You are here:

The Collaborative Design of Massive Open Online Courses: Analyzing the Design Discourses of Teacher and Student Developers

, , , , University of Houston, United States

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Amsterdam, Netherlands Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC


The purpose of this qualitative case study was to analyze the collaborative design process of two Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) for professional development of K-16 teachers. This paper describes the “design discourses” that occurred when course instructors and students collaboratively designed and developed these MOOCs using an educational design research model and provides insights into challenges they faced as well as their attempts to solve them. Qualitative data were analyzed in this single instrumental case study. The researchers used archival information from online student journal entries in which the students reflected about class activities, online discussion forums on course topics, and discussions about articles related to MOOCs and interactive learning research. Finally, students participated in focus groups in which they discussed the challenges they faced in designing the MOOCs and the significant things they learned. The framework used to develop the themes and implications for practice are discussed.


McNeil, S., Gronseth, S., Handoko, E. & Robin, B. (2018). The Collaborative Design of Massive Open Online Courses: Analyzing the Design Discourses of Teacher and Student Developers. In T. Bastiaens, J. Van Braak, M. Brown, L. Cantoni, M. Castro, R. Christensen, G. Davidson-Shivers, K. DePryck, M. Ebner, M. Fominykh, C. Fulford, S. Hatzipanagos, G. Knezek, K. Kreijns, G. Marks, E. Sointu, E. Korsgaard Sorensen, J. Viteli, J. Voogt, P. Weber, E. Weippl & O. Zawacki-Richter (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 1087-1093). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved February 19, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Abramson, G. (2013). The newest disruptive technology– MOOCs. Journal of Applied Learning Technology, 3(1), 3-4.
  2. Billington, P., & Fronmuller, M. (2013). MOOCs and the future of higher education. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 13(3/4), 36-43.
  3. Daniel, J. (2012). Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. Retrieved from
  4. Dolan, V. (2014). Massive online obsessive compulsion: What are they saying out there about the latest phenomenon in higher education? The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(2), 268-281.
  5. Guàrdia, L., Maina, M., & Sangrà, A. (2013). MOOC design principles. A pedagogical approach from the learner’s perspective. ELearning Papers, 33(May), 1–6.
  6. Hedberg, J. (2004). Designing multimedia: Seven discourses. Cambridge Journal of Education, 34(2), 241-256.
  7. Hedberg, J.G., & Sims, R. (2001). Speculations on design team interactions. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12(2/3), 189-214.
  8. Jonassen, D.H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional theories and models (2nd ed., pp. 215-240). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  9. Kolowich, S. (2013). The professors who make the MOOCs. Chronicle of Higher Education, 59(28). Retrieved from DASHDASH
  10. Lombardi, M. (2013). The inside story: Campus decision making in the wake of the latest MOOC tsunami. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 239-248.
  11. Marshall, S. (2013). Evaluating the strategic and leadership challenges of MOOCs. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 216-227.
  12. Martin, F. (2012). Will massive open online courses change how we teach? Communications of the ACM, 55(8), 26-28.
  13. Metros, S., & Hedberg, J.G. (2002). More than a pretty (inter)face: The role of the graphical user interface in engaging e-learners. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(3) 191-205.
  14. Reeves, T.C., & Bonk, C.J. (2015). MOOCs: Redirecting the quest for quality higher education for all. International Journal on E-Learning, 14(3), 385-399.
  15. Rivard, R. (2013, July). Beyond MOOC hype. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from Robin, B., & McNeil, S. (2015). The collaborative design and development of MOOCs for teacher professional development. In C.J. Bonk, M.M. Lee, T.C. Reeves, & T.H. Reynolds (Eds.) MOOCs and open education around the world. New York: Routledge.
  16. Sandeen, C. (2013). Assessment’s place in the new MOOC world. Research& Practice in Assessment, 8(1), 5-12.
  17. Savery, J.R., & Duffy, T.M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31-38.
  18. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  19. Thomas, J. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. San Rafael, CA: Autodesk Foundation. Retrieved from Innovate Learning 2018-Amsterdam, Netherlands, June 25-29, 2018
  20. Yuan, L. & Powell, S. (2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher education. Bolton: CETIS. Retrieved from

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact