Of the two typical MOOC structures, c-MOOCs and x-MOOCs, it is currently unclear whether one lends itself more readily to a posthuman interpretation than the other or whether they are in fact equally posthuman in this capacity. Fludity of structure and navigation through the MOOC itself has a large role in a posthuman analysis of the courses, and this fluidity of engagement (even in more rigid MOOCs) can be achieved through careful course design… bus does design really hold the key?
- Woodgate (2013) – MOOC structures [Chapter three]
- de Waard, I., Abajian, S., Gallagher, M., Hogue, R., Keskin, N., Koutropoulos, A. and Rodriguez, O. (2011). Using mLearning and MOOCs to Understand Chaos, Emergence, and Complexity in Education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, vol. 12 (7). Available online: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1046/2026
- Reigeluth, C. M. (2004). Chaos theory and the sciences of complexity: Foundations for transforming education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. Available online: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.127.4233&rep=rep1&type=pdf
- Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3). Re¬trieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1103
Recommended resources to explore:
- Siemens, G. (2012). Designing, developing, and running (massive) open online courses – Slide presentation. http://www.slideshare.net/gsiemens/designing-and-running-a-mooc
- Youtube – “Delvin MOOC” video – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mas5GDOfaM
The next section leads nicely into the ‘audience’ dimension of the structure – application of the course itself – which may provider greater insight into posthuman underpinnings of the MOOC itself. Once you feel you are ready to progress, please proceed to the next section of the course.