RIDE2013 presentation: How people learn in Massive Online Open Courses

Editor's Notes

• #8: The instrument is divided in three main sections: 1 a scale to measure learning opportunities provided by the workplace/role (Schalk & van Woerkom, 2009). Some roles afford more opportunities to learn than others, and therefore by including a measure of the opportunities for learning afforded by the workplace/role, we can normalise for this factor.2 a scale to measure learning activities undertaken (adapted from Raemdonck, Gijbels et al, 2012). Raemdonck and Gijbels argue that the learning activities undertaken (using definition not restricted to formal learning opportunities) by an individual provides a measure of the extent to which an employee has taken advantage of the learning opportunities available to them that is dependent on their self-directedness. We have used the same scale and hypothesis that this will be dependent on their SRL score for the workplace context (or 3 a scale to measure an SRL score for the current context; Using Zimmerman’s (2005) Social cognitive theory of SRL (with its three phases of forethought, performance and self-reflection) as a starting point, we have adapted several related SRL instruments to the workplace context.
• #9: People with a high SRL scores can better exploit learning opportunities Specific sub-components of self-regulation (for example a workers ability to rationalise what they need to learn, or have learned learning into the broader context of their role) seem to be key indicators of workers who seem to learn more effectively.
• #10: Multiple linear regression analysis was used to assess the ability of SRL components to predict the extent of learning activities actually undertaken by participants and to test the mediating role of SRL (and its sub-components) between the learning opportunities afforded by an individual’s role and the learning activities they undertake. As expected, the factor ‘learning opportunities at work’ is a predictor of learning activities explaining 24% of the variance of learning activities. SRL score and its individual components were tested in order to identify which components explain the major percentage of variance. For the mediation hypothesis proposed in this research, only three factors appear to mediate between learning opportunities at work and learning activities undertaken: factor F4: task interest, value, factor P1: elaboration, and Factor S2: self-evaluation.
• #11: ... self-evaluation becomes the argument for learning/networking across organisations ... this is exactly where cisi can be useful.
• #21: Many goals set were vague, either because they related to low level participation, or were abstract  (take ideas and apply them in my own work). Performance goals were by their nature more specific and measurable, largely focused on weekly events. The scope of goals varied – some were set at the sub-course level (largely performance goals), while participation goals were set at the course level, and most (though not all) learning goals were set at the beyond-course level (apply knowledge in own practice). Goals which were participation-focused were by their nature easy to achieve (interviewees just had to open the course email to ‘experience the course’. Learning and networking goals were more challenging, as were most participation goals.  
• #22: 24 were asked about the evolution of their goals. Of these, 15 said their goals had changed, and 9 not. Within these groups were some interesting observations: Of the nine whose goals had not changed, 8 had studied on cMOOCs before . Some of those whose goals hadn’t changed indicated that they had at least monitored their goals and decided that they were content that their original goals had been appropriate.Of the 9 participants who were new to MOOCs, 7 set goals, and 6 were asked whether their goals had changed. Of these 6, 5 indicated that they had changed – often to adjust to the specific behaviours demanded by MOOCS (for instance ‘ I had intended to read every post’ was clearly an impractical goal). As people understood the format of the course they focused their efforts onto the topics that interested them, or dropped performance goals in favour of more directed goals (Its ok not to contribute every week).