ELI WebinarAbbreviated Participant Chat Transcript

Beyond the MOOC Hype: Getting Serious about Online Learning

February 11, 2013: 1:00 p.m. ET (UTC-5; 12:00 p.m. CT,11:00 a.m. MT, 10:00 a.m. PT)

Session Link:

  • A Descriptive View:
  • Olds Mooc 2013:
  • MOOC About MOOCs Crashes and Burns:
  • Elearnspace:
  • Making Sense of MOOCs: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility:
  • George Siemens opened a MOOC (today) on analytics using Instructure:
  • What Is Connectivism?:
  • JiME:
  • MOOC Hysteria:
  • A MOOC by Any Other Name:
  • McMOOC:
  • DS106:
  • Small Business Strategy:
  • Association of American Universities:
  • ELI Spring Focus Session:
  • Learning and the MOOC: Resources:
  • MOOCs are really a platform:
  • Authentic learning:
  • Eli Events:

Participant Chat (MST):

Tom Reeves - University of Georgia: (11:11) The Open University in the UK is trying run a new kind of MOOC right now...a pMOOC (project-based MOOC).

Otto Khera: (11:13) @Tom Reeves - Who evaluates the projects in the Open U model ? I'm looking at the link know -- interesting

Lee Ann Gillen, NCSU: (11:14) That's the model we use at North Carolina State Univ in Raleigh - through our unit called DELTA.

Otto Khera: (11:15) Except, Lee Ann, DELTA is not a MOOC - right? It is about evaluating projects -- but course based for credit at NCSU , no?

Cathi Phillips (NCSU): (11:17) DELTA is Distance Education and Learning Technology Applications, a team apprpoach to course design.

Tom Reeves - University of Georgia: (11:19) The recent crash of the Coursera-Georgia Tech MOOC would suggest that instructional designers should have been involved in the development of the course

M. Evans: (11:20) The Ontario college system has been doing competency based education since the late sixties.

Cathi Phillips (NCSU): (11:20) CCK08!

David Sprunger, Whitman College: (11:21) Is there a good resource to understand the diff between Connectivist MOOCs and xMOOCs?

Otto Khera: (11:22) 'monetization' ...

Malcolm Brown: (11:22) @david Cf. Making Sense of MOOCs: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility, Sir John Daniel

Michael Feldstein: (11:22) George Seimens' original post in which he coined the term "cMOOC" can be found at

David Sprunger, Whitman College: (11:23) thanks!

Tim O'Brien: (11:23) Completion rates don't seem like a legitimate concern, as much as people keep bringing it up. We need to know what the intent of the student is before we can ascertain anything.

Lou Rinaldi (Yale): (11:24) Curious to hear about Phil and Michael's thoughts on the role of MOOCs in a predominantly monastic University culture.

Cathi Phillips (NCSU): (11:25) Here's a peek into the MOOC "Connectivism and Connective Knowledge 2011," which begins with several links to articles by George Siemens and Stehpen Downes about Connectivisim,

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:25) phil, you mentioned that moocs are ~consistent with status quo - can be adopted/provided without major transformation. but the 4 problems you outline will require radical transformation of institutions and models in order to be addressed. thoughts on how?

Tom Reeves - University of Georgia: (11:25) This paper by Sir John Daniel discusses the differences among MOOC types:

John Shank: (11:25) Great picture. ;-)

Phil Hill: (11:27) Great question D'Arcy. It's easier to answer what I don't think will happen. I don't think the current model of a handful of profs per school creating MOOCs for Coursera / udacity will continue long-term, without more of an insititutional commitment.

Phil Hill: (11:28) For example, we're starting to see cases (SJSU, others), where there is instructional design help for the profs for their MOOCs. We might see MOOC-based departments or new orgs.

Phil Hill: (11:29) Tom is right - Sir John Daniels article is good resource

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:29) what about the issue of institutional autonomy? MOOCs open the door to either losing control over curriculum, or deferring to other instutions. how will the curriculum be developed post- and meta-institutionally?

Phil Hill: (11:30) No simple answer, but you're right that institutional pure ownership of curriculum is weakening. I do think this is major trend.

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:30) I mean, if "Intro Calculus" is a high volume MOOC, why would a school offer their own? And in response, how do they ensure their needs are met in the MOOC?

Otto Khera: (11:31) D'Arcy's observation resonates when one consider state-level universities/college and the duplication across 100 and 200-level courses (e.g., CSU or UC systems ...)

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:32) or do you bother? just shut down your own and defer to the MOOC?

Veronica Diaz: (11:33) and how will we measure learning from outside sources? an entrance test for courses?

Cathi Phillips (NCSU): (11:33) MOOC as supplemental material....

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:34) and what about credit? do schools become degree-granting branches of a third-party MOOC provider? (how) do they recognize credit for moocs in their own programs?

Lee Ann Gillen, NCSU: (11:34) You could think of it as a massive flipped classroom for delivery of content, but the individual univerisities can still have classes where they work on problem set, problem based learning, more using the information with the smaller groups of students.

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:35) MOOC Madness would make a killer band name.

Ava Wolf: (11:36) ...or a killer movie...

John Shank: (11:36) Yes, that is a great point that MOOCs are newborns and they have a lot of room to grow and evolve.

Victoria Getis: (11:36) Does one need a Ph.D. to teach a MOOC? Does one need a Ph.D. to facilitate a discussion at a university for a class in which the material is provided by (someone else's) MOOC?

Malcolm Brown: (11:37) speaking of mooc madness.. how about MOOC hysteria?

Cathi Phillips (NCSU): (11:38) :) Love CogDog!

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:38) he's ok.

Otto Khera: (11:40) Victoria - doesn't this address the question of credentials in the context of online courses - ? Seems that there is some latitude on this front, in many online programs that I have seen - irrespective of "MOOC" status. This seems to diminish the value of the course -- and perhaps why higher education institutions have some important decisions and strategies to consider re: short term vs. long term; revenues vs. brand; etc.

Phil Hill: (11:41) Otto, I'd hope that accrediting bodies continue to move beyond the modeling that online courses are f2f course equivalents just done online. THey need to review the quality of courses on their own merits.

Victoria Getis: (11:43) Otto, Phil, I agree. I am also thinking about how one becomes a good/charismatic teacher while pursuing the Ph.D. You need someone to practice on! Of course, I'm assuming that one would want a charismatic f2f teacher being your charismatic online teacher. Maybe that is incorrect.

Phil Hill: (11:44) Tim, I agree that completion rates should not be over-stated, but right now the advertising of MOOCs surrounds 'billions served' model. We need to focus more on what students got out of experience. So treat completion rate as indicative that starts are not a good measure to justify investment.

Michael Berman - CSU Channel Islands: (11:44) I think "MOOC" glamorizes the course and glamorizes instruction/authority of the lecturer

Michael Berman - CSU Channel Islands: (11:44) The Stanford model, anyway

Otto Khera: (11:45) I think Phil that there is a qualitative difference between F2F and online and each needs to be rigorously reviewed -- on their own merits and where they intersectin terms of outcomes (course goals)

Tom Reeves - University of Georgia: (11:45) Automated assessment does not work well when addressing higher order outcomes. What are some alternative strategies for assessing learning in a MOOC say in the Humanities?

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:45) what if the MOOC is just "doing stuff on the internet"? it's 2013. things are done differently than in 2003.

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:46) which begs the question - how do we shif toward valuing lifelong learning, outside/across the context of a course?

Otto Khera: (11:46) Maybe it's time for the 'flipped campus' where an institution's programs are very much about competencies and situated learning ... oft powered by MOOCs and other online (flipped) opps

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:46) shift, even.

Cathi Phillips (NCSU): (11:48) @Michael Berman, regarding glamorizing the course and lecturer...The Coursera model spcifically is restricted to those universities that are members ofAssociation of American Universities,

Ava Wolf: (11:49) @Victoria so true arf

Tom Evans - Ohio State: (11:49) a lot of hi order assessment would rely on peer reviewing

Victoria Getis: (11:50) how about pulling assessment out of the MOOC

Victoria Getis: (11:50) ?

Daniel Haynes: (11:50) can you define cMOOCS?

Daniel Haynes: (11:50) connectivist models?

Cathi Phillips (NCSU): (11:50) @Victoria Getis, that is exactly what the Connectist MOOCs do --

Malcolm Brown: (11:51) The ELI's spring focus session (April 3-4) will be on the MOOC as a vehicle of learning

Cathi Phillips (NCSU): (11:51) I htinks they are using "cMOOC" to refer to "Course MOOC"

Cathi Phillips (NCSU): (11:51) think

Otto Khera: (11:51) Haven't you already answered this question re: assessing MOOCs? Per Daniel's observation ... it depends on what you are tryign to do with your MOOC

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:51) xMOOCs feel like status quo - lecture/content/testing, and cMOOCs feel like experimentation in personal learning.

Phil Hill: (11:51) connectivist style MOOCs

Veronica Diaz: (11:51) we're beginning to collect some MOOC resources for the coming focus session:

Otto Khera: (11:52) Thanks Veronica! great!

Tom Reeves - University of Georgia: (11:52) ). The concept of a MOOC first emerged from Canada in 2007 when George Siemens and Stephen Downes offered a free online course focused on “Connectivism and Connective Knowledge” to a few fee-paying students at the University of Manitoba and more than 2,000 interested learners from around the world. The MOOCs offered by Siemens and Downes and others are sometimes referred to as cMOOCs to reflect their connectivist and constructivist pedagogical origins whereas the MOOCs offered by people and entities associated with certain elite universities in the USA (most notably Stanford, MIT, and Harvard) are sometimes referred to as xMOOCs to reflect what some see as their roots in behaviorist or “transmissionist” (teaching by telling) pedagogy and/or their stated goals of making profits (Siemens, 2012).

John Shank: (11:53) What do you both think are the best reasons for an Institution or a faculty member deciding to offer a MOOC?

Tom Reeves - University of Georgia: (11:53) See: Siemens, G. (2012). MOOCs are really a platform. eLearnspace. Retrieved from

David Sprunger, Whitman College: (11:53) So ds106 is a prime example of cMOOCs, right?

Tom Evans - Ohio State: (11:53) very prime example indeed! love ds106

D'Arcy Norman - UCalgary: (11:53) @David yeah. DS106 is the poster child of cMOOCs

Ann Randall (NAU): (11:53) Much criticism of MOOCs has focused on benefits of higher education that go beyond competency and content to issues of cross-pollinization of ideas, critical thinking that occurs with challenging and justifying common answers and ideas. Can MOOCs address these goals?

Josh Kim at Dartmouth: (11:54) What would you guys say are workable university organizational / structural models to both make MOOC decisions and to run these experiments?

Tom Reeves - University of Georgia: (11:54) I am a big fan of authentic tasks as a foundation for online learning. For more info:

Phil Hill: (11:55) Having fun with internet latency between California and Italy :}

Jeannette: (11:56) Our reasoning was because our students were from all over the state and we wanted the students to be able to connect with one another. We also wanted to encourage a learning community that would last after the course is over.

John Shank: (11:56) Looking 10 yrs out - who are the big winners with MOOCs - i.e. startups, traditional highered, etc...?

Otto Khera: (11:57) hmmm... nothing is "free" ....

John Shank: (11:57) Jeannette thanks for sharing I like your approach.

Jeannette: (11:57) Think about your students - how will your MOOC making learning more interesting and impactful than what you are doing.

Otto Khera: (11:58) Can ELI dedicate a session with Tom Reeves (and similar) on evaluating/assessing online courses / environments?

Guest 2: (11:58) Is it a good strategy to stay out of the MOOC for now (for an individual faculty) since everyone is experimenting...

Denise Bosma: (12:00) Super, thank you!!

Malcolm Brown: (12:00) The ELI's spring focus session (April 3-4) will be on the MOOC as a vehicle of learning

Jess Thornton: (12:01) Duke has been working ta assess our Coursera initiatives, and recently published our first report: