Advertisement

Trends and Opportunities in Online Learning, MOOCs, and Cloud-Based Tools

  • Vanessa Chang
  • Christian Gütl
  • Martin Ebner
Living reference work entry
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE)

Abstract

Online learning, in particular massive open online courses (MOOCs) and cloud-based tools, is on the move. This chapter takes a deeper look at opportunities and possibilities that might be provided to K-12 education through these emerging tools. The chapter summarizes experiences, case studies, and examples that illustrate where technology-enhanced learning is heading.

Keywords

Online Learning MOOCs Cloud-Based Tools K-12 learning and teaching Cloud services Technology-enhanced learning 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This chapter has been partly supported by the MOOC Maker Project, and findings, in particular on cloud-based learning, have been incorporated in this work. Graz University of Technology and Curtin University of Technology are gratefully acknowledged for supporting the research visits of Christian Gütl to support this research.

References

  1. Adam, T., Robert, H., Jason, E., & Tökke, A. (2013). GWT in action (2nd ed.). Manning Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Adams Becker, S., Freeman, A., Giesinger Hall, C., Cummins, M., & Yuhnke, B. (2016). NMC/CoSN horizon report: 2016 K-12 edition. Austin: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
  3. Ally, M., Grimus, M., & Ebner, M. (2014). Preparing teachers for a mobile world, to improve access to education. Prospectus (pp. 1–17). Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar
  4. Anshari, M., Alas, Y., & Guan, L. S. (2016). Developing online learning resources: Big data, social networks, and cloud computing to support pervasive knowledge. Education and Information Technologies, 21(6), 1663–1677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Armbrust, M., Fox, A., Griffith, R., Joseph, A. D., Katz, R., Konwinski, A., Lee, G., Patterson, D., Rabkin, A., Stoica, I., & Zaharia, M. (2010). A view of cloud computing. Communications of the ACM, 53(4), 50–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aroyo, L., Dolog, P., Houben, G. J., Kravcik, M., Naeve, A., Nilsson, M., & Wild, F. (2006). Interoperability in personalized adaptive learning. Educational Technology & Society, 9(2), 4–18. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/9_2/2.pdf.Google Scholar
  7. Bullen, M., Morgan, T., Belfer, K., & Oayyum, A. (2008). The digital learner at BCIT and implications for an e-strategy. Paris: EDEN.Google Scholar
  8. Canessa, E and Pisani, A. (2013). High School Open On-Line Course (HOOC): A Case Study from Italy. European Distance and E-Learning Network. Hungary: EDEN.Google Scholar
  9. Class Central. (2016). By The Numbers: MOOCS in 2016. Class Central. Last retrieved 5 Feb 2017 from https://www.class-central.com/report/mooc-stats-2016/.
  10. Conole, G., de Laat, M., Dillon, T., & Darby, J. (2006). LXP: Student experiences of technologies. Final Report: JISC UK, http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearningpedagogy/learneroutcomes. Last visited Dec 2016.
  11. Crockett, L. W. (2016). The critical 21st century skills every student needs and why. Global digital citizen foundation. Retrieved on 21 Apr 2017 from https://globaldigitalcitizen.org/21st-century-skills-every-student-needs.
  12. Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate students’ understanding of electromagnetism concepts? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 243–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Downes, S. (2005). e-Learning 2.0, ACM e-Learn Magazine, Oct 2005 (10).Google Scholar
  14. Ebner, M., Schön, S., & Nagler, W. (2013). Einführung – Das Themenfeld “Lernen und Lehren mit Technologien”. In M. Ebner & S. Schön (Eds.), Lehrbuch für Lernen und Lehren mit Technologien (2. überarbeitete und ergänzte Auflage, pp. 11–26). Berlin: ePubli. ISBN 978-3-8442-6594-1.Google Scholar
  15. Ebner, M., Schön, S., & Khalil, M. (2016). Maker-MOOC – How to foster STEM education with an open online course on creative digital development and construction with children. In Conference proceeding 19th international conference on interactive collaborative learning (ICL2016), Belfast, pp. 1233–1234.Google Scholar
  16. edX. (2017). EdX documentation: Building and running an edX course. Last retrieved 30 Jan 2017 from https://odl.mit.edu/wiki/Running_edX_Locally.
  17. Falkner, K., Vivian, R., & Falkner, N. (2015). Teaching computational thinking in K-6: The CSER digital technologies MOOC. In D. D’Souza & K. Falkner (Eds.), Proceedings 17th Australasian computing education conference (ACE 2015) Sydney, Australia. CRPIT, 160 (pp. 63–72). ACS.Google Scholar
  18. Ferdig, R., & Pytash, K. 2013. Exploring MOOCs for K-12 teaching and learners. International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL). Retrieved on 6 Apr 2017 from http://www.inacol.org/news/exploring-moocs-for-k-12-teachers-and-learners-by-rick-ferdig-and-kristy-pytash-guest-bloggers/.
  19. Fogarty, M. (2015). Australia leads in computer use in class, education. Retrieved on 2 Apr 2017 from http://education.nswtf.org.au/education6/news-5/australia-leads-computer-use-class/.
  20. Fox, A. (2013). From MOOCs to SPOCs. Communications of the ACM, 56(12), 38–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fößl, T., Ebner, M., Schön, S., & Holzinger, A. (2016). A Field Study of a Video Supported Seamless-Learning-Setting with Elementary Learners. Educational Technology & Society, 19 (1), 321–336.Google Scholar
  22. Gütl, C., Chang, V., Hernández Rizzardini, R., & Morales, M. (2014a). Must we be concerned with the massive drop-outs in MOOC? An attrition analysis of open courses. In Proceedings of international conference of interactive collaborative learning (ICL 2014), Dubai.Google Scholar
  23. Gütl, C., Hernández Rizzardini, H., Chang, V., & Morales, M. (2014b). Attrition in MOOC: lessons learned from drop-out students. Learning technology for education in cloud. MOOC and big data. Communications in Computer and Information Science Volume, 446(2014), 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gütl, C., Chang, V., Cheong, C., Nau, S. Z., Cheong, F., & Pirker, J. (2015). Expectations of the generation NeXt in higher education – Learning engagement approaches in information sciences subjects. In Proceedings of ICL 2015, Sept 2015, Florence.Google Scholar
  25. Hernández Rizzardini, R. (2015). Flexible educational environments: Orchestration of learning activities through. Unpublished PhD thesis, Graz University of Technology.Google Scholar
  26. Rizzardini, R. H., & Gütl, C. (2016). A Cloud-Based Learning Platform: STEM Learning Experiences with New Tools. In L. Chao (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Cloud-Based STEM Education for Improved Learning Outcomes (pp. 106–122). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.  https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-9924-3.ch008.
  27. Herold, B. (2017). Technology in education: An overview. Accessed 2 Apr 2017 from http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/technology-in-education/.
  28. Höfler, M., AL-Smadi, M., & Gütl, C. (2012). Investigating the suitability of automatically generated test items for real tests. The International Journal of eAssessment, 2(1) [Online]. Available: Doc. No. 26. http://journals.sfu.ca/ijea/index.php/journal/article/viewFile/27/26.
  29. Khalil, M., & Ebner, M. (2015). A STEM MOOC for school children–What does learning analytics tell us?. In Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL) Conference Proceedings. IEEE, 1217–1221.Google Scholar
  30. Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Maurer, H., & Scerbakov, N. (1996). Multimedia authoring for presentation and education: The official guide to HM-Card. Bonn: Addison-Wesley, 250 p.Google Scholar
  32. Mell, P., & Grance, T. (2011). The NIST definition of cloud computing. NIST Special Publication, 800-145. 7 pages. Last retrieved 10 Nov 2016 from http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-145.pdf.
  33. MOOCMAKER. (2016a). The application of cloud-based tools in MOOCs: Experiences and findings. MOOC maker – construction of management capacities of MOOCs in higher education, deliverable 1.10, Version 3. Last retrieved 11 Nov 2016, from http://www.mooc-maker.org/wp-content/files/WDP1.10_Final.pdf.
  34. MOOCMAKER. (2016b). Attrition and retention aspects in MOOC environments. MOOC maker – construction of management capacities of MOOCs in higher education, deliverable 1.6, Version 3. Last retrieved 5 Feb 2017, from http://www.mooc-maker.org/wp-content/files/WPD1.6_INGLES.pdf.
  35. Nagler, W., Ebner, M., & Schön, M. (2014). Do you mind NSA affair? Does the global surveillance disclosure impact our students?. In Proceedings of world conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications 2014 (pp. 2307–2312). Chesapeake: AACE.Google Scholar
  36. Nagler, W., Ebner, M., & Schön, M. (2016). R.I.P. E-Mail * 1965 – ✝ 2015. In Proceedings of EdMedia: world conference on educational media and technology 2016 (pp. 464–473). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).Google Scholar
  37. Neuböck, K., Kopp, M., Ebner, M. (2015). What do we know about typical MOOC participants? First insights from the field, In: Proceedings of eMOOCs 2015 conference, Lebrun, M., de Waard, I., Ebner, M., Gaebel, M., Mons, Belgium, pp.183–190.Google Scholar
  38. Nussbaumer, A., Hillemann, E. C., Gütl, C., & Albert, D. (2015). A competence-based service for supporting self-regulated learning in virtual environments. Journal of Learning Analytics, 2(1), 101–133. (Special section: Self-regulated learning and learning analytics).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Oblinger, D. D., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the net generation. Available at http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen. Last visited Dec 2016.
  40. Palmer, T. (2015). 15 characteristics of a 21st century teachers. Edutopia. Retrieved on 21 Apr 2017 from https://www.edutopia.org/discussion/15-characteristics-21st-century-teacher.
  41. Pintrich, P., & García, T. (1993). Intraindividual differences in students’ motivation and self-regulated learning. German Journal of Educational Psychology, 7, 99–107.Google Scholar
  42. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rosselle, M., Caron, P. A., & Heutte, J. (2014). A typology and dimensions of a description framework for MOOCs. In European MOOCs stakeholders summit 2014, eMOOCs 2014 (pp. 130–139). Proceedings document published in collaboration with eLearning Papers, a digital publication on eLearning by Open Education Europa (www.openeducationeuropa.eu). ISBN 978–84–8294-689-4.
  44. Rotterham, A. J., & Willingham, D. (2009). 21st century skills: The challenges ahead. Educational Leadership, 67(1), 16–21.Google Scholar
  45. Schön, S., Ebner, M., & Kurma, S. (2014). The maker movement. Implications of new digital gadgets, fabrication tools and spaces for creative learning and teaching. In: eLearning papers, 39, July 2014, pp. 14–25. Last retrieved April 24 2017 from http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/article/Learning-in-cyber-physical-worlds_In-depth_39_2?paper=145315.
  46. Sharples, M., Adams, A., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., McAndrew, P., Rienties, B., Weller, M., & Whitelock, D. (2014). Innovating pedagogy 2014: Open University innovation report 3. Milton Keynes: The Open University.Google Scholar
  47. Siemens, G., & Downes, S. (n.d.). Connectivism. Retrieved from 20 Apr 2017 from https://www.learning-theories.com/connectivism-siemens-downes.html.
  48. Smith, F. (2014). 7 telling statistics about the state of K-12 online learning. Ed Tech Focus On K-12. Retrieved on 2 Apr 2017 from http://www.edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2014/11/7-telling-statistics-about-state-k-12-online-learning.
  49. Spitzer, M., & Ebner, M. (2016). Use cases and architecture of an information system to integrate smart glasses in educational environments. In Proceedings of EdMedia: world conference on educational media and technology 2016 (pp. 51–58). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Vancouver BC, Canada.Google Scholar
  50. TEALsim. (2017). TEALsim project at MIT. Official Website. Last retrieved 30 Jan 2017 from http://web.mit.edu/viz/soft/visualizations/tealsim/index.html.
  51. Wong, L.-H., Milrad, M., & Specht, M. (2015). Seamless learning in the age of mobile connectivity. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zeleznik, R. (2015). Efficient implementation of virtual physics experiments for web based interactive courses at the MIT. Master Thesis, Graz University of Technology.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Curtin Learning and TeachingCurtin UniversityBentleyAustralia
  2. 2.Institute for Interactive Systems and Data ScienceGraz University of TechnologyGrazAustria
  3. 3.Educational Technology & Institute for Interactive Systems and Data ScienceGraz University of TechnologyGrazAustria

Section editors and affiliations

  • David Gibson
    • 1
  • Hiroaki Ogata
    • 2
  1. 1.Curtin UniversityPerthAustralia
  2. 2.Kyushu UniversityFukuokaJapan

Personalised recommendations