Running Head: MASSIVE OPEN ONLINE COURSES 1

Massive Open Online Courses Official Report

Heather Yazzie-Kinlacheeny

Northern Arizona University

Massive Open Online Courses Official Report

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are identified as courses that include

multimedia resources, online assessments and communicative abilities between peers and

instructors (Miller, 2014, p. 3). Through the basic ideology of MOOCs, our institution has

established this report to institutionalize a model program for future students. Technology has an

essential role and will continue to uphold the integrity of higher education. It is the duty of our

institution to maintain the value within a society of constant change (Berg, Csikszentmihalyi, &

Nakamura, 2003, p. 41). The evolution of MOOCs has created a new precedence for how many

people will view and value higher education, its quality and purpose for the greater good of that

community it serves.

The movement of MOOCs is exponentially growing globally due to the increase in

technology and availability of technology. Therefore, the MOOCs model program will be a

collaborative effort between faculty, staff, administration and current students. It is important to

acknowledge the diverse factors embedded in initiating a program like this because of the large

anticipated number of people who currently utilized existing MOOCs programs. Since the

inception of the MOOCs, the notion of higher education has continually developed. With the

rise in nontraditional undergraduates, technology and the disbursement of education need to heed

to innovative ways such as this MOOCs model program. When Sebastian Thrun introduced the

concept of MOOCs, the acceptance and evolutionary view of higher education was changed

(Miller, 2014, p. 3).

Our institution has the capacity and expertise through faculty to participate in the creation

of a MOOCs program. The purpose of the program would be the sharing of knowledge and the

interconnectedness of people both domestically and internationally. The model program will be
Massive Open Online Courses 3

based on the basic ideology of creating courses under the Online Degree Program, where the

classes are offered without the use of specific admission criterion. The courses will be taught to

all individuals interested in gaining additional knowledge about particular subjects without

specific regard to a declaration of a major. The MOOCs model program will be open to the

public at minimal cost to provide a mechanism to quality education of our faculty and to honor

the academic freedom of our faculty and staff.

MOOCs have realistic challenges. One of the most contentious challenges is the notion

that the education through MOOCs is seen as more economical resolution in lieu of a true

advancement in modern education (Carey, 2015, p. 2 & Miller, 2014, p. 4). This challenge has

significant repercussions because of the standards that are set by what an undergraduate degree

offers or holds in weight for the viewer (Carey, 2015, p. 2). The MOOCs model program

presented could have priority in the traditional forms of education through the endorsement of

our charter and equivalence in marrying how we issue our degrees. The institutionalization of

MOOCs presents the opportunity to uphold the initial value in learning.

Another challenge of the MOOCs model programs implementation would be the

management of faculty in ensuring a correlation between what is quality education and what

individual preferences are in learning (Terras, M. & Ramsay, J., 2015, p 476). Intimately,

learners and students have specific characteristics that undergo development in higher education

or are strengthen. The MOOCs model program would then need to still consider different forms

of community and student support (Tinto, 1997, p. 613). Essentially, our institution would need

to continually recognize the potential impacts and maintain assessments. Additionally, our

institution would also need to contribute to the requirements of accreditation and support the

innovative ways of learning (Christensen & Eyring, 2012, p. 48).

Another confrontation in the creation of the MOOCs program would be its sustainability

coupled properly with measureable systems that provide accountability to the students, the

faculty involved and the public good, in the sense of educating citizens for democratic

engagement, supporting local and regional communities, preserving knowledge and making it

available to the community (Kezar, 2004, p. 430). MOOCs have relatively low expectations

and interactions because of the massive availability to the public. Our institution would have to

find a way to build the preferences and experiences that encourage good behaviors and

independent learning in the wealth of information provided through MOOCs (Admiraal,

Huisman, Pilli, 2015, 211). One way to make this a possibility is to maintain the communal

aspect of learning in groups or cohorts of students. This would include the application of

stronger technological skills and software that encourages participation (Miller, 2014, p. 11).

The intent of the program is to contribute consistently to the communities and all other

agencies involved in the process of knowledge building. The outcome of MOOCs is to educate

and build more capacities for higher education to expand on the collection of people involved.

The outlook on the ability of MOOCs to further thrive is a mixture of views that both criticize

and support the program. However, any type of change to a system will have resistance. It is

also sensible that the more higher education participates in the creation of MOOCs the better the

research and analysis of its effectiveness. It is also important to state that MOOCs may not be

the answer for some learners, subjects, topics or outcome aspirations.

Our institutional creation of a MOOCs model program would contain thorough reviews

of how the MOOCs would benefit our university. Like all other programs, assessment and

evaluation procedures would be in place to keep the goals and direction of the college of the

utmost importance. The unique factor of our MOOCs model program would be the capability of
Massive Open Online Courses 5

keeping community, even in a new form. The viral communities that exist are testaments to how

students, faculty and staff are expressing their knowledge acquisition preferences. Our goal is to

safe keep education, nurture it and share it to the fullest potential. This report provides the initial

introduction to MOOCs and how the university can effectuate change.

References

Admiraal, W., Huisman, B., & Pilli, O. (2015). Assessment in Massive Open Online

Courses. Electronic Journal Of E-Learning, 13(4), 207-216.

Anders, A. (2015). Theories and Applications of Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs): The

Case for Hybrid Design. International Review Of Research In Open And Distributed

Learning, 16(6), 39-61.

Armellini, A., & Padilla Rodriguez, B. C. (2016). Are Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)

Pedagogically Innovative?. Journal Of Interactive Online Learning, 14(1), 17-28.

Berg, G., Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Nakamura, J. (2003). Mission Impossible?: Enabling Good

Work in Higher Education. Change, 40-47.

Bozkurt, A., Keskin, N. O., & de Waard, I. (2016). Research Trends in Massive Open Online

Course (MOOC) Theses and Dissertations: Surfing the Tsunami Wave. Open

Praxis, 8(3), 203-221.

Chauhan, A. (2014). Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCS): Emerging Trends in Assessment

and Accreditation. Digital Education Review, 257-19.

Christensen, C. & Eyring, H. (2012). The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of Higher

Education. Forum for the Future of Higher Education, 47-53.

Kezar, A. (2004). Obtaining Integrity? Reviewing and Examining the Charter between Higher

Education and Society. The Review of Higher Education, 27(4), 429-459.

Mangan, K. (2012). Online Learning: MOOC Mania. The Chronicle of Higher Learning, Section

B, B4-B5.

Mesquita, A., & Peres, P. (2015). Furthering Higher Education Possibilities through Massive

Open Online Courses. IGI Global.

Miller, M. (2014). Minds Online: Teaching Effectively with Technology. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.

Pilli, O., & Admiraal, W. (2016). A Taxonomy of Massive Open Online Courses. Contemporary

Educational Technology, 7(3), 223-240.

Rubens, W. (2014). Improving the Learning Design of Massive Open Online Courses. Turkish

Online Journal Of Educational Technology - TOJET, 13(4), 71-80.

Schoenack, L. (2013). A New Framework for Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Journal

Of Adult Education, 42(2), 98-103.

Shrader, S., Wu, M., Owens, D., & Santa Ana, K. (2016). Massive Open Online Courses

(MOOCs): Participant Activity, Demographics, and Satisfaction. Online Learning, 20(2),

199-216.

Suen, H. K. (2014). Peer Assessment for Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). International

Review Of Research In Open And Distance Learning, 15(3), 312-327.

Terras, M. M., & Ramsay, J. (2015). Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): Insights and

Challenges from a Psychological Perspective. British Journal Of Educational

Technology, 46(3), 472-487.

Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as Communties. Journal of Higher Education, 68(6), 599-623.