The MOOC Honeymoon is Over: Three Takeaways from the Coursera Calamity

63 Replies

New year 2013The honeymoon with MOOCs is over. The reality check has finally arrived which was inevitable. MOOCs will not solve all the woes of higher education. It is unfortunate it had to be a class on how to design an online course; it was the Fundamentals of Online Education: Planning and Application [FOE] offered through Coursera that brought things to a screeching halt. But this experience can provide an opportunity for institutions to re-focus—identify the role and purpose of MOOCs and move forward with a thoughtful, purposeful strategy.

In my last post I discussed the MOOC disaster with Fundamentals of Online Education, which generated a rich dialogue on the purpose and role of MOOCs. The course was suspended on the third day due to the confusion around group work which created a significant technical glitch. In this post I’ll share three takeaways from this experience; principles that higher education institutions and educators might want to consider when offering MOOCs or online learning courses of a smaller-scale. I’m using the challenges within the FOE course to illustrate the struggles within higher education institutions as technology and economics are disrupting the model of traditional higher education and MOOCs are viewed as a panacea.

It was not technical issues that derailed this course (which was a symptom) it was the underlying philosophy that many institutions still hold—that a MOOC is similar to, or the same as a course in a traditional face-to-face classroom. And it can be successful using the same structure, same content and similar instructional methods. MOOC courses offered through Coursera and similar platforms often appear modified to ‘fit’ into a course experience on the Web, albeit with thousands of students.

The Three Takeaways
Below I’ve outlined the key takeaways from the FOE experience. Many ideas presented here are based upon the concepts and principles of Stephen Downes, George Siemens and Dave Cormier, founders of the original MOOC concept.

1) The instructional model is shifting to be student-centric, away from an institution or instructor-focused model.
In a massive, open and online course with thousands of students, the instructor must relinquish control of the student learning process. The instructor-focused model is counter intuitive to the idea of a MOOC; in the MOOC model the student directs and drives his or her learning. The pedagogy used for traditional courses is not applicable to a course on a massive scale. With the Web as the classroom platform, students learn by making connections with various ‘nodes’ of content [not all provided by the instructor] on the Web, they aggregate content, and create knowledge that is assessed not by the instructor, but by peers or self. This pedagogy builds upon the constructivist theory and more recently a theory developed by Downes and Siemens—the connectivist learning model.

This new paradigm highlights an existing tension where the control is moving away from the instructor. Below are two comments from readers that were part of the dialogue from the previous post:

“Her [referring to another educator] critique was that an individual[s] with years of experience and knowledge was reduced to a moderator and facilitator. I tend to think it is more of moving the instructor into a coach, guide and mentor role pointing the way. So I guess that argument between control and openness is at the heart of many of these tensions”. Felicia M. Sullivan

“Other than that I have always had the impression that some teachers want so much certain “desirable” features that they try to force what otherwise is spontaneous and diverse in nature, like class participation, group formation, …. That can’t be done. All we can do as teachers is encourage and motivate but if we force that will be counterproductive”. Leonel Morales

2)  Sound instructional design is the key to supporting self-directed learning experiences.
Online courses that adhere to a sound instructional design plan allow students to navigate the course as self-directed learners: access content from a variety of sources, connect with like-minded individuals, and create a learning experience and environment that fits with their objectives. The technology should be not be the focus, but should facilitate the learning. I often have stated that when one has created a sound instructional design plan, the technology becomes invisible.

Creating a solid instructional design strategy for an online course requires considerable work and planning upfront. Stephen Downes posted a presentation on his site called Facilitating a Massive Open Online Course (2012). His Slideshare gives an overview of the planning required to facilitate a MOOC, and highlights the unique strategy required when offering a course online—it does not mimic the traditional classroom experience.

Dick, Carey and Carey Instructional Design Model

Dick, Carey and Carey Instructional Design Model: A model I use for designing online courses

My experience with developing online undergraduate courses is somewhat similar to Downes, but from a different perspective. I usually begin with an existing college course and work with faculty and course instructors to transition their face-to-face courses to the online environment. The instructional design and approach is radically different from what is used for face-to-face, and I use a formal model to guide the process, the Dick, Carey and Carey instructional design model which is systematic approach to developing a course. This model is based upon Robert Gagné‘s nine events of instruction, all which work towards supporting conditions for learning. This model has several phases, and one that is most relevant and necessary is the analysis of the learners (#3). It is in this step that the learning context is considered, where and how the learners will learn the skills and/or knowledge, which in this instance is on the Web. The characteristics of the learner are considered as well, which in the context of MOOCs is necessary given the diversity of learners (Dick, Carey and Carey, 2009).  

Young woman pointing with pen to laptop in library3) Prepare students for the Learning Experience.
Another theme emerged within the discussions around the FOE course, how much responsibility should the learner assume in a MOOC? Does the responsibility not fall upon the student for the success of a course? These questions were posted, and my answer is yes…however, there is an onus on the course facilitators and designers to prepare students for learning by providing some sort of orientation. The instructors need to support conditions for learning, which prepares students to learn on their own, create their own experiences, knowledge, and potentially a personalized learning community.

Preparing students includes orienting the student to the technical tools that will be used in the course, guiding them to the applications (a blog platform for instance), and providing instruction for the tools to be used as needed. This is most important for students that might be new to technical applications. What I appreciate about Downes, Siemens and Cormier is the thorough preparation and guidance offered to students at the beginning of a MOOC they facilitated, change.ca.mooc. Instructions were detailed within the course home pages on How This Course Works. In addition, helpful instructional videos What is a MOOC, and Success in a MOOC, were available (Cormier, 2011). In the online program I worked with at a four-year university, we created a comprehensive orientation for all courses, that included a set of activities culminating with a quiz that reinforced technical details. This program has proved to be quite successful in reducing significantly, the number of questions by students within the first two-week period of the online course session.

Closing Thoughts
There is much to digest here, yet it is these three principles that are required to support students in massive, open and online courses. Learning has changed, the student is in the center, yet he or she still requires support and guidance upfront through an effective course design that creates a seamless user experience, and through instructors that offer guidance; supporting students in their efforts to become successful and connected lifelong learners.

Resources

Further Reading on MOOCs and thoughts about the Fundamentals of Online Education: Planning and Application course:

63 thoughts on “The MOOC Honeymoon is Over: Three Takeaways from the Coursera Calamity”

  1. Pingback: Me and my MOOC (the one that failed) – flea…bytes

  2. Pingback: Is this the end of the beginning of online learning? | TEFLiDEAS

  3. Pingback: The MOOC Honeymoon is Over: Three Takeaways from the Coursera Calamity | Life learner in a global village

  4. Pingback: Online Learning Insights Blog: 2013 in Review | online learning insights

  5. więcej

    krzyżowaną na ścianie forma.
    Mariszka wciąż trzymała wingmastera, wstydliwie zbierając więcej przy szyją fałdy
    śpiwora. – Odłóż owe, przygodna cipo – rzucił pewien
    z komandosów. Frodo nie bacząc na
    rozpaczliwego znoszenia zastrzygł uszami.
    Atakujący poinformował po polsku. Z akcentem, tymczasem
    po polsku, Co wydaje się, wywłoka, grane,
    zastanawiał się, czując, że pozostało mu w tej
    chwili ździebko czasu na rozmyśl.

    Like

    Reply ↓
  6. d袯uvert

    o nie ma? Oraz dodatkowo wszelkim d袯uvert to
    przyjmuje? Pasterzom poniekąd, tymże od chwili owieczek?
    Krzyżak rozejrzał się drugi raz, bodaj pobliscy
    goście,
    spoczywający w malowniczych pozach na ławach nie sprawial.

    Like

    Reply ↓

  8. Pingback: MOOC’s are Gaining Ground | Welcome to Wendy Blancher's Personal Website

  9. Pingback: MOOC around the clock | e-Learning docs

  10. Pingback: How Sticky is a MOOC? | Exhuming the Mastodon

  11. Pingback: MOOCs | Introduction to Digital Humanities

  12. Pingback: The Role of MOOC in Online Education - Open Creative Communications

  13. Pingback: What does a World Class MOOC look like? | Learner Weblog

  14. Terri Main

    It doesn’t have to be a massive online course. Regular online courses with caps at 30 or so should also be student-centric. My first class, I was worried how the students were going to get all those wonderful things I had in my lectures, but low and behold, in the discussions, they were coming up with the same things on their own.

    Someone said in online learning the teacher goes from being The Sage on the Stage to the Guide by the Side. It is true.

    Like

    Reply ↓
    1. Debbie Morrison Post author

      You are correct, I agree, a closed online course (with limited students) can also be student-centric, and should be. Though in many institutions, it is still instructor-focused in that the instructor is the main source of content, grades all assignments, assigns the final assessment etc. Though the role of the instructor does change to a guide as you said, though is still in control of the class for the most part. I should have clarified that more. Thanks for pointing that out. I appreciate your comment Terri. Debbie

      Like

      Reply ↓

  16. Pingback: Coursera Adds 29 University Partners From 13 Countries | Business Education Tips

  17. Pingback: The MOOC Honeymoon is Over: Three Takeaways from the Coursera Calamity | E-Learning and Online Teaching Today

  18. Pingback: Coursera Adds 29 University Partners From 13 Countries

  19. Pingback: The Coursera Calamity… Or so I’ve Read « Ed Tech Reviews

  20. Pingback: Leaning lessons out of MOOCs: the fundamentals of online education failure « Alessio Malizia

  21. Pingback: Ironic collapse of Coursera's 'Fundamentals of Online Education' MOOC | sue watling

  22. Pingback: Links _february 2013 | SPACS

  23. Niall Tracey

    Don’t you think you might be conflating two different things? A standard online course can be modelled on seminar-style teaching quite successfully, because it’s a more efficient use of teacher time. (In a live seminar class, the teacher/trainer is always standing waiting to be needed, but in an asynchronous online environment, all “teaching” time is spent responding to questions).

    Surely MOOCs are different though? The scale of a MOOC means that teacher-as-monitor is impossible and teacher-as-a-resource is a very scarce resource.

    I don’t think it’s any accident that MOOCs were popularised in the field of computer science, where closed solutions and automated marking are de rigeur. Even now, computer and maths dominate, suggesting that MOOCs are best left to the very “deterministic” subjects, and that more subjective and open-choice courses need far more teacher-student interaction.

    Like

    Reply ↓
    1. Felicia M. Sullivan

      Niall, As I wrote below in responde to another Niall, It seems to me that there are many types and designs for MOOCs possible. I took the e-Learning and Digital Cultures at Coursera just so I could experience how something different than the massive, machine graded type of basic skills sort of course might happen and it seems that a seminar-type learning possible in small groups is possible here as well. Only, instead of the instructor at the center there are many centers and clusters and participants are learning from each other in a multitude of ways. To me that would say that MOOCs don’t have to be confined closed or “deterministic” subjects as you suggest.

      Like

      Reply ↓

  24. Pingback: Are there failures in Connectivist approach towards learning? I would say NO! | Learner Weblog

  25. Pingback: Teaching in the Unknown – Faculty Preparedness for Teaching Online and MOOCs « For the Love of Teaching

  26. Niall Beag

    I’m not convinced. You say an instructor led approach goes against the fundamental principles of MOOCs, but you’re forgetting that the first courses that really launched the idea of MOOCs in the public consciousness (whether they were the first MOOCs or not is of little relevance) were the AI and Machine Learning courses that kicked off Coursera. These were very heavily instructor led, and the assessment tasks were very much closed questions, assessed automatically by machine.

    The idea of a student-centred MOOC is inconceivable — with thousands of students, the logistics are unfeasible.

    To get student-centred education on that level, you’ve got to move away from the idea of a course entirely, and start looking at adaptive systems that provide a unique tailored experience for each user.

    But in either case, you’re stuck with closed questions for assessment and a “basic skills” approach to the topic.
    http://linguafrankly.blogspot.com/2013/02/this-misunderstandings-in-moocs.html

    Like

    Reply ↓
    1. Felicia M. Sullivan

      Niall I read your blog post and it brings forth some interesting things to think on. It seems to me that there are many types and designs for MOOCs possible. I took the e-Learning and Digital Cultures at Coursera just so I could experience how something different than the massive, machine graded type of basic skills sort of course might happen and it seems the very sort of seminar learning possible in small groups is possible here as well. Only, instead of the instructor at the center there are many centers and clusters and participants are learning from each other in a multitude of ways. We clearly are all exploring many different facets. The instructors have created the container and the platform or us all ot have some sort of learning exploration that is related.

      Your reference the Fundamentals of Online Learning MOOC’s failure as an example that seminar or discussion based MOOCs are not possible. The FOE’s achilles heel was not the desire to engage multitudes to discuss, but rather to think that that discussion could be centrally controlled.

      Like

      Reply ↓
    2. Debbie Morrison Post author

      Niall, I appreciate your opinion and thoughtful post. You bring up an excellent point – we should view current xMOOCs differently than a traditional course. I absolutely agree, and as Felicia mentioned there may be different models of MOOCs to evolve. However with your point about a student focused model being inconceivable, I respectfully disagree, though we may be working from different definitions of instructor-led, which could be clouding the discussion, however I provide a few thoughts here.

      We do need to consider the origins of the MOOC, which does contrast your statement that it doesn’t matter, I disagree, it important and necessary to examine the origins of MOOCs. It’s important because this is the concept and format that Udacity and Coursera are modelling the courses on. The MOOCs developed by Stephen Downes and George Siemens are important to consider because this was, and is a successful format for learning, that is a student-focused learning model, using the Web as the platform with thousands of students from all over the world. For example the change.mooc.ca still has students networking, connecting and learning. These MOOCs are learner driven; the learner establishes his or her own learning goals, level of participation. There are few rules, it is informal, though students are encouraged to participate and share, and there are no formal tests, exams or warnings about plagiarism. These student-focused MOOCs are not inconceivable as you mentioned, they are highly functioning courses, led by the group of motivated individuals with individuals taking responsibility for their learning. They form groups, create meet-ups through Google+, they communicate and learn. I am also in a cMOOC that does just this, http://etmooc.org/.

      On the other hand, the Udacity course, Artificial Intelligence are based upon a MOOC concept, yet fundamentally they are viewed and designed as a traditional ‘course’, yet still are using the Web as a platform/classroom, are teaching to thousands of students.

      Here is where the problem arises, the instructor focused model [traditional course format] cannot work in this xMOOC format, it is impossible. The instructor cannot be in control thousands of students, cannot control groups, cannot give feedback, cannot control plagiarism in this learning environment, cannot grade papers or provide support to students. Though a ‘machine’ in this instance learning platform can be programmed to do some tasks such as grading (as you mentioned), but this is the function of the course design and the use of technological application, not instructor involvement with the student. This is where the Coursera and Udacity model can break down, assuming that the instructor can control everything, when it is the student that should be in charge. This is what I mean by student focused. It is students that should determine their level of participation, and how they want to do so, and whether to join or group or not. Truly, group formation happens spontaneously without instructor intervention.

      Perhaps we need to look at MOOCs as not a course per se, but call it something different. This is where you and I agree. Interesting that you mention adaptive platforms, that is exactly what is under study right now. The article in this post from EDUCUASE introduces this idea and provides further information.

      Thank you for your thoughtful comment and post. We are actually closer to agreeing on several points about MOOCs than not. 🙂 xMOOCs are new, mistakes will be made. But I am grateful for Coursera and Udacity. I am grateful for the discussion that is happening around it. Debbie

      Like

      Reply ↓
      1. Niall Beag

        Perhaps the answer is to stop thinking of MOOCs as “a thing” at all. I’m not familiar with change.mooc.ca , except from what you can read on its homepage, but one thing is clear: it had a very specific target audience of professional educators. Once you reach the level of that target audience, in-service training/CPD is mostly going to be seminar-led anyway, so you’re dropping a seminar-style course into a seminar-style culture.

        This is why I think it’s more important to look at the courses that got a much more general market

        Like

        Reply ↓
      2. Niall Beag

        (oops… posted an incomplete response previously….)

        Perhaps the answer is to stop thinking of MOOCs as “a thing” at all. I’m not familiar with change.mooc.ca , except from what you can read on its homepage, but one thing is clear: it had a very specific target audience of professional educators. Once you reach the level of that target audience, in-service training/CPD is mostly going to be seminar-led anyway, so you’re dropping a seminar-style course into a seminar-style culture, with people who are already operating at a very high level of abstraction. The ET MOOC is the same — it’s dealing with abstract ideas in a fully-formed framework of understanding of the topic.

        But for a wider audience, and in particular for the teaching of genuinely new topics, I still feel you need to look at the courses that netted the wider audience, and in general they have been much more like traditional universities. My own area is languages. Have you ever heard of a man called Michel Thomas? He went into language teaching after studying psychology, as he wanted to study the learning process, and he decided that foreign languages were the only area of education where students started with no knowledge whatsoever. He taught in a tightly controlled manner, but adapting to student mistakes. His students were at the far opposite end of the spectrum of abstraction from the students on change.mooc or etMOOC, operating in a sphere where they had little or no ability to deal with the subject matter independent of instructor guidance.

        Perhaps then we need to think of “MOOC” as not “it”, or “something”, not defining a “type of course”, but a set of deltas that differentiate from traditional teaching and smaller-scale online instruction, because if there’s a spectrum of teaching models in the traditional, it’s no surprise that we find we still need multiple models in the innovative.

        Moving on, I think our difference over the term “instructor led” is that I’m thinking in terms of “instructor led for as long as you’re in the classroom”, and by analogy I’m thinking of the message boards as analogous to a student common room or cafeteria.

        Which would mean the difference between me and Wirth is that she’s viewing them as a tutorial room, even though there’s no substantial presence of a tutor.

        So in fact we’re talking about three different paradigms:

        My “common room”,
        Wirth’s “tutorial room”,
        and your “something in between”.

        I suppose the traditional tutorial room scheduling is for purely logistical reasons, and Wirth seems to be taking its existance as a given for any learning environment, without critically questioning its purpose.

        The common room is naturally and organically student led, and I’m taking it for granted as something that is external to the “course”.

        But if there’s no tutorial room, the common room increases in importance. So is in now part of the course or not? I think before tackling a question that deep, I need to go and complete “Introduction to Philosophy” on Coursera…. 😉

        For my part, though, I’m trying to develop adaptive systems for language teaching, and I view the machine as an “instructor” in and of itself.

        Like

        Reply ↓
      3. Niall Beag

        I’ve thought a little bit more about our differences of opinion, and the more I think about it, it’s less a difference of “opinion” and more a difference of “point of view”.

        I wonder what you think about my latest musings on the topic?

        http://linguafrankly.blogspot.com/2013/02/putting-cart-before-course.html
        http://linguafrankly.blogspot.com/2013/02/if-mooc-isnt-course.html

        Thanks, by the way… this has been very productive for me, as it’s made me look at things much more closely, which I suppose is the goal of the cMOOCs themselves….

        Like

        Reply ↓
        1. Debbie Morrison Post author

          Hi Niall, I so much enjoyed reading both of your thought provoking blog posts, and have a few comments and some key points. I agree with you that one of the key issues with these discussions about MOOCs (not just ours) is the word COURSE, and the meanings that we have associated with it. ‘Course’ in the traditional education sense procures an image that is embedded in the education culture, ‘course’ associated with ‘instructor’, ‘student’, ‘assessment’, ‘time frame’ and ‘final grade [either pass or fail]’. Yet as you mention in the context of a constructivist MOOC, it is not a course in the traditional sense at all (even the Cormier, Downes and Siemens admit this) but an undetermined learning experience, no rules, or right-or-wrongs.

          I like the definition you suggested…a distributed conference. This is more appropriate, though at the time of the MOOC origins I doubt that the founders anticipated the MOOC mania that has transpired. The xMOOC platforms (Coursera etc) have grabbed hold of the MOOC concept and have attempted to fit their concept of traditional course, onto the Web platform, making it open, online and massive. Herein lies the problem as we have said before.

          What you have brought up is most interesting, the instruction of a new language. The teaching of a language does (it seems to me) require a structured approach, as you said “beginners need a path to follow, they need a course.” In this learning context a massive, open, online course may not necessarily be the best approach, though it may be possible for intermediate learners, depending upon the learner to form language discussion groups, through Skype or Google hangouts, as the application of the content. There is still much more to explore and learn about how MOOCs will work and in what contexts.

          This has been a very productive learning discussion Niall. Thank you for your valuable insight, discussion and sharing. I too am changing my thinking about how I view MOOCs and how instructional design models align with them. Debbie 🙂

          Like

          Reply ↓

  27. Pingback: Me and my MOOC (the one that failed) | flea...bytes

  28. Pingback: A collection and reflection on my learning in MOOCs | Learner Weblog

    1. Nathalie

      since last sundays when they reopened the forums, we have received no news as to when the course will reopen, despite numerous students’ requests (including me) to resume the course and let us complete week 1 and access resources to week 2.

      Like

      Reply ↓
    1. Debbie Morrison Post author

      Hi Tim, I enjoyed your post ‘The MOOC that Failed to Scale’ you linked in your comment. Your experiences described very well could be a result of the model that many higher education institutions are using for MOOCs – a similar model to the classroom, but applied to the online, massive format. I like the point you make in your post: “Rather, this experience appears to suggest that the idea itself is not capable of scaling under the auspices of a single organisation trying to run multiple courses simultaneously, all of which were originally designed for traditional (rather than online) methods of delivery.” Thanks for sharing Tim. Debbie

      Like

      Reply ↓

  31. Pingback: The MOOC Honeymoon is Over: Three Takeaways from the Coursera Calamity | Halina's Blog

  32. halinakasia

    Hi Debbie,
    I have been learning about new techniques and approaches in the 21st Century Education, for some time.
    Being an educator means to me being a lifetime learner.
    I have always been a passionate teacher as well as a thinker; this is why I like debating and searching for new ways, for stimulation, inspiration, motivation… Fortunately, I found your blog and started reading your thought-provoking analyses.
    I would like to express my appreciation for the opportunity to learn from you.
    I know that, I need to spend more time on studying new methods and reading your excellent analysis helps, a lot.
    Thank you again,
    Halina

    Like

    Reply ↓
  34. catherinecronin

    Thanks for this clear analysis, Debbie, and the collection of useful resources. This was bound to happen and it is certainly a “reality check” for some of the more overblown expectations of MOOCS, as well as an important moment and learning experience — if we wish it to be. You wrote the post in this spirit and your key points were well-made.

    I support online learners in different programmes at our university and, as you say, preparing students for the learning experience is essential. I noted your mention of a “comprehensive orientation programme” for online courses which you helped to develop at one time. Is this available openly online? I am always keen to learn from examples of good practice in this area — each year after orientation we start thinking of ways to improve for next year! 🙂

    Like

    Reply ↓
    1. Debbie Morrison Post author

      Hi Catherine, Thanks for your comment! I am also glad you found the resources helpful; so many people have contributed to excellent and open dialogue about the role of MOOCs and what we can learn. The article referenced from EDUCUASE, is really interesting as it addresses the concept of adaptive MOOC platforms that will customize the learning experience to the individual. This development will certainly be interesting.

      I will share the outline of the orientation program with you through Google Docs. I’ll send you the link! Thanks again Catherine!

      Like

      Reply ↓
  35. Nathalie

    A very sensionalist title.
    Its nice and easy to stand outside, look at other peopletake a chance, make mistakes, take the heat, to criticize them, and and then reap the benefit of the experience without having taken a single risk.

    Other than that, the resources are nice and useful. Thank you.

    Like

    Reply ↓
    1. Debbie Morrison Post author

      HI Nathalie, I am not criticizing, but am using this as an example of how to improve and using it as an opportunity for others to learn. I have not criticized the instructor personally, as in my original post, this was said, “I give the instructor credit for trying something new, and investing the time and energy she has done which is considerable.”

      As far as taking risks, I consider writing on an open platform such as this blog, allowing comments to be ‘open’, a risk in itself. I am open to criticism and receive comments that openly criticize what I write and say. I view this as a learning opportunity.

      Like

      Reply ↓
      1. Nathalie

        Excuse my english, im french, ill try to be clear.

        Every event in life is a learning opportunity. We learn more from mistakes and failures than from success.

        I am registered to this mooc. I didn’t really need it, i am already an instructional designer. I wanted to see how the discourse, methods, resources etc. had changed since the end of my master degree.

        I had no problem with anything in the course. Now i will stay and see this course because it is a tremendous opportunity to observe and learn from them for my professional practice. I do this in a positive, contructive, patient manner.

        Moocs are faily new, experimental methods of learning. And with that degree of interest anyway – i mean 41k ppl is a lot to manage, it should be nothing but fascinating to complete this and see “to do’s” and “not to do’s” emerge. If it ever resumes (i wish the organisers would give us some news – its been 3 days without news now).

        I also wish people (students, bloggers) would be moderate in their comments about what is happening. I wish people would be patient and understanding.

        As an instructional designer, I take risks sometimes, when its necessary. I have made mistakes. Never nothing that i couldn’t fix. Like in this course. Its nothing that can’t be fixed.

        Research works like that : Trial and errors. Hypothesis confirmed or not. New trial. And then a rule, a principle or a law emerge.

        I believe FOE is that at the moment. I wish Georgia tech. Mrs Wirth would be given the right a make mistakes without being lynched.

        Which is what i see when i read the comments of the ppl on your last blog entry, on other blogs, on student forum in FOE.

        Those with negative comment get more press than those with good press. Blood sells more than flowers.

        Like

        Reply ↓
  36. edehoratius

    I’m about to undertake researching MOOC’s for my school and their (potential) viability for our students. It certainly was timely that I found your post; I’ll be returning to it in a few weeks once I get underway. Thanks for such a complete treatment of it.

    Like

    Reply ↓

  38. Pingback: A class is not a commune. « More or Less Bunk

  39. Pingback: Some Thoughts on MOOCs… | ESL Crystal

  40. Pingback: MOOC Resources: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly « nancyrubin

  41. Pingback: Lessons to be learned via ‘MOOC Mess’ at Coursera? « GlobalHigherEd

  42. Pingback: Thoughts on MOOCs | Andrea Zellner

  44. Felicia M. Sullivan

    Debbie, thanks for quoting me, but even more importantly thanks for this excellent thinking and synthesis. It is incredibly useful to have these resources all in one place and so clearly laid out. A real benefit.

    Like

    Reply ↓

  46. Pingback: The MOOC Honeymoon is Over: Three Takeaways from the Coursera Calamity « My favorites…

  47. د. بيار جدعون

    I think we are living a great moment… I don’t like the word “calamity” … I prefer “Opportunity”… Maybe it is another experience showing us learning by doing… I believe in connectivism and the importance of interaction between humans… I hope to see soon a video 1.7 showing us some learned lessons from this experience.

    Pierre GEDEON

    Like

    Reply ↓

Leave a reply to Nathalie Cancel reply