Learners perspectives on MOOC design

From Digital Culture & Society

[Oh, E. G., Cho, M.-H., & Chang, Y. (2023). Learners’ perspectives on MOOC design. Distance Education, 44(3), 476–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2022.2150126

https://ocul-bu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01OCUL_BU/p5aakr/cdi_proquest_journals_2853697055

D.O.I: 10.1080/01587919.2022.2150126

Contents 1 Context 2 Overview 3 Strengths and Weaknesses 4 Assessment

[edit] Context

The article discusses Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) and how they have evolved into vital tools for individual learning and development. The authors point out that MOOCs have been thought of as democratizing forces in education before, but are now the most important means for professional development and career advancement. The article delves into this shift by examining learners' perspectives on MOOC design, particularly in the context of professional development. The authors highlight that despite the growing body of research on MOOC design, there is a gap – the lack of comprehensive understanding regarding learners' perspectives. The authors highlight that despite the growing body of research on MOOC design, there is a gap – the lack of comprehensive understanding regarding learners' perspectives. While individual aspects such as testing methods, social interactions and media usage have been examined in studies, an overall view of the design dimensions is missing from a learners point of view.

[edit] Overview

The purpose of the article is to explore the dimensions of MOOC design that learners find valuable and to establish connections between learner traits and these design aspects. Learner characteristics considered included age, gender, the quantity of previous MOOC experiences, and the specific goals learners had in mind. The article thus, attempts to answer what aspects of MOOC design do learners consider valuable? Are there notable distinctions in the valued dimensions among MOOC learners? and how do learner characteristics correlate with each dimension of MOOC design? To answer these questions, the authors draw upon existing literature on MOOC design, incorporating concepts like human interactions, usability, learning activities, content learning, and professional development. The study builds on prior frameworks for understanding MOOC design aspects. Furthermore, the article relies heavily on quantitative research. The data is collected through an online survey embedded in the MOOC platform. The analysis includes statistical methods such as repeated measures ANOVA, Pearson correlations, and multiple regression to explore relationships between learner characteristics and design dimensions. Overall, the authors argue that participants of MOOCs highly value four design dimension of the platform including human interactions, navigation, professional development, and course workload and that it would be valuable to conduct additional research and fine-tune the design dimensions to align more closely with the needs and objectives of the specific learners engaged in MOOCs.

[edit] Strengths and Weaknesses

On the one hand, the article excels in the identification and categorization of key design dimensions that MOOC learners value. By systematically organizing these dimensions into five categories—human interactions, usability, learning activities, content learning, and professional development—the article provides a clear and comprehensive framework for understanding the factors influencing MOOC design from the learner's perspective. This structured approach not only simplifies the complex landscape of MOOC design but also offers a foundation for further research and practical application in the field. This strength is particularly valuable as it lays the groundwork for future studies and informs MOOC designers about the specific aspects that learners prioritize.

On the other hand, the article has several weaknesses. First, the data collected originated from an introductory-level MOOC, potentially restricting the applicability of the findings to intermediate-level courses. This emphasizes the need for a more diverse sample to encompass a range of perspectives and expectations across various MOOC levels. Furthermore, the authors focus on MOOC perspectives in regard to professional development which raises concerns about whether the identified design dimensions are relevant to MOOCs with different focuses. Thus, the article would have been stronger if it incorporated insights from MOOCs with diverse thematic orientations. Additionally, the article, while establishing connections between participant variables and design dimensions, lacks depth in explaining the reasons for these associations due to its exclusive use of quantitative data. This limitation underscores the potential value of integrating qualitative research methods, such as in-depth interviews.

[edit] Assessment

In my opinion the article is beneficial for future research and technological advancements to MOOCs as it provides four important dimensions (human interactions, usability, learning activities, content learning, and professional development) which indicates that there are multiple aspects to consider when designing a MOOC valued by learners. In other words, Potential audiences that could benefit from this article include researchers seeking to delve deeper into MOOC design and learner perspectives, instructional designers aiming to optimize their course structures, and educators interested in tailoring online learning experiences. Moreover, stakeholders in the MOOC industry, such as platform providers and course developers, will find valuable insights to inform the refinement and development of their offerings.

Ja19kd 20:13, 1 December 2023 (EST)