Five Learning Design Principles to Create Active Learning for Engaging with Research in a MOOC

Halvdan Haugsbakken 1
  • 1 Norwegian University of Science and Technology, , Høgskoleringen 1, 7491, Trondheim, Norway


Creating a Massive Online Open Course (MOOC) based on analysis from research requires the adaptation of MOOC pedagogies. For example, course designers need to follow certain design principles and adapt learning content to the pedagogies and constraints of a MOOC platform. That said, this paper outlines five different learning design principles that create active learning in a MOOC. These emerged when adapting knowledge from a research case study. To exemplify the adaptation, this paper examines how research from a sociological, qualitative classroom study about a teacher who used digital technologies in foreign-language training at a Norwegian high school was adapted for a MOOC that ran on FutureLearn.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Barth, F. (1966). Models of social organization. London, England: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland.

  • 2. Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. (1987). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • 3. Bonwell, C., & Eison, J. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. AEHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, DC: Jossey-Bass.

  • 4. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

  • 5. Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In J. Law (Ed.), Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge. London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

  • 6. Conole, G. (2015). Designing effective MOOCs. Educational Media International, 52(4), 239–252. http://doi:10.1080/09523987.2015.1125989

  • 7. Dijck, J. V., Waal, M. D., & Poell, T. (2018). The platform society: Public values in a connective world. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • 8. Dona, K. L., & Gregory, J. (2019). A ‘participant first’ approach to designing for collaborative group work in MOOCs. Paper presented at the ASCILITE 2015—Australasian Society for Computers in Learning and Tertiary Education Conference Proceedings.

  • 9. Engeness, I., & Nohr, M. (2019). Videos as teaching and learning resources for developing of pre- and in-service teachers’ professional digital competence in the ICTMOOC. Paper presented at the EMOOCs-WIP 2019: EMOOCs 2019 Work in Progress Papers of Research, Experience and Business Tracks, Proceedings of Work in Progress Papers of the Research, Experience and Business Tracks at EMOOCs 2019, co-located with the European MOOCs Stakeholders Submmit 2019 Conference, Naples, Italy.

  • 10. Gamage, D., Perera, I., & Fernando, S. (2018). Increasing interactivity and collaborativeness in MOOCs using facilitated groups: A pedagogical solution to meet 21st century goals. Paper presented at the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON.

  • 11. Garreta-Domingo, M., Sloep, P. B., Hérnandez-Leo, D., & Mor, Y. (2018). Design for collective intelligence: Pop-up communities in MOOCs. AI and Society, 33(1), 91–100. http://doi:10.1007/s00146-017-0745-0

  • 12. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic Books.

  • 13. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.

  • 14. Gynther, K. (2016). Design framework for an adaptive MOOC enhanced by blended learning: Supplementary training and personalized learning for teacher professional development. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14(1), 15–30.

  • 15. Haugsbakken, H. (2015). Using social media the inside out: A qualitative study about four stories on use and local models of organizing of social media in organizations [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

  • 16. Hernández Rizzardini, R., & Amado-Salvatierra, H. R. (2018). Exploring new ways to increase engagement in full-path MOOC programs. In Vol. 10925 LNCS. Lecture notes in computer science (including subseries Lecture notes in artificial intelligence and lecture notes in bioinformatics) (pp. 16–25).

  • 17. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.

  • 18. Leonardi, P. M., & Barley, S. R. (2010). What’s under construction here? Social action, materiality, and power in constructivist studies of technology and organizing. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 1–51.

  • 19. Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 80(C), 77–83. http://doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.005

  • 20. Mohamad, N., Ahmad, N. B., & Jawawi, D. N. A. (2019). Online interaction model for MOOC design. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(2), 57–64.

  • 21. Mor, Y., Warburton, S., Nørgård, R. T., & Ullmo, P. A. (2016). MOOC design workshop: Educational innovation with empathy and intent. In Vol. 9891 LNCS. Lecture notes in computer science (including subseries Lecture notes in artificial intelligence and Lecture notes in bioinformatics) (pp. 453–459).

  • 22. Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11(4), 404–428.

  • 23. Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science, 14, 399–441.

  • 24. Salmon, G., Gregory, J., Dona, K. L., & Ross, B. (2015). Experiential online development for educators: The example of the Carpe Diem MOOC. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 542–556. http://doi:10.1111/bjet.12256.

  • 25. Weick, K. E. (2001). Making sense of the organization. Oxford, England:


Journal + Issues