MOOCs and the AI-Stanford Like Courses: Two Successful and Distinct Course Formats for Massive Open Online Courses
ARTICLE
C Osvaldo Rodriguez
European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning Volume 2012, Number 1, ISSN 1027-5207
Abstract
Open online courses (OOC) with a massive number of students have represented an important development for online education in the past years. A course on artificial intelligence, CS221, at the University of Stanford was offered in the fall of 2011 free and online which attracted 160,000 registered students. It was one of three offered as an experiment by the Stanford computer science department to extend technology knowledge and skills to the entire world. The instructors were two of the best known experts in the subject of artificial intelligence. Although students would not get Stanford University grades or credit, 20,000 from 190 countries finished the course successfully receiving a "statement of accomplishment" from the tutors Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig. Udacity is a start-up from the authors of CS221 delivering similar massive free online courses. EdX, a joint partnership between The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard University to offer online learning to millions of people around the world, is one of the most recent proposals in this realm. Massive open online courses known as connectivist MOOCs (c MOOCs) on the other hand have been delivered since 2008. They are based on the explicit principles of connectivism (autonomy, diversity, openness and interactivity) and on the activities of aggregation, remixing, repurposing and feeding forward the resources and learning. In the research literature, newspaper and magazine articles both types of OOCs, AI Stanford like courses (AI) and c-MOOCs, have been identified in many occasions as equivalent. Distance education (DE) pedagogy can be classified through the evolution of three categories: cognitive-behaviourist, social constructivist, and connectivist. These three current and future generations of DE pedagogy have an important place in a well-rounded educational experience. To a large extent, the generations have evolved in tandem with the technologies and all three models are very much in existence today and are categorized by a set of conditions. In this paper we study in detail representative courses from AI and c MOOC formats. We establish that although they share the use of distributed networks the format associated with c-MOOCs, which are defined by a participative pedagogical model, are unique and different from AI. We further assign to the AI to a cognitive-behaviourist (with some small contribution of social constructivist) and MOOCs to connectivist pedagogy. (Contains 2 tables and 4 figures.)
Citation
Rodriguez, C.O. (2012). MOOCs and the AI-Stanford Like Courses: Two Successful and Distinct Course Formats for Massive Open Online Courses. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 2012(1),. Retrieved May 29, 2023 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/73828/.

ERIC is sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) of the U.S. Department of Education.
Copyright for this record is held by the content creator. For more details see ERIC's copyright policy.
Keywords
- Access to Education
- Accreditation (Institutions)
- Adult Students
- artificial intelligence
- College Credits
- College Instruction
- College Students
- Comparative Analysis
- COMPARATIVE EDUCATION
- computer science education
- Constructivism (Learning)
- content analysis
- Course Descriptions
- Definitions
- distance education
- Dropout Rate
- Educational History
- Educational Philosophy
- Educational Principles
- educational technology
- Educational Theories
- electronic learning
- Facilitators (Individuals)
- Foreign Countries
- Handheld Devices
- Influence of Technology
- instructional design
- International Education
- Large Group Instruction
- learning theories
- Nontraditional Education
- online courses
- Open Enrollment
- Open Source Technology
- Participant Observation
- Statistical Analysis
- Student Behavior
- Surveys
- Teacher Role
- Web 2.0 Technologies
- Web Based Instruction
Cited By
View References & Citations Map-
Decision-making determinants of students participating in MOOCs: Merging the theory of planned behavior and self-regulated learning model
Niu Lung-Guang
Computers & Education Vol. 134, No. 1 (June 2019) pp. 50–62
-
Research Analysis on MOOC Course Dropout and Retention Rates
Marcela Gerogina Gomez-Zermeno & Lorena Aleman de La Garza
Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education Vol. 17, No. 2 (2016) pp. 3–14
-
MOOCs, Graduate Skills Gaps, and Employability: A Qualitative Systematic Review of the Literature
David Calonge, The University of Adelaide; Mariam Shah, Lancaster University
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 17, No. 5 (Sep 26, 2016)
-
Quality Assessments of MOOCs From the Student’s Point-of-view: Towards a Semi-Automated Student’s Feedback Analysis Method Adapted to the Needs of Educational Design
Pierre-Olivier Garand, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Canada; Normand Roy & Bruno Poellhuber, Université de Montréal, Canada
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2018 (Oct 15, 2018) pp. 490–498
-
Supporting peer interactions in a MOOC: Utilizing social networking tools to personalize learning
Nathaniel Ostashewski & Jon Dron, Athabasca University, Canada; Jennifer Howell, Curtin University, Australia
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2017 (Oct 17, 2017) pp. 833–845
-
Learner Behaviour in a MOOC Practice-oriented Course: In Empirical Study Integrating TAM and TPB
Hsi-Hsun Yang; Chung-Ho Su, Shu-Te University
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 18, No. 5 (Aug 15, 2017)
-
Trends and Patterns in Massive Open Online Courses: Review and Content Analysis of Research on MOOCs (2008-2015)
Aras Bozkurt & Ela Akgn-zbek, Anadolu University; Olaf Zawacki-Richter, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 18, No. 5 (Aug 15, 2017)
-
Investigating MOOCs through blog mining
Yong Chen, Old Dominion University
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 15, No. 2 (Apr 01, 2014)
-
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) Behind the Scenes
Brenda Cecilia Padilla Rodríguez, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Mexico; Alejandro Armellini, University of Northampton, United Kingdom; Viviana Carolina Cáceres Villalba, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Mexico
Global Learn 2016 (Apr 28, 2016) pp. 359–366
-
A Systematic Analysis and Synthesis of the Empirical MOOC Literature Published in 2013–2015
George Veletsianos, Royal Roads University; Peter Shepherdson
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 17, No. 2 (Mar 01, 2016)
-
Considering the Context of Teacher Professional Learning: A MOOC Design Case
Anissa Lokey-Vega, Lee Langub, Laurie Brantley-Dias & Julia Fuller, Kennesaw State University, United States
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2016 (Mar 21, 2016) pp. 278–284
-
Learner Perceptions of Instructional Strategies Implemented in One University’s Inaugural MOOC
Julia Fuller, Laurie Dias & Anissa Vega, Kennesaw State University, United States; Lee Langub, Kennesaw.edu, United States
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2016 (Mar 21, 2016) pp. 233–239
-
Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses
Katy Jordan, The Open University, UK, United Kingdom
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 15, No. 1 (Jan 15, 2014)
-
MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012
Tharindu Liyanagunawardena, University of Reading; Andrew Adams, Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan; Shirley Williams, University of Reading
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 14, No. 3 (Jun 03, 2013) pp. 202–227
-
iMOOC on Climate Change: Evaluation of a Massive Open Online Learning Pilot Experience
Vitor Rocio, Jos Coelho, Sandra Caeiro, Paula Nicolau & Antnio Teixeira, Universidade Aberta
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 16, No. 6 (Dec 03, 2015)
-
Learning in a small, task–oriented, connectivist MOOC: Pedagogical issues and implications for higher education
Jenny Mackness; Marion Waite, George Roberts & Elizabeth Lovegrove, Oxford Brookes University
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 14, No. 4 (Aug 28, 2013)
-
A tale of three MOOCs: Designing for meaningful teacher presence in large-enrolment courses.
Nathaniel Ostashewski, Athabasca University, Canada
EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2015 (Jun 22, 2015) pp. 1279–1284
-
MOBIMOOC 2012: A New Tree Structure for the Delivery of Connectivist Moocs
C Osvaldo Rodriguez
Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education Vol. 15, No. 1 (January 2014) pp. 41–49
-
Implementation of MOOCs as Part of the Academic Curriculum at Tel Aviv University
Tal Soffer & Anat Cohen, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Global Learn 2015 (April 2015) pp. 724–730
-
AncientGeek: Primary Sources Powering Historical Language Learning
Maria Moritz, Monica Lent, Thomas Köntges, Emily Franzini, Maryam Foradi & Gregory Crane, University of Leipzig, Germany
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2014 (Oct 27, 2014) pp. 1407–1416
-
The disruptive potential of the Massive Open Online Course: A literature review
Jean Jacoby
Journal of Open, Flexible, and Distance Learning Vol. 18, No. 1 (Aug 14, 2014) pp. 73–85
-
Building open learning opportunities: The Participating in the Digital Age cMOOC design case.
Nathaniel Ostashewski, Curtin University of Technology, Australia; Jon Dron, Athabasca University, Canada; Jennifer Howell, Curtin University, Australia
EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2014 (Jun 23, 2014) pp. 2480–2484
-
Developing the Open Factors Instrument: An Implementation Questionnaire for Gauging Openness
Fredrick W. Baker III, University of South Alabama, United States
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2014 (Mar 17, 2014) pp. 1378–1385
-
Open Participatory Engagement Network (OPEN): An Instructional Design Meta-Framework for Creating Participatory Networked Learning Environments
Fredrick W. Baker III, University of South Alabama, United States
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2014 (Mar 17, 2014) pp. 227–233
-
The concept of openness behind c and x-MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses)
Osvaldo Rodriguez, Universidad del CEMA, Ciudad de Buenos Aires
Open Praxis Vol. 5, No. 1 (Jan 14, 2013) pp. 67–73
-
Addressing the challenges of a bilingually delivered online course: design and development of the Australia China Trade (ACT) MOOC
Nathaniel Ostashewski, Michael Thorpe & David Gibson, Curtin University of Technology, Canada
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2013 (Oct 21, 2013) pp. 1284–1289
-
Building for massive scalability: the production case of an astronomy MOOC
Nathaniel Ostashewski, Curtin University of Technology, Canada
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2013 (Oct 21, 2013) pp. 916–922
-
A SWOT Analysis of The Potential Impact of MOOCs
Laddie Odom, UMUC, United States
EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2013 (Jun 24, 2013) pp. 611–621
-
Assumptions and challenges of open scholarship
George Veletsianos & Royce Kimmons, University of Texas at Austin
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Vol. 13, No. 4 (Sep 12, 2012) pp. 166–189
These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.