Literature review roundup

Dr Sarah Hayes, Aston University s.hayes@aston.ac.uk

QAA MOOCs Network Event: Making a Quality MOOC

29 April 2015

Interesting title……a literature roundup

• MOOCs are tricky to ‘roundup’ in terms of quality• Competition for HEIs, but we can place emphasis:• Not just on many types of MOOC (Clark, 2013) but on• Diversity of pedagogy (Bayne & Ross, 2014) and the• Questions that MOOCs raise about what is good

learning? (Conole, 2013, Brabon, 2014) plus:• Opportunities for students, HEIs and QAA:• Examine characteristics of good learning and the

concept of quality teaching, side by side via MOOCs

Accreditation

• If MOOCs are accredited, we can apply the UK Quality Code, as many features are like traditional courses in HEIs (Morris, 2014)

• Help HEIs solve online submission/exams/identity• Expectation A: standards, records, review, but:• Where credit is applied, B6 expects learners to

have achieved intended learning outcomes…• Those who sign up to MOOCs choose to, and have

their own specific, variable learning outcomes…

‘Process-defined’ rather than ‘outcomes-defined’

• The success of a MOOC is process-defined rather than outcomes-defined (Downes, 2014)

• A vehicle for discovery and experience• Each learner has her/his own objectives • 4 key success factors: autonomy, diversity,

openness, interactivity. (Downes, 2014)

New thinking about quality?

• Quality determines how effective learning takes place (Ehlers, Ossiannilsson et al. 2013)

• Can MOOCs be assessed traditionally?• Or related to only small sequences of learning • B5 – deliberate steps to engage all learners?• What about tailored to an individual’s purpose? • Are learning outcomes at all negotiable, when

thousands of learners are involved? • Is new QA and QE needed to facilitate ‘risk taking’?

(Raban, 2007)

….If I supply free apples should I ask what people do with them? Apples, cider, jam….

• Data on learners underpins assessment design, start and end dates, completion/non-completion (Kernohan, 2014), MOOC aims? (Pomerol, Epelboin, & Thoury, 2015)

Expectation C of the Quality Code• HEIs produce information for

their intended audiences….

• So how to know who takes the free apples – or indeed the MOOC - and what they do with it?

And, do they learn anything?

• Engaged learning in MOOCs (Wintrup, Wakefield, and Davis, 2015)

1) How can we know what learning takes place? • Based on HEA’s UK Engagement Survey • Participants feel engaged, active, creative, critical,

make connections with prior learning/experience2) Can we identify MOOCs’ potential for future use in HE? • MOOCs are competition for HEIs but opportunities

for further research, in key areas, by key people

Firstly, we should not overlook…• How many teachers actually take MOOCs• Harvard and MIT found 39% teachers-as-

learners enrolled in their MOOCs (Ho et al, 2014)• The teacher as the ‘primary point of contact' is a

design feature of the MOOC, not QA processes (Kernohan, 2014)

• New challenges for QA and QE if teachers are regulated teaching in their own institutions, but not when teaching on a MOOC…?

Opportunity to develop staff skills • Motivations for teachers to enrol varies • Knowledge of topics, resources or inspiration • HEIs do need to develop digital skills of both staff and

students within competitive global markets• Role of UKPSF (Baume, Beetham & Hartley, 2011)• SUOLL (JISC, 2015) Change Agents Network (SEDA/JISC,

2015). Pool resources across agencies? • Re-design MOOCs for teachers? (Fabris, 2015)• Curriculum design, marketing, research and policy in

HEIs are some key areas for quality debates

1) Enhancement: curriculum designers/ learners

• Understanding what engages MOOC learners is very relevant to HEIs blended forms of learning

• e.g. ‘flipped classroom’, work-based/professional learning. To make flexible benefits explicit

• Engage student partners to teach us (JISC/SEDA)• Enable learners/staff to make informed choices• Use diversity to promote networks/community • Increase opportunities for self-directed learning if

learners use MOOCs to access higher learning(Wintrup, et al, 2015)

2) HEIs and marketing teams

• Learner characteristics suggest MOOCs need to reach more of the population

• Work needed to widen access to HEIs• Learn from those who persist with MOOCs• Update distance learning strategies/student

charters/legal statements/monitoring/alumni……• Accreditation of learning that attracts UCAS points is

necessary if MOOCs are to provide routes into HEIs • HEIs need to put this into place, along with all QA

and QE considerations

(Wintrup, et al, 2015)

3) Researchers and policy makers

• Research to understand the educational role of MOOC peer communities/interactivity across

• Differs across HEIs and curriculum teams • Engage students in writing policy with us to ensure

human representation (Hayes & Bartholomew, 2015) • Follow learners: first contact to well beyond completion• Potential of analytics to support completion through

targeted communications and interventions• Government/MOOC providers, to inform widening

access goal by collation/analysis of demographics over time

(Wintrup, et al, 2015)

Learning from Europe?

• EFQUEL blog (Ehlers, Ossiannilsson et al. 2013) • EMOOC 2015: Stakeholders represented: 4 tracks• Research track • Institutional track (discuss institutional strategy)• Experience track (share practitioner experience) • Business track (corporate providers/customers)• In the UK could we include all stakeholders too in

our quality approach towards MOOCs?

Opportunities for QAA to consider

• MOOCs are resources to examine how student enhancement/engagement takes place in independent, online learning spaces

• MOOCs offer a window for QAA to review how quality is defined, as open online environments merge with traditional HEI learning environments

• QAA might create their own consultation MOOC where students and staff from HEIs contribute to a developing code that applies to the MOOC context

Opportunities for QAA to consider

• QAA might collect case studies of works in progress within HEIs, so that quality lessons might be drawn

• Debate the model Creelman, et al, (2014) suggest, where HEIs provide ‘value-added’ services on higher layers than MOOC course material

• This then ‘stands alone’ for those who do not wish to receive accreditation.

• QAA might develop guidance for HEIs regarding provision of ‘add-ons’, such as tutoring, guidance, validation, examinations, provided at a price.

In summary

• Only a few selected points presented• There are many more in the full ‘round up’• Your MOOC homework:– Read the literature review of MOOCs and quality– Consider questions raised in terms of QA and QE– There is no accredited assessment…not yet….– But do please engage with each other to discuss

moving forward. Thanks!