MOOCs aiming for non-profit

I posted on FB: In the business education history, few could survive for profits in a century. But for non-profits, such education survived for centuries. Lesson: Aim for non-profit.

Gillian Palmer The question is: where do the funds come from to keep the staff and the profs from starving, the buildings or internet from collapsing? No problem with non- or not-for profits provided the source of funds is as clear as for-profits. Academic freedom in all versions requires clarity.

Isn’t it true that OERs, open access softwares, Open Access Journals and articles and social media wouldn’t be able to survive for long if they are for profits only?  Take a look at the current social media or blogging systems, such as Twitter, Google, Google +, Blog, TED, Youtube etc., aren’t they offered for “free” for the moment?  We also noted many services which are not profitable or aiming for profits only may easily be replaced by the free-services at this digital era, due mainly to the disruption of innovative technology like internet, and mobiles.

If we are to learn from such introduction and marketing of technology innovation, then we need to consider strategies in launching MOOCs with the same principles.  The best marketing strategies to position MOOCs would be to aim for non-profit.  Profits would follow if these MOOCs matured into a critical mass, though this would attract hundreds of Venture Capitalists to invest into them.

How is MOOC positioned?  Stars – Cash Cows?  What is critical from an educational point of view is not the profits, but to treat it as a star.  The current intake is high, though it could become a cash cow once the MOOCs captured the main markets.

Picture: Google Image

We have already seen MOOCs from a short historical perspective, where the first few cMOOCs were all free and open (CCKs, PLENK, CritLit, MobileMOOCs, and Change11), followed by the xMOOCs – Artificial Intelligence (AI), Udacity, Coursera, and edX.

So, there may be a need to re-write the economic theory of demand and supply with MOOCs, mainly because MOOCs would be very difficult to sustain under a complex ecology, when new entrants and agents start to disrupt the MOOC ecology from time to time.

What are the strategies that could be used to aim for non-profit MOOCs?

These include:

(1) The use of social media as a platform to ensure such MOOCs are sustainable in the long run, though a strategic employment of those social media is necessary.

(2) Investment by government or education authorities, by setting MOOCs institutions similar to the current MOOCs but with a more adaptive and flexible education system to create MOOCs, in partnership with Higher Education Institutions.  This requires a bold, ground breaking approach as it could have a side effect of impacting on academic freedom and autonomy of Higher Education Institutions.

(3) Development of MOOCs research and learning consortium based on non-profits criteria, where professors, researchers, teachers, instructional designers and education developers would develop self-sustainable MOOCs.  These MOOCs would be project or problem based, with the support from relevant interested parties – from Higher Education Institutions, business enterprises, government bodies, and learning networks.

I have a dream on education – MOOC for free, forever

Are MOOCs freebies?   MOOCs are free, open at least still by now.  Is this model of education sustainable?  Is it a sustainable or disruptive innovation/technology?

I have had once a dream on education since I was a boy, to have quality education for free, truly open, totally free of fees payment, with no “conditions apply” in this world.  Why?  As often mentioned, Higher Education should be a human right.  If that is true, then any one has the right to be educated, and to educate, in a democratic and civilized society.

The merits of having MOOCs developed through MOOCs providers (i.e. edX, Coursera, Udacity) rather than being offered by university directly is to avoid the huge costs that are associated with the development of MOOCs alone, where the university has to bear the full costs for the course.  Besides, MOOCs are supposed to be used as an experimental platform (though also a disruptive innovation) to test out the various ways of improving both the face-to-face delivery, online delivery and blended learning options.  The use of peer assessment (massive-mooc-grading-problem-stanford-hci-group-tackles-peer-assessment) could be one way to provide a solution to assessment with massive number of students.  It’s still early stages to conclude if this method of peer assessment would overcome the bias associated with peer assessment.

As I have shared in my previous posts here and here, once the MOOCs are getting more and more popular, the more potential these MOOCs would have in overtaking the mainstream courses offered in the institutions.  These MOOCs are covering a wide spectrum of courses, extending to k-12 education. This would further impact on the mainstream courses and the professors teaching in a traditional teaching mode, even by those offered in the elite Higher Education institutions and universities.

Isn’t it a dilemma when a “lower” quality MOOCs would outperform the “highly enriched, engaging” courses that are taught by the professors and offered by the elite or traditional universities, in terms of course efficiency and cost effectiveness, by educating the “world” of learners with MOOCs?

Would MOOCs be here to stay without tears?  I am afraid they would still be facing a lot of challenges, like the pedagogy to be adopted, sound business models that are to be established, cultural and quality issues that are yet to be overcome.

Completion rates on MOOCs: Source from Google images

I have a dream – with a MOOCs for free, forever.  That would surely transform the world of education!

How would MOOCs be designed and structured differently?

Thanks to Doug Holton for opinion The case for learning designers.

What should be the role of instructors in learning design in MOOCs?  How should MOOCs be designed and delivered?

My early learning experience with CCK08 and subsequent learning experiences with CCKs and Change11 was that over-design of a course would not be able to cater for the needs of massive number of participants.  Successful MOOCs (cMOOCs) need to factor emergence (emergent knowledge and learning) in the design and delivery of the “course” and “event”.  It is based on a continuous feedback loop with distributed learning networks, just in time learning- with participants’ active contribution of content, and co-design of the conversation and engagement of instructors, facilitators and clusters of self-organised participants.

Image on Comment Ecosystem: From CCKs course postings.

Most xMOOCs are not built with that in mind, and so those courses are highly structured, often planned in a linear fashion, and thus only afford the prescriptive knowledge to be consumed by the participants, governed by the video lectures, some quizzes, and posted readings.

I reckon learning designers have often pre-conceived with a one size “suits” all sort of tool box online learning with learning object, that may be highly suitable for closed LMS with specific learning outcomes sort of courses.  Would such a design meet the needs of huge cohorts of learners?  I reckon a certain level of customization is needed as participants are coming from a diverse background.

Despite the large number of successful completion (though a relatively 5 – 15% completion rate) in the xMOOCs, I still think the original course design and pedagogy would impact on the course delivery and completion.

Would this explain why more than 80% participants are not completing the course, as they don’t see much need for their contribution or engagement in the course?  Even if they want to do so, there is simply no means for them to be involved except by joining the study group or posting on the discussion boards, where their voices would seldom be heard as these postings would only attract attention if they are voted up (for attention to be given).  Besides, as revealed in the various studies about xMOOCs, many of the participants (could be as much as 40-50%) are degree holders.  This may imply that many of the participants would be following their own set learning goals, learning pathway, and methodologies in their learning, rather than the “linear” progressive Mastery Learning.

Indeed, I have tried watching some of the videos of the xMOOCs and have often skipped the various portions of the videos where I don’t find relevance to my needs or learning.  I would also be browsing through, pausing, or rewinding certain parts of the video when I am just interested in certain part of the section for my learning.  This is similar to the learning via Youtube educational videos, or the TED talks.   Wouldn’t it be true that many participants of xMOOCs would likely do the same, in order to optimize and customize their own education and learning in a MOOC?

Would some of these participants be designing their own learning pathway (i.e. within MOOC) sub-consciously throughout their MOOC engagement?

It is interesting to note that the DS106 and the EDUMOOCs (an xMOOC) are structured as Connectivist and Cognitivist/Connectivist courses (as perceived by this participant), and analysed here.  As I have shared in the past posts, it appears more xMOOCs would be designed with some of the social constructivist and connectivist principles, even though they are conceptually designed with a linear learning pathway with structured content.

Why?  Massive participants have a diverse experience, skills level and background, and thus they would seldom participate with the same entry or exit points, except for the assessment or examination.

Isn’t it time for the MOOC providers to review the learning design so as to ensure the course is built on a flexible emergent design, rather than a rigid, one size suits all online course principle?   Otherwise, there would be a “constant” drop-out or low completion rate, as participants don’t feel their involvement or engagement in the learning community and course design, especially in the xMOOCs.  There are also power and autonomy factors, which would continue to influence the way participants would engage or not engage in the course, especially when participants don’t find any power or autonomy over their learning over the course.