Instructional quality of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)

We present an analysis of instructional design quality of 76 randomly selected Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). The quality of MOOCs was determined from first principles of instruction, using a course survey instrument. Two types of MOOCs (xMOOCs and cMOOCs) were analysed and their instructional design quality was assessed and compared. We found that the majority of MOOCs scored poorly on most instructional design principles. However, most MOOCs scored highly on organisation and presentation of course material. The results indicate that although most MOOCs are well-packaged, their instructional design quality is low. We outline implications for practice and ideas for future research. Instructional design quality of 76 randomly selected MOOCs was assessed.Quality was determined from first principles, using a Course Scan instrument.The majority of MOOCs scored poorly on most instructional design principles.Most MOOCs scored highly on organisation and presentation of course material.Although most MOOCs are well-packaged, their instructional design quality is low.

[1]  M. David Merrill,et al.  First Principles of Instruction: Identifying and Designing Effective, Efficient, and Engaging Instruction , 2012 .

[2]  J. Daniel,et al.  Making Sense of MOOCs : Musings in a Maze of Myth , Paradox and Possibility Author : , 2013 .

[3]  Charles M. Reigeluth,et al.  Instructional-Design Theories and Models: Building a Common Knowledge Base. Volume III. , 2009 .

[4]  Annemarie Hauf,et al.  Computers in education , 1983 .

[5]  Massoud Rahimpour.  Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) , 2011 .

[6]  M. David Merrill,et al.  First principles of instruction , 2012 .

[7]  Helene Fournier,et al.  A pedagogy of abundance or a pedagogy to support human beings? Participant support on massive open online courses , 2011 .

[8]  George Siemens.  Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age , 2004 .

[9]  Betty Collis,et al.  Design criteria for work-based learning: Merrill's First Principles of Instruction expanded , 2005, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[10]  Rita Kop,et al.  The Challenges to Connectivist Learning on Open Online Networks: Learning Experiences during a Massive Open Online Course , 2011 .

[11]  Allison Littlejohn,et al.  Merlot Journal of Online Learning and Teaching Patterns of Engagement in Connectivist Moocs , 2022 .

[12]  Donald G. Perrin,et al.  How Award-winning Professors in Higher Education Use Merrill's First Principles of Instruction 3 , 2011 .

[13]  Roy Williams,et al.  The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC , 2010 .

[14]  Theodore W. Frick,et al.  Improving course evaluations to improve instruction and complex learning in higher education , 2010 .

[15]  H. Fournier,et al.  New dimensions to self-directed learning in an open networked learning environment , 2012 .

[16]  Anoush Margaryan.  Work-based Learning: A Blend of Pedagogy and Technology , 2012 .

[17]  Shirley Williams,et al.  MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012 , 2013 .

[18]  Betty Collis,et al.  Multiple perspectives on blended learning design. , 2005 .

[19]  Rolf Schulmeister,et al.  MOOCs – Massive Open Online Courses , 2013 .

[20]  Gráinne Conole,et al.  MOOCs as disruptive technologies: strategies for enhancing the learner experience and quality of MOOCs Los MOOC como tecnologías disruptivas: estrategias para mejorar la experiencia de aprendizaje y la calidad de los MOOC. , 2016 .

[21]  Antonio Fini,et al.  The Technological Dimension of a Massive Open Online Course: The Case of the CCK08 Course Tools , 2009 .