidence of the benefits in terms of academic performance is limited. Case studies
portraying the successful application of the flipped classroom show increases in student
class attendance, engagement and grades. Student interaction in the classroom is key
(Sharples et al., 2014). Other benefits include more time available to work with scientific
equipment in the classroom, being able to watch lectures whilst commuting, and higher
211
involvement with the learning process (Herreid & Schiller, 2013). Students have also been
reported to become more open to cooperative learning and innovative teaching methods
when exposed to the flipped classroom (Strayer, 2012).
The flipped classroom requires independent work, which might be challenging for students
who rely on the teacher for guidance (Johnson et al., 2015). Finding suitable materials for
out-of-class learning can be time-consuming for teachers, representing extra work (Herreid
& Schiller, 2013). There are also objections from some lecturers to the use of lecture
capture; for example, some academics fear that students will not come to classroom
sessions if they can watch the lectures online (Karnad, 2013). Copyright issues may also be a
concern for academics using lecture capture (e.g., Williams, Pfeifer, & Walker, 2013).
3.2.2 Bring your own device
The “bring your own device” approach, or BYOD, refers to students using their own
smartphones, tablets, laptops or other mobile devices in an academic or work environment.
Institutions can reduce their overall technological infrastructure spending thanks to BYOD.
BYOD facilitates the ubiquity of learning. It reflects the contemporary lifestyle of many
students around the world, who are working online with their devices in the classroom
(Johnson et al., 2015; Sharples et al., 2014). BYOD facilitates task accomplishment, as
learners save the time and effort required to become accustomed to a new device. It also
enables users to access personalised content and to leverage the tools that make them most
efficient (Johnson et al., 2015; Sharples et al., 2014). BYOD enriches and extends traditional
teaching methods. For example, learners can answer online polls during a lesson without
disrupting the flow of the class. It also opens opportunities for connecting learning inside
and outside the classroom (Sharples et al., 2014).
A challenge for the use of mobile devices in the classroom is to balance their potential to
enhance learning and to distract learners. Other concerns include platform neutrality,
usability, and security risks, such as theft of data, viruses and malicious activity. Institutions
need to support a wide range of devices to ensure access. There are also questions of
equality, and concerns that learners who cannot afford their own device will be
disadvantaged. Developing ways for individuals to keep their social and academic identities
212
separated is another source of concern (Dahlstrom & Brooks, 2014; Johnson et al., 2015;
Sharples et al., 2014).
3.2.3 Teacher development
Continuous teacher development opportunities to help teachers improve the quality of their
practice are crucial and should be manifest in institutional systems of rewards, incentives
and promotions (European Commission, 2012; High Level Group on the Modernisation of
Higher Education, 2013). All around the world, countries are recognising the importance of
developing teaching skills. In Spain, the Quality Assurance and Accreditation Agency (ANECA)
contributes to the evaluation, certification and accreditation of teachers, institutions and
programmes (Ministerio de Educación, 2011). Other examples of support for teacher
development can be found in Estonia, Ireland, Belgium, Slovenia and Norway. (High Level
Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education, 2013).
Teacher development should attempt to help teachers improve their digital literacy skills to
enhance the quality of their practice (Dahlstrom & Brooks, 2014; High Level Group on the
Modernisation of Higher Education, 2013, 2014). Effective professional development
programmes for educators in face-to-face education have six core features: 1) focus on
current, research-based teaching and learning of the subject matter; 2) active and inquirybased learning activities; 3) collaborative teacher learning; 4) duration (both span of time
and actual hours) and sustainability (e.g., follow-up interventions and support) of continuing
professional development initiatives for teaching staff; 5) suitable organisational conditions
(i.e., ensuring that teachers have the required time, resources, facilities and support to be
successful in their development programmes); and 6) coherence with institutional, regional
and national policies (Van Driel, Meirink, van Veen, & Zwart, 2012).
Perhaps the main barrier for teacher development is the lack of importance generally
granted to teaching (High Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education, 2013;
Johnson et al., 2015). Higher education institutions have prioritised research over teaching,
providing few or no incentives for lecturers to aspire towards above-average teaching
engagement. Academic workload models tend not to allow teaching staff to dedicate much
time to developing their digital literacy or teaching skills, and creating programmes for busy
educators to learn new skills can be complicated (Johnson et al., 2015). Development
213
opportunities for part-time or associate tutors are also limited, resulting in some of these
academics feeling isolated and lacking support (Leigh, 2014).
3.2.4 Flexible and personalised learning
The trend towards flexible and personalised learning seeks to customise the educational
experience to enable individual students to choose how they learn and which learning
pathway they want to take (Hermans, Janssen, Vogten, & Koper, 2015; Johnson et al., 2015).
This is closely related to accessibility – the extent to which materials can be understood by
people with special needs (Ossiannilsson et al., 2015). It is also related to the use of
technologies (European Commission, 2012); for example, a student’s smartphone and its
apps directly represent that person’s interests and can be used to tailor educational content
(Johnson et al., 2015).
Examples of institutional initiatives for flexible and personalised learning include the
educational provision system developed by the Open University of the Netherlands, which
supports the use of course access levels associated with the users’ registration status and
expresses provisioning actions based on that particular status (Hermans et al., 2015); and
FlexPath3 from Capella University, which is a way of self-paced learning without the
constraints of pre-set deadlines (i.e., when students feel they have learned the materials,
they demonstrate their mastery of key competencies).
Flexibility and personalisation are also driving the development of new technologies.
Adaptive technologies can adjust and customise themselves to meet students’ learning
needs. Wearable technologies, i.e. computer-based devices that can be worn by users in the
form of accessories (such as Google Glass and smart watches), can enable virtual reality, and
integrate tools that track people’s everyday life and thus provide personalised content
(Johnson et al., 2015). They can empower learners to choose when, where and how they
want to study (Sharples et al., 2014).
3
http://www.capella.edu/flexpath-self-paced-learning/
214
Flexible course provision can be difficult to manage, as it requires a complex logistic process
(i.e., which teaching and learning services and facilities should be made available, to whom,
when and how) (Hermans et al., 2015). There is a demand for personalised learning, which is
not currently adequately supported. Approaches to effectively facilitate personalisation, for
example via the use of learning analytics, have only recently begun to emerge (Johnson et
al., 2015). There are some well-established examples within open education (e.g.,
OpenLearn) which allow students to study in their own time and at their own pace, but
generally with little or no support.
3.2.5 Increase in assessment and assessment-related activities
Assessment refers to the process of appraising knowledge, skills and/or competences against
predefined criteria, such as expectations or measurement of learning outcomes (Cedefop,
2014). Assessment-related activities and the range of tools used for assessment purposes
(e.g., plagiarism detectors and online marking) have increased. Particularly, electronic
assessment, e-assessment or ICT-based assessment, is considered a priority (Hawksey,
2015), although it is rarely clear how it should be applied (European Commission, 2012).
Reasons for the rising interest in assessment include accreditation and recognition of the
need for better evidence of student accomplishment (Kuh, Jankowski, Ikenberry, & Kinzie,
2014). Course evaluation should be rigorous, regardless of the delivery mode (Mapstone et
al., 2014). Assessment should be an adequate reflection of competence so that it provides
credible proof of the supported qualification (OECD, 2014). A greater emphasis on
assessment also facilitates portability of credentials across national borders: the High Level
Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education (2014) recommends the European
Commission and national authorities to encourage and incentivise the awarding and
recognition of credits under the ECTS for all forms of online courses.
4. Conclusions
In this paper we have outlined the key trends emerging from a number of selected articles
and reports from the recent literature which were considered relevant to the context of
UOC, an open, online university in Spain. We hope that the findings presented here will be
useful to other institutions that are reviewing or evaluating their activities in the light of
current trends in the sector. The next step for UOC in the FUTURA study will be to
215
investigate a series of cases, which were identified in relation to the particular challenges
and concerns facing online universities. Findings from this process will be disseminated
when they are available.
References
Berry, C. & Taylor, J. (2014). Internationalisation in higher education in Latin America:
policies and practice in Colombia and Mexico. Higher Education, 67(5), 585-601.
Brewer, E. & Leask, B. (2012). Internationalization of the Curriculum. In D. K. Deardorff, H. D.
Wit, J. D. Heyl, & T. Adams (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of international higher
education (pp. 245-265). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Cedefop (European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training). (2014). Terminology
of European education and training policy: a selection of 130 terms. Retrieved from
http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/4117_en.pdf
Czerniewicz, L. (2014). Global south scholars – get your content online! @Czernie Blog.
Retrieved from http://lauraczerniewicz.co.za/2014/10/global-south-scholars-contentonline/
Dahlstrom, E. & Brooks, C. D. (2014). ECAR Study of Faculty and Information Technology.
Research
report.
Louisville,
CO:
ECAR.
Retrieved
from
http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ers1407/ers1407.pdf
Dillahunt, T. R., Wang, B. Z., & Teasley, S. (2014). Democratizing higher education: Exploring
MOOC use among those who cannot afford a formal education. The International
Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5), 175–196. Retrieved from
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1841
Egron-Polak, E. & Hudson, R. (2014). IAU 4th Global Survey. Internationalization of Higher
Education: Growing expectations, fundamental values. Paris: International Association
of Universities (IAU).
European Commission. (2012). Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the
Committee of the Regions. Rethinking Education: Investing in skills for better socioeconomic outcomes. COM(2012) 669 final. Strasbourg. Retrieved from
www.cedefop.europa.eu/files/com669_en.pdf
216
European Commission. (2015). ECTS Users’ Guide 2015. Luxembourg: Publications Office of
the
European
Union.
Retrieved
from
http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/publications/2015/ects-users-guide_en.pdf
European Commission/ EACEA/ Eurydice (2015). The European Higher Education Area in
2015: Bologna Process Implementation Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the
European
Union.
Retrieved
from
http://www.ehea.info/Uploads/SubmitedFiles/5_2015/132824.pdf
Falconer, I., McGill, L., Littlejohn, A., & Boursinou, E. (2013). Overview and Analysis of
Practices with Open Educational Resources in Adult Education in Europe. Luxembourg:
Publications
Office
of
the
European
Union.
Retrieved
from
http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC85471.pdf
Guàrdia, L., Maina, M. & Sangrà, A. (2013). MOOC Design Principles. A Pedagogical Approach
from the Learner’s Perspective. eLearning Papers, 33. Retrieved from:
http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/article/MOOC-Design-Principles.-APedagogical-Approach-from-the-Learner%E2%80%99s-Perspective
Hawksey, M. (2015). Association for Learning Technology Annual Survey 2014 Data and
Report. Retrieved from http://repository.alt.ac.uk/2358/
Hermans, H., Janssen, J., Vogten, H., & Koper, R. (2015). Flexible Provisioning Adult Learners.
Journal of Universal Computer Science, 21(2), 206-222.
Herreid, C. F., & Schiller, N. A. (2013). Case studies and the flipped classroom. Journal of
College Science Teaching, 42(5), 62-66.
Higher Education Academy (HEA). (2014). Internationalising Higher Education Framework.
The
Higher
Education
Academy:
York.
Retrieved
from
https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/resources/InternationalisingHEfram
eworkFinal.pdf
High Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education. (2013). Report to the European
Commission on Improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher
education institutions. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/reports/modernisation_en.pdf
High Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education. (2014). Report to the European
Commission on New modes of learning and teaching in higher education. Luxembourg:
Publications
Office
of
the
European
Union.
Retrieved
from
http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/reports/modernisation-universities_en.pdf
217
Internationalisation of Universities Working Group. (2014). Strategy for the
Internationalisation of Spanish Universities 2015-2020. Executive Summary. Madrid:
Gobierno de España, Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. Retrieved from
http://www.mecd.gob.es/educacion-mecd/dms/mecd/educacion-mecd/areaseducacion/universidades/politica-internacional/estrategiainternacionalizacion/ResumenEjecutivo-ENFinal/ResumenEjecutivo%20ENFinal.pdf
JISC
(2014).
Developing
digital
literacies.
Retrieved
from
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/developing-digital-literacies
Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC Horizon Report: 2015
Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
Karnad, A. (2013). Student Use of Recorded Lectures: A report reviewing recent research into
the use of lecture capture technology in higher education, and its impact on teaching
methods and attendance. London: London School of Economics [E-prints archive].
Retrieved
from
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/50929/1/Karnad_Student_use_recorded_2013_author.pdf
Kopp, M., Ebner, M., & Dorfer-Novak, A. (2014). Introducing MOOCs to Austrian Universities:
Is It Worth It to Accept the Challenge? The International Journal for Innovation and
Quality
in
Learning
(INNOQUAL),
2(3),
46–52.
Retrieved
from
http://papers.efquel.org/index.php/innoqual/article/view/154/41
Kuh, G. D., Jankowski, N., Ikenberry, S. O., & Kinzie, J. (2014). Knowing What Students Know
and Can Do: The Current State of Student Learning Outcomes Assessment in U.S.
Colleges and Universities. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment
(NILOA).
Retrieved
from
http://www.learningoutcomeassessment.org/documents/2013%20Survey%20Report%
20Final.pdf
Lane, A. (2012). Widening participation in higher education through Open Educational
Resources. In A. Okada, T. Connolly & P.J. Scott (Eds.), Collaborative Learning 2.0: Open
Educational Resources (pp. 1-15). Hershey: IGI Global.
Leigh, J. (2014). "I Still Feel Isolated and Disposable": Perceptions of Professional
Development for Part-time Teachers in HE. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic
Practice, 2(2), 10-16.
Mapstone, S., Buitendijk, S., & Wiberg, E. (2014). Online learning at research-intensive
universities. League of European Research Universities (LERU). Advice Paper.
Milligan, C. & Littlejohn, A. (2014). Supporting professional learning in a massive open online
218
course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
(IRRODL),
15(5),
197-213.
Retrieved
from
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1855
Ministerio de Educación. (2011). Estrategia Universidad 2015. Contribución de las
universidades al progreso socioeconómico español. Madrid. Retrieved from
https://www.uab.cat/doc/DOC_cei_estrategia2015_edicio2011
Murphy, A. (2013). Open educational practices in higher education: institutional adoption
and challenges. Distance Education, 34(2), 201–217.
Ng’ambi, D. & Luo, A. (2013). Towards a sustainable inter-institutional collaborative
framework for Open Educational Resources (OER). In R. McGreal, W. Kinuthia, & S.
Marshall (Eds.). Open Educational Resources: Innovation, Research and Practice (pp.
223-239). Canada: Commonwealth of Learning and Athabasca University.
NVAO. (2014). MOOCs and Online HE: A Survey. The Hague: Accreditation Organisation of
the
Netherlands
and
Flanders
(NVAO).
Retrieved
from
http://www.nvao.net/page/downloads/NVAO_MOOCs_and_online_HE_A_survey_Jun
e_2014.pdf
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2013). OECD Skills
Outlook 2013: First Results from the Survey of Adult Skills. OECD Publishing. Retrieved
from http://skills.oecd.org/OECD_Skills_Outlook_2013.pdf
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2014). Skills Beyond
School: Synthesis Report. OECD Reviews of Vocational Education and Training. OECD
Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/skills-beyond-school/SkillsBeyond-School-Synthesis-Report.pdf
Ossiannilsson, E., Williams, K., Camilleri, A., & Brown, M. (2015). Quality models in online and
open education around the globe. State of the art and recommendations. Oslo:
International Council for Open and Distance Education (ICDE). Retrieved from
http://icde.org/admin/filestore/News/2015_January-June/ICDEQualitymodels.pdf
Padilla Rodriguez, B.C., Bird, T., & Conole, G. (2015). Evaluation of Massive Open Online
Courses (MOOCs): A Case Study. In Proceedings of Global Learn 2015 (pp. 527-535).
Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved from
http://www.editlib.org/p/150900/
Rosewell, J. & Jansen, D. (2014). The OpenupEd quality label: benchmarks for MOOCs.
INNOQUAL: The International Journal for Innovation and Quality in Learning, 2(3), 88100.
219
Rybak, N., Koster, M., Gilbert, E., & Flanigan, T. (2013). Building International Collaborations
from the Ground Up: Brown University Partnerships in Haiti and Ukraine. Rhode Island
Medical Journal, 96(4), 33-37.
Scanlon, E. (2013). Scholarship in the digital age: Open educational resources, publication
and public engagement. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(1), 12–23.
Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.12010/full.
Sharples, M., Adams, A., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., McAndrew, P., Rienties, B., Weller, M., &
Whitelock, D. (2014). Innovating Pedagogy 2014: Open University Innovation Report 3.
Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.
Siemens, G. (2010). About: 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and
Knowledge. Retrieved from https://tekri.athabascau.ca/analytics/
Slade, S. & Prinsloo, P. (2013). Learning Analytics: Ethical Issues and Dilemmas. American
Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510-1529.
Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation,
innovation and task orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 171-193.
Sursock, A. (2015). Trends 2015: Learning and Teaching in European Universities. Brussels:
European University Association.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2002). Forum on
the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries.
Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001285/128515e.pdf
Van Driel, J. H., Meirink, J. A., van Veen, K., & Zwart, R. C. (2012). Current trends and missing
links in studies on teacher professional development in science education: a review of
design features and quality of research. Studies in Science Education, 48(2), 129-160.
Weller, M. (2011). The Digital Scholar: How Technology Is Transforming Scholarly Practice.
London:
Bloomsbury
Academic.
Retrieved
from
https://www.bloomsburycollections.com/book/the-digital-scholar-how-technology-istransforming-scholarly-practice/
Williams, B., Pfeifer, J., & Walker, V. (2013). Lecture Capture: Student Hopes; Instructor
Fears. In H. Carter, M. Gosper, & J. Hedberg (Eds.), Electric Dreams. Proceedings ascilite
2013
Sydney
(pp.913-924).
Retrieved
from
http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/sydney13/program/papers/Williams.pdf
Witthaus, G. (2012). The OER university: from vision to reality. In A. Okada (Ed.), Open
Educational Resources and Social Networks: Co-Learning and Professional
220
Development. London: Scholio Educational Research & Publishing. Retrieved from
http://oer.kmi.open.ac.uk/?page_id=2343
Witthaus, G., Childs, M., Nkuyubwatsi, B., Conole, G., Inamorato Dos Santos, A., & Punie, Y.,
(2015). An Assessment-Recognition Matrix for Analysing Institutional Practices in the
Recognition of Open Learning. eLearning Papers, 40, 32–42. Retrieved from
http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/article/Assessment-certification-and-qualityassurance-in-open-learning_From-field_40_1?paper=164347
Wohlin, C. (2014, May). Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a
replication in software engineering. In Proceedings of the 18th International
Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (p. 38). ACM.
Retrieved from http://wohlin.eu/ease14.pdf
221
Loviscach Jörn(1), Mulligan Brian(2), Uhl Matthias(3)
Empowering lecturers: How to produce low-cost MOOCs
Affiliation:
(1)
University of Applied Sciences Bielefeld
Institute of Technology Sligo
(3)
Institute for Economic Education Oldenburg
(2)
Country:
(1)
Germany
Ireland
(3)
Germany
(2)
Email:
(1)
joern.loviscach@fh-bielefeld.de
mulligan.brian@itsligo.ie
(3)
uhl@ioeb.de
(2)
Abstract
Whereas MOOCs have been praised by many as democratization from the perspective of students,
the production of such courses can be regarded as highly elitist. The majority of such courses are
created by a tiny number of high-ranked academic institutions worldwide. The reason for this
distribution is that the making of a MOOC is a resource-intensive endeavour involving time, money,
staff, locations, technical equipment, and expertise. The Erasmus+-funded project LoCoMoTion
(Lowering the Cost of MOOC Production) aims to change this by providing concise guidelines on how
to realize such a project as economically as possible. Hence, the international project team produced
the MOOC “moocs4all”, which teaches just this. This paper introduces techniques that we
recommend, shares results from the test run of the moocs4all course that took place from June to
August 2015, present lessons learned, and outlines our plans on how to improve the course.
Keywords: MOOCs, low-cost production, video production, patterns, templates, open pedagogy,
scalability.
222
Introduction
MOOCs are expensive because of the labour and partially because of the technology involved. The
main reason behind this is the use of video as primary medium. One estimate amounts to costs of
USD 4,300 (Hansch et al., 2015) per hour playing time of high-quality educational video. Lecturers
seldom possess the didactical and technical expertise for realising such a project on their own. Thus,
producing and running a MOOC typically requires a team of specialists, which can dramatically
increase the costs, in particular if the workflow is not (yet) mature.
Due to this expensive nature, MOOCs started out as a playground for the big names in higher
education. In reverse, being able to produce a MOOC could even be seen as a sign for belonging to a
small circle of world-class institutions which can afford this (Loviscach and Uhl, 2014).
The idea that this type of courses hints at the future of learning seems weird when one considers
that digital technology generally has had a democratizing effect (think desktop publishing or music
production in the home studio). In many domains, consumers have become producers (or
“prosumers”). Nearly everyone, nearly everywhere connected to the internet can contribute. On the
side of content production, however, only a small number of educational institutions achieve
worldwide visibility. When it comes to offering courses on a global level, the playing field for
institutions and lecturers is not at all levelled. Hence, in terms of sustainability, producing MOOCs in
the style seen on platforms such as Coursera and edX does not promise to become a broad
phenomenon and practice for the future. MOOC production of this kind simply is too expensive to be
suitable for the majority of educational institutions.
Strategies for cost reduction can change this and turn massive and open online teaching into an
option that can be considered far wider. One option for a better use of time and money is to
introduce lecturers to lean ways of video production. Nobody needs a production team any more;
this requires, however, the lecturer to acquaint him- or herself with technology (which gets easier to
use day by day) and pedagogy. Another option is to introduce a lean and streamlined workflow for a
small team. In the following, we provide details on both these options.
MOOCs should not be traditional lessons on video, but constitute a novel format in its own right. This
implies specific requirements, which have to be addressed for the course to be educationally useful.
The technical part is the centrepiece for making MOOC production affordable and lowering the
entrance fee for lecturers. For an engaging learning experience, however, technology is only one of
the vital ingredients. Other vital ingredients consist in a well-adapted presentation of the content
and the use of didactics tailored to the needs and possibilities of the medium. Good online teaching
is very different to even a high-quality traditional lecture on tape. And, finally, assessment and
accreditation have to be taken care of if the MOOC is to be accepted for academic credits.
223
Publicising low-cost approaches
The LoCoMoTion project aims at providing lecturers and members of educational institutions with
knowledge on how to realize online teaching in a lean, cost-efficient way. For this reason, the project
collects and documents low-cost approaches to producing and delivering MOOCs. The LoCoMoTion
team members have been involved in online education and video production for years and share
knowledge, tips and tricks, and lessons learnt. In addition, the team conducts hands-on research, for
instance concerning the production of videos, which are a staple of this type of course. By testing
different ways to produce video, the project team tries to establish practically tested how-to
guidelines.
The central tool for spreading the knowledge about inexpensive MOOC production the team uses is
an open online course called moocs4all on the edX Edge platform. Being a European endeavour by
scientists and lecturers from five different countries (Ireland, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, and
United Kingdom), the collaboration is largely coordinated by web communication. The first (beta)
version of www.moocs4all.eu went public in June 2015, with the quizzes and the optional peer
assessment to be completed in August 2015. Being aware that production processes are constantly
evolving – as is online teaching in general –, the team is going to update the course. Feedback and
insights from the first run will be used for improving the course, that is: its content, its production
techniques, its didactics, and its institutional setting.
Low-cost Techniques
A major decision to make is which technical platform to run a MOOC on. Well-known platforms in the
cloud such as Coursera, edX, Udacity, MiríadaX, FutureLearn, and FUN may only be used by affiliated
universities (which in the case of Coursera and edX requires steep fees) to publish courses. Other
platforms in the cloud such as Udemy, Eliademy, Canvas Network, iversity, mooin, iMooX, and
mooc.house are open to many more potential producers of MOOCs, but may want to greenlight or
even inspect the course before publication.
In order to rid oneself of such interventions and in order to keep full possession and control of the
material (videos, quizzes, etc.) and the data (user tracking, comments, etc.), one can install a MOOC
platform on one’s own or rented servers or in rented webspace. There is a range of open source
software available for this, such as open edX and Google Course Builder. One may even tweak a
standard learning management system (LMS) such as Moodle into a MOOC platform, as has been
accomplished in the case of mooin. Some institutions have decided to develop their own platform,
such as openHPI. Finally, one can combine different web services for constructing an online course,
which may be the leanest approach of all. The best-known example for this is CCR08 (Connectivism
224
and Connected Knowledge 2008), which is regarded as the first connectivist MOOC. Such a mashup
of web services leads to pieces of content and discussion scattered across the Web. This complexity
of the user experience may not be adequate for all learners.
The platform is not just the place where all content is stored and can be accessed by anyone. Rather,
the platform is the central communication tool, starting with registration, which lets you build a
closed community focused on the course’s topic. The history of interactions and the results of tests
taken by every member of this community get stored for enabling an efficient handling and
evaluation of the course. This storage of data is also a prerequisite for being able to hand out
certificates.
It must not be overlooked, however, that a platform – in particular a well-established one – also is a
communication tool in another way, too: It makes a course visible and findable, it attracts learners
through advertisements such as regular mailings, and it may add to a course’s reputation and
credibility by displaying it in a list of courses from renowned institutions. For courses that are
produced in an inexpensive manner and hence probably cannot be found on such platforms, the
usual social networks such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google+ as well as blogs and mailing lists
plus search engine optimization of the course’s landing page are indispensable for (hopefully viral)
marketing.
Online courses raise the question of privacy. In traditional education, term papers and test results are
well hidden from prying eyes and cannot easily be subjected to automated data analysis. This is
drastically different from MOOCs, where each and every move of a learner can lead to a trace in the
data. Hence, a platform operated by a brick-and-mortar university may look more trustworthy in
terms of privacy that a faceless commercial platform “somewhere in the cloud”. A related aspect to
consider is which rights an author has to sign away when using a platform hosted by a third party. For
instance, it may not be possible to reuse videos of one’s own MOOC.
Deciding which platform to use (or whether to create a mashup) is only one vital decision to make.
Another decision to make that may have as many consequences is from where to source the material
of the course. The most efficient way to obtain videos, problems, etc. for use in the course may be
not to produce them but to find existing material that can be reused for free, for instance, thanks to
an appropriate version of the Creative Commons (CC) license. This idea formed the basis of many
courses run on the Peer-to-Peer University (P2PU).
In case one decides to produce one’s own videos, a complete studio staffed by several persons will
typically turn out to be too expensive. The most inexpensive approach consists in screen recordings
that only show slides or (as in Salman Khan’s videos) text and diagrams written and drawn by the
lecturer who talks at the same time, which can be heard in the audio track of the video (Noper,
225
2012). This can even be accomplished with inexpensive tablet apps such as Explain Everything. In
case the talking head of the lecturer is to be shown in the video, a web camera plus the free
PowerPoint add-on Office Mix turns out to be a straightforward solution.
On the hardware side, the most important piece of equipment is a decent microphone, as the built-in
microphones of notebook computers and tablets are abysmal. The sound must be pristine, whereas
the audience may tolerate reduced picture quality. A gadget worthwhile to build from a display or a
tablet and material from the home improvement store is a teleprompter. It enables a lecturer to read
text from a (mirrored) computer screen while looking straight into a camera.
These are four core principles we found helpful to keep video production lean:




Prepare and test. The production should be planned with notes, scripts, and/or a storyboard.
The equipment should be configured and fully tested, and the workflow of the production
should be planned and tried out as well. This includes such seemingly minor details as
defining a system of how to name files and where to place them. Templates including intro
and outro slides reduce the amount of work needed and support a consistent appearance.
Produce, don’t post-produce. Adding logos, highlighting bullet points, compositing a video
stream of a talking head with a video stream of an electronic whiteboard etc. require work in
post-production (this is, in video editing software). Many times, however, it is possible to
capture a screen recording with all such elements in place and hence save time in editing and
see the final result already during recording.
Record with editing in mind. If editing cannot be avoided, it should be made as easy as
possible. For instance, if some passage went wrong and has to be repeated, the lecturer can
ring a bell during recording to make this visible in the audio waveform shown by video
editing software. And there is another application of the audio waveform display: Pauses are
most easy to spot in the audio waveform and, consequently, are easy to edit out. Hence, it
makes sense to take some seconds to think before speaking rather than trying to be quick
and then utter nonsense. The latter is harder to remove.
Be intelligible and comprehensible. The audience has to be able to perceive the words – but
the audience also has to be able to understand the meaning. There are many guidelines on
how to write clearly; most of them also apply to speaking. Even experienced lecturers may
benefit from the “stage presence” induced through recording with an audience (possibly of
just one other person).
Finally, low-cost production also requires examination of the entire lifecycle of the courseware. With
a MOOC, one can contribute to the OER (open educational resources) movement, in particular use
appropriate CC licences that enable other producers to reuse the courseware and hence save them
cost and effort. Looking at the lifecycle is also beneficial for the original producer him- or herself and
brings up challenges like these: How to correct errors or to update the courseware, in particular for a
second run of the MOOC? How to reuse the courseware for other MOOCs or for on-campus or paid-
226
for online courses from one’s own institution? One answer to such questions may be to create videos
that are highly focussed in terms of content and are neutral in terms of visual style.
Approaches to Pedagogy
The lean production of MOOCs means using as little time, money and personal energy as possible
while still achieving a pedagogically valuable result. xMOOCs and cMOOCs constitute two broad
classes of approaches to teaching and learning. The former resembles a traditional lecture, with the
content being prepared in advance, whereas the latter can be more challenging in terms of
interaction and communication during the course, requiring significant contributions by the learners.
Hence, it can be expected (see Margaryan et al., 2015) that participants of cMOOCs are in advantage
when it comes to applying new knowledge and skills. By providing social networking tools and
encouraging their use, one may be able to achieve the same for a cMOOC.
Concerning lean production, cMOOCs benefit from the high volume of contributions typically
required from the learners. This implies that less material has to be produced upfront. A similar
reduction of costs may be possible in an xMOOC for instance by asking the participants to
demonstrate learning by creating teaching materials to be peer-reviewed by their classmates.
Typically, however, the audience of a course in a STEM field will expect and demand a substantial
amount of expository teaching being delivered to them.
In both the xMOOC and the cMOOC style of teaching, the learning path should be designed in terms
of objectives that are formulated as competencies. Again templates – in this case, patterns – are
valuable resources for the design of the learning path, see for instance the MOOC Design Pattern
Project (2015).
The lean way for organizing the steps is using word processing or spreadsheet software or, even
better, using a collaborative web-based application such as Google Docs, which facilitates updates
and online discussions. A specialized project management tool is not necessary. Define clearly what,
who, how, when and where things shall be done for using the given resources most efficiently. The
most important questions are “What?” and “Who?”. After the answers to these are fixed, the person
responsible for the respective item can look into the when, how, where and why.
The issue most discussed concerning MOOC pedagogy is the retention of participants. One may hope
to boost this by more personal (or pseudo-personal) communication. Lecturers need to be present
on the forum, which is time-consuming unless one can share this job among a group of lecturers. In
addition, lecturers can provide more seemingly personal communication such as telling stories about
the MOOC or oneself, for instance through making-of videos and filmed fireside chats. Such videos
227
may even look more authentic when recorded in an inexpensive, handmade style.
Institutional Services
A MOOC may or may not be a one-off product. A lecturer, a department or a university may want to
produce a number of such courses, for instance as part of a marketing strategy or of an outreach
project. It may even be the case that a department wishes to develop a series of MOOCs using staff
who are neither particularly skilled in IT nor interested in developing such skills. For a one-off MOOC,
the best approach may be simplification, in particular to reduce the technical and pedagogical
expertise required. If, however, several courses are produced in sequence, simplification may give
way to specialisation: Certain tasks such as video editing or the creation of quizzes occur in such
amounts that it may become efficient to assign a specialist (possibly a student assistant?) who deals
exclusively, skilfully, and efficiently with a single one of these.
Ultimately, this thinking leads to an assembly-line model: a MOOC factory as implemented by
Udacity and (under this very name) by the Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL). The
assembly-line model ensures a substantial level of quality and reduces the amount of training and
labour required from highly paid lecturers. However, it may not be appropriate for lean production.
For instance, the lecturer knows what went wrong in a video recording; the video editor, however,
has to watch the entire recording – and may still overlook mistakes concerning technical terms or
errors hidden in mathematical equations. This demonstrates a predicament: Having a team of
specialists enables everybody to do what he or she is best at: content, technology, instructional
design, or visual design. However, the larger the team, the larger the amount of communication
overhead. Once an institution decides to provide institutional services and support to MOOC
developers, costs can quickly increase, so it is important to create simple lean processes, which may
include relatively simple pedagogical models and the use of templates.
Institutional support may start with providing technology – including cameras, graphics tablets,
visualisers, and editing software – and may reach as far as keeping do-it-yourself recording booths or
even fully automated studios. These tools should come with IT support to enable lecturers to stay
focused on teaching. Depending on the volume of courses produced, the support may consist in
maintenance but may extend to personnel taking over recording and video editing.
The institutional support needs to be transparent so that lecturers know where and when to get
which kind of help. One can think about producing an FAQ (frequently asked questions) or even a
MOOC that explains the production workflow, technology, and didactics.
228
Assessment and credentialing
How can we measure what someone learned and how can a learner demonstrate the growth in skills
and knowledge? And how can this be accomplished at little cost? The massive number of participants
of a MOOC requires assessment methods that can be scaled at minimal marginal costs. Closed
questions can be graded by machine. Open response assignments can only be used with self or peer
grading, e.g., letting an essay be rated by fellow students according to a rubric provided by the
lecturer.
For awarding credible certification, ID verification used to be needed. Options are having the ID
checked through a webcam and/or to (as Coursera claims to be doing) recognize a learner’s typing
pattern. Another option possibility for reliable certificates is proctored exams taking place at
universities or in testing centres. A side effect of the verification is a high finishing rate (for instance,
50 % rather than 5 %), which may simply be due to the learners not wanting to lose their financial
investment in the testing fee. However, due to the manpower involved, standard proctored testing
involves costs which increase linearly with scale and hence require some payment by learners.
In the past years, however, new options appeared that do without the manual verification of an ID
document and hence can save costs. LinkedIn enables users to “endorse” each other concerning
specific skills. In addition, LinkedIn has teamed up with Coursera to display MOOC certificates in a
user’s profile. Internet-based badges (such as those powered by openbadges.org) can be displayed
on one’s web page, in social networks, and can be accessed through special websites. In addition,
many students and employees alike display a portfolio of past work on the net.
Given the labour that a user needs to put into creating his or her network presence over years, these
novel, entirely digital means to display one’s learning may be quite reliable, even though they are
wide open to fraud for those who do not refrain from putting in time and money for doing so. It
could be argued that many of the low-cost methods for validation of learning, being proposed or
developed, fall short of the level of reliability of proctored written examinations, but it can also be
argued that they are a significant improvement over the certificates of “attendance” or “completion”
awarded in many work-based learning courses. It is likely that in the short term such low-cost
alternatives to credentials will need to be corroborated by traditional assessment methods such as
proctored examinations or interviews, but it is reasonable to hope that techniques to reduce the cost
of assessment will emerge as demand for accreditation of independent learning increases in the
future.
229
Preparing and delivering the moocs4all beta course
An important objective of the LoCoMoTion project was to get the target audience involved in the
development as early as possible to gain feedback on the low-cost approaches being recommended
as well as the mode of delivery. This objective led to a rapidly developed “beta” MOOC consisting of
five sets of short videos and associated quizzes covering the main issues. This was hosted on the edX
Edge platform which is openly accessible but lacks a public, invitingly designed portal with course
listings; hence, the course had to be marketed through social media, mailings, conferences, and
personal contacts by the developers themselves.
Approximately 100 persons enrolled for the beta run of the course so that this pilot run of the course
should not be described as massive but simply as an Open Online Course (OOC). As is known from
most MOOCs, only a relatively small number of participants were active. The discussion forum was
relatively quiet so that the developers were able to respond to all comments themselves (which may
be counterproductive with a larger course, where you want to limit the work done by the lecturer
and rather have the learners discuss among themselves).
The drop-out curve followed the typical MOOC pattern with a low completion rate. Although
responses to the course survey were largely positive, the response rate was too low to gain
significant statistical insight into improving the course.
Conclusion and next steps
Even though the number of enrolments was modest, the general feedback was that the overall
objective – the reduction of costs in MOOC production – was worthwhile and needed to be pursued
further. Initial feedback from users and discussion among the developers indicated that the next
steps in the project should include:



The creation of detailed guides that would give practical help to MOOC developers such as:
o Detailed specifications of suitable equipment for video creation, editing, and
publishing for both individuals working alone or institutions providing services to
their faculty members.
o The creation of templates that could be used for the rapid design of courses, videos,
quizzes, assignments (including peer-assessed assignments), and even institutional
workflows.
The recruitment of a community of developers of low-cost MOOCs to test the proposed
methods and refine the techniques.
The implementation and testing of a set of institutional services to support academics in the
development of MOOCs at low cost by at least one institution.
230


The creation of a repository (including an open online course) and a community to maintain
this repository.
An increase in the level of marketing of the project to recruit a critical mass of interested
MOOC developers to sustain this initiative into the future.
This is indeed along the lines originally envisaged in the project plan. The team will proceed to carry
out the above tasks and to deliver the first version of this course as a MOOC during 2016. Details will
be published on moocs4all.eu.
References
Hansch, A., Hillers, L., McConachie, K., Newman, C., Schildhauer, T., & Schmidt, P. (2015). Video and
Online Learning: Critical Reflections and Findings from the Field. HIIG Discussion Paper Series No.
2015-02. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2577882 (last checked on 2015-0917)
Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of Massive Open Online
Courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education 80, 77–83.
MOOC Design Pattern Project (2015): Design Patterns.
www.moocdesign.cde.london.ac.uk/outputs/patterns (last checked on 2015-09-17)
Noper, M. (2012). One man, one computer, 10 million students: how Khan Academy is reinventing
education. Forbes, Dec 12, 2013. http://goo.gl/yD7zx8 (last checked on 2015-09-17)
Uhl, M., & Loviscach, J. (2014). Abstrakte Räume und unterschwellige Signale. Neue Sichten auf das
Phänomen „MOOC“. In K. Rummler (Ed.). Lernräume gestalten – Bildungskontexte vielfältig denken
(pp. 310–316). Münster, Germany: Waxmann. http://2014.gmw-online.de/310/ (last checked on
2015-09-17)
The LoCoMoTion project is funded by the Erasmus+ programme of the European Union.
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an
endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission
cannot be held responsi-ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
231
Moser Steffen, Bärtele Stefanie, Wunderlich Kathrin,
Gröger Gabriele, Slomka Frank, Schumacher Hermann
Learners' Requirements on E-Learning Platforms from a Technical Perspective
Supported by a Survey-Based Study
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Ulm University
Germany
{steffen.moser | stefanie.baertele | kathrin.wunderlich | gabriele.groeger |
frank.slomka | hermann.schumacher}@uni-ulm.de
Abstract
Blended learning with a high percentage of e-learning content has been recently gaining in
popularity for people studying academic subjects in parallel to working in part-time or even
full-time jobs. Courses with high amounts of e-learning content allow a very flexible and
individual structuring of the learner's time schedule, which is mandatory for students with
a full-time job in parallel. But this group of students typically has further strong demands
on higher education institutions: Large parts of the campus life have to be mapped to
electronic solutions to satisfy their needs.
In a previous publication (Moser et al., 2014) we have shown that the typically used webbased e-learning tools are not powerful enough to offer all of these services. For this
reason, we developed a so-called Virtual Desktop solution, which offers cloud-based selforganization of students and supports them with e-learning content. The virtual desktop
has been further extended to allow an integration of tool-based e-learning and virtual labs
which both are very important, when it comes to advanced master's courses in engineering
and computer sciences.
In this paper, we are going to present further technical advances of our e-learning platform
with an in-depth focus on the technical realization under efficiency aspects. We also
present a survey-based study, which is used to find out how and where our students learn
and in which way they might benefit from our technical solutions. This is necessary to
examine the amount of effort that should be spent for the different requirements.
This work is part of the project Mod:Master II (FKZ: 16OH12005) which has been funded by BMBF (German Federal Ministry of Education
and Research) since 2015 within the program Aufstieg durch Bildung: Offene Hochschulen.
232
Keywords: blended learning; e-learning platform; learning environment; cloud-based elearning; virtual desktop; virtual lab; master's courses; engineering courses.
I. Introduction
E-Learning in higher education has been gaining in importance during the last decade,
which is due to several reasons: On the one hand, modern technology offers new studying
techniques which can be seen as a complement to traditional lectures, seminars and
exercises. For example, multi-media content can be used to illustrate complex matters,
training on demand offers an individual and learner-oriented way to acquire in-depth
knowledge and today’s learning management systems allow an individual registration and
automatic analysis of a learner’s progress. In the last years, electronic devices, which can be
used for mobile learning, became quite ubiquitous, which makes e-learning more and more
attractive. On the other hand, modern technology and a high rate of innovations lead to a
fast-changing world, which can be observed very well at the people’s workplaces.
Continuously changing technology results in a strong demand for life-long learning in our
society, which leads to the fact that an increasing number of people have the necessity to
explore academics in non-typical forms, for example by pursuing a college or university
degree extra-occupationally. Therefore, universities and other institutions of higher
education are required to offer specialized courses, which can be studied completely or
almost completely by distance learning. E-Learning is one of the main enablers for a good
distance learning experience. In this paper, we focus on using e-learning as an instrument
for extra-occupational distant students.
Traditional learning in higher education is typically strongly linked to the students’ physical
presence at the university campus. Students attend courses like lectures, seminars,
laboratories or exercises. Besides the transfer of knowledge, a university campus has some
additional functions: It gives students the ability for social interaction between each other
and with the lecturers. Students form learning groups and they learn to solve difficult
problems in teams, as well as to organize their schedules and exams. They also have access
to computer labs or, depending on the subject, to specialized laboratory rooms. Lecturers
get feedback by direct talks. When e-learning techniques are used to set up courses for
distant learners, there is a major challenge to map all of the typical campus functions to the
e-learning platform. Common learning management systems (LMS) focus too narrowly on
the transfer of knowledge from teacher to the student, while the other mentioned
233
functions of a university campus are not available. The limits of today’s common LMS are
reached quite quickly as soon as it comes to engineering courses. Engineering courses
commonly do not only contain a lot of mathematics, but also lab courses. Very often, there
are practical exercises where students have to work with specialized software tools (e.g.
simulations) or even with specialized hardware or do experiments.
In this paper we are going to present an extension of an LMS by a set of tools to satisfy a
distance learner’s needs better than an out of the box installation of an LMS. At the same
time it is necessary to find out how well the tools address distance learners’ requirements
in their everyday lives, as setting up and maintaining additional tools can be expensive.
Therefore it is required to do early measurements of the benefit the students actually have
from offering additional tools. For this reason, we conducted a survey among our distance
learners to find out what they really need, what they use and what their technical
equipment is.
Our organization, the School of Advanced Professional Studies, is a central institution of
Ulm University in southern Germany. We offer master’s programs for extra-occupational
distant learners, i.e. they typically work in part-time or full-time jobs in parallel to their
studies. Our study programs are based on the concept of blended learning with a high
percentage of online learning (at least about 80 %). We currently offer courses in
engineering (Sensor Systems Technology) and in economics (Innovation Management and
Higher Education/Science Management). Courses in computer science (Business Analytics)
and financial mathematics (Actuarial Science) are currently produced and will start in the
next months. All programs lead to a Master of Science degree. At the time, this paper was
written, only Sensor Systems Technology and Innovation Management and Science
Management were offered. For this reason, our survey is related to students of these
subjects.
The paper is structured as follows: In the second section, we discuss the functions of a
traditional university campus and we define which functions have to be recreated in an
extension of an LMS. In the third section, we introduce the state-of-the-art in today’s LMS
and show, which functions are missing. The fourth section is used to present our approach.
In the fifth section, our survey and its results are described. The sixth section is used for
summarizing and giving an outlook to further development.
234
II. University Campus and the Requirements on E-Learning Solutions
Learning in higher education takes place at a university campus, which intrinsically fulfills
many tasks, among them:
 Teaching and learning
 Social interaction between
students
 Feedback from students to
teachers
 Team Building and formation
of learning groups
 Laboratory exercises
 Workflow of semester
 Organization and planning of
exercises, exams, laboratories,
…
 Access to computer labs,
library and further specialized
equipment or rooms
 Learning spots
 …
In study programs for distant learners, the university campus as a central institution with its
above-mentioned features is typically not available. For this reason, it is required and
logical to provide these features to distant learners via web-based platforms. According to
(Romiszowski et al., 2004), (Johnson and Johnson, 1989) and (Johnson and Johnson, 1990)
this is necessary to prevent e-learning concepts from failing. The features and possibilities
to reproduce them for distant learners can be categorized:
a) Accessibility of teaching contents.
In its simplest form, this means offering lecture
presentations, lecture notes, exercises, references to advanced literature and so on
using web technology. This is quite obvious, and it can be easily accomplished by using
the features that are provided by a typical LMS for most of the course subjects.
Nevertheless, it can become a special challenge with non-existing standard solutions
when it comes to courses in engineering or natural sciences. In these subjects, working
in laboratories, working with physical systems, like specialized hardware or working
with specialized software or tools in computer labs is quite common. Providing at least
an approximation for the services, which are typically present in on-campus programs,
is necessary.
b) Interaction between students and lecturers or tutors. All forms of feedback from the
students like contacting the lecturer or tutor in case of questions, submitting exercises
for corrections or grading, giving presentations or discussing a seminar topic must be
235
handled via a web platform. This is possible with the standard features offered by a
modern LMS. When it comes to courses where a specialized training is needed (e.g.
courses with a lot of mathematical content), additional web-based seminars (webinars)
are necessary to demonstrate and discuss correct solutions or solving strategies.
c)
Student’s presence on a university campus. On-campus students interact socially with
each other, which has many positive aspects: Besides having common activities in
private life, they meet to discuss study-related topics. They usually form study groups
voluntarily to solve more difficult exercises together, which trains the ability to work in
teams. This is an aspect gaining more and more importance to prepare students for
work-life. To learn together, on-campus students typically meet at specially prepared
learning areas, which are, for example, available in campus libraries. The usage of
social media is quite common on today’s campuses. While at first glance social media
platforms might offer an ideal platform to make the above-mentioned campus
features accessible for distant learners, they don’t provide a direct solution for all of
the learners’ requirements. To organize private activities between students, social
media work quite well, but they generally miss a direct integration into the LMS. For
example, the power of social media is below today’s technical potential when it comes
to working, especially to referencing, discussing or highlighting course materials or to
typesetting mathematical formulas. For distant learners the following conclusions can
be drawn:
a. The social interaction between distant learners has to be stimulated actively.
Therefore, we need both: Technology and teaching concepts to foster an exchange
and the formation of learning groups. This means on the one hand, we have to
develop and to provide course materials, which can be studied or have to be
studied in teams. For example, the results of a study work could be delivered as a
team presentation instead of paper work done by each student separately. On the
other hand, we have to offer software tools to allow web-based video meetings of
study teams and an easy exchange and cooperative compilation of documents. A
shared workspace for collaborative work is a base requirement for mapping the
function of team learning to web platforms.
b. The prevlance of social media must be used to enable an easy access to learning
236
materials and study teams. This means that a direct link could be established
between the functions of social media and the functions of a modern LMS. At the
same time, protection of data privacy has to be guaranteed according data privacy
acts. Students who pay a study fee usually demand that their data do not leave the
institution. At least we cannot require them to use existing social media.
Nevertheless, we can learn from social media that the ease of use and the ubiquity
are important factors for acceptance.
c. On-campus students traditionally have physical places where they work for their
studies. Such places usually are learning areas on the campus (e.g. at the campus
library) or at a personal work desk at home. As mentioned above, our programs for
distant learners typically address people who have a part-time or full-time job in
parallel to their studies. For this group we can observe differences regarding the
form of their physical work places. They typically learn at varying places, for
example: In free time slots at work, perhaps also together with colleagues, in trains
or busses while commuting between home and work place or at home at the
evening hours. Different work places lead to the necessity to have access to all
study-related materials online, whenever and wherever one has the possibility to
start learning. All contents must be accessible on demand and completely
independent of the devices (smart phones, tablets, netbooks, notebooks or desktop
computers) used for access.
This is not only related to the official course materials provided by the LMS, but also
to the materials, annotations and notes the students develop or add. To satisfy
these requirements, we propose that all materials, including the ones produced by
learners in phases of self-studying or in team learning sessions, should be stored
centrally at the institution and made easily accessible for all kinds of devices. The
approach of cloud computing allows cloud storage services to be integrated into an
LMS. At the same time, one has to consider aspects of data protection and data
privacy. To bring the concept of cloud computing in line with data privacy, we
suggest operating the cloud service by the university itself.
d) Organizational affairs. Besides the above-mentioned aspects of a university campus’
features, there are organizational affairs, which must not be neglected. For
example, in on-campus programs, the point in time of an exam is often coordinated
237
jointly between lecturers and students to avoid conflicts with other courses. Groups
for team learning form themselves in a face-to-face mode. For distant learners,
organizational processes, which often run intrinsically and silently in on-campus
study programs, have to be explicitly analyzed. When necessary, they have to be
made available for distant learners using web technologies. For example, extraoccupational students require that information about dates of exams can be
integrated into their daily used calendar application.
We can summarize that a typical university campus comes with an extensive amount of
functions of completely different manners. Based on our experience with extraoccupational learners, we conclude that a modern learning environment is web-based and
tries to clone all of the campus’ functions as well as possible. In concrete, we require a
highly flexible cloud-based solution, which stores all types of contents and allows an easy
content management while respecting data privacy. The LMS has to be part of the cloud
solution. We also demand that especially roaming learners with a variety of electronic
devices can access all types of content everywhere.
In this section, we defined the demands that we make on a modern learning environment
for distant learners. In the next section, we present the state of the art in e-learning and
especially the capabilities of today’s LMS.
III. State of the Art in E-Learning
The market for e-learning tools has been growing massively in the last decade. The most
popular 100 tools used for e-learning purpose are maintained in a freely available list by
(Hart, 2015). The tools can be divided into various categories. For instance, there are
authoring tools, which are used in the workflow of media production. When analyzing the
state of art in e-learning software, we focus on web-based tools used for interacting with
the learner: the learning management system (LMS), sometimes also named virtual
learning environment (VLE). An LMS is typically a web-based tool used for management
and delivery of teaching and learning content, for supporting the learner in self-training
sessions, for checking and tracking a learner’s progress by using quizzes and so on.
Typically, they are technically based on Web 2.0 technologies such as presented by
(Downes, 2005) and (Downes, 2007). These applications address a subset of the above238
mentioned requirements described in Section II, but by far not all. Especially cooperative
learning as described in (Liesebach et al., 2001), the usage of specialized tools and the
concept of a virtual desktop are not present.
The idea of cloud-based e-learning per se is not new. In the last few years, other research
groups started using the concept of cloud computing for e-learning: (Selviandro and
Hasibuan, 2013) show how commercially available cloud-services can be used to provide elearning services. This could be interesting for institutions of higher education who cannot
afford to operate server infrastructure. (Oludipe et al., 2014) propose a selfimplementation that offers cloud services to their own students. This paper is quite
interesting because the authors provide courses for natural sciences, which are quite
similar to engineering courses with respect to their requirements.
IV. Cloud-Based Virtual Desktop
Our cloud-based setup has been elaborately presented in (Moser et al, 2014). For this
reason, rather a short summary of the components and their interaction is given in this
section. The e-learning platform we developed is an integration of the following opensource tools:

1
OwnCloud1 is the central application where our students log in to. OwnCloud is an
open-source tool that offers cloud storage services. This means that all learners and all
teachers have an amount of data storage space, they can share documents with each
other based on course-related or module-related pre-defined groups or completely
individually. OwnCloud can be extended by plugins: For example, we use OwnCloud
Documents for a cooperative editing of documents or OwnCloud Calendar to provide a
feature-rich calendar solution to our students and teachers. Pre-defined calendars are
offered for our courses and modules and can be subscribed by the students and
teachers. Subscribing to calendars on typical calendar apps is supported. This allows us
to map large parts of our organizational campus aspects to the electronic platform.
There are specialized synchronization apps for iOS, Android and desktop
synchronization clients for Windows, OS X and Linux. The OwnCloud instance we
http://owncloud.org
239
operate is hosted locally at Ulm University. This is an important advantage regarding
data protection and privacy. We do not rely on any external cloud service and
therefore we do not give our students the necessity to create an account at an
external service.

The popular LMS Moodle2 is used for the traditional distribution of e-learning content,
e.g. lecture notes, teaching videos, for doing quizzes and for submitting written
exercises to the tutor. The students can self-control their progresses in Moodle. We
integrated MathJax3 into Moodle to allow the usage of LaTeX and MathML code in
Moodle text. This is crucial for engineering-related courses. We developed a fullyresponsive theme for Moodle based on Bootstrap. This enables an easy to use lookand-feel on all kinds of devices and screen resolutions. We point out that all of our
modifications do not touch Moodle’s core, but are implemented as themes or plugins.
This is an important measure for reducing the maintenance work (e.g. when upgrades
are necessary).

The popular forums software phpBB4 is used to provide a discussion board for each
module and also generic boards for common topics. Also the forums software supports
LaTeX and MathML code in forum posts.

Online courses with challenging mathematics and engineering contents, require that
individual tutorials take place from time time. These tutorials are typically done using
web conferencing technology. In this case, we decided for using the open-source
software BigBlueButton5. It allows recorded and unrecorded sessions and can be
directly integrated into Moodle as an activity. It can be easily linked to our central user
database. On a mid-ranged server, BigBlueButton can easily handle web conferences
with up to 80 participants. The screen sharing functionality, which is part of
2
http://moodle.org
3
http://mathjax.org
4
http://phpbb.com
5
http://bigbluebutton.org
240
BigBlueButton, allows our tutors to do their online courses for example in a room
which is equipped with an electronic whiteboard. So even mixed courses are possible:
Students who come from the Ulm area can attend the tutorials in an attendance form
and other students can follow the same content at their computers. BigBlueButton has
also been successfully used for communication between students during group work
or in exam preparation sessions.

The Remote Tool Service is a tool which enables our students to connect to a virtual
computer by using their browsers only. Technically it is implemented by using the
open-source software Guacamole6 in combination with a Linux-based and a Windowsbased terminal server. Guacamole maps the procedure of accessing the terminal
server to JavaScript/HTML5. This means that students or teachers using a modern web
browser (Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, Microsoft Edge) are able to
access their virtual Linux or Windows desktops directly in a browser window. Plugins
(Flash, Java) are not required. This very interesting feature allows the access of
specialized tools as they are often used in exercises or labs of engineering courses. For
this reason, in our course program Sensor Systems Technology, we could successfully
boost the students’ activity in tool-related exercises by offering the remote tool
service. The effort of installing and maintaining these tools on the learners’ computers
locally was considered too high for a lot of learners.
The interesting aspect of our platform lays in the combination of the above mentioned
tools: A common place for data storage, the ability to do cooperative writing or editing, the
ability to start web conferences at any time and a centralized execution of specialized tools
combined with an access via browser satisfy the needs of highly flexible students. The
concept is to offer all services including the learner’s individual progress regarding all types
of documents and exercises independently from the place where a learner is currently
staying and independently from the device she or he is currently using. For this reason, we
call our solution Cloud-Based Virtual Desktop.
We have, of course, a common user database in the background. Remote Tool Service and
OwnCloud can share common user home directories, for Moodle this is still an open
6
http://guac-dev.org
241
problem. Our whole platform is based on fully responsive themes. This allows a
comfortable usage on all kinds of devices and screen resolutions. A more in-depth technical
description of our solution has been published in (Moser et al, 2014).
V. Survey
Setting up and maintaining web-based platforms containing novel technology typically
causes a high effort: In the set-up phase of a new service a lot of development,
programming and integration work must be performed. Additionally, a lot of testing is
necessary. After that, additional work is caused by implementing a maintenance concept
for the service. Once this maintenance concept is established, the required staff
appropriations for a specific service will decrease. An institution’s budget for staff and for
material expenses is usually the bottleneck. For managing the available resources, it is
necessary to find out how much the learners benefit from the offered services. For the
aforementioned reason it makes sense to check in the early phases of implementation
whether the learners accept the implemented service and how much they benefit from it.
For this reason, between December 2014 and January 2015 a survey-based study was
undertaken among 64 students of the extra-occupational Mod:Master study program at
the School of Advanced Professional Studies at Ulm University. Mod:Master is the title of
the government-funded project under which the study programs Sensor Systems
Technology and Innovation Management and Higher Education/Science Management have
been established at the School of Advanced Professional Studies.
V.I. Basic data
Beside demographic data collection, the main focus of this survey was to collect
statements concerning the technical equipment of the students in the Mod:Master study
program and the use of the virtual desktop learning environment. Concerning the previous
topics, 58 extra-occupational students within the Mod:Master courses accessed the
associated online-questionnaire. 4 students didn’t partake in the survey and 9
questionnaires were only partly filled. The response rate of fully completed questionnaires
is 45 or 77.6 %, respectively.
40 participating students (out of a total of 49 participants) reported, that they took part in
the course program Innovation Management and Higher Education/Science Management
and 14 (out of a total of 15 participants) belonged to the course program Sensor Systems
242
Technology which is a total of 54 Mod:Master participants (93.1 %) in the online survey.
The following non-mandatory details concerning their demographic data were provided by
the students: 13 female and 29 male participants took part in the survey. 12 participants
didn’t refer to gender data. 12 of the students were between 26 and 30 years old. 11
students belonged to the group of 31-35 years-old and respectively to the group of 36-40
years-old participants. The age groups 41-45 years, 46-50 years and age over 50 years were
selected by 3 students in each variety.
Asked for their current professional status, their weekly working hours and the support of
their employers the students provided the following data: 46 out of 54 students were
employees, 6 were self-employed and 2 were job seekers. 24 of these students did work
over 50 hours a week. 19 students had weekly working hours between 40 and 50 hours, 30
to 40 hours (3) and two of the students worked between 20 to 30 hours for their job. 22
out of 37 employed students got no support at all from their employer for their studies. 3
students were allowed to use working hours for their studies. Furthermore, students got
financial support (3), support for learning materials or other support (sabbatical, days off,
job guarantee, no problems to get a day off for study purposes (e.g. exams, attendance
seminars) by their employer.
V.II. Places used for Learning
Asked which places they use for learning (multiple responses were allowed): 44 (out of 45)
students specified their home as their setting for learning. 27 participants have a separate
room or office, which they use for learning. 12 students answered with other rooms of their
homes. Only 7 students did learn at their working place (2 out of them only during break)
and 9 students did learn at a place outside their home or job: at the library (5), at university
(2), at a fellow student’s home (1) or in different places (1). 15 students used mobile
learning on business or private trips or on their way to work. Some participants provided
answers that are more detailed: They learnt while being on the train (11), as passengers on
a plane (3), in a car (2) and one student memorized learning content during sports activity
(1). 30 students did not use mobile learning at all.
Asked for their favorite location for learning (multiple responses were allowed), 39 students
voted with “yes” (6 voted with “no”) for places at their home. They preferred learning in a
separate room or office (22), at a separate desk (4), their bed (2) and their bedroom (2) the
kitchen/dining room (3), the living room (3), their bed (2) and their bedroom (2) and in the
basement (1). One student provided the answer that her favorite learning place depended
243
on her learning phase. Only one student preferred learning at her office at work. 3 students
named their favorite spots for learning outside their home or work (library (1), university (1)
and changing places (1)). Seven students preferred mobile learning on their way to work or
during business traveling (6) one student found most favor in learning outside. 44 students
agreed with the statement that they could learn at their preferred learning places without
disturbance. Four students did not agree with that statement because of disturbance by
family members (small kids) (2) or a too small housing (1). One student did not give any
reason for the disturbance.
V.III. Technical Equipment Available for Learning
V.III.I. Available Devices
We asked the students for the technical devices that have been available at their learning
locations (multiple answers were allowed). The results are depicted in Figure 1 and Figure 2.
The students also answered the following details: Other technical equipment students used
at their homes: e-book reader (1), ear protectors (-37 dB) (1), headphones (1), printer (2),
fax machine (1) paper and pencil (1). One student specified other equipment with
“confidential”.
Figure 1: Technical Equipment Available at
Students' Homes (n = 44)
Figure 2: Technical Equipment Available at
Students' Work Places (n = 44)
One student used his ear protectors at work. At learning locations outside their home or
work, students used desktop computers (4), laptop/notebook (6), tablet computers (2) and
244
smartphones (5) for learning.
As the spread of mobile devices has risen
during the last years, we especially asked
for the technical equipment, which is
available for mobile learning. The results
are depicted in Figure. When asked
about special or additional devices, two
students provided the answer that
they used their lecture notes. Asked for
technical equipment used in other
learning spots, one student who used
sporting activity to memorize
Figure 3: Technical Equipment Available for
learning content provided the answer
Mobile Learning (n = 43)
that he used a smartphone and a tablet computer during that
learning activity.
Neither the students using a desktop computer nor the ones who used a tablet computer or
a smartphone provided an answer which operating system they did use.
V.III.II. Internet Access
Besides the devices used for learning, it is also important to gather information about the
students’ internet connectivity. Especially in a cloud-based approach, the connectivity can
be crucial. We asked the students for information about the data throughput of their
predominantly used internet connection when working in a wired or WLAN-based
environment (e.g. at home or at the work place). The results are depicted in Fout!
Verwijzingsbron niet gevonden.. In the case of a required internet connection in a mobile
learning session, one has typically to come back to cellular networks. To estimate the
available data rates, we asked the students about their predominantly used connection type
in mobile learning sessions. The results are shown in Figure 5.
We also asked how satisfied the students in general have been with the learning
environment. 37 out of 45 students were fully satisfied with the communication tools
provided in the learning environment.
245
Figure 4: Predominantly used Connection Type via
Landline/WLAN (n = 45)
Figure 5: Predominantly used Connection Type for
Mobile Learning (n = 45)
V.III.III. Overall Communication
Eight students (7 students within the Innovation and Scientific Management course and 1
student out of the Sensor Systems course) suggested further improvements of the learning
environment. The following aspects have been criticized:








Missing tool for cooperative work compared to the whiteboard of the tutor (1),
lack of individualized communication tools (e.g. for group work) (1),
missing a single sign-on solution (1),
missing consistent presentation of learning content in each module (1),
missing an opportunity for a live chat (1),
lack of a better possibility to assign communication to a specific module which was
declared to be difficult via Moodle (1),
usage of learning environment was too complicated because of problems with
switching between different services provided within the environment (2),
too less attendance meetings in order to build networks (1).
246
V.III.IV. Usage of Additional Tools or Web Resources
31 students did not use further communication tools besides the provided learning
environment. 13 students out of the innovation and scientific management courses did use
the following additional tools: mailing lists (2), e-mail (7), WhatsApp (4), Skype for screen
sharing and group conferences (2), text messages via smartphone (1), telephone (1),
Dropbox (1). One student participating within the sensor systems courses provided the
following answer that he also uses Microsoft OneDrive for document management,
WhatsApp to message other learners and Facebook to organize meetings.
V.IV. Usage Frequency of our Learning Environment’s Components
Table 1 shows the usage frequency of the components our learning environment has been
offered.
How often did you use the following tools provided
on the learning environment
Tool
Answers provided by students (n=45)
often
Download of learning material
Watching video tutorials
Answering multiple choice quizzes
Communication via Big Blue Button with fellow
students
Communication via Big Blue Button with the tutor
Communication via Big Blue Button with the lecturer
Etherpad
Forum (communication with fellow students)
Forum (communication with the tutor)
Forum (communication with the lecturer
Cloud-based up-/download of documents
Calendar
Technical discussion board
Organizational discussion board
Board for announcements
Remote Desktop
Remote Desktop (Matlab)
seldom
never
36
29
13
2
from
time to
time
8
14
13
4
0
1
10
6
0
0
1
29
1
1
8
4
10
7
1
4
5
5
7
7
6
6
12
2
2
4
4
3
12
12
9
9
6
8
13
17
7
7
2
3
2
15
14
14
7
9
14
13
9
4
4
26
27
35
14
14
17
22
23
17
13
7
13
13
3
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
19
Table 1: Usage Frequency of Components
247
not available
in my course
VI. Conclusion and Outlook
The presented survey shows us two important aspects: On the one hand, the majority of
students is content with the offered services. This is also supported by the fact that the
number of additionally used external web services like Dropbox is quite low. On the other
hand, there is always room for further improvements and enhancements: For example, a
better instruction of our learners about our platform’s features might allow an even more
frequent usage of tools, e.g. Big Blue Button as a communication tool with fellow students
is definitely available in all courses, which is a contradiction to the user feedback which is
shown in Table 1. We still lack the integration of a social media-like communication tool an
we are also working on web-based simulations helping to make specific aspects in
engineering courses better understandable. While the Remote Tool Server offers a very
powerful platform to execute arbitrary programs, for some teaching aspects it can be more
feasible to have additionally small web-based simulations which can give direct feedback to
the LMS to enable individual learn paths.
Both, the technical equipment and the internet connectivity our students have access to
are quite good. Nevertheless, offline usage of e-learning content and an app-based
synchronization could be an interesting aspect for mobile learners.
References
S. Moser, F. Krapp, S. Bärtele, K. Wunderlich, G. Gröger, F. Slomka and H. Schumacher:
Cloud-based Virtual Desktop Environment for Advanced Online Master's Courses. In:
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web and Open Access to Learning
(ICWOAL), pp. 25-27, Dubai, UAE, Nov. 2014.
A. J. Romiszowski: How’s the E-learning, Baby? Factors Leading to Success of Failure of
an Educational Technology Innovation. Educational Technology, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 5–27,
2004
D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson: Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research, 1989.
D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson: Cooperative Learning and Research, Cooperative learning
theory and research, pp. 23–37, 1990.
J. Hart: Top 100 Tools for Learning. Last accessed: 2015-10-01 [Online]. Available:
248
http://c4lpt.co.uk/top100tools/
S. Downes: E-learning 2.0. Vol. 2005, No. 10. New York, NY, USA, 2005. Last accessed: 201510-01 [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1104966.1104968
S. Downes: Learning networks in practice. D. Ley, Ed., Vol. 2., p. 19–27, London, 2007.
K. Liesebach, E. Franz, A.-K. Stange, A. Juschka, K. Borcea-Pfitzmann, A. Böttcher and H.
Wahrig: Collaborative E-Learning. In Digital Privacy, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, J.
Camenisch, R. Leenes, and D. Sommer, Eds. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, Vol. 6545, pp.
657–677.
N. Selviandro and Z. Hasibuan: Cloud-Based E-Learning: A Proposed Model and Benefits by
Using E-Learning Based on Cloud Computing for Educational Institution. In: Information and
Communication Technology, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, K. Mustofa, E. Neuhold, A.
Tjoa, E. Weippl, and I. You, Eds., Vol. 7804, pp. 192–201., Springer, Heidelberg, Germany,
2013.
O. Oludipe, O. K. Fatoki, N. A. Yekini, and E. E. Aigbokhan: Cloud-based E-Learning Platform:
From the Perspective of ”Structure” and ”Interaction”. International Journal of Innovation
and Research in Educational Sciences, Vol. 1, 2014.
249
Müller Adrian, Karapanos Marios
A Simple Method for Gathering and Analyzing Customized Individual Data
Beyond the Borders of Learning Management Systems
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Hochschule Kaiserslautern
Germany
adrian.mueller@hs-kl.de
Abstract
Although Learning Management Systems (LMS) commonly log students’ behavior, and they
do provide visual clues and means for statistical analysis of their own data, there is only
limited work to provide an open, adaptive and theory-free approach to identify unknown
patterns in the students log data and relate these patterns to other sources of knowledge
like examination marks or questionnaire data. This stems from the typical nowadays system
design goals.
“Predicting student performance” and “analysis and visualization of data” are the most
prominent goals in educational data mining (EDM) research (Razgan et. al., 2013). The large
amount of data, generated day by day, makes a manual inspection difficult. Data mining
techniques – like decision trees and association rule mining – are under development to
overcome this problem. Facing the need to generate understandable rules, which often are
related to some internal student model, many integrated systems rely on rich set of
attributes and explicit student models, maintained within the LMS. Altogether, these
properties tend to heavyweight system, and complex study designs.
This paper proposes a simple method for logging, aggregating and analyzing individual data
within online courses that are based on a conventional LMS. The proposed method considers
the limited degree of freedom within such systems in terms of programming and offers the
ability to combine the resulting data sets with data from the offline world like
questionnaires. An intermediate explorative statistical analysis will test the measured
student survey data for correlations with the behavioral data from the student log data.
Subsequently the paper evaluates the usefulness of applying best data mining practices to
interpret these combined data by means of an off-the-shelf interactive, exploratory mining
toolkit (KNIME). Our mining model is focused on assisting a student during her studying time
250
in terms of performance prediction and personalized reading recommendation. We will
show how we compare students learning style and effectiveness directly from the raw data,
with minimal attribute sets and not requiring additional assumptions or questionnaire data
in the trained model. Finally, we will compare the outcome of the statistical analysis with the
predictive power of the trained mining model.
Keywords: Log File Analysis, Learning Analytics, Educational Data Mining, KNIME
Introduction
In contrast to conventional offline learning, where educators can obtain direct feedback
from their students and evaluate their teaching, web mediated learning offers no such
informal monitoring (Sheard et.al, 2003). The rise of the learning focused perspective from
2003 onwards lead to the field of learning analytics (Fergusson, 2012): the challenge is to
understand and identify new opportunities for online learning.
Hence from a practitioner’s perspective, the idea of having detailed knowledge of learners’
interaction in web-assisted learning scenarios is promising. Minor attention has been paid to
the question, how individual data could be recorded in a flexible manner within a LMS.
Having access to relevant data is the key requirement for every data analyzing process. In
educational data mining the existence of user data is often taken for granted. The basic
assumption is that server logs provide all the data that are needed to study users’ behavior
and that these logs are accessible (e.g. Romero & Ventura, 2007). But for most practitioners
this is rarely the case. When working with LMS like Moodle or OpenOLAT data access is very
limited. Although these systems offer basic functions to log users’ activities within online
courses and provide logs to the course authors. Due to privacy issues the offered data about
user interactions is almost always either anonymized or already aggregated. That makes it
impossible to bring these data in relation to data of study success (e.g. test results or
examination marks) or questionnaire data for subsequent processing. On the one hand these
data transformation happens for good reason to protect students’ privacy. On the other
hand it prevents every attempt of deeper research on and evaluation of students’
interaction with digital learning materials. Even if students agree to have their activities
logged for scientific purposes there is no way of combining it with real world data. But also
the offered anonymized data is limited. By logging just a standardized set of users’ activities
there is no possibility to adjust these logs and add customized actions, e.g. “user
played/paused a video” or “user opened outgoing link to…” to enable more insights on the
users learning behavior in further analysis.
251
Therefore, we will map the student activities to a general purpose, visual mining workbench
KNIME1 and provide an easy mapping from the log file data to KNIMEs reader node for
relational data. The course content will be taken as is, i.e., a set of loosely coupled web
pages. KNIME will not see any background information about the course, module structure,
student panels or other team ware.
Baker and Yacef (2009) identified the following categories on educational data mining:
prediction, clustering relationship mining, distillation of data for human judgement and
discovery with models. We will focus on the development of a predictive model for the
expected student performance (measured in terms of quiz and exam ranks). Therefore
training data – previous quiz scores – needs to be provided as additional input to KNIME.
Luna, Romera and others evaluated the e-learning mining techniques and concluded that
“most approaches and tools are based on models that mine frequent pattern” (Luna et.al.
2014). Whereas Luna decided to develop an evolutionary algorithm for the discovery of
patterns in rare data, we will try to experiment with an established mining algorithm, the
Apriori algorithm, developed by A. Agrawal in 1993, and to describe best-practices to
configure mining models that are suitable for large and small data sets within one algorithm.
Much work is spent into analyzing and bridging the students learning behavior to predefined
categories, learning models, and tutoring approaches. Köck and Paramythis (2011) observe a
trend during the past years to combine data mining and machine learning techniques for the
analysis of activity data. Later on, they describe their own complex approach in this
direction, using multi-target clustering and Hidden-Markov-Model to parse and structure the
student’s sequence of activities. Summing up, they conclude that “especially when exploring
novel domains of online learning activity, dimensions and related patterns may be difficult to
recognize for the human observer” is a limitation of their architecture. Aligning this
experience with our overall objective of observing a lightweight approach, we will focus on
native mining techniques for the inspection of the structure and quality of the results, as
they are provided in typical mining workbenches (e.g. multi-channel line plots and ROC views
on parameter optimization loops).
1
You can download KNIME for free at http://www.knime.org. The platform is open source and available under
GPL license.
252
Development of a simple tracking tool
Based on these issues a simple JavaScript tracking tool is developed at University of Applied
Sciences Kaiserslautern that can be integrated in HTML pages within (and outside of)
learning management systems. Development goals are: (1) ease of integration and use, (2)
adaptability, (3) lightweight code and (4) to only use existing tools published under an open
license2. The tracking tool is loosely coupled with the monitored LMS: first time a user opens
an HTML page within a course he is asked to enter a personal code. The code is stored in
cookie which makes it possible to recognize users in later sessions. If the cookie gets deleted
or the user uses a different device, the personal code will have to be entered again. As an
alternative, in case the LMS username is displayed somewhere in the frontend, the tool can
extract the username and utilize it for user recognition. To use this option the position of the
username within the DOM tree has to be specified in the configuration file. The question
may arise, why no standardized application programming interface (API) is used for user
recognition. Although modern LMS support interfaces like LTI3 (learning tools
interoperability), however using these types of interfaces would make usage a lot more
complex and offers from our point of view almost no advantages at all.
After being implemented and set up, the tracking tool converts user actions into a defined
data pattern and sends them asynchronously to a PHP script that writes the log entries to a
MySQL database (see fig. 1). This implies that authors, who wish to use the tool, need to
have access to a web server with PHP and MySQL up and running. By only using JavaScript
on client side the tracking tool is independent from operating system and works fine with a
wide variety of modern web browsers and devices.
In standard mode the tracking tool generates database entries of the following form:
 entry id
 user id
 webpage id
 user action (like the above mentioned “play video”, “outgoing link”, “ask for
explanation” etc.)
 custom field
 timestamp (time, date)
2
In its present form the tracking tool utilizes two java script libraries, jQuery (www.jquery.com) and FlyJSONP
(http://alotaiba.github.io/FlyJSONP/).
3
see http://www.imsglobal.org/activity/learning-tools-interoperability
253
 duration
Entry id is an ongoing number that enumerates all entries. The user id is read from the
cookie and helps to match actions to a specific user. The webpage id has to be set manually
on every HTML page of the online course by declaring a defined JavaScript variable. To offer
the possibility to log specific user behavior the field, user action can be used to record
custom actions like the mentioned example “user played/paused video”. For this reason the
tracking tool processes every click on all DOM (Document Object Model) elements of the
HTML page. Elements that should be tracked just have to be tagged in a defined way to be
processed by the tool. The custom field offers space for additional data (e.g. the content of
an input field that was filled out by a user). The timestamp for every log entry is set by the
web server. To track the time users spend on a specific webpage of the online course
(duration), the tracking tool sends an AJAX (Asynchronous JavaScript and XML) request to
the web server in definable time intervals as long as the web page is opened in the browser 4.
Figure 1: Operating mode of the tracking process
Due to its parameterized implementation the tracking tool can be easily adjusted or
customized to fit individual purposes and match different learning management systems. In
its present form it offers a relational data set that should meet a variety of scientific research
questions and educational data mining issues.
4
Default value is 2 seconds which leads to a measuring inaccuracy of 1 second.
254
Study and explorative analysis
To demonstrate the proposed method for gathering and analyzing individual data, we used
data from a protein biochemistry course that took place in 2015 summer semester at
Kaiserslautern University of Applied Sciences. The course is part of a degree course in
Applied Life Sciences and designed as a blended learning scenario, combining classroom
teaching with self-directed learning in an accompanying online course. Based on the learning
management system OpenOLAT the online course contained five chapters. Every chapter
finished with an online quiz. The online course and the quizzes were optional but
thematically relevant to pass the course. 24 enrolled students allowed us to record and
analyze their actions within the online course. In addition to the log file recording we used
two standardized questionnaires, one at the beginning and one at the end of the semester,
to measure three constructs that - from a theoretical point of view - could possibly influence
students’ behavior within the online course. A short scale from Study Interest Questionnaire
(Krapp, Schiefele, Wild & Winteler, 1993) was used to measure subject specific interest,
computer self-efficacy was measured with the Computer Self-Efficacy subscale of Computer
Literacy Inventory (Richter, Naumann & Horz, 2010) and system usability was determined by
using the System Usability Scale (Brooke, 1996). 19 (first questionnaire) respectively 17
(second questionnaire) students participated in the questionnaire survey.
By preprocessing the log file we extracted the following variables for every student:
 duration (total and per chapter)
 number of page views
 quiz scores
 time delay between the release of a quiz and the time students took it
 average daytime students were active in the online course
 number of outgoing links students’ clicked on
While using the course students created about 10,000 log file entries in a 19 weeks period.
On average every student visited 74 pages5, stayed logged in for about 19 hours, opened
about 31 outgoing links6, took the quizzes 3 days and 15 hours after they were published and
achieved almost 50% of the potential quiz points.
5
multiple visits on the same page included
6
multiple clicks on the same link included
255
In a first explorative statistical analysis none of the measured constructs showed significant
correlation with behavioral data from the log file. Statistically significant correlation
appeared between overall quiz score and the time delay between release of a quiz and the
time students took it (r (19) = -.506; p = .027), and the total duration of students’ activities
within the online course (rs (19) = -.551; p = .014)7. To put it simply: students who spent
more time in the course, learned later in terms of daytime and did not procrastinate the
quizzes scored better on average. Taking into account that in our data learning behavior
seems to be a more suitable predictor for learning success, we decided to concentrate on
behavioral data in the subsequent data mining process.
Since the primary goal of this paper is to identify best practices for our mining approach, not
the results of specific study itself, we picked total duration of student’s activities within the
online course as our key variable in the mining model. This decision reduced data
dramatically and therefore made computing a lot more easy.
Identifying the most appropriate mining approach
The data we collected and analyzed during the explorative analysis showed some significant
characteristics. We presume that the following properties stem from the chosen
architecture (i.e. our system is composed of loosely coupled modules) and from the
heterogeneity of the students:
-
a student’s id might change (e.g. when she logs in on two browsers simultaneously)
the five chapters showed strong variations on the amount of pages read in total and
the ratio of read pages per student
quizzes are taken by ~80% - ~90% of the students
overall, the data size is small
Identifying the learning type of a student by means of a questionnaire and apply some form
of reasoning algorithm to map each student to her corresponding learning type is a
heavyweight approach8. Furthermore, given the small sample under consideration, we do
7
Due to statistical outliers in the duration variable (caused e.g. by not logging off over night or being inactive
for other reasons) we decided to pick Spearman rank correlation instead of Pearson product-moment
correlation.
8
In late 2009, the Association for Psychological Science (APS) noted that the benefits would need to be large,
before learning style interventions could be recommended as cost-effective. See doi:10.1111/j.1539-
256
not expect statistically sound results besides more or less “trivial” insights, as we described
in the previous chapter. Identifying and mapping a student’s learning style assumes the
appropriateness of the learning types to the given learning situation (that might depend on
situational parameters too) and it requires substantial efforts. Using an explicit learning style
model to guide further personalization might be useful – but finally does not relate to the
course’s content directly.
Facing the vague character of the gathered behavioral data, a heterogeneous student body,
and the lack of supporting knowledge, it is time to focus on what might easily predict a
student’s behavior the best: his or her past behavior.
“In a web-based learning system, the learners understanding is measured based on the
reproduction of the material studied by them.” (Deborah 2014). To cope with this, we set up
a mining approach based upon the logged data, describing the student behavior. Later, the
mining model’s parameters will be optimized to reflect the student performance in the
quizzes which will be described in the next section.
For the following experimental study, we reduced the complexity of the data under
examination to the minimal feature set feasible to express which content was read by each
student, namely a triple <student id, page id, duration of reading>.9 This minimal approach
reflects the observations that student might adapt their reading behavior over time
according to their previous knowledge, situational parameters and even varying learning
styles. The detection (or not) of all these variations is deferred to the selected mining
approach.
Choosing (one variant of) clustering as the mining approach will not lead to new and
sustainable insights of understanding the log data at this point. All cluster algorithms require
a distance measure, i.e. in the simplest approach a function from domain d= <page,
duration> -> distance value. To encode groups of pages read, this function has to be a
mapping from subsets of the power set of
-> distance value.
However, there are no clues how to choose n, nor a reasonable size of the subsets and the
metrics to apply upon. Finally, the outcome (a clustering of students) has almost no
6053.2009.01038.x.
9
Actually, page id is a compound consisting of < #chapter.page title >, to overcome occasionally double name
page titles like “introduction” in different course chapters.
257
explanatory information – besides a reflection of the arbitrarily chosen parameters and its
impact – and is therefore difficult to evaluate and optimize.
Another - in this situation naïve - mining approach would ground on a decision tree learning
(DCT) system, and would use a learned (i.e. trained) model to predict student’s future
activities and quiz grades. Decision tree learning is based upon a target variable that can
either take a finite set of values (classification trees) or continuous values (regression trees).
The finite set of values could be based upon the pages (content, taxonomies, etc.) but that
would necessitate intellectual assignments to the pages by the course editors. Regression
over reading times alone seems inappropriate, and will quickly lead to over-fitted models.
Besides, the concept of “reading sequences” or “sets of read pages” must encoded through
augmentation and binning of the logged data. Since “unread” pages will not show up in the
logged data, this concept must be modelled (using substitute values) to enable the DCT
learner to develop a unique model for all students. Finally, it remains unclear, which metric
to use (the Gini impurity or entropy measures are difficult to map to our minimal data set).
Besides, most DCT based predictive models require the presences of all value sets up front
to make a prediction. This is contradictory with the design goal, to assist a student
simultaneously, while she is moving along through the course’s pages.
Summing up, the mining approach has to be based upon the set of read pages, has to be
independent of (varying) reading sequences, and must take into account the reading
durations. Pooling all gathered data of all students into the model building algorithm is
essential considering the relatively small data set at hand. We will present our approach in
the next section. Thereafter, we discuss our evaluation criteria.
The mining model
Association rule learning (ARM) is one the most well-known mining techniques for
identifying patterns in semi-structured data collection. The ARM process is based upon a
support-confidence framework, which will be described shortly in the following. The ARM
process tries to identify frequent item sets in a set of transactions, and structure them into
rules of the form “Antecedent -> Consequence”.
The rules express associations between (sets of) items. The quality of the discovered rules
depends on the balance of the data, frequency of relationships, and the trade of between
sensitivity and selectivity. Two measures for evaluation and selecting association rules
between antecedent “A” and consequence “C” are support and confidence. The support
measure is defined as the proportion of the number of transactions T including the
258
antecedent A and the consequent C in a dataset D. The confidence measure is the
probability of finding C in transactions under the condition that these transactions also
contain A, i.e. the proportion of the number of transactions which include A and C among all
the transactions that include A.
Association rule mining (ARM) has been applied to educational domains like automatic
guidance of students, discovery of relationships from student’s usage information and their
common mistakes (Merceron et.al. 2008). As Luna (Luna et. al. 2014) note, they share some
properties in common: most approaches are biased towards frequent pattern mining. We
will come back to this point later.
The first associative rule mining algorithm – the Apriori algorithm - dates back to the early
90’s (Agrawal 1994). It has been applied extensively in the field of market basket analysis. It
is designed to understand the needs of the customer, rewrite the store’s layout accordingly,
and capture new buyers. We will base our mining model on this well understood technique.
Association rule mining (ARM) when applied to the field of market basket analysis yields to
association rules like "If a customer buys wine and bread -> he/she often buys cheese, too."
It is important to note that there is no concept of an (ordered or linear) sequence of actions
here (“what did she buy first?”). Thus, the basket metaphor fits nicely to our online learning
systems, where the pages can be read in arbitrary order. Furthermore, the grouping of
transactions is implicit (by market baskets). As customers may use two different baskets for
shopping, our students may use different ids during their course. Finally, market basket
analysis is used for suggesting customers additional products, he/she will probably like,
which relates directly to the nature of our performance prediction and recommendation
system.
How do we transform the market basket analysis metaphor to our log data? We will
recommend (“sell”) the appropriate content to a student with respect to her hitherto
learning style (the pages or “items” she has already read, or: “bought”), and how long she
259
did read (“how much”). We will recommend pages to read (“buy”) because the mining
system knows that comparable classmates (who exposed the same reading behavior) finally
learned and performed successful (according to their quiz and exam ranks).
The resulting mining approach consists of five steps:
1. The seminal design to make use of the Apriori algorithm is interpreting the triples
Log entry <student id, page id, duration>
as
Student <id> adds <page id, duration> to her market basket.
Figure 2: Preprocessing raw data from log file in KNIME. Connecting lines show data flow and control parameters, here:
n bins for the reading time)
By binning the reading duration into a fixed, small set of ordinal values (e.g. “short, middle,
long”), the students reading style becomes interpretable and comparable to the association
rule learner, omitting the need for numerical regression and achieving a more robust
behavior.
260
2. Association rule learner10: The association rule learner receives as its input a
homogenous collection of sets of pages that are read in combination by at least one
student:
Eg. {<page 1, short | page 3, middle >, <page 1, short| page 7, short | page 3, long>, …}
This set is generated by pooling all market baskets for each chapter, and filter the data
by student ids who took the quiz for this chapter.
Figure 3: Step 2: KNIMEs association rule learner analyses the pre-processed data, Step 3: Subset Matcher
10
We use the Apriori Algorithm as implemented by Christian Borgelt. His implementation offers an extended
API to adapt the algorithms behavior. For details see http://www.borgelt.net/doc/apriori/apriori.html
261
Now the learning algorithm finds the regularities in the reading behaviors. By computing
frequent item sets and association rules it tries to find sets of pages (in combination with
a specific reading duration) that are frequently read together, so that from the presence
of certain pages one can infer (with a reasonably high probability) that certain other
pages are present.
Association rule sample:
“If a student has read page 3 (short duration), and has read page 4 (long duration)
 She reads page 7 (long duration)”
The output of the association rule learner is a set of relevant reading patterns (rules),
modelling the most typical student behavior for (a subset of) all pages. Missing (unread)
pages simply will not show up in the corresponding rule set for one student, which
makes it differ slightly from the generated rule set caused by a student who read the
page. The rule learner is controlled by the two variables11 “min support” (typical values
are <15%) and “min set size” (sizes of 2 and more items per rule showed to be effective).
3. Subset Matcher: Not all of a student’s behavior is significant to compare her learning
style to other students. If we would ignore this fact, the learning algorithm might
deteriorate and tend to over-fit. So, for each student we mark the set of her reading
patterns (from the log file) as “typical” or “individual”. The subset matcher is controlled
by the parameter “max mismatch” (typical values: 0, or 1) to apply some level of
fuzziness to the set intersection applied here.
Figure 4: Relevant and typical rules (sets) for student c7e01... in chapter 2.
11
In previous experiments, we use the “min confidence” parameter, too. However, it revealed a moderate
impact on the overall predictive performance.
262
4. Column Aggregator: If two students have the same learning type in common, they may
show the same reading pattern (spanning over one course chapter). The mining model
then increases the probability of two students being “similar” (in terms of their learning
type) for each common and “typical” pattern found.
The opposite is not true. Differing reading patterns can be caused by multiple
circumstances. So there is no “penalty” applied, if there is no common pattern present.
5. Auto-Binner: The model divides the students to “learning type” groups by pairwise
computing the intersection count of step 4, auto-binning12 the values into n learning
groups, and finally applying a similarity threshold (“min learning types” overlap – typical values
range from 10% to 30%) to determine whether they belong to the same group or not.
Figure 5: Steps 4 and 5: Computing learning type groups
The output of step 5 is a set of tuples of the form
<student x, student y, same learning-type: yes/no, probability>
Now that we can calculate the relatedness of two students with respect to their learning
type (per chapter), we are going to evaluate the correctness of the computation.
12
Auto-binning is applied to reflect varying numbers of pages in the courses chapters. Hence, aggregation of
the student data of all chapters requires a normalization of the number of patterns and others.
263
Evaluation
The mining model was subject to a systematic inspection of the impact of variations for the
above mentioned control variables (number of bins for the reading time, support and set
size thresholds for the rule learner, similarity threshold between learning types). Parameter
combinations got optimized by using a hill-climbing approach. Identical settings were applied
to all five chapters. The ratio of (the average number of) pages read per students spread
from 3 pages / student (chap 3.) to 15 (in final chap 5) for the five chapters.
Figure 6: Parameter Optimization loop and quality inspection (ROC curve)
The quality of the prediction was measured according to step 5 (see previous chapter for a
description). The evaluation was computed according to the two-class classification problem.
The predictions are sorted according to the positive probabilities of the model (i.e. two
students belong to the same learning type). The correctness is computed with respect to the
students quiz ranks. For each correct prediction, the ROC curve goes up one step, if not it
264
goes one step to the right. Ideally, all positive rows are sorted to front, so you have a line
going up to 100% first and then going straight to right. As a rule of thumb, the greater the
area under the curve, the better is the model (see figure 7 for a sample). The ideal sum thus
is 1.0.
We achieved overall quality objectives ranging from 0.61 (for chapter 3), which is poor, to
0.8 (for chapter 5), which is good. Considering the small data size set and the very low ratio
of pages read per student, especially in chapter 3, and opposed to the good performance in
chapter 5, we can conclude here, that our mining model tends toward reliable predictions at
the point of at least medium sized student classes and log data sizes.
Figure 7: KNIME computes best parameter set for log file data analysis and prediction of chapter 5.
ROC line shows quality of the chosen model; grey line depicts random.
During the computation, each data flow in KNIME consisted of some hundreds to a few
thousand generated association rules, up to 30,000 matches between ((subsets of) one
student’s reading patterns and the generated associative rules, and finally the computation
of several 10,000 to a few 100,000 intersection counts (of reading patterns of student x
students); intersection count hits ranged from 0 .. 15. These are very strong variations on
computing time – and we observed strong variations on the predictive performance.
265
To avoid this, one must not push a high specificity into the data (e.g. must not use a high
number of reading for reading time, and do not set strong requirements to the rule miner
like setting the “min support” higher than ~20%). The resulting model would be based on a
very low number of identified significant reading patterns, locally adjusted parameters for
the performance evaluation and thus suffer from overfitting. This is indicated in the ROC by
depicting few interpolation points only.
Likewise, it is a bad idea to force a high selectivity in the rule generation algorithm by
increasing the threshold of the minimum set size. The corresponding ROC curves will show a
steep increase in the beginning, but later will deteriorate soon back to random.
As best practice we recommend to bin the reading times into no more than short/long (or
short/medium/long) bins, choose a relatively low “min support” of ~15% for the associative
rule learner, but be strict in quality evaluation: a minimum of 30% of learning types (overlap
of common and significant reading patterns) should be applied. The corresponding mining
models showed an overall predictive performance above average. Sure enough, a drop of
performance for certain chapters – caused by the small size of data available - is a good
indicator to withdraw from the pure mining approach at this point of development of the
recommendation system – and combine the robust outcomes of the statistical analysis as a
fallback for reading recommendations, if in doubt.
Conclusion and future work
Now that we found measures to identify a robust mining model in small and medium sized
student log data it will be safe to add additional variables in the mining approach and
explore their influence. Taking into account the outcomes of the inferential statistical
analysis the procrastination behavior (delay between quiz release time and time of taking)
seems to be the most promising parameter to be investigated. A „in depth analysis“ would
be to visualize student membership in certain learning style groups by chapter: is the
membership stable in terms of student X and student Y belong to the same group in (almost)
all chapters of the course?
Of course, once we trained a robust and reliable model for all pages of our online course, we
will start testing recommendation functions. By inspecting a student’s “market basket” and
finding the closest “successful” student (by comparing the content of her “market basket”),
the recommendation system can lead the student to the next promising learning behavior.
266
As a conclusion, it can be stated that even with the limited degree of freedom when working
with LMS, logging student’s individual learning behavior and doing research upon it can be
managed in a very simple and lightweight way. To have these data enables course authors
not just to evaluate their courses in terms of descriptive statistics (e.g. “Do student’s
read/use what I’m offering? How long does it take my students to work through chapter
X?”), it also offers them answers to variety of more specific questions (e.g. “Do all of my
students profit adequately from what I’m offering?”). Combining the data with good
practices from data mining could bring e-teaching one step further – not just by revealing
hidden patterns that are inaccessible to inferential statistics. It also allows course authors to
experiment with more sophisticated mechanisms (e.g. personal reading recommendations)
that may assist students in their interaction with web-based learning materials and – if
successful – could become standard functions in learning management systems of
tomorrow. So from our perspective more research in this direction could possibly serve
both, the understanding of students’ learning behavior and the development of future eteaching and learning itself.
References
Al-Razgan, M., Al-Khalifa, A.S., Al-Khalifa, H.S. (2013), Educational Data Mining: A Systematic
Review of the Published Literature 2006-2013, In: T. Herawan et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the
First International Conference on Advanced Data and Information Engineering (DaEng-2013),
Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering 285, DOI: 10.1007/978-981-4585-18-7, Springer
Science+Business Media, Singapore 2014
Agrawal, A., Srikant, R. (1994). Fast Algorithms for Mining Association Rules. In: Proc. 20th
Int. Conf. on Very Large Databases (VLDB 1994, Santiago de Chile), 487-499, Morgan
Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, USA 1994
Baker, R.S., Yacef, K. (2009): The state of educational data mining in 2009: a review and
future visions. J. Educ. Data Min. 1(1), 3–17 (2009)
Brooke, J.: SUS: A “Quick and Dirty” Usability Scale. In: Jordan, P.W., Thomas, B.,
Weerdmeester, B.A., McClelland (eds.) Usability Evaluation in Industry, pp. 189–194. Taylor
& Francis, London (1996)
267
Deborah, L. J., Baskaran, R., & Kannan, A. (2012). Learning styles assessment and theoretical
origin in an E-learning scenario: a survey. Artificial Intelligence Review, 42(4), 801–819.
http://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-012-9344-0
Ferguson, Rebecca (2012). Learning analytics: drivers, developments and challenges.
International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5/6) pp. 304–317.
Köck, M., Paramythis, A. (2011) Activity sequence modelling and dynamic clustering for
personalized e-learning. User Model User-Adap. Inter. (2011) 21:51–97, Springer, DOI
10.1007/s11257-010-9087-z
Krapp, A., Schiefele, U., Wild, K. P., & Winteler, A. (1993). Der Fragebogen zum
Studieninteresse (FSI). Diagnostica, 39(4), 335–351.
Luna, J. M., Romero, C., Romero, C.R., Ventura, S. (2014). An evolutionary algorithm for the
discovery of rare class association rules in learning management systems. In: Journal Applied
Intelligence, Volume 42 Issue 3, April 2015 ,Pages 501-513, Kluwer Academic Publisherss,
DOI 10.1007/s10489-014-0603-4
Merceron, A., Yacef, K. (2008) Interestingness Measures for Association Rules in Educational
Data
Proceedings of the first International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM'08),
Montreal, Canada, ISBN - 10: 0615306292.
Richter, T., Naumann, J., & Horz, H. (2010). Eine revidierte Fassung des Inventars zur
Computerbildung (INCOBI-R). Zeitschrift Für Pädagogische Psychologie, 24, 23–37.
Romero, C., & Ventura, S. (2007). Educational data mining: A survey from 1995 to 2005.
Expert Systems with Applications, 33(1), 135–146. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2006.04.005
Schön, M., & Ebner, M. (2013). Das Gesammelte interpretieren - Educational Data Mining
und Learning Analytics. Lehrbuch für Lernen und Lehren mit Technologien. Retrieved from
http://l3t.tugraz.at/index.php/LehrbuchEbner10/article/view/119
Sheard, J., Ceddia, J., Hurst, J., & Tuovinen, J. (2003). Inferring Student Learning Behaviour
from Website Interactions: A Usage Analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 8(3),
245–266.
268
Oleinik Tatyana, Prokopenko Andrey, Zub Stanislav, Andrushenko
Olena, Berezhna Svetlana, Boichuk Yurii
Digital Technologies for Professional Development at H. S. Skovoroda Kharkiv
National Pedagogical University
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
H.S.Skovoroda Kharkiv National Pedagogical University
Ukraine
tatyana.oleinik@hnpu.edu.ua, andrew@hnpu.edu.ua,
stah@hnpu.edu.ua
Abstract
The report presents the curriculum peculiarities of the teachers’ training implementation of blended
learning that was based on the platform Moodle. The main objectives of the courses due to the need
to meet the requirements of modern education, providing competent personality’s regard to life in
the information society that characterizes the sense of digital literacy. A certain place in the program
was given to the problems of ensuring the education quality, in particular, the formation of an
ecosystem personal educational information environment that consists of open educational
resources, MOOCs, social networks etc. We pay special attention to cloud computing virtualization of
laboratory equipment for the development of practical skills in natural science laboratories.
Note that educational problem solving for the innovative, inclusive and reflective society connected
with the designing of the educational environment of a new generation that is characterized by
increased levels of intellectualization of resources, their appropriate and rational integration,
ensuring flexibility and adaptability of digital systems for educational purposes according to the
student’s needs. In the structure of that environment is useful to distinguish tools of project-based
learning, gamification and aggregation technologies of digital content. All e-learning resources are
characterized by attractive design, interactive content, easy access (hyperlinks) to the information
they need, integrated dynamic applications (photos, videos, animations, mind maps, infographics), eportfolio for the formation of individual educational trajectories, means of self-assessment and
evaluation.
Keywords: teacher’s training, student-centered learning, competence approach, digital literacy,
educational ecosystem
269
Introduction
World experience accumulated over centuries of human existence requires systematic rethinking
models of its development, i.e. professionals' the intellectual flexibility and inventiveness become
dominant, organic combination of educational process with scientific research much more weigh.
Undoubtedly, the transition of society to a new stage of development (the "knowledge society")
offers more opportunities for professional and social inclusion of young people that are constantly
faced with the challenges of today and the problem of choice, the solution of which depends they
can use existing opportunities for self-development and self-realization.
Modern educational challenges require attention to the problem of designing a new generation of
environment, which characterized by increased levels of intellectualization of means, their
appropriate and efficient integration, flexibility and adaptability of computer-based systems for
educational purposes according to user's personal needs. This defines ecosystem of personalized
education (EPE) for technological and psycho-pedagogical support of training / research, including
modern means of which we pay special attention to open educational resources in combination with
interactive equipments that can realize a wide range of innovative methods and technologies of
education (Bykov, 2008; Kommers, 2011; Bykov, Kukharenko, etc., 2008; Bondarenko, Kukharenko,
2015; UNESCO, 2013; Zhaldak, 2013).
Thus, the main educational measures such as: to develop the assessment skills of EPE tools; to
compose, to adapt and to coordinate existing EPE facilities; to develop teamwork skills; to seek
organizational support to develop skills in working with EPE tools; to participate in relevant
communities to share experiences; to attract students to the use of EPE in non-formal and informal
education; to promote widespread of EPE means, publishing relevant materials; to provide feedback
and information about existing EPE facilities; to expand knowledge in the field of intellectual
property rights, copyright and privacy policy; to publish their own EPE means.
The immediate necessity to improve the educators according to challenges and changes of modern
teacher status due regularity solve problems of teacher education, in particular, the need to acquire
pedagogical competence as universal for every modern specialist. So, this problem led to the
creation of KhNPU transparent and accessible educational system, first of all, lets concentrate on
maintaining the autonomy of the student (conscious planning e-learning process, evaluation,
reflection of their own study) as well as building communities of practitioners to study the urgent
problems of modern teaching. Among the priority issues we outlined include digital literacy and
digital humanities, causing the formation of a responsible citizen for innovative, inclusive and
reflective of society.
First of all, we started implementing open resources of museums (Google Art Project, Europeana, Big
History Project, History of Ukraine, Ukraine's Museum Space, history4you.ru), British National
Corpus, Corpus of Contemporary American English (http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/), Leo Tolstoy's
heritage, educational channels, Google services, repositories of digital libraries. Especially, projects
270
are known OER Commons (structured database links to search means), a network of library content
and services WorldCat and DokShyr (for Ukrainian specialists of library science) etc.
However, there is a need to analyze the features of the implementation of distance learning
technologies in pedagogical universities that provide self-improvement (i.e. approach on "equal
access to quality education for all"). Particular attention was paid to the development of core
curriculum on organizational and pedagogical aspects of prospective students (pre-service and inservice teachers) and university educators that aim to encourage them to consciously learning and
thinking for competent functioning of the individual and social activities in the digital society (by
means mixed or combined instruction technology with implementing open educational resources as
well as social communities and nets).
Course design and activities
Exploring the problems of developing courses based on Moodle (Oliynyk, Prokopenko, Zub, etc.,
2015), allowing teachers to deal with problems of transition to ecosystem personalized education,
technological and psycho-pedagogical support of course, we pay great attention to acquiring key
competencies of students, increasing their interest, improving the ability to quickly learn and
cooperate flexibly in educational projects, involvement in active cooperation and research of actual
problems of globalized society.
By this approach the subject of our special attention was the student's portfolio, which he/she works
out during active participation in the development of individual educational trajectory and
personalized learning environment. At the same time, much we paid special attention to elaboration
of modern pedagogical approaches, pedagogical design technologies according to ways of
aggregating of information, the potential of new multimedia tools and educational resources (search,
assessment, adaptation and implementation), taking into account the means of inclusive education
(we mean the wide variety of level features of educational someone training to take into account
physiological, psychological and socio-psychological levels).
The course covers various aspect of blended learning such as models of combined training, including
e-learning that occurs in synchronous mode (computer-based training (CBT), web-based training
(WBT) and discussion chat) or asynchronous manner (virtual classes and labs, Internet hostingservices with services, audio / video conferences, forums, remote administration, etc.). In this way,
we have proposed to design the course, primarily use existing digital content that has the
appropriate design and can be placed in public repositories or open educational resources (emuseums, e-libraries, educational channels, MOOCs etc.).
Among the features of this approach should be noted that the primary focus we pay to teams of
social and humanities (including historians, philosophers, economists, educators, psychologists,
healthcare biologists, artists, pre-school teachers etc. (Bezruk, 2013; Ionova, 2013; Kuznetsov, 2005;
Prokopenko, 2013; Radionova, 2013; Yermakova, 2015; Yuryeva, 2013)). Indeed university faculties
271
of natural sciences and mathematics have deep experience in ICT integration researches; they
worked with dynamic geometry software, computer algebra systems, testing technologies, expert
systems etc. Also taking into account the university specificity there were involved in the projects
those students that interested in professional improvement, in particular, the formation of the
capacity for flexible learning, the use of digital resources and social media for informal learning. In
this way, it helps to identify the various services that are very attractive for use by students, and
explore means to enhance their motivation to actively study courses, organization of an enabling
environment for productive cooperation, conscious transition to teaching and research from passive
content to interactive.
At the same time, it allows not only better understand the "digital generation" for finding means to
elevate the innovative courses development at a qualitative level and increase their competitiveness
(compared to popular services in the student audience), but also promotes cooperation in a more
creative plane as well as demonstrate the importance of a critical approach for the need of a
demanding selection of educational resources by means of evidence-based criteria.
It should be noted that particular attention we devote to research for innovation in modern
educational space as open educational resources for universities, but last times there are new results
require careful study for educator's self-realization (Brown, 2015; Brown, Costello, Donlon, 2015;
Henderikx, 2015; Ossiannilsson, 2015). They carried out by inter-governmental organizations (e.g.
UNESCO, Commonwealth of Learning), quality assurance networks (e.g. INQAAHE) and networks of
higher education institutions (e.g. ICDE, EADTU etc.) which were investigated research groups in the
framework of partnership initiatives such as EPALE, Europortfolio, HOME, OpenupEdu, IDEAL,
SEQUENT.
It is clear that there are benefits for the national platform Prometheus (http://prometheus.org.ua),
offering specific courses (Ukrainian law, foreign languages, history of Ukraine, etc.) which are shared
in Ukraine. Besides we find some adapted courses (of famous MOOCs) that are inaccessible to a
certain part of teachers due to the language barrier. Of course, greater practical importance and
adaptability of this platform to the real needs of employers we can explain due to rate a
collaboration project teams with leading companies (on the Ukrainian market) involved in the active
participation in the development of courses and programs of specific modules (Kukharenko, 2012).
Note that the common system of development of distance learning courses, which consists of the
following stages (Bykov, Kukharenko, etc., 2008), at pedagogical university has its own characteristics
related to teaching competence and educational research of the vast majority of project participants
(of curriculum design): organization of the project; analysis of the project; project advancement;
drafting project scenario performance; pilot project implementation; full implementation of the
project; testing the design and improvement of its modules. Besides it's needed to consider the
teaching skills of the prospective students (which promotes active involvement in the development
of individual educational trajectory and advancement of personalized learning environment for
inclusive education including polycultural aspect (Yuryeva, etc., 2013)).
272
To determine the quality of a distance course, we use the following criteria: 1) subjective satisfaction
of students training course; 2) competence and personal qualities that students have mastered; 3)
the time required the students for performing the course tasks. In addition, in quantitative terms, the
number of registered students and the number of participants who successfully complete the course;
qualitative indicators: positive feedback (through questionnaires and various means of reflection
remote participants or combined studies).
Evaluation didactic component of the course is based on the assessment of scientific and didactic
content of educational work (emphasis on integrated educational projects and researches) and
interaction of participants (discussions, debates, etc.), as well as teaching materials (guidelines,
manuals, glossaries, etc.) about general and specific learning problems, including the formative
evaluation of students' learning achievements and means of implementation of inclusive education.
The indicators, which traditionally valued quality of subsystems of scientific and didactic course
content (i.e. the validity of the structure of educational content; level of adaptation of educational
content to students' level; degree of design clarity educational content; validity of the use of
multimedia tools; the ability to implement formative and final evaluation so as adequate testing;
completeness the proposed training content, its compliance with training standards; the clarity and
clearness of teaching; stimulating self-learning, discussions and collaborative learning project work;
dynamic media content), we additionally pay special attention to the organization of the e-portfolio
as reflexive tool of employment ability (Oleinik, 2014).
The quality evaluation of the tutor activity in traditional way consist of questioning students about
the quality of the course the following rubrics: individual goals of participation in this course; level of
achieving goals; additional goals; unexpected issues in learning; the most difficult issue; positive and
negative moments in learning presentation; duration of download electronic content; the depth and
complexity of content; a variety of problems; suggestions for the scientific and didactic content
improvement. Besides, note that significance of work with social media is also unconditional for tutor
(Kommers, 2011).
Taking into consideration that the main task of modern education is to facilitate student's selffulfillment through the creation of conditions for adaptive learning, a priority issue is the
personality's component of readiness for professional activity and key competences. This trend
(comparing to the traditional priority of theoretical knowledge and practical skills) is reflected in new
approaches and methods of forming a common understanding of the content of qualifications and
degrees in university structures (Kalashnikova, etc., 2015; UNESCO, 2013). In organizational and
communication module ECTS those competencies include social skills necessary for social interaction
and cooperation, skills of self-organization, critical and creative thinking, intellectual openness
(Oleinik, etc., 2002).
Note also that special attention is paid to virtualization laboratory equipment on mastering practical
skills with equipment physical, chemical and biological laboratories distance education. To address
these challenges the project was initiated Grid Enabled Remote Instrumentation with Distributed
273
Control and Computation (GRIDCC) on safe distance collaboration with the research team to ensure
the data monitoring and management. Undoubtedly, that condition for introduction of virtual labs
training practices will have a positive impact not only on the motivation to learn programming and
natural subjects that makes a deep understanding of modeling processes (Zub, Sorokin, Soroka,
2006).
Conclusions
Note that solving the educational problems for innovative, inclusive and reflective of society, we are
interested in the construction of new generation educational environment (ecosystem personalized
education, technological, psychological and pedagogical support issues, training / research),
characterized by higher levels of intellectualization means of reasonable and rational integration,
flexibility and adaptability of digital educational purposes according to all student’s needs (especially
in digital humanities and digital literacy).
It's no doubt OER Particular MOOCs are very significant for realization of inclusive education in East
European countries by improving range of innovative pedagogical repertoire for transformation of
teaching and learning to exploration, investigation, research. Thus, our experience indicates that
improve the quality of teachers that capable to activity as change makers requires attention to the
study of international experience in the implementation of distance and open education and active
participation in further partnership.
References
Bezruk, O, Denisenko, I. (2013). Ukrainian society: theory and practice of democratic transition.
Modern society: political science, social science, cultural science. Scientific newsletter of the
H. S. Skovoroda KhNPU, 2, 13-27. http://journals.hnpu.edu.ua/ojs/ › E-library
Bondarenko, M., Kukharenko, V. (2015). Pedagogical aspects of distance learning. (Not translated
into English)
Brown, M., Costello, E., Donlon, E. & Mairead Nic Giolla Mhichil (2015). Why Institutions Adopt
MOOCs: Breaking Down Traditional Barriers or Reproducing Privilege? http://www.slideshare.net
/mbrownz/why-institutions-adopt-moocs-breaking-down-traditional-barriers-or-reproducingprivilege
Brown, M. (2015). Cross Country Comparison: The Good, Bad and Ugly of Blended Learning.
http://www.slideshare.net/mbrownz/
Bykov, V. (2008). Organizational models of open education. Kyiv, Ukraine: Atika (Not translated into
English)
274
Bykov, V., Kukharenko, V., Sirotenko, N., Rybalko, A., Bohachkov, Yu. (2008). Technology of the
distance course. Kyiv, Ukraine: Millenium (Not translated into English)
Henderikx, P. (2015). The Changing Pedagogical Landscape. http://eadtu.eu› E-library
Ionova, O. (2013). Formation personality’s health: experience of Waldorf School. Pedagogics,
psychology, medical-biological problems of physical training and sports. http://www.sportpedagogy.org.ua
Kalashnikova, S., Lugovyi, V., etc. (2015). Development of quality assurance in Ukraine: informational
and analytical review. Kyiv: DP "SPC"Priority". http://erasmusplus.org.ua/en/usefulinformation/resources/category/3-materialy-natsionalnoi-komandy-ekspertiv-shchodozaprovadzhennia-instrumentiv-bolonskoho-protsesu.html
Kommers, P. (2011). Social Media for Learning by Means of ICT. UNESCO IITE Policy Brief.
http://www. iite.unesco.org › E-library
Kukharenko, V. (2012). Massive educational process in open distance learning. Theory and practice of
social systems, 1. (Not translated into English)
Kuznetsov, M., (2005). Emotional Memory. Kharkiv, Ukraine: Kroc (Not translated into English)
Ossiannilsson, E. (2015). OER and quality in online learning. http://www.slideshare.net/EbbaOssiann
Oleinik, T., Evdokimov, V., Hor’kova, S., Mykytiuk, M. (2002). Handbook on critical thinking
development. Kharkiv, Ukraine: Tornado (Not translated into English)
Oliynyk, T. (2014). Information and communication technologies for evaluation of academic
achievements of university students. Information technologies and training methods. (Not translated
into English) http://journal.iitta. gov.ua/index.php/itlt/article/view/1108
Oliynyk, T., Prokopenko, A., Zub, S., Boichuk, Y., Chebotova, Y. (2015). Training of educators for the
construction of courses in the Moodle environment. (Not translated into English)
Prokopenko, I., Yevdokymov, V. (2006). Pedagogical Technologies. Kharkiv, Ukraine: College (Not
translated into English)
Prokopenko, I., Nochvina, I. (2015). Current state and prospects for export Ukraine university
educational services to the global market. Scientific newsletter of the H. S. Skovoroda KhNPU.
Economics, 15, 5-14. http://journals.hnpu.edu.ua/ojs/ › E-library
Radionova, N. (2013). Curriculum philosophy of the Slobozhanchina of ХІХ century. Scientific
newsletter of the H. S. Skovoroda KhNPU. Philosophy, 41, 207-216. http://journals.hnpu.edu.ua/ojs/ ›
E-library
275
Social profile of potential distance education students. (2015). http://idealproject.eu/downloads/
‘UNESCO’. Technologies in Higher Education: Mapping the Terrain. UNESCO IITE Policy Brief, February
2013. http://www. iite.unesco.org › E-library
Yermakova, T. (2015). Axiological approach to forming health culture of schoolchildren. Pedagogics
and Psychology. Scientific newsletter of the H. S. Skovoroda KhNPU, 47, 301-307.
http://journals.hnpu.edu.ua/ojs/ › E-library
Yuryeva, K., Voronenko, O. (2015). Ethnocultural diversity as a challenge and a resource for the
modern education system of Ukraine. Means of educational and research work. Scientific newsletter
of the H. S. Skovoroda KhNPU, 43, 259-283. http://journals.hnpu.edu.ua/ojs/ › E-library
Zhaldak, M. (2013). Using your computer in the learning process must be pedagogical deliberating.
Information and information technology in schools, 1, 10-18 (Not translated into English)
Zub, S., Sorokin, P., Soroka, D. (2006). Grid middleware configuration at the KIPT CMS Linux cluster.
Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, 559, 35-37
276
O’Reilly Naoimh, Brady Malcolm
Learning Management Systems and Virtual Learning Environments: Changing
the nature of academic work?
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Dublin City University
Ireland
Naoimh.oreilly@dcu.ie
Malcolm.brady@dcu.ie
Abstract
Information technology is having a profound impact on academic work. Arguably, academia
is at the cusp of the most significant disruptive process change in its long history. This is
particularly evident in teaching where learning management systems (LMS) or virtual
learning environments (VLE) have become the norm. These enterprise-wide, repositorybased, ubiquitously available, socially-oriented technologies are altering the nature of
institutional teaching and learning processes and in turn having a dramatic impact on the
experience of students and academics alike. However, while much research has been carried
out on the impact of LMS on student learning relatively little work has been done on its
impact on academics. This paper examines the impact of LMS and related technologies on
the work of the individual academic. The paper focuses on two aspects of LMS: their
ubiquitous availability (always-on, available-everywhere) and their repository-based
structure. The paper examines their impact on academic relationships: with student, fellow
academics, the institution and home. The paper considers a number of propositions
including: that LMS provide increased flexibility to the academic in carrying out their
teaching; that LMS allow academics to be more responsive to student learning needs; that
LMS blur the boundary between work and life outside work; that the locus of control over
teaching materials is moving from the academic towards the institution. The research
project examines these propositions through a series of in-depth interviews with practising
academics.
Key Words: LMS, VLE, technology, affordance, academic, work, student, institution
277
While information technology is often introduced for efficiency reasons in time it can have a
more fundamental impact leading to change in the underlying organizational paradigm and
becoming ‘imbricated into various facets of our social existence’ (Bryant et al., 2013:13).
While this wider impact of technology provides a great deal of social benefit it can also have
disruptive effects (Carr, 2010; Coakes et al. 2011; Wu, 2014).
The thesis of this paper is that recent teaching and learning technologies, particularly the
more repository-based, socially-oriented, ubiquitously available technologies, are much
more than mere tools that enhance academic efficiency. They have had and will continue to
have a much deeper and more substantive impact on the work practices and indeed lifestyle
of the individual academic1 than have had earlier technologies.
This paper takes a qualitative approach to examine the increasingly pervasive impact of
technology on the work of the academic under the following four headings: the interface
between the academic and the student; the interface between the academic and colleagues;
the interface between the academic and the institution; the interface between work and
home.
Learning Management Systems
The traditional classroom experience was that of the individual academic at the top of the
room communicating directly to a class of students with the aid of blackboard and chalk –
the iconic figure of the ‘sage on the stage’ (King, 1993). The introduction of early
technologies, for example projectors and presentation software, changed this model but
only to a relatively small extent: slides were prepared some time before the lecture and
could be stored, amended and re-used for future classes. The lecturer, now freed from
having to write on a blackboard, could face the class and spend more time explaining the
material. Students in turn had, depending on the quality of the projection, more easily
readable material from which to take down notes. The materials themselves resided on the
lecturer’s computer over which the lecturer had full control. Although the introduction of
presentation technology was widespread across the sector it did not fundamentally change
1
In the paper the words ‘academic’ and ‘lecturer’ are used interchangeably. Other words used with similar
meaning are faculty member, instructor and professor.
278
the nature of the class meeting process (Brady, 2013). This traditional mode of teaching is
represented in figure 1a.
The advent of learning management systems (LMS)2 such as Blackboard and Moodle has the
potential to fundamentally alter the university teaching and learning environment (Coates et
al. 2005). The LMS is an online e-learning system which is used to support face-to-face
teaching (Jackson & Fearon 2014) and offers a range of utilities to students, tutors and
others (Love & Fry 2007). LMS act as a repository of information3 and as a communication
mechanism between students and lecturers (Naveh et al., 2010) and also as vehicles for
assessment and class management (Coates et al., 2005; Schmidt, 2002). They are introduced
at organization level rather than at individual level and with the intention of making the class
meeting process and the student learning process more efficient (Johannesen et al. 2012).
This digitally enhanced mode of teaching, showing intermediary repositories and
communication systems, is depicted in figure 1b.
Much of the teaching material created by academics, and at one time proprietary to the
individual academic, is now stored and archived in virtual learning environments housed on
servers belonging to the university. This process of articulation and codification (Nonaka,
1991) converts knowledge that was tacit and held by the individual academic into knowledge
that is explicit and held by the university. With the advent of teaching repositories
ownership of the intellectual property created by academics is becoming more and more
unclear (Head, 2014). It is arguable that control over academic materials is gradually being
ceded by the academic to the university.
From the point of view of the institution, Coates et al. (2005) suggest that there exist six
major drivers behind the introduction of LMS by universities: an improvement in the
efficiency of teaching and learning processes; a promise of an enriched student learning
experience, often based on constructivist teaching methodologies; increasing expectation on
the part of students for some form of centralised learning management system; a felt need
3
The repository can hold instructor supplied learning content but also student assignments and administrative
materials such as enrolments and student groupings.
279
by universities to keep up with competitor institutions; an effective response to the strain of
delivering modules to an increasingly large numbers of students; and ‘a hitherto undreamtof capacity to control and regulate teaching’.
This change being wrought in academic life by technology is in conjunction with other
changes that are taking place at university level: increased levels of hierarchical managerial
control, budgetary reductions, revenue generation initiatives, efficiency and cost-reduction
drives, massification and globalisation of education and the merging of industry and
academia (Bond and O’Byrne, 2013; Parker, 2002; Parker, 2014; van Damme, 2001). While
technological change may in some respects reinforce the ‘pincer movements of
commodification and managerialism’ facing academia (Prichard and Thomas, 2014) it will
also afford new opportunities. Brynjolfsson and McAfee (2012) note that computers are not
good at certain tasks that humans are good at – tasks that draw on insight, creativity and
emotion - and suggest that the way forward is to combine the use of such human skills with
technology.
The introduction of LMS has a number of implications for lecturers. First, the lecturer’s role
is moving from that of transmitter of knowledge to facilitator of student learning: from ‘sage
on the stage’ to ‘guide on the side’. This role change has implications for individual lecturers
in terms of the need to change teaching style, the need to develop new classroom
management approaches and abilities, and the need to develop new digital skills (King,
1993). Second, the materials are stored on an institutional-level repository and consequently
the academic creator no longer has full control over these materials. Multiple copies of the
materials exist: on the lecturer’s own desktop and laptop, on the LMS server, in university
LMS archives, and on multiple student laptops and other devices. As a consequence,
ownership of the intellectual property of classroom materials has become less clear. Third,
while LMSs are used to monitor and control student behaviour, they also afford the
institution the possibility of monitoring and controlling the behaviour of lecturers
themselves (Coates et al., 2005; Johannesen, 2012). Fourth, the ubiquitous availability of
LMS in time and in space extends the reach of teaching related academic work beyond the
university itself to any location with an internet connection.
There is a tendency on the part of academics to extend their work activity into personal time
and space (Anderson, 2006). The near-constant access to email and other communication
technologies blurs the boundary between work and home (Barley et al. 2011), infringes on
work-life balance (Middleton and Cukier, 2006), increases the incidence of work-life conflict
280
for employees and significant others (Boswell and Olson-Buchanan, 2007), and can isolate
the individual from his or her immediate environment. Barley et al. (2011) found that
feelings of intrusion, overload and stress are due not only to the material properties of email
technology but also to the social processes that accompany its introduction and allow or at
least accept its ubiquitous use. Dery et al. (2014) point out that the smartphone is ‘the site
where we decide between work and non-work activities’ and suggest that in a world of
ubiquitous connectivity where work and non-work are embodied in a single hand-held
device the entire concept of work-life balance may need to be revisited and redefined. It is
therefore eminently possible that adoption of LMS by universities will further blur for
academics the boundary between work and non-work.
This paper centres its focus on the impact of LMS on the individual academic. It considers
this impact along a number of dimensions. It examines the interaction between the
academic and the LMS itself. It also examines the impact of this usage of LMS on key
academic relationships: with students, fellow academics, the institution itself and home.
Methodology
The research follows the phenomenological paradigm. A phenomenological study describes
the meaning that a particular phenomenon has for a group of individuals by focusing on the
common elements of the lived experiences of those individuals (Creswell 2012). Such an
approach allows us to look again at experiences which may be taken for granted and to
uncover new insights (Laverty 2003). The deep understanding generated from a
phenomenological study can be valuable to, amongst others, teachers (Creswell 2012).
Phenomenology is aligned to an interpretivist epistemology.
Both authors interviewed six respondents, all full-time members of academic staff, over the
period of 12 days. Interviews were semi-structured, using the themes that emerged from the
literature review and took the form of a “conversation with a purpose” (Mason 2002, p.62)
Each interview was double recorded and then transcribed using ExpressScribe Pro and
Dragon NS. The transcriptions were independently coded by both interviewers, using the
categories from the literature review.
Findings
This section records the findings of the research project under five headings: academic and
the LMS, and the relationships between academic and the student, colleagues, the
institution itself and home.
281
The academic and the LMS
All of the respondents engaged with the institution’s LMS, many to a considerable extent.
LMS were used as a repository of materials, as a communication vehicle and as an aid in
managing assessments. All respondents believed that LMS were here to stay: respondents
believed that there would be no going back on this particular technology by academics as
individuals or by the institution as a whole.
All respondents highlighted its use as a repository of materials and this was the main use
made of LMS by all respondents. The LMS has become a central point or focus for their
teaching: a single place for students to go for information.
Some use was made of the communication features of the LMS. The main usage was to
broadcast informational messages from lecturer to student. Attempts were made by some
of the respondents to create discussion forums but these were largely unsuccessful:
students did not participate. For communication with lecturers, students continued to prefer
email.
Several respondents used the LMS with respect to assessment. This made administration of
assignments more efficient and also provided a historical record of what was received and
when.
There was little evidence that people altered their teaching and learning style due to their
use of or engagement with LMS. If anything, the alternative held: academics picked and
chose features of the LMS that fitted their particular teaching style. Academics do not use
LMS in a standard fashion: they select certain features and use them in different ways
according to their needs and their priorities.
There was little support for standardization of materials within LMS. Indeed, several
respondents indicated that modules were different in nature and that over-standardization
may be detrimental to teaching and learning.
The academic and students
The data provided no evidence of a significant shift in the relationship between lecturer and
student since the advent of LMS. Although all respondents used LMS to a significant extent
they did not alter their teaching style to accommodate LMS. Respondents reported that LMS
had altered very little the nature of their interaction with students.
282
However, respondents did feel pressure from students to use LMS and this motivated at
least one of the respondents to commence using the technology.
While LMS did not alter the relationship between lecturer and student, email was mentioned
by several respondents as a technology that had done so. Respondents said that email was
widely used by students to communicate with lecturers. Several respondents commented
negatively about email: that reading and replying to large amounts of email took time away
from other more useful or important academic activities.
The academic and colleagues
The research project found that LMS had relatively little impact on the relationship between
academics. Apart from some sharing of materials the LMS did not appear to affect
relationships between academics either positively or negatively.
Many of the respondents viewed their LMS materials as private, between themselves and
their students, and not available to others: ‘[the LMS] is a very private thing…we generally
don’t have access to other people’s [LMS] pages’.
Academics were prepared to share their materials with colleagues if asked. However,
respondents did not like it when their materials were simply taken and used by others, even
colleagues.
Respondents also pointed out that it may occur that they have access to the materials of
other lecturers and sometimes they will avail of that access. This usually occurred for
administrative reasons, e.g. the collection of data for accreditations or the like. Respondents
pointed out that it can at times be useful to be able to access the materials of a fellow
academic should that person be away from the university.
The academic and the institution
The responses under this heading were to do with intellectual property, monitoring and
control, standardization and potential redundancy.
When initially asked, most respondents expressed little outward concern about intellectual
property: ‘it’s not something I’m worried about…if somebody wanted something I would let
them have it’; ‘if they want to rob my bullet points they can’. However, while respondents
were generally happy to share material they were unhappy if materials were taken without
283
permission.
Although not concerned at the present time, some respondents reported that they had
concerns about intellectual property for the future: ‘I am conscious, very conscious of, of IP
…because that is what we are going to be dealing with down the road’. IP is not a simple
issue as, for academics, dissemination of knowledge is integral to the role: ‘the conundrum I
think we are caught in in education really is that you, we, are not in the business of
proprietary knowledge…so we have a commitment to make knowledge as widely available
as we possibly can’ while at the same time ‘if you were to suddenly discover that somebody
in another institution is using your slides..[it might come] as a bit of a shock’.
Despite the outward lack of concern over their intellectual property, most respondents had
taken some precautions with respect to their materials. Three kinds of protective action
were described: holding back, removal of materials, and restricting access. Several
respondents held back on the materials that they placed in the LMS repository. Sometimes
this was done for student learning reasons e.g. not placing materials online until after the
lecture so as not to pre-empt discussion in class. However lecturers also held back materials
in order to protect the materials from unwanted use: ‘I don’t give too much detail…the
content of my slides is pretty scarce’. Respondents on occasion restricted access to their
materials: ‘I have deleted people that aren’t teaching the module off the list of named
teachers’.
The automatic rolling over, at institutional level, of materials from one academic year to the
next did cause some concern: ‘Now it migrates automatically and … it probably causes a few
issues’.
The academic and home
Most of the respondents reported that they used LMS outside of the university. One
respondent worked ‘wherever the laptop is’. All said that they sometimes work at home.
None of the respondents suggested or implied that using LMS at home was infringing on
home life. If anything, the ubiquitous availability of the LMS was an advantage to academics:
it allowed them work at home without having to bring home hard copy materials. Several
respondents reported that they would have worked from home anyway and that using an
LMS made work easier for them.
284
Conclusion
This paper has examined the extent to which learning management systems are being used
by academics and the impact of this on the nature of academic work and relationships
between the academic and students, colleagues and the institution. The paper found that
LMS has had a profound effect on academic work in that academics use the technology to a
significant extent and view the technology as here to stay. On the other hand, academics
have chosen to use the technology in ways that suit themselves, their teaching style, and
their work practices. Academics, even though active users of LMS, appear to resist attempts
at standardization of teaching materials.
The introduction and use of LMS was found not to have had a major impact on the
academic’s key relationships. Students have an expectation that LMS will be used by
lecturers and motivated some academics to begin to use LMS. However the primary use of
LMS has been as a repository for materials with some secondary use as a one-way
communication vehicle from lecturer to student and as an administrative support for
assessment. Lecturers did not change their teaching style to accommodate LMS: they chose
the elements of the LMS that best supported their teaching style. In turn, usage of LMS was
not found to materially change the relationship between lecturer and student. With respect
to colleagues, use of LMS was not found to materially change relationships between one
academic and another. However LMS materials were still largely viewed by academics as
private and there is evidence of holding back material and taking action to protect an
individual’s own materials.
This research project has several limitations: it examined the use of LMS technology in one
school in one university and therefore care must be taken in generalising from the results.
The research project focused on one technology – learning management systems; however,
this technology is just one of many technologies – for example email and various social
media – that are affecting university level teaching and learning; the combination of these
various technologies may have impact far beyond that of a single technology. Finally, the
research project focused on relationships of the individual academic with four entities:
students, academic colleagues, the institution, and home; there may be other existing or
new entities with which the academic may have relationships that may come into existence
due to, or are impacted by, learning technologies, for example with known and unknown
academics outside the institution and with internal professional support staff.
285
References
Anderson, G. (2006). Carving out time and space in the managerial university, Journal of
Organizational Change Management 19(5):578-592.
Barley, S.R., Myerson D.E. and Grodal, S. (2011). Email as a source and symbol of stress.
Organization Science 22(4):887-906.
Bond, C. and O’Byrne, D. (2013). If it moves, measure it: Taylor’s impact on higher education,
in C. Evans and L. Holmes (eds.) Re-Tayloring management: Scientific management a century
on, Farnham, Surrey: Gower.
Boswell, W.R. and Olson-Buchanan, J.B. (2007). The use of communication technologies after
hours: The role of work attitudes and work-life conflict, Journal of Management 33(4):592610.
Brady, M. (2013). Multiple roles of student and instructor in university teaching and learning
processes, International Journal of Management Education 11(2):93-106.
Bryant, A., Black, A., Land F. and Porra, J. (2013). Information systems history: What is
history? What is IS history? What IS history? ... and why even bother with history? Journal of
Information Technology 28:1-17.
Brynjolfsson, E. and McAfee, A.(2012). Winning the race with ever-smarter machines, MIT
Sloan Management Review 53(2):53-60.
Carr, N. (2010). How the internet is making us stupid. The Telegraph 27th August. Available
online
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet/7967894/How-the-Internet-ismaking-us-stupid.html accessed 8 Oct 2014.
Coakes, E., Bryant, A., Land, F. and Phippen, A. (2011). The dark side of technology: some
sociotechnological reflections, International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge
Development 3(4):40-51.
Coates, H., James, R. and Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of learning
management systems on university teaching and learning, Tertiary Education and
Management 11(1):19-36.
Creswell, J.W., 2012. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches
286
Third., SAGE Publications.
Dery, K., Kolb, D. and MacCormick, J. (2014). Working with connective flow: how
smartphone use is evolving in practice, European Journal of Information Systems 23(5), 558–
570.
Head, K. (2014). The hidden costs of MOOCs, in S.D. Krause and C. Lowe (eds.) Invasion of
the MOOCs: The promise and perils of Massive Open Online Courses, Anderson, SC: Parlor
Press, pp. 45-55. Available at http://www.parlorpress.com/pdf/invasion_of_the_moocs.pdf
accessed 16 Oct 2014.
Jackson, S. & Fearon, C., 2014. Exploring the role and influence of expectations in achieving VLE
benefit success. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(2), pp.245–259. Available at:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/bjet.12029 [Accessed March 25, 2015].
Johannesen, M., Erstad, O., and Habib, L. (2012). Virtual learning environments as
sociomaterial agents in the network of teaching practice, Computers & Education 59:785792.
King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side, College Teaching 41(1):30-35.
Middleton, C.A. and Cukier, W. (2006). Is mobile email functional or dysfunctional? Two
perspectives on mobile email usage, European Journal of Information Systems 15:252-260.
Laverty, S.M., 2003. Hermeneutic Phenomenology and Phenomenology: A Comparison of Historical
and Methodological Considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(3), pp.1–31.
Love, N. & Fry, N., 2007. Accounting students’ perceptions of a virtual learning environment:
Springboard or safety net? Accounting Education: an international journal,, 15(2), pp.151–166.
Available
at:
http://www.tandfonline.com.remote.library.dcu.ie/doi/abs/10.1080/06939280600609201 [Accessed
May 1, 2015].
Mason, J., 2002. Qualitative researching 2nd ed., London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Available at:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=11186904226132770946&hl=en&oi=scholarr#0
[Accessed April 9, 2015].
Naveh, G., Tubin, D. and Pliskin, N. (2010). Student LMS use and satisfaction in academic
institutions: The organizational perspective, Internet and Higher Education 13(3):127-133.
287
Nonaka, I. (1991). The knowledge-creating company, Harvard Business Review 69(6):96-104.
Orlikowski, W. and Scott, S. (2008). Sociomateriality: challenging the separation of
technology, work and organization, Academy of Management Annals 2(1):433-474.
Parker, L.D. (2002). It’s been a pleasure doing business with you: a strategic analysis and
critique of university change management , Critical Perspectives on Accounting 13(5/6):603619.
Parker, M. (2014). University, Ltd: Changing a business school, Organization 21(2): 281-292.
Prichard, C. and Thomas, R. (2014). What have we done with higher education? Organization
21(2):266-267.
Schmidt, K., 2002. The web-enhanced classroom. Journal of Industrial Technology, 18(2), pp.1–6.
Available
at:
https://moodle.elac.edu/pluginfile.php/63119/mod_resource/content/0/WebEnhanced_Learning.pdf [Accessed May 1, 2015].
van Damme, D. (2001). Quality issues in the internationalisation of higher education, Higher
Education 41(4):415-441.
Wu, L. (2014). Social Network Effects on Productivity and Job Security: Evidence from the
Adoption of a Social Networking Tool, Information System Research, Forthcoming. Available
at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2169476 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2169476
accessed 23 Oct 2014.
288
Figure 1: Traditional and digital era teaching and learning modes
289
Paaso Leena
ICT-supported Actions in Creating Cooperative Online Learning Environments
for Master Programs
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Oulu University of Applied Sciences
Finland
leena.paaso@oamk.fi
Abstract
Digitalization of education is essential in Finland. The Finnish Ministry of Education and
Culture states that electronic learning material and other resources should be freely
available in the net. By 2020 all the people working in the educational field should have
sufficient skills to use technology in a meaningful way. The students in the Master programs
of the Universities of Applied Sciences work whole time and study in addition to it, and the
studies have a strong orientation to working life. This is why the Master programs were
transferred mainly into net at Oulu University of Applied Sciences (OUAS). The study carried
out at OUAS aimed at finding the need of support of vocational Higher Education teachers
when teaching online. Material was collected from official documents and interviews of the
teachers in the Master programs. The study was carried out using action research method.
Based on the materials and interviews a basic action model for cooperative online teaching
in the Master programs has been developed. Also teaching, teaching methods and the use of
online learning environments have been developed. Based on the basic action model a
cooperative teaching environment was designed to support teachers in Master programs.
Promoting the use of online learning environments, as an integrated part of the teaching,
will need a lot of diverse actions. The added value in this project came from the possibility of
the joint building processes.
Keywords: Digitalisation of teaching, Innovative teaching model, Multi-disciplinary Courses,
Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs)
290
Introduction
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and digital media have penetrated
everyday life all over the world, but formal education is far behind in making use of the
benefits of ICT to improve learning options (Redecker et al., 2010). Because of the ubiquitous
use of technology in our society, it is often assumed that teachers can use ICT in education,
but it is not the case in real life. Teachers have varying ICT skills and the use of ICT is
inconsistent. (Voogt et al., 2011.) A wide use of high-level technology is still surprisingly low.
In the European Union (EU) countries teachers use ICT in education mainly to the
preparation of teaching activities, but are not using ICT much when working with students
(European Schoolnet & University of Liège, 2013). ICT should make learning possible, at
least partly, regardless of time and the location of the learners. The European Commission
summarizes in a document “Opening up Education” that 70% of teachers in EU think that it is
important to have training in using ICT in education. Even though teachers recognize their
needs for training, only 20-25% of students are taught by teachers who are digitally
confident and supportive. (European Commission, 2013.)
The Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture emphasizes in its strategy statement that in
the near future the Finnish educational institutions and schools are internationally advanced
users of ICT in education. Digital technologies are fully embedded in education and ICT is
used in a pedagogically meaningful way. E-learning material has to be of high quality and
cover the whole curricula and the bases of qualifications. Electronic learning material and
other resources should be freely available in the network in the near future. (Ministry of
Education and Culture, 2010.) This is a challenge given to educational institutes and schools,
including Universities of Applied Sciences.
The research design
In OUAS the amount of online teaching and tutoring was and will be increased in 2012-2015
considerably. Master programs will be transferred mainly to the net. The Master programs
development study started with a background analysis of the Master curricula (N=11) and
with teacher interviews (N=31). Material to the study was collected from official documents
including aims and curricula of eleven Master programs in semester 2011-2012 in OUAS. The
study process concerned the contents of all Master programs to find out the present local
291
situation of the courses and the amount of online and multimode courses. The study aimed
at finding the needs of teachers when teaching online and the measures how to support
vocational higher education teachers in using ICT in teaching. Purpose of the study was also
to develop online teaching, teaching methods as well as the usage of online environments.
New online learning environments were not produced.
The study was carried out using action research method. Action research involves
practitioners in the study process from the beginning of the study to final conclusions and
actions. Action research is a form of self-reflective enquiry undertaken by participants in
order to improve their own practices, their understanding of these practices, and the
situations in which the practices are carried out. (Carr & Kemmis, 1986.) This action research
study investigated the use and the integration of ICT into Master programs at OUAS.
Master programs’ needs in the development of a basic action model
The students in the Master programs in OUAS, work whole time and study in addition to it.
Theory and practical issues are integrated together and development tasks are in most cases
performed in the students’ work places and are integrated into an individual student’s
learning process (Okuogume & Jäminki, 2010). Jäminki (2008) showed that the integration of
work-related issues is not easy to accomplish. To facilitate the integration students need
special online learning environments for their master studies. Online learning possibilities
should make education available for off-campus learners. Online education provides a wide
range of opportunities for off-campus learners. This was one reason why the amount of
online teaching has been and will be increased significantly in OUAS.
Because of ICT today exist jobs that did not exist a decade ago and new jobs appear all the
time. Students have to be educated to the jobs that do not yet exist. The development is fast
and requires changes in education and raises a question: What has to be taught and how?
(Voogt et al., 2011.) Students who study in the Master programs need also ICT skills.
Embedding technological tools in the Master program studies provides students with
important ICT skills and prepares students for new jobs as well as provides the Universities
of Applied Sciences competences that are required in the working life. (Okuogume &
Jäminki, 2010.)
292
Results of the content analysis
Content analysis
The background analysis including curricula and teacher interviews showed that teachers´
skills and understanding of using ICT in teaching were on various levels. Rogers (2000) speaks
of this same aspect and states that it is important to recognize the teachers´ competences in
ICT. The analysis showed also that teachers were not very familiar with integrating ICT to
their teaching and they felt that they need help and training in using ICT in education.
Majority of teachers in EU-countries share this feeling (European Commission, 2013).
Teachers are also under significant pressure to change and they feel the lack of time which
creates barriers in ICT learning (Clarkson, 2002). The barriers are often related to teachers’
pedagogical beliefs, but also to the uncertainty of the use of technology (Hinostroza &
Mellor, 2000).
The use of technology should be in balance with the contents (Mishra et al., 2006). The
background analysis showed that traditional teaching was imported directly to online
environments. In order to produce material into online environments on the basis of the real
needs and in bigger amounts, the production process of virtual learning material has to be
supported. A good online course design requires both understanding of how technology is
used to produce and share knowledge and understanding of the contents and pedagogies.
(Mishra et al., 2006.) If the full potential of the online technologies are not utilized, the use
of technologies does not bring sufficient added value to education. If the technologies are
used only to support e-learning, the learning design will be correspondingly conservative; if
they are used to support technology-driven learning, the learning itself may be secondary to
technology (Kukulska-Hulme & Traxler, 2007).
When the documents of the Master programs were analyzed, they revealed four themes
which were taught in all Master programs in OUAS. The actual themes found from the
document analysis were:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Anticipation and understanding of future work life
Entrepreneurship competence
Research, development and innovation competence
Competence in leadership and management.
293
Teachers produced material independently and separately to all Master courses.
Cooperative teaching and common courses were not much used. Virtual and blended
implementations of all Master program courses were only very occasionally available.
Teachers were using different online learning environments depending on teachers’
personal interest in online learning. The practices of realizing the courses within the themes
varied greatly as well as the extent, methods and credits of implementation - even in the
neighboring Master programs. (Paaso, 2012).
The added value in this development project will come from the possibility of joint building
processes. Developing learning and competences of the staff is essential, but information,
knowledge and technology are not the only issues to be concentrated on. Saarinen & Lonka
(2005) describe these as invisible, “value-based soft variables of learning”.
Good practices
Side by side with the contents analyzing processes, good practices in different Master
programs were also explained in order to apply them widely to various fields of teaching.
This evaluation was carried out through teachers’ self-assessment. The evaluation resulted
in the cooperative support services to promote the use of virtual and multimode teaching.
The study around the ideas of common course production in OUAS Master Programs
revealed attitudes contrasting the development of self-sustained ICT skills: the teachers
explained that they would like to have a whole-time personal assistant for their ICT teaching.
They also wanted to have a list of ICT applications in education and wanted to know what to
do with each application. It seems that technical services come first in the selection, and
pedagogical issues follow after. It means that pedagogical usage of ICT is still considered a
skill to use technology only, although it is a question about a new type of learning
environment and a new culture of actions (Tozer et al., 2011).
Virtual study points
The amount of virtual study points of the Master courses were also calculated based on
teachers’ own information. Because there was not a commonly accepted definition of virtual
studies in OUAS, teachers may have understood virtual studies differently. This made the
calculation of the virtual study points challenging. That is why the virtual study points were
not compared between the degree programs accurately, but they were suggestive. The
amount of online courses in the Master programs varied a lot, ranged from 0% to 60%,
294
based on teachers' own information. The amount of virtual studies was also estimated on
the curricula of the Master programs.
Teachers’ ICT skills
Clarkson (2002) states that it is necessary to increase our understanding of teachers’ beliefs
of using ICT as a part of efforts to increase teachers’ technology skills and usage of ICT in
education. This is important, because more developed teachers seem to be less stressed
about ICT in education. (Clarkson, 2002.) Boud (1988) describes the ICT uptake with a
typology in which he divides the users of ICT into four categories of stages: dependence,
counter-dependence, independence and interdependence (Figure 1). At Dependence and
Counter-Dependence phase, more dependent teachers see weaknesses and they perceive
the lack of ICT support. At Independence and Interdependence phase, teachers are more
independent and they share ideas with and for others and they cooperate with each other.
(Clarkson, 2002.)
Figure 1. The four stages for teachers’ learning ICT skills (adapted from Boud 1988).
ICT learning is a complex process and a single model cannot describe the entire process, but
Boud’s model gives instruments for understanding teachers’ ICT learning. (Clarkson, 2002.)
Discussions with Master program teachers revealed that also teachers in the OUAS Master
programs vary considerably in their attitudes, understanding and behavior in relation to ICT,
not only in teaching, but also in their daily lives.
295
Successful online learning requires both teachers’ attitudinal changes and investments in the
ICT equipment, tutoring in its usage and maintenance of the devices. (Lasonen & Ursin,
2011; Gonzales. 2009; Yair. 2008). The persons in the administration, leading, management
and specialist jobs see a lot of possibilities in online teaching, while the persons responsible
for teaching arrangements see numerous problems in realizing online teaching (Aittola,
2011).
Basic action model in OUAS
There are many technologies used to transfer various aspects of teaching to virtual learning
environments, but good quality educational content, applications, devices and models for
teachers and students are still needed (European Union, 2013). Technology should make
teaching and learning more alive by integrating contents to relevant everyday functions.
Technology should help teachers as well as learners and it should have a clear impact on the
curricula and pedagogical measures. (Kukulska-Hulme & Traxler, 2007.) Technology is not
the intrinsic value in education, it should enable education and learning (Clarkson, 2002).
Based on the study and the evaluation of existing technologies already used in the OUAS
Master programs, a basic action model was developed during the study. The model was
developed considering the fact that teachers are at different stages in using ICT in education
(Figure 2). The basic action model presents the phases of online teaching in general and
emphasizes only a few full supported technologies. A limited number of technologies are
easier to adopt in education.
296
Figure 2. OUAS basic action model.
Only two full supported ICT environments were used in the model during the study. In
addition to the selected technologies teachers were encouraged to use a variety of tools and
methods inside the selected environments. The selected environments were:
 Optima – a versatile, adaptable web-based learning platform for teaching and project
management
 Adobe Connect (AC) – a complete webinar solution used to deliver lectures and
seminars.
All the Master programs were implemented in Optima, which was also the starting point for
all Master courses. AC was used mainly in teaching and tutoring sessions. Information and
guidance files were gathered to Optima.
297
In the basic action model, developed in OUAS, peer tutoring is a key element and it
encompasses the whole model. With peer tutoring it is possible to be aware of teachers’ ICT
competences and offer individual support for teachers in each section of the model. The
OUAS basic action model takes into account Boud’s four stages of the ways how teachers
react to ICT in education: dependence, counter-dependence, independence and
interdependence teachers.
OUAS basic action model vs. Boud’s taxonomy
The meaningful use of ICT shall not concentrate primarily on studying the technical
applications only, although it forms a greater part of traditional ICT teaching. Instead, the
focus should be placed on the teaching processes of the contents. (Newby & al. 2000.)
In Boud’s taxonomy Interdependence teachers are able to integrate others´ perspectives
into education, they are confident in supporting others and they understand other teachers’
lacks of using ICT in education. Independence teachers adapt ICT activities independently to
the education. They use recommendable technologies in education and are able to
cooperate with other teachers. Independence teacher feel comfortable with ICT, are more
independent of support and are able to create tasks to meet needs of online education.
(Clarkson, 2002). In OUAS basic action model peer tutors were network pedagogy experts
and they may be considered as interdependence teachers in Boud’s taxonomy.
Network pedagogy experts in OUAS created and shared different platform models in Optima
online environment. They also gave advice to others and they followed trends and
encouraged other teachers. Network pedagogy experts helped teachers in finding
pedagogical methods for the online implementations. They used versatile technologies
including social media in their education and brought new models into Optima and AC.
Network pedagogy experts had an important role in the joint development of the Master
programs in order to get the teachers started with the implementations. They acted as peer
tutors for individual teachers as well as for teacher groups.
In OUAS basic action model teachers who knew well how to use Optima and AC in education
may be considered as independence teachers in Boud’s taxonomy. Those teachers were not
network pedagogy experts, but they were also peer tutors in OUAS basic action model. Both
types of peer tutoring teachers assisted teachers who needed support and help or felt lack
of understanding the possibilities of ICT in education. Master program teachers who were
298
not familiar with ICT in education may be considered as Dependence or CounterDependence teachers in Boud’s taxonomy.
Table 1 summarizes the variety of teachers’ feelings, understandings and behaviors to ICT in
teaching according to Clarkson (2002). The division into four stages is adopted from Boud
(1988). The OUAS basic action model takes into account the fact that teachers react
differently to ICT in teaching.
Table 1. Summary of the four stages of the ways how teachers act and how they react to ICT
in their teaching (Clarkson, 2002).
Stage
Feelings
Understandings
Behaviors
Dependence
 Lack of control
 Need for support
and help is evident
CounterDependence
 Frustrations by
control issues
 May feel
independent
 May feel forced
 Survival issues with
ICT
 Concerned with own
learning
 Teaching oriented
 Need to take
increased
responsibility, but
lack of
understanding
around ICT
 Consider ICT as an
object
 Share only for selfish
support
 May be self-centered
 Unable to support
others
 Chooses individual
activities
 Use of ICT rarely in
multiple ways
Independence
 Able to cooperate
 Teaching and
with other teachers
learning oriented
 Begins to feel
 Increased concern
comfortable with
for the students
ICT
 Able to create tasks
 More independent
to meet needs
of support
Interdependence  Control issues
irrelevant
 Sees value in joint
development
 Able to integrate
 Learning oriented
 Aware of one´s own
and students´
development
 Considers both
299
 ICT a tool for teaching
 Tends to use closed
activities
 Can adapt ICT
activities
independently
 Acts as a role model
 Gives advice without
reservation
 Able to integrate ICT
into work
others´
perspectives
 Confident in
supporting others
 Understands others
frustrations
student and
software roles
 Open-ended tasks
 Encourages and
collaborates
Learning environment view
A common online environment for all Master programs was created to Optima learning
environment. Based on the OUAS basic action model first pilot courses were carried out in
the Optima environment. The common online course environment was open to teachers, for
experimenting and for getting familiarized with online implementations. Optima
environment contained reusable materials, icons, images, structure models and links to
helpdesk. Network pedagogy experts updated courses according to teachers’ requests and
with them. Teachers who had less experience in adapting ICT in teaching could concentrate
on the question “What has to be taught” and the peer tutors helped them in finding answers
to the question “how”.
All Master programs were using the same online environment in Optima. Figure 3 presents
the structure of online studies in different Master programs.
Figure 3. Structure of the Master Programs
300
Network pedagogy experts created and they also updated general information into the
Optima environment. Examples of how to produce virtual material cooperatively in online
learning environment were also available in the Optima environment. The themes found
from the document analysis were gathered together and four common multi-disciplinary
courses were created.
The teachers were being acquainted more thoroughly with ICT in education and their ICT
competences were supported correspondingly according to teachers’ special needs; the
network pedagogy experts were responsible for that. Courses were not necessarily owned
by a single teacher who taught a particular course and had earlier autonomy over its content
and delivery. Based on this model teachers produced courses together in teacher teams.
More advanced teachers acted as peer tutors in the multi-disciplinary study course
development groups. With planning the focus stayed on the educational needs, not on the
technologies.
Outcomes
As to online learning, ICT is not always ready for pedagogical use as such, but learning
environments need the reformation of action cultures, teaching methods, learning
assignments and evaluation (Collis 2002). The analysis of the official documents and the
teachers’ interviews showed that many teachers felt that they needed tutoring in the basics
of online pedagogy and even in online writing. They lacked everyday practices in online
teaching, although they could use basic desktop applications. Some teachers did not identify
the virtual and blended teaching possibilities or technologies. Teachers suggested common,
low threshold rooms to be reserved for experimenting and producing virtual and networkbased material as well as for getting familiarized with other teachers’ network
implementations. They wished that they should have an ICT support person available all the
time they were teaching or using online methods. Traditional teaching models were
imported directly to the virtual learning and teaching contexts. Many teachers listed single
techniques, devices or methods they would like to have tutoring in. In this case the full
potential of the virtual teaching is not utilized, and the use of technologies does not bring
sufficient added value to education and learning experiences (Kukulska-Hulme & Traxler,
2007).
301
Teachers who participated in the project had neither reflected the basic questions
connected to the realization of online teaching nor its interaction and the changing nature of
learning in it. It seems that many of the teachers who participated in the development
project were either in dependence or counter-dependence phase. Requests, such as “I wish
to have an ICT support person available all the time when teaching online” or “I want to
have a list of techniques, devices and methods which to use in online teaching” support this
view as well as the fact that some teachers did not identify the virtual and blended teaching
possibilities or technologies. That is why they could not ask for assistance or support. In
other words, they felt that asking for help in a situation where they did not recognize the
origin of the problem was like acting in the darkness.
Based on this research first pilot courses have been carried out. The results of the pilot
courses showed that online learning needs a lot of support in the OUAS Master programs.
The research helped to find existing common themes. The added value in this development
project came from the possibility of the joint building processes.
The amount of virtual study points increased in all Master programs from the baseline
situation considerably. The amount of virtual studies varied in the Master programs at the
beginning of the development project from 0 to 60 %. The amount of virtual studies
increased in all Master programs and was from 77 to 92% of the studies in autumn 2014
beginning studies. (Isohanni & Huttunen, 2014.)
To be able to increase the amount of virtual studies and to offer Master programs totally in
net, we have to understand the variety of people´s ICT skills, attitudes and beliefs. It is also
important to provide teachers with opportunities to experiment different online learning
environments.
Conclusions
In the future we need new competences like holism, emotional intelligence and sensitivity to
ICT applications. The demand of change is continuous and offers also many opportunities.
(Saarinen & Lonka 2005.) In today´s changing conditions retrospective way of forming future
solutions should be avoided. To be able to response to the future challenges, we have to
understand the variety of people´s ICT skills, attitudes and beliefs. It is also important to
provide teachers with opportunities to experiment different online learning environments.
302
Developing competences of all staff members working in educational field is essential and
aims at giving meanings and understanding of virtual and blended learning possibilities.
Teachers’ barriers are not impassable, but will need a lot of work both at individual and
organizational levels. The challenge today is confirming the teachers of the necessity of the
change and the gains from it. The prevailing view of today´s students and knowledge
workers is that they are digital natives and fundamentally different compared to previous
generations in how they learn, what they value in education, how they use technology and
how they interact. ICT has penetrated our everyday life and informal education and is
coming to formal education, too.
References
Aittola, H. 2011. Yliopistofuusiot akateemisen työn ja identiteetin uudelleenmäärittelijöinä?
[University fusions redefining academic work and identity] In J. Lasonen & J. Ursin (toim.),
Koulutus yhteiskunnan muutoksissa: jatkuvuuksia ja katkoksia. [J. Lasonen & J. Ursin,
Education in the changes of society: continuities and breaks] Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän
yliopistopaino, 94-136.
Boud, D. J. 1988. Developing student autonomy in learning (2nd ed.). London: Kogan Page.
Carr, W. & Kemmis, S., 1986. Becoming Critical: education, knowledge and action research.
Basingstoke. Falmer Press.
Clarkson, B. 2002. Teachers, teams and technology: Investigating a team approach for
supporting teachers’ uptake of ICT. Edith Cowan University.
Availabe in
<http://ro.ecu.edu.au/
cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1118&context=theses.>
Referred
2.7.2015.
European Commission 2013. Communication from the commission to the European
parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social committee and the committee of
the regions on Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and learning for all through new
Technologies and Open Educational Resources. Available in <http://eurlex.europa.eu/legalcontent /EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52013DC0654&from=EN> Referred
28.6.2015
303
European Schoolnet & University of Liège 2013. The Survey of Schools: ICT in Education.
Benchmarking Access, Use and Attitudes to Technology in Europe’s Schools. European
Commission. Available in <https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/node/51275> Referred
25.6.2015.
Gonzales, C. 2009. Conceptions of, and approaches to, teaching online: a study of lecturers
teaching postgraduate distance courses. Higher Education 57, 299-314.
Hinostroza, E., & Mellor, H., 2000. Teachers’ beliefs about computers: Report of a case study.
Journal of Educational Research, 22(4), 39-409.
Isohanni, I., Huttunen, J., 2014. Master-koulutuksen kohteena on työelämän tutkiminen ja
kehittäminen. Ylemmän ammattikorkeakoulututkintokoulutuksen kehittämisprojekti vuosina
2012–2014 [The target of Master programs is the research and development of working life.
The Master programs development project in 2012–2014.] ePooki 29/2014. Available in
Finnish <http://www.oamk.fi/epooki/index.php?cID=556>.
Jäminki, S., 2008. Ohjaus- ja opiskeluprosessit samanaikaisessa ja eriaikaisessa
verkkoympäristössä. Etnografinen tutkimusmatka verkkotutkinnon maailmaan [Teaching
and Stydying Processes In Synchronous And Asynchronous Virtual Learning Environments.
An Ethnographic Excursion To The World Of Edegree Programmes.] Doctoral Thesis (in
Finnish). Rovaniemi. Lapin yliopisto.
Kukulska-Hulme A. & Traxler J. 2007. Designing for mobile and wireless learning, in H.
Beetham R. Sharpe (Eds) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age. Designing and delivering elearning. London: Routledge.
Ministry of Education and Culture 2010. Koulutuksen tietoyhteiskuntakehittäminen 2020.
Parempaa laatua, tehokkaampaa yhteistyötä ja avoimempaa vuorovaikutusta. Opetus- ja
kulttuuriministeriön työryhmämuistioita ja selvityksiä [The development of education and
media society 2020. Better quality, more effective cooperation and more open interaction.
Memoranda and accounts of the work groups in the Ministry of Education and Culture.]
2010:12, 8–14. Available in <http://www.minedu.fi/export/sites/default/OPM/Julkaisut/
304
2010/liitteet/okmtr12.pdf?lang=fi> Referred 25.6.2015
Mishra P. & Kohler, M. 2006. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for
teacher knowledge, Teachrs College Record, 108 (6): 1017–54.
Newby, T., Stepich, D., Lehman, J. & Russell, J. 2000. Instructional Technology for Teaching
and Learning: Designing Instruction, Integrating Computers, and Using media. 2nd ed.,
Columbus, Prentice-Hall.
Okuogume, A. & Jäminki, S., 2010. Experiences of integrating R& D&I in professional Master
Degree Programme. The case of competence-development based learning. Approved full
paper, presented at Combi 2011-Conference, Hämeenlinna 2011.
Paaso L. 2012. Production of Virtual and Network Teaching Material – Goal and Reality. In
Manuel Fernandez, Inga Aleksejeva, Inga Vanaga (Eds.) Teachers’ Life-cycle from Initial
Teacher
Education
to
Experienced
Professional.
Available
in
<http://www.atee1.org/uploads/
2011annualconferenceproceedings.pdf.> Referred 12.7.2015.
Redecker, C., Ala-Mutka, K. & Punie, Y. 2010. Learning 2.0 – The Impact of Social Media on
Learning in Europe. Policy brief. European Communities, 2010. Available in
<http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC56958.pdf.> Referred 28.6.2015
Rogers, P. (2000). Barriers to adopting emerging technologies in education. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 22(4), 455-472.
Saarinen, E. & Lonka, K. (2005). Muodonmuutos. Avauksia henkiseen kasvuun.
[Metamorphoses. Openings for Mental Growth.] Iisalmi: WSOY. 3. painos.
Tozer, S., Gallegos, B.P. & Henry, A.M. (Eds.) 2011. Handbook of research in the social
foundations of education. New York: Routledge, 2011.
Ursin, J. 2011. Muuttuva yhteiskunta – sopeutuva korkeakoulutus? Järjestelmäteoreettinen
näkökulma. [Changing society - Adaptive Higher Education? The system theoretical point of
view.] In J. Lasonen & J. Ursin (Eds.) Koulutus yhteiskunnan muutoksissa: jatkuvuuksia ja
katkoksia. [Education changes in society: continuities and breaks.] Jyväskylä: Suomen
kasvatustieteellinen seura, 22–42.
305
Voogt J, & Dede, C. & Erstad, O. 2011. TWG 6: 21st century learning. EduSummIT 2011, Paris.
Available
in
<http://downloads.kennisnet.nl/algemeen/edusummit2011/6%20EDUsummIT%202011%20
21st%
20century%20learning.pdf>. Referred 28.6.2015.
Yair, G. 2008. Can we administer the scholarship of teaching? Lessons from outstanding
professors in higher education. Higher Education 55, 447- 459.
306
Rodríguez-Pérez D., Cortés E., Arias-Zugasti M., Santa Marta C.,
Desco M.M. and Antoranz J.C.
European Network for Open Courses Peer Reviewed Quality Assessment: a
collaborative proposal
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Dept. Física Matemática y de Fluidos, Facultad de Ciencias, UNED
Spain
{jcantoranz,daniel,maz,cris,mmdesco}@dfmf.uned.es; escortes@ccia.uned.es
Abstract
Distance teaching universities (DTU) have always offered open learning courses in the form
of short and affordable specialization courses targeted at a variety of people. Nowadays,
open courseware (pioneered by the University of Thübingen Internet Multimedia Server,
1999, and popularized by the MIT Opencourseware, 2002) and massive open online courses
(MOOCs, popularized by Coursera and EDx, 2012) are as common as social networks
(pioneered by Facebook, 2004). Their quality is often measured just from the number of
users logged in and the a priori high standards of backing universities.
Is it enough to count number of users to mark the actual quality of open courses teachinglearning models? Why not quality assessment (QA) of actual contents and skills taughtlearned?
In this contribution we take MOOCs as a metamodel of teaching-learning collaboration and
propose a peer reviewed-based QA framework from the point of view of university teachers,
focused on contents, skills and organization. Peer reviewed quality assurance (PeRQA), like
peer assessment in MOOCs, ensures quality of the courses and provides feedback. QA must
be done by teachers of related subjects. PeRQA is affordable and free of the administrative
overburden of qualification agencies, demands transparency and treasures excellence in
each field.
It is in the foundations of European culture that market alone must not rule important issues
like education or health care. Moreover, transparency is a demand in modern open societies.
We believe European DTU Open Learning community must adopt PeRQA to lead again high
quality online distance teaching. Our proposal pursues this goal.
Keywords: open learning; quality assessment; peer reviewed quality assurance; MOOC
307
1 Introduction
Open learning is the future of informal continuous learning (Tracey & Richey, 2005). There is a
tradition in distance teaching universities, that have always offered alternatives to formal studies at a
distance in the form of short and affordable specialization courses targeted to a variety of students
and professionals from different areas: from just curious to those demanding up to date
specialization (Anderson & Simpson, 2012). However, with the increasing accessibility to digital
contents through the World Wide Web, self-teaching, first, and guided self-teaching, later, have
become more common. In the first times, this self-teaching material was offered by university
professors to their students and, by extension, to all the community. Later, the material was
organized and large thematic repositories were created. This was the idea behind Open Courseware.
These courses were pioneered by the University of Thübingen Internet Multimedia Server in 1999
and later popularized by the MIT Opencourseware initiative (http://ocw.mit.edu). As time went by,
these self-teaching courseware was further organized taking advantage of new educational
techniques and computational technologies (what was called Web 2.0). Massive open online courses
(MOOC) were born. This initiative was popularized by Coursera (http://www.coursera.org) and edX
(http://www.edx.org), led by consortia of American universities, that adopted the social network
paradigm (pioneered by Facebook) well known for any Internet user.
The main advantage of open learning initiatives is that they are globally advertised and totally free.
However, a standard and widely accepted quality assessment procedure for open learning courses is
conspicuously missing. As a consequence, their quality has been only measured internally from selfevaluation (Bates, 2015) and externally from the number of users (that has become global) and the a
priori high standards of the advertising universities. At present state of affairs two obvious questions
come to mind: Is it enough to count number of users to mark the actual quality of open courses
teaching-learning models? Wouldn't it be better to perform a quality assessment of actual contents
and skills taught-learned? Is there any way a student can choose the best quality course for his/her
purposes? Who or what can tell?
For formal education, quality assurance agencies (grouped in Europe under the European Association
for Quality Assurance in Higher Education, http://www.enqa.eu) ensure the quality of degrees,
masters and doctorates. This can be done because there exists a limited number of them per
university. However, the large number of informal learning courses makes this work impossible. For
instance, our university offers 27 degrees, 49 masters, and 18 doctorate programs, all of them
evaluated by ANECA (the Spanish quality assurance agency for education, http://www.aneca.es).
However, the number of live long learning courses is 610, and the number of students involved is
18,000 (MOOC not included) versus 188,000 students attending formal courses. In our case, the only
quality assurance comes from the own university through the departments which propose the
courses.
The loose relationship of open learners with the university is not an excuse to disregard the quality
assessment of the learning (call it contents, materials, consultancy, “learning experience” …) they are
given. Open learning students are not “low cost students”, although their economic impact has only
been qualitatively assessed and rarely been taken into account in academic policy making (Hollands
308
& Tirthali, 2014). On the contrary, open courses must have at least the same quality as formal
courses; nevertheless, they are our open window to the non-academic world, our front page to the
society.
The objective of this paper is to present a sustainable academic quality assurance system for all
unregulated courses offered online or at a distance by universities.
2 Method
As we mentioned before, an administrative quality assessment is too costly to implement for open
learning courses (that may change every year, thus requiring new assessments) because they are too
many, and because they are expected to be unconventional (thus a true expert in the area may be
required to evaluate a course). But that is the same scenario found in scientific publication, a selfregulated quality assurance system we will take as a model.
We propose community evaluation of open learning courses by peers, otherwise PeRQA (PeerReview Quality Assessment). The community of a course is that formed by all people offering open
learning courses in the same area. The size of the community must be large enough to sustain the
activity; for instance all countries where EADTU is present (i.e. an international context). Also
classifying the course areas by their UNESCO code may help “cut the tree” of the classification
wherever enough participants ensure that minimum community size.
The community will decide which criteria will be more valuable. PeRQA may start from some
common ground agreeable aspects (expertise of the teaching staff, educative level, adequacy of the
proposed materials, teaching methodology and technology, etc.) on a first term. However, other
particular aspects can be suggested or voted by the reviewers and, after a period long enough to
collect a number of opinions, new items may be added and removed; this could be done every year,
for instance. An initial proposal for the evaluation form is shown in figure 1.
PeRQA evaluation will be anonymous. Four people giving other courses on the same or similar
matters will be randomly submitted the course application. They will grade all important points of
the course (those initially chosen or profiled by the community). Every applicant wishing to include
his/her course in the credited list must agree to review a maximum of four other course proposals.
Every course will be graded with A, B, C, D, E or F by the reviewer. Final grade will be computed from
detailed grading (points assigned to each item), but can be changed by the reviewer in case it largely
departs from his/her overall expert opinion (because, for instance, some important valuable item is
missing from the list, in his/her opinion). So evaluation will be objective but final grading subjective
(although this is discouraged in the name of objectivity). The resulting PeRQA grade will be made of
the best three grades given by the four reviewers.
Both course applicant and reviewer will have access to all the information, although the applicant will
not be allowed to change that information once the evaluation begins, and the reviewer will not be
allowed to edit his/her evaluation once all four revisions are complete.
309
Finally we propose the applicant to have the last word about whether the course, with the given
qualification, will be included in the list of evaluated courses.
3 Discussion and conclusions
Everyone is in agreement that every process, to be improved, must be evaluated. The only belonging
to a prestigious enterprise or educational institution does not warrant good services: in our case of
study, university quality is not inherited. Accredited quality assurance is good for service providers as
well as for costumers.
We have proposed a collaborative approach to quality assessment of open learning courses, along
the lines discussed in (Camilleri, Ehlers & Pawlowski, 2014) about federated responsibility, but with
an emphasis on its applicability. As in the case of scientific publication, the PeRQA approach has not
only the value of approval, but also of experience exchange: the applicant not only takes advantage
of the experience of his four peer reviewers but can also learn what other approaches are taking
those whose applications he is going to revise. As this evaluation is taken from the point of view of
university teachers, it is more focused on the contents, skills and organization than on the success
attracting students (although the reviewers may warn about this).
It is important, however, to keep evaluation as simple as possible, focused on really important items
(as we propose in figure 1); this will encourage applicants to submit their courses for evaluation, and
will not discourage them to do their job as reviewers. For instance, instead of full CV of the course
director, only a few DOI (digital object identifiers, ISO 26324, easily linkable to the electronic
publications through http://www.doi.org) may help the reviewer to assess the expertise of the
course director; furthermore, a similar information provided by a team member and the university,
will allow the reviewer to assess the backup the course director may have, both in his team as in his
university.
This initial proposal for evaluation must not be taken as the definitive one. Each field has its
particularities that may change along time; community suggestions should be taken into account in
each area.
This peer reviewed quality assurance would provide feedback and ensure improvement of course
quality. It will also “build community” in the same sense as the assignment evaluation by peers in
MOOCs provides feedback to the student community: open course directors will learn from each
other. Furthermore, peer reviewed quality assurance is affordable, not requiring the administrative
overburden of national or European qualification agencies, demanding transparency and treasuring
excellence in each field.
One this system is put to work, the leading agency (why not EADTU?) could also provide a
public quality assessment certificate with similar effects as the European Diploma
Supplement (http://ec.europa.eu/education/tools/diploma-supplement_en.htm) to ensure
student mobility, firstly virtual, but maybe eventually in the real world.
310
It is in the foundations of European culture that market must not rule in important things like food or
health care. Moreover, transparency is a demand in modern open societies. We believe that distance
teaching universities must take this leap forward towards a transparent quality assurance to become
again the leaders of high quality distance teaching. Our PeRQA proposal is a first step towards this
goal.
References





Tracey, M. W., & Richey, R. C. (2005). The evolution of distance education. Distance Learning,
2(6), 17-21
Anderson, B., & Simpson, M. (2012). History and heritage in open, flexible, and distance
education. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, 16(2), [1-10].
A.W. Bates (2015). Ensuring quality teaching in a digital age. Chapter 11, in: Teaching in a
Digital Age. http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/
Fiona M. Hollands, Devayani Tirthali (2014). MOOCs: Expectations and Reality -- Full
Report. Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education, Columbia University.
http://www.academicpartnerships.com/sites/default/files/MOOCs_Expectations_and_R
eality.pdf
Anthony F. Camilleri, Ulf Daniel Ehlers, Jan Pawlowski (2014). State of the Art Review of
Quality Issues related to Open Educational Resources (OER). European Commission, Joint
Research Centre, doi:10.2791/80171
Course title:
5/100
5/100: adecuacy of the title to course
contents
15/100
15/100: course director bibliography related
to course contents; take into account course
educative level
10/100
10/100: teaching staff bibliography related to
course contents; take into account course
UNESCO code:
Course educative level: Undergraduate
Graduate
Postgraduate
Course price:
< 100€ 100-500€ 500-1000€ >1000€
Director expertise on
the field
DOI 1:
DOI 2:
DOI 3:
DOI 4:
Other course teachers
expertise on the field
DOI 1:
DOI 2:
311
(DOI must not have
been included above)
DOI 3:
University production
in the field of the
course (and related
areas)
(DOI must not have
been included above)
DOI 1:
educative level
DOI 4:
5/100
5/100: university staff bibliography related to
course contents; take into account course
educative level
Maximum ratio
student/teacher
5/100
5/100: ratio adequacy to educational level,
course contents and teaching methodology
Learning Platform
10/100
10/100: existence and usability of
student/teacher interface
Course program:
15/100
15/100: completeness and adecuacy of the
program to educational level
Reference materials:
(reference books or
lecture notes)
20/100
20/100: quality and accesibility of the
materials to contents and educational level
DOI 2:
DOI 3:
DOI 4:
DOI 5:
DOI 6:
Course evaluation:
Initial
Continuous
Final
10/100
10/100: adequacy of evaluation to course
level, program contents and number of
students per teacher
Final certificate:
Yes
No
5/100
5/100: fairness of the evaluation process to
provide an academic certificate
Objective grade: A (80-100), B (70-79), C (60-69), D (50-59), E (0-49)
Subjective grade: A (outstanding), B (good), C (medium), D (fair), E (this course should not be offered in its present form)
Comments:
Other aspects that should be taken into account to grade a course:
Item1: points /100
Aspects that should not be taken into account to grade a course:
Item2:
Figure 1: An initial proposal for the PeRQA evaluation form.
312
Snow Kathy
Blending in while standing out: a case study of blended learning design for incommunity Indigenous teacher education
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Cape Breton University
Canada
Kathy_snow@cbu.ca
Abstract
The Indigenous population is the fastest growing population in Canada (Statistics Canada,
2011) however there is a marked gap between the number of Indigenous and nonIndigenous teachers found working in the Canadian public school system. Sustainable preservice teacher education is needed to respond not only by moving away from historical
practice but with a moral and social imperative that encourages academic success through
culturally responsive programming (Carr-Stewart, Balzer, & Cottrell, 2013). In September
2014 Cape Breton University instituted a new blended in community model for Indigenous
pre-service teacher education with the aim of assisting teacher candidates reach graduation
along timelines of a typical 16 month program while staying in their home community and
with the addition of technology to facilitate connections with the on-campus CBU
community. Within this pilot a Science Methods course was offered using the two-eyed
seeing approach of Elder Albert and Murdena Marshall (2012). This approach asked both
Indigenous and non-Indigenous students to come together in a blend that involved not only
the design of the logistical blend of working from two separate locations, but a blending of
two world views with regard to science education. This paper examines the design model
and experiences of the instructor responsible for the blended course design. Through
reflections from the instructor five themes emerged as important in effective and culturally
responsive practice for blended learning design in teacher education.
Keywords: Blended learning, Science Education, Indigenous Pedagogy, Post-Secondary
Education, Learning Communities
313
Introduction
Responding to Bartlett, Marshall and Marshall’s (2012) call to integrate Indigenous ways of
knowing and knowledge systems into post-secondary education and faced with both a
challenge and opportunity of teaching a blended pre-service elementary teacher science
methodology course, I set out to design the content and structure of the elementary science
methodology course around the principles of “two eyed seeing”. Two eyed seeing or in
Mi’kmaq, Etuaptmumk is defined by Bartlett, Marshall and Marshall (2007) and refers to
learning to see from two perspectives at the same time with one eye applying the strengths
of Indigenous ways of knowing and with the other eye applying the strengths of western
knowledges and ways of knowing for the benefit of all (p.4). However as a non-Indigenous
third generation Canadian how could I begin? My own story, not inconsequential to this
current narrative determined if not the pathway, the theoretical approach. I grew up in
northern Canada, living first in the small settlement of Baker Lake and then moving to what
felt like a metropolis, the town of Iqaluit, population (at that time) 3000. It was my mother's
career that brought us above the treeline, first as a teacher, then school administrator and
finally instructor in one of the earliest community based teacher education programs offered
in the arctic. Her mantra, which became embedded in me was the best way she thought she
could work towards a positive change in Canadian education “I teach to make myself
obsolete”. I myself, start every course with a similar statement in an attempt to both
acknowledge the ongoing impacts of colonization in Canada as well as offer reciprocity in the
best way I am able as a “settler ally” (Kirkness & Barnhardt, 2001). My opening statement is
as follows: “I have no place to tell you how to teach your students because every context is
unique as is every teacher, but I can share what I know, and you can take from this what you
decide is useful”. Therefore in this, as in all my courses I established course activities around
concepts of critical pedagogy, where activities were designed to provoke higher level
discussion and questioning values rather than simply walking through the elementary school
science content with a series of “how to activities”.
With theoretical framework in place the second challenge of this course was its delivery
mode. It was to be offered to two cohorts in parallel, one groups was on campus and one
group was located in an Indigenous community over 400 kms away. Purely by logistics,
given travel times, small faculty numbers, and technology resources available it was
determined that a blended approach would be the most sustainable. However, how could I
best make use of the blended modality for these diverse student groups? How could I use
this challenge to make the course content more meaningful for students? These were the
design challenges I set out to resolve over the duration of the course. The information
shared in this paper is an overview of my journey, the design decisions made, their rationale
and my lessons learned in relation to literature available.
314
Background
Cape Breton University (CBU) has a long history of working with and supporting Indigenous
Peoples of Unama’ki, which is the traditional Mi’kmaq name for Cape Breton Island. From its
beginnings in 1976 when Grand Chief Donald Marshall Sr. helped turn the first sod for what
was to become CBU, to the establishment Unama’ki College a School dedicated to
Indigenous students and studies within CBU, the university has endeavoured to work with
local communities in a respectful and mutually beneficial relationship. In 2002 the
establishment of the Integrative science program illustrated again the collaborative
partnership between Mi’kmaw communities and CBU that has lead the university to CBU
being considered as one of the leaders in Indigenous post-secondary education in Canada. In
August 2014, the CBU Education department developed a 16 month in-community Bachelor
of Education program in direct response to requests from various community stakeholders.
Its aim was to involve Una’maki College and Mi’kmaw communities in the development of a
teacher education model that promoted student success through community partnerships
but was also sustainable for our small faculty. We accepted 18 Indigenous students into the
“in-community” elementary cohort who were to be taught courses in parallel to our “on
campus” elementary cohort which numbered 10 students. The in-community cohort
students were all self-identified Indigenous students living in one of six First Nations reserves
found on Cape Breton Island and mainland Nova Scotia. Students within this cohort were
accepted using the same criteria as on-campus students, however some allowances were
made for first degree completion credits, and given the short acceptance period for these
students traditional interviews were not conducted. It is important to note, that there were
also Indigenous students in the “on campus” cohort, as CBU has a well-established
specialization in Indigenous education including courses with instruction in Mi’kimaq
language and culture.
I was assigned the elementary science methods course for both cohorts. This course is the
foundation science methodology course for elementary science teachers and must reflect
the requirements for provincial teacher education certification. Due to our small number of
faculty we decided to amalgamate both cohorts for core required course offerings. The
structure of the course was to be blended with 12 of the potential 36 hours of contact time
completed face-to-face. This number was determined predominantly by logistics, with incommunity students and faculty members’ travel time limited to evenings and weekends in
order for students to receive a balance of face-to-face instruction in all of the fall term
courses as well as account for holidays, term length, and the challenges of travel in late fall.
To encourage parity between the two cohorts it was determined both cohorts should
receive the same amount of face-to-face scheduled contact time. For the on campus
students this amounted to four three hour classes on the CBU campus spread at critical
points throughout the term, while the in-community students participated in four three hour
315
sessions in a community location provided by the local community education coordinator. As
there were students from six different communities, the community with the largest
population of students as well as the most convenient driving distance for the majority of
students was selected as the in-community face-to-face location. However this meant that
some in-community students also experienced long travel times to their face-to-face class.
The two cohorts were to come together online using a combination of CBU’s Learning
Management Platform (LMS) Moodle and our web conferencing software Blackboard
Collaborate. How each of the instructors structured their courses within these parameters
was left to our professional judgement.
Literature Review
Decisions around the design of the science methodology course were determined after
extensive literature review with regard to the application of two-eyed seeing in science
classrooms, learning design for Indigenous students, best practices in science methodology
instruction as well as blended learning design.
Bartlett, Marshall and Marshall (2012, p.4) outline eight key lessons learned from their
almost 20 year partnership in teaching and promoting approaches for weaving Indigenous
knowledge and non-Indigenous (more commonly referred to with the misnomer- western)
knowledge together for science education. The first is to acknowledge that Indigenous and
non-Indigenous people need each other and must engage in a co-learning journey. Second,
the journey must be guided by a term they refer to as two-eyed seeing. Third that “science”
must be viewed in an inclusive way. Fourth that we do things rather than simply talk about
them in a way that promotes positive development. Fifth, that we put our own biases in
terms of values and knowledges as well as our actions in front of us, like an object so that we
can examine and discuss them from an objective position. The sixth outlines the importance
of the use of visuals in scientific discussions. The seventh is that we must move back and
forth between worldviews and finally the eighth is related to the importance of collaboration
and highlights that we draw upon an advisory council of knowledgeable stakeholders from
within educational institutions and Indigenous communities. These lessons, they suggest
facilitate the building of cultural bridges between western and Indigenous worldviews and
communication. Where western science is described as a cultural pursuit that values,
empirical evidence, and systematic hypothesis testing, and whose validity and reliability is
established through extensive peer-review by other western scientists, Indigenous or
“Native Science” (Cajete, 2000) is a more holistic process, that attempts to recognize
patterns through creative participatory processes. It is not unlike western science, however
where the two distinguish themselves, is that Indigenous approaches also incorporate the
“spirit”, seeing the environment as sacred and all things as animate objects and inquiry takes
316
place by examining the interrelationships with a moral code that calls for respect for all
things (Stephens, 2000). Bartlett, Marshall and Marshall (2007) proposed an application of
critical pedagogy specifically for the conflict between Indigenous science and non-indigenous
science known as two-eyed seeing. In this approach both Indigenous learners and nonIndigenous learners are challenged to see the world with binocular vision, the lens of first
culture and that of the other. And like binocular vision, it is suggested that the viewer will
have a stronger understanding of the word by using both visions together.
This approach has been slow to be adopted in mainstream school provisions. Research
highlights the difficulties nonindigenous teachers have when discussing Indigenous
approaches to science teaching in their classrooms, highlighting fear, lack of knowledge,
racism (Deer, 2013). While alternatively Indigenous teachers outline the sanitized history of
Canada and superficial reduction of Indigenous knowledge to folktales and imagery as part
of the continued colonization of Canada as well as one of the grounds for the gap in
educational attainment (Hatcher, 2012). Two eyed seeing offered the potential for
transformative educational practice by developing educational capital to deal with the
contradictions between the norms of the different but related approaches to scientific
understandings while also respecting the differing positions.
Given the above lessons learned from Bartlett, Marshall and Marshall (2012), consideration
had to be given not only to the approach to the content of the course but the learning
design. Snow (in press) examined the needs of Indigenous pre-service teachers participating
in an urban pre-service teacher access program which piloted the use of blended learning
models and found that students in this specific case demonstrated a preference for a flipped
learning blend, and also the need for a visual course design that minimized the appearance
of steps or tasks. This evidence is supported by earlier work of McMullen and Rohrbach
(2003) who describe the barriers and best practices for distance education in Indigenous
communities arising from examine seven different case studies involving learning through
technology. Although this work is dated from a technology perspective it highlights issues
that are still current in some Indigenous communities such as access to reliable Internet as
well as learning styles which include a preference for social learning opportunities, storytelling, reflection and the cohesion seeking practices of Indigenous students in contrast to
non-Indigenous students whose tendency is more independent, focusing on concrete verbal
analysis through trial and error (McMullen & Rohrbach, 2003). It was also noted from more
recent work of McAully and Walton (2011) the hierarchical nature of the threaded
discussion forum most common to LMS platforms can reduce the number and style of posts
from Indigenous students given its top- down appearance as opposed to other
communication systems where students and instructor communication appears more equal.
317
Finally considering the current climate of integrated science teaching in Canada and the
Nova Scotia ongoing elementary curriculum review a holistic and practical design for
teaching and learning was needed. Practical application in teacher education courses is
usually conducted through “practice lessons” where pre-service teachers illustrate their
knowledge by conducing teaching simulations with classmates in a safe and supportive
environment. The design of the course therefore needed to allow for this kind of space, if
not conducted face-to-face, in some virtual platform.
Research Design and Methodology
Interested in the question of appropriate design for learning and success in this unique
context, the methodology for this research became case study. The data collection method
is based solely on the observations and reflections of the designer and course instructor
rather than student response.
Design of the course
As is typical of education technology courses, the course was organized in a manner that
would offer a balance between theory underpinning the teaching of science and actual
practice in lesson design and delivery. The course was divided into four sections, each
corresponding to a face-to-face meeting date, which allowed each section of the course to
be introduced and closed with time for discussion in a manner the students were most
familiar with. The four sections were entitled: the nature of science and student learning,
instructional strategies and issues, acquiring and applying strategy, pulling it together,
respectively. The face-to-face sessions were designed to present an over of the up-coming
section through active learning approaches and included discussions, debates, document
analysis, experiments and simulations to name but a few. Each lesson was guided by an
opening question and the lecture portion of the face-to-face meeting consisted of a
reflection or debrief of the activities conducted in relation to the question of the day and the
more administrative functions of teaching such as assignment instructions. I did not attempt
to answer the question of the day, but rather to set the stage for further inquiry as the unit
continued online.
The online portion of the course consisted of readings, videos and activities that were
organized by weeks and arranged in a manner that reduced visual clutter to aid in the
appearance of the manageability of the task (figure 1). Having identified the number of
items to click on a page can act as a deterrent to academic persistence (Snow, in press). Each
item was directly placed in the week it was needed and instructions for using the item were
placed prominently on the landing page.
318
Figure 1: Screenshot view of the landing page in Moodle for the course Teaching and Integrated Science
Curriculum, section 1.
Within each week student activities were focused through the use of an instructions page
(figure 2).
This page outlined the activities of the week in no more than 5 steps. Though content
changed weekly the five steps each had a specific function:
1. Introduce the content in relation to the instructor. In other words, demonstrate how
the content of the upcoming week was important in the instructors approach to
teaching, it’s meaning for the instructor and where it fit in relation to the instructor’s
larger understanding of the topic.
2. Activity or reading related to theory or content acquisition in relation to the issue
being explored in the week. This is likened to a traditional lecture.
319
3. An opportunity for students to explore the theory presented in relation to their own
personal context. This was usually an offline activity, students completed
independently and had direct application for future teaching.
4. Sharing their thoughts or learning in relation to the theory with the larger group. This
may have been a new task, or an extension of the previous tasks, sharing was done
through the discussion forum, but was not limited to text response. Students could
share pictures, video audio and text.
5. Finally the week ended with another activity that encouraged the students to
examine the content in relation to the world outside of the course context. These
activities varied and acted as the culminating event of the week.
Figure 2: Screen shot view of the online instructions for week 2 of the course.
The remainder of the content/items placed in each week were the resources needed to
complete the steps outlined in the instructions. It is important to note, that none of the
above items were graded, they replaced in class activities and students were told at the
beginning of the class that participation in these activities was akin to attendance in the
class. Should they choose not to participate it would be viewed the same as non-attendance
in a face to face class.
Students were also given the opportunity to participate in real time meetings positioned in
the middle of each unit- at the half-way point between the face-to-face sessions. The
meetings, hosted on Blackboard collaborate were optional for students and called tutorials.
320
The tutorial conversations were un-structured and student driven. Initially to encourage
discussion tutorials began with a review of assignment instructions and discussion continued
related to items that were observed to be posing a challenge within the course based on
student observations and questions. The meetings were recorded and shared back into the
LMS for students unable to attend the live sessions.
The design of both the activities and the assignments encouraged students from the two
separate cohorts to communicate and learn from one another as well as examine their own
perspectives on the topics in contrast to those of their classmates. In essence the aim was to
present two-eyed perspectives on approaches to teaching sciences with the students
providing the vision from each eye based on their cohort affiliation in relation to the activity
prompts provided. For example one early activity asked student teachers to draw a picture
of a typical scientist and share this with the class. In debriefing this activity student teachers
were asked to compare their drawings with one another and comment on any of the trends
in observations. Building on this strategy the two main assessment tasks were designed to
encourage similar discussion. One assignment asked students to identify and research an
issue in science that was of particular importance to them and share this in the format of a
research presentation poster. They student teachers were then asked to discuss the poster
and their learning around the issue in a five minute video and share this in the course LMS.
Student teachers were then asked to review the videos of others and again the activity was
debriefed in the discussion forum. The next assignment asked students to design a lesson
and present a lesson demonstration, again, by recording the lesson (15-20 minutes), sharing
with classmates and debriefing in the discussion forum. This task had an additional step,
which also asked student teachers to make a journal entry about their observations and
reflections on each video lesson watched. These assignments were constructed not only to
build on prior learning of the content of the course, but also to develop technical skills in a
sequential manner. The culminating assessment task, asked students to “pull together” all of
their learning by developing an interdisciplinary unit of work that addressed aspects of four
of the courses students were taking concurrently: Science methods, language arts methods,
developmental psychology and assessment. Rather than a video presentation, the
presentation of the units by groups of students was completed in the final face-to-face
session which also included a small buffet of food and drinks to add a sense of celebration
and completion to the term. All of the instructors of the courses represented participated in
this final day, with the regular timetable of 3 hour session blocks being collapsed into a one
day event.
321
The Lessons Learned
The course ran for 13 weeks from September 2014 to December 2015. Modeling the
language of Bartlett, Marshall and Marshall (2012) I will present my results and discussion in
the form of lessons learned.
Everything is two-eyed
Although not all of the activities were designed to explicitly create the opportunity to discuss
different perspectives, in every assignment where students were asked to share this
discussion ensued. In other words, the design worked better than expected. Specific
activities had been designed to encourage dialogue between the students around
Indigenous and non-indigenous approaches to science instruction, however by establishing a
climate at the outset that encouraged all students to be considered experts in their content
discussions around the meaning of responses ensued, although most of these did not occur
online.
Facilitating cross-cohort communication required considerable time
The face to face sessions allowed for relationship building between the members of each
separate cohort. The only space the cohorts had to come together was in the online sphere.
This was problematic in that the home for this communication was predominantly the LMS,
and given the research available with regard to the un-social nature of the LMS, where
students tendency is to separate school communication to social communication separate
(Siemans,2004). Therefore the initial activity design needed to concentrate on community
building activities as opposed to content development activities. The initial tendency of the
sharing, resulted in in-community students responding to only in-community students an oncampus students responding only to on-campus students essentially, two different social
groups in one space. The two groups were brought together over time through low social
risk activities. For example, one activity asked students to share an example of an enjoyable
science lesson they had experienced and highlight the features that made it memorableallowing students to find commonalities as well as differences around an object – the lessonthat was external to their own responsibility and knowledge. Also as the instructor I needed
to post regularly within forums to encourage cross-cohort communication by making posts
such as “Look at what student X has posted, this is a good example of….” Which then opened
communication pathways between the two groups.
Establishing the right level in the forum
Initially, students presented two very different types of responses in sharing areas, one type
of response could be characterized as a typical academic response where students
presented mini-essays in response to discussion prompts, while the other type of response
could be called the “text message” response, which included short responses offering words
322
of affirmation, and generally did not illustrate depth of reflection. The difference between
these kinds of posts or their causation is suggested in the work of (McMullen & Rohrbach,
2003) in describing communication patterns found within their case studies. However in
adopting a two-eyed seeing approach I wanted to encourage a balance between both
analysis and reflection. This was best achieved by asking students to present non-written
responses, or written responses around an object- rather than a purely written response. For
example the aforementioned activity that asked participants to “draw a scientist” activity,
encouraged students towards authentic discussion around an object (the drawing) as
opposed to responding to an assignment task. As the class progressed, the objects became
more challenging to create. The differences observed in the structure of the discussion
conversation appeared to be related to the different purpose of participation. The nature of
the tasks was designed to encourage relationship building, and discussion, as opposed to
assignment completion. Participation in this aspect of the course was not generally assessed
however it was difficult for students to abandon the construct, that everything the teacher
asked them to do was an assignment for grades. The removal of grading “participation”
offered some improvement, but more work in the area is needed.
Transparency of the methods
To encourage participation it was key to explain why the tasks were important and where
they fit in future learning. As adult learners the in-community students were also full time
employees as well as students, while the on campus students were full time students who
also worked to support their education. The removal of grades from participation
predictably would lead to lack of participation, with students only responding to items that
“counted” towards the final mark. This however did not occur, and participation remained
high, even in the live webinar sessions where students were explicitly told participation was
optional. This is best explained by Knowles (1974) seminal work describing adult learner
needs, where adult learners are considered to be highly motivated but only so long as the
information and tasks provided have real purpose for their personal objectives. By making
purposes clear, through both an explanation of my context and that of the classroom and
the larger community, the meaningfulness of the activity was made clear.
Debrief, debrief, debrief
The role of the instructor changed significantly, rather than presenting content, my role
became as designer to filter and establish some parameters for learning around activities
and then as teacher to be a co-learner and assistant to navigating through discussions and
moving discussions from superficial summaries to deeper questioning. The face to face
sessions became an important place for this discussion and acted as a space to debrief the
online discussions. Items, such as student products were brought forward into the face to
face discussion space. Again evidence in this case supports the work of McCauley and
323
Walton (2011) with regard to the challenges in using the LMS discussion forum as a space for
meaningful discussion given its structure. The deeper discussions around the meaning of
different objects shared in the forum took place either as a large group in face to face
sessions or in one to one conversations with me.
Conclusion
Though predominantly driven by logistical decisions around space and distance blended
learning appeared to offer an improvement over both a traditional distance or face to face
offering by allowing students time to process and play with ideas presented as well as a face
to face component for safe discussion. The instructor in this case, was central to community
cohesion and became the bridge between the two eyes of the two eyed seeing approach.
The students rose to the challenge presented to them with regard to being experts from
their relative positions and appeared to be empowered and enlightened in relation to both
their own and other world views. The true impact of this will only be see in in their future
careers as teachers. The design of activities could encourage community discussion and
served as empowering mechanisms for individual students and cultural groups, however
without intervention these groups would have remained separate throughout the course.
With regard to technology, the LMS though excellent in providing a standardized and easy
entry format for students but by nature of its structure was not the best to support real
dialogue between students as it persistently appeared to be the place to “upload
assignments” and “download information” rather than a meeting place for students. The
optional live webinars served as a better conversation place but were problematic in terms
navigating the extra technology, however this was not insurmountable, only impacting the
first few sessions. The face to face portion of the blended learning structure was critical in
proving a space for debriefing the online activities and providing the authentic
communication space not readily apparent in the online communications.
324
References
Bartlett, C., Marshall, M., & Marshall, A. (2007). Integrative science: Enabling concepts within
a journey guided by trees holding hands and two-eyed seeing. Sydney, NS: Institute for
Integrative Science and Health, Cape Breton University.
Bartlett, C., Marshall, M., & Marshall, A. (2012). Two-eyed seeing and other lessons learned
within a co-learning journey of bringing together Indigenous and mainstream
knowledge and ways of knowing. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, (3)4,
331–340.
Cajete, G. “The Making of an Indigenous Teacher: Insights into the Ecology of Teaching.” In
Education, Information and Transformation-Essays on Thinking and Learning edited
by J. Kane, 161-184. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1999.
Carr-Stewart, S. Balzer, G. & Cottrell, M. (2013). First Nations Post-Secondary Education in
Western Canada: Obligations, Barriers and Opportunities, The Morning Watch 40(3-4),
25-34.
Deer, F. (2013). Integrating Aboriginal Perspectives in Education: perceptions of pre-service
teachers. Canadian Journal of Education 36(2): 175-211.
Hatcher, A. (2012). Building Cultural Bridges with Aboriginal Learners and their ‘Classmates’
for Transformative Environmental Education. Journal of Environmental Studies and
Sciences. Retrieved from DOI 10.1007/s13412-012-0088-6.
Hatcher, A., C. Bartlett, A. Marshall, and M. Marshall. (2009). Two-Eyed Seeing in the
Classroom Environment: Concepts, Approaches, and Challenges. Canadian Journal of
Science, Math and Technology Education (9)3: 141–153.
Kirkness, V. & Barnhardt, R. (2001). First Nations and Higher Education: The Four R's - Respect,
Relevance, Reciprocity, Responsibility. Knowledge Across Cultures: A Contribution to Dialogue
Among Civilizations. R. Hayoe and J. Pan. Hong Kong, Comparative Education Research Centre,
The University of Hong Kong.
Knowles, M. S. (1974). Human resources development in OD. Public Administration Review,
34(2), 115–123.
McAuley, A., & Walton, F. (2011). Decolonizing cyberspace: Online support for the Nunavut
MED. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(4). Retrieved
325
from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/848
Siemans, g. (2004). Learning Management Systems: The wrong place to start learning.
Retreived from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/lms.htm
Snow, K. (2014). Social Justice or Status Quo? Blended learning in a western Canadian
Teacher Education program (in press).
Statistics Canada. (2011). Youth in Transition Survey (YITS).Record number 4435. Retrieved
from http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=4435.
326
Thelen Tobias(1), Emke Martina(2)
The OHN-KursPortal – Opening up higher education to adults with tutorsupported online courses
Affiliation:
(1)
University of Osnabrück
Servicestelle Offene Hochschule Niedersachsen gGmbH
Germany
(1)
tobias.thelen@uni-osnabrueck.de
(2)
martina.emke@servicestelle-ohn.de
(2)
Country:
Email:
Abstract
In this paper we present a novel approach to opening up higher education to adults. It encompasses
an online course portal that has been purpose-built in organisational, didactical and technical
manner.
The Offene Hochschule Niedersachsen (OHN) is an initiative to support opening up higher education
in Lower Saxony to adults by providing alternative pathways to higher education and encouraging
universities to offer courses suitable for adult part-time study. As recent as 2010 Lower Saxony has
widened access to higher education for adults by establishing an alternative easier pathway into
higher education. However, many adults do not know of the new access to continuous education at
universities. The online platform OHN-KursPortal has been set up in September 2014 to provide short
courses in three thematic areas that help adults prepare for university study: Student orientation,
mathematics and introduction to academic research and writing.
In this paper we describe the design principles of these tutor-supported online courses, discuss the
evaluation results of the first five courses and present corresponding qualitative research focussing
on the learning experiences of course tutors. By the end of 2014 a total of 107 adult learners
attended the OHN-KursPortal courses. The evaluation focusses on two aspects: Tutors’ perceptions
of working adult learners and their learning and course features and tutor actions that support
working adult learners in their learning.
Keywords: opening up higher education; lifelong learning; continuous professional development;
STEM subjects
327
Opening up higher education for working adults in Germany
Widening access to higher education for adults in Germany is part of an attempt to address the
“existing and increasing challenges of demographic change, of technological development and
international competition, the growing need of highly qualified personnel as well as the avoidance of
social conflict” (BMBF, n.d.) which ties in with a European strategy for social and economic
development (EC, 2014). National initiatives like “Recognition of Vocational Competences in Higher
Education”, “Transitions from vocational to higher education” and the Federal Government-Länder
competition “Advancement through Education: Open Universities” (http://www.wettbewerb-offenehochschulen-bmbf.de/ ) have sought to support the process of opening up higher education to
working adults by encouraging universities and other educational institutions offering continuing
academic education to develop models for recognizing prior learning and to offer courses suitable for
adult part-time study as these non-traditional students plan their study in combination with work
and private activities.
These national initiatives were aided by the German Länder who passed laws intended to facilitate
access to continuing academic education for working adults. As recent as 2010 Lower Saxony
widened access to higher education for adults by establishing an alternative pathway into higher
education. Adults without an upper secondary school leaving certificate (general or vocational) who
successfully completed a three-year vocational training and possess three years of professional
experience are now entitled to study at a university in a field related to their profession. In Lower
Saxony the federal government initiative ‘Offene Hochschule Niedersachsen’ (OHN) tries to foster
continuing academic education by bringing together important stakeholders for the process of
opening up higher education. The OHN initiative aims at encouraging universities to offer courses
that match the needs of new target groups such as working adults or maternity returners. Another
aim is to foster permeability between vocational and higher education through recognition of prior
(vocational) learning. This initiative is coordinated by the Servicestelle Offene Hochschule
Niedersachsen gGmbH (http://www.offene-hochschule-niedersachsen.de/ ) and funded by the
Ministry of Science and Culture of Lower Saxony.
The OHN-KursPortal
This chapter provides a short background of the OHN-KursPortal development until August 2015 as
well as a description of the main principles of platform and course design.
Background
Although access to higher education as an element of continuous academic education has become
easier for adults, there are still many challenges for working adults. Information about the new
pathway into higher education is not always readily available and courses which help working adults
328
prepare for university study often lack entirely (Bandscherus and Spexard 2014). Hanft and
colleagues (2013) show that universities are still poorly equipped to answer to the needs of students,
who bring diverse skills and experiences to their university study. The authors claim that more
flexibility is needed in the introductory stages of university study and that supportive courses, that
build on the skills and experiences these students already possess, should be offered.
It is with these challenges in mind that the Servicestelle Offene Hochschule Niedersachsen, together
with partners in higher education, set up the OHN-KursPortal (https://ohn-kursportal.de/ ), a
platform with tutor-led online courses designed to support working adults in preparing for university
study. The OHN-KursPortal provides short courses (4 – 8 weeks) in three thematic areas: Student
orientation, mathematics and introduction into academic research and writing. These new courses
enable prospective working adult students to develop an individual plan for continuous education
and lifelong learning and help refresh knowledge or bridge learning gaps. Financially supported by
the Ministry of Science and Culture of Lower Saxony these courses can be offered for free, and there
are no access requirements apart from signing in for the course a working adult wishes to take.
The OHN-KursPortal, which is being coordinated by the Servicestelle Offene Hochschule
Niedersachsen, and its initially three online courses were established in only 9 months and launched
at the end of September 2014. The project partner E-Learning Academic Network (ELAN e.V.)
provided the technical platform, has been responsible for maintenance and technical back-up and
supplied the “Allgemeine Vorbereitungskurs Mathematik” through a subcontractor, the Carl von
Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg. This course enables working adults to systematically refresh their
knowledge in basic mathematics. A second project partner, the Leibniz Universität Hannover created
the study orientation course “Vom Beruf ins Studium!?”. The course helps working adults decide
whether university study is an option for them, which study course(s) might be suitable and what the
next steps in their individual development plan will be. Finally, a third project partner, the
Hochschule für angewandte Wissenschaft und Kunst Hildesheim/ Holzminden/ Göttingen (HAWK)
developed the course “HANDWERKSZEUG studieren”, which seeks to familiarize working adults with
the basics of academic research and academic writing.
These innovative online courses enable working adults to learn whenever it suits them best. They are
designed to be clearly structured, easy to navigate and are conducted by course tutors that are
experienced in working with adult learners. The pedagogical concept seeks to integrate the
knowledge, skills and the experiences that the working adults bring to the courses, strengthening
learner motivation and fostering self-directed learning. The courses also attempt to stimulate peer
learning by providing opportunities for virtual learner exchanges through a course-integrated forum
and a regular online videoconferences.
In order to meet diverse needs of working adults in the area of mathematics, the OHN-KursPortal
started offering three courses in 2015: The “Aufbaukurs Mathematik zur Informatik” (Mathematics
for Informatics), the “Aufbaukurs Mathematik für Ingenieurwissenschaften”(Mathematics for
Sciences) and the “Aufbaukurs Mathematik für Wirtschaftswissenschaften” (Mathematics for
Economics). These courses build on the online course in basic mathematics, but can also be taken
329
without having completed this course first. By August 2015 10 tutor-supported courses with over 220
course participations (the number of participants is lower because some participants took part in
several courses) were conducted.
The courses are being evaluated through the means of an online survey. Emke (2015) reports about
the evaluation results of the first five courses in an earlier publication. In this article we describe the
evaluation results of three courses which were conducted from February to March 2015. The results
show that the participants are generally satisfied with the course portal and the courses. 78% of n=24
survey participants stated that they are satisfied or very satisfied with the OHN-KursPortal. The main
reason to participate in the courses was the ability to learn flexibly and independently from time
constraints (92% of n=24 participants agreed to this reason). For about half of the participants the
availability of experienced tutors accompanying learning (54%), the existence of courses specially
tailored to the needs of vocationally qualified participants (50%), and the possibility to find out
whether a university study programme is suitable for them (50%) were important. Contrary to the
expectations of course designers and tutors, however, only 17% of the participants named exchanges
and collaborative learning with peers as an important reason for taking a course on the OHNKursPortal.
The participants’ age ranged from 20 to 60 years but more than 40% fell into the 20-30 age category.
Using a computer and the internet were commonplace tasks for 75% of the participants (21% agreed
to this claim and 54% even fully agreed) though only 21% of them had used the internet for
structured educational and learning purposes so far. Half of the participants stated that they had no
technical problems using the OHN-KursPortal. The other half reported different problems that
related to problems with task submissions (12,5%), usability issues (using the forum, understanding
navigation, finding the course after log in – 25% of the participants) and general technical problems.
Principles of portal design
The OHN-KursPortal was designed as a single and comprehensive platform for both orientation and
preparation courses. It accompanies the website of the Servicestelle Offene Hochschule
Niedersachsen that provides extensive information about study programmes, counselling possibilities
and legal information. The requirements in developing the course portal have been:
 The entire portal adheres to the corporate design principles of the Servicestelle Offene
Hochschule Niedersachsen .
 Courses stick to given time frames, i.e. they have a starting and ending date and are not
completely self-paced.
 Users can retrieve a list of upcoming courses with extensive descriptions and preview videos
 Users can register for upcoming courses.
 When registering, users are asked for their professional background and their motivation.
This information is important for the OHN-KursPortal administrators, course instructors, and
tutors.
330
 Data privacy is an important issue. The users shall find themselves in a protected trustworthy
space.
 Users only have to register once and can enrol in as many courses as they want to.
 After a course ends, it can stay available for its participants.
 Courses can be offered several times. Later course runs can contain the same course
materials but do not share communication spaces with earlier courses.
Principles of course design
The course platform should host all courses and provide a clear and well-structured frame for
running and experiencing the courses. No strict guidelines for the instructional design can be given,
though, as the course aims differ significantly. However, all courses are based on a joint
understanding that adult learning is a socially mediated, constructivist process (Vygotsky, 1978) with
a strong emphasis on collaborative (peer) learning. The portal offers an authoring environment and
a standard toolbox of communication tools for course designers, instructor, and tutors. The following
requirements were to be met by the platform:
 Course material mainly includes video, text, additional files, and exercises.
 Asynchronous communication tools can be used for discussions, question and answer
sections, and exercises.
 Synchronous communication tools can be used for online consultation hours, group sessions,
and webinars.
 The courses are mainly structured in a chronological way providing course material, exercises
and discussions for each week of a course run.
 The courses are tutor-supported with instructors and tutors available for synchronous and
asynchronous communication and for feedback on selected exercises.
 Exercises can be mixed from automatically evaluated self-tests, group tasks discussed with
peers and tutor evaluated tasks.
 Instructors are able to gain insights into the participants’ background and performances
without violating data privacy principles.
The technical platform
Though the courses hosted by the OHN-KursPortal are not MOOCs but specialised online courses for
a well-defined target group, many of the aforementioned requirements are met by current platforms
used for designing and running xMOOCs. An xMOOC is described as a Massive Open Online Courses
(MOOC) that “consists of very structured content (divided in to 6 to 10 units), video lectures,
enhanced learning material and self-assessment” (Lackner et al. 2014, see also Daniel 2012).
331
Figure 1: The OHN KursPortal - Entry page
A typical xMOOC consists of:







“course structure with learning targets,
video lectures (recordings or new products),
additional learning content according to the video lectures
asynchronous communication possibilities (e.g. discussion forums)
self-assessment according to the video lectures
certificates for successful completion of the course
information system that provides all these contents” (Lackner et al. 2014, p. 216).
In contrast to xMOOC platforms, the OHN-KursPortal platform does not have to be able to serve
“massive” amounts of participants, i.e. it does not aim at ten thousands, not even thousands of
participants but only a few hundred. Thus, less technical optimizations in the platform performance
are necessary. On the other hand, OHN online courses put more emphasis on tutor activities, manual
evaluation of exercises and moderated discussions.
A fundamental decision in choosing a technical platform is whether it should be self-hosted. A selfhosted platform usually can be branded to a greater extend and keeps the data within the control of
the hosting institution. Both reasons have been particularly important for the OHN KursPortal. Swope
(2014) lists two self-hostable platforms, edX and Moodle. The former is an open-source platform that
also powers the official edX platform, the latter is a learning management system also suitable to
some extend for hosting xMOOCs and similar course formats. Given the large list of congruent
332
requirements, the edX platform was chosen for the first OHN KursPortal course runs. Figures 1 and 2
illustrate the design of the portal’s entry page and of the course content page.
As can be seen in Figure 2, courses mix different kind of multimedia content such as instructional
videos, interviews, informational texts, figures, formulas, and pictures with interactive content. In
contrast to xMOOCs that primarily focus on tasks that can be analysed automatically, the OHNKursPortal courses contain group tasks, discussion tasks and interaction with tutors.
333
Figure 2: A typical course content page (Vom Beruf ins Studium)
334
After the first run of courses the project partners decided to switch to a different technical platform.
The new platform is based on a classical learning management system developed by some of the
project partners and widely spread in northern German universities. This platform, Stud.IP, ranks as
number three among learning management systems in Germany. (cf. Thelen/Fuhrmann 2015, p. 55).
The main reasons for this switch of technology have been:



Better conformance to German data privacy laws. In addition to legal restrictions, the OHNKursPortal should be perceived as a safe and trustworthy environment by the participants.
Thus, automatic logging of all user actions, enforced use of third party services that don’t
meet German data privacy laws, and detailed and personalized analysis tools for instructors
are not needed and should – if they are to be used at all – only be used after explicit and
informed approval of the participants. The established LMS Stud.IP makes it both technically
and organisationally easier to conform to our data privacy standards.
Better integration of communication tools. A lot of non-MOOC features such as personal
communication or web conferencing are already integrated in LMS platforms and can more
easily be used as part of the courses. These features shall be extended in upcoming course
runs.
Finally, a better integration into existing infrastructure at Lower Saxonian universities could
become an issue in the future and would be possible without additional technical efforts.
Research method
The exploratory study presented here is part of a three-fold attempt at ensuring that the OHNKursPortal and its courses provide high-quality online learning opportunities for working adults to
support them in their continuous academic development endeavours. It complements the
continuous course evaluations mentioned in the previous section and a study focussing on interviews
with course participants which is being carried out by the Leibniz Universität Hannover.
We decided to use a qualitative research design because qualitative research methods are suitable
for “exploring and understanding the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human
problem” (Creswell, 2013 , p. 4). In our case we wanted to gain a better understanding of how course
tutors of OHN-KursPortal courses perceive working adult learners and which course features and
tutor actions they consider to be supportive for working adults’ learning processes in a virtual
learning environment (VLE) where learner participation is entirely voluntary. In our research we were
guided by the following research questions:
1. How do OHN-KursPortal course tutors perceive working adult learners and their learning? Do
they perceive any differences between working adult learners and the students they usually
teach at university?
2. Which course features and tutor actions are helpful in supporting working adults in their
learning?
335
In phrasing the interview questions we used a thematic interview approach (Boyatzis, 1998), which
was informed by our understanding of (working) adults’ learning needs and our professional
background as online platform / online course designer and university teacher (Tobias) and English
teacher /teacher educator in adult, vocational and university education (Martina).
We contacted the eleven course tutors who have been involved in the delivery of the OHNKursPortal courses since its launch, and seven course tutors (three females, four males) and one
course designer (male) agreed to take part in a structured telephone interview. In line with an open
research approach, all interview questions (see appendix) were shared with the participants prior to
the interviews. To avoid possible conflicts of interest the interviews were conducted by Tobias only,
with Martina (project coordinator) aiding the interview organisation. This helped greatly in building
an atmosphere of trust and provided the basis for the very open, conversational atmosphere in all
interviews. The interviews were carried out within a period of three weeks, transcribed and analysed,
following a grounded theory approach (Glaser & Strauss, 2008 (1967)) and using constant
comparative analysis (Charmaz, 2000), which also involved the use of memos that were taken at first
listening. We were in frequent contact throughout the research analysis to check and re-check our
categories and interpretations against each other and against the interview data to ensure that
individual preconceptions and experiences did not influence our joint analysis in an overly way. The
main findings that emerged from our research in relation to the research questions above will be
presented in the following section. A more comprehensive report of the findings will follow at a later
stage.
Findings
First the main findings concerning tutors’ perception of working adult learners and their learning will
be described, followed by an outline of the course features and actions that tutors perceived to be
helpful in supporting working adult learning in a VLE based on complete voluntary participation.
Tutors’ perceptions of working adult learners and their learning
The main themes emerging from the interview data pertain to learner engagement, learner
motivation and learner confidence. All tutors reported a lack of response and a lack of
communication from working adults in their online courses. This referred to forum posts which were
intended to stimulate interaction with peer learners and the course tutor and to tasks course
participants were expected to complete. However, tutor interpretations of the learners’ lack of
engagement varied widely. One tutor interpreted participants’ lack of response and communication
as “restrained participation” (“zurückhaltende Teilnahme”) which could not yet be explained due to
the relatively short experience he had with these courses. His view was supported by two other
tutors who mentioned that they could only speculate about the reasons for participants’ lack of
response, as they didn’t have enough contact with participants to know the reasons for certain. In
contrast to these views three tutors believed that participants’ lack of engagement was due to a lack
336
of extrinsic motivation since course participants, unlike university students, do not have to pass
exams and therefore “don’t get anything in the end” (“man kriegt ja am Ende nichts”). Overall the
data show that working adults’ lack of engagement constitutes a great challenge for all tutors of the
OHN-KursPortal courses and therefore merits further research.
Learner motivation emerged as another theme from the data. Four tutors explicitly mentioned that
the working adults in their courses were very motivated. One tutor even stated that the working
adults in her online course worked more committedly on the tasks than traditional university
students, while another tutor emphasized the positive connection between learner motivation and
learner engagement at the beginning of her course, which was visible in e-mails from participants.
However, the same tutor reported that some participants “lost their motivation or something comes
up” (“Einige verlieren aber auch die Motivation oder es kommt irgendwas dazwischen”) so that she
had gained a very “heterogeneous picture” (“heterogenes Bild”) of participants’ learner motivation in
the end.
The third theme pertaining to tutors’ perceptions of working adult learners and their learning that
emerged from our data was learner confidence. Two tutors claimed that working adult learners on
their online courses seemed to be less confident in their learning abilities than traditional university
students. This view was further supported by one of these tutors who added that some learners
were made aware of the competences and experiences they already possess and bring to university
by their peers in the course. The second tutor described the example of a learner who needed
frequent e-mail support from the tutor to confirm that he was performing a task in the correct way.
However, the same tutors also hinted at the possibility that some working adult learners might lack
self-confidence because they do not yet possess the necessary skills and experience to navigate
comfortably in a VLE. In summary, our results partially support research findings about fears of nontraditional students that their intellectual abilities might not be good enough for academic study
(Jürgens, 2014), but further research is needed to gain a more conclusive picture in this area.
Course features and tutor actions that support working adult learners in their learning
A course feature which tutors regarded as particularly supportive for working adults’ learning were
videos. Tutors reported learner feedback which emphasized that course participants found videos
particularly helpful because they could watch them as often as they wanted. One tutor commented
on the video as a tool for presenting content in a lively and slightly unusual way.
Our data show that personalized communication was seen as key to supporting working adult
learners in their learning. Tutors commented on the usefulness of e-mails for low-threshold, personal
communication, because participants do not need to log on to the course and e-mails are a medium
they use comfortably every day. Some tutors used their course forum to encourage interactions with
and between participants. Although there was only limited success, tutors found the exchanges with
these participants particularly motivating for themselves and beneficial for the course.
337
With regard to course design, the introductory stage was seen as very important for creating a good
working atmosphere and for promoting course participation. Two tutors described a
videoconference with the participants at the beginning of the course as helpful for the development
of more group coherence which led to better communication throughout the course. One tutor
added that he was planning to start his course with a videoconference to get to know the
participants before he would give them access to the course content. In this way he was hoping to
help participants overcome possible feelings of isolation and retain them longer on the course.
Course content is another area that some tutors will adapt, based on their course experiences. Two
tutors reported that they were going to reduce content (“Dann würde ich gerne den Kurs noch
weiter entschlacken”) and break it down into smaller steps, making it easier for working adults to
focus on the course parts relevant to their needs.
On the other hand, aspects that hinder learning also emerged as a topic. Four tutors described the
online teaching and learning scenario as generally inferior to face-to-face teaching. They missed a
close personal contact to the participants and couldn’t use some of their professional inventory of
methods, e.g. to walk through the auditorium, look over the shoulder and react on problems (“Da
kann man durch die Reihen gehen und denen über die Schulter gucken und sofort eingreifen”). The
main problem arising from this distance was described as a lack of a good picture or as having
obtained only a vague picture (“eher so ein diffuses Bild”) of a learner’s abilities and progress. This
perception of distance is not necessary hindering learning, but the tutors expressed their uncertainty
about if and how the learners progressed in their learning. Two of the tutors, however, mentioned
the possibility that this kind of learning may just be right for the participants. They speculated that
“they might just want this non-binding character of the courses and therefore enrolled in an online
course” (“…oder wollen die gerade diese Unverbindlichkeit und haben sich deshalb für so einen
Online-Kurs angemeldet?”) and concluded that a tutor needs to develop “a certain kind of tolerance
towards non-participation” (“eine gewisse Toleranz gegenüber auch der Nichtteilnahme”).
Technical problems were seen as an obstacle for learning, too. Here tutors reported two different
kinds of technical issues. Some participants seemed to have general problems in handling computers
and online platforms as such, with one tutor stating that only a few older participants had such
general problems. Participants’ survey results are leading in the same direction: Only 4% of the
survey participants agreed that working with the portal proved disappointing because it was difficult
to use. Among these technical issues were problems with drag and drop interactions which led to a
dramatic increase in individual tutor support, sometimes with the tutor sending several e-mails per
day. The second kind of technical problems is specific to the implementation of the OHN-KursPortal
and its underlying platform. Several tutors mentioned problems with participants’ use of the forum,
in particular in cases where it was linked to from several places. This seemed to create confusion
among some participants as to whether all links link to the same place and whether a posting is in
the correct place. Other problems described relate to the general navigation structure and problems
in finding all course components. But these reports were perceived as individual cases by the tutors.
Most of them concluded from the lack of technical inquiries that “somehow everyone got along” (“da
kam irgendwie jeder mit zurecht”).
338
Discussion and conclusion
The results of the evaluation and the qualitative research confirm some of the assumptions
underlying the course design and the pedagogical concept of the OHN-KursPortal and challenge
others. While both course participants and course tutors agree that flexible learning concerning time
and location, course content which is tailored to the needs of working adult learners and tutor
support are helpful for working adults’ learning, it is less clear which tutor interventions and course
features would promote a more active participation of working adults in a VLE based on voluntary
participation.
With regard to our first research question our study shows that tutors do perceive differences
between working adult learners and the students they usually teach at university. While this result
did not surprise us, given that working adult learners’ approaches to learning are based on
experience and knowledge traditional students do not possess, the aspects tutors focussed on in
their reports did surprise us. On the one hand the lack of previous knowledge is seen as a problem
for working adults’ access to university study by some tutors. On the other hand, some tutors
emphasize the special value of practical experiences for university study.
Our research findings show that tutors also have different views on learner confidence: In some
cases tutors reported working adult learners’ uncertainty and doubted as to whether they will meet
university requirements, in other cases no considerable differences between working adult learners
and traditional university students were perceived. In summary, our results in this area are not
conclusive. Further research on tutors’ preconceptions of working adult learners and the support
they need to successfully master university study could help explain our results.
Regarding the second research question, it appears that personal communication plays a key role in
supporting working adults in their learning. Tutors were generally dissatisfied with the lack of
communication in their courses but reported that some communication channels, such as e-mails or
video conferences work favourably and seem to provide at least a partial solution. The reasons for
the lack of participants’ communication could not be identified in this exploratory study. However,
some tutors considered the possibility that some participants don’t want to be involved in personal
communication and are quite happy to learn on their own. However, for tutors to be able to support
working adult learners if and when needed, more insight into the learning that takes place in the
courses is needed. Therefore some tutors have started to introduce mandatory and synchronous
communication, such as web conferences at the beginning of a course, to foster social interaction
and learning in the course and help participants overcome feelings of anonymity and isolation.
Outlook
The current six courses will continue to be delivered in 2016. The student orientation course, the
course on introduction to academic research and writing and the course on basic mathematics are
339
going to be run twice. The specialized mathematics courses are going to be delivered once, i.e. there
will be nine courses in total.
The courses will be continuously developed, based on evaluation and qualitative research data as
shown in this data. Some specific problems (e.g. forum usability) are to be corrected for future runs,
and more and better feedback mechanisms have to be established. These are necessary to give
tutors more opportunities to gain good insights in the course impact but they also have to be
designed with greatest concern of data privacy.
To improve motivation and to be able to make the courses more obligatory, several additions and
modifications to the course design will be implemented and evaluated. Attempts at setting up
blended learning courses in cooperation with adult education organisations such as the
Volkshochschulen will be pursued to provide an opportunity for working adults to benefit from
online learning in a face-to-face, peer-supported environment since online peer-to-peer learning
does not yet work. The project partners will explore the concept of open badges so that working
adults have a stronger extrinsic motivation to complete the courses and to document their
achievements.
Overall, more research is needed in the area of working adults participating voluntarily in online
preparation courses for academic study. As shown, the aspects of learner engagement, learner
motivation and learner confidence are important for understanding if and how the target group is
different from traditional students. The research findings presented here provided some answers to
these questions but also raised new ones.
Appendix: Interview questions
Which picture did you obtain of the participants of your online study preparation course?
(“Welches Bild haben Sie von den Teilnehmenden Ihres Online-Studienvorbereitungskurses
gewonnen?“)
Which experiences did you have observing your participants concerning the handling of the technical
platform? Have there been challenges? If yes, can you describe these challenges more detailed?
(“Welche Erfahrungen haben Sie bei den Teilnehmenden in Bezug auf den Umgang mit der
technischen Plattform gemacht? Gab es Herausforderungen? Falls ja, können Sie die
Herausforderungen näher erläutern?“)
Are there differences between the learning needs of working adult learners participating in the online
preparation course and the learning needs of students having just left school attending your
university courses? If yes, which differences did you observe?
(“Gibt es Unterschiede zwischen den Lernbedarfen beruflich qualifizierter Teilnehmender des OnlineStudienvorbereitungskurses und den Lernbedarfen der Studierenden, die direkt nach dem Abitur
340
oder der Fachhochschulreife in Ihren Kursen an der Universität / Hochschule sind? Falls ja, welche
Unterschiede haben Sie festgestellt?“)
How did you respond to specific needs of the participants of your online study preparation course?
(“Wie sind Sie in Ihrem Online-Studienvorbereitungskurs auf besondere Bedürfnisse der
Teilnehmenden eingegangen?“)
Which properties and features of your online study preparation course or the technical platform
haven proven to be especially beneficial for learning in your opinion?
(“Welche Eigenschaften und Bestandteile Ihres Online-Studienvorbereitungskurses bzw. der
technischen Plattform haben sich aus Ihrer Sicht als besonders lernförderlich erwiesen?“)
Which modifications have you already made?
(“Welche Veränderungen haben Sie bereits vorgenommen?“)
Which changes will you make for future runs or which changes would you like to make?
(“Welche Veränderungen werden oder würden Sie gerne für künftige Durchläufe vornehmen?“)
Finally we are interested in your appraisal of your experiences with your online preparation course.
(“Abschließend würde uns interessieren, wie Sie Ihr Erlebnis des Online-Vorbereitungskurses
beurteilen?“)
References
Banscherus, U., Spexard, A. (2014). Zugänge aus der beruflichen Bildung und der Berufstätigkeit:
Weiterhin keine Priorität für Hochschulen und Hochschulforschung. In: Banscherus, U., BülowSchramm, M., Himpele, K., Staack, S., Winter, S. (Eds.): Übergänge im Spannungsfeld von Expansion
und Exklusion. Bielefeld, pages 61-78.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code
development. Sage.
BMBF (n.d.). Continuing Academic Education. Retrieved
http://www.bmbf.de/en/349.php?hilite=offene hochschule
September
17,
2015,
from
Brunner, S., Kretschmer, S., Zawacki-Richter, O. (2014). Blended counselling: advising prospective
students with vocational qualifications on their way to university. Changing Configurations of Adult
Education in Transitional Times, 287.
Brunner, S., Kretschmer, S. & Zawacki-Richter , O. (2014): Blended Counselling: Advising Prospective
Students with Vocational Qualifications on their Way to University. In: Käpplinger, B., Lichte, N.,
Haberzeth, E. & Kulmus, C. (Hrsg.): Changing Configurations of Adult Education in Transitional Times.
341
Conference Proceedings. 7th European Research Conference. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 4 - 7
September 2013. Berlin: ESRA - European Society of Research on the Education of Adults, pages. 287299.
European Commission. (2014). Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: Access, Retention and
Employability. Euridyce Report. Pulications Office of the European Union. DOI: 10.2797/72146. URL:
https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/fpfis/mwikis/eurydice/index.php/Publications
Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded Theory Methodology: Objectivist and Constructivist Qualitative
Methods. In: Denzin, Y. & Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed., pages 509535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Sage publications.
Daniel, J. (2012). Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility.
Journal of interactive Media in education, 2012(3), Art-18. URL: http://jime.open.ac.uk/articles/
10.5334/2012-18/
Emke, Martina (2015): Das OHN-Kurs-Portal – Online-Vorbereitungskurse für beruflich qualifizierte
Studieninteressierte. In: Arnold, R., Günther, D. (Eds.): Lernarchitekturen und (Online-) Lernräume.
Volume 2 of the series „Selbstgesteuert, kompetenzorientiert, offen“. Hohengehren: Schneider
Verlag. In press.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2008). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative
research. New Brunswick, London: Transaction Publishers.
Hanft, A., Maschwitz, A., Hartmann-Bischoff, M. (2013) Beratung und Betreuung von berufstätigen
Studieninteressierten und Studierenden zur Verbesserung des Studienerfolgs. In: Hanft, A.,
Brinkmann, K. (2013). Offene Hochschulen: Die Neuausrichtung der Hochschulen auf Lebenslanges
Lernen. Münster, pages 110-119.
Jürgens, A. (2014). Studieninteresse – welche Unterschiede bestehen zwischen traditionell und nicht
traditionell Studierenden? Journal of Technical Education, 2 (1), pages 1-24.
Lackner, E., Kopp, M., Ebner, M. (2014) How to MOOC? – A pedagogical guide line for practitioners.
Roceanu, I. (ed.). Proceedings of the 10th International Scientific Conference "eLearning and
Software for Education" Bucharest, April 24 - 25, 2014. Publisher: Editura Universitatii Nationale de
Aparare "Carol I”. Pages 215-222.
Swope, J. (2014). A Comparison of Five Free MOOC Platforms for Educators. In EdTech – Focus on
Higher Education, Feb. 26 2014, URL: http://www.edtechmagazine.com/higher/article/2014/02/
comparison-five-free-mooc-platforms-educators
342
Thelen, T. and Fuhrman-Siekmeyer, A. (2015) Pilotprojekt zur Einzelerfassung der Nutzung von
Texten nach § 52a UrhG an der Universität Osnabrück – Abschlussbericht. Osnabrück: University of
Osnabrück.
URN:
urn:nbn:de:gbv:700-2015061913251.
URL:
https://repositorium.uniosnabrueck.de/handle/ urn:nbn:de:gbv:700-2015061913251.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge,
Massachussetts: Harvard University Press.
343
Thorne Nathalie(1), Sheridan-Ross Jakki(2), Hewson Edmund(3)
Empowering Online Learning: changing the shape of Distance Learning at
Leeds Beckett University
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Leeds Beckett University Distance Learning Unit
United Kingdom
(1)
n.k.thorne@leedsbeckett.ac.uk
(2)
j.sheridan-ross@leedsbeckett.ac.uk
(3)
e.hewson@leedsbeckett.ac.uk
Abstract
Leeds Beckett has been delivering distance learning courses for over 20 years yet only created a
centralised Distance Learning Unit in 2013. Prior to this, distance learning courses were few with a
variety of delivery approaches. Whilst the courses were successful, Course Development teams often
struggled against the University systems created primarily to service Full Time Undergraduate oncampus students. Following on from several pilot projects with external partners, the University
created a centralised service, the Distance Learning Unit (DLU) which has made a number of
innovations into improving the University’s distance learning provision.
Over the past 12 months the DLU has grown significantly, and has a series of frameworks in place to
aid distance learning development. These range from practical resources such as templates for
course design and student activity timing, to pedagogical resources such as online learning pedagogy
types, module shells and centralised reusable resources (for example, for Research Methods). The
DLU has focused primarily on investing in the people involved in developing and delivering distance
learning: creating a management group to innovate and produce guidelines; designing and delivering
a programme of workshops covering every aspect of distance learning (from commissioning new
courses to developing content and activities for our virtual learning environment); and creating a
new student-facing role, the Online Learning Tutor.
This paper discusses how the DLU have put the aforementioned processes in place, the challenges
and how we overcame them, and proposes our next steps.
Keywords
Empowering, modernisation, Higher Education, Leeds Beckett University, change management,
product strategy, staff development, online learning, distance learning, educational architecture,
instructional design, vle, virtual learning environment.
344
Strategic Context
Recent years have seen significant changes in the environment for UK Higher Education institutions.
These include changes to funding (the conversion of government grants to a system primarily funded
by student loans) and the granting of taught degree awarding powers to new providers (eg private
for profit organisations) to introduce competition and new capacity to the system, creating a more
‘market-based’ approach. The design of academic awards and granting of degrees is delegated to the
Universities themselves, an autonomy which allows for innovation with overall standards regulated
by the Quality Assurance Agency.
For some years there has been a trend for a more global Higher Education sector: “the ever-moreintense recruitment of students and faculty; the swift spread of branch campuses; the well financed
efforts to create world class universities, whether by upgrading existing institutions or by building
institutions; the innovative efforts by online universities and other for profit players to fill unmet
needs in higher education markets around the globe; and the closely watched rankings by which
everyone keeps score” (Wildavsky, 2010, pp 4-5). UK Higher Education institutions remain a top
destination for international students, and are sought after for overseas collaborations.
Several UK universities and providers of postgraduate professional qualification have embraced
distance (and online) learning in various forms, the Open University of course being the largest. Some
have managed this process themselves, for example, by employing teams of associate tutors and
setting up a separate delivery unit; others have worked with partners in the private sector,
outsourcing student acquisition, and course delivery to partners such as Laureate, RDI and Kaplan.
More recently, the creation of MOOCs, funded by US investors, led to a UK response in the
development of FutureLearn, a UK MOOC platform with a number of UK universities offering
different kinds of MOOC, not least, perhaps, because of the marketing and perceived reputational
benefits. The MOOC model put a useful focus on ‘online’ courses and pedagogy, raising the profile of
this type of learning. However, it is easy to overestimate the impact. According to Lawton et al (2013)
“Some evidence is also emerging to show that students are unwilling to pay for MOOCs even if they
are offered [academic] credit… Student distrust of online learning is not a luddite reaction but
perhaps a wariness of technology in activities defined by human interaction.”
A comprehensive round up of the potential impact of the globalisation and impact of new delivery
models was offered by Barber et al (2013). Without rehearsing the full scope of the paper here, two
messages stand out: firstly “As content becomes ubiquitous and, in each area, the world’s leading
authorities become its providers, the content of a course will cease to be a deciding factor. Instead it
is what a university and its faculty build around the content – for example the quality of teaching and
345
mentorship, the nature of facilitated dialogue between students…or indeed the type of assessment
and path from university into the labour market” (pp 51). Secondly, the paper notes an increase in
diversity of the student base: “students come in all ages, from all backgrounds, sharing only an
aspiration to make progress in their lives… as students across the world” (pp 51).
This is the context – regulatory and funding changes in the UK, a globalising HE sector, partnership
approaches, and increasing publicity around online provision (and, at the time, a view of MOOCs as
being transformative) – that led Leeds Beckett University to develop its approach to distance and
online provision.
Leeds Beckett University
Leeds Beckett is one of the UK’s larger universities with 28,000 students. The majority are UK
undergraduate students taught face to face and recruited via centralised marketing and admissions
functions; recruitment to these courses has held up well, despite the price increases. (Postgraduate
and part time recruitment has suffered.) The University’s course development and timetabling
processes work well for this category of student. The University offers a wide variety of disciplines in
four faculties, and a total of 16 Schools.
The University had been taking a number of steps to diversify its activities: an increased focus on
international student recruitment; investment in enterprise, research and consulting activities; and
investment in distance learning and online provision.
Review of distance learning activities
The University’s exposure to online and distance learning provision came from four sources:
 For a number of years, a few distance learning courses had been run in some Schools, driven
largely by the enthusiasm and interest of individual course leaders. Looked at collectively, these
courses lacked any central support, common principles or standards, and used a variety of
different platforms or VLEs.
 The University entered into a partnership with Pearson, to develop and market two online
courses; the University provided academic content using a Pearson Virtual Learning Environment
(VLE).
 The University’s Centre for Learning and Teaching has introduced and encouraged TEL
(Technology Enhanced Learning) in various contexts (for example experimentation with the use
of mobile devices in some classrooms); two Faculties, independently, worked with a third party
to provide an immersive learning experience.
346

The University’s Library and Learning Innovation department has extensive digital resources and
manages the VLE; the Offsite library service also supports distance learners.
Investment in distance learning provision and the creation of a centralised distance learning
service
The University appointed a full time Director in 2013 with a remit to develop a centralised distance
learning service, the Distance Learning Unit, but also a remit to work with Faculties and Schools and
other Services to grow income. The focus of University processes on full time undergraduate courses,
the distributed nature of distance learning provision in the University, the partnership with Pearson,
and the overall competitive position (with, for example, many providers of distance learning courses,
MOOCs and so on), all required an approach to change management covering strategy, governance,
operations and pedagogy. The following core principles and approaches were adopted (Table 1):
Table 1: Mission statement for the Distance Learning Unit
Mission statement for the Distance Learning Unit

To develop and embed an institutional capability that enables our University to engage
effectively with Distance Learners, from instructional design to student support, and to deliver
an excellent experience to them.

To create a quality and supportive structure for the development and delivery of high
quality, flexible, convenient and accessible learning to Distance Learners –by engaging,
motivating and empowering both our academics and our students.

To contribute to the growth and development of the University’s off campus provision, by
being recognised as “excellent” by our peers, our students and our clients
1. Welcoming distance learners as a distinct category of student.
The distance learning initiative is driven by a type of student, and supported by technology. We
undertook qualitative marketing research on DL (Distance Learning) student behaviour to identify
student needs, lifestyles, study habits and even technology choices and have designed our offer to
ensure as far as possible that they feel part of a Leeds Beckett community. Our DL students are
mainly postgraduates, frequently in employment in a variety of life circumstances.
347
A number of change management initiatives flowed from this: we have sought to ensure that these
benefit the wider University and can be integrated into common university systems and processes.
For example, good practice in supporting students online can help the University develop good
practice for engaging with on-campus students online. The shared learning outcomes and,
eventually, a common VLE platform (Blackboard) enables the easier development of blended courses
and delivery by academics.
2. A course and a relationship, not just content.
This strategy defines a holistic focus of selling courses, not disaggregated content. In other words we
offer a structured learning experience, relevant assessments, underpinned by a pedagogic and
tutorial relationship with faculty, and the development of a student community. This reflects what
we consider to be the motivational challenges faced by those who have to balance work, study and
family commitments.
3. Faculty ownership of delivery, and follows DLU guidance as to programme structure, instructional
design and pedagogic models.
As will be described later in this paper, DLU has recruited a team of Academic Instructional
Designers, from within and outside the University. They provide essential support to academics
developing the academic content, learning outcomes and assessments, which are equivalent for
face-to-face and distance learning courses. DLU’s ownership of the instructional design models
enables academics to focus on academic content.
Given that other DL programmes were already in existence, our approach was to bring all under one
umbrella, identify best practice in each, and codify into four formal approaches, appreciating the
different subject disciplines. This was reinforced by training offered by DLU to new course teams.
Building on this past experience and working collaboratively has given the DLU process a cultural
legitimacy which it would not have received had it been simply imposed.
Delivery of courses is not outsourced to other organisations, a contrast with some partnership
arrangements elsewhere in the sector. Instead the academics who developed the programme also
control the delivery, ensuring that they have deep knowledge of the learning content and student
needs. This approach broadens the University’s capabilities.
348
4. DLU champions the needs of distance learners with other services by working through them.
Building a sustainable capability requires working across departmental boundaries with all Faculties
and other university Services. This explains the governance structure, where the membership of a
Distance Learning Management Group includes Faculty members and champions from Services. They
act as ambassadors for DLU but also provide for emerging issues to be discussed.
5. The product strategy.
The choice of courses to be developed as Distance Learning courses is determined by the Faculties
and Schools, with the DLU being involved at various stages of the approval process to ensure
viability. This principle of incremental portfolio development plays on existing strengths and
partnerships. Market research is being carried out to identify non-UK markets for niche course
development.
Implementing the strategy in the context of other University change initiatives
The initiative to promote and develop DL can be seen in the context of wider change management
activities and projects within the University, for example: the specification of a new student
information system; the enhancement of our enterprise function by recruiting business developers;
strategic changes in the University’s approach to collaborative provision; a name change and rebrand covering all the University’s communications and web activity; the review by the Quality
Assurance Agency; and so on.
Given the wide ranging implications of ‘welcoming distance learners as a distinct category of
student’, building a sustainable ‘institutional capability’ and ‘incremental portfolio development’, the
following overarching initiatives have been adopted. A single example of the type of work involved
for each initiative is given for illustrative purposes (Table 2):
Table 2: Overarching initiatives and examples of work in progress.
A
Initiative
Purpose
Examples of work in progress
Strategy,
portfolio and
markets
Develop a suite of DL
courses to grow
student numbers based
Commissioning of international marketing
research study to identify suitable markets
for our courses, and disciplines to develop,
349
on informed decision
making
and to inform marketing and student
acquisition activities
B
Governance and
approval
processes
Set up University wide
governance structure
for DL
A DL Management Group from all Faculties
and relevant services to debate and agree
matters relevant to DL provision, from
·
All four faculties
·
Library and Learning Innovation
·
Centre for Learning and Teaching
·
Marketing
·
Quality Assurance Services
·
Enterprise Service
·
Finance
·
Human Resources
C
Awards and
educational
architecture
Create flexible awards
Development and agreement of common
terminology
D
Design of learning
teaching and
service
Ensure consistent yet
Development of training and manuals for
flexible approach to the instructional design and course delivery
student experience
E
Production
Develop and
implement processes
to produce quality
content, on time, cost
effectively
F
Student and client Strategies for
acquisition
successful
commercialisation of
courses
Ongoing development of web portal
G
Student journey
A major project with the University’s
continuous improvement unit to review the
journey a student makes from enquiry to
enrolment
Ensuring it is easy to
convert possible
students to enrolled
students
350
Recruitment of academic instructional
designers and development of a central
design team
H
Key performance
indicators
Develop measures
Identify metrics appropriate to the activity
K
People and skills
Identify skills. needs,
develop and specify
new roles and provide
training as necessary
Development of a suite of training
programmes
Operational Management & Set Up
Following the strategic vision and principles set out in the first section of this paper, the DLU has
implemented many processes on an operational level that have allowed us to realise these
strategies. In the following sections, we present an insight into some of the challenges experienced
and our solution(s).
Resource Development
Engagement with Stakeholders
As a new, centralised service being implemented from the top-down, it was absolutely essential to
build strong relationships with a variety of stakeholders, particularly within the Faculties themselves
as they form our most prolific stakeholder with whom we work. Early on, we identified the need for
key contacts within other services and the faculties, to champion the distance learning cause and
represent the views of their services or areas. The key role here has been the Faculty Distance
Learning Champions, either a Principal Lecturer or Associate Dean within the Faculty who has
oversight of the Faculty’s distance learning activity, and can further any proposals, standards and
guidelines published by the Distance Learning Unit.
Team expansion
Our first operational change was to expand the team to cope with the demands coming forth from
the Faculties. In our initial two years, we had just one Academic Instructional Designer (AID), working
across a handful of courses. Towards the end of 2013 it became clear that the demand for the skills
of an Academic Instructional Designer was increasing exponentially. We went through our first round
of recruitment to recruit an extra AID and followed this 6 months later with a second recruitment
initiative, bringing our total number of AIDs to four - one for each Faculty at our University, plus a
351
Team Co-ordinator. We also introduced a Student Placement role, which generally hires from our
Broadcast Media students. This has increased our capability to provide in-house video recording, as
well as drawing on the creativity of those students.
One of the main challenges with this role has been the confusion between a similar University role of
Learning Technologist. Working with our Centre for Learning and Teaching, we produced a diagram
which explained how the different roles worked within our University. However, there is still some
misunderstanding around the role of the Academic Instructional Designer, in particular their
relevance as a full member of the academic course team with the ability to give advice and opinions,
as opposed to a service role.
Introduction of new roles
The Academic Instructional Designer role was not an entirely new concept for the University as it was
based on the University’s experience of working with the aforementioned Learning Technologists
supporting on-campus courses. However, during our initial development phase we identified the
need for two new roles that have since been introduced to the University.
The first new role has been that of the Online Learning Tutor (OLT). This role is Faculty-based and
works to support a small number of courses, generally in which they have a specialism, and works a
varied schedule which includes non-standard working hours. Each module retains its academic
module leader who produces the learning content, sets the activities and delivers the high-level
academic input during teaching. They are then supported by the Online Learning Tutor (OLT), both
during production and teaching. The OLT has been a strong factor in ensuring our online learning
content is produced to a high standard, proofreading the content and ensuring it is clear, consistent
and understandable. The role has been key in changing working practices of academics who are not
used to having their work scrutinised and edited in such a way. During teaching delivery, the OLT
forms the first point of contact for all learners, triaging their query and directing it appropriately to
the academic, the course administrator or technical support. They also monitor student engagement
and get in touch with students who appear to be falling behind. The response to this role has been
unanimously positive, and from the original postholder has expanded five-fold, with more Faculty
areas seeking approval for funding to appoint further OLTs to support their courses.
The second new role is an internal DLU role, the Instructional Design Support Officer (IDSO). This role
supports the design work completed by the Academic Instructional Designers, taking on some of the
more repetitive tasks and thereby enabling the AIDs to spend more time on their innovative and
value-added activities. With the increase in new development work coming into the unit, and with
352
many of our courses coming into their next instance and requiring maintenance and update work,
there was a distinct need to create a role which covered these types of maintenance tasks. It also
allows the team to collaborate more, sharing work across team members whilst retaining a single
point of contact for each Faculty.
Standard Development
Setting standards
In order to professionalise and standardise our distance learning offering, we promote five guiding
principles which created a minimum standard that all of our distance learning courses should meet.
These five principles are: House Navigation and Style; Maintenance; Efficiency; Engagement; and
Feedback.
●
Under House Navigation and Style, each course must have a clear identity, on brand with our
University, and an intuitive learning journey that means when the student enters one of our
learning modules it is immediately clear where the student should go for their learning.
●
Under the principle of Maintenance, academic colleagues are asked to consider the longevity of
their course materials, and build in sections for contemporary news where learning content has
been prepared and produced in advance.
●
Efficiency looks at the student’s journey: can they access their content with speed, clarity,
convenience and consistency?
●
The principles of Engagement and Feedback look at the learning content and experience that we
are providing for the students, ensuring that we capture different learning styles, cultures, levels
of English and methods of feedback.
These principles are shared through our handbooks and training programmes.
Empowering the Staff members and sharing knowledge
One of our key aims as a Unit has been to empower the wider staff team at the University to be fully
equipped to develop distance learning. We have done this through a variety of methods: handbooks
and published guidance; training workshops, both tailored and regular; consultancy; one-to-one
353
training; and learning lunches to share best practice. We are also developing a staff training website
in conjunction with the Centre for Learning and Teaching and Learning Systems teams.
Change Management & Challenges
Many of the challenges presented to distance learning development have arisen because the
University has a long history of being set up to deal with the large volumes of full-time on-campus
undergraduate students received by the University through UCAS (The Universities and Colleges
Admissions Service). This has caused issues for many of the non-standard deliveries (ie research, offcampus and distance learning courses), which often find themselves restricted or derailed by these
processes.
The main challenge presented by the core systems of the University focusing on full time
undergraduate delivery is the seeming lack of priority given to distance learning development, which
causes huge delays to deadlines and rushed work. This has, in part, been caused by a lack of
understanding of the time investment required up front for developing distance learning, but is
exacerbated by the intense demands of huge numbers of face-to-face students requiring an
immediate solution, whereas the distance learners who are ‘in the ether’ are less apparent. We have
placed a variety of mechanisms in place to resolve this: education of colleagues; introduction to DLU
at course development stage; an escalation and notification process; use of DL champions to
encourage focus on DL. We are also looking at implementing further mechanisms over the coming
months, including: education of senior management; and central timetabling of distance learning
development hours.
One of the key implementations for our Unit has been the three terms per year calendar, an
alternative calendar to the University’s standard semester calendar, which allows students to start at
three points during an academic year. The primary advantage of this alternative calendar is that it
allows students to study one module per ‘term’ i.e. complete three modules per academic year thus
allowing swifter completion of the course. In practical terms, each module requires the student to
study between 10-15 hours per week. Where a student is taking two modules at a time, they are
expected to study 20-30 hours per week, on top of whatever other commitments they may have
(which are usually full-time). For the University, this calendar causes practical issues in terms of
academic staff deployment and ensuring that the University processes match the different start
dates set up through this calendar.
The University is currently reviewing many of its practices and processes with the aim of ensuring
flexibility for our students. This should help the implementation of the alternative three term
354
calendar, and will also look to address other problems, such as: the inflexibilities built into our
Academic Regulations; looking at how students can choose modules; choose their study pace; and
approach their studies with flexibility to balance against their work. This is coupled with various
systems reviews such as a review of our student record systems.
All of these innovations and changes have needed to be implemented under an atmosphere of
organisational change, requiring high levels of communication to educate and enthuse staff
members. We are a very open unit, with all members of staff accessible for academic staff from our
Director to our student placement. As Kirkpatrick (2015) discusses, the process of implementing what
essentially amounts to universal design on academics used to delivering teaching with autonomy
needs to be handled with care, leadership and communication.
The Practicalities
Pre-production
Each Academic Instructional Designer (AID) works closely with the Course and Module Development
teams within a particular Faculty department. The academic subject specialists are lecturers who
teach the subject face-to-face and are responsible for writing the course and module content. The
AIDs are responsible for providing instructional design advice to enhance the content and make it
suitable for a wholly online teaching delivery before developing and compiling the content in our
Virtual Learning Environment (VLE), Blackboard.
There is a clear process for mapping the design and development of each course and module.
Typically this involves several meetings to establish clear and appropriate methods of collaboration
and ensure that academic content developers are able to work comfortably with the tools to be
used. With a recent change in Quality Assurance Service’s Course Approval process, AIDs will be
involved with the Course Development Team from the very beginning of the course development,
which will aid this establishment of working practices.
It should be noted that the academic staff responsible for writing the subject specific content have a
diverse level of technical ability and digital literacy, ranging from absolute beginners to intermediate
users. While many are able to use basic technologies only a few could be described as having some
level of ability in each of the seven elements of digital literacies (JISC, 2014). The AIDs work closely
and sensitively with the academic staff to develop a process for collaboration that suits their level of
digital literacy and also allows them to gently improve their skills in a non-threatening and mutually
beneficial manner.
355
Google Drive is primarily used as our collaboration and storage space which overcomes logistical
university network issues where shared drives have restricted access. An added benefit is that
working in this way enables all contributors to work on- or off-campus in real time without the need
for version naming protocols (which are generally not followed due to the aforementioned lack of
digital literacy skills). This has proved particularly useful for our academic staff who choose to work at
weekends where they have the time and space to think more creatively about content for their
module.
Within the Google Drive environment we have developed a folder structure for each of the courses
and a series of Google Docs to support the development, proof-reading, and compilation of content
materials. Google Docs allows real-time collaboration and we have found the use of the Comments
function to be particularly helpful to identify and resolve queries quickly.
●
●
●
VLE Template – written by the academic subject specialist detailing the text, activities and
instructions for the AID.
Proofreading Checklist – compiled by the Online Learning Tutor detailing edits, queries,
suggestions to improve the student journey through the content.
Timings Template – spreadsheet with formulas for calculating study time for readings and
activities.
Course and Module structure
Each student starts their learning journey and orientation with a Course Induction module which
contains all of the details they will need to refer to for the duration of their course. Core content
within this module includes an introduction to the Course Team with names and photographs of their
tutors and support contacts, along with links to our Academic Regulations, Course Handbook, and
Library resources. Course teams are encouraged to personalise their content to create a sense of
course identity and ‘belonging’ for their students.
Table 3: Course Induction structure
Course Induction:

Intro to the university

Intro to the course team (with photos)

Academic and Quality Regulations

Library resources (including Offsite Team)

Contacts and Support
356


Useful tools
Pre-course tasks (optional but desirable)
Following the Course Induction, students’ are introduced to their learning content. Each study
subject within the course has a module containing the learning materials and resources for the study
period. Each subject module contains an Induction to the content that they will study and a schedule
of the week by week topics. Within each topic, the learning content is delivered in learning sections
with clearly identified study timings to assist the students in planning their study time.
Table 4: Module structure
Module:

Home page

Community Space (typically a private Google+ or Padlet
community)

Module Induction

Content by week or topic (chunked into Learning Sections, with
timings for each activity)

Assessment (including online submissions using Turnitin)
The introduction of providing these calculated timings to students at the beginning of each teaching
week has been one of our key innovations. If a student knows that a certain activity may take 40
minutes, and, for example, they happen to have a 45 minute train journey, they are able to schedule
their study to make best use of that time. These timings are derived using a formula that takes into
account reading speed and an independent learning factor which allows for re-reading, assimilating
and making notes. Student feedback has been overwhelmingly positive, and constructive where
timings have not been fully accurate.
A typical week of teaching includes: an overview of the required learning to be undertaken for the
week; three or four presentations on chunked topics; directed reading to support those topics; and a
selection of activities that support the learning topics and are directly relevant to the student’s
learning.
Production and content development
Within the VLE, two module shells were initially developed. These provide the core framework for
content layout and were designed to provide some support and guidance for academic staff who
were new to developing for an online environment. However, in practice, all technical design work is
357
undertaken by the AIDs. There are very few instances where the academic staff have been able to
use the module shells competently. AIDs are able to re-use the content from within the module
shells by copying across to other modules within the VLE – this can be an entire module or individual
learning sections.
Over the space of the last year, significant improvements have been incorporated with regard to
developing graphical content within the constraints of the HTML capabilities of the VLE. Every
module has a consistent ‘look and feel’ designed in from the start. A colour palette, based on the
University brand, is selected and used throughout all learning materials, including VLE navigation,
VLE text based content, and within presentations and content produced in-house. High quality
images are purchased on a licensed subscription or sourced OERs (Open Educational Resources) with
a Creative Commons Sharealike licence.
Academic content developers produce a series of Powerpoint presentations with audio voiceover as
well as developing the activities and wrap around navigation content, which are quality checked,
usually by the Online Learning Tutor. In addition to proofreading the content, the Online Learning
Tutor checks that the student journey and experience through the learning materials is clear and
well-constructed prior to handover to the AIDs.
The AIDs incorporate interactive and dynamic elements to the learning materials in order to
encourage student engagement. Presentations are carefully designed to reduce the amount of text
on screen, provide links to embedded resources (web links, videos, pdfs and so on) and incorporate
interactivity where appropriate. This may be in the form of animated elements synced with the
audio voiceover, drag and drop exercises, multiple choice questions and combinations thereof. All
presentations are optimised for mobile devices and then published and uploaded to the VLE in
HTML5 format. Alternative formats (.swf, HTML) are also available to students should they be unable
to run the HTML5 version on their device.
Learning materials are presented in the VLE in a manner designed to encourage engagement and
offer variety to the journey through the materials. High quality graphic elements are used
consistently to indicate particular elements such as a reading activity, a discussion thread, or a quiz.
Web links are provided to licensed reading materials so that the student is able to instantly access a
resource without the need to search academic databases.
358
Conclusion
DLU have already made significant inroads in empowering Leeds Beckett to develop online learning.
We will continue to implement this strategy, expanding to promote flexibility for students. The
challenges we have left to face are primarily based at an operational and strategic level, to be
supported by changes to practical actions. Ensuring that staff are appropriately deployed and that
this deployment is properly protected will form a key focus for our team over the coming year, as will
a strategic review of our Academic Regulations with an aspiration of increasing flexible provision.
References:
Barber, M; Donnelly, K; Rivzi, S (2013) An Avalanche is Coming: Higher Education and the Revolution
Ahead. London: Institute for Public Policy Research
JISC (2014) The seven elements of digital literacies Retrieved from https://www.jisc.ac.uk/fullguide/developing-digital-literacies [Accessed 29 July 2015]
Kirkpatrick, K. (2015) Universal Design in Online Education: Employing Organization Change MERLOT
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 11: 2
Lawton, W; Ahmed, M; Angulo, T; Axel-Berg, A; Burrows, A; Katsomitros (2013) Horizon Scanning;
what will higher education look like in 2020? London: UK HE International Unit
OC&C Consultants (2013) Britain’s Higher Education Empire: A study in the internationalisation of
Britain’s universities, London: OC&C Consultants
Universities UK (2013) Massive Open Online Courses: Higher Education’s Digital Moment? London:
Universities UK
UCAS
The
Universities
and
Colleges
Admissions
Service
Retrieved
from
https://www.ucas.com/corporate/about-us/corporate-governance/corporate-information [Accessed
17 August 2015]
Wildavsky, B.(2010) The Great Brain Race: How Global Universities are Shaping the World, Princeton
(NJ) and Oxford (UK): Princeton University Press
359
Venturini Ilaria, Oliviero Rosario
Lifelong Learning in Web 3.0 Environments
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Università Telematica Pegaso
Italy
ilaria.venturini@unipegaso.it
rosario.oliviero@unipegaso.it
Abstract
E-Learning has evolved along with the Web evolution. First e-Learning 1.0 (learning anytime,
anywhere and anyhow but largely course centric) was based on Web 1.0. Then e-Learning
2.0 (user-centric, centrally controlled, content creation, distribution through blogs,
decentralization of authority, liberty to share, develop and reuse content) is based on Web
2.0. Among the main features of the emerging Web 3.0 there is the ability to obtain
information drawn from a variety of previously incompatible applications by linking various
data sources. Specific information resources on the web will be organized, correlated, and
linked to other resources of interest. Semantic technologies can index data, then find and
interpret them, and also establish relationships among them. The learner’s preferences can
be taken into account by Web 3.0 environments along the whole learner life so as to be able
to tailor content to the obtained learner profile.
In the paper, focusing on technological tools to deliver custom content to the learners based
on their behaviours and preferences, it is shown that an extended notion of the classical
notion of view, termed as View 3.0 in the paper, can be a useful selection tool for the
purpose. The creation of new applications that combine public and private data for Web 3.0
services, introduce issues that are more complex and challenging than previous ones on the
web under several aspects. The enhanced view notion outlined in the paper is interesting
also outside the lifelong-learning context.
Keywords: Lifelong-Learning, Web 3.0, Views 3.0.
360
Introduction
E-Learning has evolved from the comparatively static e-Learning 1.0 (learning anytime,
anywhere and anyhow), based on Web 1.0 technologies, with e-Learning 1.0 systems largely
course centric, to the more interactive user-centric e-Learning 2.0 based on Web 2.0
technologies, which facilitates lifelong learning. E-Learning 2.0 essentially became user
centric, with content creation and distribution through blogs, decentralization of authority,
and the liberty to share, develop and reuse content. Lifelong-learning has received much
attention from several years and its specific characteristics have been pointed out and
summarized by several authors, as for instance already in (Koper & Tattersall, 2003).
According the Lisbon Agenda 2000, lifelong-learning has a primary importance in order to
improve the abilities and skills of EU citizens. In the Lisbon objectives, the ICT (Information
and Communication Technologies) play a decisive role to enhance lifelong-learning and
ensure access to education for everybody. The European Commission has adopted a multiyear program of investments dedicated to lifelong-learning. First the e-learning program
2004-2006 has been focused on the integration of technology information and
communication in education and training. Then the LLP (Lifelong Learning Programme) 20072013 that emphasizes three priorities (policy cooperation and innovation, languages, ICT).
They are called "catalyst for innovation and social evolution and education " and as "a means
of enriching the environment and methods of learning". “LLP was designed to enable people,
at any stage of their life, to take part in stimulating learning experiences, as well as
developing education and training across Europe. The 2007-2013 Programme, funded a
range of exchanges, study visits, and networking activities. The activities of LLP continue
under the new Erasmus+ Programme from 2014-2020. Over the course of its lifespan, LLP
provided support to school pupils, university students, adult learners, and a variety of
projects under some main sub-programmes as for instance: Comenius for schools, Erasmus
for higher education, Leonardo da Vinci for vocational education and training, Grundtvig for
adult education and "Jean Monnet" actions, designed to stimulate teaching, reflection, and
debate on European integration. Finally, the initiative "i2010-Participation Society" confirms
the value of learning and identifies the e-learning as a concrete solution for continuing
education ("Lifelong Learning Program". European Union Programs Agency, 2012).
Table 1 (elaborated from http://wearesocial.it/tag/statistiche/) statistically summarizes the
current utilization of the current ICT technologies by users.
361
Table 1 - A snap-shot of key digital statistical indicators
Month Countr Populatio %
%
/year
y
n
Urbanisatio Interne
n
t users
% Social
network
accounts
%Mobile
connection
s
%Social
Mobile
account
s
Jan.
2015
Europe
837
million
72%
70%
46%
132%
34%
Jan.
2015
World
7,210
milliard
53%
42%
29%
51%
23%
Emerging Web 3.0 technologies will be able to understand user likes, dislikes and
preferences based on online activities, and proactively offer mechanisms and services
tailored to user interests. On Web 3.0, all of users’ profiles and digitally traced information
will be annotated via ontology-based markup languages, such as RDF or OWL. RDF (Resource
Description Framework) is a basic instrument for coding, sharing and reuse of structured
metadata, and allows interoperability among applications that share on the Web machineunderstandable information. SPARQL (Sparkle Protocol And RDF Query Language) is a
standard query language for RDF. OWL (Ontology Web Language) will enable an application
to process or interpret information rather than simply presenting the information or
documents to the user.
One of the fundamental features of Web 3.0 will be its capability to use unstructured
information on the web more intelligently by revealing the relative meaning from the
context in which the information is published. Specific information resources on the web will
be organized, correlated, and linked to other resources of common interest by the use of
natural language processing and semantic technologies that can index data, and then find,
interpret, and establish relationships between disparate data elements so as to be able to
anticipate user’s needs.
Among the Web 3.0 main features there is the ability to obtain information drawn from a
variety of previously incompatible applications or sources. Web 3.0 is based on the principle
of routing new information streams by linking and integrating various data sources by
analysing them.
If the user preferences are taken into account by Web 3.0 environments so as to obtain a
user profile, the user’s interests should be categorized by some smart application, and also
taxonomies in learning interests could be formulated.
362
Contribution and structure of the paper
In the paper, delivering, by lifelong-learning systems, custom content to the learners based
on their behaviours and preferences, is addressed from the perspective of the view notion.
Classical views are basic tools that support personalization in accessing databases. It is
fundamental to emphasize which properties emerging Views 3.0 are desired to have to
support lifelong-learning.
In Section 1 e-learning technology in Web 1.0 and in Web 2.0 is briefly recalled. In Section 2,
views in Web 3.0 are outlined by pointing out some fundamental requirements they should
possess under the lifelong-learning perspective. In Section 3, related work is mentioned. A
brief Conclusions section completes the paper.
Personalized education technology in Web 1.0 and Web 2.0
E-Learning has evolved from the comparatively static e-Learning 1.0, based on Web 1.0
technologies, to the more vibrant, dynamic and interactive user-centric e-Learning 2.0,
based on Web 2.0 technologies.
Along with Web 1.0, e-learning evolved with many LMSs (Learning Management Systems). It
imitated various aspects of traditional learning with databases, communication tools and
task solutions (Dominic et al., 2014). Furthermore, Web 1.0 allowed incorporating the
learning theories known as Instructivism, Behaviorism and Cognitivism.
In (Rubens et al., 2014) and in (Hussain, 2013), Web 1.0 is characterized as the “read-only
Web”: every user can only visit web sites and, eventually, can contact the writer or
publisher. There is no direct link or communication between the two.
In Web 2.0 environments, users participate actively in the learning process. Web 2.0 consists
of computing platforms, web applications, continuous updated software and remixing data
from various sources.
Web 2.0 allows incorporating the learning theories known as Constructivism and Social
Constructionism.
The general scheme that identifies the main phases for accessing web databases via web
browsers is as follows:
Web Browser  Net Protocols  Web Server  Web API  Web Database
In the displayed scheme, we are interested on the user side evolution, which is the evolution
of the services provided by the web, rather than on the utilized protocols of the net and on
363
the utilized bandwidth. Overlooking also the web server specificities and the database
models (it is likely that the relational model will still play a major role (Atzeni et al., 2013)),
more interesting are the involved web API (Application Programming Interface) that
provides accessing databases and that supports the intelligent software that underlines
lifelong-learning. Web APIs are accessed using a wide range of different mechanisms. They
are interfaces designed to allow developers to create applications that take advantage of a
certain set of resources. Many Web 2.0 sites include APIs that give programmers access to
the sites' unique data and capabilities. Nowadays, there is a plethora of APIs but there exists
no widely agreed standard for them. Their increasing growth since 2005 is displayed in
Figure 1 (elaborated from http://www.programmableweb.com/api-research)
Fig. 1. Growth in web APIs since 2005.
A categorization of top 10 web API categories is displayed in Table 2 (elaborated from
http://www.programmableweb.com/api-research), where we can see the growth in the
selected top 10 web API categories since 2009. We can also observe from Table 2 that web
API categories correlation is about 0.66.
364
Table 2. A categorization of web APIs
Social
Financial
Enterprise
Mapping
E-commerce
Government
Science
Messaging
Payment
Telephony
2009
118
89
50
79
60
39
2
57
15
63
2013
518
508
474
369
348
338
333
315
312
298
The personalization issue has indeed taken advantage from APIs because mashups
significantly exploited them (website ProgrammableWeb.com currently lists 3966 mashups
based on web APIs).
However, it is worth-noticing that an API requires different implementations for each service
that a web mashup application uses. To cover such a situation (Vancea et al., 2008) propose
an object oriented database system and a proxy mechanism that supports integration at the
database level and enables mashup developers to work with a uniform abstract model.
Web 2.0 exploited mashups to achieve information sharing and to exchange objectives of
the information collected from multiple relational databases in the so called “deep Web”. A
mashup can be the combination of two or more applications into a single application. For
example, a developer might combine a program that lets users review restaurants with
Google Maps. The new mashup application could show not only restaurant reviews, but also
map them out so that the user could see the restaurants' locations.
Thus a mashup is a web application or a web page which combines data from several
sources, analogously to the mashup in the musical framework referring to a composition
created by blending two or more pre-recorded songs (usually by overlaying the vocal track of
one song over the instrumental track of another).
In the following diagram various sources that can be utilized by mashups are displayed .
Social applications

Feed  Mashups Blogs

SMS
365
Mashup applications are architecturally comprised of three different participants:
 API content providers,
 the mashup web server,
 the consumer’s web browser,
as in Figure 2 (available on line).
Figure 2. Server-side mashups.
The architecture outlined in Figure 2 follows the following three-tiers scheme, where the
APIs provide the mashable content:
User Browser 
-
 APIs
Mashups can be considered as the main services and technologies of Web 2.0 that meet the
personalization issue (Kalou et al., 2013). They are web pages or sites that combine
information and services from distinct sources on the web (Intizar et al., 2011). Actually, it is
easier and quicker to create mashups than to code applications from scratch in traditional
ways (Patel, 2013).
From the beginning, most web mashup applications generated contents by using either web
feeds, which have a data format used for providing users with frequently updated content,
or APIs based on web services. But, web feeds are not powerful enough to permit complex
data structures to be transmitted, so that mashup applications referred mainly on APIs.
366
We claim that the classical notion of view can be enhanced to cover more advanced
personalization issues than mashups. We recall that the original view notion of relational
databases is created by a query using the CREATE VIEW command of query language SQL.
For instance, for a table whose schema is STUDENTS (MSU-PID, Name, Surname, Birthdate,
Gender, Course, Enrolment), a view that allows seeing only the data relative to the female
gender (F) is as follows:
CREATE VIEW Female-students AS
SELECT *
FROM Students
WHERE Gender = ‘F’;
A view can combine data from two or more relational tables by using joins. This makes them
convenient to abstract, select or hide data. Views have had a widespread use as the typical
personalization tools for databases. Moreover, in the Web 2.0 framework, the procedures
which access a web page, or a page fragment as a header, a footer, etc., are written in a
selected language and can be saved as view files.
Views 3.0 in lifelong-learning technologies
Whereas the lifelong-learning purposes can be considered nowadays as widely agreed, this is
not the case for the lifelong-learning technologies that should support lifelong-Learning 3.0
systems.
The impact of Web 3.0 environments on lifelong-learning is yet to be completely identified
because Web 3.0 technologies are still developing. Following diagram (elaborated from
Dominic et al., 2014) displays some of the technological features that are involved in eLearning 3.0.
Semantic web



Cloud, Ubiquitous devices 




Linked data
Big data
367
Different authors have emphasized some features in the diagram with respect to others. For
instance, in (Pattal et al., 2009) semantic technologies are emphasized as a bridge for the
technological evolution from e-Learning 2.0 to e-Learning 3.0. In (Bizer et al, 2009) the
concept of the semantic web fits also with the web of data, which requires a huge unique
database as a single global data repository. In (Rubens et al., 2015) the role of Artificial
Intelligence (AI) in e-Learning 3.0 is emphasized. In (Waßmann et al., 2015) the social impact
of e-Learning 3.0 is focused.
Here we focus on the personalization technology which exploits the profile every
prospective user will have in the Web 3.0 environments. More specifically, lifelong-Learning
3.0 will utilize a learner profile, based on accumulated data about learner's interests and
preferences. Also search engines tailor their services to individual users. Thus in lifelongLearning 3.0, two different learners who perform a web search with the same keywords and
using the same service, should receive different results determined by their respective
individual profiles.
We claim that in a personalization technology perspective where user information
(preferences, behavior and then profile) is taken into account in order to provide customized
content, views can play a fundamental role. A view notion can be associated to
personalization in accessing data and in determining using metadata to read and integrate
information as well as to make decisions and give what appear to be intelligent responses to
human users. This stems from views creating a perspective on stored data in a format that
can be used to represent the data in a specific way and moreover define and filter
information so as to provide a tool for searching or querying data. Under the views
perspective, in order to better understand the personalization technology that is required
for lifelong-Learning 3.0, we figure out some fundamental features that a View 3.0 should
possess.
Since lifelong-learning should cover all knowledge and all categories of learners, a suitable
View 3.0 engine that is adequate to the lifelong-Learning technology should be clearly
conceptualized, independently of different formats in different query languages (such as
e.g., in SQL (Structured Query Language), in AQL (Annotation Query Language), in JSON (Java
Script Object Notation), in XML (eXtensible Markup Language), in YAML (Yet Another
Markup Language), in SPARQL, etc.).
The following diagram identifies four application domains where Views 3.0 can be suitably
exploited.
368
Databases

 Views 3.0 Profiles

Web pages, Web documents
More specifically, here we identify some fundamental requirements for Views 3.0 that
should be met by lifelong-Learning 3.0 technologies independently of specific formats. We
are going to point out some requirements and some related consequences from the
previous diagram concerning Views 3.0.
Views 3.0 on mashups - The new Web 3.0 technologies should support customization and
deployment to make the service composition to be more responsive than mashups for
learner’s requirement changes.
On the one hand it is likely that mashups are more a consumer-centric and lightweight
service composition technology than SOA (Service Oriented Application) composition.
Actually, service composition based on mashups essentially introduced a much simpler,
more cost-effective, self-served approach for service composition, that significantly reduces
the complexity and barriers of SOA service composition. Mashups are mainly a client-side
technology designed to support programming for end-user without a complex programming
environment. Actually, every user can compose service applications by “drag and drop”
actions within a web browser (Liu et al., 2007).
On the other hand, Views 3.0 are supposed mainly to support programming for developers,
although also learners can exploit them. Views 3.0:
 determine less overhead on behalf of the mashup server
 enjoy a greater flexibility than mashups
 can be applied also on mashups (as for instance it has been performed in Presto, as
here recalled in the related work section).
We claim that a lifelong-learning system that utilizes mashups can be extended by Views 3.0
that should be easily customized for aggregating or filtering data.
However, how to aggregate data and metadata from multiple previously incompatible
sources and systems within a given View 3.0 has to be clarified so as to control the View 3.0
performance (that includes also the time taken to update the view, the time required for the
view update to be accessed, and the time for the updated information to be returned).
Lifelong-Learning system developers can create custom views for specific mashable
information sources or mashups as well as custom apps, supported also by mobile devices,
that use several mashups or mashables or have pluggable views and capabilities.
369
Views 3.0 on databases - RDF views on databases have already been addressed within the
Linked Open Data (LOD) paradigm by representing data in RDF ontologies.
In Web 3.0, data quality issues are hard to cover since they concern various databases
instead of one database only. Those issues include all of the known ones for a single
database, and moreover syntactic inconsistencies (e.g., different data representation) as
well as semantic inconsistencies (e.g., weight measured in pounds versus weight measured
in kilograms) among data stored inside different databases, as it has been pointed out in
(Waldo et al., 2010).
But most data are nowadays stored in relational databases (RDB). Once such data are
represented as RDF triples using views, they can be accessed trhough SPARQL queries which
are syntactically translated to SQL queries which operate on the views. Such a translation is
known as RDB-to-RDF.
A general way for publishing relational data into the RDF format is creating a RDF-view (s, p,
v), where s stands for subject, p for predicate and v for value, on the relational data. In
(Sequeda et al., 2013), this is exemplified with relational tables that have schemas PROF
(PID, NAME) and STUD (SID, NAME).
The mapping from the database to the ontology with concepts Student, Professor and
Person, with axioms Student ≤ Person and Professor ≤ Person, is as follows
Student(x) <----- STUD(x,y)
Professor(x) <----- PROF(x,y)
Query Q(x) = Person(x), posed over the ontology, is rewritten as Q o(x) = Student(x) or
Professor(x)
and then SQL query
QSQL(x) = SELECT SID FROM STUD UNION ALL SELECT PID FROM PROF
is generated and sent to the RDBMS where it is evaluated.
Answering queries using views as proposed in (Sequeda et al., 2013) is composed of the
following two steps. First the mapping is represented as a SQL view named Tripleview.
CREATE VIEW Tripleview (s, p, v) AS
SELECT SID AS s, “rdf : types” AS p, “Student” AS v FROM STUD
UNION ALL
SELECT PID AS s, “rdf : types” AS p, “Professor” AS v FROM PROF
Second the ontology axioms are compiled into SQL queries and are added to Tripleview as
370
follows.
CREATE VIEW Tripleview (s, p, v) AS
SELECT SID AS s, “rdf : types” AS p, “Student” AS v FROM STUD
UNION ALL
SELECT PID AS s, “rdf : types” AS p, “Professor” AS v FROM PROF
UNION ALL
SELECT SID AS s, “rdf : types” AS p, “Person” AS v FROM STUD
UNION ALL
SELECT PID AS s, “rdf : types” AS p, “Person” AS v FROM PROF
This is done only once (not for each query execution). Now queries can be executed as
SPARQL queries. In this case as query
SELECT ?x WHERE {?x rdf : type Person}
which is first translated to a SQL query on the Tripleview and then directly evaluated by the
RDBMS as
SELECT s FROM Tripleview WHERE p = “rdf : types” AND v = “Person”
A fundamental aspect is how easy is to publish data stored in a RDB into the RDF format.
Since this turns out to not be easy, this is one of the cases where Web 3.0 environments
should enhance usability in Web 2.0 technologies, following one of the defining equations
that have been proposed for Web 3.0, namely:
Web 3.0 = Web 2.0 + Usability.
It is well known that the final purpose of usability is hiding the underlying technology to the
user so as to allow the user to concentrate on the task to be performed. A complex
technology (pattern matching, machine-learning algorithms, data mining, etc.) should make
several learners feel uncomfortable. In (Longworth, 2003) learning design barriers are
identified among the barriers to lifelong-learning. Actually, learning systems design does not
yet sufficiently take into account the individual differences and circumstances of learners
during life.
Under the usability perspective, personalization should make lifelong-learning systems
friendlier and thus should diminish the “technology barrier”.
The QWL 2 QL has been designed so that query answering exploits relational database
technology via query rewriting. Unfortunately, for a query posed in terms of QWL 2 QL
ontology, the size of the rewritten query that can be evaluated on the relational database is
worst case exponential with respect to the size of the original query (Calvanese et al., 2007),
so that rewriting algorithms that return queries with a smaller size are in order. But the
interesting approach proposed in (Sequeda et al., 2013) exploits views for answering SPARQL
371
queries on QWL 2 QL ontology over data stored in relational databases.
Views 3.0 on profiles - The current definitions of machine-readable learner profiles are rather
fluid, with several suitable customizations.
We expect that a learner profile includes at least learning levels (grades, attended courses,
etc.), supplemental achievement data, received services, work habits. They have to use
linked data to see information from many different systems. Profiles can be constructed by
means of mashups fetched through APIs once personalization technology involves software
that learns patterns, habits, and preferences. User’s preference data can be accessed
through preferences API that provides a simple, ubiquitous preferences management
facility.
Profiles are also managed within databases (as for instance in Oracle) and some professional
profile databases do exist.
The following “defining” equation summarizes a flexible and general learner profile notion
which stems from the more familiar portfolio:
Profile = Annotated Portfolio.
A common use of annotations is for disambiguation. Annotations can be easily added to
texts or to other items by utilizing several languages. Languages as XML and HTML annotate
text in a way that is syntactically distinguishable from that text. They can be used to add
information about the desired visual presentation, or machine-readable semantic
information (as it is documented in the www Consortium document 2014 “Web Annotation
Data Model”). In Java, annotations can be used as a special form of syntactic metadata in the
source code.
Annotations on digital images are commonly used as visible metadata superimposed on an
image without changing the underlying image.
A web annotation is an online annotation associated with a web resource. Using a Web
annotation system, a user can add, modify or remove information from a web resource
without modifying the resource itself.
In the profile context, annotations can play the role of supporting collaborative learning
goals, in the sense that annotations can be a guide for the learner in as much they outline:
 the cultural field where a certain learner’s activity either properly belongs to or leads
to,
 what kind of work has to be done in order to pursuit a certain path , etc.
Annotations are mainly analytical in nature but suitable suggestions can properly stem from
them.
Social annotations have already emerged in the higher-education framework. Empirical
studies into the higher-education uses of social annotation tools indicate that such tools
have been tested in some courses and have indicated that commenting, information sharing,
and highlighting, can support instruction designed to foster collaborative learning and
372
communication (Novak et al., 2012).
There are web-based annotation tools (as e.g., HyLighter) as well as research in the design
and development of annotation systems that utilize a variety of dedicated display options.
Current web-based text annotation systems are collaborative software that allow text
editing and versioning functionality, in addition to annotation and commenting interfaces.
For example, system HyLighter supports synchronous and asynchronous interactions,
comment tagging, threaded discussions and comment filtering.
In case sharing and communicating through annotations is anchored to specific documents,
the related discussion is referred to as anchored discussion (Wolfe et al., 2008).
Also specialized web-based text annotations do exist in the context of scientific publication
(either for refereeing or post-publication).
Since it is likely that profiles contain different directions which stem from different
preferences and diverse skills, Views 3.0 on profiles are useful for selecting topics of interest
and more generally for reading profiles in a semantically correct way.
In lifelong-learning the learner preferences inevitably change over time, since learning needs
vary across the various phases of an individual’s life. Therefore learner preference data and
metadata have to be modified or extended quite frequently in whatever learner profile. It is
therefore necessary to update each machine-readable learner profile and therefore the
related annotations. How to manage profile evolution is a crucial aspect, in particular how to
cover the fact that each profile does expire. A profile maintenance process that periodically
reviews profiles is in order. The time scales involved in lifelong-learning is still not reflected
in today’s mainstream learning technologies and their associated architectures. In
(Richardson et al., 2013) RESTful APIs (i.e. that conform to the Representation Software
Architecture style) are proposed for building scalable web services. How profile expiration
impacts views has to be clarified at a general setting independent of the utilized language.
As profile languages, we can mention JSON, XML, JSON-LD (Java Script Object Notation for
Linked Data) that has been proposed as an alternative to RDFS (Resource Description
Framework Schema) and that lets combine a context, i.e. a machine-readable document,
with an ordinary JSON document. But a JSON-LD context document hardly meets all
characteristics of an application profile, as defined for instance in (Pohl, 2013). Besides
HTML, designed for human readable documents, widely used are for instance HAL
(Hypertext Application Language), which keeps just the hypertext tool of HTML and is at
disposal either as XML-based (HAL+XML) or JSON-based (HAL+JSON) (Richardson et al.,
2013).
An important aspect to be addressed is that lifelong-learning systems should also provide
suggestions to learners which stem from profiles. Therefore, giving personalized responses is
a process that involves several mechanisms including proposals providing based on profiles.
373
As a consequence, it is likely that such a response process should achieve a probabilistic
nature in the general case, since taking decisions to provide suitable proposals that are
tailored to a given profile is inevitably subject to make mistakes. Thus false positives and
false negatives come into play.
For instance, suppose that a lifelong-learning system considers, under a machine readable
profile, a learner as belonging to one of the following two categories:
 unlikely to be interested in ancient history;
 likely to be interested in ancient history.
Then suppose that a recently published work on ancient Greece is candidate to be suggested
to learners. Then:
i) a false positive occurs if the learner considered in the latter category turns out, upon
further investigation, to have no interest in ancient history;
ii) a false negative occurs if the learner considered in the first category turns out, upon
further investigation, to have interest in ancient history.
It is known that decreases in the false positive rate are accompanied by increases in
the false negative rate, and vice versa (although not necessarily in the same
proportion). Only data quality or classification technique improvements can reduce
both the false positive rate and the false negative rate. Actually, using poor quality
data is likely to result in a larger number of false positives and false negatives than
would be the case if the data were of high quality.
Views 3.0 on web items - Both structured and semi-structured data (as web pages,
documents, etc.) can be accessed via Views 3.0. For instance:
 at large extent in semantic formats RDF, whose data with triples (subject - predicate object) correspond to the underlying relational data as a table with three columns,
the subject column, the predicate column and the object column, which may be
heterogeneous (unlike in the relational databases)
 or in RDFS formats (that turn out to be rather complicated for most developers)
 or in OWL (which will enable an application to process or interpret information
contained in documents rather than simply presenting the information or documents
to the user)
 or in SPARQL (that is the standard query language for RDF)
Related work
The authors do not know works on View 3.0 conceptualizations with the learner profile as
machine- readable. So far, some steps in that direction stem from some systems that have
been proposed.
374
The current trend in MOOC (Massive Open Online Courses) is characterized by providing
content to an extraordinarily high number of learners. MOOCs provide a suitable way for
lifelong-learning. However, inadequate communication and cooperation mechanisms are
considered as one of the main criticisms. In (Abeer & Miri, 2014) students’ preferences and
views about learning in MOOCs are investigated via the qualitative methodology which
included the use of an online survey with open questions and semi-structured interviews.
Specifically, MOOCs design features and how students’ competencies can influence their
participation in MOOCs were explored.
Creating mashups is already in Web 2.0 but it should become so easy in Web 3.0 that
anyone will be able to do it. To this aim, also widgets are interesting tools since prospective
users may combine widgets together to make mashups by just clicking and dragging a couple
of icons into a box on a Web page. Widgets are small applications that people can insert into
Web pages by copying and embedding lines of code into a Web page's code.
PLE (Personal Learning Environment) provided facilities for lifelong-learning in Web 2.0
(Alotaibi et al., 2015). PLE refers to an online learning environment where the learner is able
to customize the personal learning environment based on pedagogical and personal choices.
PLE is a framework comprising learning applications and Web 2.0 tools, social software tools
including blogs, applications such as del.icio.us, wiki, podcasting, videocasting, etc. PLE
focuses on the learner, who is presented with learning resources based on individual
interests, education level, attitude and cultural, social and other factors.
Quite interesting are the views in Presto that are utilized for mashups and mashable
information. They could be improved to substantially involve learner profiles. Views 3.0 have
been addressed for instance in Presto (Pettersen, 2009), where they are considered as an
advanced web based query builder with excellent abilities to fetch content from different
databases and represent it in different formats. Views 3.0 define the format and layout for
data from mashables and mashups and moreover define which devices support that layout
(e.g., desktop browsers, mobile phones and mobile tablets). Multiple views can be used in
Presto with specific mashups, defining how mashup and mashable response data are
displayed, the layout and format of the data, for one or more devices. Mashups and
mashables can have many different views. Basic apps from one mashup or mashable
information source can also be build up. Presto bundles a set of common views that can be
used to work with mashable or mashup data or used to create apps.
For what concerns time scalability, APIs evolution over time is addressed for instance in
(Richardson et al., 2013) where the focus is on what it takes to design usable REST APIs that
evolve over time.
For what concerns personalization, already the XML-based markup language APPEL (a P3P
Preference Exchange Language) allows a user to express preferences in a set of preferencerules.
375
Tool Virtuoso that presents itself as the Prometheus for relational data management in RDF
(see VirtuosoRdfViews.html) represents relational data, local as well as remote, as RDF views
in order to access them through SPARQL queries. But the standardization lack in SPARQL
may determine that different implementations do de facto omit interoperability.
If the RDF views are materialized, the performance of the query management improves
together with data availability. However, vista materialized views have to be continously
updated for taking into account the updates that have been performed on the utilized
sources. Virtuso can also function as a front end for web services, for semi-structured data or
for textual data, by declaring a procedure view to access a web service and presents the data
to be used in a SQL query.
Conclusions
Although the purposes of lifelong-learning have been widely specified, the required
education technology is still evolving. We claim that new models and architectures are still
needed to promote effective profile-based lifelong-learning. In this paper, the view
perspective has been assumed. Specifically, a View 3.0 that is able to select data in a
personalized way for lifelong-learning has been conceptualized via some fundamental
requirements that have been identified for an emerging View 3.0 independently of specific
formats. Such a view that could be exploited in lifelong-learning can be utilized for
personalization issues also in other contexts.
Further work
The privacy preservation issues that a profile-based lifelong-learning system may determine
deserve a great attention and further work. For instance, a consequence of managing
learner profiles might determine:
 inferring similar attitudes and proposals for different learners having profiles that are
similar under some aspects;
 revealing facts about other collaborating learners from the learner profiles, although
those learners do not desire those facts be revealed.
Exploiting views for privacy preservation in databases is nowadays a classical approach.
Exploiting Views 3.0 should help for enhancing the obtained results at least for what
concerns usability.
376
References
Abeer, W., & Miri, B. (2014). Students’ Preferences and Views about Learning in a MOOC,
ERPA 2014, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152, 318 – 323.
Alotaibi, S. J. (2015). From e-Learning to Lifelong Learning, over Personal Learning
Environment. IJITCS (International Journal of Information Technology & Computer
Science), 19(1), 84-92.
Atzeni, P., Jensen, C. S., Orsi, G., Ram, S., Tanca, & L., Torlone R. (2013). The relational model
is dead, SQL is dead, and I don't feel so good myself. SIGMOD Record 42(2), 64- 68.
Bizer, C., Heath, T., & Berners-Lee, T. (2009). Linked data-the story so far. International
Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems, 5(3), 1–22.
Calvanese D., Giacomo G., Lembo D., Lenzerini M., Rosati R. (2007). Tractable reasoning and
efficient query answeringin description logics: The dl-lite family. Journal of
Automated Reasoning 39(3), 385-429.
Dominic , M., Francis, S., & Pilomenraj, A. (2014). E-Learning in Web 3.0. International
Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 2, 8-14.
Hussain, F. (2013). E-Learning 3.0 = E-Learning 2.0 + Web 3.0?. IOSR Journal of Research &
Method in Education (IOSR-JRME), 3(3), 39-47.
Kalou, A. K., Koutsomitropoulos, D. A., & Pomonis T.T. (2013). Semantic Web Rules and
Ontologies for Developing Personalized Mashups. International Journal of Knowledge
and Web Intelligence, 4(2/3), 142-165.
Koper, R., & Tattersall, C. (2004). New directions for lifelong-learning using network
technologies. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(6), 689-700.
Intizar, A. M., Pichler, R., Truong, H. L., & Dustdar, S., (2011). On Integrating Data Services
Using Data Mashups. In Fernandes, A. A. A., Gray, A. J. G., Belhajame, K. (Eds.).
Advances in Databases - Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 7051, 132-135. Berlin:
Springer Heidelberg.
"Lifelong Learning Program". European Union Programs Agency. Retrieved 15 June 2012
(llp.eupa.org.mt/content.php)
Liu, X., Hui, Y., Sun, W., & Liang, H. (2007). Towards Service Composition Based on Mashup.
2007 IEEE Congress on Services (SERVICES 2007).
377
Longworth, N. (2003). Lifelong-Learning in Action: Transforming Education in the 21st
Century, Kogan Page, London.
Novak, E., Rim R., Tristan E. J. (2012). "The Educational Uses of Social Annotation Tools in
Higher Education: A Literature Review". Internet and Higher Education, 15, 39–49.
Patel, K. (2013). Incremental Journey for World Wide Web: Introduced with Web 1.0 to
Recent Web 5.0 – A Survey Paper. International Journal of Adv. Res. in Computer
Science and Software Engineering, 3(10).
Pattal, M. M. I., Yuan, L., & Jianqiu, Z. (2009). Web3.0: A real personal Web! More
opportunities & more threats. IEEE Third International Conference on Next
Generation Mobile Applications, Services and Technologies, 125-128.
Pettersen, Y. N. (2009). New in Opera Presto 2.2: TLS 1.2 Support. Opera Software.
Pohl, A. (2013). Providing machine-readable application profiles with OAI-ORE – Available
from https://wiki1.hbz-nrw.de/
Richardson, L., Amundsen, M.,& Ruby, S. (2013). RESTful Web APIs, Sebastopol CA: O’Reilly
Media.
Rubens, N., Kaplan, D., & Okamoto, T. (2014). E-Learning 3.0: anyone, anywhere, anytime,
and AI. In Chiu, D.K.W., Wang, M., Popescu, E., Li, Q., Lau, R. (Eds.). New Horizons in
Web Based Learning - Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 7697, Springer-Verlag, 171180.
Sequeda, J. F., Arenas M., Miranker D.P. (2013). Ontology-based Data Access using Views.
Vancea, A., Grossniklaus, M., & Norrie, M.C. (2008). Database-driven web mashups.
Proceedings ICWE, 162–174.
Waßmann, I., Schönfeldt, C., & Tavangarian, D. (2014). Wiki-Learnia: Social E-Learning in a
Web 3.0 Environment, WJEIS, 4(1).
Wolfe, J. (2008). Annotations and the Collaborative Digital Library: Effects of an Aligned
Annotation Interface on Student Argumentation and Reading strategies. ComputerSupported Collaborative Learning, 3 (2), 141–164.
378
Vieules Marie Bénédicte, Cohen-Bouhacina Touria, Cormier Eric
Innovative training strategy: the training platforms program of Bordeaux
University
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
University of Bordeaux
France
marie-benedicte.vieules@u-bordeaux.fr
Abstract
The Photonics training platform of Bordeaux University aims at structuring and developing
innovative training for students and workers for tomorrow careers.
The training platform program, an Excellence Initiative (funded by the French state program
Investment for the Future), intents to improve the hiring potential of students through a
better match between the initial training courses and the labour market needs and to
develop lifelong training courses in the University of Bordeaux. It ambitions to organize
these courses on a topical basis and to promote their content at national and international
levels.
This process requires modernization of the present training curriculum in terms of
educational innovation, internationalization, greater synergy with the socioeconomic sphere
through partnerships with industrials, …
The Photonics training platform designs novel learning approaches and is organized around
three axes:

Training based on the field of photonics with structured links between higher
education and continuing education,

Partnerships with industrials and international activities,

Development of educational innovation projects.
The Photonics training platform strives to become a collaborative lab of ideas to design
innovative learning tools by initiating radical evolutions of teaching methods in relation with
technological developments; create a community of education experts in the field of
photonics to promote this key enabling technology in scientific topics taught in university.
379
This effort provides resources available to all stakeholders for better efficiency in the design
and management of training projects and will be engaged in a continuous improvement
process to establish the continuity of projects and quality enhancement.
Keywords: lifelong learning, innovative learning tools, excellence, teaching methods.
Introduction
The University of Bordeaux is one of the few French universities selected in the “Investment
for the Future” French State program. The initiative of excellence (IdEx) is a program of
excellence to launch a dynamic of long-term growth and development in higher education
and research activities in and around Bordeaux, centered on the University of Bordeaux.
The IdEx Bordeaux investment strategy is based on three fundamental challenges: excellence
of research, innovative training, and outstanding transfer of knowledge. The aim of the
investment is to boost technical progress through research and innovation and enriching
human capital through education.
The training platforms are part of the innovative training program. The goal of the platforms
is to boost participants’ employability, with multidisciplinary training tailored to the needs
and challenges of different professional sectors. The training platforms are ‘sector-specific’
approach oriented, while also focusing on the university’s national and international
positioning. These platforms are focuses on sectors identified as being of key strategic
importance for our region: forestry-timber, optics-photonics-lasers, aeronautical
maintenance. The program is based around initiatives for educational innovation,
internationalization and the suppression of barriers between different educational formats.
It requires also a high degree of synergy with socio-economic partners, made possible by
close collaboration with professional and industrial experts.
The Photonics training platform (www.photonics.u-bordeaux.fr) is centered on three axes:
organizing the training offer by structuring links between higher education and continuing
education, developing partnerships with industrials and international activities, designing
educational innovation projects.
Pedagogic innovation projects
The most significant action is to provide photonics’ skills to most students and to focus on
380
the technological contribution of this field. The long term goal of the training platform is that
every student of University of Bordeaux registered in engineering acquires knowledge and
skills in photonics.
The European Commission identifies Photonics as a key enabling technology (KET) that will
shape industry over the next 5 to 10 years. Photonics is the science of light: the technology
of generating, controlling, and detecting light waves and photons, which are particles of
light. Photonics is everywhere in our everyday life from consumer electronics (barcode
scanners, DVD players, remote TV control), to telecommunications (internet), health (eye
surgery, medical instruments), manufacturing industry (laser cutting and machining),
defense and security (infrared camera, remote sensing), entertainment (holography, laser
shows), etc.
The challenge to be overcome for high education is to provide accurate skills to students and
teaching methods for teachers. Designing innovative learning tools is a way to achieve these
requirements and spread this key enabling technology around scientific topics taught in
university.
Learning photonics is challenging because it requires understanding scientific concepts,
physics properties, acquires strong abstraction ability and scientific reasoning and construct
mental images and schemes. Traditional learning in physics is based on face-to-face
classroom teaching and practical work courses. The photonics training platform is
cooperating with teachers to create and develop innovative tools. There has been
tremendous progress in teaching methods and technologies in recent years. Students of the
Y generation are native users of ICT technologies. Practical training of up-to-date optics and
laser technologies requires expensive instruments usually exceeding the budget of training
centers.
Three projects are currently under development in university of Bordeaux:
 E-book, a new tool to teach sciences
 HOBIT1, research project to make invisible visible
 VP2L2, a laser serious game
1
HOBIT: Hybrid Optical Bench for Innovative Training
381
E- book: Interactive resources editor for science education
The E-book is developed by IDSC group3 . IDSC is a private partner formerly a video game
designer, now specialized in interactive training solution and technical serious game and
working with inputs from professors of the University of Bordeaux and with support from
Région Aquitaine and IdEx University of Bordeaux.
The goal of the project is to create a prototype tool for teachers and trainers to produce
pedagogical contents adapted for Y generation students. The interactive resources editor for
science fits into the ongoing transition in education and allows a better availability of the
resources on a variety of IT platforms. The pedagogical approach is based on a better
interactivity and a playful approach. This E-book is designed as an attractive addition to the
course (complementary resources of the lecture), which includes rich media and activities
and will be used on laptops, tablets or smartphones.
Figure 1 & 2. Ebook generator
2
VP2L : Virtual Photonics Learning Lab
3
IDSC group is a french society located in Cenon (near Bordeaux) http://www.idsc-group.com/
382
Some generators are already available (iBooks Author from Apple), but they lack connectivity
with learning management system. The interactive resources editor for science generator is
designed to exchange data with the University of Bordeaux learning management system
(LMS).
In this project, the pedagogical resource and the software development aim at delivering a
demonstrator on the theme of waves. The choice of waves for the demonstrator is linked to
the importance of this theme in the understanding of nature and nowadays technology
(earthquakes, swell, light, sound, data, …) and the contribution of numerical methods in the
visualization and in the understanding of these various phenomena.
Figure 3 & 4. Editing and preview of the eBook on waves
The resource thus aims at creating a bridge between high school where these notions are
first presented and university where they are deepened. The different scientific domains
involved (physics, oceanography, geology, acoustics, photonics …) will be able to introduce
this demonstrator in their courses.
The first beta version will be released at the end of 2015. The next steps will be to work on
connectivity issues and possibility to publish a standalone eBook application.
HOBIT, a research project to make invisible visible
The Hybrid optical bench for innovative training is a research project. The goal is to create an
optical bench with tangible interaction and validate the ability to train students with an
383
augmented reality optical bench. The pedagogical approach is based on augmented reality
(make visible the physical rules).
HOBIT is developed by INRIA4 with inputs from professors of the University of Bordeaux and
University of Lorraine. This combines experts in the field of optics, human-computer
interaction, computer graphics, sensors and actuators, and education science with the
support from IdEx for the educational evaluation part.
Optics may be hard to understand, as students cannot see the optics principles (e.g. wave
optics). Currently, many students do not easily understand theoretical physical models. They
are not able to develop a coherent framework for important optical concepts, despite having
finished their introductory physics studies. The physic courses are completed by experiments
during lab work, offering the opportunity to observe the result of the optical effects. Thus,
the students can observe phenomena such as interferences and diffraction patterns as well
as polarization effects by the naked eyes.
HOBIT is a simulator and has a hybrid approach. A Michelson interferometer (used for
metrology) is recreated as an Augmented Michelson Interferometer (AMI). The optics
elements are 3D printed and the physics models are numerically simulated in real time on a
computer. The values obtained from the potentiometers (position and orientation of the
mirrors and position of the lens) modify the parameters of the simulation.
4
Inria, is public science and technology institution dedicated to computational sciences. The
French National Institute for computer science and applied mathematics, promotes
“scientific excellence for technology transfer and society”.
384
Figure 5. Michelson Interferometer
Figure 6. AMI
The manipulation of the hybrid platform will be very close to what experimenters use to do
in their daily activities because the hybrid environment will be close enough to a real optical
bench, with similar mechanical adjustments (translation, rotation).
Beyond the simulation of real optical phenomena, the system augments the workspace with
digital information. This information has educational purposes or serves as guidance to
users. For example, the users can see how the light travels through the elements that form
AMI; it also provides information about these elements such as the current orientation angle
or position. To achieve this, a mapping of the physical space is performed to ensure to the
augmented space a system consistency. This information is projected using a video projector
situated at the top of the setup.
Figure 7. Augmented information
Figure 8. The setup
385
Based on these characteristics, the hybrid setup is expected to help the student to acquire
deeper understanding and technical skills for running experiments in optics, photonics and
lasers. Such a system opens new opportunities to teach optics in a way that was not possible
before, by manipulating concepts beyond the limits of observable physical phenomena.
VP2L, a laser serious game
Practical training of up-to-date optics and laser technologies requires expensive instruments
usually exceeding the budget of training centers. Using immersive technologies and
simulation to understand optical concepts would help to learn and understand physical
phenomena.
The VP2L, virtual photonics learning lab simulate the physics of light and optical systems in a
laser serious game. The pedagogical approach is based on an immersive technology - HeadMounted Display (Oculus). VP2L uses virtual and augmented reality and includes real
physical phenomena.
VP2L is developed by NOVO 3D5, IDSC group, PYLA6 with inputs from professors of the
University of Bordeaux and with support from Région Aquitaine and IdEx University of
Bordeaux.
VP2L provides a virtual word in 3 dimensions in which an optical system can be built by the
student or the trainee. The user has available optical elements (laser source, mirrors,
lenses…) with given properties that must be assembled to build an optical system (telescope,
laser cavity…) as requested by the exercise.
5
NOVO 3D, is a french society, specialized in 3D graphic design http://www.novo3d.fr/site/
6
PYLA is the french optics and laser tranining center for the Route des Lasers cluster http://www.pylaroutedeslasers.com/en
386
The software simulates the real optical and physical properties of each component to
reproduce a system behavior close to reality. The virtual world is in fact a laboratory with an
optical table and many laser components.
Figure 9: The real laser lab
Figure 10: The virtual lab in progress
Figure 11: The virtual lab
Figure 12: The virtual optical elements
The user is immersed in the 3D environment and can move freely in the room to build his
system. All his motion are detected and reported in the virtual world displayed in Oculus rift
head set. This unique pedagogical tool based on the concept of serious game uses digital
rendering engines of the world of 3D video games. This innovation reproduces real systems
in the virtual world for educational purposes.
The first version will validate the simulation of physical rules (propagation and steering of
optical Gaussian beams) and test the first training modules.
387
This project will be continued within an Erasmus+ strategic partnership for higher education
(IT-ELLI7) and scenario will be developed for large laser infrastructures training. Based on the
virtual lab, several laser infrastructures will be recreated to train technicians and engineers
for maintenance work or laser safety.
Perspectives
The three innovative projects accompanied by the photonics training platform are currently
under development. The next step will consist in evaluating the pedagogical interest. The
benefits and limits will be evaluated as well on students ‘cohorts.
The next objectives of the training platform include implementation of these new tools
within license and master degree curricula. In parallel, the training platform works on a
greater insertion of industrials in the design of these innovative tools to better answer their
needs.
The renewing of the programs goals to attract more students to science and photonics, a key
technology for the future and a sector that creates quality jobs with a high level of added
value for the coming years.
References
David Furió, Martin Hachet, Jean-Paul Guillet, Bruno Bousquet, Stéphanie Fleck, Patrick
Reuter, Lionel Canioni, (2015), AMI : Augmented Michelson Interferometer, Talence, France.
7
IT-ELLI, Innovative Training and Education for Large Laser Infrastructure is a collaborative project of ten
European partners.
388
Zöserl Eva, Reif Josef
Improving Flexibility by Enriching Courses with Web Conferencing – Three
Case Studies
Affiliation:
Country:
Email:
Centre for Distance Studiesa (Johannes Kepler University Linz)
Austria
eva.zoeserl@jku.at
josef.reif@jku.at
Abstract
Johannes Kepler University of Linz co-operates with the German FernUniversität in Hagen
since the early Nineties by marketing, counselling and supporting their distance mode
studies throughout Austria, actually via 6 study centres related to the Centre for Distance
Studies in Austria (CDSA). On behalf of CDSA face-to-face-courses (f2f) are carried out that
aim at helping the Austrian students of FernUniversität in Hagen to progress in their studies.
In order to improve flexibility and to reach more students that are geographically
distributed, new types of short courses are implemented that help the students to plan their
study by coping with work and private obligations. Such courses have (been) started in the
summer term of 2015. Two studies/content related f2f-courses within bachelor degrees
(economics on the one hand, literary studies on the other) have been supplemented with
(introductory) online elements while one interdisciplinary course for master degree students
in the faculty of Cultural and Social Sciences was held completely online.
The paper describes three scenarios on an experimental stage using the web conferencing
tool Adobe Connect, including considerations regarding didactical aspects, technical support
as well as students’ and lecturers’ feedbacks.
Keywords: distance education, web conferences, working professionals, learner support
389
Introduction
Johannes Kepler University of Linz is a university that operates both in the conventional and
blended or online way of teaching and learning. Among other institutions, it co-operates
with the German FernUniversität in Hagen by marketing, counselling and supporting their
distance mode studies throughout Austria via 6 study centres related to the Centre for
Distance Studies in Austria (CDSA). CDSA has locations in Bregenz, Linz, Rottenmann (Graz),
Saalfelden (Salzburg), Vienna and Villach. About 3.000 Austrian students are enrolled at the
FernUniversität in Hagen and are supported by the 6 study centres.
Besides marketing and counselling the student-support of CDSA consists of the following:
 the organisation and surveillance of dislodged written exams of FernUniversität in
Hagen via different study centres
 the organisation and surveillance of dislodged oral exams of FernUniversität in Hagen
via different study centres
 the organisation and teaching/mentoring of different f2f-courses via different study
centres
In this paper we will concentrate on the third point, i.e. the f2f-courses and their further
development, e.g. online courses or units, i.e. fractions of courses.
A key challenge distance learning students face is how to successfully combine a full-time job
and/or family responsibilities with university studies when pressed hard for time. To meet
these particular challenges CDSA has developed a range of courses:
 Interdisciplinary courses (study skills related) that help students to get the study skills
they need, in particular:
o
o
o
o
o
Study Skills for Distance Learning
Mathematics Fundamentals
Competencies in Scientific Working
Web Competence – Collaboration and Social Networking
English for Social Sciences
 Studies/content related courses have been designed as support courses for content
related modules offered by the FernUniversität in Hagen.
390
In order to better accommodate working professionals, CDSA’s f2f-courses are offered on a
voluntary basis, mainly on weekends, in partitions of 4 to 8 hours and about two to 4 units a
term. Long-term experience has shown us that the people frequent these courses in a very
volatile manner (reaching from 25 to some 5 participants for the last unit). This somewhat
unpleasant situation lead us to an investigation one year ago to bring forward the reasons
for this volatile manner. The results – roughly spoken – are:
1) Students do not wish to continue a module and thus the underlying/supporting f2fcourse.
2) Students feel comfortable with their own progress in the learning and achievements
for the course and do not need the subsequent units.
3) Students do have professional or private reasons not to frequent (further) units of
the f2f-course, e.g. they (do) have time restrictions.
4) Finally but not necessarily: Students might be discontented with the particular
course/its mentor.
This lead us to rethink our support via f2f-courses. In order to improve flexibility new types
of short courses are presented in a part-time or full-time online manner. These courses
should:
1)
2)
3)
4)
reach more students that are geographically distributed
ease their time restrictions planning their attendance of courses
foster them into subsequent f2f-course units via an introductory online unit
thus enlarge the opportunities for students of the FernUniversität in Austria as a
whole, esp. for the students of “higher”, more advanced modules
Implementation of courses in a part-time or full-time online manner
The first experimental courses within that frame have been implemented in the summer
term of 2015:
 Two studies related f2f-courses for bachelor degree students have been
supplemented with or enriched by online elements.
 One interdisciplinary course for master degree students has been held completely
online.
Adobe Connect, a web conferencing tool, has been used to carry out the online sessions.
Adobe Connect is a widely known tool for virtual classrooms (Cohen, 2012; Gedera, 2014).
391
The next step for extending these offers will/shall be the following:
 an introductory course for master degree students of the faculty of economics, being
held completely online too
 another studies related course in psychology, 50 % online and 50 % f2f (rotational)
The following sections describe technical and didactical preconditions for online sessions,
then reflect the three scenarios already implemented in the summer term of 2015, including
students’ and lecturers’ feedbacks.
Technical und didactical preconditions for online sessions via Adobe Connect
 Opening up user accounts for each course lecturer
 Training of lecturers on the tool, both didactically and technically, e.g. via joint
meetings with the lecturers via Adobe Connect, i.e.
o testing the connection(s)
o the webcam picture of the lecturer to be transmitted but not the ones of the
participating students (due to possible bandwidth problems, esp. on their
side)
o preparation of slides
o fixed arrangements (tools, e.g. pods) within Adobe Connect should be
implemented before use in the session
o fixed rules for the use of chat and the microphone (lecturers should speak
alone or everybody else)
o limitation of group size (in relation to the number of enrolments in a
particular course or study)
 preparing manuals for the lecturers both considering didactical and technical aspects
 preparing manuals for students participating online, mainly with regard to technical
aspects
 testing the connections with lecturers and/or students, some days ahead of the
particular unit
 another test for webcam- and audio-configuration about half an our in advance of
the planned course unit
392
Both the two introductory online course units and the entire online course have been and
will further be subject to online evaluation and subsequent re-modelling or reshaping of
those courses or course units.
Case 1 “Introduction to Economic Science / Economics”
Before summer term 2015, the studies related course “Introduction to Economic Science /
Economics” was conducted as a f2f-course carried out by three different lecturers at five
study centres in Austria. In summer term 2015, the lecturer who gave lessons at the study
centres in Linz, Rottenmann and Salzburg decided to cut 30 minutes of each f2f-course and
to use it to offer an 1,5 hour online session in addition to and as a preparation for the f2fcourses.
The aim of the online session was to reach more students and to act like a “teaser” for the
f2f-courses. 27 students registered for the course (online and f2f). But, interestingly, only 13
students took part at the 1,5 hour online session in Adobe Connect, carried out on a Friday
from 15:00 until 16:30. As 4 students wanted to attend another f2f-course, which was
carried out on the same day later at Linz, the lecturer offered those students to take part at
the online session in a f2f way. Therefore a meeting room at the study centre in Linz was
equipped with a big screen displaying the virtual classroom of Adobe Connect. While most of
the users attended the online session from home equipped with webcam and headset, 4
students took place next to the lecturer at the meeting room of the study centre. For those
students webcams as well as headsets were not necessary as the screen was big enough and
they sat in the same room as the lecturer. In this room a microphone as well as a
loudspeaker were used.
Features used in this Adobe Connect session
 screen sharing of study material
 chat has been used, but particularly for those people who’s Internet connection
and/or headset was too weak
 a webcam has been used (esp. that of the lecturer)
 microphones of the 13 online participants were turned off, people had to raise hands
(via symbol) to be allowed to speak; only then their webcam (picture) was presented
to the group too
 After an input round on other (organisational) aspects of the module and course the
students were given 2 introductory chapters of the module in which students were
393
instructed on how economists think and they were motivated to take part in asking
questions and/or giving answers.
Results of the evaluation
 What students did like
o expert knowledge and the online “trial”
o only a few people had technical problems (3 out of 13)
 Problems that arose/to be improved
o Using websites for demonstrating subject matters turned out problematic
because scrolling of websites does not fit the observer’s eyes, i.e. it was too
fast (time lag); more slides instead of or less online material shall be used
o using/preparing more predefined templates of Adobe Connect (therefore)
seems reasonable
o a clear perspective of what will follow next in the subsequent f2f-course units
(2 on each site to follow)
 The lecturer’s experiences
o Teaching students online can be a very vivid experience.
o Students participated in a lively manner.
o Solid preparation both in technical and didactical respect is necessary.
Case 2 “Introduction for Master Degree Students of the Faculty of Cultural and Social
Sciences”
The course “Introduction for Master Degree Students of the Faculty of Cultural and Social
Sciences” is an interdisciplinary course that has been carried out for the first time in summer
term 2015. Due to the geographical distribution of the students, the audience for this course
would have been too small to carry it out in a f2f style. Therefore it was held completely
online by using Adobe Connect as virtual classroom.
The online course was divided into 4 parts that were carried out on 4 days (Tuesdays and
Thursdays) from 18:30 until 21:00, including breaks. Each part had a different topic and
according to the students’ interest and foreknowledge, it was not mandatory to participate
394
in each session. 6 students registered for the online course and from 2 through to 5 students
took part at a time.
 screen sharing has been used not only to display slides but also for demonstration
issues (e.g. how to use the library website)
 webcam has been used (esp. that of the lecturer)
 chat has been used to note upcoming questions during the lecturer’s presentation
 survey tool has been used to test the knowledge of the participants in between as
well as to vote on content preferences regarding the next online session
 Each part of the Adobe Connect session was characterised by the lecturer’s
presentation and a following discussion. Because of the small number of participants,
it was allowed to interrupt the presentation by just asking the question.
o online attendance without having to drive to a study centre
o expert tips of the lecturer as well as direct demonstration via screen sharing
o discussion rounds after the lecturer’s input as the students exchanged their
knowledge and learned from each other
o there were no technical problems on behalf of the students
o The lecturer wanted to demonstrate how to use the online library. Therefore
a VPN connection was necessary. Each time the lecturer started a VPN
connection Adobe Connect terminated. The lecturer did not test this setting
in advance.
o The use of the lecturer’s and students’ webcams is helpful, esp. in cooperative
sessions like online discussions.
395
o Testing the connections and sound settings with students, some days ahead
of the particular unit as well as just before the online course is necessary to
avoid or at least reduce technical problems during the course.
Case 3 “Introduction to Literary Studies“
Before summer term 2015, the studies related course “Introduction to Literary Studies” was
conducted as a f2f-course carried out by one lecturer at one study centre in Austria. The
course was only offered in Linz as it was the study centre where the majority of students is
enrolled in the corresponding module of the FernUniversität in Hagen. In summer term
2015, the lecturer was asked to offer an online session/introduction to the f2f-course.
Corresponding to case 1 the aim of the online session was to reach more students and to act
like a teaser for the f2f-course. 6 students registered for the course (online and f2f), but only
1 student took part at the 1,5 hour online session in Adobe Connect which was carried out
on a Thursday from 17:30 until 19:00.




screen sharing of study material
chat has been used to ask questions
webcam has been used (esp. that of the lecturer)
weblinks and downloads to additional study material
o
o
o
o
a personal conversation with the lecturer
inputs and expert information
the opportunity to ask questions
weblinks with additional information
o Technical problems with sound – the lecturer solved this challenge by adding
a telephone conference
396
o Adobe Connect may be a helpful, additional tool to prepare the f2f-course.
Findings
Participation rate
As a whole 39 students registered for the three courses. This wasn’t bad for a start.
Nevertheless only 15 students attended the online sessions. 12 out of 15 students answered
the online questionnaire (9 students from case 1, 3 students from case 2). The gap between
number of registrations and the participants may be due to the fact that:
 There has been no distinction in the registration process between online and f2fcourses. So people had to register for both automatically.
 There has been no clear announcement of online courses in advance of the term, as
was the case for the course “Introduction to Literary Studies”.
 Experiences in the online courses help us to improve or redesign our f2f-courses too.
What did the participants like most
 Participants remarked that they like the opportunity to attend the courses online
without having to drive to a study centre.
 The time when the online sessions were carried out seem to fit the students
requirements.
 Participants emphasized the participatory design of the online courses, i.e. Q&A and
feedback rounds.
 They highlighted the technical support on behalf of CDSA.
What would the participants like to be improved
 Some students remarked that it would be valuable to record online lectures in order
to make it available in retrospect. Students who were not able to attend the live
session would benefit from the recordings.
 Some difficulties have occurred while demonstrating websites via screen sharing.
Therefore the lecturers should test the compatibility with Adobe Connect in advance.
397
 The lecturers should pay attention to possible time lags the students may encounter
and therefore e.g. transitions from one slide to another should occur in a smooth
way.
Preferences regarding lecture type
Two thirds of the participants would prefer online courses as it would save time, another
third would prefer f2f-courses because of the social contact with other students as well as
with the lecturer. A smaller minority would prefer a combination of both.
Conclusion
The use of online learning environments like the web conferencing tool Adobe Connect can
offer students opportunities for flexibility, interaction and collaboration. The three scenarios
used so far focused on providing more flexibility. Online courses have the potential to reach
more students as travel time as well as possible overnight stays do not arise. Especially when
the amount of students in Austria who are enrolled in a certain module offered by the
FernUniversität in Hagen is small, the offering of an online course could be reasonable.
Based on the experiences gained from the three cases, CDSA advances its programme of
courses as follows.
Common arrangement among lecturers of the same course / subject
At the study centres in Vienna and Bregenz the course “Introduction to Economics /
Economics” is presented by different lecturers. The online session could also be useful for
students who attend the f2f-course in Vienna or Bregenz although another lecturer carries
out the online session. A common arrangement among the three lecturers regarding the
content of the online session is useful. A coordination meeting has been held using Adobe
Connect, thus introducing the f2f lecturers to online learning and the particular tool.
Planning and announcement of online sessions
Announcing an online session during the term, as has been happening in one case had a
negative impact on the participation rate. Therefore online sessions must be planned and
announced in advance, in combination with the subsequent f2f sessions.
398
Separate enrolment possibility for f2f-courses and their online supplementation
Students should be able to register for the f2f-course as well as for the online
supplementation separately. Case 1 shows that the f2f-courses which belong to the online
session are offered in various study centres while case 3 shows that the f2f-course is offered
in just one study centre. A separate enrolment would represent the amount of enrolled
participants more truthfully, which is important for planning issues. For example, if there is a
f2f-course just offered at one study centre, it is more likely that more students will
participate in the online session than in the f2f-course due to the geographical distribution
of the students. However, this means that a reference between the f2f-course(s) and the
corresponding online session(s) needs to be visible.
Facilitating students’ contact in f2f-courses
CDSA recognizes the importance of offering f2f-courses for distance mode students. F2fcourses facilitate students to get to know other students. For example, students talk to each
other in breaks and exchange their experiences. Such social contacts may be an initial point
to form learning groups.
399
References
Cohen, J. (2012). Adobe Connect: It's More Than Just for Teaching. In P. Resta (Ed.),
Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International
Conference 2012 (pp. 274-276). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of
Computing in Education (AACE).
Gedera, D. (2014). Students’ experiences of learning in a virtual classroom: An Activity
Theory perspective. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 10(4), pp.
93-101. Open Campus, The University of the West Indies, West Indies.
400

Conference Proceedings - The Online, Open and Flexible Higher

Transcription

Similar documents

Online Pedagogy

The Violation of Grice`s Maxims in Jokes Author(s): Salvatore Attardo

The Effect of Teacher`s Assistance on Malaysian Rural L Writing Self

Dutro Presentation Day I

Contents of this book

Massive open online courses - Virtual School Leadership Alliance

Project Based Learning

Overview of Events - University of California Consortium for

MOOC Moment

View Free PDF - IRMA

LTAS 15/8 Centre for Distance Education: Annual Report 2013

Think Big_Routman

Multidisciplinary Institute of Digitalisation and Energy