“I don’t always wrap MOOCs, but when I do…”: Improving postgraduates students’ experiences...
-
Upload
open-education-consortium -
Category
Education
-
view
13 -
download
0
Transcript of “I don’t always wrap MOOCs, but when I do…”: Improving postgraduates students’ experiences...
“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:
@Noobprincess
◻ Find us at the Centre for Innovation in Learning and Learning - CILT
www.cilt.uct.ac.za
Contact details 28