Appears in: IATED Digital Library
Pages: 5853-5862
Publication year: 2013
ISBN: 978-84-616-3847-5
ISSN: 2340-1095
Conference: 6th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation ICERI 2013
Dates: 18-20 November, 2013
Location: Seville, Spain

Cite

Sánchez-Gordón, Sandra; Luján-Mora, Sergio. Accessibility considerations of massive online open courses as creditable courses in engineering programs. 6th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation ICERI, pp. 5853-5862, Seville (Spain), 18-20 November, 2013

Abstract

This paper proposal is to include MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) as creditable courses in engineering programs at the National Polytechnic School of Ecuador. Currently, the curriculum of all the engineering students at the National Polytechnic School includes an elective subject of three credits chosen from the course offer of the university. The idea is to expand the options of elective subjects the students can choose from with lists of selected MOOCs from global providers such as Coursera and Udacity. In addition to fulfilling a number of requirements related to the content and duration of the courses, one important challenge is that these selected MOOCs should comply with web accessibility requirements specific for the special needs of non-native speakers.Web accessibility is the property of a website to support the same level of effectiveness for people with disabilities as it does for non-disabled people. As an accessible website is designed to meet different user needs, preferences, skills and situations, this flexibility also benefits people without disabilities in certain situations, such as MOOCs students who are non-native speakers.MOOCs do not differ much from online courses that have existed for many years: a syllabus, a calendar, educational materials (mainly videos), some activities or projects, quizzes (usually multiple choice questions) to assess students’ learning, and a forum to discuss with instructors and fellow learners. Their main interest lies not so much in the courses that offers, which are courses in a broad variety of topics endorsed by recognized educational institutions, but in the fact that MOOCs can build learning communities across a common field of study globally, massively and openly. Hence, instructors, teacher assistants and students come from diverse cultures and speak different native languages.Unfortunately, MOOCs rise new challenges on web accessibility. For example, cultural differences and background knowledge has to be taken in account when choosing contents, examples, and learning activities which might be unfamiliar or even offensive to certain cultures. Also, user interfaces requires special adaptations for non-native speakers.In this paper we will present a preliminary list of web accessibility requirements, we will highlight the challenges, and we will comment possible paths of solutions with the goal to a better understanding of the special needs of non-native speakers using MOOCs. This understanding will be the base for establishing criteria for a preliminary selection of MOOCs as creditable courses in engineering programs at the National Polytechnic School. Nevertheless, this criteria can also be useful for other higher education institutions interested in including MOOCs in their official programs.

Keywords

Engineering Curriculum, Massive Open Online Courses, Web Accessibility, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, User Interface, Non-native speakers.

Acknowledgement

This research has been partly supported by the projects MESOLAP (TIN2010-14860) and GEODAS-BI (TIN2012-37493-C03-03) from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness.

References

[1]   Kay, J., Riemann, P., Diebold, E., Kummerfeld, B. (2013). MOOCs: So Many Learners, So Much Potential. IEEE Intelligent Systems. 28(3), pp. 70-77.

[2]   Holmberg, B. (1995). The evolution of the character and practice of distance education. Open learning, 10(2), pp. 47-53.

[3]   Mackness, J., Mak, S., Williams, R. (2010). The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. Networked Learning Conference, pp. 266-275.

[4]   Pence, H.  (2012). When Will College Truly Leave the Building: If MOOCs are the Answer, What Is the Question? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 41(1), pp. 25-33.

[5]   Liyanagunawardena,T., Adam, A., Williams, S. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 14(3), pp. 202-227

[6]   Coursera.  (2013). About Coursera. Available online: https://www.coursera.org/about

[7]   Class Central. (2013). Free Online Education. Available online: http://www.class-central.com/

[8]   CIT. (2013). Preliminary results on Duke’s third Coursera effort Think Again. Available online: http://cit.duke.edu/blog/2013/06/preliminary-results-on-dukes-third-coursera-effort-think-again/.

[9]   MiríadaX. (2013). MiríadaX Our Philosophy. Available online: https://www.miriadax.net/nuestra-filosofia

[10] FutureLearn. (2013). Future Learn About. Available online: https://www.futurelearn.com/about

[11] Georgia Tech, (2013). Online Master of Science in Computer Science. Available on: http://www.omscs.gatech.edu/

[12] Rhoads, R., Berdan J., Toven-Lindsey, B. (2013). The Open Courseware Movement in Higher Education: Unmasking Power and Raising Questions about the Movement’s Democratic Potential. Educational Theory. 63, pp. 87–110

[13] New Media Consortium. (2012). Report on Higher Education in Iberoamerica 2012-2017, pp.15.

[14] Laplante, P. (2013). Courses for the Masses? IT Professional. 15(2), pp.57-59.

[15] Liyanagunawardena, T., Williams, S., Adams, A. (2013). The Impact and Reach of MOOCs: A Developing Countries’ Perspective. eLearning Papers. 33, pp. 1–8.

[16] Teng, L. (2007). Collaborating and Communicating Online: A cross-bordered Intercultural Project between Taiwan and the U.S. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 13, pp.33-48.

[17] Olaniran, B. (2009). Discerning culture in e-learning and in the global workplaces. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal. 1(3), pp.180-195.

[18] ISO. (2012). International Organization for Standardization’s ISO 9241-171 Ergonomics of human-system interaction – Guidance on software accessibility. Available online: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-171:ed-1:v1:en)

[19] W3C. (1999). Weaving the Web Berners Lee. Available online: http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/Weaving/glossary.html

[20] W3C. (2008). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines WCAG 2.0. Available online: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/

[21] Proctoru. (2013). Addressing accessibility concerns in online education. Available online: http://blog.proctoru.com/?p=345

[22] Luján-Mora, S., Saquete E. (2013). Mixing a MOOC with flip teaching in a traditional classroom. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, pp. 80-87

[23] Inside Higher Ed. (2013). Udacity project on pause. Available online: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/07/18/citing-disappointing-student-outcomes-san-jose-state-pauses-work-udacity#ixzz2gJYhPZeT

[24] SJSU. (2013). SJSU/EdX adds more campuses, courses. Available online: http://blogs.sjsu.edu/today/2013/sjsuedx-expansion/

[25] CONEA. (2009). Performance Evaluation Report of the Higher Education Institutions of Ecuador, pp. 5.

[26] EPN. (2009). National Polytechnic School’s Pedagogical Model, pp. 9.

[27] Kelly, B., Phipps, L., Swift, E. (2004). Developing a holistic approach for e-learning accessibility. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology. 30(3), pp. 1-14.