Reflections on the first week of the FutureEd MOOC

Image
I’m participating in the History and Future of (Mostly) Higher Education MOOC, on the Coursera platform, run by Cathy Davidson from Duke University. The subject of this MOOC, billed as looking at the Future of Higher Education, was interesting enough to a number of colleagues at the Centre for Innovation in Learning and Teaching at the University of Cape Town and hence we have formed a study group to meet once a week to talk about our experiences and to see how the experience of taking a MOOC from an American University might be made relevant to a higher education institution in South Africa.

Having a local study group has been motivating. By the middle of the first week, I had already watched the videos, annotated the transcripts with notes, read some of the articles, engaged a little on Twitter and felt reasonably prepared to disuss whether what the MOOC offers thus far is something that I and other colleagues can make use of in our context.

Thoughts on the MOOC Content

I’ve enjoyed the first week’s presentation of content and ideas, which seemed to set a background for framing the development of higher education in the light of what Davidson calls the four ‘information ages’ and to make links between what changed in these information ages (writing, moveable-type, mass printing leading to distribution of cheap literature and the internet) and that these changes led to changes in the social relationships and communications between people, leading to new ways of communicating and interacting.Davidson’s point seems to be that such changes follow a pattern of what might be termed ‘moral panics’. The availability of information in forms that led to social changes produced reactions that might seem to us now as patently absurd. For example, in the first information age, Socrates thought that writing would lead to a deterioration in the dialogic process, while the consumption (by women) of low-brow novels made possible by mass printing was considered  to making oneself open to sexual predators, as well as challenging structures of authority and convention. The implication is that the concerns brought about about by what Davidson calls the fourth information age, that started in April 1993 with availability of the internet and the word wide web, might be regarded by future generations as equally absurd.

Having framed the history through the lens of the four information ages, Davidson considers the types of new literacies required to learn in these ages and which education should be supporting and promoting. These include skills of privacy, security and understanding intellectual property that are necessary for people to understand, protect and negotiate. Other skills such as the ability to collaborate, establish credibility through ‘crap detection’ and being globally conscious are other ’21st Century’ literacies. Thus far, the course has set the stage and pointed to the types of discussions that are likely in future weeks, centred around imagining the Higher Education of the Future.

The study group’s thoughts

The study group members had a thoughtful discussion about their participation in the first week. The content itself was considered to be interesting, although at times simplistic, perhaps geared towards an undergraduate curriculum textbook level and to have predominantly US-centred examples. Those new to MOOCs found the Coursera platform rather busy and a little clunky although more experienced MOOCers shared tips such as using transcripts to get the gist of the videos. The first week’s quiz caused some bemusement, as it was seen as either so easy as to be a bit pointless, or that all the answers seemed to be right (Tip: ‘answer all the above’ to most of the quiz questions)! More interesting discussions centred around the motivation of this particular MOOC. Who is the MOOC really for? Can global participants, such as those in Africa, really contribute and influence the learning of others, as the course is billed to achieve. Or is it about taking what is offered (for free) and make the course relevant (localise) to particular contexts? As seen in this Google Hangout, Cathy Davidson’s face to face class at Duke appear to be studying this MOOC as part of their own course, and these students seem to be engaging with MOOC participants as a way of finding out more about MOOCs, almost in a strategic way. Are MOOC participants guinea pigs or test subjects for another more exclusive course? Furthermore,  this interesting blog post argues how global MOOC participants might help internationalize American higher education, which could be seen as a seemingly happy by-product of the global nature of MOOCs but also as a strategic view of the ‘benefits’ a global cohort might bring to a particular group.

So for me, the real value of the MOOC is the discussions it has engendered, which is what its aims appear to be. Members of the study group are sufficiently intrigued to continue with the MOOC and look forward, in particular, to seeing how the peer review assessments will work.

“Image courtesy of Sira Anamwong / FreeDigitalPhotos.net”
Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Reflections on the first week of the FutureEd MOOC

  1. Ah, thank you for this. The quizzes are not of significance to me but they are if you want a Coursera certificate. I am interested in inspiring international conversations about higher education. But the research shows that people remember the content of wrong answers on multiple choice tests as if it were simply information—not wrong information. So we worked very hard to create multiple choice tests (required by the Coursera platform) that were study guides, summaries, and study reviews. There are better or more relevant answers on our quizzes but you won’t inadvertently find wrong information. It is part of the educational philosophy of the course and a humbling experience: it turns out it is pretty easy to write wrong answers. It is quite difficult to be committed to a learning philosophy that turns the summative form of a multiple choice assessment into a formative test, that actually helps you learn, retain, and see information presented in a slightly different way (that, the research shows), helps with retention, synthesis, and applicability. Thanks for the feedback.

    • Thank you so much for taking the time to leave comments. That’s a really interesting insight into how you see the quizzes (perhaps quiz is the wrong name?), and I can see how difficult it must be to write ‘quizzes’ with no wrong answers, when we are so conditioned to expect and include incorrect answers.

  2. The reason we keep saying this isn’t a MOOC, it’s a movement is the whole thing is intended as a catalyst for international conversation. If you indicate your study group information on the “ADD A CLASS” button on #FutureEd: http://www.hastac.org/future-higher-ed , you will receive newsletters with lots of updates about articles, research, bibliographies, wikis, and all of the apparatus of this huge initiative happening around and beyond the MOOC itself. We hope you will continue to let us know what your group is thinking about relative to your own requirements. The idea is to think locally, share globally.

  3. Sorry for a third comment–I am not able to edit. Here’s the infographic of the #FutureEd initiative so far: https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1PEEChQ3xaGQb4NSUkjua98nwU3mM3YRZH6Ta2CAMHgc/edit The face to face students learn from the MOOC (there are three partnering classes: at Duke, Stanford, and UC Santa Barbara) but they also offer office hours for discussions with MOOC participants, bring research to the MOOC participants, and are helping to create tools and “wrangle” information from all over social media to central repositories on the MOOC and hastac.org, a way of enhancing online learning, spreading agency, and moving way, way beyond the amateurish videos to an interactive experience. Each week two of my f2f students post blogs on the Chronicle of Higher Education about their experience. The most recent is called “One Class, 14,000 Teachers” and underscores how this MOOC is attempting to break apart the hierarchies of one-directional learning and empower all participants to be teachers. I’m the cofounder of HASTAC, an open, free peer learning network now with about 12,000 network members, dedicated to Changing the Way We Teach and Learn.

  4. Pingback: Rap Genius, Course Constitutions, and Formative Assessment: #FutureEd Week One

  5. Hello, Sukaina.

    I was one of the reviewers of your essay, and I followed your link to this blog post. I wanted to address your question, “Can global participants, such as those in Africa, really contribute and influence the learning of others, as the course is billed to achieve. Or is it about taking what is offered (for free) and make the course relevant (localise) to particular contexts?”

    I wanted to let you know that you are influencing my learning, and that I intend to share your blog post with students in my class at Penn State, which will influence theirs as well. The course is called, “Online Innovations and the Future of Education,” and we are thinking about MOOCs as one innovation. We have been talking about the nature of MOOCs, the global audiences they are designed to serve, and how the “western” source of many MOOCs might influence their value and perhaps even promote a singular perspective that might limit divergence and perhaps even stifle creativity in the field (among other things).

    So I think that my answer to your question would be, “Both. You can influence others, and it is about students taking what is offered and making the course relevant to their particular contexts.

    Would you and perhaps your study group like to Skype with my class about this, so we can think together about it?

    If so, please email me at kpeck@psuedu. If not, I understand, and thank you for your contributions.

    • Hi Kyle
      Thanks so much for taking the time to comment and to share this post and thoughts with your class. It’s so interesting how the spaces outside of the formal MOOC are creating opportunities for interactions that might not have seemed natural in a formal (closed) learning environment, and what it takes to make these ‘boundary crossings’. Yes I agree, the possibilities of crossing contexts to hear multiple perspectives AND of localising to a particular context are not exclusive, and both are possibilities in a MOOC or open learning format.

      I am also excited about your offer to Skype with your class at Penn State. I will be in touch with you by email about a possible meetup after discussing with our study group this week.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s