Abstract
Much hype has been centered on MOOCs, or Massive Online Open Courses, in higher education recently. They possess the noble aim of bringing top quality education to the masses, often for free, but suffer from several drawbacks that include student motivation and a lack of team-based activities. Other than to alleviate some of these shortcomings, the main goal of this paper is to explore what the design of Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMOGs) can offer for the design of MOOCs. A review of MOOCs is first presented, followed by a dissection of the general structure of MOOCs with a formal game perspective. A comparative analysis with MMOGs is then provided which finally leads to a set of design guidelines for creating more engaging MOOCs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
References
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row.
Fortune, M. F., et al. (2006). A comparison of online (high tech) and traditional (high touch) learning in business communication courses in silicon valley. Journal of Education for Business, 81(4), 210–214.
Fullerton, T. (2008). Game design workshop: A playcentric approach to creating innovative games. Elsevier Morgan Kaufmann.
Jegers, K. (2007). Pervasive game flow: Understanding player enjoyment in pervasive gaming. Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 5(1), 9–es.
Jennett, C., et al. (2008). Measuring and defining the experience of immersion in games. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(9), 641–661.
Kim, W. (2007). Towards a definition and methodology for blended learning. The Proceedings of Workshop on Blended Learning, 1–8.
Means, B., et al. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning. Structure, 15(20), 94.
Nacke, L. E. (2009). Affective ludology: Scientific measurement of user experience in interactive entertainment. Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden.
Nacke, L. E., & Lindley, C. A. (2010). Affective ludology, flow and immersion in a first-person shooter: Measurement of player experience. Extended republication of Future Play 08.
Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. MIT Press.
Sher, A. (2009). Assessing the relationship of student-instructor and student-student interaction to student learning and satisfaction in web-based online learning environment. Learning, 8(2), 102–120.
Springer, L., et al. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21–51.
Sweetser, P., & Wyeth, P. (2005). GameFlow: A model for evaluating player enjoyment in games. Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 3(3), 3–3.
Vardi, M. (2012). Will MOOCs destroy academia. Communications of the ACM, 55(11), 5.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the Center for Human-Centered Technology Design and the School of Software in the Faculty of Engineering and IT at UTS for their support in this work. We would also like to thank the reviewers for their insightful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this paper
Cite this paper
Tan, C. (2013). MOOCs vs MMOGs. In: Mandal, P. (eds) Proceedings of the International Conference on Managing the Asian Century. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-61-0_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-61-0_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-4560-60-3
Online ISBN: 978-981-4560-61-0
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)