Is Higher Education Running AMOOC?

Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Is Higher Education Running AMOOC?” [Hake (2013)]. The abstract reads:

*********************************************
ABSTRACT: My discussion-list post “Evaluating the Effectiveness of College” at http://yhoo.it/16cJ7HO concerned the failure of U.S. higher education to emphasize student learning rather than the delivery of instruction [Barr and Tagg (1995)] at http://bit.ly/8XGJPc. In response, a correspondent asked me “Is There Some Hope In Coursera’s Pedagogical Foundations? ”

Despite the serious cracks detected in all but one of Coursera’s five pedagogical foundation stones, I don’t think Coursera is necessarily doomed to pedagogic collapse. Instead I think there may actually be some hope IF its MOOCs are evaluated by measurement of pre-to-post-course student learning gains using Concept Inventories http://bit.ly/dARkDY. If the physics education reform effort is any guide, then (a) such assessment will demonstrate that MOOCs are actually MOORFAPs (Massive Open Online Repetitions of FAiled Pedagogy), and (b) there will be some incentive to transform MOOCs into MOOLOs (Massive Open Online Learning Opportunities).

But even if MOOCs fail to become MOOLOs there still may be some hope since, as Keith Devlin (2013) points out at http://bit.ly/14440kt, MOOCs have the potential to uncover individuals world-wide who have the talent to learn from MOORFAPs, in the same way that most current professional physicists were able to learn physics from FAPs (Failed Academic Pedagogy).

For those who may wish to dig deeper into the MOOC milieu I recommend Nathan Heller’s (2013) scholarly “LAPTOP U: Has the future of college moved online?” at http://nyr.kr/10MmItb (probably for a limited time).
*********************************************

To access the complete 39 kB post please click on http://yhoo.it/12nPMZB.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Academia: http://bit.ly/a8ixxm
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
Google Scholar: http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3
Twitter: http://bit.ly/juvd52
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm

There was a giant MOOC,
based on a little book http://nyti.ms/114klB5,
When MOOC hype was trending torrid.
And when MOOCS were good,
They were very, very good,
But when they were bad they were horrid http://nyti.ms/14ixnQ7.

Profs stood on their heads,
‘students’ watching from beds,
With nobody by for to hinder.
Peer-graded squalor,
plagiarized ‘http://bit.ly/10cZ7W0’ in the holler,
And drummed all their palms against Winders.

Foundations heard the noise,
and thought it was the boys,
Playing Coursera and edX.
They funded and Ventured,
noncredit adventures,
While we all suffer the headX.
- Slightly reformatted version of Sherman Dorn's (2013) “The MOOC Poem”


REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 20 May 2013.]
Dorn, S. 2013. “The MOOC Poem,” Inside Higher Ed, 11 March; online at http://bit.ly/14wXPVG, with apologies to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s “There was a little girl” http://bit.ly/12M7gPM.

Hake, R.R. 2013. “Is Higher Education Running AMOOC?” online on the OPEN! Net-Gold archives at http://yhoo.it/12nPMZB. Post of 19 May 2013 18:47:06 -0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold.

R.L. Moore - Pioneer of Math Education Reform

Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “R.L. Moore - Pioneer of Math Education Reform #2” [Hake (2013)]. The abstract reads:

************************************************
ABSTRACT: Contrary to the misrepresentation of the “Moore Method” http://bit.ly/LElQzB by direct instructionist Wayne Bishop at http://bit.ly/137Wvvk I excerpt ten commentaries demonstrating that the Moore Method is, in fact, (a) an example of “math education reform,” and (b) taught by a “guide on the side.” The commentators are:

1. Keith Devlin (1999) in “The Greatest Math Teacher Ever” part 1 at http://bit.ly/12GYCSR and part 2 at http://bit.ly/17pBWdu.

2. Educational Achievement Foundation’s (2006) “A Quick-Start Guide to the Moore Method” at http://bit.ly/ZvQZly.

3. Paul Halmos in “The Problem of Learning to Teach” (Halmos, Moise, & Piranian, 1975) at http://bit.ly/12BgyOP.

4. F. Burton Jones (1977) in “The Moore method” at http://bit.ly/17nyIaB.

5. Albert C. Lewis (1999) in “Reform and Tradition in Mathematics Education: The Example of R.L. Moore” at http://bit.ly/YbjUoy.

6. G. Edgar Parker (1992) “Getting More from Moore” at http://bit.ly/YbmaMI.

7. The MAA review of The Moore Method: A Pathway to Learner-Centered Instruction [Coppin, Mahavier, May, & G.E. Parker (2009)] at http://bit.ly/LEdug3.

8. “Discovery Learning Project” at the University of Texas (2013) at http://bit.ly/12FqZEW.

9. Lucille S. Whyburn (1970) “Student oriented teaching-The Moore Method” at http://bit.ly/YNS5X4.

10. David Zitarelli (2004) in “The origin and early impact of the Moore Method” at http://bit.ly/149JYIJ.
************************************************


To access the complete 54 kB post please click on http://yhoo.it/XPvHhp.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Academia: http://bit.ly/a8ixxm
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
Google Scholar: http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3
Twitter: http://bit.ly/juvd52
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm

REFERENCE [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 16 April 2013.]

Hake, R.R. 2013. “R.L. Moore - Pioneer of Math Education Reform #2,”online on the OPEN Net-Gold archives at http://yhoo.it/XPvHhp. Post of 16 Apr 2013 09:57:44-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to several discussion lists.

Re: Casualty of the Math Wars

Some blog followers be interested in a recent post “Re: Casualty of the Math Wars” [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads:

*************************************************
ABSTRACT: Scott Jaschik (2012), in his exemplary Inside Higher Ed report “Casualty of the Math Wars” at http://bit.ly/V1ZSL2 wrote (paraphrasing):

“Jo Boaler http://bit.ly/R6XsuP, a full professor at Stanford University argues that new approaches - group work, real-life examples, and solving problems students can relate to - have the potential to transform the way students interact with mathematics. Traditional methods, which emphasize students learning key principles and facts, have resulted in schools in which too many students feel early on that they just ‘don’t get math,’ and shy away from the subject. So why does Boaler feel under siege?

On 12 Oct 2012 she posted on her own website ‘When Academic Disagreement Becomes Harassment and Persecution’ at http://bit.ly/Wpel7t , an account of what she terms unfair personal and professional attacks in an unpublished critique ‘A Close Examination of Jo Boaler's Railside Report’ at http://tinyurl.com/czsa4c by James Milgram of Stanford University and Wayne Bishop of CalState-L.A.

Of her critics, Keith Devlin http://bit.ly/P503sg director of the Human Sciences and Technologies Advanced Research Institute at Stanford, said ‘I suspect they fear her because she brings hard data that threatens their view of how children should be taught mathematics.’ He said that the criticisms of Boaler reach ‘the point of character assassination.’

Alan Schoenfeld http://bit.ly/NGfW62 of the University of California at Berkeley, a past president of the American Educational Research Association and past vice president of the National Academy of Engineering, said ‘The discussion of Boaler’s work ‘fits into the context of the math wars, which have sometimes been argued on principle, but in the hands of a few partisans, been vicious and vitriolic.’ He said that he is on a number of informal mathematics education networks, and that the response to Boaler’s essay ‘has been swift and, most generally, one of shock and support for Boaler.’ One question being asked, he said, is why Boaler was investigated and no university has investigated the way Milgram and Bishop have treated her.
*************************************************

To access the complete 14 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/R1q22j.


Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Academia: http://bit.ly/a8ixxm
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
Twitter: http://bit.ly/juvd52

***************************
“Let the war rage.” - Wayne Bishop

“Can't we all just get along?” - Rodney King
***************************
The above two quotes were cited by Alan Schoenfeld (2004) in his essay "The Math Wars."


REFERENCES
Hake, R.R. 2012. “Re: Casualty of the Math Wars,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/R1q22j . Post of 15 Oct 2012 12:18:37-0700. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Schoenfeld, A.H. 2004. "The Math Wars," Educational Policy 18(1): 253-286; online as a 164 kB pdf at http://bit.ly/OIljxk.