Opinions and proposals from Film, TV and Media students about SPOCs
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.21.2.19363Keywords:
Education, media, blended learning, higher educationAbstract
This article presents the results of the study carried out among a group of students from a B.A. in Film, Television and Media Studies, on how to implement a SPOC as part of a practice course. Classroom experience has revealed a noticeable gap in the students' technical skills when operating the equipment. The aim of the research was to assess the utility values attributed by the students to blended learning tools and to find out which audiovisual production skills they find fit to be developed through a SPOC. The research was conducted simultaneously with a pilot SPOC on video editing and the assessment was elaborated through group discussions and individual polls. As a result, a preliminary list of SPOC utility values was drawn and content proposals to complement face-to-face learning were put forward. Students widely supported the view of having online material on technical devices operation available anytime throughout their degree course, so that they can learn at their own pace.
Downloads
References
Alexander, S. (1999). An Evaluation of Innovative Projects Involving Communication and Information Technology in Higher Education. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(2), 173-183.
ANECA. (2006). Libro Blanco. Títulos de Grado en Comunicación. Recuperado de https://goo.gl/CC699q
Bartolomé, A., & Aiello, M. (2006). Nuevas tecnologías y necesidades formativas. Blended Learning y nuevos perfiles en comunicación audiovisual. Telos. Cuadernos de Comunicación. Tecnologia y Sociedad(67).
Bartolomé, A., & Steffens, K. (2015). ¿Son los MOOC una alternativa de aprendizaje? Comunicar XXII(44), 91-99. doi:10.3916/C44-2015-10
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A.,
Wozney, L., . . . Huang, B. (2004). How Does Distance Education Compare With Classroom Instruction? A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379 - 439. doi:10.3102/00346543074003379
Braun, T. (2008). Making a Choice: The Perceptions and Attitudes of Online Graduate Students. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(1), 63-92.
Burge, J., Fox, A., Grossman, D., Roth, G., & Warren, J. (2015). SPOCs: What, Why, and How. Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (págs. 595-596). ACM.
Chiappe-Laverde, A., Hine, N., & Martínez-Silva, J. (2015). Literatura y práctica: una revisión crítica acerca de los MOOC. Comunicar XXII(44), 9-18. doi:10.3916/C44-2015-01
Fox, A. (2014). Curricular Technology Transfer for the 21st Century: MOOCs and technology to advance learning and learning research. Ubiquity, June. doi:10.1145/2618397
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410-8415. doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Graham, C. R. (2004). Blended learning systems: definition, current trends, and future directions. En C. J. Bonk, & C. R. (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (págs. 3-21). Zurich: Pfeiffer Publishing.
Harding, A., Kaczynski, D., & Wood, L. (2005). Evaluation of blended learning: analysis of qualitative data. Proceedings of uniserve science blended learning symposium, (págs. 56-61).
Holzweiss, P. C., Joyner, S. A., Fuller, M. B., Henderson, S., & Young, R. (2014). Online graduate students’ perceptions of best learning experiences. Distance Education, 35(3), 311-323. doi:10.1080/01587919.2015.955262
Lee, C. P. (2014). The effects of interactive discourse, the Socratic method, and active learning labs on student achievement at the university level. A comparative approach. Texas A&M University. Texas A&M University.
Lim, D. H., & Kim, H. J. (2003). Motivation and learner characteristics affecting online learning and learning application. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 31(4), 423-439.
López, E., Vázquez, E., & Román, P. (2015). Análisis e implicaciones del impacto del movimiento MOOC en la comunidad científica: JCR y Scopus (2010-13). Comunicar XXII(44), 73-80. doi:10.3916/C44-2015-08
López-Pérez, M. V., Pérez-López, M. C. & Rodríguez-Ariza, L. (2011). Blended learning in higher education: Students’ perceptions and their relation. Computers & Education(56), 818-826. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.023
Sanagustínc, M., & Delgado Kloos, C. (2015). Precise Effectiveness Strategy for analyzing the effectiveness of students with educational resources and activities in MOOCs. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 108-118. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.003
Nunan, T., George, R., & McCausland, H. (2000). Rethinking the ways in which teaching and learning are supported: the flexible centre at the University of South Australia. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 22(1), 85-98.
Nygaard, C., & Holtham, C. (2008). Understanding learning-centred higher education. Copenhagen Business School Press DK.
Porter, W. W., & Graham, C. R. (2016). Institutional drivers and barriers to faculty adoption of blended. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(4), 748-762. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12269
Rose, K. (2009). Student Perceptions of the Use of Instructor-Made Videos in Online and Face-to-Face Classes. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5(3).
Schell, J., & Mazur, E. (2015). Flipping the chemistry classroom with peer instruction. En J. García-Martínez, E. Seerano-Torregrosa, & (eds.), Chemistry Education: Best Practices, Opportunities and Trends. Willey Online Library.
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid (2017). Competencias que otorga el Grado en Comunicación Audiovisual. Recuperado de https://goo.gl/gnf9vp
Utray, F. (2016). Implantando la metodología “flipped classroom” en la asignatura ‘Postproducción Digital’ en la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. En Sánchez Cid, M (coord.), Didácticas y modelos formativos en asignaturas prácticas audiovisuales de comunicación audiovisual, publicidad y periodismo. Dykinson.
Valles, M. S. (1999). Técnicas cualitativas de investigación social. Reflexión metodológica y práctica profesional. Madrid: Síntesis.
Voos, R. (2003). Blended learning. What is it and where might it take us? Sloan-C View, 2(1), 2-5.
Wolff, M., Wagner, M. J., Poznanski, S., Schiller, J., & Santen, S. (2015). Not another boring lecture: engaging learners with active learning techniques. The Journal of emergency medicine, 48(1), 85-93.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The articles that are published in this journal are subject to the following terms:
1. The authors grant the exploitation rights of the work accepted for publication to RIED, guarantee to the journal the right to be the first publication of research understaken and permit the journal to distribute the work published under the license indicated in point 2.
2. The articles are published in the electronic edition of the journal under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. You can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, adapt, remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
3. Conditions for self-archiving. Authors are encouraged to disseminate electronically the OnlineFirst version (assessed version and accepted for publication) of its articles before publication, always with reference to its publication by RIED, favoring its circulation and dissemination earlier and with this a possible increase in its citation and reach among the academic community.
