scholarly journals A Systematic Literature Review on the Quality of MOOCs

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 5817
Author(s):  
Christian M. Stracke ◽  
Giada Trisolini
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Online Courses ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Massive Open Online Courses ◽  
Main Research ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
Quality Framework

This paper presents the findings from a systematic literature review on the quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). The main research question was “How can the quality criteria for MOOCs identified in the analysed studies from the systematic literature review be best organised in a categorisation scheme?” The systematic literature review was conducted using the PRISMA procedures. After conducting the screening and eligibility analysis according the pre-defined criteria, 103 studies were finally selected. The analysis was done in iterative cycles for continuous improvements of the assignments and clustering of the quality criteria. The final version was validated in consensus through the categorisation and assignment of all 103 studies in a consistent way to four dimensions (pedagogical, organisational, technological, and social) and their sub-categories. This quality framework can be re-used in future MOOC research and the discussion of the analysed studies provides a current literature overview on the quality of MOOCs.

scholarly journals Evaluation Grid for xMOOCs

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Khalil ◽  
Hubert Brunner ◽  
Martin Ebner
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Online Courses ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Massive Open Online Courses ◽  
Online Course ◽  
Massive Open Online

Massive Open Online Courses, shortly MOOCs, are a phenomenon nowadays. The number of courses is worldwide steadily increasing since Sebastian Thrun has offered a free online course for more than 100.000 students. Nowadays, decision makers and students as well as lecturers are asking about the quality of such courses. After a live experiment on 15 randomly chosen courses and a brief literature review, we discuss the possibility of finding an evaluation grid for xMOOCs. The finally suggested criteria can be used now for future investigations.

What makes a good-quality language MOOC? An empirical study of criteria to evaluate the quality of online language courses from learners’ perspectives

ReCALL ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Rong Luo ◽  
Zixuan Ye
Keyword(s):  
Language Learners ◽  
Online Courses ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Massive Open Online Courses ◽  
Massive Open Online ◽  
Grounded Theory Method ◽  
Language Courses ◽  
Massive Number ◽  
Esl Learners

Abstract This paper focuses on quality assurance in language massive open online courses (LMOOCs). It is a qualitative study that adopts the grounded theory method and analyses evaluative comments on the quality of LMOOCs from learners’ perspectives. With the data collected from 1,000 evaluations from English as a second language (ESL) learners on China’s biggest MOOC platform “iCourse”, this study examines what has influenced learners’ perceptions of LMOOCs and identifies the specific quality criteria of five types of them, including ESL courses for speaking, reading, writing, cultural studies, and integrated skills. The results of the study will lay a foundation for the establishment of a quality criteria framework for LMOOCs and provide insights into design principles for effective online language courses tailored to the diverse needs of a massive number of language learners.

scholarly journals Are MOOCs Open Educational Resources? A literature review on history, definitions and typologies of OER and MOOCs

Open Praxis ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian M. Stracke ◽  
Stephen Downes ◽  
Grainne Conole ◽  
Daniel Burgos ◽  
Fabio Nascimbeni
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Online Courses ◽  
Open Educational Resources ◽  
Educational Resources ◽  
Massive Open Online Courses ◽  
Open Education ◽  
Massive Open Online ◽  
Short Answer ◽  
Quality Framework ◽  
Leading Question

Open Education gained more visibility as a result of the emergence of Open Educational Resources (OER) and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). This article discusses whether MOOCs should be considered as OER. Open Education and OER can be treated as two strands with different historical roots even though, in theory, OER are an aspect of Open Education. Different OER definitions and typologies are analyzed in relation to their dimensions and categorizations. Furthermore, the four conditions and two original categories of MOOCs are discussed, leading to a debate on their quality. It turns out that there are two perspectives on MOOCs: from an OER perspective, MOOCs as a product can be called OER. From an Open Education perspective, MOOCs are going beyond OER as enablers of Open Education and are understood as an innovative way of changing education. These perspectives are reflected by the OpenEd Quality Framework. The short answer to our leading question is: sometimes, and it depends on your perspective.

scholarly journals Sentiment Analysis of Students’ Feedback in MOOCs: A Systematic Literature Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fisnik Dalipi ◽  
Katerina Zdravkova ◽  
Fredrik Ahlgren
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Sentiment Analysis ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Online Courses ◽  
Massive Open Online Courses ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Course Performance ◽  
Research Directions ◽  
Evaluation Feedback ◽  
Future Research Directions

In recent years, sentiment analysis (SA) has gained popularity among researchers in various domains, including the education domain. Particularly, sentiment analysis can be applied to review the course comments in massive open online courses (MOOCs), which could enable instructors to easily evaluate their courses. This article is a systematic literature review on the use of sentiment analysis for evaluating students’ feedback in MOOCs, exploring works published between January 1, 2015, and March 4, 2021. To the best of our knowledge, this systematic review is the first of its kind. We have applied a stepwise PRISMA framework to guide our search process, by searching for studies in six electronic research databases (ACM, IEEE, ScienceDirect, Springer, Scopus, and Web of Science). Our review identified 40 relevant articles out of 440 that were initially found at the first stage. From the reviewed literature, we found that the research has revolved around six areas: MOOC content evaluation, feedback contradiction detection, SA effectiveness, SA through social network posts, understanding course performance and dropouts, and MOOC design model evaluation. In the end, some recommendations are provided and areas for future research directions are identified.

scholarly journals Students used a Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in higher education of Arab Countries (AC)

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 3795-3800
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Online Courses ◽  
Arab Countries ◽  
Massive Open Online Courses ◽  
To Come ◽  
Survey Research Methods ◽  
Great Portion

A systematic literature review of 124 studies considering the usage of Massive Online Courses (MOOCs) in higher education of Arab Countries (AC) from 2013 to 2020 is presented in this research. The aim of the research is to provide a broad and systematic literature review regarding MOOCs used among universities’ students. Therefore, based on certain areas, such as, research methods, year of publication, journal, country, type of respondents and author, studies of using MOOCs for educational purposes were analyzed. A great portion of the findings is for the utilization of quantitative and survey research methods with a percentage of 78%, 13% is for the qualitative research methods and 9% for the mixed methods. As shown by the findings, the interest on the topic has increased in the past few years which also indicate that this particular topic will be of great importance for the academic researches to come. Nevertheless, in order to promote and improve the use of (MOOCs) for educational purposes, it is of great significance that the coming studies utilize an extensive utilization of theoretical and methodological approaches like the qualitative methods to inspect the factors which will urge the students to utilize (MOOCs).

scholarly journals AB0602 IMPACT OF SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS ON PAIN AND FUNCTION IN KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS: A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1337.2-1337
Author(s):  
T. W. Swinnen ◽  
M. Willems ◽  
I. Jonkers ◽  
F. P. Luyten ◽  
J. Vanrenterghem ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Socioeconomic Factors ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Intervention Effects ◽  
Socioeconomic Outcomes ◽  
And Function ◽  
The Impact

Background:The personal and societal burden of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) urges the research community to identify factors that predict its onset and progression. A mechanistic understanding of disease is currently lacking but needed to develop targeted interventions. Traditionally, risk factors for KOA are termed ‘local’ to the joint or ‘systemic’ referring to whole-body systems. There are however clear indications in the scientific literature that contextual factors such as socioeconomic position merit further scientific scrutiny, in order to justify a more biopsychosocial view on risk factors in KOA.Objectives:The aims of this systematic literature review were to assess the inclusion of socioeconomic factors in KOA research and to identify the impact of socioeconomic factors on pain and function in KOA.Methods:Major bibliographic databases, namely Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane, were independently screened by two reviewers (plus one to resolve conflicts) to identify research articles dealing with socioeconomic factors in the KOA population without arthroplasty. Included studies had to quantify the relationship between socioeconomic factors and pain or function. Main exclusion criteria were: a qualitative design, subject age below 16 years and articles not written in English or Dutch. Methodological quality was assessed via the Cochrane risk of bias tools for randomized (ROB-II) and non-randomized intervention studies (ROBIN-I) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for assessing the quality of non-randomised studies. Due to heterogeneity of studies with respect to outcomes assessed and analyses performed, no meta-analysis was performed.Results:Following de-duplication, 7639 articles were available for screening (120 conflicts resolved without a third reader). In 4112 articles, the KOA population was confirmed. 1906 (25%) were excluded because of knee arthroplasty and 1621 (21%) because of other issues related to the population definition. Socioeconomic factors could not be identified in 4058 (53%) papers and were adjusted for in 211 (3%) articles. In the remaining papers covering pain (n=110) and/or function (n=81), education (62%) and race (37%) were most frequently assessed as socioeconomic factors. A huge variety of mainly dichotomous or ordinal socioeconomic outcomes was found without further methodological justification nor sensitivity analysis to unravel the impact of selected categories. Although the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) was the most popular instrument to assess pain and function, data pooling was not possible as socioeconomic factors estimates were part of multilevel models in most studies. Overall results showed that lower education and African American race were consistent predictors of pain and poor function, but those effects diminished or disappeared when psychological aspects (e.g. discrimination) or poverty estimates were taken into account. When function was assessed using self-reported outcomes, the impact of socioeconomic factors was more clear versus performance-based instruments. Quality of research was low to moderate and the moderating or mediating impact of socioeconomic factors on intervention effects in KOA is understudied.Conclusion:Research on contextual socioeconomic factors in KOA is insufficiently addressed and their assessment is highly variable methodologically. Following this systematic literature review, we can highlight the importance of implementing a standardised and feasible set of socioeconomic outcomes in KOA trials1, as well as the importance of public availability of research databases including these factors. Future research should prioritise the underlying mechanisms in the effect of especially education and race on pain and function and assess its impact on intervention effects to fuel novel (non-)pharmacological approaches in KOA.References:[1]Smith TO et al. The OMERACT-OARSI Core Domain Set for Measurement in Clinical Trials of Hip and/or Knee Osteoarthritis J Rheumatol 2019. 46:981–9.Disclosure of Interests:None declared.

scholarly journals Semi-Systematic Literature Review on Sustainability and Sustainable Development in Higher Education Institutions

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (14) ◽  
pp. 7683
Author(s):  
Amila Omazic ◽  
Bernd Markus Zunk
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Main Research ◽  
Agenda 2030 ◽  
Research Themes ◽  
Development Goals

Public sector organizations, primarily higher education institutions (HEIs), are facing greater levels of responsibility since adopting and committing to the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development (SD) and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). HEIs are expected to provide guidance for various stakeholders on this matter, but also to implement this agenda and the SDGs in their institutions. Although the role of these organizations has been recognized, the fields and issues that HEIs should address on their path towards sustainability and SD are still unclear. To provide further clarity, a semi-systematic literature review on sustainability and SD in HEIs was conducted to identify both the key concepts and main research themes that represent sustainability and SD in HEIs and to identify research gaps. This review increases our knowledge of this topic and enhances our understanding of sustainability and SD in the context of HEIs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document