Running Head: FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 1

Free Trial of Higher Education:

Using Massive Open Online Courses to Introduce College Expectations

Sarah Sampe

Northern Arizona University

FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 2

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have been an interesting topic in higher

education since their popularity exploded in 2012 (Jordan, 2015; Evans & Baker, 2016; Ferreira,

2016). The overarching goal of MOOCs was to improve access to high-quality higher education

that was free as well as open and available at any given moment (Yuan & Powell, 2013; Hoy,

2014; Perna, Ruby, Boruch, Wang, Scull, Ahmad, & Evans, 2014; Stacey, 2014; Green, 2015;

Evans & Baker, 2016; Moore, 2016; Howarth, DAlessandro, Johnson & White, 2017; A.

Kumar, P. Kumar, Palvia, & Verma, 2017). The popularity of MOOCs has diminished in recent

years with less institutions planning on offering new MOOCs in the future, mostly attributed to

low completion rates (McCulloch & Rothschild, 2014; Perna et al., 2014; Jordan, 2015; Evans &

Baker, 2016; Moore, 2016; Stich & Reeves, 2016; Online Course Report, 2017). Although, their

popularity has decreased the purpose still remains viable and worth pursuing. Higher education

institutions have an opportunity to change the higher education landscape by incorporating

MOOCs into their offerings to provide low-risk, affordable, and accessible online options for

exploring content for differing users.

It is crucial for higher education institutions to meet the growing and expanding needs of

new users within higher education with access to higher education, at a reduced cost (Perna et

al., 2014). Providing fully online degrees allows institutions to expand access to students that

may not smoothly fit into the traditional higher education environment or population (Yuan &

Powell, 2013; Green, 2015; Ferreira, 2016; Koller as cited in Coughlan, 2016; Ortiz as cited in

DeNisco, 2016; Friedman, 2017; Howarth et al., 2017; A. Kumar et al., 2017; Reiser, 2017). The

majority of students in higher education today are students with families, who might work full

time, and are older than traditional students who would enter higher education right after high

school (Kahn, 2014). Much of the population of MOOC users mirror the population of non-
FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 3

traditional students accessing post-secondary education. MOOC users are older adults who may

already have degrees, families, and work (McCulloch & Rothschild, 2014; Green, 2015; Koller

as cited in Coughlan, 2016; Stich & Reeves, 2016; Online Course Report, 2017). This shared

population is important to recognize in the shift toward fully online course and degree offerings.

Enrollment in online courses has grown to over 7 million students in the United States,

with 48% of public institution students fully online (A.Kumar et al., 2017). The population of

undergraduate students and graduate students taking online courses has increased over the past

14 years, by 11% and 14.4% respectively (A. Kumar et al., 2017). With such a large population

accessing content online, effective use of MOOCs would be a great option for the current student

demographics in higher education (Ferreira, 2016).

Building connections between traditional campus institutions and MOOCs would be a

valuable way to get new students into campus programs, online or on campus (Howarth,

DAlessandro, Johnson, & White, 2016). MOOCs can serve as an introduction to the higher

education institution (Howarth et al., 2016). Engaging the current student demographics of non-

traditional learners, online or on campus, would put higher education institutions in a place that

would allow them to offer high-quality courses to students who may not have otherwise had the

opportunity (Howarth et al., 2016; Ferreira, 2016). It would also introduce these students to

what is required to attain a college degree (Howarth et al., 2016; Ferreira, 2016).

Bridging the curriculum of MOOCs to current online offerings within the institution is

required to make higher education less risky for diverse and international learners (Howarth et

al., 2016). Blended learning experiences would be an efficient way to use MOOCs as well as a

flipped classroom pedagogy (Bralic & Divjak, 2016; Klemm, 2017). Blended learning would

include using MOOCs as part of a university course (Bralic & Divjak, 2016; Klemm, 2017).
FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 4

Specific courses would be paired to include a MOOC and a content course (Bralic & Divjak,

2016; Klemm, 2017). Students would be introduced to topics in MOOCs so they are able to learn

and review content to their understanding (Bralic & Divjak, 2016; Klemm, 2017). Then students

would participate in flipped classroom activities after watching or reviewing the MOOC that

introduced and taught the concept (Bralic & Divjak, 2016; Klemm, 2017). This approach would

allow students to learn and then directly apply their new learning within the classroom (Bralic &

Divjak, 2016; Klemm, 2017). Students would be able to learn foundational concepts and skills in

specific disciplines and then participate in practical application through in-depth discussions

(Klemm, 2017).

This approach would task instructors with focusing on foundational concepts and related

learning outcomes students should be able to achieve through taking the MOOC course (Klemm,

2017). MOOC courses would be available at no cost and could be taken separately from the in-

person course (Klemm, 2017). This will allow students who are considering the major to have an

introduction to the discipline and an intimate look into what the rigor and academic expectations

that are required within the program, risk-free (Klemm, 2017; Online Course Report, 2017).

Introduction MOOCs would allow for exploration of the institution offerings, but would

also give prospective students from diverse backgrounds, underrepresented populations,

international students, and others interested in pursuing an education at the institution, an insider

look before committing to the program (Howarth et al., 2016; Klemm, 2017). Data from MOOC

participation has shown that students who are committed to completing the course follow

through (Hoy, 2014; McCulloch & Rothschild, 2014; Jordan, 2015; Bralic & Divjak, 2016;

Howarth et al., 2017). These are students who would most likely persist to graduation within an

institution (Hoy, 2014; McCulloch & Rothschild, 2014; Jordan, 2015; Bralic & Divjak, 2016;
FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 5

Howarth et al., 2017). Providing free introduction MOOC courses to these students would be a

natural gateway for prospective students to enter the institution (Howarth et al., 2016).

All university staff would have to be on board with this idea for it to be successful, as

these courses would have implications for both academic and student affairs professionals.

Instructors would need to prepare the introductory MOOCs to be dynamic and representative of

the rigor involved with that academic discipline (Stacey, 2014; Howarth et al., 2017). Providing

students with a realistic glimpse into what will be expected of them would be necessary to create

successful bridges between the institution and students. Additionally, student affairs staff such as

the admissions team and academic support services, would also need to be prepared for

providing information about degree offerings and support services available to these students

(Howarth et al., 2017).

Challenges that present when incorporating MOOCs as introductions to institutional

study would be, escaping the decreased hype of MOOCs, effective pedagogy, and instructional

design (Hoy, 2014; Perna et al., 2014; Stacey, 2014; Keramida, 2015; Coughlan, 2016; DeNisco,

2016; Ferreira, 2016; Mohsen, 2016; Moore, 2016). Where there was once excitement for

MOOCs there is now focus on what hasnt worked such as, low completion rates and lack of

service to underrepresented populations, once the target of MOOCs (Jordan, 2015; Coughlan,

2016; Moore, 2016; Stich & Reeves, 2016). Also, the instructional design and pedagogy

associated with MOOCs have lacked in faculty and student interactions and overall engagement

(McCulloch & Rothschild, 2014; Stacey, 2014; Sonnenfeld, 2016). These challenges can be

overcome with a renewed focus on the purpose of institutional specific MOOCs.

Positive outcomes to be expected through providing students with an opportunity and

introduction to university study would be an increase in enrollment (Howarth et al., 2016).

FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 6

Allowing students to try higher education for free, provides the institution an opportunity to

reach students that would not have previously been able to afford trial runs in various disciplines

(Hoy, 2014; Ferreira, 2016; Howarth et al., 2017). These outcomes would align with the growing

trend of offering credit for MOOC courses (McCulloch & Rothschild, 2014; A.Kumar et al.,

2017; Online Course Report, 2017). Adding credit earning options to these introduction courses

would be a natural next step to incorporating MOOCs into institutional offerings.

This idea is unique, innovative, and relevant because it offers a free look into what the

institution has to offer prospective students (Howarth et al., 2016). How often are students able

to try college at no cost? How often would students receive a real-life look into where their

preparation level is compared to what they will be expected to do? This would push MOOC

offerings within the institution to truly be an innovative disruption to what the current higher

education model is (Yuan & Powell, 2013). Risk-free observation into actual higher education

courses would change the perception of higher education as we currently know it (Howarth et al.,

2016). The push and acceptance of fully online degrees makes it possible to explore these

options for future students (DeNisco, 2016; A. Kumar et al., 2017; Reiser, 2017.)

In todays market, students need to know that they will get a return on their investment.

What better way than for students to get a free trial? What is more relevant in todays fast paced,

information now society, then an instant look into what college really is? This will change the

idea of higher education and truly make the college experience free, accessible, and available to

anyone anywhere.
FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 7

References

Bralic, A. & Divjak, B. (2016). Proceedings from 9th Eurpean Distance and E-Learning Network

Research Workshop 16: Use of MOOCs in traditional classroom: Blended learning

approach. Oldenburg. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from http://www.eden-online.org/wp-

content/uploads/2016/10/BRPA-RW9_Bralic_Divjak.pdf

Coughlan, S. (2016). Top universities to offer full degrees online in five years. BBC News.

Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36703778

DeNisco, A. (2016). Why the university of the future will have no classrooms, no lectures, and

lots of tech. TechRepublic. Retrieved from http://www.techrepublic.com/article/why-the-

university-of-the-future-will-have-no-classrooms-no-lectures-but-lots-of-tech/

Evans, B.J. & Baker, R.B. (2016). MOOCs and persistence: Definitions and predictors. New

Directions for Institutional Research, 167. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ir.20155/epdf

Ferreira, J.M.M. (2016). Massive open online courses (MOOCs). Cross-Border Higher

Education and Quality Assurance, DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-59472-3_12. [PDF

Document]. Retrieved from

http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/336/chp%253A10.1057%252F978-1-137-59472-

3_12.pdf?originUrl=http%3A%2F%2Flink.springer.com%2Fchapter%2F10.1057%2F97

8-1-137-59472-

3_12&token2=exp=1491602133~acl=%2Fstatic%2Fpdf%2F336%2Fchp%25253A10.10

57%25252F978-1-137-59472-

3_12.pdf%3ForiginUrl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Flink.springer.com%252Fchapter%2

52F10.1057%252F978-1-137-59472-
FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 8

3_12*~hmac=ae4633e0a01f13aea852fdada258f8d045cbcbe903807e433ddcf03c5861b79

Friedman, J. (2017). 5 online education trends to watch in 2017. U.S. News and World Report.

Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/higher-education/online-

education/articles/2017-01-05/5-online-education-trends-to-expect-in-2017

Green, S. (2015). Pedagogy of MOOCs and benefits for modern professionals. eLearning

Industry. Retrieved from https://elearningindustry.com/pedagogy-of-moocs-benefits-

modern-professionals

Howarth, J.P., DAlessandro, S., Johnson, L., & White, L. (2016). Learner motivation for

MOOC registration and the role of MOOCs as a university taster. International Journal

of Lifelong Education, 35(1), 74-85. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02601370.2015.1122667?needAccess=true

Howarth, J., DAlessandro, S., Johnson, L., White, L. (2017). MOOCs to university: A consumer

goal and marketing perspective. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 26(2). [PDF

Document]. Retrieved from

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08841241.2017.1306603?needAccess=true

Hoy, M.B. (2014). MOOCs 101: An introduction to massive open online courses. Medical

Reference Services Quarterly, 33(1), 85-91. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02763869.2014.866490?needAccess=true

Jordan, K. (2015). Massive open online course completion rates revisited: Assessment, length,

and attrition. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3),

341-358. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1067937.pdf

Kahn, G. (2014). The amazon of higher education. Slate. Retrieved from

FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 9

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/education/2014/01/southern_new_hampshire_universit

y_how_paul_leblanc_s_tiny_school_has_become.html

Keramida, M. (2015). The pedagogy behind MOOCs: What eLearning professionals should

know. eLearning Industry. Retrieved from https://elearningindustry.com/the-pedagogy-

behind-moocs-what-elearning-professionals-should-know

Klemm, W.R. (2017). Paired courses: A new paradigm for college teaching. Journal of College

Science Teaching, 46(4), 46-50. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1871387592?pq-origsite=gscholar

Kumar, A., Kumar, P., Palvia, S.C.J., Verma, S. (2017). Online education worldwide: Current

status and emerging trends. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application

Research, DOI: 10.1080/15228053.2017.1294867. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15228053.2017.1294867?needAccess=true

McCulloch, R. & Rothschild, L.P. (2014). MOOCs: An inside view. Notices of the AMS, 61(8),

866-872. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from http://www.ams.org/notices/201408/rnoti-

p866.pdf

Mohsen, A. (2016). MOOCs integration in the formal education. International Journal for

Infonomics, 9(3), 1210-1216 . [PDF Document]. Retrieved from http://infonomics-

society.org/wp-content/uploads/iji/published-papers/volume-9-2016/MOOCs-Integration-

in-the-Formal-Education.pdf

Moore, A. (2016). MOOCs: The beginning of the end? Association for Talent Development.

Retrieved from https://www.td.org/Publications/Blogs/Learning-Technologies-

Blog/2016/10/Moocs-the-Beginning-of-the-End

Online Course Report. (2017). State of the MOOC 2016: A year of massive landscape change for
FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 10

massive open online courses. Retrieved from http://www.onlinecoursereport.com/state-

of-the-mooc-2016-a-year-of-massive-landscape-change-for-massive-open-online-

courses/

Perna, L., Ruby, A., Boruch, R., Wang, N., Scull, J., Ahmad, S., & Evans, C. (2014). Moving

through MOOCs: Understanding the progression of users in massive open online courses.

Educational Researcher, 43(9), 421-432. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.3102/0013189X14562423

Reiser, R.A. (2017). Eight trends affecting the field of instructional design and technology:

Opportunities and challenges. Learning and Knowledge Analytics in Open Education,

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-38956-1_11. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from

http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/896/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-3-319-38956-

1_11.pdf?originUrl=http%3A%2F%2Flink.springer.com%2Fchapter%2F10.1007%2F97

8-3-319-38956-

1_11&token2=exp=1491603723~acl=%2Fstatic%2Fpdf%2F896%2Fchp%25253A10.10

07%25252F978-3-319-38956-

1_11.pdf%3ForiginUrl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Flink.springer.com%252Fchapter%2

52F10.1007%252F978-3-319-38956-

1_11*~hmac=f9c88b5ab399bcbe401829e0ce15c68b679bb4ee27b5a470a8eff912f10088b

Sonnenfeld, N. (2016). Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 2016 Annual

Meeting: Exploring the future of human factors education: Online learning, MOOCs,

next generation standards, and the technological skills we need to impart. [PDF
FREE TRIAL OF HIGHER 11

Document]. Retrieved from

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1541931213601097

Stacey, P. (2014). Pedagogy of MOOCs. The International Journal for Innovation and Quality in

Learning. [PDF Document]. Retrieved from http://empower.eadtu.eu/images/fields-of-

expertise/OERsMOOCs/INNOQUAL-Issue-3-Publication-Sep-2014-FINAL-w-

cover.pdf#page=118

Stich, A.E. & Reeves, T.D. (2017). Massive open online courses and underserved students in the

United States. Internet and Higher Education, 32, 58-71. [PDF Document]. Retrieved

from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S1096751616301075/1-s2.0-S1096751616301075-

main.pdf?_tid=2e6d6f62-1bde-11e7-a1b8-

00000aab0f02&acdnat=1491602853_ebecb0637c3d242024c1860de3223ab5

Yuan, L. & Powell, S. (2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher education.

Centre for Educational Technology & Interoperability Standards. [PDF Document].

Retrieved from

http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/33781834/MOOCs.pdf?AWSAccess

KeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1491596591&Signature=H81VtcmF%

2BnqFSp2JltHLPYxxk1I%3D&response-content-

disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DThis_file_I_got_from_the_net_its_very_im.pdf