The impact of MOOC aggregators on the development of language education

Rustam Sh. Azitov; Alla Dmitriyevna Kulik; Grigoriy Mikhailovich Bazhin; Tatyana Ilinichna Golubeva; Marina Alexandrovna Golovyashkina; Natalia Sergeevna Yushchenko

doi:10.29051/el.v7iesp.4.15613

Auteurs

Rustam Sh. Azitov Kazan University, Kazan https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1792-7657
Alla Dmitriyevna Kulik Peoples’ Friendship of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1545-641X
Grigoriy Mikhailovich Bazhin Moscow State University of Civil Engineering, Moscow https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7960-6421
Tatyana Ilinichna Golubeva Russian State Social University, Moscow https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1916-2328
Marina Alexandrovna Golovyashkina K.G. Razumovsky Moscow State University of Technologies and Management (First Cossack University), Moscow https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9451-7101
Natalia Sergeevna Yushchenko Russian State Social University, Moscow https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8911-5765

DOI :

https://doi.org/10.29051/el.v7iesp.4.15613

Mots-clés :

Massive open online courses for language learning, MOOLC, MOOC platform, MOOC aggregator, MOOC provider

Résumé

Due to a large number of massive open online courses (MOOC), it becomes more and more difficult for the users to determine which course best suits their needs. To improve the efficiency of course selection, a place is needed where they can visually compare the offers of different MOOC providers. The article aims to identify the number and characteristics of massive open online courses for language learning (MOOLC) using MOOC aggregators and to trace their impact on the development of language education. The article presents different approaches to such concepts as MOOC, MOOLC, MOOC platform, MOOC aggregator and MOOC provider. The article determines MOOC aggregators, which would allow identifying the number and characteristics of MOOLC, and examines the possibilities of some MOOC platforms, which offer courses for English language learning, basing on the selected criteria for evaluation of the existing MOOC platforms. The author concludes that nowadays, the ideal MOOC platform, which could offer the necessary conditions for creating an ideal MOOLC, does not exist.

Téléchargements

Les données relatives au téléchargement ne sont pas encore disponibles.

Références

BANSAL, S. K.; KAGEMANN, S. Integrating big data: A semantic extract-transform-load framework. Computer, v. 48, no. 3, p. 42-50, 2015.

BATURAY, M. H. An Overview of the World of MOOC. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, v. 174, p. 427–433, 2015.

CHACÓN-BELTRÁN, R. Massive Online Open Courses and Language Learning: The Case for a Beginners’ English Course. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, v. 141, p. 242-246, 2014.

CHACÓN-BELTRÁN, R. The Role of MOOC in the Learning of Languages: Lessons From a Beginners’ English Course. Porta Linguarum, v. 28, p. 23-35, 2017.

CISEL, M. The Structure of the MOOC Ecosystem as Revealed by Course Aggregators. American Journal of Distance Education, v. 33, no. 3, p. 212-227, 2019.

DELLAROCAS, C.; VAN ALSTYNE, M. Money models for MOOC. Communications of the ACM, v. 56, p. 25-28, 2013.

DENISOVA, D. A.; LEVANOVA, N. G.; TOLMACHEV, O. M.; DOBROVA, E. D. Software products for creating educational video courses for people with physical disabilities. Revista Inclusiones, v. 7, no. Especial, p. 357-370, 2020.

FOURNIER, H.; KOP, R. MOOC learning experience design: Issues and challenges. International Journal on E-Learning, v. 14, no. 3, p. 289-304, 2015.

GOLUBEVA, T. I.; KOKHANOVSKAYA, I. I.; GOLOVNEVA, E. V.; FATYKHOVA, A. L.; TEREKHOVA, N. V. Social networks and education: the increase in student learning efficiency and the search for means of control. Revista Inclusiones, v. 7, no. Especial, p. 48-60, 2020.

KALMAN, Y. M. A race to the bottom: MOOC and higher education business models. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, v. 29, no. 1, p. 5-14, 2014.

KNOX, J. Digital culture clash: “massive” education in the E-learning and Digital Cultures MOOC. Distance Education, v. 35, no. 2, p. 146–177, 2014. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.917704

KOPTSEVA, T.; FOMINA, N. Festival and Competition Movement as A Form of Development of Teacher’s and Student’s Dialogical Thinking. Propósitos y Representaciones, v. 8, no. SPE(3), e776, 2020.

KRASIL’NIKOV, I. Child and Adolescent Socialization in the “Music-Making for All” Festival and Competition Project. Propósitos y Representaciones, v. 8, no. SPE(2), e687, 2020.

LANE, A.; CAIRD, S.; WELLER, M. The potential social, economic and environmental benefits of MOOC: operational and historical comparisons with a massive ‘closed online’ course. Open Praxis International Journal, v. 6, no. 2, p. 115-123, 2014.

LIYANAGUNAWARDENA, T. R.; LUNDQVIST, K.; WILLIAMS, S. A. Who are with us: MOOC learners on a FutureLearn course. British Journal of Educational Technology, v. 46, no. 3, p. 557-569, 2015.

MUHAMMAD, L. P.; PERSIYANOVA, S. G.; KARADZHEV, B. I.; LEVINA, V. N. Teaching foreign students to develop a monologic discourse based on cataphoric means. Amazonia Investiga, v. 8, no. 23, p. 17-26, 2019.

MURRAY, J-A. Participants’ perceptions of a MOOC. Insights: The UKSG Journal, v. 27, no. 2, p. 154-159, 2014.

O’CONNOR, K. MOOC, institutional policy and change dynamics in higher education. Higher Education, v. 68, no. 5, p. 623–635, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10734-014-9735-z

PALDY, L. G. MOOC in Your Future. Journal of College Science Teaching, v. 42, p. 6-7, 2013.

PERIFANOU, M.; ECONOMIDES, A. MOOC for foreign language learning: an effort to explore and evaluate the first practices. In: Proceedings of the INTED2014 conference. IATED Academy, 2014. p. 3561-3570.

ROSS, J.; SINCLAIR, C.; KNOX, J.; BAYNE, S.; MACLEOD, H. Teacher experiences and academic identity: The missing components of MOOC pedagogy. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, v. 10, no. 1, p. 57–69, 2014.

STEWART, B. Massiveness + openness = new literacies of participation? MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Technology, v. 9, p. 228–238, 2013.

TEXEIRA, M. A.; MOTA, J. A Proposal for the Methodological Design of Collaborative Language MOOC. In: Martm-Monje, E.; Barcena, E. (Eds.). Language MOOCs: Providing learning, transcending boundaries. Berlin: De Gruyter Open, 2014. p. 33-47.

WHITE, S.; DAVIS, H. C.; DICKENS, K.; LEON-URRUTIA, M.; SANCHEZ-VERA, M. M. MOOC: what motivates the producers and participants? In: Zvacek, S.; Restivo, M.; Uhomoibhi, J.; Helfert, M. (Eds.). Computer Supported Education. CSEDU 2014. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 510. Cham: Springer, 2015. p. 99-114.

ZHU, M.; SARI, A.; LEE, M. M. A systematic review of research methods and topics of the empirical MOOC literature (2014-2016). The Internet and Higher Education, v. 37, p. 31-39, 2018.