FEEDBACK FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM

·         1. Instructor (course design and content creation) 2. Technology expert for MOOC platform

·         Played a role in all parts – conceptualise, design, develop and delivery

·         Instructor

·         I helped in the development of the course by creating 8 videos that were used in the course. I was also a moderator for a synchronous session and I participated in the asynchronous forums.

·         I was mainly responsible for setting up and managing the technical platform, content release process and delivering technical lectures on Android, Mobile OS and App Development.

·         Wanted to share my knowledge in the domain and learn about how to ‘run a MOOC’ – end to end. Also wanted to explore platforms for delivering a MOOC.

·         Share my knowledge of mobile learning and participate in an m-learning dialogue; guide students; support the m-learning community

·         (These points are not in any particular order.) 1. Knowledge dissemination. 2. Gain more experience with new delivery model (i.e. MOOC) for knowledge dissemination. 3. Showcase and attain greater visibility for our capabilities for end-to-end design and operation of MOOCs. 4. Generating new knowledge/ideas via online discussions that happened over this MOOC’s forums. 5. Validate our costing models for end-to-end design and operation of the MOOCs of this nature.

·         I believe that learning materials should be available and made affordable to people in developing countries. This was my personal goal in getting involved in the MOOC course. I am also interested in MOOC research and this project gave me ideas on research areas that are needed.

·         I was interested in broadening my knowledge in the space of M4D by learning from other instructors and students. I was also interested in gaining practical experience of managing a MOOC platform, understanding issues in running a MOOC like generating good quality content, etc.

Which teaching or pedagogical strategies do you believe were supported within the M4D MOOC (for example: information transmission, experiential learning, inquiry-based learning, collaborative learning, knowledge management)?

Comment on any that you feel should be added or elaborated.

·         Major pedagogical strategies supported by M4D in that order: 1. Information transmission 2. Inquiry-based learning 3. Collaborative learning

·         Information transmission – is the major one. Experiential learning and inquiry-based learning were handled through homework (not graded – hence not known if the student has done them).

·         Information transmission, collaborative learning, knowledge co-creation through dialogue

·         There was information transmission in the asynchronous session where participants were able to view videos, access the PowerPoint presentations, and read the transcripts of the videos. This MOOC was flexible since participants who were not able to watch the videos because of low connectivity, were able to download the PowerPoint slides and the video transcripts to read at a later time offline. The MOOC allow for participants to connect with each other using forums. The forums were very active. In addition to posing questions, participants provided information on their own experience with mobile for development. One suggestion is that there should be sub-forums where groups work together on problems and projects and share with other participants. There could be more problem-based activities.

·         I believe that M4D MOOC supported many teaching strategies like learning material from field experts (video lectures/slides) were following information transmission strategy. Participation in forums and chat rooms provided collaborative learning among students. A very good quality of content has been generated in forums and chat rooms.

Please comment on the instructional design or technology support that was available to you as a developer or instructor for the M4D MOOC, and whether the support met your pedagogical objectives for the course and its students?

Reviewer comments:

Most of the team comments dealt with the technical aspects of instructional resource production. In some cases team members had knowledge or skills that enabled them to produce their own resources. In other cases specialized support was provided, particularly for video production.

One role that was not discussed explicitly in comments was instructional design support for the primary structure of the learning outcomes, resources, activities and assessment strategies within the M4D course. This is an area of practice that also requires specialized support from professionals.

·         Instructional design: It was mainly from my own experience; I did not look for any specific support in this area. However, I reviewed my lecture briefly with co-instructors to get their feedback for any glaring issues or improvements. Technology support: I myself was one of the technology support persons (There were others as well) for M4D MOOC. Tech support included: 1. Managing content on the LMS platform that we used. 2. Monitoring the web server for security and other issues (usual stuff associated with any public facing web application). 3. Editing raw lecture videos. I believe that both instructors and students were satisfied with the generation and delivery of content (whether generated by instructors as video lectures, or by students via online discussions).

·         For creating content, we used a mash-up of tools readily available in the Institute – like recording studio, Adobe video editing, MS PowerPoint, IHMC Cmap tools. Do wish we had professional level video editing and animation support was available.

·         Instructional design support provided during the video creation process was crucial to the success of my contribution to the MOOC; well-designed professionally looking multimedia materials are a vital element of any online course.

·         The video production facilities at COL allowed me to develop the videos. The LMS worked well for the course. For MOOC in developing countries it is important to have simple LMS that allow people with low connectivity to access the learning materials. The LMS was appropriate for this.

·         We used Sakai, which is an open source MOOC platform. From functionality point of view, it had most of the features available to us. However, a lot of effort has been spent in customizing these features according to our needs. For course registration process, we developed a new Drupal based application.

Please comment on the attributes of the technical platform used to deliver the M4D MOOC and in particular its ability to support your pedagogical objectives for students?

·         Primarily we wanted to have two pedagogical threads: 1. For dissemination of content 2. For allowing collaboration amongst participants. Second one — collaboration — inherently allowed for inquiry based learning. Technology platform that we chose supported the above two threads (it had online discussion forums and chat rooms, and also well sequenced video lectures). Other area where choice of technology platform was important was content creation. Chosen tools allowed us to record/edit video lectures in a flexible manner.

·         Used Sakai, hosted on Amazon. It is not a sophisticated platform like edX, but it suited quite well since our audience were not challenged by the platform. The chat room could have been better, though.

·         The selected platform offered an environment conducive to online learning through resource and expertise sharing. Materials were well organized and linked to the relevant discussion and private space in the platform. There were tools for synchronous and asynchronous interaction supporting knowledge co-creation. The platform was rather easy to navigate and a variety of tools were available to enable a more personalized learning experience. Students could easily contact other learners as well as instructors.

·         The platform allowed for the presentation of the information and for forum participation. It was simple for the novice to use. In this course, there was technical help for those with access problems.

·         The Sakai platform was robust and customizable. We had very few minor technical issues during the course. It had all features to handle our pedagogical objectives.

Please comment about how well you believe the M4D MOOC design supported the desired learning outcomes that the course was intended to deliver.

Reviewer comments:

Team members took the opportunity in this question to comment about the success of the M4D course in achieving its desired learning outcomes, and to offer thoughts on how the M4D design might be improved.

Improvement strategies suggested included:

o    Peer groups or TAs to support learners

o    More quizzes after each lecture

o    Lecture-based discussion threads

o    Personalization tactics

o    Activities to help develop skills

o    Opportunities for local sub-groups, support groups and access to locale experts

The recommendations for improvement cited by team members in Question 6 should be used as a set of design features for consideration and testing in future iterations of the M4D course.

·         Course participants, expectedly, had large variation in background and course access environment. Despite this diversity, the online discussions/chats that happened on M4D showed that the intended learning outcomes were achieved to a great extent.

·         Correcting the homework (either through peer groups or through TAs) would have helped greatly. More quizzes, especially in the middle or immediately after each lecture would be good. Lecture based discussion threads (even though this was attempted, platform support was not available) would have helped.

·         As mentioned above the MOOC design was effective; however, additional strategies to guide participants to the discussions and materials that were of particular interest to them would be desirable. For instance, forming sub-groups or discussion forums focusing on a particular issue/topic as opposed to having all discussions in one overwhelmingly large forum. Any strategies to provide more guidance towards resources/discussions on particular interests of learners, as well as personalizing the experience – making participants feel that they are individual student as opposed one of a few thousands of students.

·         The learning outcomes of the course were more of an awareness of M4D and information on how to use M4D and case studies around the world. Hence, the design supported the learning outcomes. If the learning outcomes were to develop skills in M4D then more depth should be covered and the participants should be given activities to develop the skills. To develop the skills, a blended approach will be good where participants learn the information in the MOOC and they work with local experts to develop the hands on skills.

·         The course was designed to teach technical concepts through real life examples and case studies. By looking at the participation in forums and chat rooms, I believe that the course did a great job in empowering participants (with little or no technical background) to use mobile technologies in development issues.

·         1. Should be comfortable and enthusiastic about online engagement. 2. Should have access to the Internet.

·         Engagement. Wanting to learn rather than a certificate (we had a few like that)

·         Commitment to participation and completion of the entire course or all the elements of the course that are relevant to them, which might be achieved by customizing the learning path for individuals in the course.

·         Students should have the following attributes: (1) good communications skills (2) good ethics not to offend anyone (3) basic computer skills (4) flexibility in time to access the course materials and to participate in synchronous sessions because of different time zones (5) good time management skills (6) be able to read and understand the language the language the MOOC is delivered in.

·         To be successful in a course like M4D MOOC, students should regularly cover the course material and actively participate in the course activities. Apart from learning content, the course provided a platform to students for discussion on development issues with the field experts as well as other students.

·         None.

·         We send the course material to some of the students, on a CD. The course was about Technology for the non-technologist. It was about ‘solution architecture’ — a design of the solution by the Domain expert with ‘architectural level knowledge’ of the technology (for example, missed calls and how to use them in a solution).

·         Having participated in a number of MOOCs, I believe that it would be beneficial to learners to provide them with a more personalized experience offering expert support in terms of guidance through the course materials and activities as well as the subject matter expertise. The role of the instructor and other learning supports remains vital which results in certain limitations in terms of the cost and start/end dates of the course.

·         For the first implementation of this MOOC, the design and delivery were excellent. For future delivery the following are suggested. (1) Have weekly forums (2) Get people in local areas to meet each other for collaboration (3) summarize the forums so participants get a sense of completion (4) provide high level discussion questions for critical thinking.