OPEN AND ONLINE EDUCATION
01
SEPT 2014
special edition on
DIDACTICS
A publication by SURF and the Open Education special interest Group
WWW.SURF.NL
open and online education // special edition on didactics
ABOUT THIS SPECIAL EDITION
This special edition on the didactics of open and online education is published by SURF and the
Open Education Special Interest Group.
This edition contains articles by Hanneke Duisterwinkel (Eindhoven University of Technology),
Pierre Gorissen (Fontys University of Applied Sciences), Robert Schuwer (Fontys University of
Applied Sciences/Open Universiteit), Peter Sloep (Open Universiteit) and Marjolein van Trigt
(freelance copywriter and journalist). The report has been edited by Hester Jelgerhuis (SURF) and
Robert Schuwer (Fontys University of Applied Sciences/Open Universiteit).
‘Pressure cook’ session
Prior to this edition, SURF organised a ‘pressure cook’ session on the didactics of open and online
education on 24 June 2014. The aim of this meeting was to quickly get to the bottom of the key
issues, solutions, opportunities and requirements surrounding this current topic with a number of
experts and pioneers, focusing on: what are the do’s & don’ts?
The following experts took part in this session:
Gerard Baars - Erasmus University Rotterdam
Frank Benneker - University of Amsterdam
Peter Dekker - Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences/Hogeschool van Amsterdam
Sofia Dopper - Delft University of Technology
Hanneke Duisterwinkel - Eindhoven University ­­­­­­of Technology
Renée Filius - University Medical Center Utrecht
Janina van Hees - SURF
Pierre Gorissen - Fontys University of Applied Sciences
Hester Jelgerhuis - SURF
Eja Kliphuis - Inholland University of Applied Sciences
Wim van Petegem - KU Leuven
Robert Schuwer - Fontys University of Applied Sciences/ Open Universiteit
Peter Sloep - Open Universiteit
Menno Thijssen - Edumundo
Mark Visser - Studytube
Nicolai van der Woert - Radboud University Medical Center
More information
•SURF’s Open and Online Education Innovation Programme: www.surf.nl/openeducation
•Open Education Special Interest Group on SURFspace (with information about the special
interest group, news, articles, literature, videos and conference blogs): ­www.surfspace.nl/
openeducation
•Open Education Special Interest Group on LinkedIn (with news and discussions):
http://tinyurl.com/SIGOERlinkedin
Copyright
this report is available under the Creative Commons licence Attribution 3.0
Netherlands (www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/nl)
2
3
open and online education // special edition on didactics
CONTENTS
Introduction article
Didactics of open and online education: the do’s & don’ts
04
05
by Marjolein van Trigt
intermezzo
Five pitches
article
Didactic methods for open and online education
11
15
by Peter B. Sloep
intermezzo
Quality Assurance in e-learning
19
article
Open and online education in higher professional
and academic education: never the twain shall meet?
20
by Hanneke Duisterwinkel, Pierre Gorissen and Robert Schuwer
intermezzo
List of sources for didactics of open and online education
25
open and online education // special edition on didactics
INTRODUCTION
The increasing availability of open learning materials and the rise of massive open online course
(MOOCs) has led to growing interest in the online provision of education by higher education
institutions.
The topic of open and online education features highly on the Dutch higher education agenda.
Given the rapid developments in this area and their potentially huge impact, Dutch research
universities and universities of applied sciences are faced with the strategic question of what this
will mean for them and for their students, and must now determine whether and how to use open
and online education.
Aside from the huge potential of open and online education, many questions also need to
be answered. Questions about issues such as didactic methods, online testing and feedback,
the development of open learning materials, the recognition of open and online education in
the context of formal education, the use of learning analytics, operational management and
organisation, technical preconditions, laws and regulations and legal aspects. SURF has been
helping to prioritise and answer these questions through its Open and Online Education Innovation
Programme.
SURF is working in close collaboration with the Open Education Special Interest Group to organise
three ‘pressure cook’ sessions on current issues relating to open and online education. The aim
of these sessions is to get together with a number of pioneers and experts in order to brainstorm
about a current topic and to identify the issues, solutions, opportunities and ideas.
The first session addressed the topic of ‘didactic issues surrounding open and online education’.
Open and online education has experienced a boom. However, the didactic methods used in
MOOCs and more generally in online education have come in for a great deal of criticism. Research
into the didactics of online education has been carried out over a number of decades now and,
according to critics, new providers of online education have so far failed to take heed of the results
of this research. Questions tackled during the session included: what are the key issues in the
didactic practice of open and online education? What are the potential answers and/or solutions?
What research results, practical experience or good practices are relevant in this context? Where
do the opportunities lie for Dutch higher education? The meeting was closed with a number of
conclusions regarding do’s & don’ts when in the didactics of open and online education.
This special edition contains three articles and three intermezzos. To start us off, Marjolein van Trigt
describes the key outcomes of the ‘pressure cook’ session. In addition to this, the report features
an in-depth article by Peter Sloep (Open Universiteit) on this theme. Hanneke Duisterwinkel
(Eindhoven University of Technology), Pierre Gorissen (Fontys University of Applied Sciences)
and Robert Schuwer (Fontys University of Applied Sciences/Open Universiteit) describe how
experiences with this theme differ in higher professional education and academic education. The
intermezzos bring together the background literature, present a framework for setting up highquality online education, and feature a number of pitches from the ‘pressure cook’ session.
We hope you enjoy reading this report, and that this publication will contribute towards the further
growth of high-quality open and online education.
Hester Jelgerhuis
Robert Schuwer
4
5
open and online education // special edition on didactics
ARTICLE
DIDACTICS OF
OPEN AND ONLINE
EDUCATION:
THE DO’S & DON’TS
Open and online education:
a chance to improve higher education
by Marjolein van Trigt
Open and online education offers plenty of opportunities
to improve the quality, accessibility and efficiency of higher
education. The topic has experienced a boom, particularly due
to the growing popularity of MOOCs. However, the didactic
methods used in MOOCs and online education in general have
come in for a great deal of criticism. Research into the didactics
of online education has been carried out over a number
of decades now, but, according to critics, online education
providers have so far failed to take heed of the results of this
research. In response to this, SURF organised a ‘pressure cook’
session on the didactics of this new form of education. The aim
of this meeting was to quickly get to the bottom of the key
issues, solutions, opportunities and requirements surrounding
this current topic with a number of experts, focusing on: what
are the do’s & don’ts?
Ask a dozen experts about the didactic methods of
open and online education and the opportunities and
challenges, and you will find that they are surprisingly
united in opinion. If only everyone knew what we know,
is the prevailing view. Some have been dealing with the
didactics of online education for thirty years now. Get
them started on the criticism of MOOCs – free online
courses for large numbers of participants – and they
will heave a sigh. Too impersonal? Too little focus on
the individual and their learning objectives? For years,
they have been listening to virtually the same objections
against distance education, against e-learning, against
whatever the latest term is that year. Yet many critics
make no actual effort to read up on the existing mountain
of research literature about online learning. Moreover,
many of the criticisms could just as well be applied to
traditional education.
A rich learning experience
At the other end of the spectrum, enthusiasts occasionally
Marjolein van Trigt ­
([email protected])
is a freelance copywriter and
journalist. She is fascinated by
the influence of technology
on our daily lives and writes
about this topic for a number
of publications, including Vrij
Nederland magazine. Marjolein
regularly produces articles on
developments in open and
online education for SURF.
get carried away about the many advantages of MOOCs.
But open and online education goes far beyond the
mostly closed (not freely distributable or editable) and
usually educationally limited MOOCs. For many of the
experts, openness has been a given for a long time
now. In their view, it is not only the real world that is our
classroom: we must also be able to freely draw on the
virtual world in order to learn. Nor are experts keen to see
a breakdown of traditional education, insofar as open and
online education could even effect this in the Netherlands.
Nicolai van der Woert, senior policy officer at the
Radboud University Medical Center, points out that the
rise of MOOCs adds important new components. The
MOOC target group is much larger and much more
diverse than higher education institutions are accustomed
to. How do you find an effective didactic method to
cater for such a wide range of cultural backgrounds? A
new approach and new research are required. What the
emergence of MOOCs has produced in the first instance
is a very strong focus on online teaching methods,
placing this topic back on administrative agendas. The
6
open and online education // special edition on didactics
new interest in open and online education presents
opportunities to reform education within institutions.
Smarter design can help to make teaching more personal,
enjoyable and a richer experience for participants. But
that means we need to start again with the basics. The
technology is of secondary importance, so say the
experts. The primary focus must be on the learning
objectives.
The learning objective is paramount
‘There is a tendency to use traditional education, with a
lecturer giving lectures, as a default setting when designing
new forms of education, and to create variations on this’,
argues Professor Peter Sloep of the Open Universiteit.
‘By doing this you immediately place yourself at a
disadvantage from a teaching point of view. You are
neglecting to consider all sorts of alternative teaching
methods that are made possible by online elements.’
Practical do’s for the didactics of open and
online education
The experts who took part in the ‘pressure cook’ session were
keen to stress that in many respects, the didactics of open
and online education are no different from the didactics of
campus education. For this reason, this list includes tips (do’s)
for the didactics of open and online education that also apply
to campus education.
Design process
•Do not take the existing educational offering as a starting
point.
•Start with the design of education: why (learning
objectives), for whom, what (content) and how (working
methods and learning activities).
•Determine the roles of students, lecturers, moderators and
so on in advance.
•Base your design on research results.
•Make sure your design accounts for different learning
styles.
•Make sure your design accounts for different cultural
contexts.
•Search for the ideal combination of online and offline
working methods.
•Look at whether you can use existing open learning
materials instead of developing everything yourself.
•Draw up a step-by-step plan for the development phase.
•Draw up a checklist of criteria that online education must
meet.
•Adjust the design: explore as you go along what does and
what does not work in open and online education (learning
about learning).
Implementation
•Increase the applicability of what is being taught: translate it
into practice.
•Allow students to learn in relation to their own environment;
preferably let them work on their own case studies.
•Tie in with the students’ prior knowledge.
•Use active working methods.
•Facilitate interaction and collaboration between students.
•Push students to make a mental effort.
•Take into account the diversity of the often large target
group.
•Cater for individual learning requirements.
•Start by working out students’ learning pathway and then
determine how lecturers can best provide guidance during
this process.
•Make sure that the digital tests and assignments used
challenge students.
•Opt for short learning units.
•Build in a lot of repetition.
•Avoid mere talking heads.
•Seek links with evidence-based education.
•Use learning analytics to gain insight into learning
behaviour and student progress.
•Plan learning activities sequentially rather than in parallel.
•Opt for a clear rhythm.
•Draw up a time schedule.
•Give clear instructions.
Communication
•Provide prompt and effective feedback (from lecturers,
peers, etc.).
•Determine which feedback can be automated and which
feedback requires the human touch.
•Keep students active and involved, by building in regular
contact times.
•Keep a close eye on discussions in the forum, select the
most important questions and topics and get lecturers or
moderators to respond to them.
•Ensure the social presence of the lecturer, a ‘human
moderator’ who provides students with feedback and
guidance.
•Think carefully about an effective and responsive
interaction model.
•Listen to students’ wishes, requirements and satisfaction.
•Make student progress transparent.
•Reward students for positive results.
7
open and online education // special edition on didactics
First and foremost: open and online education is a means,
not a goal. Open and online education can be used to
enable students to achieve specific learning objectives.
Placing the learning objective first means that each
teaching situation becomes a design brief, complete with
a description of the target group and the preconditions.
The didactic methods come first, the technology later.
A challenge faced here is that education institutions do
not usually view teaching as a design brief, notes ICT
specialist Frank Benneker of the University of Amsterdam.
The starting point when designing a teaching method is
that the form of education must be the most effective
method for a specific target group in a specific context.
According to Eja Kliphuis, policy officer and researcher at
Inholland, ‘The crux lies in devising effective assignments
that pinpoint what students do and don’t understand.
For example, doctoral research (Muller, 2008)1 has shown
that on watching a video about gravity without knowing
it, students retained their own misconceptions about the
subject. In this context (physics) it is more effective if the
video deals with generic misconceptions about gravity.’
Context
Kliphuis points out that, in practice, the inclusion of videos
and web lectures forms a ‘natural bridge’ for lecturers
between the classroom and online education, more so
than the use of an ELO such as Blackboard. This presents
opportunities. At Delft University of Technology, videos
are regularly used as an introduction to a topic. ‘When
used this way they are designed to stimulate students,
for example by presenting them with a practical example
that resonates and that they can connect with,’ explains
Sofia Dopper, e-learning consultant at Delft University of
Technology. She immediately emphasises that context
is essential here. ‘It works well for that subject, in that
situation, but this doesn’t mean videos should be used
solely for that purpose, or that it works like that for all
subjects.’
On the one hand, the stacks of research literature about
open and online education have grown into quite a
mountain over the last few years, that rises proudly
alongside the high mountains of literature about didactics
in general. It would be a shame not to draw on the
research literature, for instance to draw the attention of
boards, lecturers and education developers to the existing
body of knowledge. On the other hand, context plays an
essential role in determining what works well.
1
Muller, D.A. (2008). Designing Effective Multimedia for Psychics Education.
Gevonden op: www.physics.usyd.edu.au/super/theses/PhD(Muller).pdf
Helping to make a start
Imagine that a lecturer, policy officer or governor,
encouraged by the media attention for MOOCs, wants to
seek advice about introducing a form of open and online
education at their own institution. How should the experts
help them to make a start? Together they formulate three
questions.
1.What do you want to achieve? What challenge do you
want to solve? It can be an educational challenge, but
also an organisational or marketing problem.
2.Who is your target group? Which demographics,
which level of education and which prior knowledge
are you talking about?
3.Has someone else already done it? What is known
about it? What content is already available?
Once these questions have been answered, we can move on
to the ‘what’ and ‘how’ questions: What learning activities
do you want to develop? How will you approach this?
Who will do what and when? Facilitating an enthusiastic
lecturer is an excellent start for an institution that wants to
make its mark through open and online education. Give the
lecturer the confidence that it is feasible and that expert
support is available. Make it clear from the outset what you
expect from the lecturer and what they can expect from
the institution. Point out available financial resources and
audiovisual or ICT facilities. An enthusiastic lecturer also
needs support with legal matters, teaching and content.
They may be inclined to stick to what they are used to as a
basis. Instead, help them to focus on the learning objectives
and to use this as the basis for shaping the open and online
education. Start with the design before moving on to
development and implementation. The didactic methods
come first, the form second. Put together a design and
development team. Test the education before it goes online
to ensure that you can make timely adjustments. Draw up a
step-by-step plan for the development of online education.
A checklist of conditions that online education must meet
before it can go live is also essential. This checklist should
contain both simple points, such as ‘videos never last longer
than 10 minutes’, and complex quality criteria.
Lecturer professionalisation
A good way of providing lecturers with insight into
the possibilities of open and online education is to get
them to experience it for himself first. In addition to
this, an enthusiastic lecturer must be allowed scope to
experiment, ideally in combination with scientific research
into the effect of their experiments. By developing from
practice to practice, lecturers will discover what works, for
whom, in what context and why.
8
open and online education // special edition on didactics
Challenges that may be faced include copyright,
findability, didactic methods and the quality of existing
learning materials, states Pierre Gorissen, senior
consultant at Fontys University of Applied Sciences.
Lecturers need support in these areas.
with the aim to attain the knowledge covered in the first
two weeks and then quit, they are not actually dropping
out, but achieving a particular learning objective.
Human touch
Lecturer professionalisation is an important precondition
for improving the didactics of open and online education.
Wim van Petegem, senior lecturer and education support
officer at KU Leuven, identifies three different levels of
lecturer support.
‘We can encourage lecturers to do this themselves for
quite a few things, given the basic tools. But additional
expertise or special infrastructure is needed for a
somewhat bolder approach. In this case, teamwork
between the lecturer and the parties providing the
support is what is required. The solution of very complex
issues is best left to a professional team.’
Hanneke Duisterwinkel, education advisor at Eindhoven
University of Technology, comments: ‘Lecturers usually
discuss problems amongst themselves. They then carry
out independent research on the computer to find out
how their colleague’s method works. Internal research at
the Eindhoven University of Technology has shown that
they do not need support from an education specialist
until a late stage.’
Personalisation
In addition to the role of the lecturer, the student’s
requirements are an important factor in the didactics
of open and online education. Van Petegem stresses
that students want to be challenged. Their use of the
technology can be a source of inspiration when designing
education. Often, however, not all students have sufficient
intrinsic motivation. Renée Filius, programme manager at
the University Medical Center Utrecht, explains. ‘Students
first need to experience new forms of education. Otherwise
they tend to choose what is familiar.’ Personalised
education is the key to higher quality and greater
effectiveness, claim the experts. Ideally, open and online
education enables students to learn in the way that works
best for them personally. Learning analytics make it easier
to see when someone is falling behind, so students can
be provided with additional clarification or more in-depth
material in good time. According to Bennecker, Quantified
Education, or customised education, has everything it
takes to become the ultimate breeding ground for new
technology.
Personalised education also calls for taking a different view
on student drop-outs. If a student signs up for an MOOC
The greatest didactic challenge is to establish social
networks and collaboration in online education, argues
Sloep. He stresses that while this teaching method has
proved itself effective2, it is difficult to achieve online.
Students place a high value on the social dimension
of campus education, and getting them to realise the
opportunities for social encounters in online education
is a challenge. In terms of didactic methods, Sloep has
placed his hope in smart technologies such as artificial
intelligence, language technology and recommender
systems3. This does not mean that the role of the online
lecturer has become redundant. The human moderator,
who looks at the learner in depth, can be partly offset
through the use of peers – that is, learners who coach
and assess each other. However, expert guidance remains
the most effective. As such, Filius has more confidence in
small private online courses (SPOCs). It is best to apply
the human touch where it is really vital and to use it to
maximum effect in these areas. In the words of Gorissen:
‘We must no longer make a distinction between online
and face-to-face education, but work towards a situation
in which we say: “We provide open and online education,
unless…” We should no longer have to say: “Explain to me
why it needs to be online”, but instead “Explain to me why
it needs to be face-to-face”. It’s about getting the perfect
mix of working methods.’
Target groups and culture
Personalisation also means that the design of an
online course must also take into account the cultural
background of the target group. Although Sebastian
Thrun, founder of the Udacity MOOC platform, believes
that the world will be able to manage with ten or
so research universities in the future, in the experts’
experience, cross-border cultural differences have a major
and immediate impact on education: a Dutch person
might tackle a problem differently to a Belgian. From
a designer’s perspective, this problem can be partly
overcome. For example, by giving students a choice of
See for example Bitter-Rijpkema, M.E., Verjans, S., Didderen, W., & Sloep,
P.B. (2014). Biebkracht - Library professionals empowered through an
interorganizational learning network: design principles and evolution. In
L. Carvalho & P. Goodyear (Eds), The Architecture of Productive Learning
Networks (pp.152-167). New York, London: Routledge Falmer.
3
Sloep, P.B. (2013). Networked professional learning. In A. Littlejohn & A.
Margaryan (Eds), Technology-enhanced Professional Learning: Processes,
Practices and Tools (pp.97-108). London: Routledge.
2
9
open and online education // special edition on didactics
several versions of the course. By contrast, ‘providing
education to the world’ by presenting your own cultural
vision as a general truth is short-sighted and arrogant.
During the design process, always be aware of where
you yourself come from. Most importantly, look at the
background of your target group.
Sharing examples
Perhaps the most important gain from the rise of MOOCs
is the renewed focus on teaching. Whereas previously
academic activity was often dominated by research,
since the emergence of MOOCs it has been possible to
once again gain credit for ‘standing in front of a class’.
The door to the classroom is literally open to anyone
who wants to take a look. An interesting development
is that lecturers are transferring their newly acquired
skills in online education to campus education. For
instance, giving online lectures makes them think more
consciously about the purpose of a lecture and the best
way to convey the message, both online and in front of
a class. Not only are the didactics of open and online
education being extensively researched and improved,
but campus education too is benefiting from new insights.
Blended forms of learning are being used, for example. By
describing and sharing these insights, emergent practices
can change into good practices and then into shared
practices, states Kliphuis. SURF can play an important role
in this process. The gathering of good practices for design
approaches, but also the sharing of checklists, step-bystep plans and other useful tools for optimising didactic
methods, makes open and online education accessible for
anyone who needs to redesign their education.
Who thinks what?
‘Not enough attention was paid to our colleagues (not just
‘In my view, when you go to set up an MOOC, you have to
the lecturers but also support staff and administrators) in
start by formulating the learning objectives and determining
the professionalisation process. They are the best and most
the target group and the learning activities needed to
undervalued ambassadors for open and online education. It is
enable participants to achieve the learning objectives.
time for a revival of the fittest.’
Which exercises can be done online, where can you fit
Nicolai van der Woert, senior policy officer at the Education
in collaborative assignments, what content is needed?
Innovation Office, Radboud University Medical Center
Incidentally, these questions also apply to the impact of
campus education.’
‘Well-designed education is more important than knowledge-
Sofia Dopper, Online and Distance Education project leader
based education. Though this doesn’t just apply to online
at Delft University of Technology and e-learning consultant
learning, the consequences of unclear instructions are
at OC Focus, Delft University of Technology
particularly evident online: if there is any confusion the
lecturer becomes overloaded with work.’
‘Didactic methods are fairly universal and do not always
Gerard Baars, director of the Risbo research institute,
depend on the type of education. What is really important is
Erasmus University Rotterdam
to increase the impact of education and intrinsic motivation:
learning can be enjoyable! Look for the right didactic
‘I see opportunities. The key is practical research: knowing
approaches.’
what works and why, and for whom, in which context. Devise,
Mark Visser, chairman of the Online Learning Market Group/
design, test, improve.’
BVLT at NRTO and e-learning expert at Studytube
Eja Kliphuis, education policy officer at the Faculty of
Engineering, Design and Computing, Inholland University of
‘MOOCs and social media have made people accustomed to
Applied Sciences, and researcher in the eLearning Research
open and online education. That’s a huge advantage. As a
Group
counterpart to the massive scale of MOOCs, institutions are
increasingly focusing on small private online courses (SPOCs).
‘Higher professional education institutions still offer campus
Participants view the collaboration and the intensive coaching
education, with online education alongside. We want to
guidance within SPOCs as added value.’
integrate these two forms to create ‘inline education’. With
Renée Filius, programme manager at Elevate, a partnership
blended education, everyone thinks that they know what it
of institutions including University Medical Center Utrecht
involves. By using the term ‘inline’, we provoke discussion.’
and Utrecht University
Pierre Gorissen, senior consultant and researcher at Fontys
University of Applied Sciences
10
open and online education // special edition on didactics
‘What should be the business model for education, and how is
essence is still the same: learning. The technology is now so
the role of providers changing? That will be the key question.
normal that we no longer need to give it a special name. So
Everyone wants to hold onto what they have, but change is
now we can once more simply talk about learning.’
essential in order to survive.’
Wim van Petegem, senior lecturer and head of the Media
Menno Thijssen, entrepreneur, investor and CEO at
and Learning Division at KU Leuven and secretary of the
organisations including Edumundo
Bednet Foundation
‘How do you organise social learning for groups of students
‘”The future is already here, it’s just not evenly distributed”,
who the lecturer does not know, particularly when these
William Gibson once said. The time has come to redeem an
groups can be extremely large and even “massive”? Use smart
old promise, of the highly personalised learning pathways in
technology to get to know your students, to find out who
a socially appropriate context. Ubiquitous information and
they are, what drives them, what they can already do and
technology and the quantified society have now made this
what they already know.’
possible.’
Peter Sloep, professor of Teaching in and with Technology at
Frank Benneker, specialist in ICT in education at the
the Open Universiteit
University of Amsterdam
‘You learn by relating and by making a mental effort.
‘We cannot get by with old education paradigms. The
Preferably, get students to contribute their own case studies.
lecturer identifies the learning objectives. He translates
Focus on active learning activities and establish interaction. A
them into learning activities by looking at what students
human moderator who looks at the learner in depth is equally
can do themselves and what they need him for. It makes no
essential online.’
difference whether it is online or offline. It’s all about focusing
Peter Dekker, education advisor at the Amsterdam University
on the student.’
of Applied Sciences/Hogeschool van Amsterdam
Hanneke Duisterwinkel, education advisor for web lectures
and MOOCs and educational reform advisor at Eindhoven
‘The discussion around learning changed into a discussion
about e-learning, then about online learning, etcetera. But the
University of Technology.
open and online education // special edition on didactics
INTERMEZZO
FIVE PITCHES
During the ‘pressure cook’ session on 24 June 2014, experts made a short
pitch in which they presented their stance on the key issues, solutions and
opportunities, or on the most important do’s and don’ts, of open and online
education. Five pitches are presented here in full.
Pitch by Mark Visser, Studytube
Learning should be both instructive and enjoyable! The applicability of the material being taught is
essential in order to significantly increase the impact of education. How much of the subject matter
do students actually retain after the average ‘old-fashioned’ test or examination? Exactly... So, what
can we do about this? If you have students apply the material to a relevant practical situation –
preferably their own – right from the start, the result is almost always (much) better!
Here are some tips for a number of other things you should try to take into account when
developing online learning modules:
•Work with short ‘learning nuggets’ lasting no more than 10 to 15 minutes per block. This helps to
increase retention for an average participant.
•Many short repetitions boosts the impact.
• Use lots of multimedia elements to heighten the appeal.
•Combine online with class teaching (blended/inline learning!). Choose a suitable form depending
on the learning objective.
•Apply adaptive education by regularly asking knowledge assimilation questions in keeping with
each participant’s results, and use this as a basis to determine whether or not to automatically
offer extra clarification.
• Ensure students are intrinsically motivated. Learning can be enjoyable, even very much so!
•Work with incentives. For example, implement a ‘high score’ for each main function group if
possible, thereby encouraging course participants to take the module more than once. Introduce
a prize for the top 3 students/colleagues in each function group.
• Add gamification elements where possible, but only if this is realistic for the situation in question.
•Provide a clear structure with a table of contents and a searchable glossary to ensure that the
same modules can also be consulted as a reference work.
•Work with ‘use cases’ when developing the content of SMART board training. ‘As a user I want
to…’ and then teach the participant this step by step.
•Keep the aims and learning objectives in view during implementation by linking every
development to the learning objective in question.
•Regularly check whether the established objectives and expected learning outcomes have been
achieved and evaluate all components of the module/study programme.
•Do not create false expectations, be realistic and clearly show the added value of the solution to
be implemented and why we need to learn all of this.
•Technology is only a means, and never an end in itself. Ultimately, it all revolves around the
content.
• Provide high-quality and accessible lecturers/coaches for users.
Pitch by Renée Filius, University Medical Center Utrecht
Online open education is experiencing a boom. All top international institutions around the world
are investing in it. Developments in the field of online education have been given a huge boost
by the introduction of MOOCs. Some Dutch institutions (Delft University of Technology, Leiden
University) have immediately invested in this by joining an MOOC platform, whilst others (such as
the Wageningen UR) went on to do so later and others still (Utrecht University) have consciously
chosen not to move in this direction for the time being.
11
open and online education // special edition on didactics
INTERMEZZO
Since autumn 2013, the initial hype surrounding MOOCs has died down and more criticisms are
emerging. This includes criticism of the underlying didactic concept – for instance, can you provide
students with good instruction when there are thousands of them simultaneously? And why is the
pass rate so lamentably low (around 3%)? Criticism has also been levelled at the target group. After
all, part of the reason for setting up MOOCs was to reach people who would otherwise have no
access to education, but in practice it turns out that few people in that target group are actually
being reached. The majority of MOOC participants come from Western countries where high
incomes are the norm. And then there is also criticism of the business model, which has not been
worked out in sufficient detail to maintain MOOCs over the long term.
The development of MOOCs naturally also offers a wide range of benefits. MOOCs have placed
online education back on administrative agendas. The use of MOOCs opens opportunities for
large-scale research into education and a great deal can be learned about teaching methods and
the ways in which people learn. They are viewed as a testing ground for undergraduate education.
Resources that are developed for MOOCs are also being used in mainstream education, where
students are reaping the benefits. This is referred to as blended education.
Partly under pressure from the criticism of MOOCs, more institutions are switching to SPOCs, or
small-scale online education. Last November, Udacity – one of the three largest MOOC platforms –
announced that it intends to shift its main focus from MOOCs to SPOCs. And in May 2014, Harvard
announced that it wants to invest more in SPOCs, including with the launch of two small-scale MBA
programmes. This triggered much debate: shouldn’t education of all things be public and free?
When so, and when not?
The term ‘SPOC’ was only coined November 2013, but the concept has been around much longer.
Utrecht University is one institution that consciously decided, back in 2010, to invest in this type
of education, which provides an answer to the criticisms aimed at MOOCs. To this end, Utrecht
University has collaborated with the University Medical Center Utrecht to set up an open SPOC
platform called Elevate (www.ElevateHealth.eu). Courses that are held on campus can also be taken
online via the SPOC platform – on a small scale, with personal guidance and with the same learning
objectives and examinations as in mainstream education.
Now that the initial hype surrounding MOOCs has died down, it is interesting to look beyond them
to the pros and cons of all types of education. Where should institutions focus their efforts? Will
the three forms (MOOCs, SPOCs and blended education) continue to exist alongside each other, or
will choices be made? Or might we see more new forms?
Pitch by Sofia Dopper, Delft University of Technology
The criticism of the didactics of MOOCs often stems from the emphasis on transmission. I agree
with this criticism to some extent, because you do indeed see that people who set to work on an
MOOC initially focus a lot of energy on the content, on the narrative that they want to convey,
and then especially on the best way to turn this into a video. But in fact, what they should be
thinking about is what people taking part in an MOOC actually need to do to achieve the MOOC’s
learning objectives. Because, just like with campus education, when we are designing an MOOC
or online course we should start with the learning activities and only then consider the content. I
also disagree with the criticism to some extent, because some MOOCs offer more opportunities for
practice, interaction and feedback than many on-campus courses.
As an illustration, in Delft we offered a course with an online version that was designed entirely
around participants’ learning activities. In the past, this course had had a high failure rate. Everyone
could follow the demonstrations given during the lecture, but when the time came to do it
themselves on the exam, they couldn’t. In the online version the exercises and assignments now
play a central role, and students work in small groups and provide feedback on each other’s work.
We conscious opted against including short web lectures. The short films are entirely designed
to ensure students do exercises and study the book, by stimulating and challenging them. There
has been a huge increase in the pass rate, to 95%. The on-campus version of this course is now
blended. There is a physical kick-off meeting and the group work is also done face-to-face.
12
open and online education // special edition on didactics
INTERMEZZO
We have observed that this route from online to blended is much more effective than from faceto-face to blended, because you have a different mindset: you are designing for participants
who cannot come to the campus. This makes it easier to break away from face-to-face didactics,
in other words the course as it previously was. And I also think that this is precisely where the
greatest opportunities lie for Dutch higher education. If we are able to reuse all that is currently
being developed in terms of MOOCs, online courses and digital materials within our campus
education, this could lead to huge improvements in our higher education.
Pitch by Frank Benneker, University of Amsterdam
William Gibson said: ‘The future is already here, it’s just not evenly distributed.’ This quote is the
essence of the current debate. Aggrieved academics that are not being recognised by the selfmade education reformers and entrepreneurs who would change the world overnight. We already
have all of the ingredients needed for a true innovation that brings the future that is unfolding
around us into education.
To prepare for this pitch, I went through one of my own presentations from 2007
on the opportunities, challenges and threats to the promise of – sure enough – reusable learning
objects. The conclusions described there in connection with a study for the Digital University are
still valid and recognisable today. But now open educational resources and, in their wake, MOOCs
have come to occupy the spotlight, sometimes on the very same well-trodden path, and without
offering new solutions or insights.
Nothing seems to have changed, and yet everything has changed. I would contend that the real
challenge for open education lies not in fitting it into the current instructional model. Rather, daring
and vision are required to redeem an old promise: the promise of a highly personalised learning
experience, in a socially appropriate context, based on personal learning pathways and a relevant,
personalised curriculum. I believe that some of the essential conditions have been met in order to
actually fulfil this promise.
The two most important social-technological developments worldwide for shaping this vision are
ubiquitous information and technology, on the one hand, and quantified society, on the other.
The first is now part of the fabric of the world we live in and in all the devices we use every day to
obtain, create and disseminate information.
It’s impossible to imagine life today without quantified society – in other words, the urge to
measure that controls more and more aspects of our personal lives: from Big Data discussions to
the Nike armband that brings the quantified self into people’s private lives. I would argue that this
needs to lead to a form of quantified education: education that is customised and keyed to the
right phase of personal development.
Education is the ultimate testing ground for these new technologies. The real question is what form
of education is offered and why. Are we merely seeking substitution – implementing technology
to optimise existing practice? Or will we actually set the bar higher and take on the challenge to
transform education and to explore which new forms of personal online open education, of datadriven education, are possible?
Pitch by Eja Kliphuis, Inholland University of Applied Sciences
This pitch is based on my experiences as an eLearning advisor and researcher at Inholland and as
editor-in-chief of SURF Good Practices (2001-2008). Inholland is making its first foray into open
and online eduction. We do already have experience with video and web lectures, blended learning
and the structural use of ICT, which are key ingredients in open and online education.
•It starts with the lecturer who perceives opportunities for teaching their students.
Every innovation, such as web lectures or visual learning using a concept mapping tool (Kliphuis,
2008)3, begins with a lecturer who sees an opportunity – a pioneer who knows the learning
context through and through. Working with that lecturer, you then design a practice for the
13
open and online education // special edition on didactics
INTERMEZZO
context. In our Inholland web lectures, we have seen that it helps to anticipate the actual didactic
use with the lecturer well in advance. During the preparatory phase, we focus both on designing
the web lectures and on determining ‘what you, the lecturer, should be doing and what your
prospective students will be doing’.
• Lecturers are putting a stronger emphasis on embedding in an integral design.
A design for video or web lectures plus the surrounding learning activities is built on a rational
basis and is feasible in practice. You test and examine the design and then make any necessary
improvements. This takes you from the emerging practice of the pioneer to a good practice. With
my students in the Master’s programme in Learning and Innovation at Inholland, who are all also
programme lecturers themselves, I have been doing research into video and web lectures.
• Lecturers are also exploring open and online education themselves.
This is another trend we are seeing, that more of our lecturers are taking MOOCs themselves.
This shifts their perspective; they experience it as a student. And that gets them thinking about
how specific features could be applied in our own study programmes.
• Practice-based research is key.
Knowing what works and why: that is the premise applied by Kennisnet, and I am a strong
supporter of their approach. Reflect, design, test, improve. Develop from practice to practice.
When you then describe some of those practices, you go from emergent and good to shared
practices. A wide array of factors play into this process, but few come of their own accord
(Schoonenboom, Sligt & Kliphuis, 2009)4 and (Fransen, 2013)5. It helps to make things explicit
and to do the background research. That’s how you figure out what works for whom in which
context and why. And that gives you do’s and don’ts.
Kliphuis, E. (2008). Visueel leren stimuleren en faciliteren. On: http://www.hbo-kennisbank.nl/nl/page/hborecord.view/?uploadId=in
holland%3Aoai%3Arepository.samenmaken.nl%3Asmpid%3A10552
4
Schoonenboom, J., Sligte, H., & Kliphuis, E. (2009). Guidelines for supporting re-use of existing digital learning. ALT-J, Research in
Learning Technology, Vol. 17, pp.131-141
5
Fransen, J. (2013). De pionier als bruggenbouwer. On: http://www.inholland.nl/onderzoek/Lectoraten/eLearning/Nieuwsberichten/
De+pionier+als+bruggenbouwer.htm
3
14
15
open and online education // special edition on didactics
ARTICLE
DIDACTIC METHODS
FOR OPEN AND
ONLINE EDUCATION
by Peter B. Sloep
The wide availability of the Internet from around 1995 and
emerging notions about the re-usability of instructional building
blocks (learning objects) around the same period marked the
start of education that strives to be both online and open.
In the 20 years since, a great deal has happened. From an
information-based web, the Internet gave rise to a social
web. Theories about learning objects led to the conception
of OpenCourseWare. And this, in turn, has at least partly
contributed towards the development of MOOCs. On the heels
of the success of MOOCs, higher education in particular is
asking itself how to proceed with open and online education.
Drawing on decades of experience with open distance
education, I here focus first and foremost on what I consider to
be desirable developments.
Researchers with a background in open distance
education such as Tony Bates, one of the designers of the
Open Universiteit in the United Kingdom, are amazed that
lecturers in the most high-profile MOOCs are modelling
their approach on their standard lectures, in apparent
ignorance of around thirty years of education research
(Bates, 2013). The instructional model driving these top
MOOCs revolves primarily around knowledge transfer,
with a tight timeline and little scope for active forms
of learning. These MOOC lecturers have only gradually
started to realise that recording and broadcasting a
lecture does not have quite the same effect as the
physical lectures they were accustomed to giving; that
active working methods, such as working on a problem
together, also lead to better education in an online
context; and that the inter-peer contact that occurs
naturally in a classroom needs to be built into the online
context. These examples can easily be expanded with
others, for example regarding the benefits of formative
assessments and lecturer guidance. They illustrate that
education in an online setting is different, that it imposes
Peter Sloep ([email protected])
professor of Network Learning at
the Open Universiteit, has always
had an active interest in open
and online forms of learning, first
as a course developer, later as
an education researcher. Initially,
his research focused mainly
on the reuse of content in the
form of learning objects and
on education design briefs in
the context of the IMS Learning
Design specification. In recent
years, he has incorporated this
interest in reuse and design into
research on learning networks,
social networks for online
learning, and professionalisation.
special requirements on the didactic approaches to be
used and on the learning environment.
Education has to be designed
To date, the design of online education has mainly replaced
customary modes of instruction, such as knowledge
transfer via a lecture before a classroom of students, with
an online equivalent, such as knowledge transfer via prerecorded lectures made available on the web.
But substitution is a poor form of design. In open distance
education, we long ago learned the hard way that a
new education setting requires a new education design
that assimilates latest insights into didactic methods on,
for instance, social and active learning, and on learning
environments that compensate the limitations of online
learning while maximising the opportunities it presents.
This interpretation of design has been catching on in
recent years in the form of ‘learning design’ (Laurillard,
16
open and online education // special edition on didactics
2012; Mor & Mogilevsky, 2013; Conole, 2014). These views
are now also being applied in the context of MOOCs
(see the Handson MOOC at http://handsonict.eu and the
OLDSMOOC at www.olds.ac.uk).
These are just two of many examples of such media use,
which effectively illustrate that the choice of media is an
essential part of designing online education.
Incidentally, in the case of cMOOCs, which are a specific
type of MOOC, attempts have been made to actually
implement the principle that education has to be designed.
These cMOOCs are now attracting criticism (see for instance
Isabel, Martinez, & McMullin, 2014). In my opinion, this
criticism mainly traces back to the connectivist ideology
underpinning these MOOCs. Though this is a tangent I
will not elaborate on here, it is clear that the criticism of
cMOOCs relates not to the desirability of a design approach
in principle, but rather to the details of that design.
Network learning as an overlying concept
The role of media
A specific aspect of the design of online learning
environments such as MOOCs concerns the use of media.
Online education is mediated by definition; the question
is which media are most appropriate. Considerable
research has already been carried out into this aspect also
(Westera, 2013). The Open Universities in both the United
Kingdom and the Netherlands included lectures in their
initial years (the 1960s and 1980s, respectively), which
were originally broadcast on television. It quickly became
clear that a great deal of concentration and willpower
were needed to watch these lectures uninterrupted for
45-60 minutes (Bates, 1985). Later on, they were sent
to students on video cassette. The video cassette was
therefore a major step forward: students gained more
control over not only the time but, most importantly, also
the pace at which they were able to learn the content.
A video cassette can be fast-forwarded and rewound
and can be viewed selectively. These same observations
were made in very recent research by Pierre Gorissen
into recorded lectures, which prove their worth mainly in
mixed settings of offline and online education (blended
learning) (Gorissen, 2013).
Lectures are a form of knowledge transmission, an
instructional format that requires little activity. This is why
the use of media to activate students has become more
and more popular in distance education. A simulation such
as Pleit voorbereid (‘Prepare to argue a case’) in which
law students learn to write a closing speech (Nadolski &
Hoefakker, 2008) is one example of this. Another example
is the Virtueel milieuadviesbureau (‘Virtual environmental
consultancy firm’), in which environmental studies students
work together online as project consultants over a number
of months to solve genuine environmental problems (i.e.
put forward by real stakeholders) (Westera & Sloep, 1998;
Lansu, Boon, Sloep, & Van Dam-Mieras, M. C., 2010).
When designing education, students’ requirements come
first, even if they are not always able to articulate such
requirements precisely themselves. These requirements
are translated into an education brief for the development
of learning activities and a learning environment. The
students’ specific situation, their context (for instance
professionals who need to learn on the job or adolescents
who can study during the day), helps to determine the
choice of activities and environment (Sloep, 2013). If the
design format is one of online education, the learning
environment will need to be enriched with technological
tools.
In this approach, therefore, it is not the technology,
but the education brief and the resulting education
activities and learning environment that dictate which
tools are selected. Technology is not the guiding
principle. This is not to say that there is no point in
carrying out exploratory research into new technological
tools such as the use of mobile hardware (tablets,
iPads, mobile phones) or the use of augmented reality
tools or serious games. However, the purpose of such
research is ultimately to support design rules for the
use of technological tools. And the form in which the
research takes place is, of course, by testing the rules
in educational contexts. When viewed in this light, the
question of whether technology is a guiding principle or
a resulting consequence is simple: no when designing
education, yes when researching these tools.
A growing number of these types of tools are being
studied. The most recent offshoot is social networks, both
existing ones and those specifically designed for use in
education. From a research perspective, the question is
if and how social networks such as Facebook, Google+,
Scoop.it and Twitter can be used for education, or
whether it may actually be better to design and build new
network environments for this. Research into network
learning only got started around ten years ago. Sparked
by the importance of online tools, its development
has been driven largely by the development of new
technological possibilities (Jones & Sclater, 2010). At
the same time, forms of network learning are also used
in mainstream education. The aforementioned cMOOCs
are a good example of this, though the Proceedings
of the biennial Networked Learning Conference (www.
networkedlearningconference.org.uk) attest that this
has already been happening for some time. This offers
17
open and online education // special edition on didactics
an excellent illustration of the duality of research into
the possibilities of technological tools and their role in
education designs. Research on network learning shows
the huge potential that this form of learning offers. A
number of examples, mainly from my own research, can
help to illustrate this view.
In MOOCs, it has become apparent that social contact
between peers is essential. A case in point is an MOOC
that was taken offline because the tool intended to
support such contact – Google+ – was not equipped to
handle the large numbers (Jaschik, 2013). But even if
this technical problem had not occurred, Google+ would
hardly have been the appropriate tool. What is great
about network learning is that there is always a fellow
student who can answer your question – the only problem
is getting in touch with them. Forums help to make your
question public, but for an answer you are reliant on a
chance passer-by. Tools are therefore needed to establish
the right connections (Van Rosmalen et al., 2008). Once
those connections have been established, they can
become permanent and so help to boost the social capital
within the network (Fetter, Berlanga & Sloep, 2010).
But what if you want to encourage active collaboration?
A lecturer with a small group of students, all of whom
he knows, can put together small groups manually, but
in the context of an MOOC this is impossible. This also
calls for special tools. In principle, such tools are available
(Spoelstra, 2013). They work by cross-referencing
students’ knowledge and disposition against the
requirements of a specific activity. Based on the results,
groups of two or more students are automatically created
without human intervention.
As a last example, there are tools designed to help
students assess their progress in advancing their
expertise. A novice does not speak the language of a
field of expertise, but that should gradually change as a
result of their learning activities. For students, it is good
to know how their use of this language compares to that
of experts. Again, you could hire experts for this purpose,
but that would be unrealistic in the case of MOOCs. Tools
are currently being developed that can help students
to gain insight into how their expertise is developing
(Rajagopal, 2013; Marcus, 2014).
Conclusion
The massive nature of MOOCs makes them a development
in education that cannot be ignored. However, their
development is also interesting because higher education
institutions have for the first time started to recognise
the potential of open and online education. This potential
can only be realised more rapidly and effectively if we
acknowledge and consider the decades of existing
research into open and online forms of education.
Education has to be designed, and in the design of open
and online education, choices of media play a key role.
Rather than following the latest hype, the application of
technological tools in this process should be informed by
the fruit of education research.
SOURCES
•Bates, T. W. (1985). Broadcasting in Education: An
Evaluation. London: Constables.
•Bates, T. (2013). Keeping up with MOOC developments.
Online Learning & Distance Education Resources Blog, 5
February. On: www.tonybates.ca/2013/02/05/keepingup-with-mooc-developments/.
•Conole, G. (2014). Designing for Learning in an Open
World (Vol. 4). New York, Heidelberg: Springer.
•Fetter, S., Berlanga, A.J., & Sloep, P.B. (2010). Fostering
Social Capital in a Learning Network: Laying the
Groundwork for a Peer-Support Service. International
Journal of Learning Technology, 5(3), 388-400.
•Gorissen, P.A. (2013). Facilitating the Use of Recorded
Lectures: Analysing Students’ Interactions to
Understand Their Navigational Needs. Academic PhD
thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology.
•Isabel, A., Martinez, V., & McMullin, K. J. (2014). First
Steps Towards a University Social Network on Personal
Learning Environments. IRRODL, 15(3), 93-119.
•Jaschik. S. (2013). MOOC Mess. Inside Higher Ed. Blog.
On: www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/02/04/
coursera-forced-call-mooc-amid-complaints-aboutcourse#.UQ-GwhWM_O8.twitter.
•Jones, C., & Sclater, N. (2010). Learning in an age of
digital networks. International Preservation News, 55,
6-10. On: http://oro.open.ac.uk/24116/2/learning_in_an_
age.pdf.
•Lansu, A., Boon, J., Sloep, P.B., & van Dam-Mieras,
M.C. (2010). Learning in Networks for Sustainable
Development. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson,
C. Jones, M. de Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Eds),
Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on
Networked Learning (NLC-2010) (pp.249-256). Aalborg,
Denmark. On: http://dspace.ou.nl/handle/1820/2344.
•Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a Design Science:
Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and
Technology (p.258). New York and London: Routledge.
•Markus, T. (2014). Where social noise and structure
converge. Academic PhD thesis, Utrecht University.
•Mor, Y., & Mogilevsky, O. (2013). The learning design studio:
collaborative design inquiry as teachers’ professional
development. Research in Learning Technology, 21(1), 1-15.
•Nadolski, R., & Hoefakker, R. (2008). Pleit voorbereid.
open and online education // special edition on didactics
On: www.ou.nl/Docs/System/lustrum/lustrumboek/
LB_casusPleitVoorbereid.pdf.
•Rajagopal, K. (2013). Networking for Learning: The
role of Networking in a Lifelong Learner’s Professional
Development. Academic PhD thesis, Open Universiteit
of the Netherlands.
•Sloep, P.B. (2013). Networked professional learning.
In A. Littlejohn & A. Margaryan (Eds), Technologyenhanced Professional Learning: Processes, Practices
and Tools (pp.97-108). London: Routledge.
•Spoelstra, H., Rosmalen, P. Van, Van de Vrie, E., Obreza,
M., & Sloep, P.B. (2013). A Team Formation and Projectbased Learning Support Service for Social Learning
Networks. Journal of Universal Computer Science
(J.UCS), 19(10), 1474-1495.
•Van Rosmalen, P., Sloep, P.B., Kester, L., Brouns, F., De
Croock, M., Pannekeet, K., & Koper, R. (2008). A learner
support model based on peer tutor selection. Journal
of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(1), 74-86.
•Westera, W. (2013). The digital turn; How the Internet
Transforms Our Existence. Bloomington, IN (USA):
Author House.
•Westera, W., & Sloep, P.B. (1998). The Virtual Company:
Toward a Self-Directed, Competence-Based Learning
Environment in Distance Education. Educational
Technology, 38(1), 32-37.
18
open and online education // special edition on didactics
INTERMEZZO
QUALITY ASSURANCE
IN E-LEARNING
During the ‘pressure cook’ session on digital didactics, participants considered
the arguments in favour of a design-based approach to the development of
open and online education. To lay the proper groundwork for this approach,
there first needs to be a vision on e-learning and a process for providing highquality e-learning. This can be achieved through a standard strategy drawing on
theory and good practices.
One example of such a strategy is the E-Xcellence framework developed
by the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities (EADTU),
which breaks down the process towards achieving high-quality e-learning
and describes it in a series of phases:
• strategic management
• curriculum design
• course design
• course delivery
• staff support
• student support
Each of these phases includes specific goals to be attained and a set of tools to enable individual
institutions to attain those goals (for example the E-Xcellence manual).
E-Xcellence also incorporates an assessment procedure by which institutions can determine
to what extent their processes meet the described goals, leading to the possible award of an
E-Xcellence label.
Though created by an alliance of distance-learning universities, this framework is also an effective
tool for campus universities. Several campus universities have already obtained an E-Xcellence label
for parts of their curricula.
More information: http://e-xcellencelabel.eadtu.eu
19
20
open and online education // special edition on didactics
ARTICLE
OPEN AND ONLINE
ACADEMIC AND
HIGHER PROFESSIONAL
EDUCATION:
NEVER THE TWAIN
SHALL MEET?
by Hanneke Duisterwinkel, Pierre Gorissen and Robert Schuwer
With the emergence of MOOCs in 2012, higher education
institutions have become significantly more interested in the use
of online forms of education, including open education. Various
basic differences between higher professional education and
academic education can influence on the didactic methods used
in online education:
• Different areas of focus. Academic education focuses on
research, professional education on instruction.
• Different demographics enrolling in programmes. At research
universities, these are primarily university preparatory
education (VWO) graduates and international students, while
universities of applied sciences mainly enrol senior general
secondary education (HAVO) and senior secondary vocational
education (MBO) graduates, most of whom are from the
institution’s own region.
• Different teaching structures. Academic education is organised
on a large scale, particularly the Bachelor’s degree phase, while
higher professional education is more classroom-oriented.
• Different drivers. Academic education is research-driven
(particularly in the Master’s degree phase). Higher professional
education is driven by practical application, though there
is also an increasing focus on teaching students a research
mentality. At a presentation to the Open Universiteit in 2009,
former lector Arjan Dieleman of HAN University of Applied
Sciences described the difference as one between ‘evidencebased practice’ (research universities) and ‘practice-based
evidence’ (universities of applied sciences).
The question addressed in this article is the following:
To what extent do the differences between higher
professional and academic education determine the
didactic issues surrounding and approaches to the design
of forms of open and online education?
Hanneke Duisterwinkel
([email protected]) is
an education advisor at the
Education and Student Service
Center of Eindhoven University
of Technology. As education
advisor, her primary focus
in recent years has been on
innovative projects relating to ICT
and education. In her capacity as
MOOC project leader, she helps
lecturers develop their MOOCs.
She is also involved in the ‘Web
Lectures’ and ‘Clickers’ projects
and in blended learning.
Pierre Gorissen (p.gorissen@
fontys.nl) is a senior consultant
and researcher at the Research &
Education Department of Fontys
University of Applied Sciences.
His work in recent years has
included research into the use of
lecture recordings by students.
Other focus areas include inline
education, electronic books and
current developments in ICT and
education.
21
open and online education // special edition on didactics
To understand this better, the following article presents
two cases: one from a university of applied sciences and
one from a research university, each describing didactic
issues and explaining how they were handled. Based
on these cases, this article then draws a number of
conclusions on the main question.
Case study: Fontys University of Applied Sciences
As at other universities of applied sciences, the main
focus at Fontys is on campus education: high-quality
on-site classroom-based tuition, supplemented by online
sources and/or an online electronic learning environment.
Students are generally from the same region and often
have senior general secondary education or senior
secondary vocational education degrees.
Some study programmes use recordings of classes, short
web lectures or the flipped classroom concept. These
partly serve as materials and activities to supplement the
existing instruction for full-time students, allowing them
to revisit past lessons, but also to supplement or in part
replace classroom-based instruction, with the students
independently watching some or all of the instruction
on video and the contact hours reserved for studying
subject matter in greater depth. The aim is to develop
these individual initiatives into an integrated mix of online
and offline education (which Fontys refers to as ‘inline’
education, a term coined by educational scientist Pedro
de Bruyckere early in 2014).
This approach reflects the advancing digitisation
of society and education. More and more, students
enrolled in regular study programmes also expect online
components to be used to effectively support and
supplement what is taught in the classroom. However,
the aim here is not to eventually provide all instruction
online, but to enable a more purposeful use of the
offline teaching time. A series of actions have been
developed to support this process. The first is to increase
the professionalism of lecturers as part of the Fontys
Qualification Training, a competence and assessment
programme in which educators gain qualifications in
research, didactic methods & assessment and media
competence (see http://fontys.nl/fhke/fko/). This is not
concerned exclusively with online education, therefore,
but is based on attaining broader professionalism, with an
explicit focus on media competence and digital didactic
methods (the knowledge and skills to use ICT to facilitate
learning (Simons, 2003)).
We are also working on a support structure for inline
education, in the form of an online and offline community,
supplementary research, training programmes and
Robert Schuwer ­
([email protected]) holds
positions as lector in OER at
Fontys University of Applied
Sciences ICT in Eindhoven and
as senior university lecturer at
the Open Universiteit. He has
been involved in numerous OER
projects since 2006 and is the
chairman of the core team at
SURF’s Open Education Special
Interest Group.
facilitation. Facilitation also includes such matters as
providing video production services.
Until now, the question of whether education was open
was generally less of an issue. The formal facilities are
in place, however: study programmes are permitted to
share materials and attach Creative Commons licences to
them (choosing from among BY-NC-SA and BY-NC-ND),
though it is not a point of central policy to provide use of
developed materials in this manner. The formation of an
Open Education Resources (OER) research group will now
draw more emphatic attention to this issue.
Naturally, current developments such as the offering of
MOOCs are also a point of focus for the programmes
at Fontys. However, that also includes a very critical
examination of the didactic methods used in a large share
of MOOCs, which are judged to be ‘poor’, particularly
as regards possibilities for links with offline education.
Another uncertainty is whether the average new student
enrolling in a programme at a university of applied sciences
possesses the necessary self-study discipline demanded by
many MOOCs. As such, this purely online form of education
is likely less suited to this category of students than an
inline (integrated) form of education.
Similarly, the national and international marketing effect
that academic universities are often seeking to achieve
by offering MOOCs is less relevant for most Fontys
programmes.
This is not to imply that this method of open and online
education will by definition not be adopted by Fontys.
Several study programmes are investigating the possibility
of developing online education components in partnership
with other national or international institutions. That can
take the shape of MOOCs or OERs and will be used and
embedded in regular education differently by each partner.
Fontys study programmes can use the services of a
central IT Department to arrange the infrastructural
22
open and online education // special edition on didactics
facilities, and of the Research & Education Department
to help them define the educational aspects of inline
education.
However, the Research & Education Department does
not have all the answers yet: many aspects depend on
how individual programmes want to shape the education
and on the specific context, and therefore cannot simply
be transposed from previous experiences elsewhere.
Nevertheless, the Research & Education’s involvement will
ensure that experiences from outside Fontys are collected
and that those of the various Fontys programmes are
shared.
All in all, open and online education does not represent a
revolutionary change in the way the institution operates
and provides education. Yet it is a logical evolutionary
step in the pursuit of higher quality education. Having
education that is open and/or online is not a goal in and
of itself: it should be a logical outgrowth of the didactic
choices that study programmes and lecturers make when
organising their courses. Our focus on inline education
ensures a continued awareness of the didactic value
that offline education adds. It is not a matter of ‘old’
versus ‘new’. However, where previously offline was the
standard, study programmes and lecturers are now being
challenged to carefully assess whether units of instruction,
interaction and work forms can best be offered online,
offline or in a combination of the two.
This is not a change that will be achieved within the
space of just a few months. Our programme (mentioned
above) to professionalise lecturers in media competence
and digital didactic methods spans several years. Our
underlying systems have to be adapted step-by-step,
and Fontys’ student population is highly diverse. With
programmes ranging from Dance, Pedagogy and
Economics to ICT and Electrical Engineering to Teacher
Education in Physical Education, it is impossible to apply
a single and uniform didactic approach that would be
effective for all students. The challenge lies in finding the
right inline mix.
Case study: Eindhoven University of Technology
Developing high-quality digital education for MOOCs
and campus education
The TU/e’s education vision focuses on student learning,
with students themselves being largely responsible for
that learning (Meijers & Den Brok, 2013). To ensure this
learning happens as effectively and efficiently as possible,
it is important that the materials provided match students’
specific learning behaviours and levels. Student-specific
and personalised education demands a wide range of
diverse education forms, including online education.
The TU/e sees blended learning as one of the possible
instruments that it can use to achieve its education
ambitions. This means that online learning materials will
become an important part of curricular delivery, alongside
face-to-face instruction. The TU/e is primarily concerned
with finding the right mix of face-to-face and online
education. A taskforce is currently working to further
elaborate the TU/e’s vision on blended learning. Alongside
the experiments that are currently under way, lecturers are
challenged to organise their classes using a greater blend.
They receive both educational/didactic and technical
assistance for this. Besides blended learning, the TU/e also
aims to utilise MOOCs, though primarily in the areas for
which the TU/e is already known. The TU/e plans to offer
MOOCs to its future, current and alumni students. MOOCs
will also be utilised as part of the partnership with the
EUROTECH universities.
This piece zooms in on didactic issues we have
encountered in our efforts to develop and run our first
MOOC.
In 2013, the TU/e became one of three Dutch partner
universities in Coursera. The Sports & Building
Aerodynamics MOOC is the first product of this
partnership. In this, TU/e’s first MOOC, Professor Bert
Blocken (Department of the Built Environment) took
students on a six-week journey through the fascinating
world of aerodynamics. MOOCs on the Coursera platform
consist of three principal components: web lectures,
quizzes (both formative and summative) and a forum
where students can discuss the course. For our first
MOOC, we adopted these three components in their
entirety.
One of the principal didactic challenges in preparing a
course for online education (MOOC) lies in translating
lectures into digital instruction. As experts in their field,
many research university lecturers share their expertise
with passion and drive in their tutorials and lectures.
Direct interaction with students ensures feedback and
enables them adapt their narrative immediately as
needed. Lectures and tutorials are shaped by exchanges
with students, and it is precisely such exchanges that are
difficult to achieve in many forms of online education.
The fact that lecturers are unable to adapt what they are
saying during web lectures makes it even more important
that the content, structure and manner in which they
present information is carefully thought out beforehand.
Developing digital education forces lecturers to rethink
the form in which they teach.
Luckily, the TU/e already had some experience with this
new way of creating education. The project ‘From video
23
open and online education // special edition on didactics
lectures to web lectures’ inspired, and continues to inspire,
lecturers to introduce web lectures as an additional format
supplementing classical formats such as lectures and
instruction. In giving lecturers not only teaching support
but also the support of a media expert for designing their
digital education, we gained experience in the ways in
which lecturers can use web lectures to transfer content.
The initial discussions with Professor Bert Blocken as
regards his MOOC revealed how difficult it is to separate
course subject matter into several complete and properly
structured parts.
We developed a fixed structure for the web lectures
based on the didactic design for the MOOC. A web
lecture is a stand-alone narrative with a clear beginning,
middle and end. Beginning each web lecture by setting
out the module’s learning objectives allows students to
understand from the outset what they will learn. The
web lectures also all start with a multiple choice question
appropriate to the module. The answer to this question
is provided later on in the web lecture. The purpose
of such questions is to incentivise students to remain
concentrated during the entire web lecture. The middle
deals with the actual subject matter. This subject matter
is linked to a practical example, allowing students to
perceive a practical application immediately. It ends with
a clear summary and a recapitulation in which the learning
objectives are repeated.
Students’ responses in the MOOC forum suggest that this
clear-cut structure is bearing fruit:
•‘The way Professor Blocken not only shares his
knowledge in the web lectures but also substantiates it
with practical examples has shown me that it’s possible
to build a bridge between online education and F2F
education.’
•‘The structure of the course, its subject matter,
the support from the teaching assistants and the
assessments have helped my understanding of CFD and
aerodynamics to grow tremendously.’
•‘This is one of the better MOOCs on Coursera! A big
thank you to Professor Blocken and his team.’
•‘The structure of each web lecture and the use of an
opening question during each web lecture were perfect.’
This clear-cut structure is therefore perceived as positive
by students. However, it is not simply a matter of getting
information across properly: interaction is also important.
Students learn from interacting with their peers and the
lecturer. As MOOCs are a fully online teaching method,
organising that interaction presents a major challenge.
The Coursera platform forum offers a solution, premised
on the idea that students answer each other’s questions.
This creates a system of peer learning, but does not,
however, address the question of how to achieve lecturer-
student interaction. The difficulty is that once the lecturer
responds to a discussion on the forum, discussion
between students ceases. The solution we choose for our
MOOC was to deploy a number of moderators/teaching
assistants to respond to topics on the forum. This created
structured interaction between peers that also included
input from the lecturer. In some cases the discussion
continued or follow-up questions were posed, though in
others it still caused discussion to dry up. Future MOOCs
will include further experimentation with the forum
in order to better use interaction and communication
as a learning activity. Aside from this forum, positive
experiences at Leiden University also inspired us to
organise a ‘meet the professor meeting’ in Eindhoven. The
purpose of this meeting was for students to meet each
other and the lecturer face to face. Using a quiz format,
participants discussed current issues in their field of study
with each other and with staff. The meeting ended with
drinks, providing an opportunity to exchange ideas in a
casual setting. The forty students who attended this event
found the meeting to be very valuable.
This MOOC ended in late June 2014. Based on the
evaluations and students’ responses on the forum, we
believe our attempt to bridge the gap between campus
education and online education was a success, and
we will certainly also be used the didactic experiences
gained with developing this type of online education
for improving our campus education. One of the most
important lessons has been that using ICT in teaching,
whether for online or for blended learning, requires
lecturers to rethink the way in which their course is
structured: What are the final objectives, how can
students demonstrate that they have mastered them, and
what is required from students and lecturers to ensure
that students achieve the learning objectives?
Discussion and conclusions
The question on which this article focused was whether
the differences between higher professional and academic
education influence the didactic methods selected and
the didactic issues encountered in these two types of
higher education. The case studies described show very
little difference. Online forms of education (for example
the use of web lectures) are used in a blended format
at both the TU/e and at Fontys University of Applied
Sciences (with the exception of the MOOCs at the TU/e,
though they also include optional face-to-face meetings),
and lecturers receive support when developing digital
forms of education. Our conclusion based on these case
studies is that, in didactic terms, very little difference
exists in the approaches to open and online education at
universities of applied sciences and research universities.
open and online education // special edition on didactics
This conclusion is also borne out in a report entitled
‘Advice Paper on Online Learning At Research-Intensive
Universities’, published by the League of European
Research Universities (LERU) in early July 2014 (Mapstone
et al., 2014). This report explores the importance of
online learning for research universities from a strategic
perspective: What should universities bear in mind when
they turn to online learning, and how can policymakers
support their efforts? The analysis and recommendations
this report presents for ‘Online Pedagogy and Quality’ can
be applied in full to universities of applied sciences (such
as identical attention and quality evaluation processes in
both offline and online education).
Similarities between the two case studies, for example as
regards challenging lecturers and professors to further
improve their teaching quality, attest that both sectors
can learn a great deal from each other in this area. We
therefore advocate teaming up on activities relating to
open and online learning wherever possible, though of
course without losing sight of key differences.
SOURCES
•Mapstone, S., Buitendijk, S. & Wiberg, E. (2014). Online
learning at research-intensive universities. League of
European Research Universities, Leuven, Belgium. On:
www.leru.org/files/publications/LERU_AP16__Online_
Learning_at_RIUs_final.pdf.
•Meijers, A., den Brok, P. (2013). Ingenieurs voor de
toekomst, Een essay over het onderwijs aan de TU/e
in 2030. On: http://w3.wtb.tue.nl/fileadmin/nieuws_
tue/2013/TUe_Onderwijsvisie2013.pdf
•Simons, R.J. (2003). Digitale didactiek.
Thema, 1-30. On: http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/
ivlos/2005-0622-185053/5689.pdf
24
open and online education // special edition on didactics
INTERMEZZO
LIST OF SOURCES ABOUT
DIDACTIC METHODS IN OPEN
AND ONLINE EDUCATION
In addition to the references cited in the articles, the following books, articles
and websites provide further information about didactic methods in open and
online education and serve as useful additional material.
Books and articles
•Bayne, S. & Ross, J. (2014). The pedagogy of the Massive Open Online Course (MOOC): the UK
view. On: www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/elt/the_pedagogy_of_the_MOOC_UK_view.
•Gordon, N. (2014). Flexible Pedagogies: technology-enhanced learning.
On: www.heacademy.ac.uk/flexible-pedagogies-technology-enhanced-learning.
•Guo, P.J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: an
empirical study of MOOC videos. ACM Press (p. 41-50). doi:10.1145/2556325.2566239.
On: http://pgbovine.net/publications/edX-MOOC-video-production-and-engagement_LAS-2014.pdf.
•Knox, J. (2014). Digital culture clash: ‘massive’ education in the E-learning and Digital Cultures
MOOC. Distance Education, 1-14. doi:10.1080/01587919.2014.917704. On: www.tandfonline.com/
doi/abs/10.1080/01587919.2014.917704.
•Means, B., Bakia, M. & Murphy, R. (2014). Learning Online. What Research Tells Us About Whether,
When and How. Routledge, New York. ISBN 978-0415630290.
•Morgado, L., Mota, J., Quintas-Mendes, A., Fano, S., Fueyo, A., Tomasini, A., Brouns, F. (2014).
Instructional design and scenarios for MOOC’s version 1. On: http://ecolearning.eu/wp-content/
uploads/2014/06/ECO_D2.2_Instructional_design_and_scenarios_v1.0.pdf.
•Rubens, W. (2013). E-learning. Trends en ontwikkelingen. Innodoks Uitgeverij, Middelbeers. ISBN
978-94-90484-03-3.
•Stein, J. & Graham, C.R. (2014). Essentials for Blended Learning. A Standards-Based Guide.
Routledge, New York. ISBN 978-0415636162.
•Stoyanov, S., Sloep, P. B., De Bie, M., & Hermans, V. (2014). Teacher-training, ICT, creativity,
MOOC, Moodle – What pedagogy? In L. Gómez Chova, A. López Martínez, I. Candel Torres (Eds),
Proceedings of Edulearn 14, the Sixth International Conference on Education and New Learning
Technologies (EDULEARN 14) (pp.5678-5686), Barcelona, Spain: IATED Academy: IATED Digital
Library. On: http://hdl.handle.net/1820/5463.
Websites and videos
•List of books about learning, e-learning and TE learning, compiled by Wilfred Rubens:
www.te-learning.nl/blog/?p=1467.
•Online learning and distance education resources. Website managed by Tony Bates.
www.tonybates.ca.
•Hoe integreer je ICT en didactiek in het onderwijs? Het TPACK-model.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqEGzQjjetc
25
26
open and online education // special edition on didactics
PUBLICATION DETAILS
This special edition on the didactics of open and online education is published
by SURF and the Open Education Special Interest Group.
Authors
• Hanneke Duisterwinkel, Eindhoven University of Technology
• Pierre Gorissen, Fontys University of Applied Sciences
• Robert Schuwer, Fontys University of Applied Sciences / Open Universiteit
• Peter Sloep, Open Universiteit
• Marjolein van Trigt, freelance copywriter and journalist
Editorial staff
• Hester Jelgerhuis, SURF
• Daphne Riksen, Ediction
• Robert Schuwer, Fontys University of Applied Sciences / Open Universiteit
Design and layout
• Vrije Stijl Utrecht
Translation
Metamorfose Vertalingen
Cover image
• British Council Russia, https://flic.kr/p/gmY81p (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
September 2014
Copyright
this report is available under the Creative Commons licence
Attribution 3.0 Netherlands
(www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/nl)