Abstracts
Abstract
In massive open online courses (MOOCs), recommendation relationships present a collection of associations that imply a new form of integration, such as an interdisciplinary synergy among diverse disciplines. This study took a computer science approach, using the susceptible-infected (SI) model to simulate the process of learners accessing courses within networks of MOOC offerings, and emphasized the potential effects of a network structure. The current low rate of access suggests that a ceiling effect influences learners’ access to learning online, given that there are thousands of courses freely available. Interdisciplinary networks were created by adding recommended courses into four disciplinary networks. The diversity of interdisciplinarity was measured by three attributes, namely variety, balance, and disparity. The results attest to interesting changes in how the diversity of interdisciplinary knowledge grows. Particularly remarkable is the degree to which the diversity of interdisciplinarity increased when new recommended courses were first added. However, changing diversity implied that neighbouring disciplines were more likely to come to the forefront to attach to the interdisciplinarity of MOOC offerings, and that the pace of synergy among disparate disciplines slowed as time passed. In the absence of domain experts, expert knowledge is not sufficient to support interdisciplinary curriculum design. More evidence-based analytics studies showing how interdisciplinarity evolves in course offerings could help us to better design online courses that prepare learners with 21st-century skills.
Keywords:
- distance education and online learning,
- informal learning,
- interdisciplinary projects,
- simulations
Appendices
Bibliography
- Adelman, C. (1999). The new college course map and transcript files: Changes in course-taking and achievement, 1972-1993. [Based on the postsecondary records from two national longitudinal studies]. US Government Printing Office.
- Allen, L. J. (1994). Some discrete-time SI, SIR, and SIS epidemic models. Mathematical Biosciences, 124(1), 83-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5564(94)90025-6
- Anderson, T. (Ed.). (2008). The theory and practice of online learning. Athabasca University Press.
- Ang, K. L. M., Ge, F. L., & Seng, K. P. (2020). Big educational data analytics: Survey, architecture and challenges. IEEE Access, 8, 116392-116414. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2994561
- Arnaboldi, V., Conti, M., La Gala, M., Passarella, A., & Pezzoni, F. (2016). Ego network structure in online social networks and its impact on information diffusion. Computer Communications, 76, 26-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2015.09.028
- Barbera, E.., Zhang, J., Galván-Fernàndez, C., & Fernández-Navarro, F. de A. (2018). Learner support in MOOCs: Identifying variables linked to completion. Computers & Education, 122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.014
- Barnett, R. (2000). Supercomplexity and the curriculum. Studies in Higher Education, 25(3), 255-265. https://doi.org/10.1080/713696156
- Brown, M., Costello, E., Donlon, E., & Giolla-Mhichil, M. N. (2015). A strategic response to MOOCs: How one European university is approaching the challenge. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(6). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i6.2151
- Campbell, D. T. (1969). Ethnocentrism of disciplines and the fish-scale model of omniscience. In M. Sherif & C. W. Sherif (Eds.), Interdisciplinary relationships in the social sciences (pp. 328-348). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203788363-19
- Choi, B., & Pak, A. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical and Investigative Medicine, 29, 351-364.
- Cormier, D., & Siemens, G. (2010). The open course through the open door: Open courses as research, learning, and engagement. Educause Review, (July/August), 31-39. https://www.islandscholar.ca/islandora/object/ir%3A3675/datastream/PDF/view
- Eynon, R. (2017). Crowds, learning and knowledge construction: questions of power and responsibility for the academy. Learning Media, and Technology, 42(3), 257-258. http://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2017.1366920
- Fernández-Díaz, E., Rodríguez-Hoyos, C., & Calvo Salvador, A. (2017). The pedagogic architecture of MOOC: A research project on educational courses in Spanish. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(6), 18-35. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i6.2964
- Gašević, D., Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., & Siemens, G. (2014). Where is research on massive open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC Research Initiative. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5), 134-176. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i5.1954
- Gillet, D., Ngoc, A. V. N., & Rekik, Y. (2005). Collaborative web-based experimentation in flexible engineering education. IEEE Transactions on Education, 48(4), 696-704. https://doi.org/10.1109/te.2005.852592
- Graff, H. J. (2015). Undisciplining knowledge: Interdisciplinarity in the twentieth century. JHU Press.
- Higham, J. (2003). Curriculum change: A study of the implementation of general national vocational qualifications. The Curriculum Journal, 14(3), 327-350. https://doi.org/10.1080/0958517032000137649
- Holley, K. A. (2009). Interdisciplinary strategies as transformative change in higher education. Innovative Higher Education, 34(5), 331-344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-009-9121-4
- Holley, K. (2017). Interdisciplinary curriculum and learning in higher education. In G. Noblit (Ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.138
- Hubball, H., & Gold, N. (2007). The scholarship of curriculum practice and undergraduate program reform: Integrating theory into practice. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2007(112), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.293
- Janežič, M., Dimovski, V., & Hodošček, M. (2018). Modeling a learning organization using a molecular network framework. Computers & Education, 118, 56-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.008
- Jarmon, L., Traphagan, T., Mayrath, M., & Trivedi, A. (2009). Virtual world teaching, experiential learning, and assessment: An interdisciplinary communication course in Second Life. Computers & Education, 53(1), 169-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.010
- Kahn, H. E., & Agnew, M. (2017). Global learning through difference: Considerations for teaching, learning, and the internationalization of higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 21(1), 52-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315315622022
- Kelly, G. J., Luke, A., & Green, J. (2008). What counts as knowledge in educational settings: Disciplinary knowledge, assessment, and curriculum. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), vii-x. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x07311063
- Kockelmans, J. J. (1979). Why interdisciplinarity. Interdisciplinarity and higher education. Penn State Press.
- Lambiotte, R., & Panzarasa, P. (2009). Communities, knowledge creation, and information diffusion. Journal of Informetrics, 3(3), 180-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2009.03.007
- Lin, S. (2009, September). Resource transferring mechanism of entrepreneurial network: Based on establishment of the scale-free network. Proceedings of 2009 International Conference on Management Science and Engineering (pp. 1638-1643).
- Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10086
- Luo, M. M., & Chea, S. (2020). Wiki use for knowledge integration and learning: A three tier conceptualization. Computers & Education, 154, 103920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103920
- Newman, M. E., & Girvan, M. (2004). Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Physical Review E, 69(2), 026113.
- Maassen, P., Nerland, M., & Yates, L. (Eds.). (2018). Reconfiguring knowledge in higher education (Vol. 50). Springer.
- Mangaroska, K., & Giannakos, M. (2018). Learning analytics for learning design: A systematic literature review of analytics-driven design to enhance learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 12(4), 516-534. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2018.2868673
- Meyers, E. M., Erickson, I., & Small, R. V. (2013). Digital literacy and informal learning environments: an introduction. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(4), 355-367. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.783597
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (2017). Classes, grades & evaluations. Retrieved December 12, 2020 from http://web.mit.edu/registrar/subjects/cmtes/coc/
- Naidu, S. (2017). Open educational practice: Caveat emptor. Globethics.net. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/164357
- Porter, A., & Rafols, I. (2009). Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics, 81(3), 719-745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2197-2
- Priestley, M. (2011). Whatever happened to curriculum theory? Critical realism and curriculum change. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 19(2), 221-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2011.582258
- Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240-267. https://doi.org/10.2307/3556658
- Reich, J., & Ruipérez-Valiente, J. A. (2019). The MOOC pivot. Science, 363(6423), 130-131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav7958
- Rohs, M. & Ganz, M. (2015). MOOCs and the claim of education for all: A disillusion by empirical data. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(6). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i6.2033
- Schuwer, R., Gil Jaurena, I., Aydin, C. H., Costello, E., Dalsgaard, C., Brown, M., Jansen, D., & Teixeira, A. (2015). Opportunities and threats of the MOOC movement for higher education: The European perspective. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(6), 20-38. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i6.2153
- Shah, D. (2020, November 30). By the numbers: MOOCs in 2020. The Report. Retrieved January 18, 2021 from https://www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-stats-2020/
- Shannon, C. E. (2001). A mathematical theory of communication. ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 5(1), 3-55. https://doi.org/10.1145/584091.584093
- Sheail, P. (2018). Temporal flexibility in the digital university: Full-time, part-time, flexitime. Distance Education, 39, 462-479. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1520039
- Spector, J. M. (2015). Foundations of educational technology: Integrative approaches and interdisciplinary perspectives. Routledge.
- Stirling, A. (2007). A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 4(15), 707-719. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2007.0213
- Suen, H. K. (2014). Peer assessment for massive open online courses (MOOCs). International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(3), 312-327. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i3.1680
- Tabassum, S., Pereira, F. S., Fernandes, S., & Gama, J. (2018). Social network analysis: An overview. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 8(5), e1256. https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1256
- Trowler, P., Knight, P., & Saunders, M. (2003). Change thinking change practices. Learning and Teaching Support Network. https://www.academia.edu/10275967/Change_Thinking_Change_Practices
- Trowler, P., Saunders, M., & Bamber, V. (Eds.). (2012). Tribes and territories in the 21st century: Rethinking the significance of disciplines in higher education. Routledge.
- Tsai, Y. S., Rates, D., Moreno-Marcos, P. M., Munoz-Merino, P. J., Jivet, I., Scheffel, M., Drachslet, H., Kloos, C. D., & Gašević, D. (2020). Learning analytics in European higher education—Trends and barriers. Computers & Education, 155, 103933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103933
- Tucker, R., & Morris, G. (2011). Anytime, anywhere, anyplace: Articulating the meaning of flexible delivery in built environment education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(6), 904-915. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01138.x
- Veletsianos, G., & Shepherdson, P. (2015). Who studies MOOCs? Interdisciplinarity in MOOC research and its changes over time. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2202
- Venville G., Rennie L. J., & Wallace J. (2012) Curriculum integration: Challenging the assumption of school science as powerful knowledge. In Fraser B., Tobin K., & McRobbie C. (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (Vol. 24, pp. 737-749). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_49
- West, J. (2018). Teaching data science: an objective approach to curriculum validation. Computer Science Education, 28(2), 136-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2018.1486120
- Wheelahan, L. (2012). Why knowledge matters in curriculum: A social realist argument. Routledge.
- Zawacki-Richter, O., Bozkurt, A., Alturki, U., & Aldraiweesh, A. (2018). What research says about MOOCs-An explorative content analysis. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i1.3356
- Zhang, J., Burgos, D., & Dawson, S. (2019). Advancing open, flexible and distance learning through learning analytics. Distance Education, 40(3), 303-308. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2019.1656151
- Zhang, J., Lou, X., Zhang, H., & Zhang, J. (2019). Modeling collective attention in online and flexible learning environments. Distance Education, 40(2), 278-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2019.1600368
- Zhang, J., Sziegat, H., Perris, K., & Zhou, C. (2019). More than access: MOOCs and changes in Chinese higher education. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(2), 108-123. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1602541