El paradigma de la calidad normativa en el diseño de cursos en línea masivos y abiertos

  1. Ramírez-Fernández, Miguel Baldomero
  2. Salmerón Silvera, José Luis
  3. López Meneses, Eloy
Journal:
Revista DIM: Didáctica, Innovación y Multimedia

ISSN: 1699-3748

Year of publication: 2016

Issue: 33

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDDD editor

More publications in: Revista DIM: Didáctica, Innovación y Multimedia

Abstract

In the scientific and informative literature Massive Open On Line Courseshave been considered as a revolution with great potential in the education and training world. In this sense, this movement has been of interest worldwide due to its great potential to offer a free training, quality and accessible to all users regardless of their country of origin, prior training and without the need to pay for registration. Since early 2010, the arrival of these courses began to be viewed from a more academic perspective when different prestigious universities began their mass activities, among others, Stanford, Harvard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Pennsylvania and the Toronto University. It there is agreement in the scientific community about the importance and popularity of this movement, mainly by its international scope and the opportunity to provide a quality education through prestigious institutions, which recently was destined to elite organizations. However, there are discrepancies and questions about the pedagogical value and scope will move in Higher Education. Doubts are mainly focused on the value that the scientific community gives the movement from its impact on the socio-educational field and facing positions from authors who consider a destructive movement toward others define it as refreshing and creative action. In this sense, the universe of Massive Open On Line Courses is the subject of educational and training reflection among different authors and institutions of higher education in the globalized world, but the dimensions and implications of the evaluative view of these courses is necessary since different views. This article provides a descriptive overview of the instructional design of the Massive Open On Line Courses and the possible assessment of their quality is presented through setting standards on UNE 66181:2012 Quality Management of Virtual Training.

Bibliographic References

  • Aguaded-Gómez, J. I. (2013). The MOOC Revolution: A new form of education from the technological paradigm? Comunicar, 21(41), 07-08. doi: 10.3916/C41-2013-a1
  • Aguaded, J. I., Vázquez-Cano, E. y Sevillano, M. L. (2013). MOOC, ¿turbocapitalismo de redes o altruismo educativo? En “SCOPEO INFORME Núm. 2: MOOc: Estado de la situación actual, posibilidades, retos y futuro” (pp. 74-90). Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca, Servicio de Innovación y Producción Digital. Disponible en: http://scopeo.usal.es/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/scopeoi002.pdf.
  • Balfour, S.P. (2013). Assessing writing in MOOC: Automated essay scoring and Calibrated Peer Review. Research & Practice in Assessment, 8(1), 40-48.
  • Bouchard, P. (2011). Network promises and their implications. In The impact of social networks on teaching and learning. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento (RUSC), 8(1), 288–302. Disponible en: http://rusc.uoc.edu/ojs/index.php/rusc/article/viewFile/v8n1-bouchard/v8n1-bouchard-eng
  • Conole, G. (2013). Los MOOC como tecnologías disruptivas: estrategias para mejorar la experiencia de aprendizaje y la calidad de los MOOC. Revista Campus Virtuales. Revista científica iberoamericana de tecnología educativa, 2(2), 26-28.
  • Daniel, J. (2012). Making Sense of MOOC: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility. Journal Of Interactive Media In Education, 3(0). http://jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2012-18.
  • Downes, S. (2010). The role of the educator. Huffington Post Education. Recuperado de: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/Stephen-downes/the-role-of-the-educator_b_790937.html
  • Durall, E., Gros, B., Maina, M., Johnson, L. y Adams, S. (2012). Perspectivas tecnológicas: educación superior en Iberoamérica 2012-2017. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
  • Eaton, J. (2012). MOOC and Accreditation: Focus on the Quality of “Direct-to-Students”. Education Council for Higher Education Accreditation, 9(1).
  • Haggard, S. (2013). The Maturing of the MOOC (Reserch No. 130). London: Department for Business Innovation y Skills – UK Government. Recuperado a partir de https://www.gov.uk/government/upoads/system/uploaps/attachment_data/file/240193/13-1173-maturing-ofthe-mooc.pdf.
  • Izquierdo Asensi, F. (1991). Geometría descriptiva superior y aplicada. Madrid: Ediciones Dossat.
  • Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A. y Ludgate, H. (2013). NMC Horizon Report: 2013 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
  • McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Siemens, G. y Cormier, D. (2010). The MOOC model for digital practice. Canada: University of Prince Edward Island. Recuperado a partir de http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/MOOC_Final.pdf
  • Oncu, S. y Cakir, H. (2011). Research in online learning environments: Priorities and methodologies. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1098-1108. (DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.009).
  • Ravenscroft, A. (2011). Dialogue and connectivism: A new approach to understanding and promoting dialogue-rich networked learning.International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3).
  • Rodríguez, C.O. (2012). MOOC and the Al-Stanford like Courses: Two Successful and Distinct Course Formats for Massive Open Online Courses. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 1.
  • Sangrá, A. (2013). Luces y sombras de los MOOC. Investigación y ciencia, (444), 38-39.
  • Sánchez, M. L. (2014). Diseño y producción de cursos MOOC como estrategia de aprendizaje cooperativo en un ambiente de educación a distancia. Revista Didáctica, Innovación y Multimedia, 28. Recuperado de: http://www.pangea.org/dim/revista28.htm
  • Sevillano, M.L. y Quicios, M.P. (2012). Indicadores del uso de competencias informáticas entre estudiantes universitarios. Implicaciones formativas y sociales. Revista Teórica de la Evaluación. 24(1), 151-182.
  • Siemens, G. (2012). MOOC are really a platform. eLearnspace.
  • Stödberg, U. (2012). A research review of e-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(5), 591-604. (DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2011.557496).
  • Valverde, J. (2014). MOOC: Una visión crítica desde las Ciencias de la Educación. Profesorado. Revista de currículum y formación del profesorado, 18(1), enero-abril 2014.
  • Vázquez-Cano, E. y López Meneses, E. (2014). Los MOOC y la Educación Superior: La Expansión del Conocimiento. Profesorado. Revista de currículum y formación del profesorado, 18(1), enero-abril 2014.
  • Vázquez Cano, E.; López Meneses, E.; Méndez Rey, J.M.; Suárez Guerrero, C.; Martín Padilla, A.H.; Román Graván, P.; Gómez Galán, J.; Revuelta Domínguez, F.I. y Fernández Sánchez, M.J. (2013a). Guía Didáctica sobre los MOOC. Sevilla: AFOE.
  • Vázquez, E. y Sevillano, M.L. (2011). Educadores en Red. Elaboración de materiales audiovisuales para la enseñanza. Madrid: Ediciones Académicas-UNED.
  • Vizoso, C. M. (2013). ¿Serán los COMA (MOOC), el futuro del e-learning y el punto de inflexión del sistema educativo actual?. Revista Didáctica, Innovación y Multimedia, 25. Recuperado de:http://www.pangea.org/dim/revista25.
  • Zapata Ros, M. (2013). Analítica de aprendizaje y personalización. Campus Virtuales. Revista Científica Iberoamericana de Tecnología Educativa, 2(2), 88-118.
Data source: Dialnet