Literatura y práctica: una revisión crítica acerca de los MOOC = Literature and Practice: A Critical Review of MOOCs

Chiappe-Laverde, Andrés and Hine, Nicolás and Martínez-Silva, José-Andrés Literatura y práctica: una revisión crítica acerca de los MOOC = Literature and Practice: A Critical Review of MOOCs. Comunicar, 2015, vol. 22, n. 44, 09-18. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[img] Text (English version)
c4401en.pdf - Published version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (279kB)
[img] Text (Spanish version)
c4401es.pdf - Published version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (344kB)

English abstract

This article focuses on a review of both literature and practical experiences concerning MOOCs. The literature analyzed was published in peer-reviewed journals between 2007 and 2013. 268 items were selected for this study, of which 100 were analyzed in detail. The issues raised by this analysis were used as the criteria for the analysis of 10 current empirical MOOC experiences. The literature study highlighted the rapid growth in interest in understanding MOOCs and seeking to understand the pedagogic frameworks most relevant to their adoption and the importance of the concept of openness embodied within them. More recently a new emphasis has been emerging where institutional factors, particularly those concerned with financial viability, certification and retention have been highlighted. The analysis of current practice showed that many of the concerns in the academic literature were absent from not only the practices embodied in current MOOC-based learning experiences but seem to have been ignored in the conceptual phase of implementing a MOOC-based teaching model. In practice therefore, most of the current MOOC offer is only a pale reflection of the conceptualization that gave them rise and has been shown to be significant in the literature. In particular the true essence encapsulated in the concept described as Openness has been largely lost in practice.

Spanish abstract

Este artículo se enfoca en una revisión tanto de literatura como de experiencias prácticas acerca de los MOOC. Los textos analizados fueron publicados en revistas entre los años 2007 y 2013. Se seleccionaron 268 artículos para este estudio, de los cuales 100 se analizaron en detalle. Los asuntos encontrados en la revisión se utilizaron posteriormente como criterios de análisis de 10 experiencias empíricas sobre MOOC. La literatura estudiada resalta el rápido crecimiento en el interés por comprender los MOOC, sus fundamentos pedagógicos así como la importancia del concepto de lo abierto que se encuentra en ellos. Un nuevo énfasis ha surgido recientemente en la literatura donde los factores institucionales, particularmente aquellos concernientes con la viabilidad financiera, la certificación y la deserción se encuentran resaltados. El análisis de la prácticas actuales muestra que muchos de los temas relevantes expresados en la literatura académica están ausentes no solo de las prácticas relacionadas con las experiencias de aprendizaje basadas en los MOOC sino que se han ignorado como sustento de la implementación de un modelo de enseñanza basada en ellos. Del análisis realizado se concluye que buena parte de la actual oferta de MOOC es tan solo un pálido reflejo de la conceptualización que les dio origen y que se muestra significativa en la literatura. En síntesis, la verdadera esencia del concepto de lo abierto se ha perdido en la práctica.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: Virtual learning, courses, online education, learning environments, educational technology, didactical innovation, teaching practice, MOOCs. Aprendizaje virtual, cursos, educación en línea, entornos de aprendizaje, informática educativa, innovación didáctica, práctica docente, MOOC
Subjects: C. Users, literacy and reading.
Depositing user: Alex Ruiz
Date deposited: 05 Jan 2015 15:54
Last modified: 05 Jan 2015 15:54
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/24346

References

Aguaded, I. (2013). The MOOC Revolution: A New Form of Education from the Technological Paradigm? Comunicar, 21(41), 07-08. (DOI: http://doi.org/tnh).

Anderson, T. & Dron, J. (2012). Learning Technology through Three Generations of Technology Enhanced Distance Education Pedagogy. European Journal of Open, Dis-tance and E-Learning, (2), 1-14.

Anderson, T. & McGreal, R. (2012). Disruptive Pedagogies and Technologies in Universities. Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 380-389.

Baraniuk, R.G. (2007). Challenges and Opportunities for the Open Education Movement: A Connexions Case Study. In T. Liyoshi & M.S. Vijay-Kumar (Eds.), Opening up Education: The Collective Advancement of Education through Open Technology, Open Content, and Open Knowledge. (pp. 116-132). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Barth, R.S. (1972). Open Education and the American School. New York: Agathon Press, Inc.

Bragg, A.B. (2014). MOOC: Where to from Here? Training & Development, 41(1), 20-1.

Campbell, L. (2004). Engaging with the Learning Object Economy. In A. Littlehorn (Ed.), Reusing online resources: A Sustainable Approach to E-learning (pp. 35-45). London: Routledge. (http://goo.gl/303GCK) (16-04-2014).

Clarà, M. & Barberà, E. (2014). Three Problems with the Connectivist Conception of Learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30: 197-206. (DOI: http://doi.org/tpg).

Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted Kappa: Nominal Scale Agreement Provision for Scaled Disagreement or Partial Credit. Psychological bulletin, 70(4), 213-220. (DOI: http://doi.org/dpbw5f).

Conn, V.S., Isaramalai, S., Rath, S., Jantarakupt, P., Wadhawan, R. & Dash, Y. (2003). Beyond MEDLINE for Literature Searches. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 35(2), 177-182. (DOI: http://doi.org/ccpwcg).

Conole, G. (2013). MOOC as Disruptive Technologies: Strategies for Enhancing the Learner Experience and Quality of MOOC. (http://goo.gl/B13K1c) (04-03-2014).

Dans, E. (2009). Online Education: Educational Platforms and the Openness Dilemm. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 6(1), 22-30. (DOI: http://doi.org/tpj).

Daradoumis, T., Bassi, R., Xhafa, F. & Caballé, S. (2013). A Review on Massive E-learning (MOOC). Design, Delivery and Assessment. In Proceedings - 2013 8th International Conference on P2P, Parallel, Grid, Cloud and Internet Computing, 3PGCIC 2013 (pp. 208-213). (DOI: http://doi.org/tpk).

Dennis, R., Ruiz, J.G., Ruiz, A., Rodríguez, N. & Lozano, J.M. (1995). Estándares metodológicos para revisiones de la literatura biomédica. Acta Med Colomb, 20(6), 262-263. (http://goo.gl/Yv2uVh) (12-05-2014).

Downes, S. (2009). Half an Hour: New Technology Supporting Informal Learning. Half an Hour. (http://goo.gl/YboZHe) (09-03-2014).

D’Antoni, S. (2009). Open Educational Resources: Reviewing Initiatives and Issues. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 24(1), 3-10. (DOI: http://doi.org/fwfdc2).

Ehlers, U.D. (2011). Extending the Territory: From Open Educational Resources to Open Educational Practices. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, 15(2), 1-10.

Fereday, J. & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating Rigor Using Thematic Analysis: A Hybrid Approach of Inductive and Deductive Coding and Theme Development. International Journal Of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 1-11. (http://goo.gl/P5sNe5) (08-03-2014).

Fini, A. (2009). The Technological Dimension of a Massive Open Online Course: The Case of the CCK08 Course Tools. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(5). (http://goo.gl/3XdMmL) (08-03-2014).

Gibson, R. (2014). Four Strategies for Remote Workforce Training, Development, and Certification. In S. Hai-Jew (Ed.), Remote Workforce Training: Effective Technologies and Strategies (pp. 1-16). Hershey, PA: Business Science Reference. (DOI: http://doi.org/tpp).

Gil-Jaurena, I. (2013). Openness in Higher Education. Open Praxis, 5(1), 3-5. (DOI: http://doi.org/tpq).

Gordillo, J.J. & Rodríguez, V.H. (2009). Cálculo de la fiabilidad y concordancia entre codificadores de un sistema de categorías para el estudio del foro online en e-learning. Revista de Investigación, 27(1), 89-103.

Groom, J. & Lamb, B. (2009). The Un-education of the Technologist. RUSC. Uni-versities and Knowledge Society Journal, 6(1). (DOI: http://doi.org/tpr).

Hilton III, J., Wiley, D., Stein, J. & Johnson, A. (2010). The Four «R»s of Openness and ALMS Analysis: Frameworks for Open Educational Resources. Open Learning, 25(1), 37-44. (DOI: http://doi.org/fr6msj).

Jung, I. (2011). The dimensions of e-learning quality: from the learner’s perspective. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(4), 445-464. (DOI: http://doi.org/bbp6fg).

Knox, J. (2013). The Limitations of Access Alone: Moving towards Open Processes in Education Technology. Open Praxis, 5(1), 21-29. (DOI: http://doi.org/fr6msj).

Koller, D., Ng, A., Do, C. & Chen, Z. (2013). Retention and Intention in Massive Open Online Courses: In Depth. Educause Review. (http://goo.gl/DEJzxZ) (05-04-2014).

Kop, R., Fournier, H. & Mak, J.S. (2011). A Pedagogy of Abundance or a Pedagogy to Support Human Beings? Participant Support on Massive Open Online Courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), 74-93. (http://goo.gl/TFOzfB) (10-05-2014).

Lehman, R. (2007). Learning Object Repositories. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 113, 57-66. (DOI: http://doi.org/dfx2fb).

Liyanagunawardena, T.R., Adams, A.A. & Williams, S.A. (2013). MOOC: A Systematic Study of the Published Literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(3), 202-227. (http://goo.gl/CwyhSW) (12-05-2014).

Mackness, J., Mak, S. & Williams, R. (2010). The Ideals and Reality of Participating in a MOOC. En L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, C. Jones, M. De-Laat, D. McConnell & T. Ryberg (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010?: (pp. 266-275). Lancaster: University of Lancaster. (http://goo.gl/4plqWf) (09-05-2014).

Marcelo, C. (2008). Evaluación de la calidad para programas completos de formación docente a través de estrategias de aprendizaje abierto y a distancia. RED, VII, 1-6.

Martin, F.G. (2012). Will Massive Open Online Courses Change How we Teach? Communications of the ACM, 55(8), 26-28. (DOI: http://doi.org/h4v).

McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Siemens, G. & Cormier, D. (2010). The MOOC Model for Digital Practice. University of Prince Edward Island. (http://goo.gl/NtFZCt) (08-04-2014).

Miguel, J., Caballe, S. & Prieto, J. (2013). Providing Information Security to MOOC: Towards Effective Student Authentication (pp. 289-292). IEEE. (DOI: http://doi.org/tps).

Miranda, S., Mangione, G.R., Orciuoli, F., Gaeta, M. & Loia, V. (2013). Automatic Generation of Assessment Objects and Remedial Works for MOOC (pp. 1-8). IEEE. (DOI: http://doi.org/tpt).

Montoya, M.S. & Aguilar, J.V. (2012). Movimiento Educativo Abierto. México: CIITE-ITESM. (http://goo.gl/4F6KWA) (11-03-2014).

Nerantzi, C. (2012). A Case of Problem Based Learning for Cross Institutional Collaboration. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 10(3), 277-285.

North, S., Richardson, R. & North, M.M. (2014). To Adapt MOOC, or Not? That is No Longer the Question. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(1), 69-72. (http://goo.gl/kiMsVG) (10-03-2014).

Pantò, E. & Comas-Quinn, A. (2013). The Challenge of Open Education. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 9(1), 11-22.

Parrish, P.E. (2004). The Trouble with Learning Objects. Educational Technology Re-search and Development, 52(1), 49-67. (DOI: http://doi.org/dcf4gz).

Peter, S. & Farrell, L. (2013). From Learning in Coffee Houses to Learning with Open Educational Resources. E-Learning and Digital Media, 10(2), 174-189. (DOI: http://doi.org/tqb).

Pirani, J. (2013). A Compendium of MOOC Perspectives, Research, and Resources. Educause Review. (http://goo.gl/tVImJd) (06-03-2014).

Ramírez, M. (2013). Retos y perspectivas en el movimiento educativo abierto de educación a distancia: estudio diagnóstico en un proyecto del SINED. RUSC, 10(2), 170-186 (http://doi.org/vgd).

Rodriguez, O. (2013). The Concept of Openness behind c and x-MOOC (Massive Open Online Courses). Open Praxis, 5(1), 67-73.

Saadatmand, M. & Kumpulainen, K. (2014). Participants' Perceptions of Learning and Networking in Connectivist MOOC. MERLOT (Journal of Online Learning and Teaching), 10(1), 16-30. (http://goo.gl/jyJrKb) (05-05-2014).

Schmidt, J.P., Geith, C., Håklev, S. & Thierstein, J. (2009). Peer-To-Peer Recognition of Learning in Open Education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(5). (http://goo.gl/jNroFM) (05-05-2014).

Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing Knowledge. US/Canada: Lulu Press, Inc.

Siemens, G. (2009). Socialization as Information Objects. (http://goo.gl/PRh4YU) (01-03-2014).

Siemens, G. (2013). Massive Open Online Courses: Innovation in Education? In R. McGreal, W. Kinuthia, S. Marshall & T. McNamara (Eds.), Open Educational Resources: Innovation, Research and Practice (pp. 5-16). Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning and Athabasca University. (http://goo.gl/KHuoSf) (02-02-2014).

Tuckett, A.G. (2005). Applying Thematic Analysis Theory to Practice: A Researcher’s Experience. Contemporary Nurse, 19(1-2), 75-87. (DOI: http://doi.org/dhmwc8).

Walberg, H.J. & Thomas, S.C. (1972). Open Education: An Operational Definition and Validation in Great Britain and United States. American Educational Research Journal, 9(2), 197-208. (DOI: http://doi.org/czcqr6).

Whittemore, R. & Knafl, K. (2005). The Integrative Review: Updated Methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546-553. (DOI: http://doi.org/dhbpb8).

Wiley, D. (2012). The MOOC Misnomer. Iterating toward Openness. (http://goo.gl/IlZwv1) (28-01-2014).

Yang, D., Sinha, T., Adamson, D. & Rose, C.P. (2013). Turn On, Tune in, Drop Out: Anticipating Student Dropouts in Massive Open Online Courses. (http://goo.gl/FyZjlX) (10-04-2014).

Young, J.R. (2012). Coursera Adds Honor-Code Prompt in Response to Reports of Plagiarism. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 24. (http://goo.gl/mxdZh3) (10-05-2014).


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Altmetric
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS