Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

MOOCAT: A visual authoring tool in the cMOOC context

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents an authoring tool in the cMOOC context called MOOCAT (MOOC Authoring Tool). It is a visual authoring tool that helps teachers to design cMOOC-oriented pedagogical scenarios. MOOCAT has two main innovative features. The first is that it offers a tool for conceiving pedagogical scenarios in a simple way through graphical representation, by providing the functionality to design learning workflows. The second is related to its capacity to bridge the gap between the conception phase and its execution into different LMS (Learning Management System), by offering services that allow the automatic deployment of pedagogical scenarios to existing platforms (e.g. OpenEDX, Moodle, etc.). This facilitates the authoring process considerably, and enhances the ability of teachers to concentrate their efforts on the content. This paper presents the model underlying MOOCAT, and describes the cMOOC scenario-building process. Also, the paper highlights the findings from a case study which was organized in order to evaluate the utility and the usability of the tool, and the usefulness of its innovative feature of conceiving and deploying a cMOOC scenario into OpenEDX platform. MOOCAT seems to be an easy-to-use tool, which offers guidance and flexibility during the design process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://bpmn.io/

  2. Graphical Visual Instructional Design Languages for Teachers (www-lium.univ-lemans.fr/~laforcad/graphit/)

References

  • Abedmouleh, A., & Modeling, A. D. (2014). Approche Domain-Specific Modeling pour l ’ opérationnalisation des scénarios pédagogiques sur les plateformes de formation à distance Aymen Abedmouleh To cite this version : HAL Id : tel-01019917 Thèse pour obtenir le grade de Docteur de l ’ Université du.

  • Abedmouleh, A., Laforcade, P., Oubahssi, L., & Choquet, C. (2011). Operationalization of learning scenarios on existent learning management systems the moodle case-study. In ICSOFT 2011 - proceedings of the 6th international conference on software and database technologies, 2(march 2014) (pp. 143–148). https://doi.org/10.5220/0003486001430148.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Adesina, A., & Molloy, D. (2010). Capturing and monitoring of learning process through a business process management (BPM) framework. In Proc. of 3rd International Symposium for Engineering Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alario-Hoyos, C., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Cormier, D., & Delgado-Kloos, C. (2014). Proposal for a conceptual framework for educators to describe andDesign MOOCs. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 20(1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.3217/jucs-020-01-0006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alario-Hoyos, C., Estévez-Ayres, I., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Kloos, C. D., & Fernández-Panadero, C. (2017). Understanding learners’ motivation and learning strategies in MOOCs. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 18(3), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i3.2996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, D., & Tanner, K. (2006). Rubrics: Tools for making learning goals and evaluation criteria explicit for both teachers and learners. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 5(3), 197–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bangor, A., Kortum, P., & Miller, J. (2009). Determining what individual SUS scores mean: Adding an adjective rating scale. Journal of Usability Studies, 4(3), 114–123. https://doi.org/66.39.39.113

  • Barchino, R., Hilera, J. R., De-Marcos, L., Gutiérrez, J. M., Otón, S., Gutiérrez, J. A., et al. (2012). Interoperability between visual UML design applications and authoring tools for learning design. Information and Control, International Journal of Innovative Computing, 8(1), 845–865.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanco, Á. F., García-Peñalvo, F. J., & Sein-Echaluce, M. (2013). A methodology proposal for developing adaptive cMOOC. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Technological Ecosystem for Enhancing Multiculturality - TEEM ‘13, (November), 553–558. https://doi.org/10.1145/2536536.2536621.

  • Botturi, L., Derntl, M., Boot, E., & Figl, K. (2006). A classification framework for educational modeling languages in instructional design. In 6th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookhart, S. M. (1999). The art and science of classroom assessment: The missing part of pedagogy. ASHE-ERIC higher education report. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=507605047&site=ehost-live

  • Caron, P.-A., Derycke, A., & Le Pallec, X. (2005). Bricolage and Model Driven Approach to design distant course. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 2856–2863).

  • Consortium, I. M. S. G. L., & others. (2003). IMS learning design specification. Retrieved February, 7, 2009.

  • Da Costa, J. (2014). BPMN 2.0 pour la modélisation et l’implémentation de dispositifs pédagogiques orientés processus. University of Geneva.

  • Da Costa, J., & Schneider, D. K. (2015). Modélisation et implémentation de dispositifs pédagogiques avec BPMN 2.0. In 7ème Conférence sur les Environnements Informatiques pour l’Apprentissage Humain (EIAH 2015) (pp. 282–287).

    Google Scholar 

  • Downes, S. (2008). Places to go: Connectivism & connective knowledge. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 5(1), 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Figl, K., & Derntl, M. (2006). A comparison of visual instructional design languages for blended learning. Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia Hypermedia and Telecommunications, 941–948. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/INDEX.CFM?fuseaction=Reader.ViewFullText& paper_id=23118.

  • Glance, D. G., Forsey, M., & Riley, M. (2013). The pedagogical foundations of massive open online courses. First Monday, 18(5).

  • Hernández-Leo, D. (2007). A pattern-based design process for the creation of CSCL macro-scripts computationally represented with IMS LD. Universidad de Valladolid.

  • Katsamani, M., & Retalis, S. (2013). Orchestrating learning activities using the CADMOS learning design tool. Research in Learning Technology, 21(1063519), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 9(3).

  • Kop, R., Fournier, H., & Mak, J. S. F. (2011). A pedagogy of abundance or a pedagogy to support human beings? Participant support on massive open online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(7), 74–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopp, M., & Lackner, E. (2014). Do Moocs Need a Special Instructional Design? EDULEARN14 Proceedings, (July), 7138–7147. Retrieved from http://library.iated.org/view/KOPP2014DOM

  • Mariño, O., Casallas, R., Villalobos, J., Correal, D., & Contamines, J. (2007). Bridging the Gap between e-learning Modeling and Delivery through the Transformation of Learnflows into Workflows. In E-Learning Networked Environments and Architectures (pp. 27–59). Springer.

  • Mclellan, S., Muddimer, A., & Peres, S. C. (2012). The effect of experience on system usability scale ratings. Journal of Usability Studies, 7(2), 56–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morales, L., Castillo, L., Fernandez-Olivares, J., & Gonzalez-Ferrer, A. (2008). Automatic generation of user adapted learning designs: An AI-planning proposal. In International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems (pp. 324–328).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nodenot, T. (2007). Scénarisation pédagogique et modèles conceptuels d’un. EIAH: Que peuvent apporter les langages visuels? Revue Internationale Des Technologies En Pédagogie Universitaire (RITPU)/International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education (IJTHE), 4(2), 85–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, K. L., Forte, M., Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (2017). Metaliteracy as pedagogical framework for learner-centered Design in Three MOOC platforms: Connectivist, Coursera and canvas. Open Praxis, 9(3), 267. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.9.3.553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Object Management Group (OMG). (2011). Business process model and notation (BPMN) version 2.0. Business, 50(January), 170–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11576-008-0096-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouraib, E. A. (2012). Scénarisation pédagogique pour des EIAH ouverts: Une approche dirigée par les modèles et spécifique au domaine métier, 265. Retrieved from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01128256/document

  • Pernin, J. P., & Godinet, H. (2006). actes du colloque » Scénariser l’enseignement et l’apprentissage: une nouvelle compétence pour le praticien? ». INRP, Lyon, Avril.

  • Pettenati, M. C., & Cigognini, M. E. (2007). Social networking theories and tools to support Connectivist learning activities. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 2(3), 42–60. https://doi.org/10.4018/jwltt.2007070103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauro, J., & Lewis, J. R. (2011). When designing usability questionnaires, does it hurt to be positive? In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2215–2224).

  • Stylianakis, G., Moumoutzis, N., Arapi, P., Mylonakis, M., & Christodoulakis, S. (2015). COLearn and open discovery space portal alignment: A case of enriching open learning infrastructures with collaborative learning capabilities. In Proceedings of 2014 International Conference on Interactive Mobile Communication Technologies and Learning, IMCL 2014, (Imcl) (pp. 252–256). https://doi.org/10.1109/IMCTL.2014.7011142.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao, F., & Pardamean, B. (2016). MOOC model: Dimensions and model design to develop learning. New Educational Review, 43(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2016.43.1.02.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank persons who participated in the experiment of the MOOCAT tool.

Availability of data and material

MOOCAT Authoring tool is available on the link: https://projets.iut-laval.univ-lemans.fr/moocat/

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Le Mans Université, LIUM, EA 4023, Laboratoire d’Informatique de l’Université du Mans, Avenue Messiaen, 72085, Le Mans Cedex 9, France

    Aicha Bakki, Lahcen Oubahssi & Sébastien George

  2. IRF-SIC Laboratory, Ibn Zohr University, Agadir, Morocco

    Aicha Bakki & Chihab Cherkaoui

Authors
  1. Aicha Bakki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lahcen Oubahssi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sébastien George
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chihab Cherkaoui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

As Corresponding Author, I confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved for submission by all the named authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aicha Bakki.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

We know of no conflicts of interest associated with this publication. The authors declare that they have no competing interests. We declare that this manuscript is original, has not been published before and is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bakki, A., Oubahssi, L., George, S. et al. MOOCAT: A visual authoring tool in the cMOOC context. Educ Inf Technol 24, 1185–1209 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9807-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9807-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation