Towards E-presence at Distance as a Way to Reach and Share E-quality: The Case of the ECO sMOOCs

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10254)


This paper presents an original approach to e-presence in social participatory MOOCs (or sMOOCs), taking the case of EU-funded ECO project on sMOOCs. First it considers the model for e-presence based on the different layers proposed by Garrison and Anderson (2003): “cognitive presence” (emphasis on the reflexive) and “social presence” (emphasis on the collaborative) to which “designed presence” is added (emphasis on the platform constraints and opportunities) (Frau-Meigs 2013).

Using examples from a corpus of sMOOCs produced for ECO, the paper then proposes an ECO model for e-presence. It incorporates the various tools developed for the participants by the creative team of managers/trainers in this model, according to how they foster one of the types of e-presence (cognitive, social and designed). The results show that these tools tend to be more cognitive and designed than social, probably because social presence can be carried on with online commercial platforms for chatting and blogging.

The conclusions point to the use of e-presence to diminish distance and to bring awareness to pedagogical and technical design and functionalities. Such tools for e-presence produce a multiplier effect that can use the benefits of heavy prototype investment at the beginning by ensuring some sustainability over time and e-quality. Such e-presence is part of the ECO model that contributes to the specificity and originality of European MOOCs in the global MOOCosphere. This process indicates that e-quality itself is being redesigned by sMOOCs, in a qualitative manner.


sMOOC Quality E-presence Cognitive presence Social presence Designed presence Model Distance ECO project Sustainability E-quality Participants 


  1. Conole, G.: MOOCs as disruptive technologies: strategies for enhancing the learner experience and quality of MOOCs (2013).
  2. Ehlers, U.: Quality in e-Learning from a Learner’s Perspective. Eur. J. Open Distance E-learn. (2004).
  3. Frau-Meigs, D.: Transliteracy: sense-making mechanisms for establishing e-presence. In: Carlsson, U. (ed.) Clearinghouse Issue on “Media and Information Literacy and Intercultural Dialogue”. UNESCO, Goteborg (2013)Google Scholar
  4. Frau-Meigs, D., Bossu, A.: The ECO Project for E-Teaching: Social MOOCs at the Crossroads of Actors Cognitive Logics and Strategies. Graz, Eden (2016)Google Scholar
  5. Frau-Meigs, D., Bossu, A.: Le projet européen ECO: les MOOC participatifs au croisement des logiques d’acteurs publics/privés dans la formation ouverte des enseignants, TICEMED (2016).
  6. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T.: E-Learning in the 21st Century. A Framework for Research and Practice. Routledge, London (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Haythornthwaite, C.: Building social networks via computer networks. In: Renninger, K., Shumar, W. (eds.) Building Virtual Communities: Learning and Change in Cyberspace. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  8. Hodgson, V., Reynolds, M.: Consensus, difference and multiple communities in networked learning. Stud. High. Educ. 30(1), 11–24 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. McAdam, R., McCreedy, S.: A critique of knowledge management: using a social constructionist model. New Technol. Work Employ. 15(2), 155–168 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Osuna, S., Frau-Meigs, D., Bossu, A., Jansen, D.: Intercreativity and interculturality in ECO project’s virtual learning environments. In: Jemni, M., Kinshuk, Khribi, M.K. (eds.) Open Education: from OERs to MOOCs. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology Series, pp. 161–187. Springer, Heidelberg (2016)Google Scholar
  11. Siemens, G.: New structures and spaces of learning: the systemic impact of connective knowledge, connectivism, and networked learning. In: Communication Presented at Web 2.0 Conference, University of Minho, Braga (2008)Google Scholar
  12. Siemens, G., Downes, S.: Connectivism and connective knowledge (2009). Accessed 28 Jan 2009Google Scholar
  13. Wright, K.: Personal knowledge management: supporting individual knowledge worker performance. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 3(3), 156–165 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CREWUniversity Sorbonne Nouvelle, USPCParisFrance
  2. 2.MICAUniversity Bordeaux MontaigneBordeauxFrance

Personalised recommendations