Open2Study is one of the lesser known learning platforms based, for once, not in the US but in Australia. It is backed by Open Universities Australia who are providers of accredited online and distance qualifications. So, what has Open2Study to offer that differentiates it from the major players like Coursera or edX?
Open2Study currently offers around thirty courses and is growing this total slowly but steadily, adding a few more each month. The courses have a slightly different focus to those offered by the big US players with more attention to vocational topics and less paralleling of existing university programmes. The distinctive feature of Open2Study is the highly structured nature of its courses; every course is the same length, shares the same internal structure and even appears to have had its videos shot in the same studio. There are both advantages and disadvantages to this approach, as we shall see.
All Open2Study courses are four weeks long. While this makes them accessible to more potential students it also imposes a tremendous limitation on how much material can be covered. Most of the courses are clearly intended to be introductory but four weeks can be rather short even to meet that ambition. Courses repeat on a five week cycle with all courses starting on the same date.
Each course has the same structure of a weekly series of 8-9 video lectures, each around 5 minutes in length. This gives about 45 minutes of lecture time per week and, as few courses have any other elements, that's it for learning. There is a single multiple choice question "Pop Quiz" after each segment (other than the last) and then a module assessment consisting of five similarly styled questions. The pass mark is 60% average across the four assessments but, in truth, most students should be getting 100%. Assessments can be repeated if you want to improve your score (or learning). Assessments open at the start of each week but can be taken at any time up to the end of course.
The videos all appear to have been produced in the same studio with the speakers usually appearing against a black background and being shot from a two camera set up. I find this a little distracting as the producers have a tendency to use far too many shots from camera two which is at an angle to the speaker showing them in a semi-profile talking to the main camera.
Most videos also make use of a clear screen 'whiteboard' with the presenter writing from behind the panel and the image being flipped horizontally so the writing is not mirror-imaged. This has the side-effect of making most presenters appear left-handed but possibly only those with my nit-picking nature would notice that! While it makes a change from the usual run of Powerpoint presentations, I wish they would buy some new markers as the speakers struggle from time to time to write clearly with fading pens! A quick mention should be made hear of the anonymous young lady who provides many of the illustrations drawn in 'real time' on the same board; she is clearly a very skilled artist and should have some credit.
I should also mention the course forums. The set up does not really encourage participation (in my view). The forums seem to be very fragmented and visible only while you are completing a particular module so, having made a comment and moved on to a later section, it is unlikely that posters will see responses or follow up on the discussions. In practice it is unusual to see a discussion getting past one or two responses. This is, in part, down to the relatively low numbers participating (500-1000 registered students seems typical) but the forum design also plays a part. In fact, it is possible to access earlier discussions but the site doesn't tempt you to do so. Instructors do not interact on the forums although there are some 'Learning Facilitators' who drop in mainly to address technical and administrative issues.
There are some advantages to the fixed design of courses: it is easy to find your way around, once you've completed your first course; scheduling is straightforward as they all run for four weeks; there is less scope (from the operator's side) for technical issues and it should be more straightforward to roll out platform improvements. The disadvantages are equally unsurprising: the four week courses are very short; there is no scope for additional activities such as peer assessed writing or programming exercises; assessments are pretty unchallenging.
Courses are quite variable in quality of content, despite the uniform production, but the short length means that there is little reason not to complete the courses, once started. Certificate's of Achievement are issued (as pdf files) to those who reach the 60% threshold and, unusually, show the percentages gained on each assessment (on a second page). There is clear signposting from the course page to (paid) accredited courses offered by Open Universities Australia - although I wonder how many will be interested in following up on those.
An additional progress indicator is offered through the use of 'badges'. These seem to be popular in some quarters--although they seem rather juvenile to me--and reward participation in social aspects as well as study activities. The badges are not (yet) integrated with any external badging such as Mozilla OpenBadges although I understand they are planning to address this in the future.
Overall, some interesting areas of study--I've not seen an introduction to nursing offered elsewhere--but all at a very superficial level. If you want a very brief introduction that will neither take too much time nor tax you too much then take a look. It makes a change to hear a different accent but, to be honest, some of the speakers really aren't that good. Open2Study needs to think about offering longer courses or having multi-part courses as the four week pattern is very restrictive. They should also consider introducing more active learning activities beyond simply watching videos and they really need to rethink the forum design.
Monday 14 October 2013
Sunday 22 September 2013
What's the Point of Coursera's Signature Track?
The question of whether or not to pay for the Signature Track option offered on many of Coursera's courses regularly crops up on the discussion forums. Even those who are already paying for the option are frequently unclear or mistaken as to its benefits. Here's my view, for what it's worth.
In my opinion, most students will see no benefit from the use of Signature Track and I'll explain why. Firstly, we should be clear what Signature Track is and what it offers. Signature Track is an identity verification service. Through the use of photo identification, web cam monitoring and keyboard profiling (basically recognising how you type) the operators can say that the person taking the course is the person named on the certificate. What the scheme does not offer is any accreditation of courses or certificates. Signature Track certificates share most features with the standard (free) Statements of Accomplishment; they are delivered electronically as pdf files, they do not indicate a grade and they are non-accredited. Unlike the standard Statements of Accomplishment, they carry both the Coursera logo and that of the content supplier (ie the college or university presenting the course). The free certificates carry only the Coursera logo although they do name the content provider.
Will colleges accept Coursera courses for credit? I've seen no indication that any college has accepted a course for credit with or without the benefit of Signature Track. There are, I think, a couple of reasons. Firstly, Signature Track, while verifying the identity of the person at the keyboard, does not replace proctored (in UK terms, invigilated) examinations. There is nothing to stop the student having a supporter 'off-camera' feeding them the answers or, indeed, from registering multiple accounts in order to access the examination in advance of their Signature Track attempt. Secondly, if I may be forgiven some cynicism, the colleges have a vested interest in recognising only paid courses for credit. If they were to routinely recognise free courses where would that leave the faculties formerly offering the courses? General Education courses, for example, seem particularly vulnerable as they are effectively standalone, so don't need to match later courses in terms of content, and seem to be relatively poorly valued by many students. These courses do, however, by dint of the large numbers required to take them, generate significant income for colleges. I would suspect that, for example, PSYCH101 or CS101 courses taken by many hundreds of students as a part of their Gen. Ed. requirement cross-subsidise more advanced Psychology or Computer Science courses taken by much smaller numbers.
So, will employers accept Coursera courses as adding a benefit to applicants or employee's CVs (resumes)? Here, in my experience, the situation is quite different from the world of academia. Employers are generally far less wedded to the concept of 'accreditation'. I've taken many professional development courses over the years, some costing up to £500 per day (say $750) but few have ever had any external accreditation. Indeed, I used to present such courses. But does Signature Track offer any additional benefit in this market? I don't think so. I've never been asked to confirm my identity on a professional development course and employers have never questioned this. Both in my former career as an engineer and in my more recent work as a teacher, employers are happy to take development claims at face value. It is important, however, to recognise that most employers are looking for evidence of vocationally relevant training rather than primarily academic courses so the direct benefits might be marginal.
There are some very limited circumstances in which Signature Track might have benefits. A small number of courses, for example, offer the option of proctored examinations in order to obtain credit for a course. In the two I have seen Signature Track is a prerequisite of registration for the examinations. I have also seen one or two students report that employers will only accept courses as fulfilling development requirements if they take the the Signature Track option (although I suspect this arises more from lack of understanding on the part of employers then from any inherent value).
The final point I would make is that this is largely academic (so to speak). Research indicates that most students of MOOCs are already graduates and a high proportion actually have post-graduate ('graduate' in US terms) qualifications. Few will have any intention of seeking credit for the courses undertaken here. From discussions, it seems that many view Signature Track as a cross between a vanity product and a way of offering financial support to the course supplier and Coursera. The profits from Signature Track are split between Coursera and the course providers. Those taking an altruistic view should, of course, remember that Coursera is a for-profit corporation, not a charity, and Signature Track is merely one of the ways that their operations are being monetized.
In my opinion, most students will see no benefit from the use of Signature Track and I'll explain why. Firstly, we should be clear what Signature Track is and what it offers. Signature Track is an identity verification service. Through the use of photo identification, web cam monitoring and keyboard profiling (basically recognising how you type) the operators can say that the person taking the course is the person named on the certificate. What the scheme does not offer is any accreditation of courses or certificates. Signature Track certificates share most features with the standard (free) Statements of Accomplishment; they are delivered electronically as pdf files, they do not indicate a grade and they are non-accredited. Unlike the standard Statements of Accomplishment, they carry both the Coursera logo and that of the content supplier (ie the college or university presenting the course). The free certificates carry only the Coursera logo although they do name the content provider.
Will colleges accept Coursera courses for credit? I've seen no indication that any college has accepted a course for credit with or without the benefit of Signature Track. There are, I think, a couple of reasons. Firstly, Signature Track, while verifying the identity of the person at the keyboard, does not replace proctored (in UK terms, invigilated) examinations. There is nothing to stop the student having a supporter 'off-camera' feeding them the answers or, indeed, from registering multiple accounts in order to access the examination in advance of their Signature Track attempt. Secondly, if I may be forgiven some cynicism, the colleges have a vested interest in recognising only paid courses for credit. If they were to routinely recognise free courses where would that leave the faculties formerly offering the courses? General Education courses, for example, seem particularly vulnerable as they are effectively standalone, so don't need to match later courses in terms of content, and seem to be relatively poorly valued by many students. These courses do, however, by dint of the large numbers required to take them, generate significant income for colleges. I would suspect that, for example, PSYCH101 or CS101 courses taken by many hundreds of students as a part of their Gen. Ed. requirement cross-subsidise more advanced Psychology or Computer Science courses taken by much smaller numbers.
So, will employers accept Coursera courses as adding a benefit to applicants or employee's CVs (resumes)? Here, in my experience, the situation is quite different from the world of academia. Employers are generally far less wedded to the concept of 'accreditation'. I've taken many professional development courses over the years, some costing up to £500 per day (say $750) but few have ever had any external accreditation. Indeed, I used to present such courses. But does Signature Track offer any additional benefit in this market? I don't think so. I've never been asked to confirm my identity on a professional development course and employers have never questioned this. Both in my former career as an engineer and in my more recent work as a teacher, employers are happy to take development claims at face value. It is important, however, to recognise that most employers are looking for evidence of vocationally relevant training rather than primarily academic courses so the direct benefits might be marginal.
There are some very limited circumstances in which Signature Track might have benefits. A small number of courses, for example, offer the option of proctored examinations in order to obtain credit for a course. In the two I have seen Signature Track is a prerequisite of registration for the examinations. I have also seen one or two students report that employers will only accept courses as fulfilling development requirements if they take the the Signature Track option (although I suspect this arises more from lack of understanding on the part of employers then from any inherent value).
The final point I would make is that this is largely academic (so to speak). Research indicates that most students of MOOCs are already graduates and a high proportion actually have post-graduate ('graduate' in US terms) qualifications. Few will have any intention of seeking credit for the courses undertaken here. From discussions, it seems that many view Signature Track as a cross between a vanity product and a way of offering financial support to the course supplier and Coursera. The profits from Signature Track are split between Coursera and the course providers. Those taking an altruistic view should, of course, remember that Coursera is a for-profit corporation, not a charity, and Signature Track is merely one of the ways that their operations are being monetized.
Friday 5 July 2013
Coursera: The User Experience
I talked in very broad terms last time about Coursera. This time I want to look at how the user interacts with the platform and how well the various features of Coursera courses work. The advantage to course providers of using a platform like Coursera is that much of the technical work has been done and is (by this point) working meaning that the academics can focus on what they do best; teaching. The disadvantage can be that sometimes the fit between a course and the platform is not perfect - but that's something I'll come back to in a future post.
So. let's take a look at a typical course. Once registered and logged in you will arrive in the main landing page. Here's one I am studying a the moment:
To the right you will see upcoming assignments and newly posted lectures. To the left you can see the main navigation strip which gives you links to all the sections of the course. The parts which you will probably visit most regularly will be the video lectures, which are the core of most courses, the forums and the assignments. In most cases there are both quizzes and peer assessments which will each have their own button. On this course, unusually, there is only peer assessment which, for some reason, the course providers have chosen to call Peer Responses - which was almost guaranteed to cause confusion when the first assessment came around.
The naming and arrangement of the navigation button is one of the most irritating features of Coursera. Clearly, the course providers are given free rein in naming the buttons and choosing the order in which they appear. What this means is that those who are taking more than one course will spend far too long looking blankly at the navigation bar wondering where, say, the Discussion Forum button has gone. Here are a few I took at random from current and past courses:
So. let's take a look at a typical course. Once registered and logged in you will arrive in the main landing page. Here's one I am studying a the moment:
To the right you will see upcoming assignments and newly posted lectures. To the left you can see the main navigation strip which gives you links to all the sections of the course. The parts which you will probably visit most regularly will be the video lectures, which are the core of most courses, the forums and the assignments. In most cases there are both quizzes and peer assessments which will each have their own button. On this course, unusually, there is only peer assessment which, for some reason, the course providers have chosen to call Peer Responses - which was almost guaranteed to cause confusion when the first assessment came around.
The naming and arrangement of the navigation button is one of the most irritating features of Coursera. Clearly, the course providers are given free rein in naming the buttons and choosing the order in which they appear. What this means is that those who are taking more than one course will spend far too long looking blankly at the navigation bar wondering where, say, the Discussion Forum button has gone. Here are a few I took at random from current and past courses:
Sorry for the large images today. As you can, hopefully, see, there is very little in common between these courses - take a quick scan across and see how long it takes to spot the Discussion Forum link on each course. Now, I'm certain each course designer is sure that their layout best suits the material but perhaps this is an area where Coursera could reasonably lay down some stricter design rules.
Among the useful buttons there are also some which seem pretty much unused. There is always a Join a Meetup link although I've never heard of anyone actually doing so - I guess that Coursera has some arrangement with Meetup. There is usually a link to a Course Wiki although this feature is both rough around the edges and underused. The Wiki is still in beta, it often asks for a separate login (which requires the same credentials as the main site) and really does seem to be an afterthought bolted on to the structure. There is little evidence that the wikis are widely used. With a few honourable exceptions, most content on the wikis appears to have been posted by staff - not quite the point of a wiki.
The one thing you won't see anywhere is a Progress button because, for some reason, Coursera is convinced that nobody is interested in how they are doing points-wise. This means that working out your current percentage requires a tortuous collection of points from peer assignments, quizzes and exams. These then need to be weighted in line with the individual course policy - except that is often not given in detail (e.g, "the quizzes will account for about a third of the marks") or, in some cases, not stated at all! For Coursera courses, the first thing I do when starting is to make up a simple spreadsheet to calculate my running total. I will then know when I've done enough to pass and also be able to calculate whether a 'Distinction' is still within reach.
Discussion Forums are undoubtedly one of Coursera's strengths (as is also the case with edX). Due to the very high numbers of students looking at the same material at the same time support is rarely more than a few minutes away. If you have a problem a post will normally see a quick response. There is, of course, some petty bickering, points scoring and randomly bad behaviour from the online equivalent of schoolyard bullies (and often with the same level of maturity) but overall it can be a major asset for those with the time and inclination to participate. Although it may not replace a night in a student union bar, it is undoubtedly more productive in addressing problems with understanding!
Take care when posting on the forums, particularly on a busy thread, as the default setting is to subscribe you for email updates. This can mean that, after posting on a couple of topics, you come home to find hundreds (literally) of email updates filling your inbox. This is exactly the opposite of Saylor.org where the default setting does not subscribe you where, given the quiet boards there, it would be sensible to do so.
Next time I'll look at one or two courses in more detail and see how they work.
Friday 14 June 2013
Coursera: The Biggest MOOC Operator, But Are They The Best?
This time I’ll take a look at the biggest to the MOOC players, Coursera. Spawned from the same Stanford pilot that resulted in the formation of Udacity, Coursera is a commercial educational undertaking. Courses are available free of charge to students but there is a paid-for option, Signature Track, which I’ll discuss a little later.
Coursera has the greatest number of courses listed of any of the MOOC operators, 386 at the time of writing, produced by a number of university partners. Most of the partners are US-based although there are a growing number of international contributors. As you might expect, almost all courses are taught in English but there are small numbers presented in Spanish, French, Chinese, German and Italian.
So what are the courses like? All courses follow a fairly standard pattern based around a series of video lectures. Courses are normally offered on a ‘synchronous’ basis, that is to say, all the students start at the same time and follow weekly lectures with assignments having set deadlines for submission. Courses run from between 5 and 12 weeks and have an estimated 4-12 hours per weeks study load.
A very small number of courses are run on a ‘self-paced’ basis where all resources are available immediately and students can dip in and out as they like. The only ones I've seen to date are a couple of older courses from Stanford but it may well be a route pursued by other providers for courses they no longer wish to fully support.
Students undertake a range of assignments which can include auto-graded quizzes, peer evaluations and course specific activities such as machine-graded software submissions. Many courses also include one or more examinations. Overall grading varies from course to course with different weights being applied to each element.
Quiz-style assessments are multiple choice, single word or numeric questions – pretty much as you’d expect given the state of assessment technology. The advantage is that they are marked instantly and feedback can be given on how answers are derived. Most of the quizzes I have seen offer more than one attempt. There are disadvantages to the format which are mainly around the relative inflexibility but they can still be very challenging.
Peer evaluation is used very commonly on Coursera, often being the largest part of the overall mark for a course. This method of assessment allows the review of material which is outside the scope of machine grading. Such assignments might include written work, such as essays, graphical products like graphs or pieces of artwork. I won’t go into my views on peer evaluation here but will return to the topic in a future post.
Peer evaluated work runs in three phases. The first step is to submit your own work, in most cases the submission phase is open for about a week. Once the submission period ends work is allocated to peers for assessment. In most cases each student who has submitted is allocated five pieces for review. If a student doesn't complete their quota of evaluations then they won’t receive their own mark. One thing to look out for is self-evaluation; a few courses make this compulsory with a 20% grade penalty for non-completion! The final stage is to receive your feedback.
Exams, where they are used, use the same mechanism as the quizzes. Exams are timed (although this is usually fairly generous, for example 24 hours from beginning) and most only allow a single attempt. As with quizzes, marks are available immediately.
Certificates – Statements of Accomplishment – are provided to students who meet the criteria. Usually that means getting 70% overall (although that varies) with some courses also offering a ‘with Distinction’ grading for those achieving the top grades (eg over 90%). Coursera also offer the option to pay for a ‘verified’ certificate through their Signature Track scheme. I’ll come back to Signature Track in a later post.
Next time I’ll look at the user interface and course experience on Coursera.
Coursera has the greatest number of courses listed of any of the MOOC operators, 386 at the time of writing, produced by a number of university partners. Most of the partners are US-based although there are a growing number of international contributors. As you might expect, almost all courses are taught in English but there are small numbers presented in Spanish, French, Chinese, German and Italian.
So what are the courses like? All courses follow a fairly standard pattern based around a series of video lectures. Courses are normally offered on a ‘synchronous’ basis, that is to say, all the students start at the same time and follow weekly lectures with assignments having set deadlines for submission. Courses run from between 5 and 12 weeks and have an estimated 4-12 hours per weeks study load.
A very small number of courses are run on a ‘self-paced’ basis where all resources are available immediately and students can dip in and out as they like. The only ones I've seen to date are a couple of older courses from Stanford but it may well be a route pursued by other providers for courses they no longer wish to fully support.
Students undertake a range of assignments which can include auto-graded quizzes, peer evaluations and course specific activities such as machine-graded software submissions. Many courses also include one or more examinations. Overall grading varies from course to course with different weights being applied to each element.
Quiz-style assessments are multiple choice, single word or numeric questions – pretty much as you’d expect given the state of assessment technology. The advantage is that they are marked instantly and feedback can be given on how answers are derived. Most of the quizzes I have seen offer more than one attempt. There are disadvantages to the format which are mainly around the relative inflexibility but they can still be very challenging.
Peer evaluation is used very commonly on Coursera, often being the largest part of the overall mark for a course. This method of assessment allows the review of material which is outside the scope of machine grading. Such assignments might include written work, such as essays, graphical products like graphs or pieces of artwork. I won’t go into my views on peer evaluation here but will return to the topic in a future post.
Peer evaluated work runs in three phases. The first step is to submit your own work, in most cases the submission phase is open for about a week. Once the submission period ends work is allocated to peers for assessment. In most cases each student who has submitted is allocated five pieces for review. If a student doesn't complete their quota of evaluations then they won’t receive their own mark. One thing to look out for is self-evaluation; a few courses make this compulsory with a 20% grade penalty for non-completion! The final stage is to receive your feedback.
Exams, where they are used, use the same mechanism as the quizzes. Exams are timed (although this is usually fairly generous, for example 24 hours from beginning) and most only allow a single attempt. As with quizzes, marks are available immediately.
Certificates – Statements of Accomplishment – are provided to students who meet the criteria. Usually that means getting 70% overall (although that varies) with some courses also offering a ‘with Distinction’ grading for those achieving the top grades (eg over 90%). Coursera also offer the option to pay for a ‘verified’ certificate through their Signature Track scheme. I’ll come back to Signature Track in a later post.
Next time I’ll look at the user interface and course experience on Coursera.
Friday 7 June 2013
The Lifelong Learner's Ten Top Tips for Effective Study with MOOCs
From discussions on various courses it is apparent that many of those taking part have either been out of formal education for some time or never really put too much thought into the study process in the first place! Here are my top tips for effective study online. Some of these apply to any study and come from my own experience as a student and a High School teacher, others are specific to online learning and have been developed to take into account research findings and, of course, my own experience.
I make no claims to have any earth-shattering secrets but, if you apply these ideas, you should find that you make more effective use of your study time and faster progress. As with all study, the
more you put in, the more you will take out - so good luck.
1. Set up folders on your computer or online to keep your electronic files together and in order (I have one for each course which, in turn has a folder for each Unit or week). Keep your paper files in equally good order! Having an orderly filing system will mean you can find information more quickly which is important for revision and during exams (which are invariably 'open book'). These files will also be your main reference after the course is finished so look after them - hopefully, you'll want to use the information again.
2. Set aside some undisturbed time, ideally on a regular schedule (I know, dream on) and try to work in the same place. Having a settled routine and a regular study environment helps to focus the mind and improves recall (honestly, it does). I know that one of the attractions of MOOCs is that you can study as and when time allows but, although this makes use of time which might otherwise be wasted, it really isn't as good as settled study. I should admit that I do about 25-30% of my study in odd short bursts between other tasks but ideally...
3. Make notes. Depending on your preferences
either buy yourself some new notepads and pens (or pencils!) or polish up your
latest note-taking software. Make notes regularly as you work through the material. Especially for the video lectures, finding your way back to review something without notes can be quite difficult.
5. Plan your time. Mark any due dates for assessments in your planner, either on your computer (or online) or in your desk diary. Be realistic about the time you have available and leave some 'contingency time' for when things go wrong. Working around any set dates, decide how much time each course needs and divide up the time and work to allow you to be ready in good time to submit your assessments. Don't forget to mark in your holidays or you may find yourself falling out with your loved ones! When you are planning your study time...
6. Don't try to
work in big continuous blocks - it just isn't efficient. Normally no more than
an hour is recommended on a single topic. Either take a break or switch
subjects - one hour of Computer Science then half an hour of Psychology. A
hidden benefit of the General Education requirement (should you be a Saylor student), is that you will always have 'something else'
to study!
7. Review your notes regularly. Try to
structure and restructure the information in different ways to help learning and
understanding. I like to use visual representations (I would say mindmaps but
Tony Buzan has registered that as a trademark!), you might just want to
summarise or bullet point, or transfer to study cards (does anyone else still
do that) or anything that requires you to change the format around. This process of synthesis (taking information and putting it together in a new form) is one of the key ways to strengthen learning.
8. Do all the exercises. Nobody's looking
over your shoulder to make sure you do but we're all adults now and surely know
who will lose out if you take short cuts. As well as helping to secure learning, these exercises can be a useful resource later in revision.
9. Don't put it off. Leaving a difficult exercise until the last minute won't make it any easier. If your course has a more relaxed attitude to deadlines (or is self-paced like most Udacity and all Saylor courses) this doesn't mean you should let things drag on. If you don't make regular progress then you will waste much of your study time reacquainting yourself with the previous material. If it is self-paced then set yourself targets and plan to meet them. But...
10. Be flexible. It can be difficult to judge time requirements when you are studying new subjects or have been away from study for a while. The guidelines given by course providers are quite good - for average students.
If you find yourself struggling to keep up then take stock. Is it a short term problem, for example a difficult new concept or an overlap of courses for a couple of weeks, or a major miscalculation of time requirements? The former you can just ride out with a bit of extra time squeezed out somewhere. the latter means you need to make a decision.
While I encourage everyone to keep going when problems crop up, you need also to be realistic. There is no penalty for dropping a course and it (or another similar) will be along shortly. Decide which courses are most important to you, maybe a later course will rely on one you are studying now, and which you can postpone. Make a decision and move on. Another option pretty much unique to the current online offerings is to move to an 'auditing' mode. That means you 'sit in' on the lectures but don't worry about assessments or deadlines. This can be useful if you plan to retake the course later or maybe if you just want some background before going on to related study areas.
11. Because ten is never enough. Remember why you are studying. Enjoy it and don't get too stressed.
Next time I'll be taking a closer look at the largest of the MOOC platforms, Coursera.
Thursday 6 June 2013
Saylor - A Five Step Programme
I've written a little about the overall structure of Saylor and something about the courses so this is just a short practical guide to getting started.
All courses are self-paced and open to enrolment at any time so you can jump in whenever you like. In fact, as I said last time, you don't actually need to enrol or even register on the site, you can just turn up and start learning! So where do you begin? A number of students seem to get confused simply by the open nature; it is as if you arrived on your first day at university to find the doors flung open and a note saying 'help yourself'. So this is my five step guide to getting started:
Step 1: Click on the ePortfolio link at the the top of the page and register. you don't have to but it will give more options - which I'll discuss in a later posting.
Step 2: While in your new ePortfolio, click on the 'Course Catalog' link. You'll now see in the centre of the screen a list of every course offered in order of course code from ARTH101 (Art History) to STS203 (History of Technology) and on the left (in large blue lettering) a list of Areas of Study (ie 'Majors') from Art History down to Psychology. Click on one of the Areas of Study and you'll see just the courses which contribute to that area. Browse around, see what interests you and take a look at the first units for a couple of courses.
Step 3: Back to your ePortfolio for a rest...
Step 3A: If you have decided on an area of specialisation then click on the 'Areas of Study' tab and choose your area. Click on the area and you will be taken to a list of the required courses. Select as many or as few as you like to register immediately.
Step 3B: If you haven't decided yet or just want to complete one or two individual courses, click on 'Add a course' (which takes you right back to the Course Catalog) and click on the 'Enrol' button next to the courses you want.
Step 4: Back in your ePortfolio, click on the 'Courses' tab, if you're not already there, then on the course that you want to study first.
Step 5: Start at Unit 1 and keep going....
Good luck with your studies and next time I'll offer a few hints and tips on how to make the most effective use of your time.
All courses are self-paced and open to enrolment at any time so you can jump in whenever you like. In fact, as I said last time, you don't actually need to enrol or even register on the site, you can just turn up and start learning! So where do you begin? A number of students seem to get confused simply by the open nature; it is as if you arrived on your first day at university to find the doors flung open and a note saying 'help yourself'. So this is my five step guide to getting started:
Step 1: Click on the ePortfolio link at the the top of the page and register. you don't have to but it will give more options - which I'll discuss in a later posting.
Step 2: While in your new ePortfolio, click on the 'Course Catalog' link. You'll now see in the centre of the screen a list of every course offered in order of course code from ARTH101 (Art History) to STS203 (History of Technology) and on the left (in large blue lettering) a list of Areas of Study (ie 'Majors') from Art History down to Psychology. Click on one of the Areas of Study and you'll see just the courses which contribute to that area. Browse around, see what interests you and take a look at the first units for a couple of courses.
Step 3: Back to your ePortfolio for a rest...
Step 3A: If you have decided on an area of specialisation then click on the 'Areas of Study' tab and choose your area. Click on the area and you will be taken to a list of the required courses. Select as many or as few as you like to register immediately.
Step 3B: If you haven't decided yet or just want to complete one or two individual courses, click on 'Add a course' (which takes you right back to the Course Catalog) and click on the 'Enrol' button next to the courses you want.
Step 4: Back in your ePortfolio, click on the 'Courses' tab, if you're not already there, then on the course that you want to study first.
Step 5: Start at Unit 1 and keep going....
Good luck with your studies and next time I'll offer a few hints and tips on how to make the most effective use of your time.
Saylor: Close Up on the Courses
As I promised, I'll look in a bit more detail at Saylor's courses this time. We obviously can't go through every unit of every course but I'll try to give a flavour of how learning works in this environment.
Getting started. There's no need to register (although the ePortfolio adds useful functionality), just choose the course you want and start. The courses are all laid out in the same way on screen so once you've found your way around the first course you are set! Each course starts with sections for the Purpose of Course, Course Information, Learning Outcomes and Requirements. You will hopefully have looked at these when deciding whether to take the course. Here you can find the time estimate, which is normally around 100-120 hours, and any pre-requisites. You may also find information about the core texts. Some courses make extensive use of one or two (electronic) texts which it might make sense to download as single complete volumes at the start rather than collecting endless separate chapters and excerpts.
Jumping into the first unit you will find that it is broken down into numbered sections and sub-sections. Click on anything which is blue and it will expand with further information or instructions and links to resources. You might be told to read certain parts of a linked document, watch a video (in whole or part) or listen to an audio recording. Around about this point you begin to realise that somebody is taking this all very seriously. The work really is at college/university level.
The materials. One thing you will notice straight away is that the resources used are generally hosted elsewhere and come from a wide range of sources. There are some Saylor originated pieces - mainly introductions, summaries or bridging pieces but the general policy is to use existing freely available resources. This can lead to a bit of a patchwork effect as you swap from book to book, site to site and lecturer to lecturer. On the other hand it possibly reflects better the nature of independent study and academic literature reviews at higher levels than would a course built entirely around a single book and a single lecturer (ie the typical undergraduate university pattern). I find it effective and stimulating, others might not like it so much. The quality of the materials is almost perfect; there are a very few pieces which really don't match the overall standard but Saylor are constantly reviewing courses so hopefully these will be improved as time goes by.
Let's look at POLSC101: Introduction to Politics. A nice gentle introductory course in the Gen Ed programme... It gets underway with a nine page reading from Jean-Marc Coicard on Political Legitimacy, followed by twenty nine pages of analysis of soft power under Obama then back to the 18th Century for twenty two pages from Jean Jacques Rousseau’s A Discourse on Political Economy followed up by two chapters from Harold D. Lasswell’s 1935 Politics: Who Gets What, When, How?. There are a few more readings and then a rest for an hour while you take in a video lecture. Finish off with two lengthy entries from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and it's time to complete the first assessment. Official 'Time Advisory', 11.5 hours. It took me over twice that although I did get tempted off into some interesting sidetracks.
Assessment activities within a course are generally self-assessed against supplied rubrics or have an answer sheet supplied. There's nobody looking over your shoulder so you can cheat if you like - but it is only yourself you are cheating so why bother. If you can't get to grips with self-assessment or just want some feedback you can try posting on the course forum. I should warn you that these are very quiet at the moment but are seeing more activity as students start to find Saylor. There are auto-graded activities on some courses. It depends what others have prepared and made available.
The Final Exam is the only assessment which counts for the overall grade. This is a two hour machine-graded multiple choice quiz and, despite all my doubts, they are tough exams which dig into every corner of the courses. Exams are 'open book' but as the questions often require the student to apply the learning rather than just recall answers, this isn't always helpful. The pass mark is 70%.
Again, to give an example, despite being an experienced teacher, examiner, a normally rapid examinee and despite having been coached by my wife, a doctor, psychology graduate and soon to be Master, I took nearly the whole two hours to get through the PSYCH101 paper and was happy to pass with 78%. That's nearly two and a half minutes per question. I'd normally expect to crash through multiple choice papers at a rate two to four times as rapid.
So what are the courses really like? They are true representations of the academic standards of mainstream universities - so expect to be challenged. You can also expect to spend quite some time on the courses. I've found the time estimates to be pretty good (even if I've taken longer where interests lead me astray) so one hundred hours plus for most courses. As in real life you must get through extensive readings alongside video lectures and other materials. There is a decent amount of variety within courses and they are well put together.
What do I like? I like the challenging standards, the readings (because this is how I learn best) and the fact that the courses are part of an overall structure. I quite like the self-paced nature of the courses although this also leads to temptation... One of the major assets is the staff, both administrative and academic. Queries are usually answered quickly and Professors are prowling the boards on a daily basis.
What don't I like? The place is far too quiet - too many course forums have no postings at all! As you might guess from this blog, I like to talk! The nature of the site means that some resources disappear from time to time (these are highlighted as red text). I've not come across any in my own studies... yet! There are a few rough edges on the system software, such as the sporadic requests to sign in as you move between courses, ePortfolio and forums but nothing too drastic.
What would I like even more? More courses (how about a Physics or Electrical Engineering major and what about the French, Spanish and Russian language courses that have been 'due shortly' for the last year), more students and more attractive certificates (I know, it's trivial and below me but even so, they look like they were designed in Microsoft Publisher over a coffee break - and they misspell 'verification').
Conclusion. To go back to my comment in the last posting, the courses are great. If you want real learning in a fairly traditional style then get down to Saylor.org and take a look at what they have to offer. Whether you want to sign up for a full four year 'degree' or just pop in to use part of one course then you are free to do so. The academic style may not suit everybody (but that is true of all university study) and the self-paced nature does mean you need more self-discipline but it really is well worth it.
Next time, a quick Five Step Guide to getting started on Saylor. After that I'll move on to some hints and tips for more effective studying whichever platform you choose.
Tuesday 4 June 2013
Saylor.org - The Gem Hidden in Plain Sight
My topic for the next couple of postings is Saylor.org. A site that offers nearly 300 undergraduate courses and the unique opportunity to build a programme of study that emulates a full US-style four year degree - and all for free! The question that you should be asking (because it's the question I have asked) is why, if it is so great, has nobody heard of it?
The Saylor Foundation (more about this later) has been involved in free education for some years but only set out on its current mission about eighteen months ago. Their goal is to provide free, quality education to anyone with internet access. Saylor has taken a quite different approach to this task than the better known platforms such as Coursera or edX. Rather than offering a haphazard assortment of courses supplied by existing universities, Saylor has recruited it's own academic staff (on a consulting basis) to construct a coherent set of courses based primarily on existing freely available online resources.
The initial, and ambitious, target was to cover the most popular subject areas in US colleges. Rather than starting with a handful of courses and gradually growing, Saylor opened on day one with over two hundred courses (although, in fairness, not all were complete). There are now courses offered providing the opportunity to 'major' in fourteen different subjects from Computer Science to Art History and Mechanical Engineering to Psychology. There are also a range of Electives which basically cover odds and ends that don't fit into existing specialisations (Astronomy, for example) and General Education which provides for the requirement to study outside your own specialist area (this is a standard part of the US four year degree although unknown here in the UK).
So what is it like? Firstly, I should say that it is quite unlike the more 'flashy' MOOC platforms. It is rather conservative in appearance and has an beautifully uniform design across every course. Everything you see says that this is a serious academic venture and, as we shall see, that is borne out by the courses themselves. Clicking on any of the Areas of Study (as the specialist subjects are known) will take you to a page detailing the courses necessary to build a degree majoring in that subject - these include mandatory core courses as well as electives which can take the degree down different specialist tracks. As I mentioned, to complete the full programme you will also need to undertake the Gen Ed element.
Saylor is totally open-source; materials can be used as the students wish (subject to whatever limitations the original suppliers had although most are issued under Creative Commons licences). Students need not even register to access the courses although you will have to do so if you want to take the exams and collect your certificates. Registering will also give you access the discussion forums and to an ePortfolio where you can manage your courses, showcase your work and form study groups.
So what about the courses? Well, I'll go into more detail about the courses in tomorrow's posting but for today I'll start with the conclusion - they're great! The courses are very much at the level I would expect for undergraduate study, unlike some other MOOC offerings which are rather watered down. They are heavyweight and satisfying with plenty meat to them (apologies to my vegetarian friends for the metaphor). Unlike virtually any other courses I've seen online there are substantial required readings as well as the usual video lectures. There are no concessions and no kid gloves - this is the real thing.
If you are serious about learning then you won't find much better than Saylor. Go and take a look then come back tomorrow for my next instalment where I'll look at some of the courses and report on my experiences as a student there.
Sunday 2 June 2013
Who's Who in the World of MOOCs
Now we have the general idea of what these MOOC things are, let's take a quick look at some of the main players.
Coursera is probably the biggest of the MOOC providers with close to four hundred courses on offer and millions of registered students. Courses are all free and share a common user interface. The content is supplied by a wide range of universities, mainly US-based but increasingly worldwide. Subscribing institutions include the University of Pennsylvania, John Hopkins University, Georgia Institute of Technology, University of London and Princeton University among many others.
Courses are based around weekly video lectures and typically include both machine-graded and peer-evaluated assessment elements. Most courses issue 'statements of accomplishment' to those who meet the requirements and a few go further to mark the highest achievers 'with Distinction'. A small minority of course providers do not permit such certificates to be issued, most notably including Princeton and Yale.
edX is non-profit set up by MIT and Harvard to compete head on with the likes of Coursera and Udacity (both for-profit spin-offs from Stanford). It currently has around 60 courses running or upcoming. It is expected to have many more coming up soon as some 29 universities from around the world have joined. Among those joining the founding institutions are Berkeley, Rice, University of Toronto, Cornell and Kyoto University.
Courses follow a similar pattern being based around weekly lectures and assignments. Peer assessment seems much less common on edX than is the case with Coursera. Certificates of Achievement are issued by all courses and marked with both the names of both edX and the sponsoring university. Courses typically run from 5 to 12 weeks in length and require 5-15 hours study time although this obviously depends on the individual.
Udacity is the third of the big high profile providers and arose from the same pilot-work at Stanford that spawned Coursera. Like Coursera, it is a for-profit business although they have not yet settled on a monetisation plan. Most of Udacity's courses were produced internally but they have recently partnered with San Jose State University to offer a small number of courses with the option of earning college credit, to which we will return in a moment.
Courses are generally self-paced,that is,the student can proceed as fast or as slow as suits their needs and abilities. The exceptions to this are the San Jose 'for credit' option courses where students must work to the schedule for lectures and assessments. Udacity courses are notable for having extremely short lectures slices, typically one or two minutes, interspersed with single question quizzes. How you get on with this presentation style will depend on the individual. Certificates of Achievement are provided for all courses. Courses are free to students but the SJSU college credit option cost $150 for administration costs etc.
Other options exist, there are new providers such as Open2Study in Australia and an offering sponsored by the Open University in Britain, Futurelearn, which is due to launch later this year. I'll return to these in later posts.
Saylor.org is the last provider that I want to mention today and it is last because it is rather different. Saylor.org is a charitable trust sponsored by Michael J. Saylor with the aim of providing free educational access for all. Operating from 2008 in the Open Education Resources field it has latterly moved into online education and now has an unusual and impressive offering. Two things make Saylor different, the use of existing open access material and the attempt to emulate a full US-style four year degree programme.
Saylor's aim is to offer, free of charge, programmes that match the most popular US college courses and majors. They currently offer just under three hundred courses, the vast majority at undergraduate level. Students may enroll in an 'Area of Study ' and be guided through a full programme including major core and electives courses and a General Education requirement.
I'm a big fan of Saylor and will be returning to talk more about them next time.
Coursera is probably the biggest of the MOOC providers with close to four hundred courses on offer and millions of registered students. Courses are all free and share a common user interface. The content is supplied by a wide range of universities, mainly US-based but increasingly worldwide. Subscribing institutions include the University of Pennsylvania, John Hopkins University, Georgia Institute of Technology, University of London and Princeton University among many others.
Courses are based around weekly video lectures and typically include both machine-graded and peer-evaluated assessment elements. Most courses issue 'statements of accomplishment' to those who meet the requirements and a few go further to mark the highest achievers 'with Distinction'. A small minority of course providers do not permit such certificates to be issued, most notably including Princeton and Yale.
edX is non-profit set up by MIT and Harvard to compete head on with the likes of Coursera and Udacity (both for-profit spin-offs from Stanford). It currently has around 60 courses running or upcoming. It is expected to have many more coming up soon as some 29 universities from around the world have joined. Among those joining the founding institutions are Berkeley, Rice, University of Toronto, Cornell and Kyoto University.
Courses follow a similar pattern being based around weekly lectures and assignments. Peer assessment seems much less common on edX than is the case with Coursera. Certificates of Achievement are issued by all courses and marked with both the names of both edX and the sponsoring university. Courses typically run from 5 to 12 weeks in length and require 5-15 hours study time although this obviously depends on the individual.
Udacity is the third of the big high profile providers and arose from the same pilot-work at Stanford that spawned Coursera. Like Coursera, it is a for-profit business although they have not yet settled on a monetisation plan. Most of Udacity's courses were produced internally but they have recently partnered with San Jose State University to offer a small number of courses with the option of earning college credit, to which we will return in a moment.
Courses are generally self-paced,that is,the student can proceed as fast or as slow as suits their needs and abilities. The exceptions to this are the San Jose 'for credit' option courses where students must work to the schedule for lectures and assessments. Udacity courses are notable for having extremely short lectures slices, typically one or two minutes, interspersed with single question quizzes. How you get on with this presentation style will depend on the individual. Certificates of Achievement are provided for all courses. Courses are free to students but the SJSU college credit option cost $150 for administration costs etc.
Other options exist, there are new providers such as Open2Study in Australia and an offering sponsored by the Open University in Britain, Futurelearn, which is due to launch later this year. I'll return to these in later posts.
Saylor.org is the last provider that I want to mention today and it is last because it is rather different. Saylor.org is a charitable trust sponsored by Michael J. Saylor with the aim of providing free educational access for all. Operating from 2008 in the Open Education Resources field it has latterly moved into online education and now has an unusual and impressive offering. Two things make Saylor different, the use of existing open access material and the attempt to emulate a full US-style four year degree programme.
Saylor's aim is to offer, free of charge, programmes that match the most popular US college courses and majors. They currently offer just under three hundred courses, the vast majority at undergraduate level. Students may enroll in an 'Area of Study ' and be guided through a full programme including major core and electives courses and a General Education requirement.
I'm a big fan of Saylor and will be returning to talk more about them next time.
Saturday 1 June 2013
MOOCs... What?
For the first entry in what will, hopefully, be an ongoing review of the world of online learning, it makes sense to begin from basics.
MOOCs (Massive Open Online courses) are open access educational courses offered through the medium of the internet. 'Open access' means that they have no mandatory prerequisites, no admissions process and, generally, no cost. Most of these courses are offered at undergraduate or US 'College' level although there are some courses at foundational (ie pre-college) levels.
Although MOOCs are presented as 'free', there are, of course some costs both direct and indirect. The student will, fairly obviously, need internet access and, ideally, good broadband access. The core of most courses are video lectures and these do not come cheap in terms of download size. A week's lectures will typically come in at 100-200MB. Now that may not sound too bad for those on uncapped broadband access but for those using mobile broadband (and paying by the byte) or using dialup networking in isolated or less developed areas it can be a major issue.
Another potential cost is the purchase of textbooks. Most courses are self-contained supplying all the material needed but some, either through the choice of the course designer or because it is unavoidable, require the student to purchase books either in physical or electronic form. Where this is the case, I'll always try to highlight it. Students may also feel the need to buy a textbook to support their further learning after the end of the course especially as online materials will tend to become unavailable once the course finishes.
I came across MOOCs around Christmas 2012. I had been looking to update my programming skills and in the search for online courses stumbled on edX (about whom much more in future posts). From there I quickly became obsessed and found myself scouring the internet for more opportunities to learn. What I quickly found was that, while there are many courses and many providers, there is relatively little considered opinion published. Much of what exists is often based on the experiences, positive or negative, of a single course and virtually all of it comes solely from a student's point of view.
My aim is to bring together my experiences as a lifelong learner, a commercial trainer and a qualified teacher to bear on the growing area of online education. I will try to offer some comments on the providers and their platforms as well as looking in detail at courses. But, in the spirit of my commitment to lifelong learning, I'll only be reviewing courses which I have personally studied - it would be too easy just to skim through the course catalogues and pontificate based on descriptions.
So what is a 'MOOC'?
MOOCs (Massive Open Online courses) are open access educational courses offered through the medium of the internet. 'Open access' means that they have no mandatory prerequisites, no admissions process and, generally, no cost. Most of these courses are offered at undergraduate or US 'College' level although there are some courses at foundational (ie pre-college) levels.
Is it really free?
Another potential cost is the purchase of textbooks. Most courses are self-contained supplying all the material needed but some, either through the choice of the course designer or because it is unavoidable, require the student to purchase books either in physical or electronic form. Where this is the case, I'll always try to highlight it. Students may also feel the need to buy a textbook to support their further learning after the end of the course especially as online materials will tend to become unavailable once the course finishes.
So what is this blog about?
I came across MOOCs around Christmas 2012. I had been looking to update my programming skills and in the search for online courses stumbled on edX (about whom much more in future posts). From there I quickly became obsessed and found myself scouring the internet for more opportunities to learn. What I quickly found was that, while there are many courses and many providers, there is relatively little considered opinion published. Much of what exists is often based on the experiences, positive or negative, of a single course and virtually all of it comes solely from a student's point of view.
My aim is to bring together my experiences as a lifelong learner, a commercial trainer and a qualified teacher to bear on the growing area of online education. I will try to offer some comments on the providers and their platforms as well as looking in detail at courses. But, in the spirit of my commitment to lifelong learning, I'll only be reviewing courses which I have personally studied - it would be too easy just to skim through the course catalogues and pontificate based on descriptions.
Who am I?
My professional background is as a radio engineer. I have also been a professional trainer, a producer of interactive training materials and am a qualified High School teacher. I also have professional qualifications in Aerospace Studies (Avionics) and Finance. By choice and necessity I have worked in many different fields and in a number of countries. For the last twenty five years I have been continuously enrolled in some kind of learning and that has only accelerated lately.
Fortunately, I have a tolerant and supportive wife who, although not quite matching my obsessions, has managed to accumulate a doctorate in Medicine and both Bachelors and Masters degrees in Psychology along with a number of more minor specialist awards. I also have a three year old son who reminds me every day of the wonder of learning.
Next time: A quick overview of the major providers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)