Module 2 Journal: My Project – Enhancing Learning in MOOCs through Face-to-Face Meetings

The draft hypothesis for my project is that ‘by attending weekly face-to-face meetings, as a supplement to participating in a ‘live’ online MOOC, learning by adults will be enhanced.’ For my project I am focusing on one particular MOOC entitled:  ‘Developing Your Research Project, University of Southhampton’ on the FutureLearn platform. It is 8 weeks long and in 2016 it ran 3 times starting in June, September and October. My learners will be adults living in or around The Glebe neighbourhood in Ottawa, Canada.

Teaching and Learning Theories

The teaching and learning theories that I am most committed to supporting in this project are ‘experiential learning’ and ‘social constructivism’. 

Experiential learning is based on Dewey’s characterization of learning.

No matter what their age or stage, the learner will continually develop their knowledge through attempting to work through realistic experiential problems involving “the formation of ideas, acting upon ideas, observation of the conditions which result, and organization of facts and ideas for future use” (Dewey 1938: 88 quoted in Laurillard, 2012, p 48).

I choose ‘experiential learning’ as this particular course focuses on the learner’s own research project and step by step over an 8 week period the learner acquires the skills and knowledge (and obtains feedback) to develop a summary of their own research proposal.

Social Constructivism. I am also committed to ‘social constructivism’ which emphasizes the role of language and social interaction in development and learning (Laurillard, 2012). This is based on the work of Vygotsky who argued that “learning through discussion is important, and distinct from learning through practice, because the act of articulating an idea is itself a contribution to what it means to know that idea" (Laurillard, 2012, p.49).

Scaffolding. Linked with social constructivism is Vygotsky’s concept of ‘zone of proximal development’.

The zone of proximal development is “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86 quoted in Lipscomb et al., 2004). Italics, my emphasis.

A method consistent with this learning theory to help learners meet their level of potential development is by scaffolding whereby a teacher or peer “offers assistance with only those skills that are beyond the student’s capability. Of great importance is allowing the student to complete as much of the task as possible, unassisted” (Lipscomb et al, 2004). In the case of adult learners “motivation comes from within and is based on the learner’s goals and objectives such as advanced degrees, career opportunities, and increased pay. Ultimately, the learner assumes a dual role in that they are students and peer instructors as they scaffold their classmates” (Lipscomb et al., 2004).

While the selected online course has numerous activities in the online discussion forum where peer-to-peer and tutor-to-peer discussion is encouraged, my project is proposing an opportunity for oral discussion in a face-to-face environment between a group of learners living in proximate distance. This discussion alone will help them in formulating their ideas.  In addition, as all the learners are adults it is expected that this face-to-face environment will give them the opportunity to identify areas that they are having difficulties with from the course content and to ask peers to provide guidance and advice. In this case they will be ‘scaffolding’ each other.

Learning Outcomes and Bloom’s Cognitive Categories

The course objectives are already fairly well developed and listed in the selected MOOC. In order to make them more clearly linked to Bloom’s Cognitive Categories (Green and Johnson, 2010) I have changed the verb in several instances and in the table below specified the particular cognitive category and also noted which week (W) that each objective refers to. This is a first step in developing a table whereby I will integrate the online and face-to-face activities on a weekly basis to support the course objectives.

Course Objectives (FutureLearn, 2015)
Students will …
Define the term ‘academic research’. (Cognitive category: Knowledge) W1
Describe skills that can be developed from undertaking a research project. (Cognitive category: Comprehension) W1
Compose key research questions drawn from your draft research proposal & hypothesis (Cognitive category: Synthesis) W2
Formulate a draft research proposal and hypothesis. (Cognitive category: Synthesis) W2
Analyze the pros and cons of using different types of sources to be used for a research project. (Cognitive category: Analysis) W3
Justify a methodology which fits your research project and update your research proposal (Cognitive category: Evaluation+Synthesis) W4
Explain a range of effective reading techniques and distinguish which is suitable for what source (Cognitive category: Comprehension + Analysis) W5
Use appropriate techniques to actively note down the important information you find when you're doing this reading. (Cognitive category: Apply) W5
Recognise the different styles of referencing and use references consistent with an academic standard. (Cognitive category: Knowledge + Application) W6
Construct a well-supported, original academic argument. (Cognitive category: Synthesis) W7
Write a summary of your proposal that will prepare you for writing an abstract for your research project (Cognitive category: Synthesis) W7
Identify the key elements of delivering an effective academic presentation based upon your research project. (Cognitive category: Knowledge) W8

References

FutureLearn. (2015). Developing Your Research Project, University of Southhampton (online course). Retrieved from https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/research-project/7/steps/111785.

Green, S. & Johnson, R. (2010). Assessment is Essential. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a Design Science. New York: Routledge.

Lipscomb, L., Swanson, J., West, A. (2004). Scaffolding. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://epltt.coe.uga.edu/