Page - 147 - in Radical Solutions and Open Science - An Open Approach to Boost Higher Education

154 H.ChaandH.-J.So large-scaleMOOCsofferedbyeliteinstitutionshaspropelledMOOCsintothemain- stream.MOOCs represent the democratization of education, bymaking education more accessible to awide range of learners. However, this chapter problematizes that little frameworks are available to unpack the complex potential of integrating MOOCs inhigher education.With that, the integration frameworkproposed in this chapter considers learners’ purpose (e.g., for earning academic credits) and course structure (e.g., online vs. F2F). In this chapter,wemainly discussed three possible integration approaches: (a) integratingMOOCs in blended learning, (b) integrat- ingMOOCsinflipped learning,and(c) integratingMOOCsinnon-formal/informal learning. We then discussed some related research for the respective integration approaches to provide better understandings about howMOOCs can be integrated intovariouscontextsofhigher education. Thereviewofrelated literature revealedsomelimitations in theexistingresearch studies.First, authors tend touse terms loosely, suchasusingblended learningand flippedlearninginaninterchangeablewaywhile therearecleardifferencesbetween thetwoapproaches.Second,wefoundthattherearefewempiricalstudiesconducted on this topic, andmanyof themadopted a case study approach.Methodologically, there is a need to conductmore empirical studies that investigate the potential and challenges of integratingMOOCs in higher education settings. Third, we suggest thathighereducationinstitutionsmayneedtotakecautiousstepsinofferingMOOCs to fee-paying students for academic credits. Given that the initial goal ofMOOCs was to reach out to awider range of learners, including learners in disadvantaged areas and conditions, the increasing trend of offeringMOOCs to fee-paying stu- dents who are already in formal higher educationmay indicate thatMOOCs are failing in the initial philosophy on “openness”. Indeed, it is true that such features of “openness” and“free”have ledMOOCs tovivid arguments of the sustainability issues including dropout rates and cost. TomakeMOOCplatformsmore sustain- able,bothhighereducationinstitutionsandMOOCsprovidersneedtoconsidersome possibilitiesofpricingstrategies(e.g.,cross-subsidy, third-party, freemiumandnon- monetary)inMOOCbusinessmodels(Baker&Passmore,2016).However,MOOCs providers should also consider the balance between the original goals ofMOOCs andsustainablestrategies. In this respect,webelieve that thischapterprovidessome insightsconcerninghowMOOCscanbe integrated intohighereducation toprovide meaningful learningexperiences for awide rangeof learners. References Abdelrahman,A.M.(2016).MOOCsintegrationintheformaleducation. InternationalJournal for Infonomics, 9(3), 1210–1216. Akgül, Y. (2018). Accessibility evaluation of MOOCs’ websites of turkey. Journal of Life Economics, 5(4), 23–36. Alraimi,K.M.,Zo,H.,&Ciganek,A.P. (2014).UnderstandingtheMOOCscontinuance:Therole ofopennessand reputation.Computers& Education, 80,28–38. Atiaja, L., & Gueerero, R. (2016). MOOCs: Origin, characterization, principal problems and challenges inhighereducation.Journal of e-learning and KnowledgeSociety, 12(1), 65–76.