![]() The problem comes when it is argued that because MOOCs are open and free to end-users, they will inevitably force down the cost of conventional higher education, or eliminate the need for it altogether, especially in developing countries (see the Friedman comment at the beginning of this chapter.) As we shall see though they work best when people are already reasonably well educated. In other words, MOOCs are a tool for continuing and informal education, which has high value in its own right. The first is that these earlier forms of open and free did not replace the need for formal, credit-based education, but were used to supplement or strengthen it. There are also lessons we can learn from these earlier forms of open and free education that still apply to MOOCs. Libraries, open textbooks and educational broadcasting are also open and free and have been for some time, even if they do not have the same power and reach as Internet-based delivery. However, this is not the only form of open and free education. In this sense, MOOCs are an incredibly valuable addition to educational provision. Who could argue against this? Certainly not me, so long as the argument for MOOCs goes no further. This in itself is an amazing value proposition. MOOCs, particularly xMOOCs, deliver high quality content from some of the world’s best universities for free to anyone with a computer and an Internet connection. Lastly, it should be remembered when I am evaluating MOOCs I am applying the criteria of whether MOOCs are likely to lead to the kinds of learning needed in a digital age: in other words, do they help develop the knowledge and skills defined in Chapter 1? 5.4.2 Open and free education At the same time, we should be clear that we are discussing a phenomenon that to date has been marked largely by political, emotional and often irrational discourse, and in terms of cumulative hard evidence, we will have to wait for some time. However, wherever possible, I have tried to use any research that has been done that provides insight into the strengths and weaknesses of MOOCs. There is very little independent research to date on either xMOOCs or cMOOCs. However, MIT and Harvard, the founding partners in edX, are conducting some research, mainly on their own courses. ![]() The commercial platform providers such as Coursera and Udacity have provided limited research information overall, which is a pity, because they have access to really big data sets. ![]() Much of the research to date on MOOCs comes from the institutions offering MOOCs, mainly in the form of reports on enrolments, or self-evaluation by instructors. My big concern with xMOOCs is their limitation, as currently designed, for developing the higher order intellectual skills needed in a digital world.īecause at the time of writing most MOOCs are less than four years old, there are relatively few research publications on MOOCs, although research activities are now beginning to pick up. In-depth analysis by standard academic criteria shows that MOOCs have more academic rigor and are a far more effective teaching methodology than in-house teaching
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |