Good MOOC Bad MOOC #futurelearn

Continuing liveblogging from the Edinburgh FLAN meeting, Andy Wright (University of Birminham) was talking about Good MOOC Bad MOOC 2. He started by giving a report from a conference he attended in Asia and how the discussion matched the MOOC success factors he had mentioned his previous talk to FLAN (see http://information-literacy.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/good-mooc-bad-mooc-report-1-flansoton.html). He added “Reuse” to his list of factors that could be used to judge MOOC success. He talked about these factors in relation to his own institution. As regards Recruitment as well as straightforward student recruitment there are also “try before you buy”, “recommended reading” and “prerequisite” aspects (you could charge e.g. if you were requiring a certificate for the last option). In terms of Reuse he mentioned the Good Brain/Bad Brain MOOCs, where the MOOC content can be used to enhance on campus experience, to save academics’ time, develop academic skillsets etc. Also the MOOCs are being translated into Portuguese and republished by the Brazilian MOOC platform Veduca. He also gave an example at Sheffield Hallam University where MOOCs have been integrated into a holistic healthcare CPD offering. In terms of Revenue, he mentioned small private online courses (SPOCs) and CLOCs (closed online courses). Obviously these have to differentiate themselves from the free project, and revenue could come from project funding or per student/group and obviously closed online courses are not new (i.e. the existing online degree courses).
In terms of Research, he mentioned a patient outreach research paper on liver disease treatment he was coauthoring and the subject he was researching for his Masters dissertation, analysing the impact of diversity of MOOC learner communities on the achievement of learner goals.