Open online courses with a
massive number of students have represented an interesting development for
online education in the past years.
They have basically followed
two very different formats: MOOCs and courses similar in spirit to the
AI-Stanford course.
In this post I analyze the
behavior (both in number and pattern), for both types of the massive courses,
of what are described in the research literature as lurker participants (see Rita Kop,
2011).
MOOCs
MOOCs represent an emerging methodology of online teaching with a structure
inspired by the philosophy of connectivism. During the last years
they have been carried out with great
success. Examples are CCK08, PLENK2010, MobiMOOC (2011), EduMOOC (2011),
Change11, and LAK12. Their implementation
requires conceptual changes in perspective from both “facilitators” (tutors)
and learners.
These courses can be classified within the connectivist pedagogy (Dron and Anderson 2011, see also a previous post).
These courses can be classified within the connectivist pedagogy (Dron and Anderson 2011, see also a previous post).
Figure 1 (extracted using
google analytics to the home page of EduMOOC 2011) represents a typical behavior
pattern of those participating in a MOOC. A big number register (2700 in this
case) but after a few weeks the active participants reduce to less than 100. Activities
like online meetings do not register more than a few tens. Participation in
surveys is also small.
Then an important question
emerges: have more than 90% of registered participants dropped the course?
Lurker is a term used to define a
participant that just follows the course, looks at the recordings, and browses the
available course resources. He is mostly behind the scenes waiting for some
interesting event as can be seen in Figure 1 and quantified in Table 1. A successful blog post or a particular debate posted to the Google
group mailing list may obtain responses that could be 50% of those registered.
The AI-Stanford like courses and udacity.com
The 2011 AI-Stanford
class on Artificial Intelligence taught by Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig
was also a massive open online course with 160,000 registered enrollees of
which 20,000 completed all coursework. It was offered free and online to
students worldwide from October 10th to December 18th 2011. A very similar
pattern is followed by courses released and still in progress by udacity.com.
The Ai-stanford course included feedback on progress and a statement of
accomplishment. The curriculum drew from that used in Stanford's introductory
Artificial Intelligence course. The instructors offered similar materials,
assignments, and exams.
These course can be classified within the cognitive-behaviorist
pedagogy
Figure 2 shows the number of participants through the
duration of the AI-course course expressed as daily reach (analytics extracted
using alexa.com). A huge peak surges to nearly 100.000 (the daily reach of
Khanacademy.org) around October 10th (the beginning of the course). Very
rapidly it stabilized at 25.000 active participants. The smaller peaks are linked
to the weekly obligatory exams. Practically no lurkers participate and the
change from 160.000 to 25.000 simply represents dropouts.
Figure 2. Number of active participants in the Stanford AI-class. |
Two very different
course formats.
From previous studies it has become evident (George Siemmens 2012) that we are in the
presence of different formats:
- the AI-Stanford participants have totally different learners goals and preparation than those in MOOCs.
- there exists a very different nature of the subjects studied: engineering and educational theory.
- the AI-Stanford course falls into the cognitive-behaviorist pedagogy category and the MOOCs into the connectivist.
The retention and lurker behavior described above adds
another differentiation to the previous list.
tag for: #lak12 and #change11
tag for: #lak12 and #change11
No comments:
Post a Comment