Creating MOOCs for College Credit
S J SU ’s Pa rtn e r shi p w ith ed X a nd Ud a cit y
Research Bulletin
August 14, 2013
Catheryn Cheal, San Jose State University
Overview
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are both an evolutionary and a revolutionary
1
phenomenon. They have evolved from 50 years of educational technology and theory, and
they are also pivotal and potentially disruptive for higher education. Many in the media and in
higher education have found the concept to be both promising and threatening.
The interest at San Jose State University (SJSU) in developing MOOC courses for credit was
twofold. First, we wanted to lower the cost of courses for our current, very diverse student
population and create more flexible scheduling. Several hundred thousand students in the
California State University System have difficulty being admitted to or enrolling in the courses
they need because there aren’t enough public funds to support that enrollment growth. The
demand for certain courses is so high that they become bottlenecks, hampering students from
advancing in their studies. MOOCs offer a way to expand enrollments in bottleneck courses
due to automated content that students access on their own time. Second, SJSU was
interested in improving learning outcomes and increasing student motivation. Retention and
graduation rates in colleges have become increasingly important concerns and are directly
related to learning and motivation. MOOC methods of teaching are similar to programmed
learning: short amounts of information coupled with questions and feedback, which has been
shown to be an effective behavioral learning methodology since the 1950s. This method,
especially at MOOC provider Udacity, has been updated with video, energized with young
actors, and centered on inquiry-based topics.
Highlights
In fall 2012, an SJSU team of administrators and faculty decided to use and develop MOOC
2
materials in for-credit courses. This meant that the courses would not be free or even massive
but would aim for a higher enrollment than traditional courses. We were interested in two
different models. One was to use previously created edX materials in traditional blended or
flipped courses, and the other was for our faculty to create completely new online courses
partnering with Udacity.
During the 2012–13 academic year, I monitored the necessary faculty development and the
business process changes needed for the SJSU initiatives to produce MOOCs jointly with
external companies. This project had a life of its own due to political ramifications, media
attention, perceived changes for faculty roles, pedagogical innovation, commercial hopes, and
the tension caused by the differences between a “start-up” company and a public institution.
This paper presents my view, but each of the many, many facilitators in this project will have
other perspectives to report.
© 2013 EDUCAUSE and Catheryn Cheal.
CC by-nc-nd.
1
Pedagogical Background
For all the media attention about MOOCs, they are a pedagogical evolution rather than a startling
innovation. The open education movement started with the MIT OpenCourseWare project in
3
2004, which posted all course syllabi and course materials publicly. As the technical
developments made it easier to create and distribute video, The Khan Academy began posting
4
tutorial math videos on YouTube in 2006. Siemens and Downes created the first full MOOC in
5
2008 in a course called “Connectivism and Connective Knowledge.” Later, MOOC providers
Coursera, Udacity, and edX, combined video tutorials with embedded quizzing and other
resources to produce college courses with automated content. They remained free unless a small
fee was paid for a certificate but not college credit. SJSU was the first higher education institution
to partner with edX and Udacity to offer full college credit for the jointly developed courses.
edX
SJSU’s first venture with a MOOC provider began with SJSU faculty visiting edX in the summer of
2012. They decided that the SJSU Electrical Engineering 98 Circuit Analysis (EE 98) course
could use some of the edX MITx6.002x Circuits and Electronics online materials. Instead of a fully
online course, the SJSU course would have the traditional on-campus format but would use the
edX materials for a new flipped pedagogy during the fall 2012 semester. Students were
responsible for watching the edX videos and taking the quizzes outside the course as homework.
Multiple-choice quizzes were graded by the edX platform and available to the instructor, keeping
the students accountable for completing the work. The in-class experience changed from the
former lecture model to group problem solving and additional quizzes. Before the flipped
pedagogy and the use of the edX materials, 40% of the students received a C or lower on the
midterm. Students in the fall 2012 course did much better, with only 9% receiving a C or lower. In
previous sections of EE 98, an average of 65% of students passed the course, but in the fall 2012
course a full 91% of students passed. This success provided grounds for further experimentation
for the flipped methodology using edX materials in additional sections of EE 98.
SJSU Plus
During the spring semester 2013, SJSU and Udacity created an additional project, called SJSU
Plus, to co-develop three courses. SJSU was attracted to Udacity’s course materials because
of their inquiry-based approach mixed with engaging, short tutorial videos and frequent
questions. The three courses were MATH 6L (Entry Level Mathematics), MATH 8 (College
Algebra), and Stat 095 (Elementary Statistics). Math 6L is a remedial math course, while Math
8 and Stat 95 are prerequisite courses that need to be completed before students can progress
to other courses in their degree plan. For the summer 2013 term, SJSU increased the SJSU
Plus offerings to include PSYC 1 (General Psychology) and CS 46 (Introduction to
Programming). Teams of SJSU faculty, who were paired with Udacity course developers,
developed the inquiry-based instructional strategy and content. The majority of the content is
based on short, 2–3 minute videos (often of a hand drawing explanations on a table with a
voiceover) and an embedded multiple-choice question. Evidence suggests that this method
provides students with the feeling of a personal tutor and interactivity that is engaging and
motivating.
2
Faculty Development Challenges
Creating for-credit courses with an external company—in this case, Udacity—involves many
challenges. Bridging the differences of age, background, lifestyle, and work style between
university faculty and technology start-up staff to create a single course-development team was
a challenge. After SJSU faculty were introduced to their Udacity courses developers, they had
to develop their own working relationships, plan a schedule, and decide what each individual
would contribute. The SJSU faculty brought content expertise and years of teaching experience
to the group. As young graduates, the Udacity staff also brought content knowledge; they also
had technology expertise, but no teaching experience.
Other specific faculty professional development challenges in creating partnership courses for
college credit with Udacity included the following.
Intellectual Property
The provost’s office and faculty created a contract for the development pay for faculty. It
includes intellectual property and the schedule of payments.
Course Development
The three courses for the spring semester were developed at the same time that they were
being taught. This was done so the start date for the courses could be in January 2012, but this
approach was problematic for the course teams. Writing scripts, shooting video and reshooting
takes, making edits and fixing sequencing issues, and writing exams were all very timeconsuming. It led to an emotional, exhausting, and exasperating experience for many of the
participants, even if it was also gratifying in the end. In the future, we must separate the
development experience from the teaching experience.
Teamwork
Each course development took approximately 400 hours of faculty time, which does not include
the time of Udacity staff of course developers, programmers, and others to develop a SJSU
Plus course. In general, the SJSU faculty provided the content scripting and test banks and
were filmed, whereas the Udacity staff ran the studios, did the editing, and provided the
technology for the web platform. Faculty needed to be open to working with nonfaculty on the
course content, flexible with their time, and patient with the time required for the video-shooting
and editing process and for the programming needed for the web platform.
Student Identity
Accreditation bodies have become very concerned about student identity in online courses in
general. The exams in SJSU were fully proctored online by ProctorU (http://www.proctoru.com/)
for student authentication. Proctors watched students taking exams through web-conferencing.
The students had to prove identity and allow their computer desktops to be shared and locked.
Colleagues in the same home department as the SJSU Plus professors were often new to this
technology and so needed to be convinced of its effectiveness.
Compensation and ISAs
A compensation plan that would scale up as student enrollment numbers increased had to be
created through the College of International and Extended Studies (CIES). SJSU faculty
3
typically have a four-course teaching load. A development stipend of $15,000 was paid for the
additional 400 hours of overload to develop an SJSU Plus course. In addition, the faculty
member receives the equivalent of one course teaching pay for teaching up to 300 students in
the MOOC; if there are more than 300 students enrolled, the faculty member receives the
equivalent of two courses’ pay. Student work that includes writing components or complex math
problems is graded by hand by the instructor and/or ISAs (Instructional Student Assistants).
ISAs are provided when needed at the rate of three hours per week for every 100 students.
Scheduling and Enrollment Scaling
I worked with all parties including the provost, faculty, and CIES on scheduling issues, such as
faculty workload requirements and scaling enrollment for summer 2013. University departments
and governance committees were concerned about larger enrollments causing other sections
to close for lack of enrollment. That didn’t prove to be the case, though, because such a large
proportion of the summer students were nonmatriculated students.
Business Practice Challenges
Several business practices had to be addressed when partnering with an external company to
offer college credit. For example, Udacity enrolls free students immediately with three webpage
clicks. For regularly admitted and matriculated students, SJSU’s admissions and enrollment
process for credit courses takes nine months. Finding a middle ground between these extremes
to ensure a smooth experience for students has been difficult.
Contracts
Contracts had to be developed. One contract, the MOU (memorandum of understanding)
between SJSU and Udacity, was written by our procurement office and vetted by the
chancellor’s office legal staff. This document defined the terms of work, intellectual property,
and the profit split. A second contract is the Faculty Agreement between the SJSU faculty and
the provost’s office to pay a development stipend; this contract outlines payment amounts, due
dates, scope of work, and intellectual property. The third contract between the SJSU faculty
and Udacity concerns work and intellectual property.
Business Processes of Admission, Registration, Payment, and Systems
Integration
SJSU used eMarket software to enroll and bill students for the spring 2013 SJSU Plus courses.
This process was problematic, however, in that the data then had to be shifted to PeopleSoft,
the student information system, for record keeping and account creations in the registrar’s
office rather than admissions. The process used for summer 2013 was for the matriculated
students to enroll in PeopleSoft and for nonmatriculated students to be enrolled on the Udacity
website and then transferred to SJSU. That approach was also problematic, however, because
of difficulties with data transfers and confusion among some students. We will explore using a
Quick Admit module in PeopleSoft for the fall semester.
Prerequisites and Disabilities Checking Processes
SJSU’s handling of prerequisites and students with disabilities is primarily manual. A faculty
member checks the complex system of possible prerequisites for the math courses one by one.
Cases of students who need extra exam time due to learning disabilities are also usually hand-
4
processed, depending on the written proof that a student carries to the on-campus office.
Scaling up the number of online students from 100 to 1,000 will certainly increase the workload
and necessitate the development of an online process. Each SJSU Plus course is accessible
with a closed-captioning button for students with hearing impairments, and extra time is allowed
on quizzes and exams for students with learning disabilities.
Webpage Production
CIES and Udacity needed to create very clear webpages of directions and information. These
pages are at http://www.sjsu.edu/plus/ and https://www.udacity.com/.
What It Means to Higher Education
MOOC providers continue to evolve. In order for faculty to have access to MOOC materials or
to develop their own, MOOCS will have to follow some type of monetization model. Many of the
companies are currently funded by venture capitalists or grants that allow them to offer their
web content globally for free, at least initially. Monetization options include:

Employer matchmaking, with the employer covering some costs of the education

A licensing model (like software) that charges universities for the use of materials based
on student numbers

An author model in which faculty co-create MOOC materials and agree to a contract that
describes profit-sharing or royalties between the MOOC provider, university, and faculty

A small direct charge to students, such as $25, for a certificate of completion
In the case of the edX partnership, SJSU will likely follow the licensing model. The edX
materials for EE 98 are being used like a textbook in a traditional course, and there is interest
among SJSU faculty in using additional edX course materials for other courses. edX will charge
a license fee for student access at a particular time. This will also grant faculty access to edit
the edX course materials and access student grades.
The Udacity model is different. SJSU charged a direct $150 fee to students for a 3–5 credit
college course, combined with an author model. A profit-sharing contract between Udacity and
SJSU was adopted, and if the materials are licensed to other universities there should be a
royalty split between the faculty author and Udacity.
Some educators fear that the MOOC model is revolutionary and will change our current system
of higher education. If more students can be taught by fewer faculty, won’t that reduce the
numbers of faculty perilously? With fewer faculty, we would have less one-on-one faculty and
student interaction during teaching, learning, and research. Fewer faculty also would result in
less nonbiased, noncorporate research, especially in basic science and humanities that has
benefited society as a whole. So far, though, our courses have demonstrated the need for
faculty as content developers, mentors, guides, and graders. The work needed has not
decreased, but on the contrary it has increased. If the MOOC materials function more like
publisher’s materials as an auxiliary to the usual faculty and student interactions, MOOCs might
simply offer another educational option. In addition, this model might open up a new market
and make education available to those who would never have attended college. The largest
5
percentage of students in the SJSU Plus summer 2013 courses are nonmatriculated students
who haven’t been admitted formally to a degree program.
Creating MOOCs and using MOOC materials for credit has widened SJSU’s choices for
excellent online course pedagogies and opened up learning to a larger audience. Universities
are increasingly in competition with knowledge easily found by students on the Internet.
Universities will continue to offer credentials needed in the workplace and have a responsibility
to investigate new educational model brought about by changes in technology, disruptive
though they may be.
Key Questions to Ask

What does your university hope to accomplish from working with MOOCs: publicity, open
education for global educational equity, lower-cost courses with higher enrollments, or
excellent course materials for flipped, blended, or traditional courses? Should the courses
be no cost and open, or should they incur a fee and offer credit?

Does your university want to create its own MOOC materials or MOOCs and offer them
through a public LMS or iTunes U courseware, or would it rather work with an external
company on its proprietary platform?

How will your university recruit faculty and help them with MOOCs—through a top-down
process with dean appointees or a bottom-up request for proposals that would be judged
by a faculty committee?

Would the faculty be recruited for interest in teaching with technology, public-speaking
ability, desire to work with external partners as a member of a course-development team,
or for personal characteristics like patience, dynamic energy and acting ability, flexibility,
organizational skills, social skills, and/or content knowledge?

Does your university have the ability to effect change in its business processes for
innovations such as rolling registrations, flexible billing, and automated prerequisite and
accessibility processing?

How will your faculty governance committees react to change?
Where to Learn More

Breslow, Lori, David E. Pritchard, Jennifer DeBoer, Glenda S. Stump, Andrew D. Ho, and
Daniel T. Seaton. “Studying Learning in the Worldwide Classroom: Research into edX’s
First MOOC.” Research and Practice in Assessment 8 (Summer 2013).
http://www.rpajournal.com/studying-learning-in-the-worldwide-classroom-research-intoedxs-first-mooc/.

Daniel, J. “Making Sense of MOOCs: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox, and
Possibility.” Journal of Interactive Media in Education (2012). http://wwwjime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2012-18.
6

Koller, Daphne, Andrew Ng, Chuong Do, and Zhenghao Chen. “Retention and Intention
in Massive Open Online Courses: In Depth.” EDUCAUSE Review Online (June 3, 2013).
http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/retention-and-intention-massive-open-onlinecourses-depth-0.

Pappano, Laura. “The Year of the MOOC.” New York Times, November 2, 2012.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-aremultiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html.

de Waard, Inge, Sean Abajian, Michael Sean Gallagher, Rebecca Hogue, Nilgün Keskin,
Apostolos Koutropoulos, and Osvaldo C. Rodriguez. “Using mLearning and MOOCs to
Understand Chaos, Emergence, and Complexity in Education.” The International Review
of Research in Open and Distance Learning 12, no. 7 (2011).
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1046/2026.

McGuire, Robert. “MOOC News and Reviews.”
http://moocnewsandreviews.com/category/news/.
Acknowledgments
The president of SJSU, Mo Qayoumi, and Provost Ellen Junn were instrumental in first
understanding how MOOCs could help universities. They implemented efforts to partner with
MOOC providers in 2012 and continue to be very involved with all aspects of the project.
About the Author
Catheryn Cheal is the Associate Vice President and Senior Academic Technology Officer and
Associate Professor of Art at San Jose State University.
Citation for This Work
Cheal, Catheryn. “Creating MOOCs for College Credit: SJSU’s Partnership with edX and
Udacity” (Research Bulletin). Louisville, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research,
August 14, 2013, available from http://www.educause.edu/ecar.
Notes
1.
Dave Cormier of the University of Prince Edward Island first created this term when discussing the course taught
by George Siemens of Athabasca University and Stephen Downes of the National Research Council (Canada).
2.
Since this bulletin was written, the spring passing rates for the SJSU Plus courses were released, and they weren’t as
high as we hoped, compared to the traditional sections. For example, the class that did the best was Statistics 98. Its
sections have historically averaged a 74% passing rate; the SJSU Plus version had a passing rate of 51%. The
students for the SJSU Plus courses were an atypical population, however, including SJSU students who had
previously failed the traditional versions of the course, underserved high school students, and journalists who were
interested in the MOOC phenomenon. Faculty are offering five SJSU Plus courses in summer 2013 and then will
spend the fall revising the courses. They will offer them again in spring 2014, partnering with Udacity. Faculty have
been continuously developing and teaching the courses since January 2013. Because the video content is as detailed
as a textbook and also needs to stand on its own, the faculty will take the time to revise the content, adding in
faculty/student synchronous chat sessions, an introductory orientation week, and more granular grading. The SJSU
Plus courses continue to evolve as an additional option for online education.
7
3.
MIT OpenCourseWare program (http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm) was established in 2002 by the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. See Charles Vest, “Why MIT Decided to Give Away All Its Course Materials via the
Internet,” Chronicle of Higher Education 50, no. 21 (Jan. 2004), http://chronicle.com/article/Why-MIT-Decided-toGive-Away/9043/.
4.
Salman Khan, TED Talk, 2011, http://www.youtube.com/user/khanacademy.
5.
Stephen Downes, “‘Connectivism’ and Connective Knowledge,” HuffPost Education (January 5, 2011),
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-downes/connectivism-and-connecti_b_804653.html.
8