The [Un]Democratisation of Education and Learning
MOOCs have engendered excitement around their potential to democratise education. They appear to act as a leveller and offer equal opportunity to millions of learners worldwide. Yet, this alluring promise is not wholly achieved by MOOCs. The courses are designed to be used by people who are already able to learn, thereby excluding learners who are unable to learn without direct tutor support. The solutions to this problem tend to focus on the course, as ‘learning design’ or ‘learning analytics’. We argue that effort needs to be focused on the learner directly, supporting him or her to become an autonomous learner. Supporting millions of people to become autonomous learners is complex and costly. This is a problem where education is shaped principally by economic and neoliberal forces, rather than social factors. However, ‘automated’ solutions may result in attempts to quantify learners’ behaviours to fit an ‘ideal’. There is a danger that overly simplified solutions aggravate and intensify inequalities of participation.
The authors wish to thank Vicky Murphy of The Open University for comments and for proofing this chapter.
- Anderson, T. (2013). Promise and/or peril: MOOCs and open and distance education. Commonwealth of learning.Google Scholar
- Biesta, G. (2005). Against learning. Nordic Educational Research, 25(1), 54–66.Google Scholar
- Boga, S., & McGreal, R. (2014). Introducing MOOCs to Africa: New economy skills for Africa program. Available from https://auspace.athabascau.ca/bitstream/handle/2149/3473/MOOCs_in_Africa_2014_Boga-McGreal-2.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
- British Council. (2014). Understanding India Report. Retrieved from: https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/understanding_india_report.pdf.
- Council Canada. Retrieved from http://www.downes.ca/files/Connective_Knowledge-19May2012.pdf.
- Daniel, J., Cano, E. V., & Cervera, M. G. (2015). The future of MOOCs: Adaptive learning or business model? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 12(1), 64–73.Google Scholar
- Downes, S. (2012). Connectivism and connective knowledge: Essays on meaning and learning networks. Ottawa, ON: National Research.Google Scholar
- Dua, A. (2013). College for All. In Voices on society: The art and science of delivery. New York: McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from http://voices.mckinseyonsociety.com/college-for-all/.
- Equipping people to stay ahead of technological change. (2017, January 14). The Economist. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21714341-it-easy-say-people-need-keep-learning-throughout-their-careers-practicalities.
- Field, J. (2000). Lifelong learning and the new educational order. Stoke on Trent, UK: Trentham Books.Google Scholar
- Godwin-Jones, R. (2014). Global reach and local practice: The promise of MOOCS. Language Learning and Technology, 18(3), 5–15.Google Scholar
- Guàrdia, L., Maina, M., & Sangrà, A. (2013). MOOC design principles: A pedagogical approach from the learner’s perspective. eLearning Papers, (33), 1–6.Google Scholar
- Hanushek, E. A., Jamison, E. A., Jamison, D. T., & Woessmann, L. (2008). Education and economic growth. Education Next, 8(2), 62–70.Google Scholar
- Hood, N., & Littlejohn, A. (2016). Quality in MOOCs: Surveying the terrain. Burnaby, Canada: Commonwealth of Learning.Google Scholar
- ICEF. (2012, July 16). China and India to produce 40% of global graduates by 2020. ICEF Monitor. Retrieved from http://monitor.icef.com/2012/07/china-and-india-to-produce-40-of-global-graduates-by-2020/.
- Illeris, K. (Ed.). (2009). Contemporary theories of learning: learning theorists… in their own words. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Kellner, D. (2004). Technological transformation, multiple literacies, and the re-visioning of education. E-Learning, 1(1), 9–37.Google Scholar
- Kennedy, J. (2014). Characteristics of massive open online courses (MOOCs): A research review, 2009–2012. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 13(1), 1–15.Google Scholar
- Knox, J. (2016). Posthumanism and the massive open online course: Contaminating the subject of global education. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Milligan, C., Margaryan, A., & Littlejohn, A. (2013). Patterns of engagement in connectivist MOOCs. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9 (2), 149–159. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/milligan_0613.htm.
- Selwyn, N. (2012). Education in a digital world: Global perspectives on technology and education. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Selwyn, N. (2016). Is technology good for education. Cambridge, UK: Polity Books.Google Scholar
- Siemens, G. (2014). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm.