
handle: 11336/25738
Les cinq dernières années ont été marquées par un battage médiatique autour des MOOC (Massive Open Online Courses) annonçant une révolution dans l'enseignement supérieur. Bien que tous les MOOCs aient en commun leur échelle et leur libre accès, ils ont déjà bifurqué dans deux types de cours très distincts en termes de théorie, de format et de structure sous-jacents, connus sous le nom de c-MOOCs et x-MOOCs. Le concept d'ouverture derrière chacun des formats est également très différent. Des études antérieures ont montré que les MOOCs c et x partagent certaines caractéristiques communes, mais qu'ils diffèrent clairement sur la théorie de l'apprentissage et le modèle pédagogique sur lesquels ils reposent. Dans cet article, nous étendons les résultats antérieurs et nous nous concentrons sur le concept d '« ouverture » derrière chaque format en montrant des différences importantes.
Los últimos cinco años han sido testigos de una exageración sobre los MOOC (Cursos Masivos Abiertos en Línea) que presagian una revolución en la educación superior. Aunque todos los MOOC tienen en común su escala y acceso gratuito, ya se han bifurcado en dos tipos de cursos muy distintos en comparación con su teoría, formato y estructura subyacentes, conocidos como c-MOOC y x-MOOC. El concepto de apertura detrás de cada uno de los formatos también es muy diferente. Estudios anteriores han demostrado que los MOOC c y x comparten algunas características comunes, pero que difieren claramente en la teoría del aprendizaje y el modelo pedagógico en el que se basan. En este documento ampliamos los hallazgos anteriores y nos concentramos en el concepto de "apertura" detrás de cada formato que muestra diferencias importantes.
The last five years have witnessed a hype about MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) presaging a revolution in higher education. Although all MOOCs have in common their scale and free access, they have already bifurcated in two very distinct types of courses when compared in terms of their underpinning theory, format and structure, known as c-MOOCs and x-MOOCs. The concept of openness behind each of the formats is also very different. Previous studies have shown that c-and x-MOOCs share some common features but that they clearly differ on the learning theory and pedagogical model on which they stand. In this paper we extend earlier findings and concentrate on the concept of "openness" behind each format showing important differences.
شهدت السنوات الخمس الماضية ضجة حول MOOCs (دورات ضخمة مفتوحة عبر الإنترنت) تنذر بثورة في التعليم العالي. على الرغم من أن جميع MOOCs تشترك في حجمها وحرية الوصول إليها، إلا أنها انقسمت بالفعل إلى نوعين متميزين جدًا من الدورات عند مقارنتها من حيث نظريتها الأساسية وشكلها وهيكلها، والمعروفة باسم c - MOOCs و x - MOOCs. يختلف مفهوم الانفتاح وراء كل صيغة أيضًا اختلافًا كبيرًا. وقد أظهرت الدراسات السابقة أن c و x - MOOCs تشترك في بعض السمات المشتركة ولكنها تختلف بوضوح عن نظرية التعلم والنموذج التربوي الذي تقف عليه. في هذه الورقة، نوسع نطاق النتائج السابقة ونركز على مفهوم "الانفتاح" وراء كل تنسيق يظهر اختلافات مهمة.
Scale (ratio), FOS: Political science, Massive open online course, Social Sciences, Openness, Social psychology, https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.3, Engineering, Open Course, Sociology, Psychology, Political science, Geography, Pedagogy, Underpinning, Special aspects of education, Massive Open Online Course, Distance Education, Computer Science Applications, FOS: Sociology, World Wide Web, FOS: Psychology, Online learning, Physical Sciences, Cartography, openness, open course, MOOCs, Massive Open Online Courses, MOOC, FOS: Law, massive open online course, Open educational resources, Education, https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5, Higher education, Civil engineering, Innovation in E-Learning and Knowledge Management, Open Learning, LC8-6691, Openness to experience, Computer science, Mathematics education, Open education, distance education, Computer Science, Recognition of Prior Learning in Higher Education, open learning, mooc, Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics, Law, FOS: Civil engineering
Scale (ratio), FOS: Political science, Massive open online course, Social Sciences, Openness, Social psychology, https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.3, Engineering, Open Course, Sociology, Psychology, Political science, Geography, Pedagogy, Underpinning, Special aspects of education, Massive Open Online Course, Distance Education, Computer Science Applications, FOS: Sociology, World Wide Web, FOS: Psychology, Online learning, Physical Sciences, Cartography, openness, open course, MOOCs, Massive Open Online Courses, MOOC, FOS: Law, massive open online course, Open educational resources, Education, https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5, Higher education, Civil engineering, Innovation in E-Learning and Knowledge Management, Open Learning, LC8-6691, Openness to experience, Computer science, Mathematics education, Open education, distance education, Computer Science, Recognition of Prior Learning in Higher Education, open learning, mooc, Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics, Law, FOS: Civil engineering
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 104 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
