EDEN template - DSpace Open Universiteit

EDEN 2016 ANNUAL Conference

Re-Imagining Learning Scenarios

EDEN 2016 Annual Conference Budapest, Hungary

14-17 June 2016

CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

Edited by António Moreira Teixeira, András Szűcs and Ildikó Mázár on behalf of the European Distance and E-Learning Network European Distance and E-Learning Network, 2016

EDEN 2016 Annual Conference Budapest, Hungary Published by the European Distance and E-Learning Network Editors: António Moreira Teixeira András Szűcs lldikó Mázár Editorial co-ordination: Anna Wagner EDEN Secretariat, c/o Budapest University of Technology and Economics H-1111 Budapest, Egry J. u. 1, Hungary Tel: (36) 1 463 1628, 463 2537 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.eden-online.org

Supported by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union The publication reflects the authors’ view, the EACEA and the European Commission are not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Copyright Notice 2016 European Distance and E-Learning Network and the Authors This publication contributes to the Open Access movement by offering free access to its articles and permitting any users to read, download, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software. The copyright is shared by authors and EDEN to control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ISBN 978-615-5511-10-3

Introduction Our current times have been framed by the concept of the information age, sometimes also known as the computer age. In a networked society as ours, digital technology has touched and changed many aspects of day-to-day life. Several long-standing societal, business and institutional systems have either lost their relevance or have transformed beyond recognition, the music, banking and travel industries being excellent examples. Education does not stand untouched and we observe emerging and declining paradigms, changing expectations from society, our students now framed as consumers, with new and emerging types of informal learning experiences (take MOOCs for example) and all too frequently operating in unstable economic and policy environments. The powerful combination of the information age and the consequent disruption caused by these unstable environments provides the impetus to look afresh and identify new models and approaches for education (e.g. OERs, MOOCs, PLEs, Learning Analytics etc.). For learners this has taken a fantastic leap into aggregating, curating and co-curating and co-producing outside the boundaries of formal learning environments – the networked learner is sharing voluntarily and for free, spontaneously with billions of people. How do we as a community of educators respond to these directions? What could it mean for learning and the changing socio-economic demands of society? We are set a challenge to really understand our learning environments. To create and invent responses that are possibly not even thought of yet. Perhaps there are new business models, new policies, different ways to understand technological influences, new ways to interpret the collaborative and social-networked society that we live in: the learning environment, in its widest sense. Following up on the results of the EDEN Research Workshop (RW8) in Oxford in 2014 and the Barcelona 2015 Annual Conference, a clear focus has been awarded to the expansion of emerging learning scenarios, identifying an ongoing shift towards greater attention to the importance of context in the learning process. The EDENRW8 report from Tony Bates highlighted that openness needs to go beyond the content-centred focus. What is driving the need for new approaches is the massification of higher education and the need to find new ways to create openness, which requires a greater focus on the contexts of learning. This implies an integrated approach to online education and the various ways of openness in education which are now developing. More present core questions include the tension between human and machine approaches to learning – raising the important question of what in education is best done by humans and what by machines? New knowledge is also needed regarding how to combine scalability with personalisation, as well as about learning context and contextualisation.

iii

The social and socio-economic context is more important than ever. Society itself can be understood as a learning environment, with questions of learners’ connection with the community and the empowerment of the practitioners. In the new learning environments, the core players and stakeholders – learners, educators, government bodies, educational and learning institutions – increasingly acknowledge the chance for constructive and positive changes. How do we as a community of educators respond to these directions? What could it mean for learning and the changing socio-economic demands of society? What can we, the community of experienced educators, say about this? The EDEN 25th Anniversary Conference in 2016 in Budapest aims to evaluate and invent better responses regarding these changing socio-economic demands, the functioning of institutions, the new tools and their usability, the collaborative learning cultures, digital pedagogy – in other words the learning environment in its widest sense.

András Szűcs Secretary General

António Moreira Teixeira EDEN President

iv

Acknowledgement and thanks are given to the Programme and Evaluation Committee António Moreira Teixeira, EDEN President, Open University, Lisbon, Portugal Andras Benedek, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary Alan Tait, Chair of the 25th Anniversary Celebrations Committee, The Open University, United Kingdom Diana Andone, Politehnica University of Timisoara, Romania Deborah Arnold, University of Burgundy, France Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd., United Kingdom Ulrich Bernath, Ulrich Bernath Foundation for Research in ODL, Germany Lisa Marie Blaschke, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Germany Mark Brown, National Institute for Digital Learning, Dublin City University, Ireland Alan Bruce, Universal Learning Systems, Ireland Helga Dorner, Central European University, Hungary Maxim Jean-Louis, Contact North, Canada Andrea Karpati, Eotvos Lorand University – ELTE, Hungary Elsebeth Korsgaard Sorensen, Aalborg University, Denmark Sandra Kucina Softic, University of Zagreb, Croatia Gila Kurtz, The Center for Academic Studies Or Yehuda, Israel Ildiko Mazar, EDEN, United Kingdom Gyorgy Molnar, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary Fabio Nascimbeni, MENON Network, Belgium Don Olcott Jr., Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Germany Ebba Ossiannilsson, Lund University, Sweden Antonella Poce, University Roma III, Italy Marci Powell, Past President, USDLA, Marci Powell and Associates, United States of America Christian-Andreas Schumann, University of Applied Sciences Zwickau, Germany Sofoklis Sotiriou, Ellinogermaniki Agogi, Greece Andras Szucs, Secretary General, EDEN, UK Ildiko Takacs, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary Costas Tsolakidis, University of the Aegean, Greece Belinda Tynan, The Open University, UK Wim Van Petegem, K.U. Leuven, Belgium Airina Volungeviciene, Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania Steve Wheeler, Chair of EDEN NAP Steering Committee, University of Plymouth, United Kingdom Stavros Panagiotis Xanthopoylos, Brazilian Association for Distance Education – ABED, Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV-EAESP), Brazil Denes Zarka, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary Olaf Zawacki-Richter, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Germany

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS THEORY, CONCEPT AND PRACTICE IN ICT ENHANCED LEARNING An Invitation to Look at Enhancement in Technology-Enhanced Learning ............................................................ 1 Stéphanie Gauttier, Inmaculada Arnedillo-Sanchez, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland Validation of Non-Formal Learning: Opportunities for Distance Education ............................................................ 9 Judy Harris, Christine Wihak, Thompson Rivers University, Canada Academics’ Use of Academic Social Networking Sites: The Case of ResearchGate and Academia.edu ..... 18 Hagit Meishar-Tal, Holon Institute of Technology, Learning Technologies, Efrat Pieterse, West Galilee College, Israel New Methods in the Digital Learning Environment: Micro Contents and Visual Case Studies ..................... 27 András Benedek, János Horváth Cz., Department of Technical Education, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary Adapted Learning Environment in Future Education ................................................................................................... 35 Shimon Amar, Ohalo College of Education, Israel, Frederic Roblin, Steelcase Education, France Top-Down or Bottom Up: A comparative Study on Assessment Strategies in the STUDIO Adaptive Learning Environment .............................................................................................................................................................. 41 Christian Weber, Corvinno Technology Transfer Center, Réka Vas, Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary If Learning to Code is not about Coding, then what it is about? .............................................................................. 50 Koen DePryck, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Jens Vermeersch, Annemie Tytgat, GO! Onderwijs van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap, Belgium Gamification for Online Courses to Improve Inquiry Methodology ........................................................................ 53 Paula Carolei, Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo – UNIFESP, Eliane Schlemmer, Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos – UNISINOS, Brazil

POLICY DIMENSIONS OF ICTS AND LEARNING DEVELOPMENT Development of a New Activity-Based Instructional Design Model........................................................................ 63 János Ollé, László Hülber, Eszterházy Károly University of Applied Sciences, Knowledge Center for Education Theory, Instructional Design, and Methodology, Henrik Sablik, Ágnes Kocsis, Nexius Learning – ELMS Zrt., Hungary E-Learning Decision Making: Methods and Methodologies ....................................................................................... 70 Nikola Kadoić, Nina Begičević Ređep, Blaženka Divjak, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Organization and Informatics, Croatia Sustainability for Whom? Planning for Student Success in Open Education and Distance Learning......... 80 Alan Tait, The Open University, United Kingdom Mobilising Leadership for Innovative Open and Distance Education in the 21st Century ............................... 88 Don Olcott, Jr., Charles Sturt University, Australia and Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Germany, Lisa Marie Blaschke, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Germany

vi

OPEN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES Opening Studies Through Virtual Exchange – Case Description .............................................................................. 96 Airina Volungevičienė, Estela Daukšienė, Margarita Teresevičienė, Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania Advantages and Disadvantages of SPOCs (Small Private Online Courses): Experiences with Online Learning ........................................................................................................................................................................................105 Gerard Gielen, UC Leuven Limburg, Belgium Educational System Interoperability – Challenges for Open Learning and Training Programs .................. 112 Christian-Andreas Schumann, Eric Forkel, Helge Gerischer, Janek Goetze, Thomas Klein, Claudia Tittmann, West Saxon University of Zwickau, Jana Weber, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany, Feng Xiao, Tongji University, China, Jorge Alejandro Manríquez Frayre, Tec de Monterrey, Mexico Open Education as Disruption: Lessons for Open and Distance Learning from Open Educational Practice120 Ronald Macintyre, The Open University in Scotland, Scotland Dear Educator, How Open Are You? .................................................................................................................................. 128 Fabio Nascimbeni, Universidad Internacional de La Rioja (UNIR), Spain Researching Laureate’s European Hybridity Initiative ................................................................................................ 138 Alain Noghiu, Laureate Network Office, The Netherlands, Pedro J. Lara Bercial, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Spain, Michael Vogelsang, BiTS, Germany, Marios Vryonides, European University Cyprus, Cyprus

MOOCS ISSUES – EXPERIENCE, UNDERSTANDING, ATTITUDES, HOPES The ECO Project for E-Teaching: Social MOOCs at the Crossroads of Actors’ Cognitive Logics and Strategies .....................................................................................................................................................................................145 Divina Frau-Meigs, Sorbonne Nouvelle University, Adeline Bossu, Bordeaux 3 University, France MOOCs for Motivation: Promoting Student Engagement in Higher Education Studies ............................... 157 Steven Warburton, Maria Fragkaki, Sophia Vahora, University of Surrey, United Kingdom MOOCs and Change Dynamics in Higher Education ................................................................................................... 168 Cathrine Tømte, Siri Aanstad, Jørgen Sjaastad, Sabine Wollscheid, The Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education NIFU, Norway Do Our MOOC’s Work? Creative Ways to Assess Innovative E-Learning Programs ......................................... 174 Michal Elran, Carmel Bar, Naama Bar-On, Yossi Elran , Davidson Institute of Science Education, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel Exemplars of Collaborative Learning Design in Online Courses ............................................................................. 181 Afsaneh Sharif, Manuel Dias, University of British Columbia, Canada A Benchmarking Study of K-Means and SOM Approaches Applied to A Set of Features of MOOC Participants ..................................................................................................................................................................................188 Rosa Cabedo Gallén, Edmundo Tovar Caro, Technical University of Madrid, Spain An Experiment of Social-Gamification in Massive Open Online Courses: The ECO iMOOC .......................... 199 Eva Garcia-Lopez, Antonio Garcia-Cabot, Luis de-Marcos, University of Alcala, Spain, António Moreira Teixeira, Universidade Aberta and University of Lisbon, Maria do Carmo Teixeira Pinto, Universidade Aberta, Portugal Openness, Multiculturalism, Attitudes and Experience in Online Collaborative Learning ........................... 208 Noga Magen, Gordon College of Education, Miri Shonfeld, Kibbutzim College of Education Technology and Art, Roni Dayan, Ministry of Education, Israel

vii

MOOCs Are Dead! – Open Education and the Quality of Online Courses Towards a Common Quality Reference Framework .............................................................................................................................................................215 Christian M. Stracke, International Community for Open Research and Open Education (ICORE), Welten Institute, Open University of the Netherlands (OUNL), The Netherlands The Evolution of MOOCs and a Clarification of Terminology through Literature Review ............................. 222 Hakan Altinpulluk, Mehmet Kesim, Anadolu University, Turkey How a MOOC-Like Course is Facilitating Teachers’ Continuing Education and Teachers’ Professional Learning Community? .............................................................................................................................................................234 Sabine Wollscheid, Cathrine Tømte, Jørgen Sjaastad, Siri Aanstad, The Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education NIFU, Norway

WORK BASED LEARNING AND TRAINING SUPPORTED BY TECHNOLOGY Extracurricular Vocational Training in Higher Education: Resume of Experiences After Ten Years of Practice ..........................................................................................................................................................................................241 Thomas Richter, Heimo H. Adelsberger, Pouyan Khatami, TELIT @ University of Duisburg Essen, Germany Building Together Efficient, Targeted and Long-Lasting e-Training: Experience Feedback from the uTOP Project ...........................................................................................................................................................................................251 Vincent Beillevaire, UNIT Foundation, Anne Boyer, Lorraine University, France Augmented Learning Environment for Wound Care Simulation ........................................................................... 258 Nelson Jorge, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands, Lina Morgado, Universidade Aberta, Portugal, Pedro Gaspar, Instituto Politécnico de Leiria, Portugal Bridging Theory to Practice Through a Flipped Classroom Approach in an Entrepreneurship Course ... 267 Ingrid le Roux, University of Pretoria, South Africa

SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL ASPECTS IN E-LEARNING Establishing Open Badges in Europe – The Open Badge Network ........................................................................ 277 Ilona Buchem, Beuth University of Applied Sciences Berlin, Germany The Changing Nature of Course “Authorship” in Online Higher Education ....................................................... 287 Keith Hampson, Research Associate, Contact North/Contact Nord, Canada Creating a Socially Sensitive Learning Environment for Science Education: The SSIBL Framework ......... 290 Andrea Kárpáti, Andrea Király, ELTE University, Faculty of Science, Centre for Science Communication and UNESCO Chair for Multimedia in Education Global Citizenship and Leadership in Changed Learning Environments ............................................................ 300 Alan Bruce, Universal Learning Systems, Ireland Cork Learning City: Toward a Community Wide Learning Environment ............................................................. 308 Séamus Ó Tuama, University College Cork, Ireland Recasting “Wikinomics” in Educational Environments – Case Studies in the Wikinomics Project ............. 317 Athanasios Priftis, Jean Philippe Trabichet, Haute école de gestion de Genève (HEG-Genève) of the University of Applied Sciences Western Switzerland (HES-SO), Switzerland, Núria Molas-Castells, Universitat de Barcelona, Spain Have New Technologies Improved Access to Quality Higher Education? .......................................................... 329 Anne Gaskell, St Edmund’s College, University of Cambridge, Roger Mills, Centre for Distance Education, International Academy, University of London, United Kingdom

viii

LEARNER NEEDS, CHARACTERISTICS AND THE E-LEARNING SOLUTIONS Perceptions of Learning Activities and Learning Outcomes in a ROSE (Random Short-term Learning Environment) ..............................................................................................................................................................................338 Keren Levy, Elaine Hoter, David Burg, Ohalo Teacher College, Israel Situated Formative Feedback – How a Moodle Can Enhance Student Learning through Online Feedback346 Niels Bech Lukassen, University College of Northern Denmark and Aarhus University, Christian Wahl, University College of Northern Denmark, Elsebeth Korsgaard Sorensen, Aalborg University, Denmark Examination of the Effectiveness of Electronic Learning Environments .............................................................. 357 Erika Jókai, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary The Integration of Information Literacy Skills into the Curriculum ........................................................................ 364 Luis Guadarrama, Marc Cels, Athabasca University, Canada Re-Imagining Coursework Masters for Online Learning Based on Research and Design Principles ......... 372 Lynette Nagel, University of Pretoria, South Africa Pen or Keyboard – An Empirical Study on the Effects of Technology on Writing Skills ................................. 381 Benedetto Vertecchi, Antonella Poce, Francesco Agrusti, Maria Rosaria Re, Università Roma Tre, Italy Guiding Students to Become Lifelong Learners: Flipped Classroom and Meaningful Participation in a Blended-Learning Environment .......................................................................................................................................... 389 Teemu Leinonen, Eva Durall, Aalto University, Finland Immersive Learning – Learning Patterns inside Digital Cultural Immersive Experiences in Situ ................ 398 Patrizia Schettino, Università della Svizzera italiana, Switzerland Amplifying the Process of Inclusion through a Genuine Marriage between Pedagogy and Technology407 Elsebeth Korsgaard Sorensen, Hanne Voldborg Andersen, Aalborg University, Denmark Transformachines: Transforming City Data to Architectural Design Strategies ................................................ 417 George Parmenidis, Nelly Marda, Olga Ioannou, National Technical University of Athens, School of Architecture, Greece

SMART DIGITAL PEDAGOGY AND LEARNING METHODOLOGY Curricular Development and ICT: From Technological Deficit to Methodological Deficit ............................ 430 Fernando Albuquerque Costa, University of Lisbon, Portugal Use of Big Data in Education Efficiency Analysis ........................................................................................................... 442 György Molnár, Dávid Sik, Zoltán Szűts, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary Integration of Virtual Learning Environment into the Educational Process ....................................................... 450 Sandra Kučina Softić, Ana Ćorić Samardžija, University of Zagreb University Computing Centre, Croatia Using Hypervideos in Initial Vocational Education: Effectiveness and Motivation of Instructional Scenarios ......................................................................................................................................................................................458 Alberto Cattaneo, Florinda Sauli, Swiss Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training, Switzerland How Social Networking Experience Relates to Social Presence and Attitude of Using SNS in Education466 Jieun Lim, Jennifer Richardson, Purdue University, United States of America Online Courses Evolving Teacher Education Programs.............................................................................................. 475 Miki Kritz, Miri Shonfeld, Kibbutzim College of Education, Ilan Nagar, Hemdat Hadarom College, Israel

ix

Extending Learning Environments in Higher Education: Online Peer-to-Peer Counselling in Professional Degree Programs of Social Work ......................................................................................................................................... 483 Patricia Arnold, Munich University of Applied Sciences, Germany How Do Faculty Members React Towards the Use of Personal Mobile Devices by Students in the Classroom?...................................................................................................................................................................................492 Hagit Meishar-Tal, Holon Institute of Technology (HIT), Alona Forkosh-Baruch, Levinsky College, Israel Repository of Inspiring Science Education Project about Space and Astronomy in Science Education . 501 Panagiota Argyri, Evangeliki Model School of Smyrna, Greece Online Mentoring: Strategies and Challenges ............................................................................................................... 510 Swapna Kumar, Melissa Johnson, Catherine Coe, University of Florida, United States of America

QUALITY, ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION “First in Line” Student Assessments of Pioneering Examples of Blended Learning......................................... 518 Roderick Flynn, School of Communications, Dublin City University, Ireland Opening up Higher Education: Quality Assurance for Innovative Approaches ................................................ 522 Stamenka Uvalić-Trumbić, Senior Advisor to the US Council for Higher Education Accreditation; Former Chief of Higher Education Section, UNESCO Quality Culture in Blended Learning: Self-Assessment as a Driver for Change ................................................. 530 Hilde Van Laer, Koen De Pryck, Chang Zhu, Yves Blieck, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium Evaluating Online Programs: Adapting the Community of Inquiry Survey ........................................................ 538 Swapna Kumar, University of Florida, United States of America, Helga Dorner, Central European University, Hungary Implementing a Model and Processes for Mapping Digital Literacy in the Curriculum (Online Badges) 547 George Evangelinos, Anglia Ruskin University, Debbie Holley, Bournemouth University, Mark Kerrigan, Anglia Ruskin University, United Kingdom

INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES AND COLLABORATION CASES International Students’ Behaviour in Virtual Collaborative Learning Arrangements ...................................... 556 Wissam Tawileh, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany Digital Learning in Higher Education – “Lessons from America” ............................................................................ 565 Gerard L. Danford, Haaga-Helia University of Applied Sciences, Finland Exploring ICT Education Policies and Teaching Practices in Australian and Vietnamese High Schools .. 573 Thang Manh Tran, Dorian Stoilescu, Western Sydney University, Australia School Displacement: Learning Outside Borders ......................................................................................................... 585 Ana Mouta, Ana Paulino, Hélder Quintela, JP-inspiring knowledge, Portugal

ONLINE LEARNING NATIONAL CASE STUDIES Design Challenges for an E-Learning Accreditation System for the Republic of Malta .................................. 594 Anthony F. Camilleri, Knowledge Innovation Centre, Alex Grech, StrategyWorks, Malta Digital Creativity for Net Generation Students: Retooling the Art and Design Environment at School .. 601 Andrea Kárpáti, ELTE University, Faculty of Science, Centre for Science Communication and UNESCO Chair for Multimedia in Education, Tünde Simon, Szeged University, Graduate School of Education, Ágnes GaulÁcs, KAPTÁR Visual Arts Workshop and Archive, Hungary

x

The Impact of the National ICT Program on the School from the Viewpoint of the Administration – A Case Study ...................................................................................................................................................................................612 Egoza Wasserman, Tami Targani, Herzog Academic College, Israel Developing an Irish Professional Development Framework for Teaching and Learning, in the Changing Higher Education Learning Environment ........................................................................................................................ 617 Geraldine O’Neill, Terry Maguire, Elizabeth Noonan, National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning, Ireland

INSTITUTIONAL INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT WITH ICTS Current Situation of e-Learning in Higher Education: A Case Study...................................................................... 628 Yasemin Gülbahar, Hale Ilgaz, Ankara University, Turkey The Technological Foundation of Disruptive Education at UNED.......................................................................... 636 Timothy Read, Carmen García Llamas, Juan Cigarrán Recuero, PVC Methodology & Technology, UNED, Spain The TU Delft Online Learning Experience: From Theory to Practice ...................................................................... 638 Nelson Jorge, Willem van Valkenburg, Sofia Dopper, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands The Assessment Process as a Cornerstone of Quality Assurance in Higher Education: The UOC Case .... 645 Ana-Elena Guerrero-Roldán, M. Elena Rodríguez, Xavier Baró, David Bañeres, Ingrid Noguera, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain

POSTERS Tell Me Your Story: A MOOC Model for Reducing Bias Through Personalizing Cultural Narratives in Small, Collaborative, Multicultural Student Groups .................................................................................................................. 648 Elaine Hoter, Ohalo College of Science Education and Sport, Reina Rutlinger-Reiner, Talpiot Academic College, Nili Alon Amit, Kibbutzim College, Jen Sundick, David Yellin College of Education, Manal Yazbak Abu Ahmad, Sachnin College of Education, Israel The Massive Open Online Course on Palliative Care Enables Communication in Six Languages .............. 652 Anca Cristina Colibaba, Grigore T. Popa University Iasi and Fundatia EuroEd, Romania, Irina Gheorghiu, Albert Ludwig University Freiburg, Germany, Stefan Colibaba, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University Iasi, Ovidiu Petris, Grigore T. Popa University Iasi, Romania Teaching to Teachers: A MOOC Based Hybrid Approach .......................................................................................... 659 Alessandro Bogliolo, University of Urbino, Rosanna De Rosa, University of Naples, Italy Embedding MOOCs in University Courses: Experiences and Lessons Learned ................................................. 665 Sólveig Jakobsdóttir, University of Iceland, Iceland ICT Contests as a Road to Computer Literacy of Older People ................................................................................ 669 Olga Grishina, Elena Sidorova, Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, Russia Incentivising Online and Open Education: Can Government Funding Change Practice? ............................ 673 Nick Baker, University of Windsor, Canada Is E-learning an Option in Inclusive Post-Secondary Education? ............................................................................ 678 Chrisann Schiro-Geist, University of Memphis, United States of America Knowledge in Motion between Formal Education and Professional Practice – How to Design for Learning across Boundaries .................................................................................................................................................. 680 Anne Mette Bjørgen, Line Kristiansen, Lillehammer University College, Norway

xi

The Significance and Possibilities of International Cooperation between Institutions of Higher Education685 Éva Sándor-Kriszt, Anita Csesznák, Budapest Business School, Hungary The Impact of Learning Technology on Students’ Learning..................................................................................... 689 Miri Shonfeld, Miki Kritz, Einat Rozner, Egoza Wasserman, Keren Levy, Asmaa Ganayem, Hayley Weigelt Marom, Dorit Barat, Smadar Bar-Tal, Alona Forkosh Baruch, MOFET Institute, Israel Redefining the Student Experience: Information-Seeking Behaviour – The Complete Picture .................. 693 Sandra Tury, University of London, United Kingdom Monitoring a Learning Community in a Hybrid Environment: A Sentiment Analysis ..................................... 700 Ilaria Merciai, Marco Cerrone, University of Naples Federico II, Italy Moving Beyond Access: Distance Education and Capacity Building ..................................................................... 704 Adnan Qayyum, Pennsylvania State University, United States of America, Albert Sangra, Open University of Catalonia, Spain Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) Case Studies for Exemplary Mathematics Teachers in Low SES Schools ................................................................................................................................................ 708 Dorian Stoilescu, Western Sydney University, Australia Enhancing 21st Century Skills in a Regular University College Setting through Blended Learning ........... 715 Sofie Vanmaercke, VIVES University College, Belgium The E-Campus-Project – The Transformation of a Student Administrative Tool into a Personal Learning Environment ...............................................................................................................................................................................721 Mikael Reberg, Mid Sweden University, University Library and Learning Resource Centre, Sweden Development of Shared Knowledge in a Virtual Reality Environment for Collaborative Learning ........... 726 Laura Kiss, Balázs Péter Hámornik, Máté Köles, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary Changing LMS: How to Manage Change about Technological Innovations in Higher Education ............. 732 Eva P. Gil-Rodríguez, Ana Maria Delgado García, Mireia Leg Gil, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain Blended Learning before a Learning Environment Change: Pre-Departure Training for Medical Exchange Students........................................................................................................................................................................................737 Nynke de Jong, Laury de Jonge, Marijke Kruithof, University of Maastricht, The Netherlands Is E-learning an Option in Inclusive Post-Secondary Education? ............................................................................ 741 Chrisann Schiro-Geist, University of Memphis, United States of America The Bavarian Virtual University – An Innovative Approach for the Information Age ...................................... 743 Corina Erk, Regine Prem, Bavarian Virtual University, Germany Diversity in Learning Environments and the Use of Technology for Education at UNAM ............................ 746 Jorge León Martínez, Edith Tapia Rangel, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico 10 Years of Experience in Virtual Mobility: Developing Competencies for Mastering the Virtual Learning Environment and Participating in Virtual Mobility Courses – The Case of DOBA Faculty ............................. 752 Nataša Ritonija, Anita Maček, DOBA Faculty for Applied Business and Social Studies, Slovenia A Model of the Digital Maturity of Schools in Croatia ................................................................................................. 761 Lucija Dejanović, Croatian Academic and Research Network (CARNet), Croatia Quality Pact for (E)Teaching – An Example from the University of Bonn............................................................. 765 Cornelia Helmstedt, University of Bonn, Germany

xii

Citius, Altius, Fortius, Reticulius: Opening up Volunteer Training for the Olympic Games to The Networked Age ..........................................................................................................................................................................767 John P. Egan, University of Auckland, Learning Technology Unit, New Zealand Professional Skills in Management and Leadership, Entrepreneurship and Communication – The e-PROFMAN Project .................................................................................................................................................................777 Nataša Ritonija, Nuša Lazar, Pedja Ašanin Gole, Anita Maček, Tina Vukasović, DOBA Faculty of Applied Business and Social Studies Maribor, Slovenia

xiii

Re-Imaging Learning Environments Proceedings of the European Distance and E-Learning Network 2016 Annual Conference Budapest, 14-17 June, 2016 ISBN 978-615-5511-10-3

MOOCS ARE DEAD! – OPEN EDUCATION AND THE QUALITY OF ONLINE COURSES TOWARDS A COMMON QUALITY REFERENCE FRAMEWORK Christian M. Stracke, International Community for Open Research and Open Education (ICORE), Welten Institute, Open University of the Netherlands (OUNL), The Netherlands

Abstract This paper presents the current status of Open Education and MOOCs as the main instruments and drivers in the publicity. The evolution from e-Learning towards MOOCs and Open Education is introduced as basis to discuss the main question of this paper: Is Open Education a revolution or are MOOCs only marketing instruments? According to Marx, a revolution is the complete change of the production relations and means and their new ownership and direction towards changed production power. Transferred to Open Education, the current question is whether Open Education is indeed a social revolution for individual learners, educational institutions and the society worldwide or whether MOOCs as the most prominent appearance of open learning are only marketing instruments by the traditional educational systems. The presentation at EDEN Conference 2016 will start the debate and following research will provide further argumentations for future discussions.

Open Education: What is the Current Situation? Open and Openness are becoming more and more in vogue: It is not a fashion but an increasing requirement due to dramatic changes in societies. Therefore open education is raising interest as well as gaining adaptation, implementations and success. In parallel open research is getting popular through the opportunities for researchers to share their results among themselves. While these developments are taking root, another phenomenon suddenly appeared and changed the public discussion on open courses: Massive Open Online Courses, called MOOCs. This article outlines the relation between these movements and the (“older”) E-Learning.

What is Open Education? Open Education is as manifold as the term openness: It can be related to quite diverse approaches and understandings. Generally, open education is related to learning innovations and learning quality changing the educational environments and offering selections of methodologies, tasks and resources by the learners. Learning innovations and learning quality are important and reflected topics for a very long time from the beginning of discussions and theories about learning processes: In Europe, Plato’s Allegory of the Cave is one of the earliest

MOOCs Are Dead! – Open Education and the Quality of Online Courses Towards a Common Quality Reference Framework Christian M. Stracke

examples. Their debate continued during the introduction of the first universities in the Middle Age and of the school systems in the 18th century. During the last years and the upcoming so called digital age, many discussions took place (also in the fields of school and higher education, learning for work and at workplaces as well as non-formal and informal learning) due to the two main changes covering all sectors, branches and levels of the society: first, globalisation and second, establishment of the worldwide internet. In our days, the European Commission has set a new milestone with its policy Opening up Education even though it focuses too much new technologies and Open Educational Resources (OERs) instead of new pedagogical methodologies and Open Educational Practices (OEPs).

What is E-Learning? The term E-Learning is controversial and ambiguous from the beginning: Its introduction is often assigned to Jay Cross but it normally remains unclear for which abbreviation E-Learning stands for. Therefore the term Technology-Enhanced Learning (TEL) is more precise but could not become broadly accepted. E-Learning has existed and been promoted by many experts, professional providers and associations at national, European and international levels (such as EDEN in Europe and ICDE worldwide) for more than 20 years, but has not achieved the awareness and attention of a broad audience and society as a whole. The huge promises from the internet hype at the beginning of this millennium were not fulfilled as predicted: despite the continuous and slowly increasing success and implementations of E-Learning in enterprises, it was not recognized as a driver and enabler for innovation across all educational sectors. Meanwhile E-Learning is normal practice in lager enterprises (95% penetration in companies with more than 500 employees) but not yet widely accepted in other educational sectors.

Dimensions of Quality Development We could conclude earlier (Stracke, 2015) that the (learning) quality is most important for learning, education and training. The debate on learning quality is very old, but discussions and theories on quality development in learning and education have only been started a few years ago. The concept and philosophy of holistic quality development with continuous improvement cycle was introduced in Japan first and could gain recognition, acceptance and implementations worldwide: A long-term debate has focussed the quality development in general regarding the different quality issues, aspects and approaches (cf. Deming, 1982; Juran, 1951 and 1992; and for an overview Stracke, 2006). In its broad sense it can be defined as “Quality development covers every kind of strategy, analysis, design, realisation, evaluation, and continuous improvement of the quality within given systems”. (Stracke, 2013; p.21). Thus, quality development can be described formally by the chosen scope. Quality is not a fixed characteristic belonging to subjects or systems but depends amongst others on the point of view and scope. The differentiation of the scope into the three quality dimensions Potential, Process and Result was introduced by Donabedian (1980) in the healthcare sector and has become widely accepted. These three quality dimensions are focusing the following questions

216

Re-Imaging Learning Environments – EDEN Annual Conference Proceedings, 2016, Budapest ISBN 978-615-5511-10-3


(cf. Donabedian, 1980; for the long-term debate on the quality issues, aspects and approaches cf. Deming, 1982 and 1986; Juran, 1951 and 1992; and Stracke, 2006): 1. Potential dimension: What are the potentials for the quality development in the future? 2. Process dimension: How can the processes be described and optimized for the purpose of quality development? 3. Result dimension: How can the quality development be supported regarding given results and systems? Quality development requires a long process to be established and integrated throughout a whole organization and in particular the society. Once started, it has to become a continuous improvement circle to be finally successful (Crosby, 1980; Deming, 1986). Quality cannot be described and fixed by a simple definition, because in itself quality is too abstract to have any impact. Therefore, quality has to be defined and specified according to the given context and situation considering the perspectives of stakeholders involved (Donabedian, 1980). It is important to identify the relevant aspects and to specify the suitable criteria. It is necessary to find a consensus amongst the different views and perspectives to gain a common understanding of quality for the given context and situation due to different and sometimes contradictory needs and definitions of quality by all stakeholders (for detailed explanations on context determinations cf. Crosby, 1980; Deming, 1986; Donabedian, 1980). The question is now: How can quality development be addressed and improved in learning, education and training in our times of the digital age? The concept of Open Education tries to provide a framework in theory and practice for the improvement of the learning quality through the integration of learning innovations leading to opening up the education. Therefore openness and Open Education are becoming not only more and more in vogue but also crucial: It is not a fashion but an increasing requirement due to the dramatic changes in societies.

Quality Dimensions for Open Education We can transfer and apply the three generic quality dimensions that we have analysed above to learning, education and training in general and in particular to Open Education: •

Learning objectives: To address and exploit the full potential of future learning, education and training and to ensure its best quality development, the learning objectives have to be defined precisely: They have to meet the given situation and target group as the best quality always differs and is dependent on the circumstances and conditions. Sometimes a simple solution is meeting better the learning objectives and needs than a highly sophisticated learning opportunity.

•

Learning realization: The learning realization is covering all processes in learning, education and training related to its quality development. That includes the definition of learning strategies as well as the design of learning, education and training and its


217


practical implementation, assessment and evaluation in courses and any other learning opportunities. •

Learning achievements: Learning achievements are the results of the realized learning opportunities, i.e., what the learners have learned. We have to underline that this dimension is very different in learning, education and training compared with other sectors: In learning, education and training, the achievements are not a result of a production or service process but are built and achieved by the learners themselves. Therefore the learning opportunities as products of learning providers cannot be judged objectively (like for travel services) but only individually for the specific given learning objectives. And in particular a learner can judge the quality of a learning opportunity only after its completion. Therefore the quality development in learning, education and training is more complex and difficult than in any other sector.

Figure 1 is illustrating the quality dimensions and their application to Open Education:

Figure 9. Quality dimensions in Open Education (Stracke, 2016)

MOOCs Are Dead! – Long Live the MOOCSs? The new term MOOC (Massive Open Online Course) has immediately attracted the masses even though it is just another label for a diversity of different online learning scenarios and methodologies that were already developed and implemented many years before. MOOCs can be considered and defined as a special type of E-Learning, raising a new interest and offering opportunities to (again) reach learners that are attracted by E-Learning solutions due to many reasons. Thus, MOOCs can be the enablers for a renaissance of E-Learning even though their completion rates are very low and their general quality is questionable and currently under 218



lively debate. Nowadays, different types of MOOCs (so called cMOOCs and xMOOCs) are discussed but the focus is still on the masses, technology and promised innovations that are not easily to discover: Most MOOCs are lacking continuous tutoring and support for all learners who are expected to teach themselves. Not only the high drop-out rates have raised the question of quality for MOOCs and several international conferences (such as LINQ 2014) had a special focus on MOOCs. On the other hand MOOCs have prepared the future path for opening up education and currently the European initiative MOOQ for the quality of MOOCs has started to develop a common Quality Reference Framework for improving, assessing and comparing the quality of MOOCs.

Is Open Education the next revolution? According to Marx, a revolution is the complete change of the production relations and means and their new ownership and direction towards changed production power. Transferred to Open Education, the current question is whether Open Education is indeed a social revolution for individual learners, educational institutions and the society worldwide or whether MOOCs as the most prominent appearance of open learning are only marketing instruments by the traditional educational systems. The presentation at the EDEN Conference 2016 will start the debate and following research will provide further argumentations for future discussions.

Conclusions This article can only initiate the debate on the impact of Open Education and future research and publications are required to focus and provide more argumentations for further discussions. We believe in education as a human right and public good and that learning and education have to be changed to keep this status due the major global challenges. This overview of the quality and future of Open Education and MOOCs presented the needs and potential approaches to meet these requirements and how we can achieve higher learning quality by opening-up education and introducing open learning innovations. We presented current main movements for Open Education such as MOOQ and hope that much more initiatives in theory and practice will take place leading to an increasing recognition and realization of Open Education. As there are much more, we have started to collect them on the portal www.opening-up.education and invite all interested experts and practitioners to share expertise, further initiatives and experiences. We believe in the importance of Open Learning and Open Education for our future and the positive impact on our personal lives and developments as well as on all societies worldwide.


219


References 1. Crosby, P. B. (1980). Quality is Free. The art of making quality certain. New York McGraw-Hill. 2. Daniel, J. (2012). Making Sense of MOOCs: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility. Retrieved November 2, 2012, from http://sirjohn.ca/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2012/08/120925MOOCspaper2.pdf 3. Deming, W. E. (1982). Quality, productivity and competitive position. Cambridge, MA: MIT. 4. Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT. 5. Donabedian, A. (1980). The Definition of Quality and Approaches to Its Assessment. Vol 1. Explorations in Quality Assessment and Monitoring. MI: Health Administration Press. 6. Downes, S. (2005). E-Learning 2.0. eLearn Magazine, October 2005. Retrieved from http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1104968 7. European Commission (2013). Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and learning for all through new Technologies and Open Educational Resources. COM(2013) 654 final. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52013DC0654&from=EN 8. ICORE (2016). Welcome to ICORE, the International Community for Open Research and Open Education! Retrieved from http://www.ICORE-online.org 9. Juran, J. M. (Ed.) (1951). Quality Control Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill. 10. Juran, J. M. (1992). Juran on quality by design. The new steps for planning quality into goods and services. New York: Free Press. 11. Karrer, T. (2007). Understanding E-Learning 2.0. Learning Circuits, 07. Retrieved from http://www.astd.org/Publications/Newsletters/Learning-Circuits/Learning-CircuitsArchives/2007/07/Understanding-E-Learning-20 12. Marx, K. (1887). Capital. A Critique of Political Economy. Volume I: Book One: The Process of Production of Capital. Moscow: Progress Publishers. Retrieved from http://synagonism.net/book/economy/marx.1887-1867.capital-i.html 13. MOOQ (2016). MOOQ is the European Alliance for Quality of Massive Open Online Courses, called MOOCs. Retrieved from http://www.MOOC-Quality.eu 14. Stracke, C. M. (2006). Process-oriented Quality Management. In U.-D. Ehlers & J. M. Pawlowski (Eds.), Handbook on Quality and Standardisation in E-Learning (pp. 79-96). Berlin: Springer.

220



15. Stracke, C. M. (2012). Learning Innovations and Learning Quality: Relations, Interdependences, and Future. In C.M. Stracke (Ed.), The Future of Learning Innovations and Learning Quality. How do they fit together? (pp. 13-25). Berlin: Gito. Retrieved from http://www.learning-innovations.eu and http://www.opening-up.education 16. Stracke, C. M. (2013). Open Learning: The Concept for Modernizing School Education and Lifelong Learning through the Combination of Learning Innovations and Quality. In C.M. Stracke (Ed.), Learning Innovations and Quality: The Future of Digital Resources (pp. 15-28). Berlin: Logos. Retrieved from http://www.learning-innovations.eu and http://www.opening-up.education. 17. Stracke, C. M. (2014). Evaluation Framework EFI for Measuring the Impact of Learning, Education and Training. 华东师范大学学报（自然科学版）Journal of East China Normal University, 2014(2), 1-12. Shanghai: ECNU. doi: 10.3969/j. ISSN 1000-5641. Retrieved from http://www.opening-up.education 18. Stracke, C. M. (2015). The Need to Change Education towards Open Learning. In C. M. Stracke & T. Shamarina-Heidenreich (Eds.), The Need for Change in Education: Openness as Default? (pp. 11-23). Berlin: Logos. Retrieved from http://www.learning-innovations.eu and http://www.opening-up.education 19. UNESCO (2002). Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries. Final Report. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001285/128515e.pdf 20. UNESCO (2012). 2012 Paris OER Declaration. 2012 World Open Educational Resources (OER) Congress. UNESCO, Paris, June 20-22, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/Events/Paris%20O ER%20Declaration_01.pdf 21. Wiley, D. (2009, November 16). Defining “Open”. [Blog post] iterating toward openness. Retrieved from http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/1123


221