MOOCs,Cynicism&and&Learning&Analytics: … · 2018-07-06 ·...

MOOCs,  Cynicism  and  Learning  Analytics:“Medicines  Adherence”  and  

“Understanding  Drugs  and  Addiction”  MOOCs

Dr  Natasha  S.  Khan  King’s  Online  

Ms  Kal BreadmoreDistance  Learning  Team      

Institute  of  Psychiatry,  Psychology  &  Neuroscience

King’s  FutureLearn MOOC  Portfolio

2015/16

Internetof  Things

Caring  for  People  with  Psychosis  &  Schizophrenia

International  Health  Electives

Supporting  People  Living  with  Long-­‐term  Conditions

Shakespeare:  Print  &  Performance

2013

2014

Understanding  Drugs  &  Addiction

Causes  of  War

Medicines  Adherence

Medicines  Adherence  |  Drugs  &  Addiction:  Similarities  &  Differences

Understanding  Drugs  &  Addiction

Medicines  Adherence

Audience/LOs

Faculty

Length

Hours/ week

BROAD  SUBJECT

Broad

IoPPN

6 weeks

4  hr/week

Specific

IPS

2  weeks

2 hr/week

Learning  Analytics“the  measurement,  collection,  analysis  and  reporting  of  data  about  learners  and  their  contexts,  for  purposes  of  understanding  and  optimizing  learning  and  the  environments  in  which  it  occurs”

(Siemens,  G.,  5  August  2011)

• Overall  course  measures:    e.g.  enrolment  and  completion  rates

• Pre/post  course  survey  feedback:  demographics,  satisfaction

• Raw  data:  from  each  step  (activity)  

MOOC  Cynicism“the  loss  of  pedagogic  principle  caused  by  MOOCs”  

(Baggaley,  2014,  p.  129)

“there  is  the  urgent  need  to  build  an  adequate  pedagogy  for  MOOCs,  based  on  a  valid  learning  theory”  

(Clarà and  Barberà,  2013,  p134)

Medicines  Adherence:  18,152  enrolees

1st run 2nd run 3rd run

Learners  (  %  of  enrolees) 51.5 60.3 52.7

Active  Learners  (%  of  learners) 86.5 80.4 67.0

Returning  Learners 48.9 44.7 34.9

Social  Learners 33.5 32.4 34.1

Fully  Participating  Learners

40.6 40.6 32.2

Drugs  and  Addiction:  34,420  enrolees

1st run 2nd run 3rd run

Learners(  %  of  enrolees) 53.7 48.1 50.4

Active  Learners  (%  of  learners) 85.0 82.2 80.9

Returning  Learners 49.2 46.1 44.2

Social  Learners 29.6 28.4 24.9

Fully  Participating  Learners

24.5 21.2 21.0

What  the  learners  told  usFrom  course  feedback  surveys  • International  audiences:  from  over  100  countries

• Target:  Healthcare  |  Service  users  |  Academic/General  Interest  

• High  satisfaction  levels:  pitch  |  activities  |  expectations

• Implications  of  taking  course:  desire  for  further  study  |  workplace

BIG  DATA

Understanding  Drugs  and  Addiction  2014  (First  run)  – Learner  Interactions

“Education  is  not  a  mass  customer  industry:  it  is  a  personal  client  industry.”

(Laurillard,  2014)

MOOC  Cynicism

“90%  of  the  courses  had  a  completion  rate  less  than  or  equal  to  14%”  

(Aráuz,  2013,  p536)  

Modes  of  Participation  – 99%  of  learners  chose….Mode Mode  Description Individuals

1 Steps X Quiz  X     Comments  X 799

2 Steps  ! Quiz  X Comments X 1673

3 Steps  ! Quiz  ! Comments X 1681

4 Steps  ! Quiz  X Comments  ! 189

5 Steps  ! Quiz  ! Comments  ! 1631

Total 5973

MOOC  Cynicism

“so  new  that  there  is  little  or  no  evidence  for  educationally  useful  they  are,  or  how  they  might  be  financially  sustained”

(Bateman  and  Davies,  2014).

Evidence  of  Learning  1:  Short  Answer  Questions

Discussion  steps  containing  short  answer  questions  =  9  (12%  of  77  total  steps)

Numbers  of  comments  on  discussion  steps  containing  SAQs  =  7911  (46%  of  17292  total  comments)

• Number  of  individuals  answering  at  least  one  SAQ  =  1435

Evidence  of  Learning  2:  Cohort  quiz  scores

HEIs  and  Funding

“We  find  costs  ranging  from  $38,980  to  $325,330  per  MOOC”

(Hollands  and  Tirthali,  2014)

“20%  fewer  new  MOOCs  being  produced  and  offered  by  HEIs  in  the  UK  in  2015  compared  with  2014”

(Macintyre,  2016,  p25.)

Stakeholders

• Learners

• Academics  providing  course  content,  mentoring,  updates

• Researchers  publishing  in  mainstream  academic  press

• Funders  of  MOOC  production:  most  commonly  Higher  Education  Institutions

• Platform  providers

Some  stakeholder  issues

• Learners – not  “consumers”,  are  diverse  and  autonomous• Content  providers  – information  to  support  decisions  about  pedagogy,  mentoring,  frequency  of  re-­‐runs

• Researchers -­‐ analytics  and  visualisations  relevant  to  research  questions  which  can  be  published

• Funders  of  MOOC  production  -­‐ need  figures  comparable  across  MOOCs  to  be  used  internally  for  service  evaluation  &  audits

• Platform  providers  -­‐ concerns  which  overlap  the  above,  but  are  not  the  same

ReferencesAráuz,  J.  (2013).  Self-­‐organizing  Evolving  Education.  Procedia  Computer  Science  20,  535-­‐540.

Bateman,  J.,  Davies,  D.  (2014).  The  challenge  of  disruptive  innovation  in  learning  technology.    Medical  Education  (2014)  48:  225-­‐233.

Clarà,  M.,  Barberà,  E.  (2013).  Learning  online:  massive  open  online  courses  (MOOCs),  connectivism,  and  cultural  psychology.    Distance  Education,  34:1,  129-­‐136.

Hollands,  F.  M.,  Tirthali,  D.  (2014).  Resource  requirements  and  costs  of  developing  and  delivering  MOOCs.  The  International  Review  of  Research  in  Open  and  Distributed  Learning  (2014)  15:5.

Laurillard,  D.  (2014).  Five  Myths  about  MOOCs.  Times  Higher  Education.  16th  January  2014.    Accessed  at  https://www.timeshighereducation.com/comment/opinion/five-­‐myths-­‐about-­‐moocs/2010480.article  

MacIntyre,  C.  (MoocLab.club)  (2016).  UK  MOOC  Report  2016:  An  insight  into  MOOCs  provided  by  UK  institutions.  Accessed  at  http://www.mooclab.club/Reports/UK%20MOOC%20Report%202016.pdf  on  20th  September  2016.

Siemens,  G.,  5  August  2011,  Learning  and  Academic  Analytics.  Accessed  at  http://www.learninganalytics.net/?p=131