Variations in Pedagogical Design of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) Across Disciplines

Given that few studies have formally examined pedagogical design considerations of Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs), this study explored variations in the pedagogical design of six MOOCs offered at the University of Toronto, while considering disciplinary characteristics and expectations of each MOOC. Using a framework (Neumann et al., 2002) characterizing teaching and learning across categories of disciplines, three of the MOOCs represented social sciences and humanities, or “soft” MOOCs, while another three represented sciences, or “hard” MOOCS. We utilized a multicase study design for understanding differences and similarities across MOOCs regarding learning outcomes, assessment methods, interaction design, and curricular content. MOOC instructor interviews, MOOC curricular documents, and discussion forum data comprised the data set. Learning outcomes of the six MOOCs reflected broad cognitive competencies promoted in each MOOC, with the structure of curricular content following disciplinary expectations. The instructors of soft MOOCs adopted a spiral curriculum and created new content in response to learner contributions. Assessment methods in each MOOC aligned well with stated learning outcomes. In soft MOOCs, discussion and exposure to diverse perspectives were promoted while in hard MOOCs there was more emphasis on question and answer. This study shows disciplinary-informed variations in MOOC pedagogy, and highlights instructors’ strategies to foster disciplinary ways of knowing, skills, and practices within the parameters of a generic MOOC platform. Pedagogical approaches such as peer assessment bridged the disciplines. Suggestions for advancing research and practice related to MOOC pedagogy are also included.

[1]  K. Trigwell,et al.  Development and Use of the Approaches to Teaching Inventory , 2004 .

[2]  J. Donald,et al.  Disciplinary differences in knowledge validation , 1995 .

[3]  Tony Becher,et al.  Teaching and Learning in their Disciplinary Contexts: A conceptual analysis , 2002 .

[4]  Daniel A. McFarland,et al.  Encouraging Forum Participation in Online Courses with Collectivist, Individualist and Neutral Motivational Framings , 2014 .

[5]  Liisa Postareff,et al.  Academics’ conceptions of assessment and their assessment practices , 2012 .

[6]  Elena Barberà,et al.  Designing online interaction to address disciplinary competencies: A cross-country comparison of faculty perspectives , 2014 .

[7]  Avner Caspi,et al.  The Relationship between Academic Discipline and Dialogic Behavior in Open University Course Forums , 2010 .

[8]  H. Hubball,et al.  Case Study Methodology: Flexibility, Rigour, and Ethical Considerations for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning , 2015 .

[9]  Nira Hativa,et al.  Teaching in a Research University: Professors' Conceptions, Practices, and Disciplinary Differences. , 1997 .

[10]  Ruth Neumann,et al.  A Disciplinary perspective on university teaching and learning , 2003 .

[11]  Tansy Jessop,et al.  The influence of disciplinary assessment patterns on student learning: a comparative study , 2016 .

[12]  Karen Swan,et al.  Assessing MOOC Pedagogies , 2014 .

[13]  Kerri-Lee Krause,et al.  Challenging perspectives on learning and teaching in the disciplines: the academic voice , 2014 .

[14]  Deanne Gannaway,et al.  Managing Active Learning Processes in Large First Year Physics Classes: The Advantages of an Integrated Approach , 2014 .

[15]  Stephen E. Newstead,et al.  Teachers’ beliefs and intentions concerning teaching in higher education , 2005 .

[16]  G. Wiggins,et al.  Understanding by Design , 1998 .

[17]  Linda Corrin,et al.  Visualizing patterns of student engagement and performance in MOOCs , 2014, LAK.

[18]  Ulrik Schroeder,et al.  The Effect of Peer Assessment Rubrics on Learners' Satisfaction and Performance Within a Blended MOOC Environment , 2015, CSEDU.

[19]  D. Randy Garrison,et al.  The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective , 2010, Internet High. Educ..

[20]  A. Biglan The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. , 1973 .

[21]  George D. Kuh,et al.  The Effects of Discipline on Deep Approaches to Student Learning and College Outcomes , 2008 .

[22]  Min-Yen Kan,et al.  Towards Feasible Instructor Intervention in MOOC discussion forums , 2015, ICIS.

[23]  Kevin Cox,et al.  Student Assessment in Higher Education: A Handbook for Assessing Performance , 1998 .

[24]  Robert E. Stake,et al.  Multiple Case Study Analysis , 2005 .

[25]  Gerhard Fischer,et al.  What Can Residential Research-­‐based Universities Learn …? What Can Residential, Research-based Universities Learn about Their Core Com- Petencies from Moocs (massive Open Online Course)? , 2014 .

[26]  Dwayne E. Paré Put Students ’ Minds Together and their Hearts Will Follow : Building a Sense of Community in Large-Sized Classes via Peer-and Self-Assessment , 2015 .

[27]  K. Trigwell,et al.  How approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context , 2006 .

[28]  Donna Charlevoix,et al.  Do professors matter?: using an a/b test to evaluate the impact of instructor involvement on MOOC student outcomes , 2014, L@S.

[29]  Margaret Mazzolini,et al.  When to jump in: The role of the instructor in online discussion forums , 2007, Comput. Educ..