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

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.

[1]  S. Merriam Qualitative research in practice : examples for discussion and analysis , 2002 .

[2]  Justin Reich,et al.  Rebooting MOOC Research , 2015, Science.

[3]  N. Selwyn,et al.  Massive Open Online Change? Exploring the Discursive Construction of the "MOOC" in Newspapers. , 2015 .

[4]  Armando Fox,et al.  Monitoring MOOCs: which information sources do instructors value? , 2014, L@S.

[5]  Rémi Bachelet,et al.  Peer assessment in the first French MOOC : Analyzing assessors' behavior , 2014, EDM.

[6]  K. Hew,et al.  Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges , 2014 .

[7]  Kate O’Connor,et al.  MOOCs, institutional policy and change dynamics in higher education , 2014 .

[8]  Luc Paquette,et al.  A Longitudinal Study on Learner Career Advancement in MOOCs , 2014, J. Learn. Anal..

[9]  Tony Bates MOOCs: getting to know you better , 2014 .

[10]  Carlos Delgado Kloos,et al.  Delving into Participants’ Profiles and Use of Social Tools in MOOCs , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies.

[11]  Jolie Kennedy,et al.  Characteristics of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): A Research Review, 2009-2012. , 2014 .

[12]  G. Biesta Disciplines and theory in the academic study of education: a comparative analysis of the Anglo-American and Continental construction of the field , 2011 .

[13]  Nicholas C. Burbules,et al.  How to improve your impact factor: questioning the quantification of academic quality , 2011 .

[14]  N. Tsigilis,et al.  Impact factor and education journals: a critical examination and analysis , 2006 .

[15]  Siân Bayne Teacherbot: interventions in automated teaching , 2015, Apertura.

[16]  Philip J. Guo,et al.  How video production affects student engagement: an empirical study of MOOC videos , 2014, L@S.

[17]  C. Osvaldo Rodriguez,et al.  MOOCs and the AI-Stanford Like Courses: Two Successful and Distinct Course Formats for Massive Open Online Courses. , 2012 .

[18]  Devayani Tirthali,et al.  Resource requirements and costs of developing and delivering MOOCs , 2014 .

[19]  Som Naidu,et al.  MOOCs: emerging research , 2014 .

[20]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Forum Thread Recommendation for Massive Open Online Courses , 2014, EDM.

[21]  Eva Hornecker artec,et al.  Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education ( AACE ) . Distributed via the Web by permission of AACE Coupling Physical Artifacts , 2022 .

[22]  Lauri Malmi,et al.  MOOCs and their impact on academics , 2014, Koli Calling.

[23]  Chris Piech,et al.  Deconstructing disengagement: analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses , 2013, LAK '13.

[24]  Krzysztof Z. Gajos,et al.  Understanding in-video dropouts and interaction peaks inonline lecture videos , 2014, L@S.

[25]  Alma Swan,et al.  Open access self-archiving: An author study. Technical Report, Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC), UK FE and HE funding councils , 2005 .

[26]  Aras Bozkurt,et al.  Trends in Distance Education Research: A Content Analysis of Journals 2009-2013. , 2015 .

[27]  George Siemens,et al.  Recognising learner autonomy: lessons and reflections from a joint x/c MOOC , 2015 .

[28]  Wilfried Admiraal,et al.  Self- and Peer Assessment in Massive Open Online Courses , 2014 .

[29]  Antonio J. Gómez-Núñez Una aproximación multimetodológica para la clasificación de las revistas de Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) , 2015 .

[30]  Bowling Green State Tweeting for Learning : A Critical Analysis of Research on Microblogging in Education Published in 2008-2011 , 2015 .

[31]  Lars Konge,et al.  Massive open online courses are relevant for postgraduate medical training. , 2014, Danish medical journal.

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

[33]  Ke Zhang,et al.  Tweeting for learning: A critical analysis of research on microblogging in education published in 2008-2011 , 2012, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[34]  Sebastian Vogt,et al.  Review of distance education research (2000 to 2008): Analysis of research areas, methods, and authorship patterns , 2009 .

[35]  Rob Kling,et al.  Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication , 1999, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[36]  Anirban Dasgupta,et al.  Superposter behavior in MOOC forums , 2014, L@S.

[37]  Jeremy Rose,et al.  The shape of eParticipation: Characterizing an emerging research area , 2008, Gov. Inf. Q..

[38]  Neil Selwyn,et al.  Making ‘MOOCs’: The Construction of a New Digital Higher Education within News Media Discourse , 2014 .

[39]  George Siemens,et al.  What public media reveals about MOOCs: A systematic analysis of news reports , 2015, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[40]  George Siemens,et al.  Where is research on massive open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC research initiative , 2014 .

[41]  Jeffrey M. Stanton,et al.  Got MOOC?: Labor Costs for the Development and Delivery of an Open Online Course , 2014, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[42]  Jessica Robles,et al.  The employer potential of MOOCs: a mixed-methods study of human resource professionals' thinking on MOOCs , 2014 .

[43]  C. Sinclair,et al.  Teacher Experiences and Academic Identity: The Missing Components of MOOC Pedagogy , 2014 .

[44]  George Veletsianos,et al.  Who Studies MOOCs? Interdisciplinarity in MOOC Research and Its Changes over Time. , 2015 .

[45]  David E. Pritchard,et al.  Studying Learning in the Worldwide Classroom Research into edX's First MOOC. , 2013 .

[46]  Katy Jordan,et al.  Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses , 2014 .

[47]  Patrick R. Lowenthal,et al.  Open access journals in educational technology: Results of a survey of experienced users , 2016 .

[48]  Maureen Ebben,et al.  Unpacking MOOC scholarly discourse: a review of nascent MOOC scholarship , 2014 .

[49]  Jean Jacoby,et al.  The Disruptive Potential of the Massive Open Online Course: A Literature Review. , 2014 .

[50]  Martin Ebner,et al.  “How satisfied are you with your MOOC?” - A Research Study on Interaction in Huge Online Courses , 2013 .

[51]  Kevin Oliver,et al.  A Social Network Perspective on Peer Supported Learning in MOOCs for Educators , 2014 .

[52]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Challenges and Opportunities of Dual-Layer MOOCs: Reflections from an edX Deployment Study , 2015 .

[53]  George Veletsianos,et al.  Digging deeper into learners' experiences in MOOCs: Participation in social networks outside of MOOCs, notetaking and contexts surrounding content consumption , 2015, Br. J. Educ. Technol..