Abstract
This paper is in response to the article entitled, “MOOCocracy: the learning culture of massive open online courses” (Loizzo and Ertmer, Educational Technology Research and Development, 64, 1013–1032: 2016). After summarizing the original study, this paper examines the value of Loizzo and Ertmer’s (2016) finding that massive open online courses (MOOCs) support a unique adult learning culture comprising a social learning democracy. It suggests a number of ways researchers can apply the concept of a learning culture and the themes of MOOCacracy to other online contexts and audiences. The paper also addresses some limitations of the original study—such as the need to ensure the themes of social learning democracy apply to content areas outside of the social sciences. The perspective concludes with suggestions for future research on the applicability and appropriateness of MOOCocracy in K-12 settings and the knowledge and skills leaners may need to participate in and benefit from a social learning democracy.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Loizzo and Ertmer (2016) presented findings from a study examining the experiences of adults enrolling in massive open online courses (MOOCs). Interested in the construct of learning culture and how it influences individual beliefs and attitudes (Xiaojun and Peng 2010; Loizzo and Ertmer 2016) used virtual ethnography to investigate learners’ perceptions of their experiences within social science MOOCs. After an analysis of course artifacts, field notes, and post-course interview data, they argued that a unique adult learning culture exists within MOOCs and that this culture comprises a “dynamic global social learning democracy” (p. 1018).
To encapsulate these findings, Loizzo and Ertmer (2016) coined the term “MOOCocracy”—a portmanteau of MOOC and democracy—to refer to the dynamic learning culture emerging within MOOCs. They then described six themes thought to support the MOOCocracy concept. These themes, edited here for clarity and length, included: (1) participating in MOOCs leads to critical education consumers; (2) voting and reputation mechanisms enable a social media mentality; (3) lurking is recognized as a form of learning; (4) engaging with instructors is nice, but not expected; (5) reviewing peer work is accepted and common; and (6) participating in MOOCs fosters a sense of hope. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of MOOCocracy for anyone tasked with designing or implementing MOOCs.
From a research perspective, Loizzo and Ertmer (2016) introduced a number of valuable ideas pertinent to the “Shift to Digital”. One of these ideas is the concept of viewing online environments as spaces with unique learning cultures. A learning culture has been defined as “a collective, dynamic system of basic assumptions, values and norms which direct the learning of people within an organization” (van Breda-Verduijn and Heijboer 2016, p. 124). In this case, Loizzo and Ertmer (2016) argued that MOOCs are a form of organization and the themes they identified represent some of the assumptions, values, and norms of the organization’s members. Building on these ideas, it is possible to argue a learning culture is collective when it is participatory, meaning “large numbers of people from all walks of life have the capacity to produce and share media with each other” (Jenkins 2019, p. 3). Similarly, a learning culture is dynamic when it is student-centered, meaning it is student-centric and individualized as opposed to instructor-centered and standardized (Kaput 2018), suggesting it will inevitably evolve as students come and go. In short, the concept of a learning culture is a particularly valuable lens for examining various online educational contexts.
In terms of application, there are multiple ideas researchers might consider. One promising avenue is to examine the degree to which each theme identified by Loizzo and Ertmer (2016) contributes to adults’ sense of participating in a MOOCocracy. Which theme, or combinations of themes, seems to influence the experience of a dynamic learning culture the most? A related line of inquiry would investigate how the size and scope of an online environment interacts with each theme. Examining such relationships would advance the field’s understanding of how specific design decisions at the course level influence the resulting learning culture.
Another possibility for application is to delve deeper into one of the supporting themes. For example, how should the first theme, which noted the ways in which adults are becoming critical consumers of education, inform efforts to offer online learning experiences? Rather than being passive recipients with few opinions or preferences, today’s learners are discriminating consumers who want “more voice in, and control over, their learning path” (p. 1021). Thus, researchers may want to study how instructors can give students more control over their learning, an idea that aligns with Lee and Hannafin’s (2016) “own it, learn it, share it” framework for student-centered learning. If the backgrounds, needs, and preferences of individual learners are accounted for, the field might finally transcend the standard, one-size-fits-all model of education, engaging an entire generation in a more personalized and tailored educational experience.
There are some limitations to consider regarding Loizzo and Ertmer’s (2016) study. Besides the obvious limitation of generalizing from a small sample, another concern has to do with a possible tension between viewing MOOCs as simultaneously embodying social learning democracy and promoting critical education consumers. How compatible are these two ideas over time? This is an important question given existing concerns about consumerist ethos emerging within higher education (Tomlison 2017). Another limitation has to do with the applicability of the tenets of MOOCocracy outside of social science courses because previous research has found differences in learners’ social and societal orientations depending on their pursuit of “hard” or “soft” sciences (Diekman et al. 2017; Struyf et al. 2017). Thus, further research is needed to understand the extent to which a social learning culture is present and valued in other domains.
For future work, the findings described by Loizzo and Ertmer (2016) point to several possibilities. One possibility is to examine how the concept of a social learning democracy is applicable and appropriate to contexts that aren’t massive or adult-oriented. For example, how do K-12 learners experience a social learning culture? And what skills and knowledge do young learners need to participate meaningfully? Similarly, it is recommended that future research explore the prerequisite skills learners need to participate in and benefit from MOOCocracies. This is essential since prior work has shown that digital competence and interaction skills are predictors of MOOC enrollment and participation (Castaño-Muñoz et al. 2017). Such work will help the field understand the extent to which the concept of MOOCocracy is suitable for other online settings and audiences.
In closing, Loizzo and Ertmer’s (2016) study shared valuable insights and prompted important questions about the future of MOOCs, which are still in their “experimental stages” (p. 1026). From a research perspective, their work is particularly useful since most, if not all, of their themes can be applied to other contexts experiencing the “shift to digital”. Readers are encouraged to continue applying the lens of learning culture as openness and technology continue to transform education into a global and participatory enterprise (Bonk 2009).
References
Bonk, C. J. (2009). The world is open: How web technology is revolutionizing education. Wiley.
Castaño-Muñoz, J., Kreijns, K., Kalz, M., & Punie, Y. (2017). Does digital competence and occupational setting influence MOOC participation? Evidence from a cross-course survey. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(1), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9123-z.
Diekman, A. B., Steinberg, M., Brown, E. R., Belanger, A. L., & Clark, E. K. (2017). A goal congruity model of role entry, engagement, and exit: Understanding communal goal processes in STEM gender gaps. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(2), 142–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316642141.
Jenkins, H. (2019). Participatory culture: Interviews. Wiley.
Kaput, K. (2018). Evidence for student-centered learning. Education Evolving. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED581111.pdf
Lee, E., & Hannafin, M. J. (2016). A design framework for enhancing engagement in student-centered learning: Own it, learn it, and share it. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(4), 707–734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9422-5.
Loizzo, J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2016). MOOCocracy: The learning culture of massive open online courses. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64, 1013–1032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9444-7.
Struyf, A., Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2017). ‘Hard science’: A career option for socially and societally interested students? Grade 12 students’ vocational interest gap explored. International Journal of Science Education, 39(17), 2304–2320. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1376259.
Tomlinson, M. (2017). Student perceptions of themselves as ‘consumers’ of higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(4), 450–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2015.1113856.
van Breda-Verduijn, H., & Heijboer, M. (2016). Learning culture, continuous learning, organizational learning anthropologist. Industrial and Commercial Training, 48(3), 123–128. https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-11-2015-0074.
Xiaojun, L., & Peng, L. (2010). The impact of learning culture on individual innovative behavior. Proceedings of Management and Service Science, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMSS.2010.5577177.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Paek, S. A research perspective on the concept of learning culture: MOOCs and other online contexts. Education Tech Research Dev 69, 365–368 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09924-9
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09924-9