Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences

Published by: Kowsar

Identification and Evaluation of the Features of the Epistemology of the MOOC (Open and Online)

Akbar Jadidi Mohammadabadi 1 , * , Mohammad Reza Sarmadi 2 , Mehran Farajolahi 2 and Hossin Zare 2
Authors Information
1 Department of Education Sciences, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Psychology and Educational, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran
Article information
  • Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences: March 31, 2019, 10 (1); e83757
  • Published Online: January 7, 2019
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • Received: August 30, 2018
  • Revised: September 12, 2018
  • Accepted: December 26, 2018
  • DOI: 10.5812/ijvlms.83757

To Cite: Jadidi Mohammadabadi A, Sarmadi M R, Farajolahi M , Zare H. Identification and Evaluation of the Features of the Epistemology of the MOOC (Open and Online), Interdiscip J Virtual Learn Med Sci. 2019 ; 10(1):e83757. doi: 10.5812/ijvlms.83757.

Abstract
Copyright © 2019, Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Footnotes
References
  • 1. Sarmadi MR, Masoomi Fard M. [Epistemological evaluation of existentialism and its educational implications in distant education system (with emphasis on virtual education)]. Q J Res Sch Virtual Learn. 2018;5(4):101-15. Persian.
  • 2. Sarmadi MR. [Evaluation of epistemology of distant education based on constructivist school and islamic epistemology]. J Res Sch Digit Learn. 2017;5:19-30. Persian.
  • 3. Eskanderi H, Fardaanesh H, Sajadi SM, Sadeghzade A, Beheshti S. [Connectivism and explanation and critique of its epistemological basis]. Education. 2011;17(4):29-50. Persian.
  • 4. Rezaa'ee MH, Paakseresht MJ. [The impact of epistemological perspectives on teaching and learning in open and distant educational systems]. New Thought Educ. 2008;4(4):9-36. Persian. doi: 10.22051/jontoe.2008.223.
  • 5. Raffaghelli JE, Cucchiara S, Persico D. Methodological approaches in MOOC research: Retracing the myth of Proteus. Brit J Educ Technol. 2015;46(3):488-509. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12279.
  • 6. Abasian M. [Practical principles of epistemology %j wisdom and philosophy]. J Manage Sys. 2007;3(9):25-37. Persian. doi: 10.22054/wph.2007.6683.
  • 7. Bates AWT. Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning for a digital age: Tony Bates associates. University of British Columbia: BCcampus; 2015. doi: 10.14288/1.0107914.
  • 8. Swenson P, Taylor NA. Online teaching in the digital age. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications; 2012.
  • 9. Clow D. MOOCs and the funnel of participation. Third Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK 2013); 8-12 Apr 2013; Leuven, Belgium. 2013. p. 185-9.
  • 10. Deng R, Benckendorff P. A contemporary review of research methods adopted to understand students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Int J Inf Educ Technol. 2017;7:601-7.
  • 11. Alinajafi MT, Sarmadi MR, Farajollahi M. Study of the fundamentals of anthropology and epistemology of the distance education system [dissertation]. Payame Noor University, Tehran; 2009. Persian.
  • 12. Gore H. Massive open online courses (MOOCs) and their impact on academic library services: Exploring the issues and challenges. New Rev Academic Librarian. 2014;20(1):4-28. doi: 10.1080/13614533.2013.851609.
  • 13. Ebben M, Murphy JS. Unpacking MOOC scholarly discourse: A review of nascent MOOC scholarship. Learn Media Technol. 2014;39(3):328-45. doi: 10.1080/17439884.2013.878352.
  • 14. Liyanagunawardena TR, Adams AA, Williams SA. MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. Int Rev Res Open Dis Learn. 2013;14(3):202. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1455.
  • 15. Hashim H, Salam S, Mohamad SNM. Investigating learning styles for adaptive massaive open online cource (MOOC) learning. J Adv Hum Soc Sci. 2017;3(5). doi: 10.20474/jahss-3.5.4.
  • 16. Wright F. What do librarians need to know about MOOCs? D-Lib Magazine. 2013;19(3/4). doi: 10.1045/march2013-wright.
  • 17. Creswell J. Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. 4th ed. Delhi, India: Pearson; 2012.
  • 18. Douglass BG, Moustakas C. Heuristic inquiry. J Hum Psychol. 2016;25(3):39-55. doi: 10.1177/0022167885253004.
  • 19. Hiles D. Heuristic inquiry and transpersonal research. Annual meeting of the centre for counselling and psychotherapy education. London; 2007.
  • 20. Djuraskovic I, Arthur N. Heuristic inquiry: A personal journey of acculturation and identity reconstruction. Q Rep. 2010;15(6):1569-93.
  • 21. Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs. 2000;32(4):1008-15. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.t01-1-01567.x.
  • 22. Diaz P. Usability of hypermedia educational e-books. D-Lib magazine. 2003;9(3).

Featured Image:

Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:

Author(s):

Article(s):

Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments