You are here:

A Systematic Analysis and Synthesis of the Empirical MOOC Literature Published in 2013–2015
ARTICLE

, Royal Roads University ;

IRRODL Volume 17, Number 2, ISSN 1492-3831 Publisher: Athabasca University Press

Full Text

Abstract

A deluge of empirical research became available on MOOCs in 2013–2015 and this research is available in disparate sources. This paper addresses a number of gaps in the scholarly understanding of MOOCs and presents a comprehensive picture of the literature by examining the geographic distribution, publication outlets, citations, data collection and analysis methods, and research strands of empirical research focusing on MOOCs during this time period. Results demonstrate that (a) more than 80% of this literature is published by individuals whose home institutions are in North America and Europe, (b) a select few papers are widely cited while nearly half of the papers are cited zero times, and (c) researchers have favored a quantitative if not positivist approach to the conduct of MOOC research, preferring the collection of data via surveys and automated methods. While some interpretive research was conducted on MOOCs in this time period, it was often basic and it was the minority of studies that were informed by methods traditionally associated with qualitative research (e.g., interviews, observations, and focus groups). Analysis shows that there is limited research reported on instructor-related topics, and that even though researchers have attempted to identify and classify learners into various groupings, very little research examines the experiences of learner subpopulations.

Citation

Veletsianos, G. & Shepherdson, P. (2016). A Systematic Analysis and Synthesis of the Empirical MOOC Literature Published in 2013–2015. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(2),. Athabasca University Press. Retrieved August 10, 2024 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Admiraal, W., Huisman, B., & Van de Ven, M. (2014). Self-and peer assessment in Massive Open Online Courses. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(3), 119–128.
  2. Alario-Hoyos, C., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Delgado-Kloos, C., Parada, G. & Munoz-Organero, M. (2014). Delving into participants’ profiles and use of social tools in MOOCs. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, (3), 260–266.
  3. Bates, T. (2014). MOOCs: Getting to know you better. Distance Education, 35(2), 145–148.
  4. Bayne, S. (2015). Teacherbot: Interventions in automated teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(4), 455-467.
  5. Bayne, S., & Ross, J. (2014). The pedagogy of the Massive Open Online Course: The UK view. York, UK: The Higher Education Academy.
  6. Biesta, G. (2011). Disciplines and theory in the academic study of education: A comparative analysis of the Anglo-American and Continental construction of the field. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 19(2), 175-192.
  7. Breslow, L., Pritchard, D.E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G.S., Ho, A.D., & Seaton, D.T. (2013). Studying learning in the worldwide classroom: Research into edX's first MOOC. Research and Practice in Assessment, 8, 13-25.
  8. Bulfin, S., Pangrazio, L., & Selwyn, N. (2014). Making “MOOCs”: The construction of a new digital higher education within news media discourse. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5), 290–305.
  9. Cisel, M., Bachelet, R., & Bruillard, E. (2013). Peer assessment in the first French MOOC: Analyzing assessors’ behavior. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 403–404). London, UK: International Educational Data
  10. Ebben, M., & Murphy, J.S. (2014). Unpacking MOOC scholarly discourse: A review of nascent MOOC scholarship. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(3), 328–345.
  11. Gao, F., Luo, T., & Zhang, K. (2012). Tweeting for learning: A critical analysis of research on micro-blogging in education published 2008–2011. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(5), 783–801.
  12. Gasevic, D., Kovanovic, V., Joksimovic, S., & Siemens, G. (2014). Where is research on massive open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC Research Initiative. The
  13. Guo, P.J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference: L@S ’14 (pp. 41–50). New York, NY: ACM.
  14. Hew, K.F., & Cheung, W.S. (2014). Students’ and instructors' use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational Research Review, 12, 45.
  15. Hollands, F.M., & Tirthali, D. (2014). Resource requirements and costs of developing and delivering MOOCs. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5), 113-133.
  16. Huang, J., Dasgupta, A., Ghosh, A., Manning, J., & Sanders, M. (2014). Superposter behavior in MOOC forums. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference—L@S ’14 (pp. 117–126). Atlanta, Georgia, USA: ACM Press.
  17. Jacoby, J. (2014). The disruptive potential of the massive open online course: A literature review. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, 18(1), 73-85.
  18. Jona, K., & Naidu, S. (2014). MOOCs: Emerging research. Distance Education, 35(2), 141–144.
  19. Jordan, K. (2014). Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(1), 133–160.
  20. Kellogg, S., Booth, S., & Oliver, K. (2014). A social network perspective on peer supported learning in MOOCs for educators. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5).
  21. Kennedy, J. (2014). Characteristics of massive open online courses (MOOCs): A research review, 2009–2012. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 13(1), 1–16.
  22. Khalil, H., & Ebner, M. (2013). “How satisfied are you with your MOOC?”-A research study on interaction in huge online courses. In Proceedings of the World Conference on
  23. Kim, J., Guo, P.J., Seaton, D.T., Mitros, P., Gajos, K.Z., & Miller, R.C. (2014). Understanding invideo dropouts and interaction peaks in online lecture videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference—L@S ’14 (pp. 31–40). New York, NY:
  24. Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., Gašević, D., Siemens, G., & Hatala, M. (2015), What public media reveals about MOOCs: A systematic analysis of news reports. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 510–527.
  25. Liyanagunawardena, T.R., Adams, A.A., & Williams, S.A. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008–2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 202–227.
  26. Merriam, S. (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  27. O’Connor, K. (2014). MOOCs, institutional policy and change dynamics in higher education. Higher Education, 68(5), 623–635. Perkins, R., & Lowenthal, P.R. (in press). Open access journals in educational technology: results of a survey of experienced users. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology.
  28. Perna, L.W., Ruby, A., Boruch, R.F., Wang, N., Scull, J., Ahmad, S., & Evans, C. (2014). Moving through MOOCs: Understanding the progression of users in massive open online courses. Educational Researcher, 43(9), 421–432.
  29. Radford, A.W., Robles, J., Cataylo, S., Horn, L., Thornton, J., & Whitfield, K.E. (2014). The employer potential of MOOCs: A mixed-methods study of human resource professionals’ thinking on MOOCs. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5), 1–25.
  30. Reich, J. (2014, December 10). MOOC completion and retention in the context of student intent. EDUCAUSE Review. Retrieved from http://er.educause.edu/ero
  31. Reich, J. (2015). Rebooting MOOC research. Science, 347(6217), 34–35.
  32. Rodriguez, O. (2012). MOOCs and the AI-Stanford like courses: Two successful and distinct course formats for Massive Open Online Courses. European Journal of Open, Distance, and E-Learning. Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2012/Rodriguez.pdf
  33. Sæbø, Ø., Rose, J., & Flak, L.S. (2008). The shape of eParticipation: Characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 400–428.
  34. SCImago. (2007). SJR: SCImago journal & Country rank. Retrieved June 08, 2015, from http://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php
  35. Selwyn, N., Bulfin, S., & Pangrazio, L. (2015). Massive open online change? Exploring the discursive construction of the ‘MOOC’ in newspapers. Higher Education Quarterly, 69(2), 175-192.
  36. Sheard, J., Eckerdal, A., Kinnunen, P., Malmi, L., Nylén, A., & Thota, N. (2014). MOOCs and their impact on academics. In Proceedings of the 14th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (pp. 137–145). New York, NY: ACM.
  37. Singer, S. (2014). Learning about learning in a technology-enabled world. Keynote presentation at the meeting of Learning with MOOCs: A Practitioner’s Workshop. Retrieved from http://www.moocworkshop.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/08/Singer_Learning_MOOC_Boston_8-12-14.pdf
  38. Smeyers, P., & Burbules, N.C. (2011). How to improve your impact factor: Questioning the quantification of academic quality. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 45(1), 1–17.
  39. Sparks, S., & House, L. (2005). JISC disciplinary differences report. London, UK: Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC).
  40. Stanton, J.M., & Harkness, S.S.J. (2014). Got MOOC? Labor costs for the development and delivery of an open online course. Information Resources Management Journal, 27(2),
  41. Stephens-Martinez, K., Hearst, M.A., & Fox, A. (2014). Monitoring MOOCs : Which information sources do instructors value ? In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference—L@S ’14 (pp. 79–88). Atlanta, GA: ACM Press.
  42. Subhi, Y., Andresen, K., Rolskov Bojsen, S., Mørkeberg Nilsson, P., & Konge, L. (2014). Massive open online courses are relevant for postgraduate medical training. Danish Medical Journal, 61(10), A4923.
  43. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook on mixed methods in the behavioral and social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  44. Togia, A., & Tsigilis, N. (2006). Impact factor and education journals: A critical examination and analysis. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(6), 362–379.
  45. Veletsianos, G., Collier, A., & Schneider, E. (2015). Digging deeper into learners' experiences in MOOCs: Participation in social networks outside of MOOCs, notetaking, and contexts surrounding content consumption. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 570–587.
  46. Veletsianos, G., & Shepherdson, P. (2015). Who studies MOOCs? Interdisciplinarity in MOOC research and its changes over time. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2202
  47. Wang, Y., Paquette, L., & Baker, R. (2014). A longitudinal study on learner career advancement in MOOCs. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1(3), 203–206.
  48. Yang, D., Piergallini, M., Howley, I., & Rose, C. (2014). Forum thread recommendation for massive open online courses. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 257–260). London, UK: International Educational Data

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Links

Also Read

Related Collections