Completion, particularly assessed completion, of MOOCs offers some advantages to learners. As Wright et al (2009, p. 3), note “For many students, distance education provides a path to a better life: the more educated they are, the better jobs they will obtain, and the better they will be able to meet the needs of their families”.
Accreditation as formal recognition of the value of MOOC content
Five courses offered by Coursera are now recognised by the American Council on Education (ACE) as being sufficient for award of college credit. To do this, students must complete all assessment tasks within the MOOC as well as a proctored exam, which carries a fee. At present, about 2,000 universities and colleges in the US are members of the ACE, but it is up to individual universities whether they accept the Council’s recommendation and award credit for the MOOC instead of completing a course offered by that university (Coursera, 2013). It is unclear as to how many universities outside of the US would officially recognise these courses.
Assessment as part of accreditation
Formally recognising the learning obtained through an education provider relies on the quality of the learning, which is generally measured through summative assessment (Rawlins & Poskitt, 2008). Coursera commonly uses peer-assessment when auto-grading is not an option, which Koller (2012) claims to be a very valid approach to assessment. However the literature she cites in support of this statement applies to the classroom context (Sadler & Good, 2006), not the context of massive online courses. Furthermore, Coursera’s webpage on pedagogy, references a different, and comparatively weak study into the use of peer-review in the online context (Coursera, n.d.-c; Robinson, 2001). A more comprehensive study indicates that peer-assessment in online courses can be valid provided that: the questions being asked are well written; questions are restricted to simple answers, calculations, or short texts referencing exact parts of a science field; that each paper is reviewed by at least four peers; and that students were appropriately scaffolded to a point where they were confident in their peer-assessment abilities (Bouzidi & Jaillet, 2009). Accordingly, it is questionable whether peer-assessment is a valid approach to assessment in xMOOC courses that deal with complex subjects, where student responses may vary considerably, and where, apart from providing a marking rubric, very little support has been given about how to review the work of one’s peers. It is also unclear how the process of tutor review of peer-assessed work actually occurs.
This data visualisation, by Katy Jordan, draws together information about enrolment numbers, completion rates and the types of assessment used in 48 different MOOCs.
Recently, Udacity partnered with Georgia Tech to offer an online Masters in Computer Science degree. This moves beyond the point of courses offered by MOOC providers being accepted for credit at other institutions, into the realm of sub-contracted delivery of services.
This data visualisation, by Katy Jordan, draws together information about enrolment numbers, completion rates and the types of assessment used in 48 different MOOCs.
Recently, Udacity partnered with Georgia Tech to offer an online Masters in Computer Science degree. This moves beyond the point of courses offered by MOOC providers being accepted for credit at other institutions, into the realm of sub-contracted delivery of services.
Talking point: Have you ever assessed another student’s work, as part of a course that you were completing? How knowledgeable were you in that subject, and did you feel that you were able to provide useful feedback?