Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Littlejohn, Allison

  • Google
  • 2
  • 5
  • 0

University College London

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (2/2 displayed)

  • 2014Massive Open Online Courses: a traditional or transformative approach to learning?citations
  • 2007Community Dimensions of Learning Object Repositories (CD-LOR): Deliverable 10, Recommendations to JISC for Future Research and Developmentcitations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Vale, Katie
1 / 1 shared
Douglas, P.
1 / 1 shared
Margaryan, A.
1 / 1 shared
Milligan, C.
1 / 1 shared
Nicol, D.
1 / 2 shared
Chart of publication period
2014
2007

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Vale, Katie
  • Douglas, P.
  • Margaryan, A.
  • Milligan, C.
  • Nicol, D.
OrganizationsLocationPeople

booksection

Massive Open Online Courses: a traditional or transformative approach to learning?

  • Littlejohn, Allison
  • Vale, Katie
Abstract

Massive Open Online Courses are viewed by some as a gamechanger, radically shifting expectations around the ways in which people can access education (Daniel, 2012).But there are questions around whether and how MOOCs radically shift learning. A MOOC is an online course, free of charge and open to anyone regardless of their pre-requisite knowledge or qualifications. As such they have the potential to transform – or even destabilise – societies, since learning and education play a central role in societal development (Brennan, King & Lebeau, 2004; Hardt & Negri, 2003).Many analyses of MOOCs agree that open courses are potentially threatening to current models of Higher Education (OBHE, 2013, p. 5). MOOCs disrupt the traditional form of course delivery to residential campus-based students and open up opportunities for for-profit education providers to offer scaled-up courses (ibid p. 48). The response from universities has been attempts at agile innovation, testing business models and pursuing brand enhancement through open courses. There has been a marked escalation in the number of MOOCs offered by universities over the two-year period 2011-2013. MOOC learner experiences have been reported as (largely) positive, emphasising the expansion of learner access, learner empowerment, relationship building with individuals who may want to extend their studies through enrolment on formal educational programmes (ibid).Despite the excitement, conflicting perspectives around MOOCs divide education communities. Not all learning professionals agree the value of MOOCs, voicing concerns around instructional design, quality and accreditation (ibid). Learning researchers have evidence of poor engagement in online learning by those learners who have relatively low levels of digital literacies (Kop & Fourier, 2011) and may have limited ability to self-regulate their learning (Milligan, Littlejohn, & Margaryan, 2013). Other researchers are critical that many MOOCs are based on the production and consumption of ‘formal educational content’, missing opportunities to empower learners to self-direct their own learning (see Fiedler, this volume). The ability of learners to direct their own learning could trigger a significant shift in the position of the academy in society, therefore it is not surprising that universities may want to influence the direction of MOOC development.This chapter examines potential benefits and limitations of MOOCs, using a case example of a major MOOC initiative: edX. The chapter begins by examining conflicting perspectives around MOOCs from the literature. Then the HarvardX course design workflow model is outlined. HarvardX is the centre of a variety of activities at Harvard University associated with Open Educational Resources and open courses. The first five HarvardX MOOCs are described and learner behaviours in these MOOCs are analysed. Finally, the benefits and limitations of open courses are reported.

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy