Teaching and learning with MOOCs: computing academics perspectives and engagement
From Digital Culture & Society
Eckerdal, A., Kinnunen, P., Thota, N., Nylén, A., Sheard, J., & Malmi, L. (2014). Teaching and learning with MOOCs: computing academics’ perspectives and engagement. Proc. 19th Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, 9–14.
D.O.I: 10.1145/2591708.2591740
Contents |
[edit] Context
The article discusses the impact of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) on the academic community, particularly focusing on the computer science academic community. The authors highlight that discussions about MOOCs have mainly taken place in non-scientific forums, making it challenging to assess wider opinions within academia. To gather more rigorous data, the authors conducted a survey among teachers, researchers, and academic managers in the computer science academic community. The study aims to understand their perspectives, attitudes, and experiences with MOOCs. The analysis is based on responses from 137 participants. The findings reveal a mixed set of feelings about MOOCs within the computer science academic community.
[edit] Overview
The main focus of the research is to understand the attitudes, awareness, and perceptions of academics, especially in the computer science academic community, regarding MOOCs. The authors aim to investigate academics’ views on the pros and cons of MOOCs concerning teaching and learning.Although, the article doesn't explicitly mention specific theories, it engages with various perspectives and experiences of academics regarding MOOCs. The discussion touches upon pedagogical models, assessment practices, interaction issues, and the impact of MOOCs on traditional teaching methods. Furthermore, to answer their research question, what are the attitudes and perceptions of the computer science academic community on MOOCs they employ an online questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of two parts: one for all academics, regardless of their prior experience with MOOCs, and another for those with more knowledge and experience in MOOCs. The survey received responses from academics on five continents, representing 19 countries and more than 90 universities. The participants included teachers, researchers, academic managers, and other roles within the computing and IT disciplines. To analyze this data in regard to open-ended questions a content analysis was performed. Four members of the research team individually read the open-ended responses, noted emerging themes, and agreed on preliminary categories. To ensure consistency, two researchers analyzed a subset of responses, interchanged their analyses, and discussed any disagreements until harmonization was achieved. Overall, the authors argue that MOOCs in higher education settings are bringing about mixed opinions within the academic community. Positive aspects include increased accessibility to new content, access to expert international teachers, flexibility in time and place for studying, and the potential to provide free education to non-traditional student groups. Negative aspects include poor pedagogical models in MOOCs, lack of interaction between students and teachers, concerns about the quality of assessment practices, worries about plagiarism, and difficulties in authenticating student work.
[edit] Strengths and Weaknesses
On the one hand, the article is extremely strong since it provides a mixed-method approach, combining quantitative data from a survey with qualitative insights obtained through open-ended questions. This approach provides a nuanced understanding of the attitudes, experiences, and practices of computer science academics regarding MOOCs. Essentially it provides numerical statistics backed up by reason.
On the other hand, the article could benefit from a more explicit statement of research objectives. While it is evident that the study aims to investigate academics' perspectives on MOOCs, specifying clear research questions at the outset could enhance the article's focus. Furthermore, although there is a research methodology section, it lacks clarity and transparency. In fact, it simply states “To learn about computing academics’ awareness, attitudes and perceptions concerning MOOCs we constructed an online questionnaire…one researcher categorized the themes found in the responses and then the other researcher reviewed the results”. Providing details on the development of the questionnaire, its validation, and the steps taken to ensure its reliability would enhance the methodological rigor of the study. Moreover, when conducting a content analysis with a human analyst it is important to mention reliability scores to show that there was no biased evaluation which they did not.
[edit] Assessment
In my opinion the article is beneficial for understanding perspectives on MOOCs in the computer science community, i believe that it should not be used for future research. The findings, although informative, may be limited in generalizability, and the potential biases in the study should be acknowledged more explicitly. The absence of a codebook or coding scheme raises concerns about the reliability and replicability of the analysis. Without a transparent and well-defined coding process, it becomes challenging to assess the rigor of the study and the validity of its findings.
Ja19kd 20:13, 1 December 2023 (EST)
Please consider the environment before
printing this page.