Critical reflection and dialogical learning design: moving MOOCs beyond unidirectional transmission of content

Forfattere

  • Kim Haagen Mathiesen Behandlingsinstitutionen Eggertshus & Aarhus Universitet
  • Mathias Helbo Nedergaard Aarhus Universitet
  • Rikke Toft Nørgård Aarhus Universitet

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7146/lom.v9i16.24379

Nøgleord:

learning design, MOOC, critical pedagogy, teaching design, blended learning, online dialogue,

Resumé

Distance education and e-learning has been around for some time now. The ubiquitous development of the internet (Sharples, 2007) has however made way for the emergence of new educational formats such as the much talked-about Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Within MOOCs users have access to educational literature and tasks at all times, which allow users to fit the course into their own pace, place and Personal Learning Environment (Attwell 2007).

Today MOOCs has spread across the globe, and in Denmark we now see institutions such as Aarhus University developing a new course with roots in the MOOC format, however without the ‘Massive’ part (Aarhus University, 2016).

Over a 5 week period we conducted a netnographic (Kozinet, 2015) mixed methods research of the MOOC Blended Learning Essentials (https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/blended-learning-gettingstarted/2). Contrary to the acclaimed potentials of MOOCs, our research showed a pronounced lack of dialogue and a high degree of what Freire (1996) calls “the banking concept of education,” entailing a high amount of one-way knowledge transmission (Hoem, 2006). To circumvent these tendencies, the paper presents a case analysis and design framework for moving MOOCs beyond “the banking concept of education” and towards dialogue in ways that support critical thinking; a high-level cognitive skill essential to higher education (Laurillard, 2012). 

Forfatterbiografier

Kim Haagen Mathiesen, Behandlingsinstitutionen Eggertshus & Aarhus Universitet

Socialpædagog & Stud. Cand.pæd IT., Aarhus Universitet

Mathias Helbo Nedergaard, Aarhus Universitet

Stud. Cand.pæd IT., Aarhus Universitet

Rikke Toft Nørgård, Aarhus Universitet

Associate professor,
Center for Undervisningsudvikling og Digitale Medier

Referencer

• Anderson, T. & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: a decade of progress in education research?. Eductional Researcher, Vol 41(1), pp. 16-25. • Attwell, G. (2007). Personal Learning Environments - the future of eLearning? eLearning Papers, Vol 2, Nº 1, January 2007, ISSN 1887-1542 http://www.informelles-lernen.de/fileadmin/dateien/Informelles_Lernen/Buecher_Dokumente/Attwell_2007-ple.pdf • Bang, J., Dalsgaard, C., O’Donovan, M.M. (2015). Conference Proceedings The Online, Open and Flexible Higher Education Conference, Hosted by Fern Universität in Hagen, 29­30 October 2015 (pp. 39­56) lokaliseret d. 14.06.2016 på; http://conference.eadtu.eu/images/2015/home/Conference_2015_proceedings_def.p df • Bang, J.(2006) eLearning reconsidered: Have eLearning and virtual universities met the expectations. http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/es/node/2604 • Baym, N.(2015). Personal Connections in the Digital Age. Second Edition. Polity Press. USA. • Brinkmann, S., Tanggaard, L.(2015) Kvalitativ metode ­ En grundbog. 2. Udgave. Hans Reitzels Forlag. Latvia. • Bryant and Charmaz(2007) The sage handbook of Grounded Theory. Sage Publications Ltd. London, England. • Dalziel, J., Grainne, C., Wills, S., Walker, S., Bennett, S., Dobozy, E., Cameron, L., Badilescu-Buga, E. & Bower, M. (2013). The Larnaca Declaration on Learning Design. Available at www.larnacadeclaration.org. • Daniel, J., (2012). Making Sense of MOOCs: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. Vol 2012(3), p. Art. 18. DOI:http://doi.org/10.5334/2012-18 • Dysthe, O. (1997): Det flerstemmige klasserum - skrivning og samtale for at lære, Klim • Emerson, R., Fretz, R.I. & Shaw, L.L.(2011). Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago, United States of America. • Freire, P., (1993): Pedagogy of the oppressed. The Continuum International Publishing Group,London, England • Gynther, K. (2005): Blended learning: it og læring i et teoretisk og praktisk perspektiv. Unge pædagoger. • Haber, J.(2014) MOOCS. MIT Press. • Hoem, J. (2006). Openness in communication. First Monday Vol. 11 No. 7. Chicago. http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1367/1286 • Jordan, K.(2015) http://www.katyjordan.com/MOOCproject.html • Kozinets, R.(2015) Netnography: Redefined. Sage: London. • Laurillard, D.(2012) Teaching as a Design Science - Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. Routledge. • Laurrilard, D. (2008). The teacher as action researcher: using technology to capture pedagogic form. Studies in Higher Education Vol. 33 (2), pp. 139-154- • Qvortrup, A. and Wiberg, M., (2013). Læringsteori & Didaktik. Hans Reitzels Forlag. • Sharples, M., Taylor, J. & Vavoula, G. (2006). A Theory of Learning for the Mobile Age. In: R. Andrews and C. Haythornthwaite, The Sage Handbook of E-learning Research. Sage Publications. Pp.221-247. • Scolari, C. A. (2012). Media Ecology: Exploring the Metaphor to Expand the Theory. Communication Theory, Vol. 22(2), 204­225. • Sumner, J.(2000) Serving the System: A critical history of distance education. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e­learning. Vol. 15, Iss. 3. Pp 267­285.

Downloads

Publiceret

2016-11-04

Citation/Eksport

Mathiesen, K. H., Nedergaard, M. H., & Nørgård, R. T. (2016). Critical reflection and dialogical learning design: moving MOOCs beyond unidirectional transmission of content. Tidsskriftet Læring Og Medier (LOM), 9(16). https://doi.org/10.7146/lom.v9i16.24379