1,721,516 research outputs found
Exploring stakeholder perspectives on the development of MOOCs in higher education – a case study of the University of Southampton
No full textMany higher education institutions have engaged with massive open online courses (MOOCs) since their emergence in 2008, often presenting these courses as a means to increase access to education. These courses have subsequently evolved and diversified substantially in terms of their form and pedagogy. Numerous predictions have been made about the purposes for which MOOCs have been developed and their possible impact on teaching, learning and the structure of HE more generally. However, few studies have investigated the perspective of MOOC creators and facilitators on the purposes and potential of these online courses. This study uses grounded theory analysis of interview data to explore motivations behind MOOC creation and implementation at the University of Southampton from the perspective of internal stakeholders in the development process. The results confirm previous research which identify a reputation-building aim underlying MOOC development, the perception of which is broadly shared by participants in this study. The study also reveals how stakeholders feel the institutional momentum behind the development process can be exploited to achieve changes in educational practices amongst university staff and students. The paper concludes that MOOCs are primarily perceived as a dynamic for internal change and external engagement in the interests of the institution and its stakeholders, rather than as a means to pursue objectives of open education and open access more generally
Resisting ideological echo chambers: if we are all critical pedagogues, how will we know we are doing LD well?
No full textAt the launch of How to be a Learning Developer in higher education (Syska and Buckley, 2024), a common thread emerged during contributor presentations: the need to develop a shared critical approach to position ourselves effectively within higher education. This approach would identify and implement strategies to resist the challenges of neoliberalism, working towards social justice for our students, using critical pedagogy. These themes are relatively common in the LD literature, and the ALDinHE value of ‘embracing […] critical pedagogy’ accompanies the manifesto statement that ‘neutrality is not an option’ (ALDinHE, 2023). These terms carry political connotations and implications for LD practice. Together, these factors suggest a move to develop a ‘signature’ critical LD pedagogy, underpinned by an explicitly ideological vision. Under these circumstances, we risk constructing ‘a bounded, enclosed media space that has the potential to both magnify the messages delivered within it and insulate them from rebuttal’ (Jamieson and Capella, 2008, p.76) — in short, an echo chamber. This raises some important questions:- Given the explicitly political nature of critical pedagogy, in recruitment of new LD colleagues, should we test for and limit entry to our critical pedagogy club to those with ‘acceptable’ political views?- Critical pedagogy is skeptical of dominant narratives. How will we prevent critical pedagogy from becoming the dominant narrative in our community?- What if we are wrong? Even if our diagnosis of the challenges we face is correct, how will we test our solutions in the absence of robust challenges from alternative perspectives
On third space and critical paralysis: the case for a pragmatic conception of third space to advance Learning Development in higher education
No full textThe concept of ‘third space’ in HE identifies an emerging area of work and consequent development of roles and practices which exist ‘in-between' academic and professional departments of universities (Whitchurch, 2013). Third space roles and practices can shape, challenge and extend what were previously considered well-defined boundaries in and around HE. As evidenced by the 21 distinct mentions of third space in How to be a Learning Developer (Syska and Buckley, 2024) and its place in the ALDinHE Manifesto (2023), awareness of third space is widespread in our field. In this theoretical analysis, I briefly sketch the origins of Whitchurch’s concept of third space in higher education in broader critical theory perspectives on the social world. This intellectual heritage, often articulated through social justice approaches to learning development (LD), has informed nuanced analyses of problems and tensions in HE institutions. However, inspired (in a bad way) by ‘mystical Marxist’ Soja’s ‘startlingly arcane’ definition of Thirdspace, I argue that aspects of critical theory or critical social justice orientations to LD can lead to contradictions or even paralysis in attempts to actually use the considerable empirical insights provided by Whitchurch, and the metaphor of third space more broadly, to inform practice. I highlight a more pragmatic approach to using the third space concept. This approach involves applying Whitchurch’s practically applicable ideas of ‘four dimensions of blended professional activity’, and three ‘phases of third space processes’. These ideas are exemplified in some aspects of LD research but are rarely elaborated on for use
Replication Data for: Slavery, Reconstruction, and Bureaucratic Capacity in the American South
No full textReplication materials for "Slavery, Reconstruction, and Bureaucratic Capacity in the American South
Replication Data for: "Slavery, Reconstruction, and Bureaucratic Capacity in the American South"
No full textReplication files and data for "Slavery, Reconstruction, and Bureaucratic Capacity in the American South
Spectral functions from time-dependent DMRG
No full textWhite, Steven. (2012). Spectral functions from time-dependent DMRG. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/129657
A research agenda for exploring MOOCs and change in higher education using Socio-Technical Interaction Networks
No full textIn recent years, exaggerated claims about the impact of MOOCs on education systems have appeared in various media. But how can claims about the effects of MOOCs in higher education be effectively investigated? Simplistic, technologically determinist concerns with ‘impact’ mask the complexity of processes, infrastructure and interactions involved in the creation and use of MOOCs. It is challenging, therefore, to investigate the relationship between technology and change in higher education. This paper proposes a novel way of researching MOOCs as socio- technical systems. It is argued that the analytic strategy of Socio-Technical Interaction Networks (STIN) can highlight the social and technical forces intertwined in the construction and practical use of MOOCs in particular HE contexts
MOOCs, Educators and Learning Designers in UK HE
No full textMOOCs are frequently portrayed as “agents of change” in higher education impacting on institutional practices, processes and structures. Few studies have looked at the relationship between social change and the construction of MOOCs within higher education, particularly in terms of educator and learning designer roles and practices. This research takes a socio-technical perspective, combining the established analytical strategy of Socio-Technical Interaction Networks (STIN) with social theoretical frameworks of HE activity. These social theories are used as lenses through which to relate the STIN findings to the particular activities of educators and learning designers. This multi-site case study provides empirical evidence of the extent to which MOOCs are constructed in particular contexts, and the social implications of MOOCs for educator and learning designer roles and practices. Preliminary findings indicate that learning-designers occupy a hub-like position in the networks of actors involved in MOOC development within an emergent ‘third space’. The analysis also reveals how certain seemingly peripheral actors exert a strong influence of on course production processes and content. The work contributes to the body of STIN research in relation to the Web, and understandings of ‘third space’ activity in higher education by including analysis of both social and technical factors to account for changing practices and roles in H
Learning designers and educators in the ‘third space’: the socio-technical construction of MOOCs in UK higher education
No full textMassive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have been portrayed as “agents of change” in Higher Education (HE) which impact on educator practices, course design and teaching. However, MOOCs do not ‘fit’ neatly into existing university organisational structures, or align completely with conventional university functions. Few studies have looked at the complexity of the relationship between social change and the construction of MOOCs within higher education, particularly in terms of educator and learning designer (LD) roles and practices. To address this gap, this study combines the analytic strategy of Socio-Technical Interaction Networks (STIN) with the social theory of a ‘third space’ in HE. Thus it analyses socio-technical activity which spans professional and academic domains of HE in order to account for both educator and LD roles. The approach balances concerns with social and technical factors in analysing the relationship between technologies and social and organisational change related to MOOC development. The research involves a multi-site case study of three UK HE institutions. It aims to capture an empirically based, nuanced understanding of the extent to which MOOCs are socio-technically constructed in particular contexts, and the social implications of developing MOOCs, especially for educator and LD roles and practices. The findings highlight the complexity of interactions and collaborative processes underlying MOOC development. LDs are shown to occupy a hub-like position within a network of social actors, incentives, pressures and technologies involved in MOOC development and implementation. This LD role is enacted within an emergent ‘third space’ which spans conventional academic and professional boundaries and functions, allowing LDs and seemingly peripheral actors to significantly shape and partially unbundle the roles of educators in determining course structure and content. The study contributes a valuable socio-technical element to research on the third space which frequently identifies TEL projects as characteristic of third space activity, yet fails to consider the role of technology in co-constructing this space. The findings also provide a richer understanding of the LD role and the way social and technical means can be deployed to shape this role and the roles of others within a third space context. The thesis has implications for the planning and implementation of online learning projects and other domains of inter-professional practice in which Web technology and education coincide.<br/
- …
