Here is my response to Lisa’s post You-say-mooc-we-dont-anymore :
Wonderful too to think deeper into the way Lisa’s class was structured. I am wondering if the multi-pedagogy would co-exist in a MOOC, as such pedagogy would evolve as the class progresses. New set of values and expectations may also emerge as learners develop competency and capability, allowing a number of pedagogy be adopted at different times, in response to the actual needs of learners and educators. I think the past MOOCs (c MOOCs) have influenced some of the educators’ beliefs in pedagogy, though instructivism is still the predominant belief of teaching as a pedagogy – to ensure mastery learning is achieved.
This is apparent in the x MOOCs, where the professors’ teaching is the basis of the course.
As Lisa said, there is an instructivist core as the curriculum is set. That is both rational and legitimate to ensure the learning outcomes are achieved, based on the instructors’ instruction and guidance. That is one of the major responsibilities of educators in ensuring the focus of learning (in terms of learning outcomes, and performance achievement – under competency based education and training).
What could be challenging for educators in a MOOC is to understand that instructivism would not be perfect when dealing with hundreds or thousands of learners. However, that has become a myth when x MOOCs are introduced, when machine-grading are coupled with video lectures, leading to the belief that mass education could be tackled through “semi-automation” in education and teaching.
I have elaborated on the issues and challenges in mass education based on such approach in my latest post.
Thanks again for Lisa’s great insights.