“The best part was the contact”: Understanding postgraduate students’ experiences of wrapped MOOCs in a South African university

Tasneem Jaffer, Shanali Govender & Cheryl Brown

1

M

C

00

assive

pen

nline

ourse

No shows

Active

Passive

Drop-ins

Observers

• Large course sign-ups (Mustafaraj, 2014)• No prerequisites or admission requirements (Sandeen,

2013)• Relatively low completion rates (Jordan, 2014; Khalil

and Ebner, 2014)• Generally no institutional accreditation (Chauhan, 2014)• No cost for enrollment and participation, (McAuley,

Stewart, Siemens & Cormier, 2010)• Relatively low cost for certification (Dellarocas & Van

Alstyne, 2013)

3

Blended learning

Blended learning landscape 4

Online

Face-to-Face

Formal

Eg: Accreditation

Non- Formal

EG: Summer

school

Semi - Formal

EG: Short

courses

Curriculum landsacpe

Blended learning - MOOCs and face-to-face contexts

5

Online

Face-to-Face

Formal

Eg: Accreditatio

n

Non- Formal

Eg: Summer

school

Semi - Formal

Eg: Short

courses

MOOCs

Curriculum landsacpe

Wrapped MOOCs6

Questions?

◻ Is an institution or organization hosting and supporting the face-to-face element of the learning experience?

◻ What kind of institution is it - a regulated educational institution, or an employer, non-governmental organisation, or a professional body?

◻ If the former, then is the MOOC incorporated into the formal academic curriculum or the co-curricula activities of the institution?

7

Types of Wrapped MOOCs

◻ Type 1: Peer Wrapped

◻ Type 2: Collegial Wrap

◻ Type 3: Co-curricula Wrap

◻ Type 4: Formal, Curricula Wrap

8

Background of UCT

● Research-intensive ● PGs drawn from beyond UCT

9

The Office of Postgraduate Studies

◻ OPS supports PGs in completing their studies. Identified a problem: PGS are ⬜ Diverse in their levels of preparedness for postgraduate study (Essa,

2011; Hanyane, 2015), ⬜ Diverse in their attainment of graduate attributes by the end of a

programme (Mouton, 2007; Le Grange & Newmark, 2002)⬜ Identified MOOCs as a possible site for learning - opted to wrap

MOOCs to mitigate high attrition rates⬜ Local facilitator with class of 15-20 students ⬜ NB facilitators designed to support students not teach

10

Method

◻ Qualitative, case study approach

◻ Data collection: A range of primary and secondary data, sample of 406 students, including:⬜ 3 semi-structured student & 5 facilitator interviews = 7 hours of data⬜ 35 online student experience surveys ; and ⬜ 62 open-ended course evaluations (secondary data)

11

The framework 12

◻ Data analysis: Analytical framework: Garrison, Anderson and Archer’s (2000) Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework ⬜ Content analysis (Stemler, 2001),

with the CoI presences providing predetermined codes

⬜ The context and literature provided a guide for additional themes which emerged during the analysis.

⬜ Established ‘learner presence’ and ‘structural factors’ as additions to the framework

13

14

Finding #1

Having an authority figure is important

Findings - Teaching Presence

◻ Replaced the MOOC instructor ⬜ MOOC became unimportant - students only came to sessions ⬜ “people only came to the facilitated sessions and did little -- if

anything -- of the online work”⬜ “we weren’t watching [the MOOC videos], please tell us what you

found important”◻ Provided context (local and disciplinary)

⬜ Students enjoyed the “practical application in [a] South African context”

⬜ Students were able “to relate the course to our own research and background”

15

Findings - Teaching Presence

◻ Flattened classroom⬜ Students came expecting traditional authority - they were “quite at sea

with all this equalness” ⬜ Facilitators were PG students themselves - established a comfortable

environment⬜ Hierarchy was still necessary - learning activities, answering questions

◻ Clarify MOOC content⬜ “The facilitator was able to clarify some concepts that I failed to

understand online by giving very good examples.” ◻ Facilitator central link to foster social and cognitive presence

⬜ E.g. facilitators creates a practical learning activity which prompts discussion and the cognitive learning process

16

17

Finding #2

People like real people

Findings - Social Presence

◻ Preference for face-to-face interaction ⬜ “I was able to ask questions and interact with other students

having the same queries, which is not possible with a purely online course”

⬜ “The discussions were more real than that of online peers” ◻ Place to share postgraduate student experiences

⬜ “it may sound cheesy but I felt far less alone to know that colleagues in science or whatever were facing similar challenges

⬜ One facilitator referred to sessions as “group therapy”

18

19

Finding #3

People learned stuff

Findings - Cognitive Presence

◻ Adapted MOOC assignments to the class for e.g writing and public speaking MOOC

◻ Students were able to apply knowledge to their research ⬜ “I won best poster presentation at the School of Public Health's

annual research day, so thank you - I could not have done without your help” - Public speaking student

⬜ “The course has had a huge implication for me and has now altered the route of my thesis and where I project myself in the long haul of life”

⬜ “I have a better grasp of how to manage a project for both my discipline and personal life.”

20

21

Finding #4

Independent learning is hard

Findings - Learner Presence

◻ Voluntary programme ⬜ Student intrinsically motivated ⬜ Wrapped MOOC experience requires more “self-motivation

than normal undergraduate lectures” ◻ Dropout remained high despite facilitated sessions

⬜ “heavy workload forced my withdrawal from the course” ⬜ “I stopped attending toward the end because I felt that it was

eating into my other course time”

22

23

Finding #4

Logistics matter

Findings - Structural factors

◻ Structure and format⬜ Period between MOOC content being released & facilitated sessions

was too short. ◻ Venue

⬜ Computer lab was not conducive for discussion, meeting rooms were preferred

◻ Duration of the session⬜ “Too short to accomplish much.” ⬜ “More time, especially the discussion needs more time allocation.”

◻ Group size ⬜ Some sessions had two people attending - not enough for discussion

24

Conclusion 25

◻ Facilitated sessions provided a meaningful experience to students - addressed their cognitive need

◻ Students still struggled with independent learning, even with facilitated support

◻ This study foregrounded the social issues of being a PG student

26

Questions?

Authors

Tasneem Jaffer

Cheryl Brown

Shanali Govender

27

◻ Corresponding author:

tasneem.jaffer@uct.ac.za

@Noobprincess

◻ Find us at the Centre for Innovation in Learning and Learning - CILT

www.cilt.uct.ac.za

Contact details 28