Cloud Learning Activities Orchestration for MOOC Environments

  • Rocael Hernández
  • Christian Gütl
  • Hector R. Amado-Salvatierra
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 446)


In this paper we focus on an approach to using cloud-based (Web 2.0) tools for MOOCs applying a new version of an innovative architecture for ‘cloud learning activities orchestration’ (CLAO). This works presents the CLAO, and examine its effectiveness for the use of learning activities in the cloud for MOOC experiences, presenting results and findings. Having performed learning analytics to examine the actual behavior of learners using the CLAO, we present results describing how learners evolved, after doing several learning activities, to a more elaborated and meaningful use of the cloud-based tools. These results contribute to a better understanding of the use of a cloud education environment in three MOOC courses with different topics (Medical Urgencies, Introduction to E-Learning and Cloud Tool for Learning Activities), and will enable further discussion and insights to improve methodological and orchestration strategies, and the use of innovative cloud-based tools in future MOOCs.


Cloud Education Environment MOOC E-Learning Learning Analytics Learning Orchestration VLE Cloud-based tools Web 2.0 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Mikroyannidis, A.: A semantic framework for cloud learning environments. In: Chao, L. (ed.) Cloud Computing for Teaching and Learning: Strategies for Design and Implementation, pp. 17–31. IGI Global, Hershey (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rizzardini, R.H., Linares, B.H., Mikroyannidis, A., Schmitz, H.C.: Cloud services, interoperability and analytics within a ROLE-enabled personal learning environment. Journal of Universal Computer Science 19(14), 2054–2074 (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., Fischer, F.: The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning. In: Technology-Enhanced Learning, pp. 3–19. Springer Netherlands (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chatti, M.A., Dyckhoff, A.L., Schroeder, U., Thüs, H.: A reference model for learning analytics. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning 4(5), 318–331 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Daniel, J.: Making Sense of MOOCs: Musing in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility. Journal of Interactive Media in Education (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Verbat, K., Duval, E., Klerkx, J., Govaerts, S., Santos, J.L.: Learning analytics dashboard applications. Americal Behavioral Scientist 57(10), 1500–1509 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pardo, A., Kloos, C.D.: Stepping out of the box: towards analytics outside the learning management system. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, pp. 163–167. ACM, New York (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Clow, D.: MOOCs and the funnel of participation. In: Third Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, pp. 185–189. ACM, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rizzardini, R.H., Gütl, C., Chang, V., Morales, M.: MOOC in Latin America: Implementation and Lessons Learned. In: 2nd International Workshop on Learning Technology for Education in Cloud, pp. 147–158. Springer Netherlands (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Juve, G., Deelman, E., Vahi, K., Mehta, G., Berriman, B., Berman, B.P., Maechling, P.: Scientific workflow applications on Amazon EC2. In: IEEE International Conference on E-Science, pp. 59–66. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hernández, R., Amado-Salvatierra, H.R., Guetl, C.: Cloud-based Learning Environments: Investigating learning activities experiences from Motivation, Usability and Emotional Perspective. In: CSEDU 2013 Proceedings. SciTePress (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ko, C.-C., Young, S.S.-C.: Explore the next generation of cloud-based e-learning environment. In: Chang, M., Hwang, W.-Y., Chen, M.-P., Müller, W. (eds.) Edutainment 2011. LNCS, vol. 6872, pp. 107–114. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Conole, G., Alevizou, P.: A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. A report commissioned by the Higher Education Academy (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rizzardini, R.H., Chang, V., Gütl, C., Amado-Salvatierra, H.: An Open Online Course with Accessibility Features. In: Herrington, J., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, pp. 635–643. AACE, Chesapeake (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Beetham, H., Sharpe, R. (eds.): Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning. Routledge (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Claiborne, T.: Update to Sessions in Google Analytics. Google Analytics (2011),
  17. 17.
    Hernandez, R., Pardo, A., Delgado, C.: Creating and Deploying Effective eLearning Experiences Using. LRN. IEEE Trans. on Education 50(4), 345–351 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rocael Hernández
    • 1
  • Christian Gütl
    • 2
    • 3
  • Hector R. Amado-Salvatierra
    • 1
  1. 1.GES DepartmentGalileo UniversityGuatemalaGuatemala
  2. 2.IICMGraz University of TechnologyGrazAustria
  3. 3.SISCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations