Where is research on massive open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC research initiative

International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning

Volumn 15, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 134-176

  Gašević, Dragan ^a   Kovanović, Vitomir ^a,b   Joksimović, Srećko ^a,b   Siemens, George ^c  

^a ATHABASCA UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Content analysis; Education research; Massive online open courses; MOOC; MOOC research analysis; MOOC research initiative

Indexed keywords

EID: 84908653189     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14923831     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.19173/irrodl.v15i5.1954     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Bures, E. M., Borokhovski, E., & Tamim, R. M. (2011). Interaction in distance education and online learning: Using evidence and theory to improve practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 23(2-3), 82-103. doi:10.1007/s12528-011-9043-x
2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
3. Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). Understanding cognitive presence in an online and blended community of inquiry: Assessing outcomes and processes for deep approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 233-250. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01029.x
4. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. Newburyport, MA: Sloan Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingcourse.pdf
5. Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 80-97.
6. Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research a decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16-25. doi:10.3102/0013189X11428813
7. Baker, R. S. J. d, & Yacef, K. (2009). The state of educational data mining in 2009: A review and future visions. Journal of Educational Data Mining, 1(1), 3-17.
8. Bastian, M., Heymann, S., & Jacomy, M. (2009). Gephi: An open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. In Proceedings of the Third International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 361-362).
9. Belanger, Y., & Thornton, J. (2013). Bioelectricity: A quantitative approach. Duke University. Retrieved from http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/handle/10161/6216
10. Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243-1289. doi:10.3102/0034654309333844
11. Brent, E. E. (1984). The computer-assisted literature review. Social Science Computer Review, 2(3), 137-151.
12. 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. Journal of Research & Practice in Assessment, 8, 13-25.
13. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
14. Burt, R. S., Kilduff, M., & Tasselli, S. (2013). Social network analysis: Foundations and frontiers on advantage. Annual Review of Psychology, 64(1), 527-547. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143828
15. Centola, D. (2010). The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science, 329(5996), 1194-1197. doi:10.1126/science.1185231
16. Chang, Y.-H., Chang, C.-Y., & Tseng, Y.-H. (2010). Trends of science education research: An automatic content analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(4), 315-331. doi:10.1007/s10956-009-9202-2
17. Cheng, B., Wang, M., Mørch, A. I., Chen, N.-S., Kinshuk, & Spector, J. M. (2014). Research on e-learning in the workplace 2000-2012: A bibliometric analysis of the literature. Educational Research Review, 11, 56-72. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2014.01.001
18. Clarebout, G., Elen, J., Collazo, N. A. J., Lust, G., & Jiang, L. (2013). Metacognition and the use of tools. in R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 187-195). Springer New York.
19. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29. doi:10.1007/BF02299088
20. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13. doi:10.3102/0013189X032001009
21. Coughlan, S. (2014, April 8). The irresistible urge for students to talk. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/business-26925463
22. Cribb, A., & Gewirtz, S. (2013). The hollowed-out university? A critical analysis of changing institutional and academic norms in UK higher education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 34(3), 338-350. doi:10.1080/01596306.2012.717188
23. Dawson, S., Gašević, D., Siemens, G., & Joksimovic, S. (2014). Current state and future trends: A citation network analysis of the learning analytics field. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Learning Analytics And Knowledge (pp. 231-240). New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/2567574.2567585
24. Dawson, S., Tan, J. P. L., & McWilliam, E. (2011). Measuring creative potential: Using social network analysis to monitor a learners' creative capacity. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(6), 924-942.
25. De Wever, B., Keer, H. V., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2010). Roles as a structuring tool in online discussion groups: The differential impact of different roles on social knowledge construction. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 516-523. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.08.008
26. Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8. doi:10.3102/0013189X032001005
27. Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Wecker, C. (2013). Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 56-66. doi:10.1080/00461520.2012.748005
28. Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215-239. doi:10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7
29. Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century a framework for research and practice. New York: Routledge.
30. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
31. Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 31-36. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002
32. Gašević, D., Adesope, O., Joksimović, S., & Kovanović, V. (2014). Externally-facilitated regulation scaffolding and role assignment to develop cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions. Submitted for Publication to The Internet and Higher Education.
33. Gašević, D., Zouaq, A., & Janzen, R. (2013). Choose your classmates, your GPA is at stake! The association of cross-class social ties and academic performance. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1460-1479. doi:10.1177/0002764213479362
34. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255-274. doi:10.3102/01623737011003255
35. GSV Advisors. (2012). Fall of the wall: Capital flows to education innovation. Chicago, IL: Global Silicon Valley (GSV) Advisors. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/NMtKZ4
36. Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
37. Hoonlor, A., Szymanski, B. K., & Zaki, M. J. (2013). Trends in computer science research. Commun. ACM, 56(10), 74-83. doi:10.1145/2500892
38. Jordan, K. (2013). MOOC completion rates: The data. Retrieved from http://www.katyjordan.com/MOOCproject.html
39. Kinshuk, Huang, H.-W., Sampson, D. G., & Chen, N.-S. (2013). Trends in educational technology through the lens of the highly cited articles published in the Journal of Educational Technology And Society. Educational Technology & Society, 3-20.
40. Kizilcec, R. F., Piech, C., & Schneider, E. (2013). Deconstructing disengagement: Analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 170-179). New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/2460296.2460330
41. Koller, D., Ng, A., Do, C., & Chen, Z. (2013). Retention and intention in massive open online courses: In depth. Educause Review, 48(3), 62-63.
42. Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., Gašević, D., Siemens, G., & Hatala, M. (2014). What public media reveals about MOOCs? Submitted for Publication to British Journal of Educational Technology.
43. Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7-19. doi:10.1007/BF02299087
44. Leckart, S. (2012, March 20). The Stanford education experiment could change higher learning forever. Wired. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/2012/03/ff_aiclass/
45. Li, F. (2010). Textual analysis of corporate disclosures: A survey of the literature. Journal of Accounting Literature.
46. 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 Distance Learning, 14(3), 202-227.
47. Lou, Y., Bernard, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2006). Media and pedagogy in undergraduate distance education: A theory-based meta-analysis of empirical literature. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(2), 141-176. doi:10.1007/s11423-006-8252-x
48. Lust, G., Juarez Collazo, N. A., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2012). Content management systems: Enriched learning opportunities for all? Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 795-808. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.12.009
49. Martin, F. G. (2012). Will massive open online courses change how we teach? Commun. ACM, 55(8), 26-28. doi:10.1145/2240236.2240246
50. Maslen, G. (2014, May 20). Australia debates major changes to its higher-education system. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Australia-Debates-Major/146693/
51. McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Siemens, G., & Cormier, D. (2010). The MOOC model for digital practice. elearnspace.org. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/MOOC_Final.pdf
52. Muilenburg, L., & Berge, Z. L. (2001). Barriers to distance education: A factor-analytic study. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 7-22. doi:10.1080/08923640109527081
53. OECD Publishing. (2013). Education at a glance 2013: OECD indicators. doi:10.1787/eag-2013-en
54. Pappano, L. (2012, November 2). The year of the MOOC. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/6QUBEK
55. Porter, W. W., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. A., & Welch, K. R. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Institutional adoption and implementation. Computers & Education, 75, 185-195. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.011
56. Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2005). Design research: A socially responsible approach to instructional technology research in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(2), 96-115. doi:10.1007/BF02961476
57. Rosé, C. P., Carlson, R., Yang, D., Wen, M., Resnick, L., Goldman, P., & Sherer, J. (2014). Social factors that contribute to attrition in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale Conference (pp. 197-198). New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/2556325.2567879
58. Rovai, A. P. (2002). Building sense of community at a distance. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1).
59. Sari, N., Suharjito, & Widodo, A. (2012). Trend prediction for computer science research topics using extreme learning machine. International Conference on Advances Science and Contemporary Engineering 2012, 50(0), 871-881. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2012.10.095
60. Selwyn, N., & Bulfin, S. (2014). The discursive construction of MOOCs as educational opportunity and educational threat. MOOC Research Initiative (MRI) - Final Report. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/ok43eT
61. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10.
62. Siemens, G., & Gašević, D. (2012). Special Issue on learning and knowledge analytics. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 1-163.
63. Smith, B., & Eng, M. (2013). MOOCs: A learning journey. In S. K. S. Cheung, J. Fong, W. Fong, F. L. Wang, & L. F. Kwok (Eds.), Hybrid learning and continuing education (pp. 244-255). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
64. Thoms, B., & Eryilmaz, E. (2014). How media choice affects learner interactions in distance learning classes. Computers & Education, 75, 112-126. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.002
65. Tight, M. (2008). Higher education research as tribe, territory and/or community: A co-citation analysis. Higher Education, 55(5), 593-605. doi:10.1007/s10734-007-9077-1
66. Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 68(6), 599-623. doi:10.2307/2959965
67. Tucker, B. (2012). The flipped classroom. Education Next, 12(1), 82-83.
68. Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press.
69. Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Wouters, P. (2013). Counting publications and citations: Is more always better? Journal of Informetrics, 7(3), 635-641. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2013.04.001
70. Wasserman, S. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press.
71. Winne, P. H. (2006). How software technologies can improve research on learning and bolster school reform. Educational Psychologist, 41(1), 5-17. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4101_3
72. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277-304). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
73. Zhou, M., & Winne, P. H. (2012). Modeling academic achievement by self-reported versus traced goal orientation. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 413-419. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.03.004
74. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press.
75. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. New York: Routledge.