13

The recognition, accreditation and certification of MOOCs may be defined in many different ways, but generally refers to establishing a set of arrangements to make visible and value all learning outcomes (incl. knowledge, skills and competence) against clearly defined and quality-assured standards (Yang, 2016). Proper recognition and accreditation procedures and certification can offer an educational solution for those who are not in a traditional setting, they can constitute an opportunity of virtual mobility or simply provide a chance of re-skilling or up-skilling employees. However, the adequate usage of those processes is yet to become a reality.

Key Issues

A large number of MOOC providers as well as researchers are highlighting the need for a solution for the withdraw/dropout rate of MOOCs. It is acknowledged that dropout rates of this kind of courses are comparatively high (Koutropoulos et al., 2012). A MOOC offered by Coursera in 2012, on Functional Programming Principles in Scala, registered a completion rate of 19.2% (Jordan, 2013). Nevertheless, it must be stated that the majority of MOOCs have completion rates of less than 10% and little is known about the experiences of non-completing MOOC participants (Koutropoulos et al., 2012).

Motivation has been identified as an important contributor to student engagement in a MOOC (Milligan et al., 2013; Milligan et al., 2016). What can motivate people to engage in MOOCs? Individual motivation can go from the desire to achieve an academic credential at a reduced cost, personal enrichment, up to self-satisfaction (Liyanagunawardena, Adams and Williams, 2013). It must be underlined that having updated information about the actual motivations in place would be valuable, among others, for the design of MOOCs.

According to Milligan et al. (2016), while high self-regulator students establish specific goals related to the course content, the effect on their professional needs and the structure of their learning around the development of content knowledge and expertise (Pintrich, 1999), low self-regulators focus more on their passion for learning, curiosity, or desire to broaden their knowledge. The range of motivation is reflected by the goals set (Zheng et al., 2015; White et al., 2015). Moreover, high self-regulators are pursuing the extension of their knowledge and expertise to benefit their current or future roles independently if they were intending to complete the course, or if the study process was planned more strategically. On the opposite, low-self regulators are not focusing the learning, but mainly their performance, looking for the completition of the course. In this case, the recognition of MOOCs and their accreditation could be a more valuable source of motivation than for high self-regulators.

Policy Debates

Together with monetization, recognition/certification is one of the most divisive aspects of MOOC. In fact, the accreditation process opens the door towards an income source at the time it is the way of evaluating the learning process, offering the certification needed/requested by the employers (BIS, 2013). According to Moody´s, regarding the foresight of the incomes of north American HEIs, states that MOOCs certificates should be considered as an experiment in the attempt of obtaining extra incomes by granting credits (Moody’s Investor Service, 2013).

Usually, educational technology companies like Coursera, edX or Udacity conduct MOOCs. These companies are offering different types of certification for which a fee must be paid. The scale of these fees depends on the type of course. It must be highlighted that certification for a MOOC is offered and recognized by at least one higher education institution. Traditionally learners enrol with one institution and expect to receive the teaching, the content, the assessment and the eventual accreditation from this very same institution (Murray and Friesen, 2011).

Policy-wise, the issue of recognition of digital education has been tackled by international organisations such as UNESCO or OECD that have been emphasising the added value of e-learning methods particularly in its wide social outreach. UNESCO’s Education 2030: Framework For Action underlines the importance of access to quality basic, vocational and higher education with a clear commitment to lifelong learning strengthened by the usage of ICT tools. Additionally, it reads as follow: In addition, the provision of flexible learning pathways, as well as the recognition, validation and accreditation of the knowledge, skills and competencies acquired through non-formal and informal education, is important (UNESCO, 2015).

When integrating informal learning (open learning) with formal study, one of the major hurdles in this process is the assessment of learning and its accreditation toward a credential (Conrad, 2013; Friesen and Wihak, 2013). Following McGreal et al. (2014), academic assessment is still the privilege and purview of individual post secondary systems. Despite the development of national accreditation frameworks, international ones are still to be developed and adapted to the new needs due to the introduction of each time more informal learning options (e.g., MOOC and other open learning tools).

Practical Options

In the case of  non-formal learning there are two basic forms of recognition:

1. Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL).  Also referred to as Accreditation of Prior and Experiential Learning (APEL), Prior Learning Assessment (PLA, mainly in the USA) and Prior Learning Assessment and Recognition (PLAR, mainly in Canada), among others (McGreal et al., 2014). This is a common approach which involves giving learners credit towards a formal qualification on the basis of evidence of informal learning.
2. Credit Transfer. Institutions may mutually recognise credits that students may have gained through formal study and allow them to be transferred from one HEI to another.  Complexity results from the fact that there are may different approaches to these credit systems and no one overall approach.

Many MOOC providers recognise their own courses and will allow them to be considered towards a qualification. MOOC learning is typically recognised in the following ways:

• The majority of MOOCs are offering digital badges for completition of either the entire course, of each unit or of a week of work (e.g., OLDSMOOC by The Open University, UK);
• Other MOOCs, as the ones facilitated by Coursera, offer proctored exams for a fee, which will involve the earning of a certificate for successful students;
• Some MOOCs provide a Statement of Accomplishment for successful students, but in this case no college credits are conferred.

Evaluating learning can be a particular challenge when there are thousands of learners on a MOOC. Pundak et al. (2014) suggest the following:

1. Automatic examination of prewritten questions, graded by machine
2. Peer evaluation: learners effectively grade the work of each other
3. Examination through artificial intelligence

The latter of these is perhaps some way off, but arguably is also encapsulated in automatic examination. In future it may be that automatic tutoring systems do the majority of grading work, but we aren’t there yet.  Consequently a balance should be sought between human and mechanical forms of assessment.

The proliferation of MOOCs included also new challenges and new requirements from the consumers of MOOCs. Among others, the recognition of this type of courses started to be one of the most important issues to be solved by the producers. Universities count with the trust of society in the accreditation process of formal learning. Thus, higher education institutions are needed. Without their involvement, the process is not covering the needs of the consumers. However, academic boards and senates of many universities are often reluctant to reuse open-licensed courses and associated assessments even though a.) those materials have been formally approved by another accredited university; and b.) these open courses can be adapted locally at no cost and offered in parallel with existing courses in order to diversify curriculum at the home institution.