Lessons Learned from Teaching Multiple Massive Open Online Courses in Veterinary Education

Main Article Content

Jill Rowan Deans MacKay, Dr http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7134-4829 Jessie Paterson, Dr Victoria Sandilands, Dr Natalie K Waran, Dr Bryony Lancaster, Ms Kirsty Hughes, Dr

Abstract

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are a rapidly expanding avenue of diversification for higher education institutes. MOOC development is varied, individual course teams may have near complete creative control over the content, style, format and aims of their course, or be led by MOOC-specific teams within their institution. A single institute therefore may offer a wide variety of courses from short introductory level discussions to learning outcomes pitched at the postgraduate level. In this study, we examined the performance of four relatively long-running MOOCs offered by Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies at the University of Edinburgh: EdiVet Do You Have What It Takes to Be A Veterinarian; Animal Behaviour and Welfare; Chicken Behaviour and Welfare; and Equine Nutrition. Comparisons were made between the format and style of courses, their learning outcomes, and performance metrics such as completion rate, user satisfaction and benefit to institute. Retention was a challenge for all session-based MOOCs, with Chickens being most successful at retaining 50% of its potential audience until the start of Week 3. The average retention rate across all lectures and sessions was 38.5% (±14.08). All courses showed a notable female learner bias far above the Coursera average of 39% (Range Chickens: 58.1% ±3.1, Equine: 79.3% ¬±1.69). The majority of learners were North American or European (Range, Animals: 64.0±0.6, Equine 84.0%±3.0%). Across all courses, over 25% of learners had already achieved a Master’s degree or higher. A qualitative analysis of 188 learner stories revealed an overwhelmingly positive experience, highlighting the quality of resources, a perceived friendly relationship with the course instructors and referencing perceived barriers to education in face to face models. In conclusion, high quality digital resources embedded in well-designed courses can be a powerful tool to widen access to science education, however the MOOC platform does not necessarily reach a wide global audience, and may still struggle to widen participation in higher education, and alternative platforms are worth considering.

Article Details

Section
Original Research
Author Biographies

Jill Rowan Deans MacKay, Dr, R(D)SVS

Jill MacKay  is a Research Fellow in Veterinary Medical Education at the Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies. Jill is interested in the evaluation of educational methodologies and student experiences in digital environments.

Jessie Paterson, Dr, R(D)SVS

Jessie Paterson is a lecturer in student learning at the Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies. Her research interests include transitions into university, academic student support and peer support.

Victoria Sandilands, Dr, SRUC

Victoria Sandilands is a senior scientist in poultry behaviour and welfare at Scotland’s Rural College

Natalie K Waran, Dr, Eastern Institute of Technology

Natalie Waran is Executive Dean and Professor (One Welfare) at the Faculty of Education, Humanities and Health Science at Eastern Institute of Technology in New Zealand.

Bryony Lancaster, Ms, R(D)SVS

Bryony Lancaster is the programme manager for the distance learning MSc in Equine Science at the Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies and a teaching fellow.

Kirsty Hughes, Dr, R(D)SVS

Kirsty Hughes is a research assistant in veterinary medical education at the Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies.

References

[External] Coursera Product Updates for Edinburgh - Google Docs. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-m3775CxfcuUMnatx70sPK6WNfvP8CneKabp2LJRgts/edit
Baggaley, J. (2013). MOOC rampant. Distance Education, 34(3), 368–378.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.835768
Bayne, S., & Ross, J. (2014). The pedagogy of the Massive Open Online Course (MOOC): the UK view. The Higher Education Academy.
Belanger, Y., & Thornton, J. (2013). Bioelectricity: A Quantitative Approach. Duke University’s First MOOC.
Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender and Education, 17(4), 369–386.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/09540250500145072
Bothwell, E. (2016). US blended learning students ‘least engaged with teaching’ | THE News. Retrieved 15 November 2016, from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/us-blended-learning-students-least-engaged-teaching
Breslow, L., Pritchard, D. E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G. S., Ho, A. D., & Seaton, D. T. (2013). Studying Learning in the Worldwide Classroom Research into edX’s First MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment, 8, 13–25.
Buzzeo, J., Robinson, D., & Williams, M. (2014). The 2014 RCVS Survey of the Veterinary Profession. Institute for Employment Studies. Brighton.
Clifton, A., & Mann, C. (2011). Can YouTube enhance student nurse learning? Nurse Education Today, 31(4), 311–313.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2010.10.004
Conole, G. (2013). MOOCs as disruptive technologies: strategies for enhancing the learner experience and quality of MOOCs. RED - Revista de Educación a Distancia, 39, 1–17.
Coursera. (n.d.). Legacy Analytics – Coursera. Retrieved 7 October 2016, from https://partner.coursera.help/hc/en-us/articles/204273375-Analytics-Dashboard?flash_digest=e02c5cf5657f58ea18aa1ae6fd9dbb2cb70d218a
Coursera Blog • Introducing Signature Track. (2013). Retrieved 4 October 2016, from http://coursera.tumblr.com/post/40080531667/signaturetrack
CrashCourse. (n.d.). Retrieved 6 December 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/user/crashcourse
Daniel, J. (2012). Making Sense of MOOCs: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility. Journal of Interactive Media in Education.
doi: https://doi.org/10.5334/2012-18
Fernandez, V., Simo, P., Algaba, I., Albareda-Sambola, M., Salan, N., Amante, B., … Garriga, F. (2011). ‘Low-Cost Educational Videos’ for Engineering Students: a new Concept based on Video Streaming and YouTube Channels. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(3), 518–527.
Fox, A. (2013). From MOOCs to SPOCs. Communications of the ACM, 56(12), 38–40.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1145/2535918
Franzosi, R. (1998). Narrative Analysis - Or Why (and How) Sociologists Should Be Interested in Narrative. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 517–554.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.517
Georgakopoulou, A. (2006). Thinking big with small stories in narrative and identity analysis. Narrative Inquiry, 16(1), 122–130.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1075/ni.16.1.16geo
Gledhill, L., Dale, V. H. M., Powney, S., Gaitskell-Phillips, G. H. L., & Short, N. R. M. (2017). An International Survey of Veterinary Students to Assess Their Use of Online Learning Resources. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 44(4), 1–12.
doi: http://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.0416-085R
Goldschmidt, K., & Greene-Ryan, J. (2014). Massive Open Online Courses in Nursing Education. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 29(2), 184–186.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2013.12.001
Hammershøj, L. G. (2018). The perfect storm scenario for the university: Diagnosing converging tendencies in higher education. Futures, (June), 0–1.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2018.06.001
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Most people are not WEIRD. Nature, 466(29).
doi: http://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
Holley, D., & Oliver, M. (2010). Student engagement and blended learning: Portraits of risk. Computers and Education, 54(3), 693–700.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.035
Hout, M. (2012). Social and Economic Returns to College Education in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 379–400.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102503
Jordan, K. (2014). Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses Massive Open Online Courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(1), 133–160.
doi: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i1.1651
Kizilcec, R. F., Piech, C., & Schneider, E. (2013). Deconstructing disengagement: Analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses. Proceedings of the {Third} {International} {Conference} on {Learning} {Analytics} and {Knowledge}, 170–179.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/2460296.2460330
Kjus, Y. (2009). Everyone Needs Idols: Reality Television and Transformation in Media Structure, Production and Output. European Journal of Communication, 24(3), 287–304.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1177/0267323109336758
Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell. (n.d.). Retrieved 6 December 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/user/Kurzgesagt
Lane, A., Caird, S., & Weller, M. (2014). The potential social, economic and environmental benefits of MOOCs: operational and historical comparisons with a massive ‘closed online’ course. Open Praxis, 6(2), 115–123.
doi: http://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.6.2.113
Laurillard, D. (2016). The educational problem that MOOCs could solve: Professional development for teachers of disadvantaged students. Research in Learning Technology, 24, 1–17.
doi: http://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v24.29369
Lawton, W., & Katsomitros, A. (2012). MOOCs and disruptive innovation: The challenge to HE business models. The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, 2011(August 2011), 1–10.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/1361457042000186967
Lund, V., Coleman, G., Gunnarsson, S., Appleby, M. C., & Karkinen, K. (2006). Animal welfare science - Working at the interface between the natural and social sciences. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 97(1), 37–49.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2005.11.017
MacKay, J., Langford, F., & Waran, N. (2014). Animal welfare education - can MOOCs contribute? Veterinary Record, 175(15), i–i.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1136/vr.g6168
MacKay, J. R. D., Langford, F., & Waran, N. (2016). Massive Open Online Courses as a Tool for Global Animal Welfare Education. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 43(4), 287–301.
doi: http://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.0415-054R2
Mackness, J., Fai, S., Mak, J., & Williams, R. (2010). The Ideals and Reality of Participating in a MOOC. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning (pp. 266–274).
Markoff, J. (2013). Measuring the Success of Online Education - The New York Times. Retrieved 27 September 2018, from https://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/measuring-the-success-of-online-education/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
Martin, F. G. (2012). Will massive open online courses change how we teach? Communications of the ACM, 55(8), 26.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1145/2240236.2240246
Meyer, R. (2012, July). What’s It Like to Teach a MOOC (and What The Heck’s a MOOC?). Retrieved 25 May 2015, from http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/07/what-its-like-to-teach-a-mooc-and-what-the-hecks-a-mooc/260000/
Ntourmas, A., Avouris, N., Daskalaki, S., & Dimitriasdis, Y. A. (2018). Comparative study of MOOC forums: Does course subject matter? In 17th Panhellenic and International Conference, ICT in Education (HCICTE 2018), Thessaloniki, Greece (pp. 1–8).
Paterson, J., Hughes, K., Steer, L., Das Gupta, M., Boyd, S., Bell, C., & Rhind, S. (2016). Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) as a Window into the Veterinary Profession. Veterinary Record.
Reich, J. (2014). MOOC Completion and Retention in the Context of Student Intent. Retrieved 27 September 2018, from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2014/12/mooc-completion-and-retention-in-the-context-of-student-intent
Reich, J. (2015). Rebooting MOOC Research. Science, 347(6217), 34–35.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1126/science.1261627
Rivard, R. (2013). Measuring the MOOC Dropout Rate. Inside Higher Ed, (March).
Ryan, R. M., Patrick, H., Deci, E. L., & Williams, G. C. (2008). Facilitating health behaviour change and its maintenance : Interventions based on Self-Determination Theory. The European Health Psychologist, 10, 2–5.
Schabram, K., & Maitlis, S. (2016). Negotiating the Challenges of a Calling: Emotion and Enacted Sensemaking in Animal Shelter Work. Academy of Management Journal, 60(2), amj.2013.0665.
doi: http://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0665
Silverman, D. (2014). Interpreting qualitative data. (K. Metzler, Ed.) (Fifth Edit). SAGE Publications.
Smith, C. P. (2000). Content Analysis and Narrative Analysis. In Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology (pp. 313–335). Cambridge University Press.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1093/acprof
Stavisky, J., Brennan, M. L., Downes, M. J., & Dean, R. S. (2017). Opinions of UK Rescue Shelter and Rehoming Center Workers on the Problems Facing Their Industry. Anthrozoös, 30(3), 487–498.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2017.1326677
University Edinburgh. (2013). MOOCs @ Edinburgh 2013 – Report # 1.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1202451
University of Edinburgh. (n.d.). MOOCs at the University of Edinburgh. Retrieved 22 June 2016, from http://moocs.is.ed.ac.uk/edinburgh-report-2/
Unknown, A. (2015). On demand courses – Coursera Help Center. Retrieved 4 October 2016, from https://learner.coursera.help/hc/en-us/community/posts/205780125-On-demand-courses
Unknown, K. (2015). Free MOOCs? Forget about it. | Coursera Junkie. Retrieved 4 October 2016, from https://courserajunkie.wordpress.com/2015/05/26/courseras-free-statements-of-accomplisments-die-a-quiet-death/
UUK. (2012). Massive Open Online Courses: Higher Education’s Digital Moment? Universities UK (Vol. 19).
doi: http://doi.org/10.1145/2316936.2316953
Vardi, M. Y. (2012). Will MOOCs destroy academia? Communications of the ACM, 55(11), 5–5. http://doi.org/10.1145/2366316.2366317
Verified Certificates Ensure Academic Integrity. (2014). Retrieved 4 October 2016, from http://coursera.tumblr.com/tagged/statementofaccomplishment
Watson, W. R., Kim, W., & Watson, S. L. (2016). Learning outcomes of a MOOC designed for attitudinal change: A case study of an Animal Behavior and Welfare MOOC. Computers and Education, 96(June), 83–93.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.013
Zenner, D., Burns, G. A., Ruby, K. L., Debowes, R. M., & Stoll, S. (2005). Veterinary students as elite performers: preliminary insights. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 32(2), 242–248.
doi: http://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.32.2.242