The role of learning design and learning analytics in MOOCs

The last couple of years there has been a lot of attention for MOOCs. More and more universities start offering MOOCs. Although the open dimension of MOOC indicates that it is open in every aspect, in most cases it is a course with a structure and a timeline within which learning activities are positioned. There is a contradiction there. The open aspect puts MOOCs more in the non-formal professional learning domain, while the course structure takes it into the formal, traditional education domain. Accordingly, there is no consensus yet on solid pedagogical approaches for MOOCs. Something similar can be said for learning analytics, another upcoming concept that is receiving a lot of attention. Given its nature, learning analytics offers a large potential to support learners in particular in MOOCs. Learning analytics should then be applied to assist the learners and teachers in understanding the learning process and could predict learning, provide opportunities for pro-active feedback, but should also results in interventions aimed at improving progress. This paper illustrates pedagogical and learning analytics approaches based on practices developed in formal online and distance teaching university education that have been fine-tuned for MOOCs and have been piloted in the context of the EU-funded MOOC projects ECO (Elearning, Communication, Open-Data: http://ecolearning.eu) and EMMA (European Multiple MOOC Aggregator: http://platform.europeanmoocs.eu).

Game Learning Analytics: Learning Analytics for Serious Games

Video games have become one of the largest entertainment industries, and their power to capture the attention of players worldwide soon prompted the idea of using games to improve education. However, these educational games, commonly referred to as serious games, face different challenges when brought into the classroom, ranging from pragmatic issues (e.g. a high development cost) to deeper educational issues, including a lack of understanding of how the students interact with the games and how the learning process actually occurs. This chapter explores the potential of data-driven approaches to improve the practical applicability of serious games. Existing work done by the entertainment and learning industries helps to build a conceptual model of the tasks required to analyze player interactions in serious games (gaming learning analytics or GLA). The chapter also describes the main ongoing initiatives to create reference GLA infrastructures and their connection to new emerging specifications from the educational technology field. Finally, it explores how this data-driven GLA will help in the development of a new generation of more effective educational games and new business models that will support their expansion. This results in additional ethical implications, which are discussed at the end of the chapter.

Software Components for Serious Game Development

The presentation explains the approach of the RAGE project. It presents three examples of RAGE software components and how these can be easily reused for applied game development.

Education and self-regulation of learning for gifted pupils: Systemic design and development.

Gifted pupils differ from their age-mates with respect to development potential, actual competencies, self-regulatory capabilities, and learning styles in one or more domains of competence. The question is how to design and develop education that fits and further supports such characteristics and competencies of gifted pupils. Analysis of various types of educational interventions for gifted pupils reflects positive cognitive or intellectual effects and differentiated social comparison or group-related effects on these pupils. Systemic preventive combination of such interventions could make these more effective and sustainable. The systemic design is characterised by three conditional dimensions: differentiation of learning materials and procedures, integration by and use of ICT support, and strategies to improve development and learning. The relationships to diagnostic, instructional, managerial, and systemic learning aspects are expressed in guidelines to develop or transform education. The guidelines imply the facilitation of learning arrangements that provide flexible self-regulation for gifted pupils. A three-year pilot in Dutch nursery and primary school is conducted to develop and implement the design in collaboration with teachers. The results constitute prototypes of structured competence domains and supportive software. These support the screening of entry characteristics of all four-year old pupils and assignment of adequate play and learning processes and activities throughout the school career. Gifted and other pupils are supported to work at their actual achievement or competency levels since their start in nursery school, in self-regulated learning arrangements either in or out of class. Each pupil can choose other pupils to collaborate with in small groups, at self-chosen tasks or activities, while being coached by the teacher. Formative evaluation of the school development process shows that the systemic prevention guidelines seem to improve learning and social progress of gifted pupils, including their self-regulation. Further development and implementation steps are discussed.

Learning for self-regulation: Improving instructional benefits for pupils, teachers, parents, schools, and society at large

Compulsory education laws oblige primary and secondary schools to give each pupil positive encouragement in, for example, social, emotional, cognitive, creative, and ethical respects. This is a fairly smooth process for most pupils, but it is not as easy to achieve with others. A pattern of pupil, home or family, and school variables turns out to be responsible for a long-term process that may lead to a pupil’s dropping out of education. A systemic approach will do much to introduce more clarity into the diagnosis, potential reduction and possible prevention of some persistent educational problems that express themselves in related phenomena, for example low school motivation and achievement; forced underachievement of high ability pupils; concentration of bullying and violent behaviour in and around some types of classes and schools; and drop-out percentages that are relatively constant across time. Such problems have a negative effect on pupils, teachers, parents, schools, and society alike. In this address, I would therefore like to clarify some of the systemic causes and processes that we have identified between specific educational and pupil characteristics. Both theory and practice can assist in developing, implementing, and checking better learning methods and coaching procedures, particularly for pupils at risk. This development approach will take time and require co-ordination, but it will result in much better processes and outcomes than we are used to. First, I will diagnose some systemic aspects of education that do not seem to optimise the learning processes and school careers of some types of pupils in particular. Second, I will specify cognitive, social, motivational, and self-regulative aspects of learning tasks and relate corresponding learning processes to relevant instructional and wider educational contexts. I will elaborate these theoretical notions into an educational design with systemic instructional guidelines and multilevel procedures that may improve learning processes for different types of pupils. Internet-based Information and Communication Technology, or ICT, also plays a major role here. Third, I will report on concrete developments made in prototype research and trials. The development process concerns ICT-based differentiation of learning materials and procedures, and ICT-based strategies to improve pupil development and learning. Fourth, I will focus on the experience gained in primary and secondary educational practice with respect to implementation. We can learn much from such practical experience, in particular about the conditions for developing and implementing the necessary changes in and around schools. Finally, I will propose future research. As I hope to make clear, theory-based development and implementation research can join forces with systemic innovation and differentiated assessment in educational practice, to pave the way for optimal “learning for self-regulation” for pupils, teachers, parents, schools, and society at large.