Thank you Jonathan
(Now i can take your comments seriously)
Thank you for the thoughtful comments. I agree with some and have a more
nuanced view of others. But I think we agree about all the important
points. Here is my response:
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Jonathan Bishop
<[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> As one of the innovators of Classroom 2.0 and eTwinning, I cannot see any
> added value MOOCs can have as they offers nothing technically or
> conceptually on top of the knowledge that is already out there
>
>
>
...
>
>
> I have right next to me a book by a certain Dr Nielsen called 'Multimedia
> and Hypertext: The Internet and Beyond' - I cannot see anything in your
> MOOC course t
>
> hat had not already been considered in this 1995 book by your
> eminent colleague :-)
>
I've never claimed (nor have any of the MOOC folks I interact with claimed)
that there is any new technology here. The major newness is the wide
availability and ease of access and use of this course material. Hell,
the Kahn Academy simply films someone in front of a blackboard, and they
have revolutionized teaching of elementary and mid-level math and now other
sciences.
https://www.khanacademy.org/
The Kahn Academy's real power lies in the fact that their videos are short,
so students can find the ones that cover the difficulty they have been
having and then review it as many times as necessary. In other words,
modularization and ease of access are the key technical aspects and having
lots of content is the key pedagogical point. Also,because the units are
small, it is very simple to revise them when they get feedback. Revision
of this sort is is difficult in most courses and the detailed feedback
required to discover the need is absent in most courses
(including traditionally taught ones).
>
> In my view MOOCs (and indeed other platform dependent 'apps' for learning)
> are the CD-ROMs of our current era and the hype around it will look as
> dated as people start to realise established mechanisms such as SCORM and
> other models for enabling 'persuasive, adaptive, sociability and
> sustainability' (PASS) as I coined on my MSc, will become equally as
> important as they were when E-Learning became the broad brush term to label
> all kinds of technology-enhanced learning.
>
I hope so. The goal is not to push any single technique for education. The
goal is to have available a diverse set of tools and methods, so students
can select what best fits their needs. Different domains will require
different educational methods. Different student needs will also require
different methods.
In ten years, I hope that MOOCs, if they still exist, will look very
different than they do now.
As for hype, that is a social disease. I ignore it.
thanks for your thoughtful comments. I hope my replies are satisfactory.
We both share the same goal: better education.
Don
Don Norman
Nielsen Norman Group, IDEO Fellow
[log in to unmask] www.jnd.org http://www.core77.com/blog/columns/
Book: "Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded<http://amzn.to/ZOMyys>"
(DOET2).
Course: Udacity On-Line course based on
DOET2<https://www.udacity.com/course/design101>
(free).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|