An interesting side-note

[Delibrarian]

I just completed a MOOC on equine nutrition, offered via Coursera by the University of Edinburgh. Responding to requests in the discussion forums, the staff created an online donation form in support of some of the outreach and animal welfare efforts of the veterinary school, and participants in the MOOC donated almost $2,000 as a result of their engagement with this program.

[Rita Vine]

That is so interesting.  One of the most important things I learned from listening to instructors at the OCLC MOOC conference last week was that the MOOC environment is merely a platform, and that "students" (I prefer to call them "participants") who take all or bits of a course may do so for reasons which may have little in common with the typical degree-level objectives that educators generally associate with a "course".   And, from your point below, this is a great example of transformational, unexpected social learning that comes from large numbers of committed participants engaged in a common experience that just happens to be online.

[Beth Filar Williams]

Good points!  especailly like calling them participants as well. Made me want to share this article on "72% Of Professors Who Teach Online Courses (MOOCs) Don’t Think Their Students Deserve Credit" http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/22/72-of-professors-who-teach-online-courses-dont-think-their-students-deserve-credit/ 
but read the comments, that's a good part of the conservation, from the article.

beth

[Tasha Bergson-Michelson]

Beth, I noted that statistic in the article Rita posted, as well.

I think that is not a clear statistic, in that so many different factors go into whether the course is worth credit.

As people noted in the comments, there is the possibility for cheating or plagiarism--which we have seen blow up in MOOCs already, plus the related fact that we don't yet have identity verification. In peer review circumstances, some sincere students may be at the mercy of less engaged classmates. And rubrics may still be in the process of developing appropriately for certain topics, so that instructors have seen that people legitimately scored a passing grade on an assessment, but the work was still not up to the quality they would expect in their classes.

Also, with the range of motives students have--as Delibrarian noted--it becomes more difficult to judge. I've had loads of students who have communicated clearly to me that they went through the assessments because it would be "fun" to have a certificate, but their real learning revolved around the coursework itself, and that is where they spent their time. Add to that students taking your course though some online translation tool or who are struggling with the language of interaction. They may not have passed by a rubric rigorous enough to support an argument for credit, but they worked darned hard and clearly learned a great deal, and felt a great sense of accomplishment.

Having built and run three of these, I have to say that I would fall under the category of "I would not give credit." Mine were not through an academic institution, but the line is still clear. At this time, I would say that the learning and engagement that I saw in our hundreds of thousands of participants was totally worth it, anyway.

Tasha

[Ilene Frank]

I think Tasha's on to it: Getting college credit is not the goal of all MOOC participants. But if that's your goal and you want to prove that you are you...  did you all see that Coursera has started offering something called Signature Track?  It links up your identity with your typing pattern. You need a verified photo ID and  a webcam - and some money. They charge for use of Signature Track.  https://www.coursera.org/signature/guidebook  

Tasha

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MOOCs and Librarianship" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to moocs-and-librari...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to moocs-and-l...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--

Ilene Frank, ilene...@gmail.com
Dir. of Library Services Ilene...@uopeople.org
Adjunct librarian, HCC-Dale Mabry campus ifr...@hccfl.edu
Adjunct Assoc. Prof. UMUC Ilene...@faculty.umuc.edu
Tampa Library, Univ. of South Florida, Professor Emerita ifr...@usf.edu

Librarian staff member http://writingcommons.org  il...@writingcommons.org

Ilene Pratt on Second Life 
http://sites.google.com/site/ilenefrank
Ask me about University of the People

[phb256]

Cheating, plagiarism and identity verification should be non-issues in MOOCs. People cheat because they're more interested in the grade than the learning. If a course is truly open, it is open to participants from all levels, who may all have objectives. This entails open outcomes, in which case traditional assessments and grades make little sense. It is up to the participants to decide what they want out of a MOOC, so it should be up to them to determine how successful they've been.

 

As for the issue of credit, that should come from the student's institution, not the course. A MOOC could function as part of an independent study, and the credit would have to be negotiated between the student, the institution, and the faculty supervisor. 

My two cents anyway,

Paul Bond

[Beth Filar Williams]

I love this conversation - Learning from all of your thoughts and comments!    I didn't quite get MOOCs before now  but after watching that OCLC online conference in March on MOOCs and Libraries I really heard first hand on how it working and HOW LIBRARIANS can and should get involved (resources, licensing, creative commons, copyright, tech tools, information literacy, preservation/archival, creating materials....)  We are just starting discussion here on campus w/ edX so I asked and was put on the MOOC campus planning team... so I'll dive in and learn as we go forth.

On Monday, March 25, 2013 7:39:26 AM UTC-4, Delibrarian wrote:

[Tasha Bergson-Michelson]

Cool, Beth, can't wait for you to keep us in the loop! And Paul, I could not agree more. Learning through MOOCs is ideally for its own sake and each participant's own goals is so very powerful.

I want to stop there, but I have to add that there appeared to be several distinct (and less distinct) objectives "tracks" for participants in our MOOCs. There were a whole variety of reasons people showed up around wanting to learn to search better, wanting to see what an individual had been missing in search, etc. Then there were a great number of people who were serial MOOC participants--folks doing 2, 3, 4+ MOOCs at the same time. I think their objectives were all over the place, as well, but I think a bunch were educators. (In our case, I think a bunch were educators who wanted to teach search, and a bunch were educators who are just taking lots of MOOCs to get a bead on what education looks like in MOOCs.)

Then, there were people looking for some competitive edge to distinguish themselves. These folks came from the US and abroad. From big countries and small countries, rich and poor countries. In the end, they were looking for a certificate (and possibly one specifically from my institution) that would differentiate them in the workforce, or possibly fill in for the fact that their own educational system did not have room for them to earn a degree the traditional way. To them, the certificate matters. They want it with a barcode or serial number that maps back to a database held by the institution that offered the class--as proof that they earned it. And let me be clear this was *not* a trivial number of participants, but a very significant one.

So, I love learning, and love curiosity, and love that open education offers opportunities for us to share and expand our passions. I want to see that MOOCs are about engaging in a way that is meaningful to me, and knowing that at the end of the day I have to look in the mirror and ask what I got out of my investment of time and effort. But I am torn because I know this is not the whole story, and the other half is really important. It is almost palpable, the impact this trend is having (or getting ready to have) in countries where smart people are born in situations that mean they will not have access to a college--or perhaps a high school.

I am not sure what this means, for people building MOOCs, how we serve this many-headed beast, or how we prove the value of our projects. But I do know that there is a delicate balance we need to strike, or some hard decisions about who we intend to serve.

</rant>

Tasha

[dana.ro...@rutgers.edu]

I started the Coursera gamification MOOC yesterday (is anybody else enrolled in this?), both because I think the topic has applications for libraries, and to have experience with a MOOC. I did see the Signature Track option, and I have about two weeks to decide if I want to opt in. I was actually wondering about possible privacy issues with this, since you are creating some kind of biometric profile. Any thoughts?

On Saturday, March 30, 2013 12:34:21 PM UTC-4, ilene.frank wrote:

I think Tasha's on to it: Getting college credit is not the goal of all MOOC participants. But if that's your goal and you want to prove that you are you...  did you all see that Coursera has started offering something called Signature Track?  It links up your identity with your typing pattern. You need a verified photo ID and  a webcam - and some money. They charge for use of Signature Track.  https://www.coursera.org/signature/guidebook  

On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Tasha Bergson-Michelson <tothepoin...@gmail.com> wrote:

Beth, I noted that statistic in the article Rita posted, as well.

I think that is not a clear statistic, in that so many different factors go into whether the course is worth credit.

As people noted in the comments, there is the possibility for cheating or plagiarism--which we have seen blow up in MOOCs already, plus the related fact that we don't yet have identity verification. In peer review circumstances, some sincere students may be at the mercy of less engaged classmates. And rubrics may still be in the process of developing appropriately for certain topics, so that instructors have seen that people legitimately scored a passing grade on an assessment, but the work was still not up to the quality they would expect in their classes.

Also, with the range of motives students have--as Delibrarian noted--it becomes more difficult to judge. I've had loads of students who have communicated clearly to me that they went through the assessments because it would be "fun" to have a certificate, but their real learning revolved around the coursework itself, and that is where they spent their time. Add to that students taking your course though some online translation tool or who are struggling with the language of interaction. They may not have passed by a rubric rigorous enough to support an argument for credit, but they worked darned hard and clearly learned a great deal, and felt a great sense of accomplishment.

Having built and run three of these, I have to say that I would fall under the category of "I would not give credit." Mine were not through an academic institution, but the line is still clear. At this time, I would say that the learning and engagement that I saw in our hundreds of thousands of participants was totally worth it, anyway.

Tasha

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MOOCs and Librarianship" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to moocs-and-librarianship+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to moocs-and-l...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[paul bond]

Dana,

Personally, I wouldn't bother with the Signature Track. I don't know what the cost is, but I don't see any value in it regardless of price. If you take what you learn on gamification and apply it to a real-world situation in your library, that example will be worth more than any certification from Coursera.

Paul

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to moocs-and-librari...@googlegroups.com.

[Proffitt,Merrilee]

Colleagues,

 

I wanted to alert you that the outputs from our meeting last month are now available. I also have started summarizing the meeting in a series of postings on the OCLC Research blog, HangingTogther. The first one is here: http://hangingtogether.org/?p=2666

 

 

Taken from the announcement page:

 

http://oc.lc/WPXJwP

 

The "MOOCs and Libraries: Massive Opportunity or Overwhelming Challenge?" event took place 18-19 March at the University of Pennsylvania and was broadcast live online. Hosted by OCLC Research and University of Pennsylvania Libraries, the event featured thoughtful and provocative presentations about how libraries are already getting involved with MOOCs, and engaged attendees in discussions about strategic opportunities and challenges going forward. More than 500 people participated in this event: 125 attended in person and more than 400 attended remotely online.

Links to the 11 individual videos and a MOOCs and Libraries video playlist that comprises all of these videos are available at the links below, on the MOOCs and Libraries event page, and on the OCLC Research YouTube Channel. Links to the presenters' slides, thenext steps document (.pdf: 124K/1 pp.) and the #mooclib archived tweets (pdf: 639K/32 pp.) from this event are available on theMOOCs and Libraries event page. Look to the OCLC Research blog, HangingTogether, for a short series of postings that recap presentation highlights and summarize outcomes from this event.

MOOCs and Libraries Video Playlist

Monday, 18 March

Welcome from the University of Pennsylvania Libraries (8:12)

·         Carton Rogers, University of Pennsylvania

Why MOOCs, Why Penn, Why Now? (23:01)

·         Ed Rock, University of Pennsylvania

MOOCs and Libraries, An Overview of the Landscape (14:46)

·         Jim Michalko, Vice President, OCLC Research Library Partnership

MOOCs and Libraries, An Overview of the (Current) Landscape (14:09)

·         Merrilee Proffitt, Senior Program Officer, OCLC Research

Copyright, Licensing, Open Access (59:39)

·         Brandon Butler, Director of Public Policy Initiatives, Association of Research Libraries, moderator

·         Kevin Smith, Scholarly Communications Officer, Duke University

·         Kenny Crews, Director, Copyright Advisory Office, Columbia University

·         Kyle K. Courtney, Manager of Faculty Research and Scholarship, Harvard Law School

Production & Pedagogy (1:16:11)

·         Bruce Lenthall, Director of Center for Teaching and Learning, University of Pennsylvania, moderator

·         Christian Terwiesch, Wharton School Faculty, University of Pennsylvania

·         Jackie Candido, Online Learning & Digital Engagement, School of Arts and Sciences, University of Pennsylvania

·         Amy Bennett, Penn Open Learning, University of Pennsylvania

·         Anna Delaney, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania

Tuesday, 19 March

New Opportunities for Librarians: What Happens When You Go Behind the Lines in a MOOC? (1:04:11)

·         Marjorie Hassen, Director of Teaching, Research, and Learning Services, University of Pennsylvania Libraries, moderator

·         Sarah Bordac, Head, Instructional Design, Brown University

·         Jennifer Dorner, Head, Instruction and User Services, University of California Berkeley

·         Lynne O'Brien, Director of Academic Technology and Instructional Services, Duke University

Who Are the Masses? A View of the Audience (19:04)

·         Howard Lurie, Vice President, Content Development, edX

Who Are the Masses? A View of the Audience (16:24)

·         Deirdre Woods, Interim Executive Director, Open Learning Initiative, University of Pennsylvania

Who Are the Masses? A View of the Audience (23:02)

·         Margaret Donnellan Todd, County Librarian, County of Los Angeles Public Library

Summary, Next Steps and Group Discussion (18:32)

·         Merrilee Proffitt, Senior Program Officer, OCLC Research

·         Chrystie Hill, Director, Community Relations, OCLC