Massive Open Online Course

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Massive Open Online Course (German giant open online course ), MOOC for short , refers to online courses mainly used in higher education and adult education, which usually have a large number of participants, as they do not have access and admission restrictions.

MOOCs combine traditional forms of knowledge transfer such as videos, reading material and problem statements with forums in which teachers and learners interact and work together in virtual learning groups. A distinction must be made between xMOOCs and cMOOCs. While the former are essentially video-recorded lectures with an exam, cMOOCs are based on the idea of connectivism and are more in the form of a seminar or workshop. In general, MOOCs can be characterized by the fact that they do not require any fees or requirements other than Internet access and interest on the part of the user.

history

precursor

Before the digital age , there were already ways to exchange knowledge despite spatial separation. In the 19th century, distance learning was often based on letter correspondence, and learners received their teaching texts by post. In the following years the possibilities of exchanging information with the use of other media changed. Distance learning was offered by some universities by telephone or television. In the course of the technologies of the 1990s, the Internet finally came more and more into use. In the 2000s, the online presence and thus the opportunities for learning on the Internet rose sharply, so that numerous open learning courses, summarized as Open Educational Resources , were offered. These courses are considered to be the forerunners of the Massive Open Online Courses ( MOOCs ) used today . A free course “Basic Human Sexual Anatomy and Physiology” was put online in January 2003 by Erwin J. Haeberle and the Magnus Hirschfeld Archive for Sexology (Humboldt University Berlin). The wiki-based course "Open Ed Syllabus" offered by David Wiley in 2007 is another open online course in which various topics of open education were dealt with.

2008

In 2008, George Siemens and Stephen Downes from the University of Manitoba in Canada hosted the “Connectivism & Connective Knowledge” course, which later became the trademark for the format under the acronym CCK08. In this context and through a publication by George Siemens , the term connectivism became known for the first time, the conceptual considerations of which the pedagogical principles of open online courses often refer to.

From 2010

A wide variety of MOOCs will be offered from 2010, for example:

  • Course PLENK - Personal Learning Environments Networks and Knowledge (Fall 2010)
  • Relaunch of the first course Connectivism and Connective Knowledge under the code CCK11 2011
  • Course LAK11 - Learning and Knowledge Analytics (Spring 2011)
  • Course Change11: Education, Learning, and Technology! (Fall 2011)

To this day, the format has been taken up by a number of educational actors and you can find countless offers on all possible topics under the term MOOCs (Massive Open Courses). For example, two university lecturers Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig from Stanford University held an open course on the topic of artificial intelligence in 2011 , to which 160,000 people registered, of which around 20,000 participants actually completed the course and received confirmation from the organizers.

In this case, the university did not issue the certificate itself, but only the university lecturers, which was the first topic of discussion about the question of the value of such a certificate. The blogger Michael Feldstein, who is known in the USA on the subject of educational media, commented z. B. in the online newspaper Inside Higher Ed: "When individual university lecturers begin to certify student performance, this calls into question the role of a university."

A lot has happened since then, especially in the English-speaking American area, with Udacity , Coursera and EdX, commercial providers of MOOCs have developed and the number of publications has also increased at a rapid pace. According to the New York Times , 2012 is known as "the year of MOOCs" as MOOC platforms have not only developed rapidly, but increasingly elite universities like Princeton , Brown , Columbia and Duke have started offering courses on platforms like Coursera . Even Google has published a tool with which MOOCs can be created online.

Characteristics and classification

Kennedy core characteristics

Kennedy (2014) identified three core characteristics of MOOCs in a comprehensive literature review: openness, persistence barriers, and model.

openness
MOOCs are characterized by freely accessible technologies and software for educational purposes, freely accessible content and learning resources, and freely accessible knowledge. Course participants and teachers openly share learning methods. Accordingly, openness is essentially understood to mean free, open communication and participation in an open networked environment. For example, registration at MOOCs is possible for everyone and sources of information are freely available to everyone.
Persistence Barriers
MOOCs contain certain disabling factors that represent obstacles to smooth participation and thus successful learning. Such barriers can result in poor results or dropping out of the course. The barriers of a MOOC also explain the frequently mentioned problem of the low graduation rate of MOOCs. Such barriers can be, for example, the ability to deal with new technologies, language skills, the structure of the MOOC, time zone differences, individual problems of a social nature in dealing with other participants and time / deadlines of the MOOC.
model
Every MOOC is based on a specific learning model. Today's MOOCs can mainly be classified as cMOOC or xMOOC. These differ, for example, in terms of the degree of autonomy of the participant and the degree of structure of the course. The handling of performance evaluations and exams also differs between the models. Above all, however, the various models are based on a different pedagogical approach. In general, however, process-based models rather than product-based models can be identified as the underlying mechanisms in MOOCs.

xMOOCs

The xMOOCs have their origins in regular university events that were subsequently made available to a large number of participants as online courses. The x preceding the abbreviation MOOC stands for extension and is due to the fact that Harvard University put an x (pronounced "cross") after the course number in its course catalog for online versions of its courses .

Typical elements of the xMOOCs are videos and quizzes in which test questions have to be answered. Depending on the type of course, additional elements can be added, for example texts to be read or written assignments, which, due to the large number of participants, are not assessed by the course management but by other course participants.

xMOOCs are usually accompanied by online forums in which learners can exchange ideas. Networking with one another is not an integral part of the concept, but it can make sense to combine xMOOCs with the concept of the personal learning network (PLN).

cMOOCs

Dave Cormier at the Swedish Skolforum 2012

Based on a main topic and a schedule with a few defined sections and events, the course providers at cMOOCs provide some resources, such as texts or videos, which are usually available online as an impulse. The participants decide for themselves whether and in what way they contribute. If they take action, they create additional materials themselves, for example in the form of blog posts, tweets , videos or podcasts . They are made available to the course and can henceforth be commented on, discussed or expanded upon. This creates a network between learners and their content, as propagated in connectivism . This approach (English connectivism ) stems from the c preceding the MOOCs .

Participation typically takes place in four stages or main actions:

Orientation (aggregates)
get an overview and choose what seems interesting.
Arrange (Remix)
Record a topic in a structured manner and look for points of contact and connections to your own everyday life.
Contribute (Repurpose)
write your own post or comment on a topic.
Share (Feed Forward)
share your own contributions with other participants.

P4P MOOCs

Peer for Peer Massive Open Online Courses (P4P MOOCs) are online courses from learners for learners. MOOCs are not consumed, but created by yourself. In school, training and studies, learners can flexibly combine individual MOOCs from Open Educational Resources (OERs) and their own content. Typical elements of the P4P MOOCs are videos, interactive and open assignments. When using the P4P MOOCs before, during and after the attendance phase, e.g. B. in blended learning or flipped classroom there is the possibility at schools to do justice to the heterogeneity of the learners through internal differentiation . In German-speaking countries, the MOOC-Wiki MOOCit.de is a portal that is editorially managed by the Glanz Verlag . Certificates are issued on MOOCit for creating a MOOC .

Who uses MOOCs?

learner

In order to better understand who uses MOOCs and with what motivation, Christensen and colleagues (2013) set themselves the goal of clarifying these questions in their study. They examined over 30,000 people who took one of the University of Pennsylvania's 32 courses on Coursera. Generally speaking, the courses were attended by people from all over the world, with the majority from the United States or other OECD countries. Regardless of their geographic origin, the participants were well educated. They are also more likely to be young people (under 30 years of age). Significantly more men than women take part in MOOC courses, especially in the BRICS states and in other developing countries. More than half of the participants are employed.

Two main reasons could be identified as reasons for participating in MOOCs: On the one hand, the participants want to further educate themselves and learn skills in order to be able to do their job better and, on the other hand, the focus was on curiosity and fun. These differences were mainly dependent on the courses taken and the country of origin.

Teacher

Lecturers who use MOOCs have to spend time preparing for the courses as well as providing support afterwards. In 2013, the Chronicle of Higher Education looked at the role of teachers in MOOCs. According to a survey, it takes 100 hours to prepare a MOOC. Another 8-10 hours can be allocated to the weekly care. Videos they have made themselves are used particularly intensively by teachers in the design of their courses (97%). Furthermore, 75% of the surveyed professors stated that they incorporate open learning resources into their MOOCs. Only 9% requested the purchase of classic books. E-books are used even less , only in 5% of cases.

Pedagogical basis

In connection with the criticism of MOOCs as a new form of teaching and learning, the question of the pedagogical and didactic basis is often raised. Even if not all aspects are likely to always apply to every course, the following arguments are generally made to underpin the pedagogical basis of the MOOC concept:

  • Online learning is efficient.
  • With tests and quizzes is the importance of retrievals (= retrieving the learned; Engl .: "retrieval-based learning") received.
  • MOOCs adapt to the learner through mastery learning (only when one concept is fully mastered is the next one).
  • The combination of peer and self-assessment supports the development of the learners' self-learning abilities , critical and reflective thinking and the recognition of their own strengths and weaknesses.
  • Using 10- to 15-minute videos allows learners to decide on speed, pauses, and repetitions while maintaining their attention.
  • MOOCs have a flat hierarchy, so that traditional, social boundaries are broken and connections between students and teachers can be created.
  • Possibility to use MOOCs in connection with traditional courses in a “ blended learning ” context.
  • Numerous support options through online forums:
    • z. B. direct help with questions of understanding
    • Ability to replace face-to-face sessions
    • Building a learning community in which knowledge can be generated

One of the best-known providers of (x) MOOCs coursera.org also operates on this basis and wants to achieve its goal of helping learners to learn material quickly and effectively . The authors Glance, Forsey, and Riley conclude from the points above that MOOCs have a solid pedagogical base, but point out that this does not yet mean that attending a lot of MOOCs constitutes training that with attendance at one Campus. There is still a need for research on this.

Design guidelines

For the successful use of MOOCs as part of didactic design, Guo, Kim & Rubin list numerous recommendations for the design of a MOOC based on their findings:

Research result recommendation
Shorter videos are especially engaging. Individual videos should be no longer than 6 minutes.
Videos that show the speaker's face are more motivating. During post-processing, the teacher's face should be faded in as often as possible at appropriate times.
Videos that are perceived as personal are especially stimulating. You should film in a more informal setting.
So-called "Khan-style" tutorials are more motivating than normal PowerPoint slides. * One should combine movement and a visual flow with a natural flow of speech.
The use of recorded lecture videos is not particularly helpful. If you want to use recordings from a lecture, you should adapt them to the MOOC format.
Videos in which the teachers speak quickly and with great enthusiasm are more motivating. Teachers should be trained beforehand to speak as enthusiastically as possible.
Learners deal with lecture and tutorial videos in a different way. Tutorials should be given the opportunity to repeat the video in different sections.

Three aspects that were shown to be particularly decisive when designing a good MOOC are the quality of the material, the commitment of the teacher and the interaction between the students.

* “Khan-style” tutorials are rather simple, dynamic videos that were created by Salman Khan . This type of video has received a great deal of attention after it has been found to be particularly helpful during the learning process.

Use

In their book Making Sense of MOOCs , Patru and Balaji wrote a chapter about the possibilities and challenges of MOOCs for society. While their focus is primarily on developing countries, they cite a number of aspects of how learners around the world benefit from MOOCs.

Improved access to and increased participation in academic education

Because MOOCs give students around the world access to full university courses (in theory), they are often seen as an important tool in expanding access to academic education for millions of people. They make knowledge more accessible, so that one can say that they contribute to the democratization of academic education and content, both locally and globally.

In this context, for example, Daphne Koller, co-founder of Coursera , mentions an incident in South Africa in a lecture on the motives for the platform. In 2012, one person was injured and one killed at the University of Johannesburg when thousands of people tried at once to get one of the few university places still available. Even if many other problems in developing and emerging countries cannot be solved in this way, the free access to education provided by MOOC platforms such as Coursera can be a start.

Affordable and achievable alternative to formal education

While Germany is one of the few countries in which the cost of tertiary education is manageable through free higher education, in many countries these are an obstacle for people who want to pursue a university education. And the share of private universities is also increasing overall. Even if MOOCs cannot completely replace formal education, they do offer some services that a higher education would also guarantee. The difference here, however, is that no entry requirements are necessary and the education is not tied to a specific location. Furthermore, it is possible to decide for yourself to what extent you want to participate in a MOOC. This means that you can organize participation depending on your own wishes and level of knowledge. It is therefore possible that a participant can determine their own learning rate, which one they are most comfortable with.

Sustainable development

Through the open and free offer of education and thus the attempt to make academic education available to a wider audience, MOOCs can be seen as a tool to promote sustainable development, especially in developing countries. Patru and Balaji refer to the official 2030 Agenda of the United Nations and formulate it as follows:

"The (initial) philosophy of MOOCs is to open up quality HE to a wider audience. As such, MOOCs are an important tool to achieve Goal 4 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development."

criticism

Media coverage

The MOOC issue received a lot of attention in the German press at the beginning of 2013, but coverage was limited to xMOOCs. The improved accessibility to learning opportunities is highlighted as a special opportunity. On the other hand, there are problems of a didactic nature. In a lecture, the e-learning researcher Rolf Schulmeister criticized the xMOOCs “processing that was not conducive to learning” up to this point. The sometimes little experience of some teachers with the organization of online events is also reflected in various reports: One professor broke off his xMOOC because he felt overwhelmed by the increased interaction compared to traditional lectures. Another professor ended a course prematurely because of massive technical problems - tellingly, in an xMOOC on the subject of "Fundamentals of Online Education: Planning and Application". At the end of 2013, voices in the press spoke of excessive expectations of the xMOOCs format and only viewed them as harbingers of further developments in e-learning. Sebastian Thrun , founder of the xMOOC platform Udacity, says self-critically that his company has a miserable product. At the end of March 2014, however, the former President of Yale University , Rick Levin, switched to the Coursera platform as the new CEO for further market expansion in countries such as China .

Low graduation rate

XMOOCs are also criticized for their low graduation rate. On the basis of freely accessible data, it was determined that often not even 10% of the participants successfully complete the course. The reasons given are, for example:

  • Participants find that the MOOC takes too much time after all
  • Symptoms of fatigue due to the receptive lecture format
  • generally poor didactic design of the course
  • Participants do not want a certificate at all, but instead want to acquire knowledge and therefore do not take the planned exams
The "funnel of participation" to conceptualize the constant drop-out in MOOCs.

To conceptualize the high decrease in the participation rate in MOOCs with increasing duration, Clow adapts the model of the marketing and purchase funnel. The funnel of participation describes three chronologically ordered phases, each of which is characterized by a steep decrease in the number of participants. In an initial awareness phase, learners first need to know about the existence of the MOOC. This naturally applies to a larger proportion of learners. A smaller proportion of the learners reach the second registration phase. The proportion of those registered who actually take part in course activities (activity phase) is again a lot lower.

Attempts are made again and again to divide MOOC participants into certain groups. Glance and Barrett find that a distinction can be made between auditors and engagers for MOOC participants. While auditors mainly take part passively in the course and receive teaching units, engagers take an active part in more in-depth, voluntary course activities. Contrary to the obvious view, however, such a level of participation in MOOCs has no influence on the tendency towards completion of the MOOC. Gender and educational level also have no influence on course retention. In contrast, interaction with the course instructor and the perception of the course material and the perceived effectiveness of the course are shown as predictors for course retention. The time of course enrollment is also relevant. The earlier participants enroll in a MOOC, the lower the likelihood of early withdrawal. In addition, social influencing factors can be used to predict the drop-out behavior. The intensity and quality of the interaction between learners within the course influences the tendency of those who complete the course. For example, course participants who serve as an authority and initiate discussions with other participants show greater engagement in the course. The same applies to participants who are often involved in discussions initiated by other participants. In addition, the stability of the social network within the course shows itself to be an influencing factor: If direct colleagues of a participant finish the course prematurely, the probability increases for them to also leave the course.

Recommendations for action can be derived from the determined influencing factors of course retention in order to be able to reinforce them as well as possible. MOOCs have to create the possibility, despite late enrollment in the course, to find access to the social structures and to form an appropriate peer network in order to be able to participate effectively in discussions. It is also possible, based on the influencing factors, to identify participants who may be at risk of dropping out early enough and to provide targeted support. Automated, text-analytical processes are a potent way of identifying such course participants. It has already been shown that using sentiment analysis and neural networks, drop-out probabilities for course participants can be predicted.

Other problems and challenges of MOOCs

In addition to the low graduation rate, other problems can be found with MOOCs. From an economic point of view, the profitability of MOOCs is quite low, because they are often free of charge and result from voluntary projects. For this very reason, the problem arises that MOOCs are in some cases not yet fully accredited. Although MOOCs are a way of giving people in developing countries easier access to education, a MOOC still requires a certain level of technology. Another problem with the distribution of participants is that live sessions are not always possible. These live sessions are often not possible because many MOOCs are within fixed time frames.

Alternatives

Self-Paced Online Course (SPOC)

Self-paced online courses allow greater flexibility. Both the learning pace and the time to start can be chosen by the participants themselves. In 2015 there were over 800 courses designed according to this idea.

Distributed open collaborative courses (DOCC)

Another alternative are distributed open collaborative courses . This type of course is based on a distributed learning plan that, unlike MOOCs, is not centralized. The classic roles of money, hierarchy and the instructor are being softened. The acquisition of knowledge should be achieved through the shared expertise of all participants and not only be carried by one or two individuals.

Server software

Ready-made software specifically for MOOCs that can be installed on servers and filled with content:

  • Open edX : Open source software from edX and Google . Open edX does not offer its own courses, but provides free software for other providers.
  • OpenMOOC: MOOC software developed in Spain that is licensed under the open source Apache 2.0 license.
  • Chamilo : also open source. System requirements are very low; Proven sessions with more than 5,000 simultaneous visitors.

Providers of MOOCs

International proprietary platforms

  • Coursera : A leading commercial MOOC platform from the United States.
  • Cognitive Class (previously: IBM Big Data University): Computer science courses in the fields of databases, big data, cloud computing, blockchain, IoT, ...
  • edX : Cooperative open e-learning platform of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard University .
  • Udacity : Commercial US platform that primarily offers courses in the IT sector.
  • Udemy : A commercial platform that offers courses in various fields.
  • Stanford Lagunita: MOOC offer from Stanford University (open source).
  • NovoEd: MOOC offering from Stanford University (open source).
  • Polimi Open Knowledge: Italian MOOC offer from Politecnico di Milano.
  • Open2study: Australian MOOC offer.
  • France université numérique : French MOOC platform.
  • FutureLearn : An English-speaking provider with over 6 million users, numerous collaborations with universities and opportunities to obtain "postgraduate degrees".
  • XuetangX: The largest MOOC provider in China. The platform is based on the open-edx software and stands out from other MOOCs through special changes.
  • Kadenze: From the former Coursera teacher Dr. Ajay Kapur developed MOOC specifically designed for teaching art and design.
  • EduOpen: A MOOC founded by the Italian government with a network of Italian and European universities.

Platforms for content under free license

  • P2PU : English educational platform that offers MOOCs, among other things. All content is under an open license.
  • Khan Academy : Non-commercial website with educational material in the form of videos, founded by Salman Khan .

German-speaking platforms

  • iversity : First German MOOC platform, with over 1,000,000 users. After filing for insolvency and taking over by Holtzbrinck GmbH, iversity wants to focus on further training opportunities for companies.
  • OpenCourseWorld: A German MOOC platform operated by IMC AG, a provider of software solutions in the e-learning sector.
  • mooin: German MOOC platform of the Technical University of Lübeck .
  • iMooX: Austrian platform of the Karl-Franzens-University Graz and the Technical University Graz.

Platforms of individual institutions

Useful examples

literature

  • Udo Glanz : Digital discourse culture in education; Basics of communication theory, analysis of online forums and conclusions regarding the conception of an educational portal. Glanz Verlag Freiburg 2016, ISBN 9783940320063 , e-book ISBN 9783940320322
  • Imke Jungermann, Klaus Wannemacher : Innovations in higher education. Massive open online courses at German universities . EFI , Berlin 2015 (Studies on the German Innovation System, 15-2015), ISSN  1613-4338 . URL: e-fi.de (PDF)
  • Rolf Schulmeister (Ed.): MOOCs - Massive Open Online Courses. Open education or business model? Waxmann, Münster, New York, Munich et al. 2013, ISBN 978-3-83092-960-4 . URL: waxmann.com (PDF)
  • Behnam Taraghi, Martin Ebner, Sandra Schön (2013). Systems in use WBT, LMS, e-portfolio systems, PLE and others. In: Martin Ebner & Sandra Schön (Eds.), Textbook for Learning and Teaching with Technologies (L3T) . URL: l3t.eu
  • Timo van Treeck, Klaus Himpsl-Gutermann, Jochen Robes (2013). Open and participatory learning concepts. E-portfolios, MOOCs and flipped classrooms. In: Martin Ebner & Sandra Schön (Eds.), Textbook for Learning and Teaching with Technologies (L3T) . URL: l3t.eu

Web links

Wiktionary: MOOC  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Individual evidence

  1. ^ A b Rolf Schulmeister: As Undercover Students in MOOCs. University of Hamburg, 2012, accessed on September 1, 2017 .
  2. ↑ a b c d e f Alexander McAuley, Bonnie Stewart, George Siemens, Dave Cormier: The MOOC Model for Digital Practice . 2010 ( [1] [PDF]).
  3. ↑ Li Yuan: MOOCs and Open Education Timeline (updated!). Retrieved July 22, 2017 (American English).
  4. ^ Erwin J. Haeberle: January 2003: World's first sexological e-learning course. Accessed December 12, 2017 .
  5. ^ George Siemens: Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. (No longer available online.) 2005, archived from the original on September 8, 2016 ; Retrieved July 20, 2017 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.itdl.org
  6. ↑ Laura Pappano: Massive Open Online Courses Are Multiplying at a Rapid Pace . In: The New York Times . November 2, 2012, ISSN  0362-4331 ( online [accessed July 20, 2017]).
  7. ^ Jolie Kennedy: Characteristics of massive open online courses (MOOCs): A research review, 2009-2012 . In: Journal of Interactive Online Learning . tape 13 , no. 1 , 2014, p. 1-15 .
  8. ↑ Jochen Robes: Massive Open Online Courses: The Potential of Open and Networked Learning . In: Andreas Hohenstein, Karl Wilbers (Ed.): Handbook E-Learning . Wolters Kluwer, Cologne 2012 ( [2] [PDF]).
  9. ↑ MOOCit.de: Don't consume P4P MOOCs, create them yourself , October 1, 2019
  10. ↑ Gayle Christensen, Andrew Steinmetz, Brandon Alcorn, Amy Bennett, Deirdre Woods: The MOOC Phenomenon: Who Takes Massive Open Online Courses and Why? ID 2350964. Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY November 6, 2013 ( online [accessed July 20, 2017]).
  11. ↑ Steve Kolowich: The Professors Who Make the MOOCs. 2013, accessed September 1, 2017 .
  12. ↑ a b David George Glance, Martin Forsey, Myles Ryley: The pedagogical foundations of massive open online courses . In: First Monday . tape 18 , no. 5 , 2013, doi : 10.5210 / fm.v18i5.4350 .
  13. ↑ David Boud, Nancy Falchikov: Quantitative studies of student self-assessment in higher education: A critical analysis of findings . In: Higher Education . tape 18 , no. 5 , 1989, pp. 529-549 .
  14. ^ Keith Topping: Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities . In: Review of Educational Research . tape 68 , no. 3 , 1998, p. 249-276 .
  15. ^ Salman Khan: The one world schoolhouse: Education reimagined . Hodder & Stoughton, London 2012, ISBN 978-1-4555-0838-9 .
  16. ^ Derek O. Bruff, Douglas H. Fisher, Kathry E. McEwen, Blaine E. Smith: Wrapping a MOOC: Student perceptions of an experiment in blended learning. In: Journal of Online Learning and Teaching . tape 9 , no. 2 , 2013, p. 187 .
  17. ^ Qing Li: Knowledge building community: Keys for using online forums . In: TechTrends . tape 48 , no. 4 , 2004, p. 24-29 .
  18. ↑ Thomas Baker: https://profesorbaker.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/mooc-pedagogy-theory-practice/. October 1, 2012, accessed on July 14, 2017 .
  19. ↑ Philip J. Guo, Juho Kim & Rob Rubin: How Video Production Affects Student Engagement: An Empirical Study of MOOC Videos . In: L @ ​​S '14 Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning . ACM, New York 2014, pp. 41-50 .
  20. ^ Laura Pappano: The Year of the MOOC . In: The New York Times . 2012.
  21. ↑ a b Khan Academy German. In: Youtube. Retrieved August 16, 2017 .
  22. ^ Khan Academy. Retrieved July 15, 2017 .
  23. ^ Clive Thompson: How Khan Academy is changing the rules of education. In: Wired Magazine . tape 126 , 2011, p. 1-5 .
  24. ↑ a b c Mariana Patru, Venkataraman Balaji: Making Sense of MOOCs: A Guide for Policy Makers in Developing Countries . UNESCO, Paris 2016, ISBN 978-92-3100157-4 ( [3] [PDF]).
  25. ↑ Zeit.de: Only Germany still offers free higher education. Zeit, February 23, 2017, accessed July 17, 2017 .
  26. ^ Fridjof Küchemann: Online courses for everyone: The globalization of teaching. 2013, accessed September 1, 2017 .
  27. ^ Derek Bruff: Prof Leaves MOOC Mid-Stream. 2012, accessed September 1, 2017 .
  28. ↑ Steve Kolowich: Georgia Tech and Coursera Try to Recover From MOOC Stumble. 2013, accessed September 1, 2017 .
  29. ↑ Jörg Dräger: Tailor-made lectures for everyone. 2013, accessed September 1, 2017 .
  30. ↑ Steve Kolowich: Researchers Push MOOC Conversation Beyond 'Tsunami' Metaphors. 2013, accessed September 1, 2017 .
  31. ↑ Max Chafkin: Udacity's Sebastian Thrun, Godfather Of Free Online Education, Changes Course. 2013, accessed September 1, 2017 .
  32. ^ Dan Colman: MOOC Interrupted: Top 10 Reasons Our Readers Didn't Finish a Massive Open Online Course. 2013, accessed September 1, 2017 .
  33. ^ Doug Clow: MOOCs and the funnel of participation . In: Dan Suthers, Katrien Verbert, Erik Duval, Xavier Ochoa (eds.): Third Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK 2013) . ACM, New York 2013, pp. 185-189 .
  34. ^ David G. Glance, P. Hugh R. Barrett: Attrition patterns amongst participant groups in Massive Open Online Courses . In: ASCILITE Conference . Dunedin 2014 ( [4] [PDF]). Attrition patterns amongst participant groups in Massive Open Online Courses ( Memento of the original from July 18, 2017 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / ascilite2014.otago.ac.nz
  35. ↑ Kate S. Hone, Ghada R. El Said: Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study . In: Computers & Education . tape 98 , 2016, p. 157-168 .
  36. ↑ Diyi Yang, Tanmay Sinha, David Adamson, Carolyn Penstein Rose: “Turn on, Tune in, Drop out”: Anticipating student dropouts in Massive Open Online Courses . In: Proceedings of the 2013 NIPS Data-driven education workshop . tape 11 , 2013, p. 14 .
  37. ↑ Carolyn Penstein Rose, Ryan Carlson, Diyi Yang, Miaomiao Wen, Lauren Resnick, Pam Goldman, Jennifer Sherer: Social factors that contribute to attrition in MOOCs . In: Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference . ACM, New York 2014, pp. 197-198 .
  38. ↑ Diyi Yang, Maiomiao Wen, Carolyn Rose: Peer Influence on Attrition in Massive Open Online Courses . In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Educational Data Mining . 2014, p. 405-406 .
  39. ↑ Wanli Xing, Xin Chen, Jared Stein, Michael Marcinkowski: Temporal predication of dropouts in MOOCs: Reaching the low hanging fruit through stacking generalization . In: Computers in Human Behavior . tape 58 , 2016, p. 119-129 .
  40. ↑ Devendra Singh Chaplot, Eunhee Rhim, Jihie Kim: Predicting Student Attrition in MOOCs using Sentiment Analysis and Neural Networks . In: AIED 2015 Workshop Proceedings . 2015.
  41. ↑ Dhawal Shah: MOOCs in 2015: Breaking Down the Numbers. 2015, accessed September 1, 2017 .
  42. ^ Scott Jaschik: Feminist Anti-MOOC. 2013, accessed September 1, 2017 .
  43. ↑ Open edX Portal | Open Source MOOC Platform |. Retrieved on August 16, 2017 .
  44. ↑ OpenMOOC. Retrieved August 16, 2017 .
  45. ↑ cognitiveclass.ai
  46. ^ The New Equation For Free Education: MITx + HARVARDx = edX; Article by James Marshall Crotty in Forbes English
  47. ^ Stanford Lagunita. Retrieved on August 16, 2017 .
  48. ↑ Home - NovoEd. Retrieved August 16, 2017 (American English).
  49. ^ POK - MOOCs portal of Politecnico di Milano. Retrieved on August 16, 2017 .
  50. ↑ Free Courses Online | Open2Study. Retrieved on August 16, 2017 .
  51. ↑ Future Learn's 2016: Year in Review - Class Central . In: Class Central's MOOC Report . December 19, 2016 ( online [accessed July 15, 2017]).
  52. ↑ XuetangX: A Look at China's First and Biggest MOOC platform - Class Central . In: Class Central's MOOC Report . October 16, 2016 ( online [accessed July 15, 2017]).
  53. ↑ Kadenze, a MOOC platform optimized for arts education . In: Class Central's MOOC Report . July 6, 2015 ( online [accessed July 15, 2017]).
  54. ↑ EduOpen: a new MOOC providers funded by the Italian Government - Class Central . In: Class Central's MOOC Report . November 22, 2016 ( online [accessed July 15, 2017]).
  55. ↑ P2PU. Retrieved on August 16, 2017 .
  56. ↑ One million course registrations and a successful financing round at iversity. In: iversity. Retrieved October 11, 2016 .
  57. ↑ Online learning platform iversity gets a lifeline from Holtzbrinck media group. In: iversity. Retrieved June 22, 2017 .
  58. ^ MOOC in the EU project Biofector