Higher education institutions face conflicting challenges; they must equip students with up-to-date knowledge in fields in which knowledge is constantly being renewed, while they also need to guide students to examine reality through broad-based observation and consider different scientific disciplines. They operate within different constrictions such as: learning program boundaries, budgetary constrictions, and lack of accessibility to experts in different areas, and the range of courses offered to students is limited. To cope with these constrictions, Ort Braude Academic College of Engineering opened an experimental program. As part of this program, students were allowed to study MOOC courses under the college’s supervision, and were eligible for accreditation if they completed the courses successfully. Only 15 out of the 600 students offered the program, registered for these courses. Only seven were accepted for the program. This paper describes the background for the college’s decision, the registration process and supervision of students, detailing students’ challenges and achievements in the MOOC courses. Students who completed the MOOC courses reported that they enjoyed meaningful learning, requiring serious efforts in comparison to the courses that the MOOC courses replaced. Given this positive feedback by the students, it was decided to continue with the experiment.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.
1. Bolkan, J. (2013). MOOCs Top Open Access for Disruptive Potential. In Campus Technology, Blog, 2013, October 23. Retrieved from: http://campustechnology.com/articles/2013/10/23/report-moocs-top-open-access-fordisruptive- potential.aspx
2. Cheng, C.Y. (2014). An Exploratory Study of Emotional Affordance of a Massive Open Online Courses. In European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 17(1), (pp. 43-55). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2014/Cheng.pdf
3. Daniel, J. (2012). Making Sense of MOOCs: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility. In Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2012. Retrieved from http://wwwjime. open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2012-18
4. DeBoer, J.; Ho, A.D.; Stump, G.S.; Breslow, L. (2014). Changing “Course”: Reconceptualizing Educational Variables for Massive Open Online Courses. In Educational Researcher, 43(2), (pp. 74-84).
5. Hatiba, N. (2014). The tsunami of MOOC courses: Will they induce an overall revolution in teaching, learning and higher education institutions? In Teaching in the Academy, 4, (pp. 40-64). Retrieved from http://www.academicteaching.net [Hebrew]
6. Kirp, D.L. (2013). Tech mania goes to college: Are MOOCs - massive open online courses - the utopia of affordable higher education, or just the latest fad? In The Nation, Blog, 2013, September 23. Retrieved from: http://www.thenation.com/article/176037/tech-mania-goescollege# axzz2g2HzfG5t
7. Lewin, T. (2013). Colleges adapt online courses to ease burden. In The New York Times, 29 April 2013. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/30/education/collegesadapt- online-courses-to-ease-burden.html
8. Norton, A.; Sonnemann, J.; McGannon, C. (2013). The online evolution: when technology meets tradition in higher education. Grattan Institute Report No. 2013-3, April 2013. Retrieved from: http://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/186_online_higher_education.pdf
9. Olsson, U. (2014). A preliminary Exploration of Operating Models of Second Cycle/Research Led Open Education Involving Industry Collaboration. In European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 17(1), (pp. 76-92). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2014/Olsson.pdf
10. Perrin, D. (2013). Robo-Grading and Writing Instruction: Will the Truth Set Us Free? In English Journal, 102(6), (pp.104-106). Retrieved from: http://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Resources/Journals/EJ/1026- jul2013/EJ1026Robo.pdf
12. Shah, D. (2013). MOOCs in 2013: Breaking Down the Numbers. In edSurge, Blog. Retrieved from: https://www.edsurge.com/n/2013-12-22-moocs-in-2013-breaking-down-the-numbers
13. Smith, J.A.; Flowers, P.; Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. Sage.
14. Thompson, G. (2013a). A MOOC Platform Based on Engagement. In Campus Technology, Blog, 2013, November 06. Retrieved from: http://campustechnology.com/articles/2013/11/06/a-mooc-platform-based-onengagement. aspx
15. Thompson, G. (2013b). Can MOOCs Replace Traditional Textbooks? In Campus Technology, Blog, 2013, December 04. Retrieved from: http://campustechnology.com/articles/2013/12/04/can-moocs-replace-traditionaltextbooks. aspx
16. Yuan, L.; Powell, S. (2013). MOOCs and Open Education: Implications for Higher Education. JISC CETIS. Cetis publications - publications from the Centre for Educational Technology, Interoperability and Standards. Retrieved from: http://publications.cetis.ac.uk/2013/667