Moodle in the World of MOOCs: What Might the Future

Look Like?Dr. Iain Doherty

Associate Professor

Director eLearning Pedagogical Support Unit

Centre for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning

24th May 2013

The University of Hong Kong

Overview

• Massive Open Online Courses• Standard Learning Theories• Standard Technologies• Connectivism• Moodle in a Massively Open World

An Story about a 15 Year Old Girl

Moodle’s Rubbish

I’m Not

Listening To

You

Massive Open Online Courses

• Massive Open Online Courses are arguably the most talked about – and potentially most disruptive – phenomenon in the current educational landscape.

• They provide an impetus for institutions to reflect upon their teaching and learning and to reflect upon their eLearning practices.

• Compared with the past many institutions may well be forced into doing this in order to survive e.g. look at the Open University in the U.K. (Weller and Anderson, 2013).

Massive Open Online Courses

• Thinking about MOOCs, higher education institutions can reflect on what the LMS – any LMS but let’s say Moodle – has meant for their teaching and learning.

• This process will be much more productive if our institutions understand the different sorts of MOOCs.

• Contrary to current designations I am going to suggest that there are three different types of MOOCs – cMOOCs, sMOOCs and xMOOCs.

cMOOCs

• cMOOCs are grounded in the Connectivist learning theory first proposed by George Siemens.

• Learning is a networked process and course content is generated by teachers, students and other “nodes” in the network.

• cMOOCs employ multiple technologies – 12 in the first MOOC offered by Siemens (Fini, 2009) – and theLMS is one in a range of technologies.

sMOOCs

• Standard MOOCs or sMOOCs are grounded in traditional pedagogies – predominantly Behaviorist with a smattering of Cognitivism and Constructivism.

• The MOOC platform operates as a massive LMS and learning is process of working through transmitted material, engaging in multiple choice quizzes and being assessed by peers.

• Use of additional technologies is limited.

xMOOCs

• Excellent, exploratory, expansive” (Rodrick & Sun, 2012) MOOCs or xMOOCs aspire to innovating in pedagogical practices / use of technologies for teaching and learning.

• MOOC platform still seems to operate as a large scale LMS but the trajectory for these MOOC is one of innovation.

• Use of technologies still seems to be somewhat limited but there are signs that this will change.

The MOOC As Vehicle

• It is time to take a stand with respect to teaching and technologies.

• The most innovative MOOCs are in fact the cMOOCs run by Siemens and others.

• We can learn a lot from these MOOCs in terms of teaching approach and aligned use of technologies.

• This will require a massive eLearningre-think on the part of most institutions.

for Reflection

Learning Theories

• Education has operated for decades in terms of three learning theories:– Behaviorism (drill and practice)– Cognitivism (mental structures)– Constructivism (making meaning)

• Technologies have been integrated into teaching on the basis of these three learning theories (Mergel 1998).

• We need a change because the world has changed!

Standard LMS Usage is Poor

• The LMS is predominantly used for text transmission (Coates et al, 2005, Mott, 2010).

• Limited use of other functions such as discussion forums as a nod to Cognitivism and Constructivism.

The Nature of

“Understanding knowledge in a particular era is important in ensuring that we have aligned our spaces and structures with the nature of knowledge” (Siemens, 2006).

Are we teaching in a way that aligns with the nature of knowledge acquisition in contemporary society?

Knowledge as Driver

As a learner (Oblinger, 2005) the fifteen year old is:

– Always connected to something or someone;– Accessing multiple sources of information;– Learning socially with her friends;– Adept with multiple technologies;– Highly creative and inventive;– Fascinated by certain things; and– Intermittently engaged with learning.

The Nature ofStudents as Driver

“The rapid development of information . . . requires a model that sees learning less as a product (filling a learner with knowledge) and more of a process of continually staying current and connected (learning as a process of exploration, dialogue, and interaction)” (Siemens, 2006).

• Information is increasing exponentially so for Siemens knowing how / where is more important than being able to store knowledge in our heads.

Connectivism asPedagogical Approach

Personal Learning Network

Node

Node

Node

Node

Connectivism asPedagogical Approach

“Connecting with people and content is a constant, ongoing, daily activity . . . Learning is a continual, network-forming process . . . As we encounter new resources (knowledge, people, and technology nodes), we may choose to actively connect and create our personal learning network”(Siemens, 2006).

• The network forming process in a Connectivist MOOC occurs in terms of multiple technologies -12 in the first MOOC offered by Siemens.

Connectivism asTechnology Use

Connectivism

• FaceBook• Bebo• Blogs• LinkedIn• Yammer• YouTube• iTunes U• Skype• Messenger

Remember the Fifteen Year Old Girl

What are you talking about?

• We can look at our students and say that they are “learning” when they connect to multiple sources of information in order to complete learning activities.

• But what place for Moodle in a Connectivist MOOC?

Connectivism

We want to see,

“ . . . A shift away from the model in which students consume information through independent channels such as the library, a text book or an LMS, moving instead to a model where students draw connections from a growing matrix of resources that they select and organize”(Mott, 2010)

Siemens says no to the LMS:

“ . . . we are repeating the ‘instructor/school controls’ hierarchy online. Linear, one-way, managed knowledge flow doesn't work well in a information overload society. Networks do work . . .”(Siemens, 2004).

• We can avoid this with relative ease and deliver rich, engaging and rewarding learning experiences.

LMS: The Wrong Placeto Start Learning?

• If there is an issue then it is this; the LMS needs to be employed in the service of student learning.

• This means thinking pedagogically in the first instance and then determining whether the LMS has the features and affordances to meet pedagogical needs.

LMS: Not ReallyThe Wrong Place to Start

Some Guiding Thoughts

• It is not clear that Connectivism is a learning theory and there is no empirical evidence for its efficacy.

• But Connectivism is saying something important about the 21st Century epistemological framework.

• It is also saying something important about the ubiquitous nature of technologies / living in a networked world.

• Can we navigate to abalanced picture ofteaching / technology use?

Heading towards a Balanced Picture

“What if course portals, typically little more than gateways to course activities and materials, became instead course catalysts: open, dynamic representations of “engagement streams” that demonstrate and encourage deep learning?” (Campbell, 2009).

Heading towards a Balanced Picture

• Sage on the Stage or teacher as source of knowledge (King, 1993)– Aligns with Behaviorism and Cognitivism

• Guide on the Side or teacher as facilitator (King, 1993)– Aligns with Constructivism and its variants

• Meddler in the Middle described as a “usefully ignorant co-worker” (McWilliam 2008)– Aligns with the central tenants of Connectivism

Heading towards a Balanced Picture

• Project based learning• Experiential learning• Case based learning• Problem based learning• Guided discovery learning• Student led teaching• Student presentations• Interactive teaching sessions

Heading towards a Balanced Picture

• From a technological perspective the LMS is one node in the network (Masters & Qaboos, 2011) with learners’ personal spaces and technologies – 12 different technologies on Siemens’ and Downs first MOOC (Fini, 2009) – defining additional nodes in the network (Rodriguez, 2012).

• It is an important node as research into Siemens first MOOC shows (Mackness et al., 2010). Moodle was favored by a significant number of participants.

• Because if offered structure / was manageable?

Heading towards a Balanced Picture

Siemens says (2004) that an LMS needs to offer:

– A place for learner expression (blog/portfolio);– A place for content interaction; – A place to connect with other learners; – A place to connect the thoughts of other learners in a personal,

meaningful way - i.e. using RSS and then brought back into the "learner expression tool“;

– A place to dialogue with the instructor (email, VoIP, etc.)

Heading towards a Balanced Picture

– A place to dialogue with gurus (apprentice) - the heart of online communities is the mess of varying skills and expertise. Gurus are people currently in industry or established practitioners of the organizing theme of the community.

– A place for learning artifacts of those who've gone

before - i.e. content management capabilities accessible and managed by the learner. Tools like Furl, del.icio.us are examples of personal knowledge management (PKM) tools.

Heading towards a Balanced Picture

• Moodle can provide a structured environment for innovative teaching following the Meddler in the Middle model using a variety of teaching approaches.

• In addition students need to be given the option of using a variety of other tools to organize a personal learning environment.

• This brings about the best of both worlds and achieves a balance between structure for “knowing what” and Connectivism for generating knowledge.

Closing Comments

• We do need to re-think the learning theories that we are using;

• We do need to re-think the technologies that we are using in teaching;

• Despite the LMS nay sayers, Moodle has clear utility as one technology in a Connectivist environment.

• The issue lies with teaching and learning commitment and MOOCs will likely make institutes focus on their teaching / technology use.

The Fifteen Year Old GirlHas an Epiphany

I’ve seen the light. Moodle

is awesome. Ha, victory is mine

. . . Still not talking to you

References

• Campbell, G. (2009). A Personal Cyber Infrastructure. Educause Review, 44(5), 58–59. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/personal-cyberinfrastructure

• Fini, A. (2009). The Technological Dimension of a Massive Open Online Course: The Case of the CCK08 Course Tools. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(5). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/643/1410

References

• King, A. (1993). From Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side. College Teaching, 41(1), 30–35. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/27558571

• Mackness, J., Fai, S., Mak, J., & Williams, R. (2010). The Ideals and Reality of Participating in a MOOC. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010 (pp. 266–274). Retrieved from http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fss/organisations/netlc/past/nlc2010/abstracts/PDFs/Mackness.pdf

References

• Masters, K., & Qaboos, S. (2011). A Brief Guide To Understanding MOOCs. The Internet Journal of Medical Education, 1(2), 2–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.5580/1f21

• McWilliam, E. (2008). Unlearning How To Teach. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(3), 263–269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703290802176147

References

• Mergel, B. (1998). Instructional Design and Learning Theory. Retrieved from http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/802papers/mergel/brenda.htm

• Mott, J. (2010). Envisioning the Post-LMS Era : The

Open Learning Network. Educause Quarterly, 33(1), 1–8. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/envisioning-post-lms-era-open-learning-network

References

• Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the Net Generation. (D. G. Oblinger & J. L. Oblinger, Eds.)Educating the Net Generation (p. 264). Boulder, CO: Educause. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen/5989

• Rodrick, D., & Sun, K. (2012). EdX: Harvard’s New Domain. The Harvard Crimson. Retrieved May 1, 2013, from http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/10/4/edx-scrutiny-online-learning/?page=single

References

• Rodriguez, C. O. (2012). MOOCs and the AI-Stanford like Courses: Two Successful and Distinct Course Formats for Massive Open Online Courses. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning back, 05.07.2012, 1–13. Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/?p=current&article&article=516

References

• Siemens, George. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

• Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing Knowledge. Retrieved from

http://www.elearnspace.org/KnowingKnowledge_LowRes.pdf

References

• Siemens, S. (2004). Learning Management Systems : The Wrong Place to Start Learning. elearningspace. Retrieved September 17, 2012, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/lms.htm

• Weller, M., & Anderson, T. (2013). Digital Resilience in Higher Education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 16(1), 53–66. Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/?article=559

Contact

• Email: idoherty@hku.hk• Web: http://www.iaindoherty.com• Linkedin: http://hk.linkedin.com/in/iaindoherty• SlideShare: http://www.slideshare.net/iaindoherty