Archived entries for MOOC

Cheating for Credit

cheating

… or at least that’s the premise of the course “Understanding Cheating in Online Courses.” The course, taught by Bernard Bull at Concordia University Wisconsin, is the result of Professor Bull’s ongoing interest in online plaigiarism:

For two years he conducted research on cheating, focusing not on those who get caught but those who get away with it. At the end of his study, he found his views on cheating had begun to shift. It wasn’t as black and white as he originally thought. Were some courses designed in a way for which cheating seemed the best option? Could professors do more to not just detect cheating but help create an environment where it doesn’t happen in the first place?

I love this approach; it reminds me of how the FBI first captured Frank Abagnale, Jr., a formidable check forger and con artist, and then hired him to work in the Fraud division.

Ethical behavior remains a sore spot as teaching migrates online, as well as expanded pedagogies that include strategies such as take home exams and collaborative test-taking, and ignorance (feigned or otherwise) of the difference between working together and copying each others’ work.  Ignoring the problem or hectoring students for their bad behavior misses the structural affordances that allow it to thrive.

 

What about the rest of them?

The Guardian [UK] has this article extolling the virtues of MOOCs, and asking the trenchant question, “is this the end of traditional classsroom education?” For those familiar with the field, there’s nothing groundbreaking or new here, and by no means does the author answer his own question.    Rather, he breathlessly extols the virtues of these massively online courses:

they’re typically free, broadening access to a global audience and to everyone but the very poor;
they’re diverse (dozens of universities and private consortiums have gotten in on the act);
they’re  collaborative, as students jam up the chat boards assisting one another;

Education, like information, just wants to be free.  Some hiccups along the way include:

poor completion rates: of the 200,000 students who signed up for Sebastian Thrun’s AI class via Stanford, only 16,000 finished it.  While 16k course graduates is nothing to sneeze at, that’s a success rate of 8%.

questionable accreditation:  if the online course features the same content as the classroom course, why does the former earn a certificate and the latter compelled to continue with additional coursework?  The article cites companies such as Google as “taking these certificates seriously.”  What I see is a voc-tech type of spot education system in which companies can compel its workers to enroll.

Chaos in those chatrooms:  I recently took an online course that operated on a much smaller scale, and it was very challenging to find even basic pieces of information. Now multiply that by a factor of 40, and I envision students wasting a lot of time looking for resources and answers versus actually learning the material, the digital needle lost in the online haystack.

Academic content in the hands of private companies:  I certainly have my share of issues with higher education, but they’ve at least make a show of trying to be fair and equitable.  As economics increasingly drive education, expect some subjects — those subjects valuable to Google, for instance — to get the lion’s share of the resources.  If humanities are seriously taught via MOOCs in 50 to 100 years, I’ll eat my top hat.

It’s clear that MOOCs now rule the roost, and less because  they (education and learning) want to be free, but because they (universities and companies eager to jump on the bandwagon) are eager to scale up their intellectual holdings, cut staff and supporting resources, maybe even sell off a campus building or two since it’s no longer in use.



Copyright © 2004–2015. All rights reserved.

RSS Feed. This blog is proudly powered by Wordpress and uses Modern Clix, a fabulous theme by Rodrigo Galindez.