Investigating Self-directed Learning Dimensions: Adapting the Bouchard Framework

  • Inge de WaardEmail author
  • Agnes Kukulska-Hulme
  • Mike Sharples
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9307)


Self-Directed Learning (SDL) is gaining interest, as online learning is increasingly learner-centered. FutureLearn courses provide an array of online interactions and content deliveries, which have allowed the authors to investigate a diversity of SDL elements. This preliminary research examines the SDL taking place in three FutureLearn courses, and categorises those learner actions into meaningful elements and dimensions for the learners. The SDL framework by Bouchard [1] is used to interpret the self-reported findings coming from active learners. The research uses a grounded theory approach to look for learner experiences related to four dimensions (algorithmic, conative, semiotic, and economic) of the Bouchard [1] framework, and to discover new dimensions. Various research instruments are used: online surveys, learning logs, and one-on-one interviews, all collected pre-, during, or post-course. The initial adaptation of Bouchard’s framework offers insights into SDL, its meaning, and value as perceived by the learners.


Self-directed learning MOOC Futurelearn Grounded theory 


  1. 1.
    Bouchard, P.: Pedagogy without a teacher: what are the limits. Int. J. Self-Directed Learn. 6(2), 13–22 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Siemens, G.: Connectivism: a learning theory for the digital age. Int. J. Instr. Technol. Distance Learn. 2(1), 3–10 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Downes, S.: Evaluating a MOOC [Web log post]. (2013). Accessed 14 June 2015
  4. 4.
    Kop, R., Fournier, H.: New dimensions to self-directed learning in an open networked learning environment. Int. J. Self-Directed Learn. 7(2), 2–20 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Waard, I., Kukulska-Hulme, A., Sharples, M.: Self-directed learning in trial FutureLearn courses. In: Proceedings of the European Stakeholder Summit 2015, pp. 234–243 (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Knowles, M.S.: Self-Directed Learning. Association Press, New York (1975)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Song, L., Hill, J.R.: A conceptual model for understanding self-directed learning in online environments. J. Interact. Online Learn. 6(1), 27–42 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Milligan, C., Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A.: Patterns of engagement in massive open online courses. MERLOT J. Online Learn. Teach. 9(2), 149–159 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    de Waard, I.: Analyzing the Impact of Mobile Access on Learner Interactions in a MOOC. Masters dissertation, Athabasca University. (2013)
  10. 10.
    Long, H.B.: Philosophical, psychological, and practical justifications for studying self-directed learning. In: Long, H.B., Associates, Self-directed Learning: Application and Research. Oklahoma Research Center, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73037 (1992)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Charmaz, K.: Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. Pine Forge Press, CA (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Creswell, J.W.: Qualitative Inquiry And Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage Publications, London (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sharples, M.: FutureLearn and Pedagogy. Internal presentation circulated during Learning Fair, The Open University (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Inge de Waard
    • 1
    Email author
  • Agnes Kukulska-Hulme
    • 1
  • Mike Sharples
    • 1
  1. 1.The Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK

Personalised recommendations